Howard Dean's head is now firmly above the parapet. The former Governor of Vermont is currently established as the leading candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, a position confirmed by the latest polling. It's a good position to be in, providing you can handle intensified scrutiny from rivals, Republicans and reporters alike.

This week, Dean has been taking that test, confronted by questions over his decision to seal up documents relating to his decisions as governor for 10 years. Why do such a thing, ask suspicious minds, if he hasn't got anything to hide? Another angle of attack is Dean's military record; he was exempted from the Vietnam draft with a back problem. During a high-profile television interview this week, Dean was asked whether he had hoped his health would defer his drafting; on the second time of asking, he answered 'yes'. True to his anti-war reputation, Dean also said he thought the Vietnam conflict itself 'was wrong'.

Andrew Sullivan, the conservative blogger of renown, has also picked up on Dean's recurrent references during his TV grilling to the Soviet Union, when he meant Russia. Sullivan observes that Bush wouldn't be allowed to get away with such a gaffe, so why should Dean? That's the problem of being the frontrunner and, while we're on the subject, here's a gaffe I'd like to highlight myself. When Dean was asked as to his favourite musician, a question to which he responded: 'Wyclef Jean'. Oh dear.
· Paul MacInnes

http://www.guardian.co.uk/weblog/usa...057810,00.html

Dean's my pick. But, I'll take Clark as a consolation prize. I saw clark on C-SPAn for about an hour last night fielding questions.

supposing dean's (stated) policies more closely matched your own, would you support clark in the primaries if you thought he had a better chance against bush?

Was it really his decision? I would imagine that there are some well-paid lawyers somewhere that did it, not Dean itself. As for why it was done, if your advisors suddenly can't give advice without it being made public then likely the quality of your advisors (and therefor your advice) will decrease. Its not unheard of for advisors to basically play the other side in an argument (e.g. an argument over particular bill), not because they agree with what they are saying, but just because a counter-argument is needed to prepare for the real fight (It is generally easier to prepare for a fight if you can guess what the opposition is going to do before hand). Why should someone who thought he was giving confidential advice years ago have what he said revealed when he isn't the one running for office?

What the heck does Dean's favorite musician have to do with anything?

My personal prediction is the Dem ticket is going to be either Dean/Clark or Clark/Dean.

<center>
http://www.frontierworlds.com/images/outsider/dean.jpg
</center>

Djinn ... now that's scary. I'm saying NO on Howard Dean. There's something fishy about him when he made that remark about supporting those who wave the Confederate flag. IMO he just doesn't look Presidential. Now I do like Gen Wesley Clark. It be nice to see him tag with John Kerry. [img]smile.gif[/img]

He didn't say he supported those that wave the Confederate Flag. What he was getting at is that the Democratic Party can not afford to write off those voters and should attempt to reach out to poor southern white voters, who currently vote heavily republican.

All I have to say about Howard Dean, is that he was the governor of the state I live in for 11 years, and he did a damn fine job of it!

Mark

When he took over, the state was in the red (in debt) and had a deficit. Now, the state operates "in the black" and even has a "rainy day fund" set aside. 'Nuff said.