MYTH: Howard Dean bombed on ‘Meet the Press’

The head of the Democrat National Committee has made a fool of himself again, this time on yesterday's "Meet the Press." As he has done for years, Dean used personal attacks to smear his perceived enemies, including your humble correspondent. The display was simply sad. (Bill O’Reilly, “The Self-Destruction of Howard Dean,” Fox News, 5/24/05)

Howard Dean is giving Democrats heartburn. That's a good thing. His performance on Meet the Press yesterday was less than impressive. (Neil Boortz, “Say What?” Neil Boortz, 5/23/05)

Since his election as chairman of the Democratic National Committee on Feb. 12, Dean has studiously avoided most national television exposure. But he has been talking to party gatherings across the country, and his intemperate language at these outings contradicts the notion that he has been kept under control. That he will leap onto the national stage Sunday on NBC's ''Meet the Press'' with Tim Russert raises concern among the Democratic political players whether he will contain himself. Dean's election by the DNC membership was a case of the inmates seizing control of the asylum. (Robert Novak, “Dean vs. Russert: It’ll be a Scream,” Chicago Sun-Times, 5/19/05)

In a pointedly embarrassing interview with NBC's Tim Russert, the DNC chairman spent almost the entire program under withering attack as Russert demonstrated Dean's hypocrisy on past comments he made about abortion, his criticisms of Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly and the way he has tried to explain away his party's fundraising woes since he took the DNC helm in February. (Carl Limbacher, “Tim Russert Rips Howard Dean Apart,” NewsMax, 5/22/05)

REALITY

Having watched Howard Dean on NBC News’ Meet the Press and read the transcript of his appearance, one can only conclude that the columnists and commentators, who reported on the defeat and humiliation of Howard Dean at the hands of Tim Russert, did not actually watch the program. While Russert certainly pressed Dean to explain some of the more colorful statements he has made since being elected Chairman of the Democratic National Committee, Dean handled these requests very professionally and answered every question that Russert asked him.

The accusation that Howard Dean used personal attacks to get his points across is ridiculous. This supposition also brushes over the fact that the individuals that Dean did mention over the course of the program have made more hurtful and damaging attacks against him. Many of these offenders have even done so in the name of “news” and have said far more derogatory things about him. The most egregious act in the defamation of Howard Dean was, of course, the media’s coverage of the infamous speech that he gave in Iowa after finishing 3 rd in the Iowa caucuses. The right’s re-crafting, and in some cases re-mixing, of this speech in order to make Dean into a raving lunatic that is emotionally unfit to be President of the United States, effectively killed his candidacy. This would be fine, of course, if there was a shred of truth to anything that right said about him and the speech, but there was not. That is the difference between the attacking right and Dean.

Has Howard Dean mentioned some of the personal short-comings of some members of the right and the media? Yes—he has pointed out the inherent hypocrisy of Rush Limbaugh lecturing anyone on moral values, given Limbaugh’s own history of lying; Bill O’Reilly’s arguments with families of 9/11 victims; and the large litany of Tom DeLay’s criminal offenses. But each of the events that Dean has made reference to actually happened. It is rather hypocritical to chastise Dean for pointing out the hypocrisy of others.

The bigger picture here is the right wing media’s never-ending battle to belittle and poke holes in the armor of Howard Dean. The right, and perhaps some members of the left, are terrified of Dean. He is a relative political outsider from Vermont who managed to assemble and motivate a large legion of voters in a rather short period of time. During the 2004 primary season, he displayed a passion for America and bringing change to America that no other candidate came close to radiating. He is truly a man who speaks for the people and who is not afraid to say what many Democrats are thinking. The political arena needs more people like Dean.

MYTH: Calvin College students and professors were wrong to protest and try and prevent the President from giving a commencement speech at the college

So you guys are protesting the president of the United States, an opportunity for your students to come and you're attacking him just before he gets there in this letter in a lot of different ways. This, Mr. Jelks, is not the first time you've been engaged in such behavior. Isn't it true, sir, that when William Rehnquist was to speak at your college a few short years ago, that you were part of an effort to prevent him from speaking on campus, an effort that went all throughout the campus, accusing him of racism, sir? (Sean Hannity, “Don’t Speak,” Fox News, 5/18/05)

I find this fairly amazing coming from — you know, you're upset about the president's position on the issue of a war and the last resort. And you believe the administration launched an unjust war, et cetera. You say that his environmental policies have harmed creation as part of this letter. Do you know what bothers me about your position? This is for both of you professors. If both of you had your way, those mass graves would still be being filled. I have yet to see a letter to Saddam Hussein from either one of you. If you guys had your way, the torture chambers and the rape rooms would exist. You two obviously haven't looked at the pictures of dead babies laying in the street because Saddam launched weapons against them. Where's your letter against Saddam? Because it would still continue if you had your way. (Hannity)

But your way — your way would appease evil, which is the difference. If you had your way, he would still be in power committing atrocities, wouldn't he? (Hannity)

REALITY

It is truly amazing how Sean Hannity is blame a group of professors at a small college in Grand Rapids, Michigan, for the mass graves that Saddam Hussein employed in Iraq? I am sorry, but where does Hannity get off making this ridiculous accusation?

Hannity is showing his true hypocritical colors when he railed against the students and professors at Calvin College for exercising their right to free speech. It is okay for him, Sean Hannity to say take advantage of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, but not the people of Calvin College. This is an ironic position for Hannity to take, given the fact that he once gave a speech at Talker Magazine’s New Media Seminar in which he “defended the talk industry’s right to freedom of speech and spoke out against government intervention into free speech whether it is political or artistic.” Apparently Hannity only thinks Americans should speak freely when they are in agreement with him. That is not the sign of a great American.

Regardless of Hannity’s own credentials to infringe on the rights of others, the issue is whether these protesters’ rights should be infringed on at all. What are they doing that is wrong? They are a Christian college (the right should like this) that had some students and professors that did not believe the United States should not have fought an unjust war against Iraq and who believe that the President and Congress should not enact tax cuts that make the rich richer and the poor worse-off. All the Calvin College community did was draft a letter and publish it as an advertisement in a local newspaper. They didn’t even throw pies at anyone. How is this bad or wrong? Isn’t this what democracy is supposed to look like?

To start putting conditions on the right to protest or the right to free speech would start America’s march towards fascism. First one isn’t allowed to peacefully protest the visit of the President. What next? Are people going to be banned from writing letters to the editor? This country was founded based on certain inalienable rights—what does it say about our media when the very people who should protect these rights the most chastise Americans for exercising them?