View Full Version: Dean Now Says He Never Screamed

Al Gore Support Center Online Forum 2008 :: A Reality Based Organization Fighting For Al Gore! > General Democratic Talk > Dean Now Says He Never Screamed



Title: Dean Now Says He Never Screamed
Description: Mother says Clintons cost him nomination


GSC Admin - June 28, 2004 08:46 PM (GMT)
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/6/28/135929.shtml

Monday, June 28, 2004

Dean Now Claims He Never Screamed

That saucy Dennis Miller still plays the recording on his program on CNBC, but now Howard Dean, the sore loserman of 2004, claims the scream that finished his campaign "never happened."

Trying to explain away his crazy, red-faced rant after his loss in Iowa, Dean recently told a crowd of broadcasters in Washington that he was merely trying to make himself heard over his loudmouth supporters, Broadcasting & Cable magazine reports.

He claimed that none of the (pro-Democrat) reporters on hand who heard the speech noted anything unusual and that it "was only the next day, when their editors saw it, with the noise-canceling mike making Dean stand out, that it became a story," the mag says.

In his wonderfully Democratesque refusal to take responsibility for himself, the Park Avenue Vermonter, naturally, tried to blame the Dems' favorite bogeyman: Rupert Murdoch.

Attacking what he called the "Murdochization" of cable (i.e., the growing popularity of Fox News Channel), Dean said, "Not because Murdoch is a right winger, which he is, but because Roger Ailes is so incredibly good at what he does that the other stations are starting to copy what Fox does."

Maybe Howard missed it, but we thought we noticed both CNN and MSNBC playing -- and replaying -- and replaying the Dean rant.

Of course, we do not Howard believes for a moment his media troubles began with Fox News.

We hear Howard's mother has told Manhattan friends that the Dean family blames the Clintons for Howard's political misfortunes. "They did everything they could do to stop him," a family friend quotes Mrs. Dean as telling her.

Oh. So Al Gore's supporters are "right wingers." What does that make John Kerry's supporters?

GoreLeadership - June 28, 2004 09:05 PM (GMT)
Well many are beginning to see that the Clintons dont want Gore in there either.. Well you know what, who cares.. America was not built around them anyway!! They risk nothing and gain everything, what comes around goes around and taking more than you give will prove to be the end- and on we go to a better chapter.

When is the last time EITHER of the Clintons whispered Gore's name anywhere?

Pls. someone enlighten me

-GoreLeadership

JamesAquila - June 28, 2004 09:41 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (GoreLeadership @ Jun 28 2004, 05:05 PM)
Well many are beginning to see that the Clintons dont want Gore in there either.. Well you know what, who cares.. America was not built around them anyway!! They risk nothing and gain everything, what comes around goes around and taking more than you give will prove to be the end- and on we go to a better chapter.

When is the last time EITHER of the Clintons whispered Gore's name anywhere?

Pls. someone enlighten me

-GoreLeadership

Nothing could be further from the truth. The Clinton's desperately wanted Gore to run this time out. Clinton just mentioned Gore during his Larry King interview.

Dean started his campaign by lying about the other Dems and it seems he's ending it that way. He's become delusional denying that he screamed.

GSC Admin - June 28, 2004 10:00 PM (GMT)
I actually agree with GL on this. Clinton hasn't mentioned Gore in a while. Even Clinton's former press secretary Dee Dee Myers said that have not been speaking for a while. Here is the LK interview, and he does not mention Gore once:

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0406/27/lkl.00.html

JamesAquila - June 28, 2004 10:46 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (GSC Admin @ Jun 28 2004, 06:00 PM)
I actually agree with GL on this. Clinton hasn't mentioned Gore in a while. Even Clinton's former press secretary Dee Dee Myers said that have not been speaking for a while. Here is the LK interview, and he does not mention Gore once:

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0406/27/lkl.00.html

If it wasn't the Larry King interview it was one of the others but I know I heard Clinton mention Gore in one of them. But for argument's sake let's say that he didn't. Why is he obligated to mention Gore? Is Gore obligated to always mention Clinton? I don't remember Gore doing so in every speach and interview that he has given.

GSC Admin - June 28, 2004 10:49 PM (GMT)
The point is, the Clintons do what they want, whether it is good for the party or not. Clinton did not intervene in the Florida debacle, nor did he encourage Al to run in 2004. The two are on the outs and it is Clinton's fault for lying to Al, betraying his trust, and in result costing Al the 2000 election.

JamesAquila - June 29, 2004 12:02 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (GSC Admin @ Jun 28 2004, 06:49 PM)
The point is, the Clintons do what they want, whether it is good for the party or not. Clinton did not intervene in the Florida debacle, nor did he encourage Al to run in 2004. The two are on the outs and it is Clinton's fault for lying to Al, betraying his trust, and in result costing Al the 2000 election.

Did Gore ask Clinton to intervene in Florida? No he didn't. Gore didn't want any National figures in Florida. That was his strategy. Bob Kerrey flew there at his own expense because Gore didn't want him to come.
And I know for a fact that Clinton asked Gore to run last summer. I have it confirmed by two different sources.
As far as what cost Gore the election there were many contributing factors, it can't be laid at Clinton's feet.

LeftistIndependent - June 29, 2004 12:04 AM (GMT)
Honestly, I have trouble beliveing much in that article. I have never heard Dean once deny the "scream." Yes, he said he had to raise his voice because the Iowa crowd was really riled up. But he knows how it came out on television. And the media did play it way too many times. I am not sure about the Clinton thing, but the truth is that the DLC did not want him to win. Just go to thier website and do a search and you will see what I mean.

But Newsmax is a right wing source. Just go to thier front page and see all the glory they give Bush and the bias towards Democrats.

GSC Admin - June 29, 2004 12:39 AM (GMT)
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/C...e=SUPP&nid=2228

Howard Dean: Scream 'Never Happened'

By John Eggerton -- Broadcasting & Cable, 6/14/2004 3:25:00 PM

Howard Dean said the scream speech "never happened," and that its repetition more than 900 times in the following week showed cable "at its worst" and revealed cable news as a "Murdochized" entertainment medium, not journalism.

The former Vermont governor and presidential candidate calls it part of the "Murdochization," of cable, referring to the growing success of Rupert Murdoch's Fox News Channel. "Not because Murdoch is a right winger, which he is," says Dean, "but because [Fox News Channel head] Roger Ailes is so incredibly good at what he does that the other stations [sic] are starting to copy what Fox does."

Dean told a crowd of broadcasters in Washington Monday morning that all the cable networks showed of the speech following his loss in Iowa was "me at a microphone carrying on. No crowd noise or crowd shot," that would have shown that the crowd was screaming and Dean was trying to make himself heard. None of the pool reporters reported the scream initially, he said. It was only the next day, when their editors saw it, with the noise-canceling mike making Dean stand out, that it became a story. "The speech as it was portrayed in cable television shows 937 times in one week "never happened," he said.


Of course, loads of broadcasters carried the speech too, but Dean suggested they were being driven by the cable news cycle. He told his audience they had better news instincts about what to cover than their national counterparts and should not let the 24-hour news cycle set their agendas for them.

Jim Farley, VP, news and programming, for WTOP(AM) Washington seconded Dean's assessment of the "Scream," saying reporters covering the speech had felt it was proportionate to the crowd and the occasion. "The news media done him wrong," said Farley.

Dean did not lay all the blame for his precipitous fall from front-runner to Monday-morning quarterback on cable news, however, pointing out that he had already lost Iowa and that he did not use the platform of the speech to address a national audience.

Still, Dean had little good to say about the national media, warning local broadcasters that to aspire to a national post was "the path to ruin," saying the national media "doesn't understand its role," and is too into "gotcha" journalism. He says he avoided Tim Russert and Meet the Press for months not because Russert isn't good but because of the "gotcha" fear, which turned out to be prophetic, he said, since Russert's one "bad" question, about troop strengths, came back to bite the cadidate when he finally did appear.

Dean was among the panelists at the National Association of Broadcasters Education Foundation's Service to America Summit in Washington Monday (B&C is a co-sponsor), where he praised local broadcasters as the "best of the bunch" at reporting the news of interest to their viewers.

He said that although President George W. Bush has been criticized for giving interviews to groups of local station bureau chiefs on the assumption he was looking for softballs, Dean thinks it was a smart move, and not because the questions would be served up on a platter. He told his audience he didn't think they asked softball questions. "I think what he really wanted to do is talk to someone who is really interested in what he has to say and less interested in writing down what they are going to write anyway. "

His advice for local broadcasters: Keep on doing what you are doing, with some caveats, including setting their own agendas, airing more positive news--which he says will help attract the 18-35 audience--and avoiding appearances of partisanship.

He says one local Vermont station owner "writes checks to the Republicans every year. I suggest not doing that," he says, because you want to avoid the perception that you are biased. He drew the analogy of the voting machine maker who wrote a letter saying he would do whatever it takes to get George Bush elected. He's free to do that, says Dean, but if it undermines the public confidence, he probably shouldn't.

GSC Admin - June 29, 2004 12:43 AM (GMT)
James, I along with many others, including yourself, worked all last year on the draft last year and I never once, nor anyone I have talked to, said Clinton urged Gore to run. I know of many others who urged him to run, but Clinton did not to my knowledge. As I said, Clinton and Gore have been on the outs for 6 years now. Gore was devestated when Clinton lied to him, and for good reason. Clinton's actions has pre-doomed Gore's campaign. Gore had to make a choice between associating himself with a liar and someone who is viewed as unmoral, or to run as him own man. Gore tried to run on their record, however it was hard because of Clinton's behavior problem. There in lies the problem. He either had to distance himself and run as his own man or run side by side with him, in effect associating himself with the scandals. That may be unfair, but it is the truth. The American people would have saw Gore as playing second fiddle and continuing on the Clinton scandal legacy.

However, this is just my opinion.




Hosted for free by InvisionFree