Who's Nader Now?
Some quibbles with the initial premise but the main argument resonates:
Some of Dean's rivals have launched vitriolic attacks that might as well have been scripted by Karl Rove. And I don't buy the excuse that it's all about ensuring that the party chooses an electable candidate.
After Dean declared that Saddam's capture hadn't made us safer — a statement that seems more justified with each passing day — Lieberman and, to a lesser extent, Kerry launched attacks that could, and quite possibly will, be used verbatim in Bush campaign ads. (Lieberman's remark about Dean's "spider hole" was completely beyond the pale.)
By seeking to undermine the election prospects of a man who may well be the nominee, Lieberman and Kerry have reminded us of why their once-promising campaigns imploded. Most Democrats feel that the right, ruthlessly exploiting 9/11, is making a grab for total political dominance. The party's rank and file want a candidate who is running, as the Dean slogan puts it, to take our country back. This is no time for a candidate who is running just because he thinks he deserves to be president.