Originally Posted by guthmund

I completely agree with this. The one thing that really disappointed me during the election was the negative spin on everything the Republicans did. Instead of giving burgeoning Democrats sound ideas and developing a platform for them to hang their hats on, the DNC attacked the administration at every opportunity they had.

It seemed that despite having softball type questions thrown his way about the Democratic agenda and their plans for America, Terry McAuliffe was only concerned with trashing the President.

I'm all for laying blame where blame is due, but mud slinging does not an agenda make. There has to be substance, there has to be something there to debate, there has to be an alternative offered.

Howard Dean may be too liberal for America and he may even be too liberal for the Democratic party, but at least he's offering more than 'President Bush sucks" as an argument.

And that's why I'm glad he won the DNC nomination. In reality, I suspect that Howard Dean's appointment will do very little to bring both sides together, but at the very least, I think, he'll pull the straggling Democratic party together in an effort to at least offer an alternative to current policies and plans that, up till now, simply wasn't there.