What can you say about this kind of slimy, unethical innuendo from a former Democratic Party chair? How hateful and uncivil the brand of politics and partisan nastiness that it symbolizes and advances? That it represents gutter political smearing at its worst and most unforgivable? That a party with any dignity and sense of decency would demand an apology and a retraction or cut ties with such a shameless creep? That someone who would do this has never heard of the Golden Rule, much less follows it?
The only remaining question is whether this ugly tweet allows Dean to surpass or merely Harry Reid as the most loathsome individual on the political scene, edging past the disgraced Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
I’m trying to think of a similarly ethically irredeemable Republican. Chris Christie hasn’t sunk to this level; Newt Gingrich is close, but he wouldn’t do this. Ironically, the only one I can think of is…Donald Trump.
16 thoughts on “Unethical Tweet Of The Month: The Despicable Howard Dean”
Speaking of being a possible coke user, the “Dean Scream” always struck me as more than a little weird. Mental problems? Substance abuse? Who knows.
Silly, how would anyone get cocaine past the secret service detail?
As a reminder, here it is. Yeeeeeerraaaahh!! https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=l6i-gYRAwM0
i noticed we could hear donald’s breathing, sniffing, a lot of mouth sounds. my husband is a sound man and usually when a person is not speaking/singing, there is a noise gate thing that keeps little noises from going thru and when the sound is loud enough it lets sound thru. it’s called a noise gate. (i think)
i wonder why the sound man didn’t turn that ON or when it was audible (which it clearly was) turn down his mike?
it makes one think it could have been deliberate. (only because have you EVER heard a person’s mouth or lip noises before??? no. we see ppl talk live every day on TV and there’s never this issue.
seems VERY suspicious to me, seeing that it’s just not something that happens with a good sound guy at the mixing board and for live TV on major networks they are supposed to have the best.
Trump suggested the mic was faulty, and has been roundly mocked for it.
we thought something was off (besides him) lol… hahah. *face palms* I also thought the moderator went on him a bit hard asking about tax returns, comments about hillary not looking presidential, and one other thing…
I kept wondering what that had to do with anything since i “thought” the rules were a question they’d BOTH answer? maybe i misunderstood but i didn’t see him ask her about things like “health records” or other things we’re concerned about. that seemed a bit odd to me too… that being said… he tanked to me.
but it did seem the moderator singled him out. i’m just glad he’s not saying “it was unfair to me!!”
Well, he is saying that. And he may have a point.
yeah. and when hillary almost coughed we didn’t hear a thing and i thought “oh good they have the mic down so we don’t hear that.” (i was happy for her, that they were doing that, even though i don’t like her either)
i picked up on it right away. (early on is when i noticed it)
Noise gates are there to eliminate “continuous” noise like equipment/microphone hums, ambient effects, a noise gate squelches off the signal at a predefined dB level at low levels and wouldn’t work too good with peaks from slights although thy can help with some of the really quite ones. What you are talking about is more along the lines of compressors or limiters that squelch out rapid unwanted peaks.
This is probably more along the lines of a gain issue.
Signal chain – Mic – Gain- Effects (if used) – EQ – Effects (if used) – Volume – Effects (if used) – amp/output. Effects could be reverb, delay, noise gate, limiters, filters, etc, etc.
There is a gain vs volume thing that can also affect picking up these slight noises, amplifying them, and sending them to the output. Generally the further away the mic is from the speaker the higher the gain must be set to pick up the voice and if the gain is set really high (upper 30%) the gain will “push” the slight sounds a great deal and send them on to the volume control that then outputs the sounds to the amps, it is much less likely that these slight sounds will be picked up when the gain is set lower and the volume set higher.
Their sound check should have addressed most of the normal issues; on-the-fly adjustments ware almost always needed once a live production begins.
I just checked photos and video of the debate; Trump’s podium mic was further away from his mouth in relation to Clinton’s, he felt the need to lean into it. Trump’s mic was pointed much more vertical and further away from his mouth, if this was a cardioid type of mic (which is quite likely) they are unidirectional and this placement could effect how the mic picks up sounds and how high the gain is set, Clinton’s mic was pointed much more horizontally and almost directly in front of her mouth, this is a much better placement method of a unidirectional mic and results in lower gain levels. Note: Both Clinton and Trump had lapel mics that were likely to help counter mic gain drop-off when they weren’t facing their mics.
Unless there was some obviously horrendous microphone errors, I think arguments surrounding the microphones and using them as excuses are petty deflections; the content of what was said is where the focus should be.
There are already conspiracy theories that are implying that there was a receiver and wire that was under Clinton’s clothing that was for some kind of earphone to coach her on the fly. These conspiracy theories COMPLETELY IGNORE the fact that she had a lapel mic which accounts for the transmitter and wire under the clothing. People are just stupid to believe this kind of intentionally fabricated crap.
ok i just called my hubby, and told him about this post and he said “there’s no way you could have heard all that stuff unless someone went out of their way to make sure you heard it. we’re talking about presidential debates with the best sound, camera, etc in the nation and that stuff never happens!”
then he said “good job honey” LOL.
i am a record producer and i know in the studio we work hard to keep out all mouth noises. i did notice often noises last night and him bending to talk into the mic so maybe he not only could not hear himself but… well… i’m not a conspiracy person, but this is odd after thinking about it.
Anything Howard Dean says is okay because he’s a progressive.
I actually made the same cocaine joke to my husband during the debate, but it was just that — a joke. I assumed Trump has seasonal allergies (like me) and he should have taken some medicine before going into the debate.
These mic issues comments are just silly.
As for Dean, he’s doubled down on his cocaine remarks. Revolting.
Trump doesn’t even drink, it is highly doubtful that he has a drug addiction.
I noticed HRC staggering around a bit at the 9/11 ceremony. Drunk?
Yeah, I know. Apologize in advance.
I remember a snippet from a Michael Moore Playboy interview when Dean was running for POTUS in 2004.
Moore and his wife attended a fundraiser with, according to him, checkbook at the ready.
After talking to (listening, actually) Dean for a mere five minutes: “we thought Geez, this guy is kind of a prick. ”
My point? considering the (if you’ll forgive me) size and nature of Moore’s…um…body of work, might Dean have some redeemable quality?
The notion that an out of power party can be taken over by an unqualified loudmouth who is sufficiently obnoxious towards a sitting President to garner the support of a plurality of primary voters was Dean’s idea. He almost pulled it off. Trump must have been taking notes.
Now there’s a trenchant comment.