I merely share a couple of quotations, straight from the horse's mouth. The first, via Sebastian Holsclaw's site:

Dean said that "the president is about to let North Korea become a nuclear power" because of his "petulance" and his dislike for that country's leader, Kim Jong Il.

This is stupid on quite a number of levels. For starters, as Sebastian points out, North Korea is most certainly already a nuclear power. Secondly, they most certainly became a nuclear power at some point in the mid-90's, well before the Bush Administration's supposedly arrogant, belligerent foreign policy that's now supposedly making everyone reach for nukes. Thirdly, again as Sebastion points out, Dean doesn't offer any substantive alternative to actually dealing with North Korea. It's a rough hand to play (I'd be the first to admit), but Dean is satisfied solely with criticizing the President...imagine that.

And from Andrew Sullivan, here's Dean on Hardball:

Also, we have less-fewer levers much the key, I believe, to Iran is pressure through the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union is supplying much of the equipment that Iran, I believe, most likely is using to set itself along the path of developing nuclear weapons. We need to use that leverage with the Soviet Union and it may require us to buying the equipment the Soviet Union was ultimately going to sell to Iran to prevent Iran from them developing nuclear weapons.

Hey, didn't those guys break up in the late 80's or something?

As Sullivan points out, misspeaking once is one thing, but Dean says this repeatedly. As he also notes, if Bush had said this, everyone would have mocked the living shit out of him.

Hmm...maybe Slate should tack up a page of Deaners right next to its Bushisms.