Wow -- that intro is heavy. I don't know if I want to read the rest. You'll tell us about it, though, I hope? :)

If I read it, I'm sure I'll comment on it here.

I think you misread the footnote. He was indicating that the press kept using second hand sources and that only Dean and him were in the room.

"Slightly different versions of this story have appeared in various media reports quoting Howard as saying he didn’t want to be president. It’s worth noting that only Howard Dean and I were in the room that day."

The governor has denied to this day saying that he didn't wwant to win. Trippi is confirming Dean's account.

Adam is right -- I confirm the Gov's account -- my account of that meeting matches with the Governor's and not with the press accounts which in many ways is the point of much of the book.

In that case, I found the footnote to be ambiguous, but I'm willing to chalk it up to a misinterpretation. Still the Intro (and some of the promotional commentary I've seen around) reads to me as an effort to diminish Dean. I hope that's not the case. It's possible to applaud and promote grassroots and participatory democracy without at the same time undercutting their most recent standard-bearer. I worry that this is an attempt at the latter, although I recognize I should read the entire book before coming to that conclusion.