Last night's onstage mental breakdown ("YARRRGHHH!")by Howard Dean was the stuff of conservative dreams. But only AFTER he had clinched the Democrats' nomination. We have only ourselves to blame. We blew it.

Sure, it was fun to highlight his overheated rhetoric, his flip—flops, his goofy semi—embrace of conspiracy theories, his injudicious comments about Iowa caucuses on Canadian TV, his patrician/phony populist upbringing where the servants weren't treated like servants and he requested a black (surely he must have used the word 'Negro' in 1967) roommate at Yale, and especially his uncontrollable temper. But look what good it did us. The most beatable potential Democratic nominee has all but disqualified himself in the eyes of even anti—war Democrats. Only those with anger management issues themselves remain in his camp.

I have a serious mea culpa here. On my regular Thursday appearances on Lucianne Goldberg's syndicated radio show, Lucianne and I had great fun making light of his family's nicknames for him, 'Little Howard' and 'Ho—Ho.' We delighted in speculation about the reasons for the absence of Dr. Judith Steinberg (a.k.a. 'Judy Dean') from the campaign trail, and mockery of the press's failure to cover the arrest of his son for burglary. And boy, did we ever speculate about his mental stability!

But mere talk radio chatter is one thing. The leftish media elites are used to paying no attention to it. I think that the turning point came when the estimable National Review put a photograph of Dean in full rage on a podium, eyes popping and fingers jabbing, on its cover, along with a plea to the Democrats to nominate him, pretty please with sugar on top. Print media, unlike talk show chatter, does not vanish into the ether. It lasts at least until the recycling truck arrives. Even worse, this particular paper had a picture on it, one which offered irrefutable evidence of the limits to Dean's sanity.

Once the Bigfoot media saw that the right really was serious, that we did think a Dean nomination would assure a second GWB term, they began to take s serious look at him themselves, and they saw that those crazy right—wingers were, well, right. Then, and only then did the alphabet networks, the New York Times, the Washington Post and their assorted hangers—on, begin the full court press to nail Dean.

And Dean did not handle the scrutiny well. Having learned from his fanatic followers that the best response to criticism is to turn up the volume of his rhetoric, he got even more aggressive in his public appearances. Most fatally, he told a sixty—something heckler to sit down and be quiet. You can get away with a lot of things in American public life, but you cannot tell a senior citizen to sit down and shut—up. Especially in Iowa, where niceness is a cherished part of the state's character.

Dean still hasn't learned. That's why he is probably finished as a political force. If only, if only this had happened after he had the nomination clinched. We had to open our big mouths! As the political philosopher who used to be co—president put it, 'Shoulda, coulda, woulda.'

A word to the wise: Wes Clark would be a formidable opponent. Gee, I sure hope the Democrats don't nominate him. How are we ever going to compete with a real live ex—general?

Posted by Thomas  01 20 04
Response from Richard:  01 20 04

I think there is something to this. But also the Clintons were onto Dean early, and while they are comfortable with a Democratic defeat this year. they did not want the party obliterated, endangering future standard—bearers (guess who?), and  carrying many senators, house members and  governors down too.  They helped Clark raise money, and if he proves not ready for prime time (a real possibility), they will turn  up the spigot for Kerry or Edwards. Ted Kennedy is close to Clinton, and he has been the Kerry surrogate. Edwards would be the toughest general election candidate of the three remaining serious candidates. Clark is too hot tempered, and says unusually stupid things. Kerry may be a war hero but he is Massachusetts liberal, without a common touch. Edwards could be competitive in a few Southern states, and the media now love him.

Conservatives should hope for Kerry.

Response by Thomas   01 20 04

I think the Clintons' main concern has always been keeping control over the Democratic Party machinery. Dean, with his independent fundraising capability, was a genuine threat to that control. We may be facing one of those rarest of circumstances in which I want to the same thing as the Clintons: a Clark candidacy. The best of all possible worlds would be for Clark to grab the nomination, with Clinton skullduggery implicated. That would probably cause Dean to oppose him, maybe as a third party candidate himself, or by backing Nader or some other insurgent.