|
Jewish World Review Feb 22, 2005 / 13 Adar I 5765
Jay D. Homnick
DNC: Dean And (we'll) See?
http://www.jewishworldreview.com |
At my age I don't relish the prospect of Tommy John surgery on my
shoulder, so if I must pat myself on the back, I do it very gingerly. But
Republican stalwarts everywhere have dispensed with such cautionary
concerns. Their patting continues unabated, generally accompanied by this
homely lyric: "The Democrats just don't get it." The latest Democrat move
derided for its putative unwisdom is the selection of Howard Dean as the
head of the Democratic National Committee. This is deemed to be a further
retreat from the battleground of moral values as defined by the religious
sensibility.
No less shrill a shill than Cokie Roberts declared this week on This Week
that Dean was a startlingly 'secular' choice. This sort of thing, they
tell us, sends a chilling message to the heartland. It positions the
Democratic Party further out of the mainstream. All the old shibboleths
are trotted out by the pundits: alienation, extremism, playing to the base
instead of to the uncommitted. Here is a rare bit of bipartisanship how
often do Laura Ingraham and Cokie agree?
It occurs to me that perhaps we are in danger of making the common
miscalculation of extrapolating from the thinking of the candidate himself
rather than surveying the arena with dispassion. Sure, Dean and his band
of fanatics think that he will become the king and the kingmaker all
rolled into one. But that is not the opinion that should interest us: we
should rather be asking what Bill Clinton thinks about this choice. After
all, does anyone seriously think that if Bill had gone all out and worked
the phones for a different candidate the outcome would be the same? Ergo,
Bill does not believe that Dean in that spot hurts the party. As a general
rule, Bill's political instincts are more reliable than Laura's or
Cokie's.
The fact is that an unemployed Howard Dean was a very big problem for the
Democratic Party. His lulu of a ululation cost him the Presidential
nomination this time around, but it did not leave him permanently scarred.
He still sports a merry band of true believers. His prowess in Internet
fundraising and organizing is undeniable. Give him three years to prepare
for the 2008 primaries and he may well ride a tidal wave of momentum right
into the Presidential nomination.
Furthermore, having him in the role of permanent candidacy would mean
enduring a series of horizontal snipes at fellow Democrats. No one gearing
up for a primary battle could be expected to confine his barbs to the
Republicans. He would have to keep up a fairly consistent barrage of
kibitzing his potential rivals for the party nod. Him wandering in the
land of Nod and raising Cain among his peers can hardly be a thrilling
prospect for Democrats.
The best way to dispatch a nettlesome comrade who has too much power to be
ignored is to give him a job which has panache of prestige while
essentially leading to a dead end. And since the Democrats do not have the
power to name the Vice-President, the next best choice is to make Dean the
head of the party. This is one of those great positions that gives an
illusion of leadership but mostly means being the lapdog of the
Congressional party leaders and the last ex-President.
Almost by definition, being the head of the party means being "a person
not of Presidential caliber". Is it conceivable that Terry McAuliffe,
having served his term as party chief, might make a run at the Presidency?
Or how about Ed Gillespie, who recently completed a highly successful term
running the Republican National Committee, steering it through the
reelection of George W. Bush and growing Congressional majorities? Is he a
viable Presidential candidate now? I would venture to assert that the vast
majority of Republican voters do not even recognize the name of Ed
Gillespie.
True, Haley Barbour parlayed his leadership of the RNC during its
momentous retaking of Congress in 1994 into the governorship of
Mississippi. But that is a rare event indeed; furthermore, Dean has
already been a small-state Governor in Vermont for multiple terms. If
anything, it is a comedown for him to go from real executive power in a
state of the Union to a job that is one-third figurehead, one-third
bureaucrat and one-third presiding over an entity befouled by the miasma
of moribundity.
Here is what the Democrats accomplish by having Dean in that position. 1)
His Presidential prospects are finis. 2) He is de-clawed as an infighter
among the class of Presidential hopefuls. 3) His fundraising skills must
now be diverted away from his aggrandizement and toward the party. 4) Even
this mordant secularism that is said to be so abrading to churchgoers will
have to be tempered to accord with his role as titular leader of all
Democrat politicians.
All in all, I see the Democrats making a fine bargain. To paraphrase the
old Henny Youngman joke, they have crowned him a king. "Here, King. Here,
King."
02/17/05: Has Kofi been percolating too long?
|