A Dean, mean, fighting machine

John Nichols comments on the "election" of former Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean to lead the DNC. He says:

With the selection of Howard Dean as its chairman, the 213-year-old Democratic Party has become something it has not been for a long time: exciting.

...unlike past DNC chairs, Dean won't have to scream for attention. Taking over as chairman of a party that is locked out of the White House and unable to muster anything more than a "minority leader" to flex its legislative muscle, Dean has positioned himself as the most camera-ready Democrat in the country.

This is fairly accurate. People are excited, sure. And Dean will definitely be one of the most visible Dems around. But is that a sign that the Democrats are inching closer to a solution, or fueling the problem? Let's try this. Step back for a second and tell me who the chairman of the GOP is. Could you name him without clicking on my oh-so-technologically-savvy embedded link? Exactly.

Mississippi Congressman Bennie Thompson sums up the pro-Dean sentiment when he says Dean will "bring new spirit and new energy to the party, the likes of which we haven't seen in a long time."

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to pooh-pooh the ascension of Dean. I personally like the guy. He was my early choice in the primaries. I think he will do some good for the party, and maybe slap some sense into "veteran" Democrats still posing at the Republican look alike contest. If anything, he can help get a party once known for it's strong ties to the working class and minorities away from the corporate puppet masters and back to the liberal, grass roots efforts that make younger voters gravitate to the Green Party. At least that's the ideal.

But the DNC chair can't do everything. Not in the fashion Nichols suggests. Especially since he won't be running for president in 2008. Making someone who won't be a candidate your most visible and vocal party member kind of poses a problem.

So, who's left? Certainly not John Kerry or John Edwards. That's the bigger question. Because in the end, people didn't think about Terry MCauliffe when casting their votes in 2004, and they won't be thinking about Howard Dean in 2008.