Ouch. Well, file this under "don't post your best stuff on other people's blogs when you should be creating content on your own." Roger L. Simon has a bit of a post-mortum on Howard Dean's Iowa fiasco. Go ahead and read Roger's interesting take. The discussion there inspired me to post about the issue, but rather than leaving my remarks buried on Roger's blog I figured I'd re-post it here. Anyway, here's my (re-posted) take:

I think Dean got caught up in his own echo-chamber. The rest of the world outside the close-on followers got a look inside that chamber during his Iowa fiasco and what they saw wasn't pretty. Dean's been showing signs of being surrounded by too many people who like the angry-man act, and that's OK at first but it will only carry you so far. He should have known it was time to start widening his appeal a bit but he lost perspective. The average, undecided voter doesn't like that angry stuff and the signs were already showing that something was amiss. What was it he said? "George Bush isn't MY neighbor." Sorry, that kind of thing is going to be a big turn-off to most voters. I've watched election after election here in Massachusetts as the Kennedy haters wonder why someone doesn't go after Teddy with more passion considering all the skeletons in his closet. Simple answer is because it does not work. The American people will not elect someone they perceive to be classless to the US Senate or the Presidency. Smart politicians get others to do the attacks for them, but again, Howard Dean got caught up watching the reaction of his cheering crowds and mistook them for the electorate as a whole. Big mistake.

So the "YEEEAAAGH" moment was just the frosting on the cake. I actually didn't think it in and of itself was so bad. To me it didn't sound nutty, it just looked unnatural. Governor, you're an MD politician. In short, you're a nerd. That means no break-dancing and no shouting "Yeehaw" (oh, and avoid riding in tanks - like the plague). Try either one and prepare to look very, very silly and also prepare to apologize to your staff who are going to have to run around the country trying to buy up all the video tape.

Thing is, he gave the media the hook they needed to feel important. One thing the press shares - left or right - they like to feel powerful, and taking down a front-running Presidential candidate is like hunting big-game for them, and Dean's performance of late has left him limping, weak and outside the protection of the rest of the pack. So now he gets to wear the Ross Perot albatross - the label of "nut." A candidate cannot survive with that label strapped around their neck, and it's Dean's turn to wear it.

Jeff Brokaw [commenter at Roger's place]:

"Not only are you 100% correct about Dean being an opportunist on the Iraq war, so is just about every other anti-Bush - oops I mean anti-Iraq-war - politician. Very of them said anything negative in the slowest "rush to war" in history; it was only after they saw political opportunity that they dug down deep and found some brand new conviction. A pox on all their houses. Take a stance and mean it, or shut up and let people with vision and courage drive."

Totally agree. Now we have Kerry as front-runner. This Bay Stater has watched Kerry from the beginning and I've been embarrassed watching his lame perfomance - his poor delivery, his absolutely execrable self-serving statements at every possible opportunity and his waffling. He's had it easy up until now since he's been nothing but a dissappointing also ran. Well that just changed so get ready Senator.

I do expect he'll have an easier time than Dean, though. Before the "nut" label, Dean was already getting the "can't beat Bush" label, which sub-consciously translates into the "not a serious candidate" label - front-runner or no. Kerry is still a "could possibly beat Bush," and that will keep him in good stead with at least a large portion of the press. The big question is how long that lasts.

But hey, who really knows. This could all be irrelevant. It's only Iowa, right?

=end quote=

As I think about this further, I've just thought of an example of one of Kerry's free-rides. The day Saddam was captured Kerry's remarks were self-serving and embarrassing. Even the local liberal talk-hosts were embarrassed for him. Dean's remarks were mostly decent, but the press focussed in on the one controversial thing he said - that Saddam's capture didn't make us safer, while Kerry got a complete pass for his lame response (No, I don't have transcripts or access to Lexis-Nexus search. These are just my personal recollections.). Now, no more free ride for Kerry.