The Dean Visit

I managed to miss the Dean (plus what were their names?) symposium, work and all, but Dan Munz blogged it here. My take on Dean is that he's basically a centrist deficit hawk with progressive (in the best sense of the word) social values, who became so enraged about the administration's conduct in Iraq that he became spokesman for a movement that would disdain a lot of his positions. In other words, I think the guy is fundamentally sound.

I wish he would take some time over the next two to four years, if his plan is to run again, to engage in a fair-bit of self-criticism. Sure, Bush's misadministration of the Iraqi occupation is unforgiveable. That doesn't justify lending creedence to the idea that Saddam Hussein's capture wasn't a fantastic advance in the cause of international justice, or any of the other silly things he let slip because he is not practiced enough at bullshitting to make photo-op executions of self-lobotimized inmates or indecent assaults on despised minorities into demonstrations of core values.

The 2008 field is wide open, as it will be the first election since 1952 when neither a sitting president nor vice president has headed one of the national tickets. I'm going to be optimistic about the various possibilities (though I will of course be disappointed). Maybe, just maybe, an eagle will emerge (discounting the Constituionally-prohibited and insufferably egomaniacal Arnold Schwarzenneger, who I'd like to see run for the Republican nomination anyway so he can appreciate just how strong the Dobson-Weyrich wing's control of the party really is.) Whatever party he belongs to---though it's inconceivable to me that he will be a Republican---that will be my man. If Dean can temper his own ego, and craft a sensible position on security, he might just be the one.