Howard Dean hasn't changed much since he lost the bid for the Democratic presidential candidacy. The crazy ranting is still his choice of speech delivery. It is said that his grassroot support is still strong. He is the leader of the Democratic Party and the Democrats believe that he is the man for the job -- the one to represent them. This is troubling to me considering the state of the cultural war in our nation albeit not surprising.
I have a difficult time seeing the logic of picking Dean as the head of the Party. Given his records, I would think that the Dems would've picked someone else to represent them and to revive the image of the Party that is presently tarnished. The Dems know they need to work hard to earn the religous American and the traditionalist votes. However, Dean hasn't done much toward this goal. On the contrary, he's done much to offend and discredit these voters. The picture isn't so clear to me, but I'm not so sure at this point that electing Dean as the Party Chairman was simply a badly calculated move or an underhanded one. We shall see as the Democrats' strategists unveil their plans to win the next election.
If the Democrats are being underhanded, then I think it is the case that either Dean is a moron or a puppet or a sacrificial lamb for the Party or quite possibly all of the above. Is Dean so reckless as to think that his behavior and his rantings won't have any effect on his personal integrity? Is he so blind to not see his actions as hurting the Party? Or, is Dean just a political puppet used by the strategists to advance the image of Hillary Clinton as a moderate and a peacemaker? We shall see.
