So. Much to his credit, Lott stepped down, in a way that showed class. The road to redemption is long, Senator Lott, but you've made the right choices this time.
I'm sure this isn't breaking news for most of you, and I'm sure other folks are already asking about this, but I'm just getting back on my feet and I want to talk about it. Here's the question: a large number of weblogs--more than I can count, Dean's World being but one of a very large chorus--broke this story. A few days later, it was on all the mainstream media sources (CNN, Fox, ABC, CBS, PBS, NPR, etc). So, how much can we credit the weblog phenomenon for this? I think it's fair to say that we were probably a catalyst. I'd even say it's the first definitive proof that, in at least some way, weblogs can play a role in changing the world around us. Please tell me what you think.
By the way, I'm moving pretty darned slow, but I'm back. Now I need to go get some drugs and get back in bed. You have no idea how much I've suffered. I mean, seriously, people. Do you know what pain is? Let me tell you what pain is.
I just spent four days with nothing to watch but CNN!!
I've always tried to keep an eye on that channel, but can I just say here and now that they really need to go through that place with a battle ax and start swinging? I don't necessarily mean the on-air personalities, most of whom are competent. The producers, the writers, the editors, everything and everybody behind the scenes. "Boring" doesn't even begin to describe it. And if you don't quite see it, try going four days without Fox, MSBNC, NPR, the BBC, or the internet to give you somewhere else to turn.
I could spend a whole day watching Fox News. I could spend a whole day watching PBS or listening to NPR. I think I'd rather be gutted like a fish (again) than be stuck with nothing but CNN. These people have not moved one inch out of the 1980s, have they?
Uuurrgh. Okay. I need to take some drugs and go back to sleeep. Mr. Utter, can you keep going for another day or three? %-)
(Thanks all for your words of encouragement. You are all very kind and your messages cheered me to no end.)
I supported Senator Lott right up to the end, but I agree that it is time to put this episode behind us. Senator Frist, assumed likely successor as US Senate majority leader, is a class act and will have strong support from the conservative community. I am told he is a likely candidate for president in 2008, when, assuming a Bush victory in 2004, the Republicans will need a new top leader. The top spot in the US Senate will give Senator Frist exactly the preparation time he will need to battle the other side, especially if Senator Clinton is their candidate.
Arnold Harris
Mount Horeb WI
Dean:
Welcome back. Great to hear from you, really.
Re: CNN -- it is really dreadful and hideous isn't it? The only thing worse than that would be to have to watch MSNBC 24/7.
Ara
P.S. Are you doing Demerol? I had occasion to be taking that once, after I fell off a house. It was, er, pretty intense stuff.
Arnold: Good thoughts, but I must point out that, for all that Senators have always been considered viable Presidential candidates, in the entire history of the Republic we have only sent two of them directly to the White House, and the last (Kennnedy) won one of the closest elections in history, taking power amid a flurry of accusations that he'd stolen the office.
We have put more generals into the White House than we have sitting Senators.
I would be looking to the governors. That is, of course, conventional wisdom. But then, conventional wisdom is usually correct.
Ara: I started out with Morphine, then they moved me to Demerol when the Morphine got me itchy. However, they're using those newfangled gadgets these days where you pump it as-needed, and it's very difficult to get much of a high anymore. The man's always oppressing us that way.
Out of hospital, I'm now on Propox-N/APAP, also known as Darvocet-N. Not much fun, but perfectly adequate.
Right now I just wish I could find something that would crave my urge to plunge my face into a Double Whopper-hold-the-mayo, but alas, I'm stuck with Jell-o and broth for at least a few more days. :-P
I might could do another day or two, although today pretty much didn't happen. I'll bet I've slept more than you in the last 24 hours.
Dean, you are historically correct about the paucity of senatorial leaps directly into the Executive Mansion, Kennedy being the last.
Nonetheless, there is no known principal of political science that explains this particular American phenomenon, whereby army generals and governors have proven more electable to national office than US senators. God only knows what chances, if any, a mere member of the House of Representatives has in such a contest. (Gephardt, get real and keep your seat in the House while you still have it).
In any case, I wonder if the Curse of the Senate is any different from the odds on heads or tails with the flip of a coin. Each flip is its own unique event. There is no particular reason you can't flip it to land heads-up 50 times in a row, or tails-up either, for that matter.
Another factor: This particular biennium, all 50 state governments are dead broke. They all suffer from sacred-cow programs that cannot be cut, coupled with diminishing expectations of tax revenues to pay for them. If I were a betting man, I would say that most of America's governors are going to seem like they are walking down Loser Boulevard for the next few gubernatorial elections, because their budget problems are essentially insoluble and their increasingly conservative legislatures (hopefully) will not allow them to raise taxes. This is not the yeast from which the dough of national candidacies are baked.
Besides, my bet is that the media will make Frist -- the doctor-senator -- into some new kind of hero now that he has been raised to accidental glory by another man's untimely and unwise birthday party remarks broadcast on CSPAN; a movie producer might justifiably entitle this: "Dr Smith goes to Washington". He even looks a little like Jimmy Stewart and is said to have a pleasant bedside manner, which is not at all bad for television.
Arnold Harris
Mount Horeb WI
Arnold, I have an excellent reason: Senators are representatives, while Governors are executives.
And, as a reminder, the President of the United States is an executive position. QED.
Arnold: I quite agree with most of that. Indeed, we have had only 43 tosses of the coin. How much of a sample is that? Although in fairness, one should also count primary victories to really look at this issue, and I do not have hard data on that. On the flip side, given that most other republics around the world use a parliamentary system, looking to them for examples would seem a bit fruitless anyway.
In any case, we have what evidence we have, and it remains empirically the case that Senators typically don't get elected. Governors usually do. My own theory is simply that Senators aren't generally seen as executives.
As for your descriptions of the problems America's governors have at the moment: I don't think Bill Owens has as many problems as many of the other governors do. Just to name at least one name. :-)
Dean, I bend to your factual data about the non-electability to to the presidency of senator. An ounce of empirical observations is worth a pound of theory.
But what happens if a US Senator Bill Frist is facing a US Senator Hillary Clinton for the same presidency in the same election year? Is this the equivalent if the tossed coin landing straight up on its edge?
Arnold Harris
Mount Horeb WI
Well that'ud pretty much do it, wouldn't it?
All is possible, of course.
But then, in theory, they could well nominate me. Not that I'll be running. But it wouldn't stop the potential for a draft based on a groundswell write-in candidacy. I will leave such machinations to my legions of loyal followers.
(Don't mistake my joking for sarcastic disagreement. A Frist/Clinton matchup in 2008 is entirely plausible. I'd call it long odds, but good gracious, if I could predict such things with certainty I'd be a billionaire.)
Dean, Why are the odds long for a Frist/Clinton 2008 matchup? Mrs Clinton will most probably be re-elected to the senate in 2006, meaning that she would not have to give up that seat to run for the presidency two years later. Frist is already being talked about as Republican heir apparent to succeed George W Bush after the assumed second Bush term in the White House, and as senate Republican leader and probable majority leader for the next 4-6 years, he will have the most bully pulpit in the United States short of the presidency itself. He is not known to be a screw-up, will probably be effective, and for some reason probably rooted in the perversity of political stardom, will have even the liberal press rooting for him for some time to come. And behind the Jimmy Stewart-like good looks and the demeanor of "Dr Smith Goes to Washington", I see a competitor with his eye on the main chance.
Does anyone imagine Mrs Clinton's long-term goal has been anything other than the presidency? Especially after her husband was elected to that office for two terms and her known penchant to try to accomplish anything he has taken on? Whenever I listen to and look at a televised appearance of that woman, I see only fierce determination and a singular will to power such as one would expect from a Morgan Le Fey of the American empire in the late 20th and early 21st centuries. She is not really a contender for a run in 2004, and she will be 61 years of age on election day 2008. That, then, is probably her last chance, because in order to run in 2012, she must give up her senate seat because her second term ends that year. This does not necessarily mean she will get her hand on the Democratic brass ring, but I think that is year in which she will make her play for it.
Arnold Harris
Mount Horeb WI
Please, if anyone is going to be written in as a candidate let it be me. I'd be a much better President and Dean would be a fine First Gentleman...
Besides, Dean would be impeached as soon as he installed a urinal in the Oval Office.
An interesting side view for the Frist/Clinton discussion: I was recently reminded that LBJ moved from Senate Majority Leader to VP on Kennedy's ticket. It could be that Frist would like to re-enact that event. He seems to be one of the more frequently named possibilities for VP these days, and I'm not sure that Cheney would like to run again considering his age and health.
What I would like to see is Condi Rice as VP in 2004. That would ROCK! Heh.
Dean:
Given your record, I'm betting against any picks you make.
:^)
He who looks into the crystal ball ends up eating broken glass.
Hell, even Saruman knew that! Even Pippin Took knew that! And Denethor too.
Heh.