Bashing Brooks Part XXXVI

David Book's latest column is once again, nonsense packed. He criticizes the Democratic establishment for not crushing the Dean insurgency like the Republican party elite did to John McCain in 2000. Needless to say, there are a few problems with Brook's argument. In the fist place, Brooks completely ignores how utterly dishonorable the conservative war on McCain was, most likely because his party's race baiting and naked appeals to bigotry reflect rather poorly on George W. Bush, the man these ugly tactics benefited. Brooks also fails to recognize the practical and idealogical reasons why the Democratic establishment would have with snuffing the Dean campaign. Firstly, there are too many "establishment" candidates (Lieberman, Clark, Kerry, Gephardt, ect.) and the power of establishment, to the extent that there is an establishment, is diffused. Since many in the press are so fond of comparing Dean to McGovern, it might be important to note that one of the reasons why McGovern failed was because of the Party Bosses' hostility towards him, so perhaps the Democratic heavies of today want to avoid that same mistake (though clearly Mr. Brooks would like nothing more than for that to happen). Finally, the Democratic establishment might be hesitant to go nuclear against Dean on principle, because this is after all the "Democratic" party and they might be the teensiest bit uncomfortable with an influential minority smashing a grassroots movement, I'm not saying this is the best reason, just that it is possible. Either way, the last thing I would want the Democrats to do is emulate the Republican's horrible 2000 South Carolina presidential primary, it is things like that to make me pround that I'm not a conservative.