I'm not a far left person.  I'm a little left of the old center, the center that existed before the Republican Revolution of '94, the center that's been largely either obfuscated or forgotten in the national politics of the last dozen years.  I don't want the government involved in my personal decisions - whether or how I have sex, how I decide to control my reproductive process, whether or not my shell of a body should be forced to continue should I be forced into a persistent vegetative state.  I want guns controlled, but don't see the feasibility of outright outlaw.  I'm generally against the death penalty, but will make exception for certain truly heinous crimes or determinedly persistent criminals.  I am part of the forgotten constituency - doubly so since I live in the south.

Members of the DLC, which is certainly more centrist than the netroots who overwhelmingly support Dean, would write me off because of my geography.  And yet, for all I'm just slightly left of center, I'm still left-leaning, and would - given the choice between a Republican or a Democrat - largely prefer to vote Democratic.  And, largely, I do.  A Republican might sneak in here or there, based on how they've done their jobs so far, or how they stack up against the competition, but point-for-point, social issues matter more to me than taxes, and I vote accordingly.

And, as I said, certain elements of the Democratic party would abandon me, and others like me, because they find it difficult to win over the region.

But not Howard Dean.  He believes in us.

Dean's a little further left than Hillary, but not so far left as Kennedy.  He's more centrist than credited, and his 50 state strategy is determined to make inroads in the states I love - the homes of bluegrass, and Sunday dinner, and bar-be-que you simply cannot find anywhere else.   Prior to the latest election, much had been made of the regionalization of the Democratic party, localizing and focusing on northeastern and west coast states, falling out of touch with "the heartland." 

The Democrats never really "lost touch" with the heartland or the south, so much as they forgot how to talk to us, and after a while they stopped caring about us.  They abandoned us as much as some of us abandoned them.  It is, after all, difficult to cast a vote for a party affiliation when many members of that party automatically assume you're stupid, or bigoted, or both.  Dean looked beyond the superficial stereotypes, recognized a south worthy of salvation and worked to bring that transition to fruition.

It is thanks to Dean's grassroots work, his focus on the old populist values - subverted, but not usurped, of late by the GOP - that the Democrats saw the progress of progressivism in the south.  Shumer wasn't really interested in us and Bayh or Emanuel couldn't really have managed it.

Contrary to certain national Democrats, Dean believes there are 50 states in the union, that each state brings something to the table, and that every state is worth winning.  As such, Howard Dean should absolutely stay on at the DNC - it is the Democratic National Committee, after all.  Why have someone in charge who would write off an entire swath of our nation?  That kind of attitude only gets repaid by voting for the other guy.

Unless the Dems really don't care about winning at the national level in '08, in which case they should definitely toss Dean out.  Wouldn't want to rack up too many successes, I guess, if you're hoping the south will hand you your hat.

The blame game in full swing: it's everywhere, it's everywhere!

Certain members of the rank and file blame Sen. Elizabeth Dole (R-NC), Sen. Dole blames "the market," Republican analysts blame Karl Rove, Karl Rove blames Mark Foley and "the six year itch," Arkansas Gov. (and potential Republican '08 candidate) Mike Huckabee blames George Bush, GOP Senators and Representatives blame George Bush and Donald Rumsfeld, Massachusetts GOPers blame their Governor, Mitt Romney (also a potential '08er), outgoing RNC Chair Ken Mehlman blames the voters, libertarians blame social conservatives who blame the middle of the party for losses felt across the nation.

There's plenty of blame to go around, yet no one seems willing to accept any of it.

Since Sen. George Allen (R-VA) conceded his race to Jim Webb (D), the election meme has turned to the Democrats, with far leftists urging them on toward liberal revolution and anyone right of center admonishing them to "play nice."  We don't need either.  With a good 2/3 of citizens identifying, on some level, with certain elements of traditional, Goldwater conservatism, a full on liberal revolution is not likely to occur in the next two years, particularly if Dems want to maintain and expand the legislative control they won last week.  Dems will have to chart a relatively moderate course, embracing and finalizing legislation with wide, cross-party support: increasing the minimum wage, finding and enforcing a solution in Iraq, and addressing trade imbalances. 

Then they'll have to just govern: balancing budgets and funding programs and commemorating post offices, the terminally unsexy stuff that has to be done even when they'd rather be playing squash or writing their memoirs.

Neither, however, should the Democrats "play nice" with an administration so invested in its own mythos of indestructibility that it steals our country out from under us.  They must begin real government oversight, not just in Iraq - where it is arguably the most immediately necessary, but also at the FDA, at the Department of Energy, at Gitmo, and, yes, even in their own congressional offices.  Investigations will - and should - commence, and, where we cannot take back the outsized power granted this inept administration, certain legislative items expanding the already monstrous power of the executive should be blocked.

But back to the blame game.  What the Republicans, on the whole, fail to realize is that they are all to blame.  From their laissez-faire approach to oversight, to their kowtowing sycophancy, to their ingrained corruption, to their inert disdain for the public whom they nominally serve, they are entirely responsible for their fawning, feckless lack of job performance.  The voters didn't do that to them, they did it to themselves.

We just finally got tired of it.