Someone please stop the E$tablishment Democrats

In my earlier predictions on this blog regarding the elections, I noted that Howard Dean would not get any credit for the congressional sweep. Well, it seems I was a bit cautious in my assessment (as I was with my House and Senate picks). In the New Republic, there is a piece which suggests that Dean failed the Democratic party. Here it is:

Some big name Democrats want to oust DNC Chairman Howard Dean, arguing that his stubborn commitment to the 50-state strategy and his stinginess with funds for House races cost the Democrats several pickup opportunities.

The candidate being floated to replace Dean? Harold Ford.

Says James Carville, one of the anti-Deaniacs, "Suppose Harold Ford became chairman of the DNC? How much more money do you think we could raise? Just think of the difference it could make in one day. Now probably Harold Ford wants to stay in Tennessee. I just appointed myself his campaign manager."

So let me get this straight...the Democratic incumbents running for office were undefeated in all House, Senate and Governor races, in addition to gaining their respective majorities. Yet, we are to believe that Dean held this up? While, I am not going to suggest that Dean was solely responsible for the sweep, he certainly had a more integral role than all of the E$tablishment Dems put together.

Note to James Carville, Paul Begala and the rest of you jackasses: We will win more elections if you learn to just shut the hell up. Enough of the inane centrist blather of the DLC, the Dems won this election because they appealed to the people, not the DC king makers.