Austin Bay has written what I'd like to hope is John Kerry's political epitaph:

John Kerry’s simply not ready for the YouTube world.

Follow his career, such as it is. Kerry’s made it to the lofty perch of Senator from Massachusetts by:

(1) planning a political career from the age of 15 (if not age 11)

(2) riding the coattails of the Kennedy political machine (ie, brown-nosing and carrying water for the clan)

(3) marrying rich women

This nifty route to power works for a mediocre, arrogant politico in a world where the friendly political machine and a friendly media mask his foibles, incompetencies, and inadequacies.

The friendly machine and media also blunt criticism. The arrogant mediocrity (backed by clan and family cash) can float along within a machine and media bubble, slowly rising from preening young poseur to Beltway Clerk to Senator.

The Internet and talk radio have burst that bubble. The bubble is a puddle of slippery soap. I suspect Kerry now knows it. His Tuesday (October 31) press conference was a dismal failure. He essentially pounded his chest like an eighth grade boy and shouted “I’m a man.” That conference was designed to focus his (Kerry’s) media enablers on the White House, and spin the story as a “Kerry versus Bush” conundrum rather than Kerry responding to the people he’d slandered. The New York Times bought that meme, but the Internet didn’t. Troops responded with the now classic “Jon Cary halp” photo, which Drudge slapped on his page. Kerry then went into “seclusion” — as safe a place as any for a “man” insistently destroying himself. But seclusion sounds so un-manly, doesn’t it? (Seclusion– that’s where Victorian ladies retreat after their latest affair becomes London’s topic du jour.)

[Update about 10 AM EST]

Mark Steyn has further thoughts on Kerry, and the extinction of the Henry Jackson Democrats.

OTOH, I don't particularly like what brought him low. Ie, it was an off the cuff remark. It strikes me that a lot of politicians are hamstring by these things and it's not necessarily a good thing. For example, it means that some races might be decided not by the person with the better platform and experience, but by the person who can better control their environment. Ie, it can't be used against you, if it isn't on video.

However, I think Kerry also had a more traditional political problem. If he made a straightforward apology, he'd lose suppose from some of the anti-war groups. Lower profile media appearances can be tailored to the audience, but this apology was to everyone. Hard to be two-faced under those circumstances.

If Kerry didn't have a 35 year history of denouncing and defaming the military, then probably more vets would've been willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. However, given his track record, it's very easy to believe Kerry said what he actually thinks. Perhaps it wasn't what he intended to say out loud, but what he said was in keeping with his track record.

Karl,
If the "off the cuff" remark had been defamatory to blacks, women, any-religion-but-Christianity, homosexuals, union members, teachers, or the Democrats as a party, he'd be toast too. Probably worse. Oh, wait, I need to insert "and he was a Republican" in there somewhere.

To me, Larry nails the issue. This remark wasn't a simple slip, but rather a re-affirmation of stances he has taken many times previously.

Karl, I agree that we end up with the Congress we have because the process requires those who are socially correct rather than professionally qualified. However, Kerry should really have done the simple apology (certainly not stated, "I apologize to no one").

If anti-war groups had a problem with this, then that's another issue. To date, anti-war groups have tried to put up a facade that they oppose war but support the troops. Kerry's apology would have been to the troops, and if they anti-war crowd would complain at their peril.