2004 Elections: Democratic Party Contenders

You have a damn good spatial sense, Blatham!

Nice metaphor, but do you really think it is true? Gebhart? Kerry? Mosley Braun? Clark? Sharpton? "Towering above..." ???

I do happen to believe Kucinich, Lieberman, and possibly even Edwards are, at least, authentic versions of what they claim to be.

Dean is merely an engaging and stimulating figure who can make the various splinter groups which make up the Democrat party feel that together they can mean something. Gradually the contradictions among them (and within Dean) will emerge, and this phenomenon will collapse.

hi george...hope you had a nice weekend...when you get time, tell me a bit about the renovation challenge you are facing in SF

The dwarf line was meant as a response to the 'ten (once seven) dwarves' derogation. But I truly don't think Bush is even nearly the equal of any of those folks in intellect. I have been flabbergasted, and remain so, that anyone voted for or defends the fellow. I say that not to make a political stab, but with utter sincerity.

You bring up 'authenticity', and something like that notion is what is commonly put forward to describe what Bush possesses, in lieu of other qualities - 'he's a straight-shooting practical everyman'. But god in heaven...has there ever been a president so coddled and packaged and stage-managed and protected?

This presentation reaps the anti-intellectual populist tradition (you gotta read hofstadter), but more importantly, it is the only way the fellow could be made palatable as the leader of a modern state.

"Dean is merely an engaging and stimulating figure.." and experienced, and courageous, and smart as hell, and with a significant base in each state thanks mostly to an alert, hardworking staff, clever use of resources. Plus he's got Bush's number, sees him for what he is. Kucinich is indeed authentic, principled, more courageous but less well organized than Dean.

Kucinich quotes and spiritual education info.

Excerpts

Quote: "The energy of the stars becomes us. We become the energy of the stars. Stardust and spirit unite, and we begin: One with the universe. Whole and holy. From one source, endless creative energy, bursting forth, kinetic, elemental. We, the earth, air, water, and fire source of nearly 15 billion years of cosmic spiraling" (remarks to Praxis Peace Institute, June 9, 2002).

Quote: "In that moment I had a new understanding that this flag, as spangled with stars as a bolt of heaven itself, connects the United States with eternal principles of unity, of brotherhood, of sisterhood. … One bright star shines for hope. Another star for optimism. Another for well-being. One for freedom. One for abundance. One for creativity. One for togetherness. One for peace. One star to wish upon to create your highest aspirations, to make your dreams come true" (remarks at Redwood Sequoia Conference, Sept. 14, 2002).

Charge: Kucinich is "at risk of being tagged the 'Moonbeam Congressman' " (Cleveland Plain Dealer, March 10, 2003).

Context: According to the Associated Press and the Plain Dealer, Shirley MacLaine is the godmother to Kucinich's daughter. She introduced Kucinich to Chris Griscom, who has become a "spiritual adviser" to Kucinich. Griscom, who reportedly helped MacLaine "communicate with trees," has founded two institutes "to teach people how to connect with their inner [selves], partially by helping them to remember their past lives." Carol Rosin, another Kucinich friend and supporter, "helped arrange to send the cremated remains of her friend LSD guru Timothy Leary into space."

Full story

How inappropriate for a Presidential candidate to be spiritual! What the hell would Nancy and Ronnie Reagan or the Bush family make of that?

Clark, Edwards Cede Iowa


I gotta see this as tacit admission by both that they really have no chance. Gephardt, as a neighboring-state favorite son, is the logical choice for an Iowa win, with Kerry as a likely strong second and Dean a disappointing third. Edwards, Kucinich, Sharpton, and Mosely-Braun really have nothing to sell there. What this will do is split the Footnotes-to-be into two camps; Dean, Kerry, and Gephardt vs The Stragglers. The biggest effect will be a stronger foucus on February 3rd, which now stacks up as the real shake-out point.

Blatham,

Well you are right - the "dwarf" derogation was mine. So perhaps I do deserve your "towering" riposte. However I don't believe it is accurate.

No doubt that Bush is inarticulate. You and I (and many others) have ways with words that he clearly lacks. That however is not the same thing as wisdom. A political figure who, with admirable logic and clarity of expression, advocates positions I find to be illogical, wrongheaded, or even self-serving and perverse, worries me far more than one who advocates positions I think wise, even though the clarity and eloquence of his expressions of them leaves much to be desired. It is also true that the chattering classes who most value verbal dexterity, are most likely never to reconcile themselves to the positions he advocates. Bush may well have calculated that there is little payoff to the attempt to address them in the terms which they may find less revolting, and instead focused on addressing a larger population in a more visceral manner. If so, he would not be the first political leader who has encouraged his foes to underestimate him.

Political leaders of all stripes are carefully coddled, packaged, and stage managed. The various European empires lived on this for centuries. Franklin Roosevelt was an adept practicioner of the art, as were Kennedy and even Clinton (who used far more of what passes for White House pomp than Bush). I believe Bush is merely typical in this. If, instead you believe he is the wizard of Oz, merely a prosaic figure behind the curtain, and utterly sustained by others, you will, no doubt, reach a different conclusion.

Pretty good weekend - recovering from cold that appears to be sweeping through the area. We bought the house in San Francisco about 16 years ago and lived in it for about six years. Since then various business ventures have taken me first to Seattle, then to Denver, and now the Washington area. We kept the house and installed a daughter there to watch over it. My wife, in an effort at self-fulfillment, started a decorating business which she gradually grew and transported with me in our travels. Now she has a regular construction crew, rooms full of catalogues, fabric and stone samples, a scattering of clients across the country and spends time prowling trade shows from France to Los Angeles. A few years ago she took up some "minor" improvements to the house (a 'classical revival' Victorian with lots of too small rooms). It was all a ruse for a seven year project that was to become the fulfillment of her fantasies. She goes out there periodically to oversee major new phases of the work: I go out there periodically to see if I have any money left.

Actually she has done a wonderful job in a project that has involved everything from a new foundation to plumbing, wiring, new bathrooms & kitchen, wine cellar, a wall or two knocked down - and an old garage turned into a gym - just to distract me. The work is about done and the result is bright, colorful, cheerful - and livable. Our plan is to give up all this drudgery and ensconce ourselves in her fantasy palace. I fear however that she has become addicted to such projects, and live in dread at what may come next.

Just an observation about wives and renovations, george; it seems to me they think along the lines of "Wouldn't that look nice", while we think along the lines of "Well, yeah, but if we're gonna do that, we're gonna hafta rebuild the subfloor, relocate two bearing walls, and move a bunch of plumbing, electric, and ductwork".

Its much worse than that Timber ! They think of all that other stuff too - they just don't think it is useful to let us get confused with all the details. When you know, beyond all doubt, that you are right, dwelling on the thoughts and reservations of a less enlightened mortal, is a great waste of time.

Women lack doubt. They are certain of their conclusions in a way that we cannot match. Regular guys like you, me, Blatham, Cicerone, and others - even Bi Polar - know in our hearts that at least a third of what we put out is bull. We judge each other on style and consistency like civilized people. Women are by nature certain their goals are right, and view all related communications as mere formulas for dealing with lesser beings. Frightening when you think of it. Consider Tartarin.

Wait a minute! Are you saying Donald Rumsfeld is a woman?

george

It is not that Bush is inarticulate or inelegant in language use. It's that, clearly, he is incurious. One might attribute his language problems to a learning disability, but any educator reading or hearing his sentences will immediately can spot immediately that this fellow has spent very little time with books. And that observation is strengthened by the content of what he has said.

Incurious people ought not to be in such positions. Either they are convinced they are already in possession of enough knowledge, or they trust to authority to reveal truth to them. Bush apparently suffers from both of those assumptions.

Yes, I do think the man has been sustained by others. That was true in his business dealings and it is surely true now. I mentioned the pre-packaged nature of his relationship to the electorate as a response to your suggest of 'authenticity'...because though I do understand that all politicians have PR staff (Didion's book Political Fictions is merciless with Dems too), I have never encountered such an extreme case as Bush. But the reason isn't just standard pragmatics, it is because he's not very bright and not very knowledgeable, so he cannot be allowed to attempt something like a townhall even if he wanted it.

Your house sounds wonderful, and so does your wife actually. I'm sure you two will be very happy there for many years with the adopted painters and carpenters

"Women are by nature certain their goals are right, and view all related communications as mere formulas for dealing with lesser beings. Frightening when you think of it. Consider Tartarin."

It's the erection uncertainty problem. Men are worriers by nature all the time. They have that maybe/maybe not dangling through their lives. Can't really blame their insecurity. Can't really stop laughing either!

tart

Great response!

Hasty, slapdash, Blath. New puppy arrived yesterday. Everywhere. Puddles. Wants to play.

Quite interesting article about Rumsfeld here:
Rumsfeld's Roots

Interesting interview indeed. I'd never have thought Rumsfeld used to be a dove on Vietnam. Thank you, Walter!

Thomas,
Rumsfeld, a woman. THAT was good !

Tartarin,
I figured you would throw in the erection uncertainty bit, but I didn't count on the subtlety of "... maybe/maybe not dangling through their lives."
With the follow-on "Can't really blame their insecurity. Can't really stop laughing either!" part, you amply proved my point. You may well be a classic case, exhibiting as you do all the symptoms.

Blatham,

This was a real test of character and loyalty - and you failed ! What a slavish reply. "Tart, Great Response". You could easily have noted that she illustrated my point or something, anything - even a small clause - there for me. But no, nothing at all. I feel abandoned.

george

Abandonment builds character. Clever bits always win my heart.

and i have always prefered bumpy bits.