Newscoma

The Washington Post has a story about Ron Paul and why libertarians are just smitten with him.

That force is less about Paul than about the movement that has erupted around him — and the much larger subset of Americans who are increasingly disillusioned with the two major political parties’ soft consensus on making government ever more intrusive at all levels, whether it’s listening to phone calls without a warrant, imposing fines of half a million dollars for broadcast “obscenities” or jailing grandmothers for buying prescribed marijuana from legal dispensaries.

Paul brings a forceful argument to the table, however, I can’t get passed some of the stuff in the past. I do go back to a post I wrote last month about that I don’t think he can win the nomination, but would he be willing to run a libertarian ballot as he has done in the past?

News today has liberal darling (I’m not talking Democrat darling, but true liberal darling) Dennis Kucinich suggesting a Republican running mate. Let’s see what he has to say and then let’s break it down, shall we:

“I’m thinking about Ron Paul” as a running mate, Kucinich told a crowd of about 70 supporters at a house party here, one of numerous stops throughout New Hampshire over the Thanksgiving weekend. A Kucinich-Paul administration could bring people together “to balance the energies in this country,” Kucinich said.

I’m thinking. I’m thinking.

It won’t happen, I don’t think, but to be having this dialogue in 2007 is leaps and bounds ahead of both parties’ rhetoric of the last eight years. Actually, would an idea like this, in these times with two men on opposite sides of the fence (but have similar views on the war) be revolutionary in this day and age?

Could voters get behind this kind of balance? Raging Liberal hippie and curmudgeon conservative plain speaker?

I work in a rural college town, I’m hearing a lot about Ron Paul (not so much about Kucinich) and also see that he was only speaking to roughly 70 people when he said this. From a public relations perspective, I think that’s probably a great move on Kucinich’s part. Bring in the rebel Republican rock star’s name and you get national ink.

The article goes on to say that a spokesperson for Paul didn’t fluff it off although he agrees with me that it wouldn’t work in the long run:

It would create a stunning, if dizzying, blend of beliefs, wedding two politicians who hold different views on abortion rights, the role of government in providing health care, and the use of government in fostering — or hampering — the public’s greater good. Those are among the reasons it would never work, said a spokesman for Paul, a Texas congressman and doctor.

“Dr. Paul and Rep. Kucinich are friends and there is a lot of mutual respect,” Paul communications director Jesse Benton said in an e-mail when asked whether a running-mate spot on the Kucinich ticket would be attractive to Paul. “They have worked, and will continue to work, together on ending the war and protecting civil liberties.

“However, Ron wants to substantially cut the size and scope of the federal government. There are too many differences on issues such as taxes and spending to think a joint ticket would be possible.”

Kucinich and Paul are gadflies to their parties’ establishments. Kucinich challenges Democrats to stop cozying up to corporate interests, while Paul challenges Republicans to shed the trappings of big government.

Now, campers, this is getting a little bit more interesting. I sorta hope they keep talking about it, because it could make some of the slicker presidential candidates start giving some firm answers about stuff.

We want answers about stuff, don’t we?

Just saying.

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.

Margaret Mead

In meeting with some folks on Saturday about progressive politics and next year’s upcoming election, I was taken with a couple of things. First of all, we had a lot to say to each other on a personal level. I also agree with Aunt B. when she says we needed a round table. The conversation drifted. And that was alright because we hadn’t seen each other in a few months, B. had just had surgery and she only has a flesh wound. We checked it out. It’s rather saucy.

There were a few things that had whirled through my mind after we met up after Mack asked me what the number one issue was in our minds. Several people answered but I didn’t. I had to think about this because I think many Americans vote on One Issue. Think about the solidarity of the Republican Party right now although I think it is a fragmented because they don’t have a uber strong candidate running for president is well, but this is, of course, the time of infighting in both partisan camps as the clamoring continues to be the presidential nominee next summer.

Back to the One Issue, it may have tendrils but it usually is back to the “one mind think of the issue that is the most important to me” for the voter, some folks vote about family, about national security, women’s rights, immigration, evangelical leadership, gay rights, denying gay rights and the list goes on.

I don’t think it comes down to one thing, per se, as a collective whole. But, it’s the word of mouth that gets people talking about one issue. People in northwest Tennessee are not talking about immigration or gay rights or urban development so much, they are talking about abortion and Christian Leadership and the viability of rural economic industrial recruitment. Lots of Blue Dog Democrats here, that will vote blue but want it with a conservative center. (I know, I know.)

Personally, I’m a Steve Cohen girl in what I dig in my politics, but then again, I hear a lot of chit-chat about others. I’m figuring I’m a minority around here in the ‘ville when it comes to mad Cohen love.

Who are folks talking about around here, you ask? Ron Paul, Bill Richardson and some John Edwards. Hillary, not so much and Barack Obama, very little. But this is just in the world I live in.

And every political election, no matter where the office is, a local election. The issues of rural voting trends are going to be different than urban voting trends. Ask Harold Ford Jr. this question and I’m sure he could fill you in about how rural America sealed his last campaign for senate (and his own folks in Memphis, who are very tired of the Ford dynasty).

Back to a small group of people, I got busy when I got home from Nashville yesterday and found a few places to go but I think the Republicans are a bit more organized right now online as I said last week and I think this is crucial. Their message is on task. We, as democrats, have has such a weird, disconcerting seven years that we have so many issues we want addressed. But we are getting there.

Their were seven of us on Saturday. Southern Beale, Mack, Aunt. B, Chris Wage, Lesley, Squirrel Queen and myself. The meeting stemmed from another cancelled meeting of progressive politics on Saturday but we decided to meet anyway because it needed to be done or at least we felt it did.

It takes a small group of people. That’s how grassroots movements are born and evolve. You meet because it needs to be done.

So, we talked about the issues that are bothering us. We talked about political blogs. And we need to do it again. And then again.

And next time, there will be nine of us, and then later on, 15. And other groups are getting together.

And we will not agree on everything, but we will agree on that we want a voice in a country that has tried to stifle voices and create static where the words of others have had trouble being heard.

But we found each other online. And, that’s something because we heard over the noise.

And this pleases me.

Rex Hammock makes an interesting observation about Ron Paul, although he says his post is not about politics. It’s not, actually. But interesting nonetheless…

If I were blogging about politics, I’d be predicting that Paul’s campaign will continue to display the story-arc of the Howard Dean netroots movement and how Paul’s campaign will likely use the money raised by the those internet people to hire “a super expert” who will get paid lots of money while the campaign crashes and burns, but that’s okay, because that super expert will still get paid even more money to write a memoir and give speeches about the experience.

But this is not a post about politics.

Go read what he’s talking about.

Folks are talking about the political primaries right now and what the presidential candidates are doing and saying which, of course, is always a bit different than their actions. Right now, everyone is on their best behavior. And, I can honestly say, I’ve never seen a presidential campaign anything like this. Ever.

GoldnI says she’s not voting for John Edwards in the primary and gives a detailed, very reasonable analysis of why she doesn’t think he’s the right man for the job:

The decision to accept public financing says a lot about where they are right now. Sure, it’s really easy to say “Well we’ve always supported public financing, so this is about taking a principled stand, it’s not a money calculation, and we hope the rest of the field will be as PRINCIPLED as we are!”

Only problem is, what happens if the “rest of the field” doesn’t take the bait? Then they’re raising as much money as they can (for both the primary AND the general) while you’re constrained by limits that you wouldn’t otherwise have.

Jon at Mushin No Shin has given his first political donation. Here’s why:

I just made my first financial contribution EVER to a major party candidate. Yeah, it creeped me out a little. But Bill Richardson is the first major party candidate I ever thought was actually right for the job. I use the phrase “right for the job” quite precisely. It doesn’t mean I think he’s my ideological soulmate. It means I think he has the right combination of experience, leadership, and “good enough” positions on every major issue to actually do the job we’re hiring someone to do …

Aunt B and I are on the same page I believe here. She discusses a Hillary Clinton presidency:

I just don’t believe it’s good for us to have power pass back and forth between two families.

Bill tried to convince America that it’s not a dynasty, but it feels like that to me.

Finally, Sean Braisted wrote about Barack Obama last Thursday and Iowa.

The Quad City Times is reporting that Michelle Obama, wife of Barack, said that “[i]f Barack doesn’t win Iowa it is over.”

That is certainly what Edwards and Hillary want people to believe, but is it really that true? Iowa is one of the whitest (about 96% white) states in the Union with about 3 Million people overall, the country as a whole is about 77% white. They have a large farming base, which is not true of a majority of electoral votes. Also, in order to win Iowa, you have to be very good at retail politics…but what the hell does retail politics have to do with the Presidential election in this day and age?

In political circles where I live, a lot of folks are talking about who has the capacity to win the election on the democratic ticket.  I’m hearing Edwards name a lot, but I also think that has to do with him being a Southern Democrat. Another name I’m hearing, as you would guess I think, Al Gore, but I don’t think he gives a damn about being president. Energy Czar under a democratic president, yes. Prez, no. I don’t really buy that too much but I’ve been trying to listen to some of the college students that live in the area.

Two names I keep hearing from them is: Ron Paul and Bill Richardson. This, of course, is completely unscientific.

I find that very interesting. These are kids that are not tied up in the politics, just randomly talking about politics at large. I tend to believe that Bill Richardson was initially running for vice-president as much as anything, but I’ve noticed in social networking systems and in my email that Richardson is making a subtle, yet deliberate push right now.

I honestly don’t think we need to dismiss him as a middle-of-the- packer anymore.

With that said, I’m still undecided. I know I’m expected, probably, to jump on someone’s wagon, but I haven’t.

I just haven’t been reached yet by a candidate. Isn’t that what they are supposed to do, reach us with their message. We’ll see if that happens anytime soon.

After the last seven years, I’m having trouble believing anybody.