Saturday, December 22, 2007

Mike Gravel will apparently go the third-party route

I can't really say I'm surprised. Nor am I surprised with the press coverage of Gravel's campaign that appears (if one were not to know any better) to have been written by a bunch of petulant bratty J-school interns.

Not to worry, Andrew Malcom, your wish for a non-unique candidate to end up occupying the White House will no doubt come true. In this conformist culture, uniqueness (which is what folks like Gravel promise) is sinful.

Still, I'll use this space once more to suggest that Gravel's ideal of uniting the nation's discontents (of which there are plenty, given the sorry state of partisan politics) is certainly worthy of entertaining. We have plenty of potential front-runners to try to unite a diverse and admittedly divergent proportion of the electorate. The wars (Iraq, Afghanistan), the frontal assault on whatever was left of Constitutional liberties, etc., are issues that have the potential to unite many of us, and Gravel has been one of the few to consistently discuss those issues as openly and as bluntly as possible. Heck, he even has plenty of anti-war street cred. Whether or not Gravel is the right messenger per se remains to be seen, but his ideas are quite reasonable, and I could think of far worse potential candidates (all of the front-runners in the Dem and GOP parties jump immediately to mind as among the worst of the worst).

I would once again politely suggest that it's high time as well for anti-war activists - whether leftist, libertarian, conservative, etc. - ditch the sectarianism and look at what we have in common. One point in common already is that the likely Dem and GOP nominees will be common enemies. That's a starting point.

No comments:

Post a Comment