In response to my email (see below), I received this reply. It specifically addresses the question of whom he (Mat) would have rather seen follow Paul.
"Any relative of Wellstone."
My response:
"So you'd pick Mark or David. Do you know anything about Mark or anything about David? Don't you think that just picking a relative implies that leadership is some kind of genetic trait. Do you know what they each do for a living? Why would Mark and David be better at this job than say any of a number of other elected officials. For what it's worth I've met (briefly) both of them neither of them would have been able/prepared to take on that role. Just being related to Paul doesn't/didn't make you a great leader. His daughter died, his wife died--that only leaves two relatives...and I'm guessing you couldn't tell me which was is Mark and which is David---which suggests that maybe they aren't ready to run for Senate. Oh, just for what it's worth--they (the boys) picked Walter Mondale. That was their wish. They figured that was what their father would have wanted."
My initial response to his frustration with Mondale (and my being touchy): I guess I'll have to disagree again. I think that Mondale was a fine choice. He'd filled the role with distinction, he was not seen as an opportunist (ie, he wasn't capitalizing on Paul's death), he was wildly popular. He is brilliant. He's served honorably, and is dramatically to the left of nearly everyone else in the Senate. Whom would you have chosen?
No comments:
Post a Comment