Kerry-Vilsack?

In an article that will only bolster the already preposterously large ego of politically minded Iowans, the NY Times reveals that Jim Johnson (the CEO of the VP selection committee for Kerry) has interviewed Gov. Tom Vilsack. Great.

I should explain this frustration. Throughout the campaign Iowans argued in their traditionally passive-aggressive fashion that they alone deserved the right of first refusal. Through years of demonstrated brilliance they had "earned" the right to be the first in the nation. They were smarter, more tenacious in their inspections, more savvy, and finally they were above making their decisions based on the triumverate of modern political evils--polls, TV ads, and media favorites.

They then proceeded to jump on the Johns' band wagon in the last week. It's fine that they want to be first in the nation. It's fine if they want to pretend that they are smarter than average voters. But then they better fucking behave in a fashion that engenders some confidence in the accuracy fo those claims. To make your decision in the last 2 weeks, based on Dean's disdain for the process, Edwards' fine hair and easy charm, and John Kerry's inevitability and great TV spots is hardly the same as the profile of measured analysis and careful reasoning that Iowans so dearly cherish. The idea that election in Iowa requires a candidate to sit down across diner tables with countless elderly taciturn Iowans survives only to the extent that that action actually influences Iowans. Iowans seem to think that they are imbued with a power, possibly gleaned from years of REALLY looking at crops and livestock, that allows them to REALLY know about a man; to know about his will and his abilities.

So that's why Iowans won't cross county lines to see a major presidential candidate. The candidate, the judged, needs to travel to visit me--they say. I am a caucus attendee. I am special, I am capable. And many of them are more well informed, if only because of the actions they carry out in service of the lie. Attending countless meetings, frys (steak and otherwise), and central committee meetings. But I mentioned "the lie."

The lie? That Iowans are inately better judges than any other. That they take more care in their deliberations than those crazy Minnesotans, or those silly Kansans. Iowans are no more capable judges of character, electability, decency, competency, etc than any other people. They simply have constructed this nice little lie that they tell each other. If the voters of New Mexico spent as much time with each candidate as Iowans did they could claim that they were the best judges. However....the real lie is that Iowans make their decisions based on all those moments spent sipping weak brown water coffee with presidential candidates. The truth is that Iowans, like AMERICANS make their decisions based on polls, TV and the media. That's how John Kerry and John Edwards surged while GHD and Dick fell. Howard Dean was hurt because he once said that the precious caucus system was flawed. He didn't play along with the lie. And it bit him in the ass. Editorial note--For months in Iowa I said that I thought it was the most byzantine, arcane and fucked up process on earth, that it was inherently anti-democractic and skewed towards party regulars to the exclusion of infusing the process with new energy. I cheered when Dean's quotation was revealed.

All of this is fine. The only frustration is that you cannot have it both ways. Campaigns shouldn't have to take out your fucking trash, spay your dog, teach your child trig, and attend countless "impromptu coffee meetings" if Iowans are just going to make their decisions like everyone else. Iowans want to be treated like some fragile, nearly ephemeral remnantof American democratic beauty--something to be cherished, catered to, and nurtured (with countless press releases extolling the virtues of Iowans and the process).

If you want to be treated like an endangered species it helps to look like something different from the dominant species. Iowans aren't the spotted owl--they're pigeons. They choose the same way that every other primary Democrat chooses. They claim that they are making a winner, that they are seeing through the hype to find the "diamond in the rough." Truth is they try to pick a "winner" --not the person that they think should win--but the person that they think will win.

The final frustration in all this is the belief that their power extends well beyond the caucus. They think that their governor is a man of such power, political ability and noteriety that he MUST be considered for the Vice Presidential slot. Wrong. Tom Vilsack is the able governor of Iowa. What does he bring? He probably does ensure that Iowans again cast their votes for Kerry. Does Vilsack carry weight in MN? Doubtful. How about Wisconsin? Don't bet on it. The belief expressed by Iowans that their boy is a golden boy simply reeks with the stink of unadulterated caucus-bred arrogance.

I am sick of it.