Big Sky Cairn

Bob Kelleher has a new website.  It’s got about 2 pages on it, but just in case you get lost he was kind enough to provide a site map.

Judging from his “Issues” area, he is trying to reinvent himself as a conservative.  Not sure why he would do that - he’d probably get more votes if he came at Baucus from the Left - where he’s more comfortable.

In any case, given his issue shoe-horn act, his bio page is certainly appropriate, and not just a little ironic:

“Under Construction”

Yep, he’s doing a complete refab on who he is and what he stands for.  He’ll probably be under construction again in 2 years when he picks another Party to run in.

In the mean time, head over to Eyebrows Over Highbrows.  It’s a fun new blog that takes some pot-shots at “Doesn’t-Live-In-Montana” Baucus.  It’s also very well written.

David Crisp has recently fancied himself a monkey on the back of Republican strategists. Lately, he criticizes the GOP for denying Kelleher a speaking slot on the main stage at their convention. He sets up this faulty dilemma:

1. Give the guy the five minutes at the convention podium that he has earned and then let everybody have dessert.
2. Turn our dissatisfaction into a front-page news story that makes us look more divided and inept than ever.

The problem here is that he assumes giving the guy five minutes at the convention wouldn’t be front page news. I think it would under the headline “State GOP Endorses Kelleher” or “Kelleher Finds Himself at Home in GOP.” Kelleher is a nut-job liberal, so giving him a microphone and a stage would make reporters drool. It might even turn into a national story.

There’s plenty of precedent here for the no-win media situation. The GOP comes across badly (in the press) no matter what they do with regard to RINO Lt. Governor Bohlinger - invite him or exclude him. It’s damned if you do, damned if you don’t and my preference is that they keep Kelleher as far away from my party as possible. I don’t want to the convention to be about that.

From a media perspective, Kelleher is the story - it doesn’t really matter what the GOP does.

The paragraph reads:

He supports a huge, New Deal-type government work program to reduce poverty, backs nationalizing U.S. oil and gas industries and favors government-run, socialized medicine. He is highly critical of President Bush.

Not a flattering portrayal of liberal ideologies. Do you think this paragraph (with linguistic gold like “huge government program” and “government run” and “socialized medicine”) would ever show up if the candidate it was describing wasn’t on the Republican ticket?

If this ‘graph was describing a candidate with the same views running as a Democrat, it would read more like this:

He supports expanded work programs to reduce poverty, government-regulated interventions to reduce the cost of energy for consumers and believes that no American should be without health care. He is also critical of President Bush, whose approval ratings are at record lows in Montana.

I have to respectfully disagree with Montana Headlines. Bob Kelleher is not better than Max Baucus. He’s worse. Much worse. He’s not a Republican, but worse, he’s not conservative. He’s liberal as hell.

So I was a little relieved when I read this over at Billings Blog. Maybe a write-in candidacy for Lange? It’s an uphill battle, sure, but that’s nothing new. Republicans were never supposed to win this thing. And maybe a conservative running independent of damaged Republican Party wouldn’t actually be a bad thing. A black-horse candidate could blind-side Baucus and by the time he knew what was going on, it would be too late for the national muscle to step in.

Readers of this blog know that I think Max is much more vulnerable than you’d think if you just read Montana press. He’s the textbook definition of “gone Washington” right up to the fact that he doesn’t even own a house in Montana! He’s unpopular with his base and a thorn in his party’s liberal tendancies nationally.

Here’s the question: If Max Baucus didn’t have $10 million in out-of-state money would anyone still think he was untouchable?

Montana’s an unpredictable state when it comes to politics, so when it comes to money and votes, it would be a mistake to write-off an write-in victory for Lange.

If anyone out there reading this voted for Driscoll or Kelleher, please post your reason here - and feel free to do it anonymously. I know quite a few people who are very interested. Maybe Jay can ask this over at LITW too.

Thank you.

Never thought either Driscoll or Kelleher would get their own Categories, but look at that down there…