Charlie Dooley pulled it out of her, Jill says: why she’s running, that is, for Sam Page’s House seat in Creve Coeur for the Dems. He kidded her, asked her if she was just some bored housewife who woke up one morning and said to herself: I think I’ll be a state rep. She gave Dooley’s question some thought and remembered that when she was seven or so, she was aware that a lot of people were hungry. She used to tell herself that when she grew up, she would take a suitcase (just like the one her parents had), fill it with steaks, and take it to poor people so that they would never be hungry again.

Her idea of how to help people has gotten … more nuanced now that she’s an adult. A lot more nuanced. We talked at length about what she’s learning these days: about eminent domain, proposed health care programs for Missouri’s poor, the long-term advantages of quality pre-schools and the need to offer free pre-school–to our poorest children, at least for starters. Then there are the tax issues: Every time she’s around Jeanette Mott-Oxford, she tells me, she wants to whip out a pen, because, when it comes to understanding tax justice issues in Missouri, Jeanette is “brilliant.”

So Jill Schupp isn’t just running a campaign. She’s simultaneously taking a crash course from the local reps in what every legislator ought to know. She’s serious about doing the job right if she wins.  

Education is an area she’s given lots of thought to–understandably, since she’s a former two-term Ladue School Board member. She’s already familiar with what the schools in her well-to-do district need, but she’s also thinking about the St. Louis City schools. Knowing that poor families who can’t meet the rent move often and that there’s sixty percent turnover in elementary schools every year in the city, she’d like to propose that children be kept in the same schools even when they do move. Without that kind of stability, getting a decent education is next to impossible. And unless we educate those young people, the entire metro community will continue to bear the burden of their failures.

Schupp thinks back to all the money this area spent during the school deseg years busing kids to county schools. And for what? An hour and half on the bus both ways left the kids too worn out to apply themselves. It would make more sense to put those transportation funds into keeping kids, for as long as possible, in their core schools.

Big ideas, no? Here’s another unusual idea: Schupp wants to build bridges with Republicans as much as possible. She’s good at it. As a city council member in Creve Coeur, she’s worked so well with the Republican mayor, Harold Dielmann, that he showed up at her campaign kickoff. He’ll always be a Republican, she says, but that doesn’t mean they can’t find common ground.

A further example of her bridge building talent comes from her school board days when she was a representative on the Missouri School Boards Association. The MSBA has members from every district, but it’s effectively run by the permanent staff. When Jill was a member, the MSBA had begun endorsing political candidates. The candidates were from both parties, but still, she didn’t feel those decisions represented the total membership. So she formed an alliance of members from various districts who lobbied school board representatives throughout the state and, using their combined voices, they got that practice eliminated. It was the first time the temporary members had ever gotten a policy changed at MSBA.

Jill strikes me as a sane person with a “we’re all in this together” outlook on life. And she’s principled. After the “interview”, we chit-chatted about national politics, and McCain’s name came up. I mentioned that the Dems ought to hit him hard about wanting to stay in Iraq for a hundred years, and Jill said that, as she recalled, that remark of his had been taken out of context. The discussion had been about leaving some troops there once the bulk of them were gone, and that’s when McCain made the “one hundred years” remark.

Still, I said, it’s kind of tempting to hit him over the head with it. His policies are ugly in so many ways, and we must beat him. Of course his policies are ugly, Jill said. But let’s not stretch the truth. Let’s nail him for the stuff he’s really guilty of.

She’s right. That “steaks in the suitcase” seven year old has grown up with her determination to help people intact and with a fine-tuned conscience.

What do you think of using the term “Repug”? Some think Republicans deserve that and a few more tons of invective. Others wince at the thought that we’re trying to out-Coulter Ann Coulter.

Those of us who blog on this site sort of accidentally got an e-mail conversation going about that topic recently. It grew out of a discussion about an article by Joe Wilson that criticized Barack Obama for being too nice to John McCain when McCain openly insulted him. Jeannette Ward, writing about Wilson’s article, happened to use, as she often does, the term “Repug”. (I include her entire e-mail because she had some interesting observations on wimpiness):

I’ve been reading the discussion regarding who, Clinton or Obama, might better  withstand and oppose attacks from the Repugs in the fall.  Everyone keeps using terms like “fight back”, etc., as though discussing a prize fight or other sporting event.  I guess it’s just our culture (even Democrats) to think in terms of fighting, conquering, dominating.

I like to point out that dominance or defending oneself does not always involve aggression or fighting.  If you are a big enough dog, all  you have to do is calmly regard your “attacker” with bemusement as if to express “do you believe this twit?”. I have seen dogs do this many times for example when a scrappy little toy stud barkingly challenges a Great Dane who could gobble him down in one bite. The Dane doesn’t bark back or go after the toy, he just looks at him like the toy has lost his mind.

I think Reagan intended to convey this type of  dominance when he famously said “There you go again…” with a big confident smile. Kerry didn’t flunk because they attacked him and he didn’t fight back.  He flunked because he was so obviously a wimp who wanted the job so badly that he couldn’t bring himself to do anything because it might be wrong and cost him the election.  Everything about him was wimpy:  his body language, the content of his speech, his manner of speaking, etc.  I held my nose and voted for him, but consider:  who wants a wimp for President?

On the other hand a hyper-reactive attack dog is not very attractive either and doesn’t really project the image of the rational, self-confident, together kind of a person that many would imagine a leader to be.

Just my thoughts on the utility of political  conflict.

After a couple of other people commented on the meat of Jeannette’s observation, BillinMidMO wrote:

I agree with Jeanette….but not with her use of the term “Repug” . I see this term a lot in Dem/left listservs and blogs and it always makes me wince. I believe it serves no purpose other than to set up confrontation at a time when many Republicans are searching for a better way…recognising what they have put the nation through in the last 7 years. Fight for progressive principles…yes…leave the name calling aside. They are Republicans; there are many who really do have common cause with Democrats on many issues and can be swayed to vote Democratic as long as they feel welcome.

My 2 cents.

Perhaps some of the people who responded to Bill will copy those responses in the comments section here. That’s up to them. But whether they do or not, you may have an opinion to offer on the use of “Repug.”

Twenty-First Century Democrats is a national group whose goal is to elect progressive, populist Democrats. They will endorse and support between 30-50 candidates this year.

Their second group of ten endorsements includes Deb Lavender, who is running for state rep in Kirwood (district 92).

The Twenty-First Century Democrats website describes the group this way: “Each candidate receives a combination of political support; field organizer(s); online organizer; and/or financial support.” But the site stresses the field organizers:

The bulk of our resources will be spent hiring and training field organizers during the next cycle. Organizers will be assigned to persuade, identify and turnout voters in the campaigns of candidates we endorse and in party turnout programs. Our organizers write effective field plans, implement canvass and phone contact programs and recruit volunteers.

Deb is thrilled to be getting their endorsement and their help. Couldn’t happen to a nicer person.

I get a kick out of politicians who brazen out their losing situations. Roy Blunt, who has finally been forced to endorse McCain, invites us into his fantasy world:

“I believe this [Republican presidential] contest is over,” Blunt said after the meeting. “I think it’s produced the best possible nominee for us to take back the House, ….

If that ain’t a hoot. Take back the House? Let me put it this way: Twenty-nine Republican representatives have decided not to seek re-election. That beats their old record of 27 departures set back in 1952. “‘It’s become an epidemic,’ said David Johnson, a Republican consultant and strategist based in Atlanta.”

Democrats, on the other hand, are departing at the rate of … five.

Another truth-telling Republican analyst gives the lie to Blunt’s bravado:

“The Republican brand right now is damaged. Voters are not blaming the Democratic Congress, even though the polls show that Congress is held in such low esteem. Voters are blaming Republicans more than they’re blaming the Democrats who are in power. . . . All of a sudden we’re playing defense.”

Poor babies.

Then there’s the Senate, where five long time Senate Republicans are also leaving: John Warner of Virginia, Pete Domenici of New Mexico, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, Larry Craig of Idaho and Wayne Allard of Colorado. That’s FIVE. OPEN. SEATS. Hoo-wah!

Oh-blah-di, Oh-blah-dah, Life Goes On, Yeah. La La How the Life Goes On.

Photo showing McCain flanked on the left by Blunt, courtesy of McClatchy newspapers.