Another (Uninspiring) Candidate for CA-04

Michael Hamersley has thrown his name in for CA-04. A quick look over his website made me want to, as I did with Rea, run screaming, though for different reasons. Whereas Rea comes across to me as just weird and mildly creepy, not to mention an unabashed senior-panderer, Hamersley is seemingly lifeless. Completely stiff, completely uncharismatic. He and his people attempt to sell him as an ethical man, a whistle-blower, etc. I don't care how "ethical" this guy is based on the whistle-blowing incident, he will fall flat with Red county voters. Someone without charisma, without even the sense to put a photograph of himself on his campaign website, will never win in Red territory. And with all the talk about his ethics, it's amazing how cold and scientific it seems. See below:

"I find it exceedingly difficult to fathom that no illegal quid pro quo existed when John Doolittle 'earmarked' millions of dollars for a Department of Defense contract that was awarded to a man he calls his 'close friend,' Brent Wilkes, who contributed $85,000 to Mr. Doolittle's campaign coffers and political action committee in close temporal proximity to the awarding of this contract. At the very least, this conduct is highly unethical." Hamersley said.

All his ethics talk is wrapped up in cold, legal jargon... There's no humanity to it. There's no outrage. Ultimately, there's no value-appeal - which should be easy with a topic such as ethics - and there doesn't seem to even be a sense amongst him and his people that values appeals should be made.

In the end, I want to hit Hammersley over the head with a copy of Don't Think of an Elephant. But then, I'm not sure I want him to even be in the race. I don't want him to steal the candidacy from under Brown. I don't want to run the risk of the idiotic Dem establishment running an uncharismatic stiff over an inspiring candidate, as they did in '04.