George:

I had a good, long talk with Meredith this evening. Throughout the conversation, she reiterated to me -- and asked me to pass on to you -- her continued position:

"When people have come to me in the last few days and have asked me to run as an independent candidate, I politely, but firmly, turned them down. When people have come to me and have asked me to declare my candidacy as a write-in candidate, I have politely, but firmly, turned them down. I am not seeking to be elected to City Council as a write-in candidate. I am not encouraging in any way the people who have been talking about writing in my name on May 4, and I am not asking anyone to write in my name for City Council on May 4."

Before anyone starts to try to parse the sentences looking for wiggle room, let me say that this was not intended as a finely crafted statement that is intended to leave some "out." It is intended to be what it is -- a statement that she isn't running as a write-in candidate.

Why does she have me pass this on? Because she is upset with the way in which the issue has been portrayed -- that she is somehow trying to manipulate things so that she can sabotage the Democratic ticket. That is not true, she resents the insinuations, and she has better things to do with her time than to respond to such palaver.

Now, let me add my own take on things.

As many folks know, I have been a supporter of Meredith for many years. I chose not to make any comments about some of the accusations or insinuations that were being made about Meredith during the campaign -- in part because I learned something from two years ago, when I received unmitigated hell for endorsing two candidates. [For the response to Snook's previous endorsement on the Loper website, type in "Snook Endorsement" in the search engine on the sidebar of the front page.]

But there are a couple of comments that were made about Meredith during the campaign that were either factually dead wrong or analytically off base.

One standard complaint was that she was interested in running for other offices -- State Senate in 2001, and Congress in 2002. Ambition is a very strange thing in politics. You have to have some ambition even to be involved in politics; if you didn't, you'd stay home and watch TV all evening. We praise our own candidate for having the courage to put him or herself on the line, for sacrificing his or her nights to attend yet another work session or out-of-town meeting. When the other candidate does the same thing, it is seen as naked "ambition," which presumably is not as noble.

I have always tried to distinguish between politicians who are on what we aging boomers would call a "power trip" and those who are on an "ego trip." The folks who are on a power trip want to be elected to office because of what they can DO; those who are on an ego trip want to be elected because of what they can BE. Yes, Meredith has been ambitious -- ambitious to DO things. That's good ambition -- necessary ambition.

Somehow it got planted in a blurb in a newspaper some time in January that Meredith was thinking of running for statewide office. I have not yet found anyone who has any clue what that reporter was referring to -- including Meredith.

Meredith ran for Congress in the Fifth District because she wanted to DO something. She wanted to awaken a moribund Democratic Party in the Fifth District. She was smart enough to know how unlikely it was that she would win in 2002, but that didn't matter -- it was important to start an awakening. To me, that is the best kind of ambition, and she deserves our heartfelt thanks, not our scorn, for her efforts. And Meredith did in fact get something started. Al Weed is running for Congress in 2004, building off of that awakening -- using, in many cases, people who woke up in 2002 to just how bad Virgil Goode has been.

There are a great many reasons that might be offered as to why Meredith did not win renomination. Some were substantive -- disagreement over the Meadowcreeek Parkway being one; some were not -- the feeling that
"eight years is enough and let's give someone else a chance" played a part. Some were petty and personal. It makes little sense to rehash these matters; the Party will be much better served if we move forward.

Let everyone in Charlottesville -- even those who did not vote for her on February 7 and those who disagreed with her on the issues -- recognize that in Meredith Richards we have had for eight years a hard-working, honest, conscientious Councilor, whose performance on Council should be praised. We will be lucky indeed if we elect three Councilors who work as hard, who pay as much attention as has Meredith.

And let all Democrats in Charlottesville know that she is a class act who is not seeking to sabotage the Democratic Party that has been her political home.

Now -- can we start to talk about David, Kendra and Kevin? Can we start to talk about issues?

Lloyd Snook (electronic mail, March 3, 2004)