ATLANTA -- A fiery former GOP congressman who gained national prominence for doggedly pursuing impeachment of President Clinton has some Republicans worried he'll play spoiler in a tight presidential contest.

Bob Barr's Libertarian Party bid for the White House is the longest of long shots, but political experts say he may be able to exploit the unease some die-hard conservatives still feel about Sen. John McCain, the Republican nominee-in-waiting. Combined with the surge in turnout among Democrats during the primaries and a difficult political climate for Republicans, they see what could be a recipe for trouble for the GOP.

"Bob could be the Ralph Nader of 2008," said Dan Schnur, a GOP consultant in California who worked on McCain's 2000 campaign but is not involved in this year's contest.

Original DVD cover.

Some Republicans aren't worried about Barr's candidacy. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said voting for Barr is the same as voting for Democrat Barack Obama, and said he's confident most GOP voters will understand that.

"No reasonable conservative is going to vote for anyone except McCain," Gingrich said.

Then Newtie excused himself to change his poopy underwear.

Even so, Barr campaign manager Russell Verney said he expects Republicans to mount challenges to keep Barr off the ballot in a number of states, much like Democrats did to Nader in 2004.

...snip...

The Libertarian Party hasn't cracked 1 percent of the national popular vote in a presidential race. But it bills itself as the third-largest political party and is already on the ballot in 30 states, with petition drives this summer aiming at 20 others.

...snip...

But Barr may have the most impact in his home state of Georgia, where he is still well-known.

In recent years, Barr has earned a reputation as an iconoclast. A National Rifle Association board member, Barr has joined with the liberal American Civil Liberties Union against the Bush administration-backed Patriot Act and reversed himself on medical marijuana use, now lobbying in favor of it.

He said it is the unchecked growth of government that led him to abandon the GOP two years ago.

In the coming weeks, Barr plans to open a campaign headquarters in Atlanta.

...snip...

Georgia and its 15 electoral votes have been expected to go Republican on election night, and McCain spokesman Jeffrey Sadosky said he remained confident they still would.

Still, the enthusiasm Obama has generated among Georgia's large black population continues to worry McCain strategists. Far from writing off Georgia, Obama has a campaign team registering voters and is airing a TV ad in the state.

...snip...

"If Senator McCain is not successful, it will be because his message and his vision did not resonate with a plurality of the voters," Barr said in an interview with The Associated Press.

Barr also hopes to tap into the zealous grass-roots network of Rep. Ron Paul, who recently dropped his bid for the GOP presidential nomination and pledged to support "Libertarian-leaning Republicans."

For many people, that’s certainly true. But there are plenty of other voters who don’t necessarily base their votes solely on jobs and taxes, and many of them are quite financially successful. They have determined their political affiliations largely as a result of the same continuing battles over abortion, guns and same-sex marriage that have drawn so many working-class voters to Republican candidates over the years. The only difference is the side of the fight they’ve chosen. It’s hard to argue that a wealthy pro-choice Democrat is any less of a values voter than a pro-life construction worker who votes Republican.

Perhaps Mr. Frank’s book would benefit from a sequel. We could call it: “What’s the Matter With the Upper East Side?” or perhaps “What’s the Matter With Beverly Hills?” or “What’s the Matter With Martha’s Vineyard?” The answer is that there’s nothing wrong with these voters at all, nothing more than there is anything inappropriate about blue-collar Kansans or Pennsylvanians who have decided that economic issues are not the most important influencers on their vote.

Many wealthy Democratic voters do recognize that they are voting against their economic interests and do so deliberately. They are actually voting on an economic agenda, one that recognizes that there are many people who are not as fortunate as them and that they can afford to pay more in taxes. Indeed Bill Clinton has made this argument about the Bush tax cuts, as has just about every major Democratic contender in recent years.

They also happen to side with the Democrats on social issues in addition to fiscal ones. In recent years, the social issues of most concern to Democrats have faded from prominence in the wake of 9/11 and the constant defense against the Republicans, particularly Bush.

The mistake that Senator Obama and Mr. Frank both make is that they assume that only the values of culturally conservative voters require justification. An environmentally conscious, pro-stem cell bond trader who votes Democratic is lauded for selflessness and open-mindedness. A gun-owning, church-going factory worker who supports Republican candidates, on the other hand, must be the victim of partisan deception. This double standard is at the heart of the Democratic challenge in national elections: rather than diminish these cultural beliefs as a byproduct of economic discomfort, a more experienced and open-minded candidate would recognize and respect the foundations on which these values are based.

The bond trader is fully aware of his fiscal situation. He watches the taxes come out of his pay check every month. The economic impact on the Reagan Democrats or whatever you want to call them is much less direct. There has not been a deliberate strategy from the Democrats to lure the bond trader to our side, where there absolutely has been a strategic attempt to trump up values issues during election season to lure social conservatives to vote for Republicans.

I am not saying that what Schnur has written here has absolutely no merit. The Democrats run into problems when they say things that are condescending and insulting to voters. The tone is an issue and that is where Obama ran into trouble. Talking about the impact of policy positions on voters lives is not. Democrats do need to make an argument that fiscal issues are more important to voters' daily lives than things like guns and marriage equality.

It is the phrase "reaching out," used to mean contact, appeal to, please, solicit, as in "Mitt Romney is not yet reaching out to the all-important gay animal tamer vote."

The phrase "Reaching out" isn't new, but its frequency is suddenly off the charts with the intense (albeit superficial) campaign coverage of the last few months. Listening to recent reports might convince you the presidential candidates had mutated into thousand-armed Hindu deities.

Take Day To Day's two-way between reporter Anthony Brooks and Republican strategist Dan Schnur today. Here's a highlight:

Schnur: "...it gives him the party's leading conservative spokespersons from the president on down to help him reach out to the party's conservative base and try to motivate them toward a fall election."

To which Brooks responds: "And what does he have to do though to really reach out and convince them..."

And what about all the unintended nasty overtones of the phase "reaching out?" Some scuzzy guy going for a grope on the subway. Zombies' rotting hands emerging from their graves. Fill in your own.

I imagine AT&T still regrets being associated with the phrase "reach out and touch someone." They may be the "new" AT&T now, but I'll bet they're still listed in the Meghan's law database.

Of course the habit is not limited to public radio. A quick google of "clinton" and the phrase "reaching out" generates almost a million hits. But one of the themes of this blog is that public media, to demonstrate why it matters and deserves listeners' donations, must rise above the rest of the silly fish-wrap* manufacturers.

So, if you are a public radio host or a campaign reporter, think about reaching out to a thesaurus in the very near future.

* I adore the phrase "fish-wrap." I love nothing more than referring to the New York Times as "the fish-wrap of record." (c)(tm)2008 Airbag Moments.

But finger-staining news is inexorably evaporating into carpal- tunnel- inducing news, so we need a digital version of this perfect put-down.

Reader(s): Please suggest a replacement for "fish-wrap" that will take us into the 21st century!