Commentary: Jon Ralston defends Nevada as a political entity after an Iowa columnist takes Democrats to task

Wednesday, Aug. 2, 2006 | 7:37 a.m.

The gauntlet has been laid down, fellow Nevadans.

Sen. Harry Reid has been silent. The state Democratic Party has been silent. But I cannot remain silent in the face of the calumny from the Midwest.

David Yepsen, the political columnist for the Des Moines Register, recently penned a piece deriding the Democrats for selecting Nevada as the second-in-the-nation presidential caucus - right after Iowa.

Calling Nevada the "land of gamblers and brothels" - isn't that clever? - Yepsen suggested "few may take (the Nevada caucus) seriously."

Yepsen scoffed at the idea of Nevada as the "real" America and concocted a fake dialogue between national media members outside the Bellagio and a hooker (now that's a knee-slapper) and how silly it is to call Democrats who live in Sin City "values voters."

Now this is satire at its best. If reports of his death were greatly exaggerated, Mark Twain (a Nevadan, Mr. Yepsen) would be jealous.

Since the Democratic National Committee announced last month that Nevada would be chosen as a barometer for the party's presidential candidates and sandwiched between Iowa and New Hampshire, the whining from those two states has not abated. But Yepsen, a national figure because of Iowa's importance in presidential races, has upped the ante (that's a gambling phrase, Mr. Y., so I am fitting your stereotype) to insist that Iowa and New Hampshire go before any other state.

Good advice. The Democrats should keep a system that has worked so well for them and produced Presidents Dukakis, Gore and Kerry. The notion that the Iowa-New Hampshire nexus is some hallowed tradition that should not be trifled with is as evanescent as the ones Tevye saw dissolve as the fiddler played.

The country has changed dramatically, even over the last decade, and no place represents that evolution better than the fastest-growing state .

Let's see: What's more a tableau of America today - a thriving, cosmopolitan city below a sprawling rural landscape or all-white, always-boring bumpkinville? Now that's a tough call.

Yes, Nevada will have a difficult challenge matching the real-world atmosphere of Iowa :

I am not one of those locals who convulses every time some out-of-state observer lampoons the state, usually based on stereotypes that are anachronistic.

I understand why Yepsen and some of the bleaters in New Hampshire are upset. No one would ever pay attention to those states if it weren't for their role in presidential politics. And they also realize that if candidates had a choice between being in Las Vegas in January 2008 or in Des Moines or Concord, it wouldn't be much of a choice.

Yepsen concludes by suggesting, "With limited time and budgets, candidates leaving Iowa the night of Jan. 14, 2008, may bypass Nevada for the granddaddy of all primaries - in New Hampshire."

Really? Considering that Nevada is a much more diverse, vibrant and dynamic place to visit, maybe the candidates should skip Iowa, go directly to Nevada before New Hampshire and render the land of tractors and jealous columnists obsolete.