I am a staunch conservative. I have always had an interest in politics, but it was, believe it or not, meeting Terry McAuliffe and his liberal economic aide that really launched a fervent political interest.
I was on a flight to Phoenix, AZ and it was midterm election campaign time (Fall 2002). Terry was on his way to campaign with some Arizona Senator hopeful (probably some fruitless attempt to unseat John McCain). Mr. McAuliffe happened to be on the flight with an entourage of aides. A black dude in a suit and tie came and sat beside me in the aisle seat (I was in the middle seat). Before the plane took off, Terry came back from First Class and asked the guy beside me if he was comfy and if the rest of the team had boarded without security incident (this was post 9/11, and as Ted Kennedy proved, no one is immune). He then introduced himself to me as Terry McAuliffe, Chairman of the Democratic National Committee. At that point, I had no clue who the DNC or RNC were (I was only 14), I just knew that the keywords “chairman” and “national” meant big cheese... We shook hands and he asked me if I was Democrat or Republican. I replied with the rather obvious point that since I was not old enough to vote I could not technically be either. He then asked how I would vote if I would vote. I replied Republican. He said, “That’s too bad, [I forget aide’s name] will convert you.” The aide said, “I wanna convert the whole plane!”
The aide told me I could move to the window ‘cause no one was sitting there, “So we can both have more room.”* Throughout the flight we debated a whole range of issues from the economy (he wanted to increase spending and subsidy programs) to the potential Iraq war to the recent court ruling regarding the eligibility of a Democratic congressional candidate to be on the ballot.
He was trying to convince me that Bush didn’t spend much time on the economy. I made the mistake of asking him, “How in the world can you tell what Bush is or isn’t working on in the White House?” This left me open to this “logical” reply: Because he hasn’t said anything about it. If he was doing something constructive with the economy, he’d want to talk about it. Now that I have had two years to rehash this conversation in my mind, the perfect reply would have been, “So, because he doesn’t do Clintonesque showboating means he isn’t working on it?” I only had a couple of seconds, however, so I pointed out that he was proposing tax cuts. At that point I think both of us realized that economic debate would go nowhere fast if we delved into the age-old supply-side versus demand-side economics debate which represent such a polarity of views and of which neither has definitive proof of correctness. He did, however, deride the tax cuts as being for the wealthy. I pointed out that the wealthy and poor alike got an equal percentage tax cut. Since 10% of the wealthiest pay 90% of the taxes, it logically follows that an equal tax cut would result in a larger dollar amount cut to those that pay more of the taxes.
We talked about the whether or not invading Iraq was the right thing for America to do. He said he wanted to try more diplomacy with Sadaam (diplomacy and Sadaam in the same sentence: a sad kind of oxymoron). I reminded him that it is proven that Sadaam had WMD in the past (and there are [this was 2002] indications that they still have them and are working toward building nukes), he has used them on civilians, and that our civilians could easily be the next targets now that the Kurds are adequately protected. I also reminded him that whether Iraq had WMD or not, Iraq was in material breach of the UN Security Council’s resolution and that the UN had threatened use of force if they were found in material breach. If Bush would invade Iraq, he would only be standing up for what the UN said. (The other spineless members of the UN Security Council would have backed off of those threats and made such future threats meaningless. Because Iraq was invaded, Libya saw that we were serious, and started a voluntary program of surrendering WMD and illegal weapons. Bush, in that process, actually bolstered the UN’s authority and strength.) I made a comment about Republicans being historically better on National Security. I must have touched an inferiority complex or something, because he took strong issue with that. He began to list wartime Democratic Presidents: “FDR, Lincoln…” At this I snorted and gave him a dirty look along with a mini-lecture on the history and evolution of the Whig/Democratic/Democratic-Republican/Republican party. He sheepishly and guiltily admitted that Lincoln was a “Democrat” in name only; he was really a Conservative. He seemed surprised that I knew enough not to be hoodwinked by his attempted deceit.
We talked about a recent State Supreme Court ruling in the Democrats favor. He of course was hoping the Supreme Court wouldn’t overturn it. The ruling also happened to be in direct contravention with the State Constitution. (Mr. Activist Judge must have been thinking, “It’s not the way that I think it should be, so I guess that makes the Constitution “un-Constitutional”. D*** the Constitution! Full speed ahead!”)
A couple of things really turned me off on these Democrats: first and foremost he tried to deceive me about Lincoln being a Democrat. Secondly, he was just plain disrespectfully rude to President Bush, not even showing basic courtesy and resorting to childish insults that reveal a lot about the Democrats’ unreasoning, visceral dislike of Bush. He said, like it’s a known fact, “Well Bush is an idiot! He’s just plain stupid.” (A clear case of misunderestimation!)
The third thing is expressed in Mr. Aide’s sentence, “Well, everyone knows Gore won in Florida.” Such utter ludicrosity! Even in the independent post-election statewide newspaper recount showed a Bush win, albeit a narrow one. Whether the electoral votes of a state are won by a thin or a fat margin, a win is still a win. I don’t necessarily agree that the electoral college is a good or fair idea in this day and age. I would support a direct popular vote, while unfortunately helping Democrats, would be fairer. It would also eliminate “swing state” pandering. The electoral college was initially meant as a Republican (form of government, not party) balance to Democratic (form of government) mob rule that that the Founding Fathers saw fail so miserably in the French Revolution. It was also an element of having a Federation of States type government instead of a direct central government. It since has been watered down as any effective mainstay of a Republican and Federation type government as to be nothing but an anachronistic impediment to equity. That being said, rules are rules, laws are laws. If everyone did what they thought was fair, that would be anarchy.
The fourth thing that turned me off of the Democrats: “Bush won the election… 5-4 in the Supreme Court.” Some Florida precincts were recounted. Gore still didn’t win. He wanted to recount more precincts. It was a simple legal decision. Should recounts just be done as mandated by state law? Or should Gore be allowed to keep recounting precincts until he would somehow obtain a favorable result? The Florida Supreme Court opined that it would be more fair to allow more recounts. It also extended the deadline for the manual recounts, despite the law saying that the State’s Secretary of State was the one with the power to extend that deadline, which she declined to do. It was appealed to the Supreme Court, the appropriate decision making body for a legal challenge to the law of this magnitude. They properly ruled that counties that had laws in place to allow for recounts should do so, and those where the criteria were not met, shouldn’t. They also rescinded the extended deadline put in place by the Florida Supreme Court.
At the end of our debate he complimented me as being an intelligent young man and gave me a pair of Donkey cuff links. Despite my being so obviously conservative, he encouraged me to continue to be engaged in the political process, which was much to his credit. He said, “We don’t have enough young people excited and involved in politics.” This is one of the few points on which we agree. Among the others are defending the Constitution’s clause on copyright term limits, and campaign finance reform (I agree with this in principle; the practice still needs some loopholes closes as the 527s, “Swift Boat” and MoveOn.org, in this election showed.)
* I was reminded of the bad thing that affirmative action is for the country (black and white) when he sat beside me. I was in the middle seat and he was in the aisle. I wanted to move to the window, but because of racial tensions caused by proponents of Affirmative Action, I was afraid that he would construe it as me wanting to sit as far as him from possible. Affirmative Action is nothing but Racism against whites. Bill Cosby put it best:
Here are a few sound bites as transcribed by Washington Post reporter Hamil Harris:
"I am talking about these people who cry when their son is standing there in an orange suit. Where were you when he was 2? Where were you when he was 12? Where were you when he was 18 and how come you didn't know that he had a pistol? And where is the father?"
". . . we cannot blame white people . . . ."
"People putting their clothes on backward: Isn't that a sign of something gone wrong? . . . People with their hats on backward, pants down around the crack, isn't that a sign of something, or are you waiting for Jesus to pull his pants up? Isn't it a sign of something when she has her dress all the way up to the crack and got all type of needles (piercing) going through her body? What part of Africa did this come from? We are not Africans. Those people are not Africans; they don't know a d--- thing about Africa."
"With names like Shaniqua, Taliqua and Mohammed and all of that crap, and all of them are in jail. Brown versus the Board of Education is no longer the white person's problem. We have got to take the neighborhood back. . . . They are standing on the corner and they can't speak English."
The aide ended up requesting what I was afraid to do, It is just ridiculous that so-called Civil Rights activists profiteer off of Blacks so that they can pay off their mistresses and in the process create an inequitable social situation that causes unnecessary, unwanted tension. I am not the least bit racist; I volunteer at a Kids’ Klub that strives to help inner-city kids of all ethnicities (mostly Black and Hispanic). I am great buddies with some Black dudes in DC that I love to play basketball with. I have a Japanese and three Hispanic uncles. I have Vietnamese, Ethiopian, Dutch, Israeli, Palestinian, Chinese, and Hispanic friends. I long for the day when everyone has the ethnicity of Tiger Woods and profiteers no longer exploit an unfortunate past to create inequity and racial tension.
As you may or may not already be aware, members of the Watcher's Council hold a vote every week on what they consider to be the most link-worthy pieces of writing around... per the Watcher's instructions, I am submitting one of my own posts for consideration in the upcoming nominations process.
Here is the most recent winning council post, here is the most recent winning non-council post, here is the list of results for the latest vote, and here is the initial posting of all the nominees that were voted on.
