Tuesday, July 06, 2004

Open Letter to the RNC

I detest this part of the campaign.

Dear Homeless Pers... sorry, Campaign Telemarketer,

First, let me apologize. You may or may not remember me. You called my home during (surprise!) dinner this evening, and I was a bit short with you. If you still don't remember me, I'm the fellow who correctly guessed (before you even got started on your script) that you were begging for money again this year. I said (and I quote), "You people need to do a better job with the money you already have!" and hung up. This was completely rude of me, and I am sincerely sorry. Heaven knows you've got homework you should be doing at this hour of the night instead of trying to pick my pocket, and you certainly don't need the extra pressure.

No, I apologize to you. NOT, however, to your bosses.

Listen up, Party Elite. You don't need my money. I need my money. My kids need my money. My wife needs my money. Not you. Not Kerry. Not anyone else pretending they're sincerely interested in representing my best interests in the White House for the next four-year stand-up government routine.

You will, of course, be offended. How could anyone claiming to be a Republican NOT want to hand over his disposable income to keep an incumbent in office? It's not right. It's (dare we say it?) downright un-American!

I guess, then, that you are entitled to an explanation for my refusal to cough up the greenbacks:

Four years ago, an admittedly much whinier Chairman of your august (<- hint: NOT the month!) committee sent me letter after letter after letter. Some ten of them, if memory serves, that appeared in my mailbox roughly every two to three weeks. Every one of them carried the same message: We cannot hope to beat Gore and Whatsisname unless we have YOUR MONEY. Every bit of it you can afford to send us. Even the stuff you can't afford to send, if you want to see your precious country again. Bwahahahahaha! (Sorry. That may be a false memory.) It will probably surprise you to know that I tore most of them up. I actually answered one, making note of the fact that I had no intention of paying the inferred ransom for my liberties, and was promptly awarded with another hand-out letter. I shredded that one.

My participation in that election was limited to the following Pros and Cons analysis:

Gore Cons:
- Numerous
Gore Pros:
- None

Bush Cons:
- Numerous
Bush Pros:
- Has a classy wife to act as First Lady

On the strength of that argument alone, I voted my conscience.

So here it is, four years later, and the argument is the same: We cannot hope to beat <insert name of presumptive Dem candidate here> and <presumptive running mate> this year unless we have YOUR MONEY. Etc., etc. So let me ask, Mr. RNC, what you've done for the past four years with the money that obviously got you into the White House?

Have you...

- Fought hard to put God back into Government where he belongs, despite what the ACLU says?
- Fought even harder to keep marriages as a sacred institution between a man and a woman?
- Won even one battle in the fight to limit abortion to only those situations where there is a real medical need?
- Even attempted to return Government to Constitutional limits?
- Realized the blatant stupidity of the term "no child left behind?"

Then I read the news accounts and realize, "No. You have not."

I'm sorry, RNC. When you consider that the most remarkable thing your candidate has done in office has been to get us into another war (unless you count landing on an aircraft carrier in a war jet), I just can't get excited about this campaign.

Do you have my vote? Of course. Kerry/Edwards is not the way to go, especially when measured against the same points listed above. But...

What a sad way to earn anyone's vote.


Cameron said...

Hey - if it'll get me some cold, hard cash I'll make any political promise you need me to make.

*cough* verb alert *cough*

Anonymous said...

"I'm sorry, RNC. When you consider that the most remarkable thing your candidate has done in office has been to get us into another war..."

Funny, I thought it was the Child and Woman Raping/Gassing Saddamic Regime who ignored UN sanctions 42 times that was to blame for managing to get us into the war. Are you sure Bush was the bad guy here?

I don't care for the RNC letters, either, but I am grateful for a president who does not consider convenient ignorance of a Nazi-like situation as an alternative to war. Yes, sometimes we as a nation need to painfully return to the very practices that made this country great in the first place in order to remain great.

A perhaps oversimplified analogy:

I, as a peace officer, drive up on a pair of 6'2" street thugs threatening to beat an elderly man with a baseball bat. I happen to know these thugs have a history of committing just this sort of crime, and in fact, they have used baseball bats on their own family members and neighbors (I even have photos!). I get out of my car, hold them at gunpoint, and command them to drop the bat.

They continue to stand their ground. I ask them in polite language FORTY-TWO times to please drop the bat. The first 30 times or so I remain calm, but the final dozen or so times, I say, “Let me tell you exactly what will happen if you do not cease your violation of this
law. I will use force, thereby incapacitating you.”

By now, several other cops have shown up, representing various agencies in the region. They have heard all 42 of my warnings, and nodded their heads in agreement.

Then, finally, after telling the thugs the exact time and place that the deployment of my forces will occur, I act on behalf of those I serve, and take action. Immediately, several of the other officers (French, German and Russian speaking officers, namely) condemn
my actions, I suppose because I should have offered a few dozen more warnings (It is later discovered that the French-speaking officer has a long standing secret relationship with the gangsters).

So, back to the original post, what exactly was the alternative to the war?

And BTW, I DO count landing on an aircraft carrier in a war jet as a remarkable action. Speak to those who are serving in the forces, protecting your blog, and see how they feel about the man. I have.


Postscript: I suppose there could always be an argument (from the ACLU, I'm sure) that the thugs never had a bat. I'll look forward to pursuing that in a later post, if you like.

Woody said...

There are excellent reasons why you are a peace officer and I am not... I don't have the requisite courage (or patience) for your line of work! And I sure as heck would never presume to attempt second-guessing those who lead us into battle.

Lemme clarify: I never said Bush was a "bad guy", even for getting us into the war. It was, admittedly, an oversimplification of a very complex issue.

I am not qualified to adjudicate Bush's performance as Commander-in-Chief. I don't for a minute wish to belittle the efforts of our soldiers, or even their leadership. 'Twasn't my intent.

My bottom line here is that I don't think this party's leadership (and here I'm referring to the RNC, not the administration) have EVER done anything worthy of even a $20 donation since I have been an active voter. Their primary purpose in life seems to be taunting the Democrats (I especially love their incredibly mature web site, brought to you, apparently, by the same folks who did the opposing web site!), and raising money. Sorry, there are plenty of rich Republicans out there that they can fleece.

I'm just not one of them.

P.S. The ACLU has always been a favorite target of mine. Can you say, "the Constitution hanging, as it were, by a thread?" ;-)

Anonymous said...


BTW, if patience is a virtue, then I've lost my virtue many a time in this line of work.

And yup, I agree wholeheartedly regarding just about any fundraising organization these days. Can't stand 'em, and don't trust 'em.

Cameron said...

Speaking of fund raising, I'd like to bring your attention to my own particular fund raising idea.