Dear Diary, It's Deja Vu All over Again: 08/08/00

[CorpGovActivist]

From an e-mail I sent a good college friend and diehard moderate GOP voter on that date. The response is priceless.

*************************************************************

<Friend's name redacted>,

It's great to hear from you! I mentioned you to another friend of mine just last night (the context was the discussion you and I had back in the spring of 97 about Dubya being the GOP nominee).

I'm glad to hear that <significant other> and you have had a nice summer. Did you take up another job during the summer break, or did you fully enjoy your "teacher's perk"?

Patrick and I have had an eventful summer. This weekend, we just got back from my high school reunion (10th, of course). It was nice to reconnect with some old friends.

I think of you every time I tune in to Millionaire. You're still at the top of my Call a Friend List!

: )

My thoughts on the race:

The presidency as an institution is too resilient for the officeholder himself/herself to singlehandedly steer us off course as a nation. However, there are still certain things that the officeholder himself/herself does or has sole responsibility over that matter very much.

Chief among these in my mind are judicial appointments. As much as I like Bush as a person (and as much as I respect his father and mother) I will be swallowing hard and voting for Gore.

Why?

I'd like to see civil unions recognized in my lifetime. I'd like to be protected against job and housing discrimination in all 50 states (by the way, I think that the disparate treatment of this issue is an impediment to interstate commerce).

As much as I think Gore could have or should have said more during The Scandal, I also know that he was very much hamstrung. A good historical analogy would be the loyal silence Ford maintained. Since there was, at all times, a certain possibility that Clinton would resign or be removed, it was best for Gore to say as little as possible.

The choice of Lieberman is a good way of telegraphing the extent of Gore's own displeasure with Clinton's actions.

Cheney is in the crosshairs of the Washington Post, by the way. Yesterday, an article broke outlining a federal lawsuit that was recently remanded to the district court level by the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals. The gravamen of the case is that Cheney precipitously ordered the cancellation of a couple of defense contracts while he was Secretary of Defense. Two large defense contractors raised very serious issues about Cheney's truthfulness during depositions, etc. about the extent of his involvement in the decision (which has been pretty much universally criticized for not having followed the usual cancellation procedures). In other words, someone with a very heavy hand and a lot of clout ordered them cancelled.

Then, of course, there is the red herring of Vietnam service. I think the Democrats should make an issue of the distinction of two little prepositions. Gore can talk about what he did "in" Vietnam. Bush and Cheney can only talk about what they did "during" Vietnam.

It's a distinction with a great deal of difference to the 40+ demographic. I guess our generation doesn't much care, for the most part.

Well, that's stream of consciousness for ya. Rambling, but that's my first cut analysis.

And, oh yeah! I don't like the way the GOP is ducking the issue of Mary Cheney (the lesbian daughter).

And another thing! Lynn Cheney is as frightening to me as Hillary. Can you say "mirror image"? Spooky!!!

I guess it remains to be seen whether America is open to the idea of a Jewish VP. Haven't seen a lot of ink yet about how this might affect voter turnout in New York state (which, of course, would probably help Hillary).

Aren't you tired of voting for the lesser of two evils?

*sigh*

Glad you wrote. It would be nice to see you before you get back to teaching and coaching.

: )

-Dave