How I lost my virginity in the College Republicans

I friend of mine posted a link to an article about College Republicans:

Swimming with Sharks: In the College Republicans, young GOPers learn to fight hard against Democrats–by practicing on one another. 

The article describes the tactics CRs learn and use for the campaigns of the Chairman of the group and how it seems real familiar to those who follow real elections.

It reminded me of my short stint with CR back in the mid 1980’s and I thought I would share my story:

I grew up in a white bread conservative town where most of the city and county leaders were Republicans. Most of my friends in school were sons and daughters of Republicans. Even though the GOP didn’t really do anything for me as someone who was poor, lived in a trailer, and was on welfare from time to time, this was the Reagan Era and everyone was in love with the old coot.

I went to Ohio State in the fall of 1986 and when I made the move I wanted to be more political. Naturally I joined the College Republicans. It included the sons, daughters, nieces, and nephews of the big wigs of the Ohio GOP. The vice president of the group was the son or grandson of a former congressman.

I attended my first meeting and found someone else from Findlay there. In fact Jim was in my class at Findlay High. Not much about the meetings really stick with me other than at the time there was a governor’s race. Jim Rhodes, one of the most famous modern Ohio governors was trying again to be governor. Ohio had term limits and so he had to sit out for 4 years while his Lt. Governor – Democrat Richard Celeste ran the state.

Celeste was the last Lt. Governor from an opposite party as the constitution had changed to allow the Governor to pick their own Lt. Governor rather than the previous lesser vote getter getting the job.

Rhodes picked a youngster (compared to him) named Bob Taft to be his Lt. Governor. Yes, THAT Taft family – President, US Supreme Court Judge, two US Senators.

The OSU College Republicans invited Taft to speak at a meeting.

The day came and people filed into the classroom being used for the meeting and just before the event started a guy wearing an Army jacket and sandals sat in the back of the room. The CR suits were buzzing about this “hippy” in their mists but for the moment they left the guy alone. The meeting was public after all. They didn’t want any bad PR.

So Taft was introduced and began to speak about what he and Jim Rhodes would do to the state if elected. It was the usual “create jobs by cutting taxes.” A couple of minutes into the talk the “hippy” pulls out a sign from under his coat and holds it up. He doesn’t say anything. He just holds the sign up in protest. (I forget what the sign said but it was opposite what the GOP stood for of course.)

CR goons swarmed the guy looking like they were going to beat the crap out of him but Bob Taft told the guys to back off and let him protest – that he wasn’t afraid.

During the rest of the talk there were 3 goons standing near the guy staring at him waiting for him to do anything more than hold the sign. Taft finished with some Q & As then the meeting broke up into small talk. That’s when the “hippy” left.

Most of the chit chat was about the protester. “How dare he disrupt our meeting.” “We need to keep the riff raff out.” “Can you believe it, sandals AFTER labor day.”

It was on that day that I started not to have good vibes about CR or Republicans. I didn’t want to be part of a group that tried to control speech or who had shallow ideas about people. I was a poor person from a trailer – just image what they would say about me if they found out.

The other incident that finally caused me to quit CR was the OSU group sponsored a Reagan Birthday Party event as a fundraiser for CR and way for GOP members to mingle with the CRs. It seemed too much to me like when the Nazis use to celebrate Hitler’s birthday. They would sing songs about the fatherland and have a big cake.

Also being exposed to different viewpoints at Ohio State, I learned how closed minded and insular my hometown had been as I was growing up. It had been that way all along but I really didn’t see until I contrasted it with living in Columbus and meeting so many different people with so many different backgrounds. For example: I was shocked to learn that in other areas of the state there was subsidized housing. We were stuck living in a trailer for years because Hancock county had one apartment complex that was subsidized and the wait list stretched into years.

I didn’t go and join the College Democrats though because of my bad experiences with Political Correctness. That is another story.

My friend Jim stayed in CR and last I heard, after college, he was legal counsel for a state agency under former Governor George Voinovich (now our US Senator). Me, I worked as a security guard for a property management firm.

The Democratic Party died today

I am announcing my official break with the national Democratic party.

I was never a party member. I have never declared my party at election time and I refused to vote for party candidates during the primaries, but in recent years I have voted Democratic and given them money – especially during the 2004 elections. But even that level of support has ended for me as of today.

The party died for me on Wednesday when the Senate Judiciary Committee’s senior Democrat, Patrick Leahy of Vermont, announced his endorsement of Judge John Roberts, shortly after leaving the White House where the 2nd vacancy in the Supreme Court was discussed with President Bush.

Leahy said:

[Judge John] Roberts “is a man of integrity,” said Leahy, who told Roberts over the telephone about his decision. “I can only take him at his word that he does not have an ideological agenda.”

John Roberts Picks Up Democratic Support

The problem is that Roberts refused to answer truthfully many of the questions during his confirmation hearing. For example:

“At least two other matters enjoy sacramental status. Sen. Diane Feinstein, D-Calif., asked Roberts — who had promised the committee to tell the truth, “so help me God” — whether he accepted the “absolute” separation of church and state and whether he would support giving special treatment to racial minorities.

Again, Roberts promised to follow the Constitution, which is why Feinstein undoubtedly will vote against his confirmation.”

The problem with Roberts

Basically Roberts is Scalia light. Someone who plans on ruling based on the 200 year old text of the Constitution rather than on the interpretation of those words as the court has done since judicial review – which by the way also isn’t in the Constitution – was invented.

Abortion isn’t in the text so women have no right to it. Separation of church and state isn’t in the text so it doesn’t exist either and so on.

Scalia’s Dissenting Rhetoric

The truthful answer he should have told Senator Feinstein was – No, but instead he side stepped the question with a vague answer.

So much for Roberts being a man of integrity with no agenda .

The only thing that could save my support for the Democrats would be that maybe Leahy worked out a deal – he gives up on Roberts and Bush nominates a less conservative woman for O’Connor’s spot.

Some how I doubt it.

Some would argue that the Democrats realized that the Roberts nomination was a done deal what with the GOP majority. It would seem that Leahy wanted to preserve what political capital the Dems have and hold off a fight until it really matters.

Bullcrap!

How important is the appointment of the Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court? Political and religious conservatives are frothing at the mouth to get Roberts on the court since they seem to think he will start putting the court back to where they think it should be – like “separate but equal” is ok and women *ARE* property of their husbands.

Face it, the Democrats got outplayed again by Rove and company and were handed their balls.

If principles don’t mean enough to them, to fight to the bitter end, then why should I vote for them or give them money?

I still don’t plan to declare a party but I do plan on supporting my local and state Democrats where it makes sense but my days of supporting the National party are over.

Peter Jennings 1938-2005


The “face” of ABC News died today and I really miss him.

I was a Cronkite kid, growing up with Uncle Walter who I trusted as much as my mom. Then when he retired and Dan Rather took over I was a bit lost. For some reason I just never cared for Dan.

Then I found Peter on ABC’s World News Tonight. His confident delivery and focus on World news fit in with my needs at the time. I wanted to know and felt I needed to know about the world outside the US. In the days before cable news and the Internet, the main source of world news was one of the nightly newscasts.

I was alone in my love of World News Tonight. My Mom was a stick in the mud CBS News viewer and we use to have arguments over watching Rather or Jennings. I lost those battles but when she would be napping after work or wasn’t home, the TV was on Jennings.

Peter Jennings reminded me of Peter Mansbridge on the CBC and if you squinted they looked like twins. I also liked Jennings Canadian accent as it gave him a non-US allure like the presenters on the BBC.

It is a sad day for me.

Photo sparks a memory


I was checking out the Friday edition of the Findlay Courier (my hometown) online and came across a photo on the first page. It was a young kid playing chess with an older man with large wrap around sun glasses. He looked familiar.

It was Glen Shelton. He taught me how to play chess when I was the boy’s age many moons ago. Mr. Shelton would visit my elementary school (Bigelow Hill) once or twice a month and those of us interested would learn and play chess during our recess period. He taught us the basics and introduced us to some of the opening moves and strategy.

To me it was better than playing four square or “smear-the-queer”. I liked having to think ahead and use my brain in a fun way.

The twist was that Mr. Shelton is blind. The board he used had the white squares raised and the black chess pieces had their tops shaved flat. The pieces also had pegs that fit into holes in the center of the squares so they wouldn’t shift.

Not only did he teach us chess but he also taught us about people with a disability. I remember when he first visited kids would ask him about his blindness. He would answer the questions and that would be that. Back to the chess.

http://www.thecourier.com

Cell phones in Findlay High School causing trouble

Back on May 9th a group of Findlay High School students approached the school board to ask for a change in the cell phone policy at school.

It seems that FHS as a zero tolerance for cell phones on campus and if found they are confiscated and returned at the end of the day. If the same person is found with one again then a parent or guardian has to come to school to pick it up.

Cell phones are like a part of the body of most teens these days. They are always talking, texting, or now taking pictures to share. Schools do have a reason to control the use of the phones during school hours for the same reason you can’t have a boom box. The phones not only can disrupt class but they can also be used to cheat.

When I heard about the issue I sided with the current policy.

In my younger days calculators were just being made affordable for most students. At first they were banned from school. It was considered cheating if you used one. But then they found out that calculators can help marginal students in math since most of the trouble is doing basic math functions. The policy changed and calculators were allowed but if you had a fancy one that could save formulas you had to bring them to the teacher before a test and he/she would reset the machine to wipe out any attempts to cheat on the test.

The problem with cell phones is, that unlike calculators, they have NO educational value.

The students suggested changing the policy to allow them to bring them as long as they are off and kept in their lockers during the day.

Sounds reasonable.

Then I read a follow up story in today’s Courier.

It seems that some students still bring the phones to school and some even use them during the day, fully knowing that it is against the rules.

But that wasn’t the kicker.

It seems that the administration is searching the phones they confiscate and punishing any rule violations contained on them like bad language in text messages and pictures showing underage drinking.

The kids are pissed. They feel that their privacy is being violated.

I think the kids had a good argument – if it wasn’t in school. Students have no privacy in school. When I was there in the mid 80’s we had a couple of school wide locker searches. Each class had to open their lockers and a staff member would look through them and punish any violation they found. One time they even brought a drug sniffing dog.

Cell phones are not school property but you really can’t blame the administration for searching them especially because they aren’t allowed in the first place.

As a teacher is quoted in the Courier article:

“Doesn’t there have to be some respect for the rules?”

Originally posted on the blog “Hancock County Politics Unfiltered”