Publisher's Note: Jim Bispo's weekly column appears in the Beaufort Observer.
It's interesting. The Dems in the state legislature are rather vocal in telling us how little (as in not at all) they trust the Reps in the State Legislature. They took a vote in the middle of the night without forewarning the Dems and the Dems didn't like the result. I suppose that's a lot different than when Marc Basnight ran (knowing full well that he would be re-elected) only to resign after the election which allowed our governess to appoint another Dem to replace him (which likely "saved" one Dem seat in the Senate).. All strictly above board and in the best tradition of political integrity. ("Political integrity"?? Is that what "Oxymoron" means??) Hmmm...
Now we are seeing all manner of Dems switching to run as Reps. (More political integrity??) What do you suppose we should make of that?? Short answer: Nothing, if it had only happened a time or two In that case it would probably be something that could be ignored. But when it starts to look like an avalanche, perhaps it's time to start paying attention. Do you suppose they could be intermingling with the Reps (who are not to be trusted) so they won't "stand out" nearly as much as if they were among an upstanding group like the Dems who remain true to their cause (and whose integrity is never in question)?? Yeah, right...
In a recent column, "There Oughta be a Law", I made the following observation:
\When someone decides to run for office under the banner of a political party, they should be a bona fide member (or at least) a supporter of that party. They should not be allowed to wrap themselves in the party banner and run just because they believe they have a better chance of being elected as a member of whatever party it is. Running under the banner of a party (any party) should indicate that the candidate is a member of the party and supports the party's philosophy (or most of it). That way we would not have folks like Rep Jones who half way inherited his position from his father and then switched to the Rep. party simply to improve his chances of getting elected. We would not have folks like Arthur Williams and Jerry Evans switching parties because they are fearful they could not be reelected as Dems., and we would not have folks like Jay McRoy and Al Klemm calling themselves Reps. - presumably to get themselves elected. They vote as Dems; they should run as Dems. All of 'em!!!
There really Oughta be a Law.
It is not difficult to imagine that the Dems may be trying to muddy the water by forcing "primaries" in the hope that they may be able to knock out some of the bona-fide Reps before they even get to the general elections. It begins to look like a "Heads I win, tails you lose" type situation. The Dems seem to be pretty good a that game. Or, perhaps it's the Reps who aren't.
It is even easier to imagine that the Raleigh Reps may be the party's worst enemy. What are the new GOP power brokers in Raleigh doing about this influx of newly minted conservatives?? Short answer - welcoming them with open arms (could that really mean "encouraging them"?) Otherwise, how does one explain redistricting a solid conservative in the east out of the picture in what sure looked like a payback to a Dem who voted with them on several occasions. The reason why the Dems have been in control of politics in the state for so long begins to become ever more clear.
It's clearly too late to do anything about this aberration for this election cycle, but perhaps for future contests we can restrict only Dems to vote in the Dem primary and only Reps to vote in the Rep primary. The so called "Independents" can just wait for the General election to vote. Their choice, not mine. Of course, we must keep in mind that the Justice department might view that as disenfranchising minorities and the aged who may be part of that cohort, just as requiring them to produce a photo ID would.. (You'll need it to pick up certain prescriptions, but not to vote.) Hmmm...
Speaking of the Justice department, do you suppose there is anyone besides yours truly who thinks it's about time to get them out of the act when it comes to how we set up and manage our elections. The whole notion of having them monitor what we are doing is to make sure we don't discriminate against any minorities. Surely it is not about ensuring that minorities get a "leg up" on whatever we do. There's a difference!!
And now, our Governess and her Dem colleagues have us using statistics to "prove" discrimination in the punishment meted out to convicted NC criminals. If we could only do the same thing to "prove" the absence of bias in the way we elect County Commissioners, perhaps we could get the Justice Dept out of our business.. About all we should have to do is identify the racial makeup of that group that has been elected over the last 15 or 20 years. Case closed. Surely the Dems can't argue with the idea. It is the same notion that they so strongly supported when it was time to look at how "fair"our courts have been with their sentencing. But wait... it may not be that clear cut in the eyes of the Eric Holder justice department: not even close would probably be a good guess. In fact there are a lot of folks who believe they name streets after organizations like the Eric Holder Justice Department: One Way!!
We may have to wait for the next AG before we can expect to see any honesty and integrity from the DoJ. With a little luck we will have an Atty. Gen. who respects the Constitution and is even handed as he (or she) interprets and enforces our laws. He (or she) may even enforce those laws with which he may not totally agree. But then, I suppose that will depend on who ends up being the "boss". Hmmm... We can always hope... But I digress...
It's too bad that we in the east seem to represent little more than the unwashed masses in the eyes of the GOP Patricians in Raleigh. We are not bright enough for the Ivy League. Many of us don't even know anyone who is. A lot of us are NASCAR fans. We own firearms and cherish our Bibles. Many of us go to Church on Sunday morning and Wednesday evening. (For some of us, the Sabbath starts Friday evening and ends Saturday evening.) Those things are clearly enough to "prove"that we are incapable of understanding and appreciating the world around us and therefore are incapable of making our own political choices, which may be why the GOP Patricians in Raleigh seem to be striving to make those choices for us.
Do you suppose that inalienable rights apply to only the GOP Patricians (i.e. the ones in Raleigh)?? If not, why would anyone who apparently welcomes our votes in November seem to be trying to usurp our selection of those who would represent us in March??
D'ya think??
