Republican Calls Voters Stupid
While Bombs Explode In London
July 14, 2005
My recovery proceeds apace. The good news is that I'm walking and writing much better. In fact, the doctor for my vestibular rehab has cleared me from further visits. I have returned to work and get tired at the end of the day, but each day gets a little better.
Following the events of the past two weeks, the support really was overwheming. I am working, and am very tired at night, but I am still trying to respond to everyone. And I know my campaign manager and webmistress are working too. So please be patient!
Like most of you, I listened to the President's speech the other week. I listened in vain. I had hoped he might say something substantive. But his speech was full of mindless talk and phrases. Evidently much of America thought so too, as he did not get much of a bounce in the polls.
And then there was the London bombings just as the G-8 summit was meeting. How convenient. Max the Dog asked me a very good question. Who benefits from this? Other writers have commented, so I will not add to their remarks. Suffice it to say that it has not changed my views on the war in Iraq.
Speaking of the war, I wanted to say that my statements were not directed at the individual soldiers. They are doing their jobs and should not be villified.
When they return home, they should be given their honors and treated with respect. My comments were aimed at the administration and the high-ranking generals at the Pentagon.
The war is unwillable for several reasons. First, there is an endless supply of terrorists. For every one we kill or one that blows himself up, there are more to replace them. We are not fighting a conventional war. The terrorists are engaged in guerrilla tactics; they are killing Americans and Iraqis every day or blowing up a pipeline or some other thing. This will continue; there is no end in sight.
And we are not doing the things we should be doing, both at home and abroad. If the Downing Street memo is authentic, it shows not only that we intended to invade Iraq , but that we had no game plan. Did we seal the borders? No. How about the U.S. borders? No. Are we focusing the efforts on the terrorists? Not really. They came from Saudi Arabia and places other than Iraq . All the while, it is the American people who are asked to give up our liberties, not the terrorists.
On the local political front, there is not much news to report. Having failed to derail me in other ways, the newest ploy is judicial appointment. As Representative Paul Stam of Apex said, he is sponsoring a bill for judicial appointment because "[t]he current system will inevitably result in some poor choices for judge chosen by the voters because the voters don't have any clue who they're voting for," he said. What Mr. Stam is saying is that the voters don't elect the "right" kind of people. In other words, he thinks the voters are stupid.
No, the voters are not stupid Mr. Stam. Perhaps voters are too busy with their own lives, getting the kids to school or soccer practice or just trying to make ends meet. Others may have tuned out because they realize that its a rigged game and "there's not a dimes' worth of difference" in the candidates. Still others may think that we have a two-tiered level of justice in this country; one justice if you are rich, another if you are poor, and it won't make much difference. But the voters' aren't stupid.
Folks, judicial appointment is a bad idea. And I am not saying that just because I'm a candidate. Want Washington , D.C. here? Can you imagine the possible brawls over a nominee? No matter what party is in charge, backroom deals will be made. People will seek to ingratiate themselves with the party or to those in charge. Only the "right" kind of people will be appointed, that is those who the party or the lawyers approve of, not necessarily those who will make the best judges.
No judge or judicial candidate likes to campaign and ask for money. But with election, the power is in my hands to say no to particular candidates. That power will be lost if we go to the appointment system. What would you rather have?
Rachel Lea Hunter
Candidate for North Carolina Supreme Court Chief Justice