The Freedom Agenda

The Republican Party is doomed. John McCain isn't, but the Republican Party is doomed. It has no unifying philosophy, no will to fight for anything (with the glaring exception of continued military presence in Iraq), and no intellectual strength to convince the public that it is right. The principal cause of the party's electoral success in the last few election cycles (2006 naturally excepted) will shortly become an Achilles' heel. That principal cause was pandering at all levels of the party to socially conservative Evangelical Christians. Pandering to this interest group has created the not unjustified belief that the Democratic Party is the party of individual liberty. To conservatives, this is obviously false, but to the uninitiated, who is more obviously the defender of liberty, the party of free choice in the bedroom or the party of anti-gay marriage constitutional amendments? The party of rights of the accused or the party of "Chuck Norris Facts?" This conundrum demands that the Republicans redefine themselves not as carbon-copies of the Democrats but as unqualified defenders of freedom.



The following issues could define a "Freedom Agenda:"

1. Freedom to Earn: This plank is classical 1898 Republicanism: Lower taxes. All taxes. Not just income taxes.


2. Freedom to Worship (or not): Keep government out of matters of metaphysics. Let people, not judges, decide whether or not "In God we Trust" and "under God" are acceptable to 21st-century sensibilities. Accept their judgements.


3. Freedom to Broadcast: The FCC is nothing more than legalized censorship. Get rid of it. Tell the Parents Television Council to go to Hell along with the Fairness Doctrine. End the "public airwaves" nonsense.


4. Freedom to Surf (the Web): Keep internet commerce free of taxes. Legalize internet gaming.


5. Freedom to Trade: Enact free trade with all allies, such as Colombia. Educate the American people on the benefits of trade.


6. Freedom to Drill: Drill for oil in ANWR and the outer continental shelf. Educate the American people on new technologies that reduce risk to ecosystems and the benefits of increased domestic oil supplies.


7. Freedom to Drive: End CAFE standards. Let the free market determine the primacy of fuel economy in American automobiles. Raise speed limits where prudent.


8. Freedom to Eat: Fried food is banned at the Democrat National Convention (I shit you not). Barack Obama says we can't eat as much as we please. Let the people make their own lifestyle choices. Let them also accept the consequences.
9. Freedom to Smoke: Let the people who choose to smoke tobacco smoke. Call for national dialogue on the legal status of marijuana.
10. Freedom to Drink: End further restriction on the alcohol industry. Reconsider legal age 21.
11. Freedom to Choose: Appoint federal judges who will return abortion law to the legislatures of the states. Accept the judgements of each individual state with respect to itself.
12. Freedom Abroad: Foster, by use of hard (military) and soft (nonmilitary) power, growth of democratic states and institutions across the world.

In the coming months I will elaborate on these as I see fit.

Not a Catastrophe

So Matt Beato has now lost the race for City Council. I will now determine what this means, what this doesn't mean, what I would like to have, and what I don't know.

What This Means

• The Three-Person Rule will remain unresolved: Councilman Freiling, who supports reform of the rule, won re-election by wide margins. However, former mayor Granger lost narrowly to highly anti-reform candidate Judy Knudson. This means that the rule will remain in limbo for the next couple of years at least, as the council will be divided among pro-reform and anti-reform elements who will not view the rule as central to their governance.
• City noise regulations will favor non-students: The turnout by non-students was high enough to counter any student bloc vote, and thus rulings will still be made in favor of the more numerous non-students.
• Limousines and identity politics are not the best response to perceived marginalization in city politics: Forgetting the sheer waste of student funds that providing stretch limousines was (student activities vans do the same job for much less), it is now clear that an identity-based campaign for a council seat is insufficient. Regardless of the number of students registered, the citizens of Williamsburg will have a plurality of votes. Thus, putting forward a student candidate heavily dependent on the fickle student turnout profile (see limousines) is not going to be a winning formula unless the candidate is capable of appealing to citizen voters on the issues on which they move their votes: property taxes and schools. Perhaps Sievers was more able to do this in 2006 when he ran, or he may have had a larger proportion of anti-incumbent voters than Beato in this cycle. This election shows that the 157-vote defeat in an election without student votes that Sievers sustained was a fluke, as Beato lost by a larger margin in an election with more favorable demographics.

What This Doesn't Mean:

• The City Council can ignore student concerns: They can't for the same reason they couldn't before the election: We can vote still. Depending on the turnout model one uses, anywhere from 30-60 percent of registered student voters turned out. For young voters in any non-presidential election, these figures are actually rather high! As student political thinking matures (go figure first go-round we'd screw it up), if these turnouts remain the same students will be able to carry the balance in some races. What this election shows is that students cannot elect a candidate. Students can and ought to, however, enter coalitions with candidates friendly to their interests. This can get student opinion on Council, as was the case with Freiling.

What I'd Like to Have:

• An exit poll! It would make all this speculating a whole lot more certain. As it stands, nobody really knows anything, not even how many students voted. After-the-fact surveys, especially those conducted by the annoying folks at Rock the Vote (STOP TEXTING ME GODDAMNIT), will surely be subject to social desirability bias, distorting crucial findings which would affect future student political action strategies.
• Specifically, information on under-voting: Compared to the 2006 City Council elections, there were 1907 "whole ballots" (total votes/seats available) in the '08 race versus 1748 "whole ballots" in '06. Did students go to the polls for Beato alone, or only two candidates? Surely some did, but how many? For whom did they vote? Could this practice have gifted Knudson a seat? Wanna-be Michael Barones need to know!

What I Don't Know

• What the loss does to the Flat Hat: The paper had been a big booster of the Beato candidacy and likely will blame low student turnout (which I do not believe was the case) for the defeat. Will this affect readership?
• What the deal with the limos was: When I take up my position with the Informer in the fall, I intend to rip Valerie Hopkins et al. a new one for spending my money on limousines to get out the vote for Beato. That is, of course, for another day.
• What Beato does now: Other than sitting on the Soil and Water Conservation board (it's easy to win when no one runs!), it is unclear what Beato will do in wake of the defeat, as he had previously resigned his position as SA Senate Chairman. I do not know if he holds a Senate seat still.

Coming Soon to an Ivory Tower Near You!

It seems that Mr. Jefferson's alma mater is not the only elite university with a vacant leadership post. In response to their presidential search (no doubt less acrimonious than ours), Dartmouth freshman Jordan Osserman had this to say: "Straight white men need not apply." If you want to torture yourself with the full identity-politics manifesto, here it is.
http://thedartmouth.com/2008/04/30/opinion/osserman/

A few observations. First, I believe it goes without saying that if anyone had written "Lesbian Chicano transgendered need not apply" the writer would be marksteyned (see post from 4/29). That is, he would be, if he were allowed to keep his life. It seems that all sexual orientations, races, and gender identies are equal, but some are more equal than others. Second, this is coming to William and Mary. All is quiet on the presidential selection front now, but as the deadline on Reveley's caretaker period approaches, surely we will see "enlightened" calls for certain people to take over at the Brafferton. The oddsmakers (me) have it at 5/1 that similar sentiments to Mr. Osserman's will be published by someone, perhaps in the DOG Street Journal (does anybody actually read that?).
Third and most importantly, let me call Mr. Osserman's sentiments what they are: absolutely fucking racist. It is patently shocking that so-called liberals, in the name of "progress," insist on clinging (if I may coin a phrase) to the same racial caste system used by Bull Connor and Jefferson Davis. If we are ever to move beyond "race" into true "multiculturalism" (for lack of a better word) it's about damn time we realize that culture doesn't fit into neat racial or ethnic categories. Why is it that two first-generation Americans, one Czech and one French, one whose parents fled Communism or Nazism and one whose parents freely emigrated, are classified as "Caucasian" with your humble correspondent, an at-least-fifth generation American whose ties to the "old country" are purely artificial? Why is it that a first-generation American whose parents immigrated from China classified as "Asian" with a third-generation American whose ancestors came from Japan before 1941? I could do this calculus for every "racial" group, but that would be excessive; the absurdity is demonstrated. Likewise, it is absurd to assume that only an "oppressed minority" can end "oppression." I cannot speak for Dartmouth. Perhaps they burn crosses and huddle in white sheets in the Ivy League. But from what I've seen at W&M, the "races" get along much better than anybody gives them credit for. Don't be the fool who cries "opression" every day of the week. You might look absurd, to say nothing of the fact that no one will listen when you're really being opressed.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=dOOTKA0aGI0

Modern Dictionary of Political Discourse, No. 1

Note: This is the first of a periodic series. And yes, these aren't real words.

marksteyn (vt)-to silence speech, especially of a conservative, on grounds of being "offensive to a group." Etymology-eponym from Mark Steyn, Canadian commentator brought before Canadian Human Rights Commissions for statements critical of Islamic terrorism on grounds of being anti-Muslim. Usage-as any transitive verb, i.e. "The bias response team marksteyned the student who criticized Obama's immigration plan."

obamanation (n)-small portion of East and West coasts enamored with Barack Obama, plus college campuses everywhere. Etymology-Obama+nation. Usage: "Yes, British consulate? I am seeking asylum from the obamanation, can you help me?"

Fair Play/Yellow Card: Blowout Edition

In the spirit of The Flat Hat's "Cheers and Jeers" feature, this edition of Fair Play/Yellow Card will be cumulative!

Fair Play

• Taylor Reveley-Without question, his forward-looking, pragmatic governance in the wake of Gene Nichol's (never heard of that guy) resignation has put the College in a better position for next year than any dared hope.


• Matt Beato-The dare-I-say-likely Councilman has run an aboveboard campaign, committed to moderate policy in both student-city relations and general city governance. If he wins, one hopes that his term will be defined by care and moderation, in addition to the signature achievement that reform of the absurd three-person law would be.


• Tribe Basketball-res ipsa loquitur.


• Tribe Women's Soccer, Women's Track, Women's Tennis-for bringing athletic glory (and some silverware) to the College while no one watched.

Yellow Card

• The Flat Hat-for showing a committment to journalistic excellence commensurate with rewriting and reproducing press releases. Journalism isn't class-you can ask questions, even of people you like, and a hundred people DON'T issue sighs of dread.


• The Virginia Informer-for incredibly biased coverage of almost everything. Even though controversy is the paper's raison d'etre, I cannot say I've read anything positive about an administrator in this paper. It is right to criticize error, but it is also right to commend proper actions.
  
• All the folks who wore T-shirts reading "If Nichol isn't welcome here then neither am I"-see you next fall.

Straight Red

• Artists-whether it is Aliza Shvarts' heaven-knows-what sort of bullshit at Yale or the dude in Guatemala starving dogs to death, it seems that putting anti-Bush words to pretty good music or depicting various nudes just isn't hardcore enough for them these days. Look, I'm all for free expression, but a simple code of behavior is necessary right now. Perhaps "Do not kill, do not rape, do not steal" would be a start.

And now, the first annual Robbie Savage award for being an all-around wanker and stuff:

• Gene Ray Nichol-could his actions in wake of his non-renewal have been any worse? Not content simply to resign, he issued an email blaming politics for his termination and inciting protest among his "Tribespeople" (my quote). Although I myself was neutral, and would have accepted the BOV's decision either way, by the end of the week I couldn't help telling Nichol to not let the door hit his arse on the way out. That, and Reveley's exceptional performance in the special legislative session puts your claims to absolute shame. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Fair Play/Yellow Card: Now Biweekly!

There's been a lot of good, solid, fucking up by the Estates General this week, so here are the midweek's bookings.

Fair Play:

1. The BOV-denied green fee action. Well done.

Yellow Card:

1. The Flat Hat-for the hit piece on John Foubert. The founder of One-in-Four was attacked in a very poorly written front-page-below-the-fold article on Tuesday that did not address the supposed reason for writing it. The piece was written in a backhanded attempt to discredit Foubert and secure support for the SA's mixed gender sexual assault prevention program.


2. The SA-spent your money on the Lips female sexuality magazine. Now, I don't suppose I could get funding for W*nker, the single male bachelor's sexuality magazine. Not that I would try or anything; I'm just trying to illustrate the absurdity of the thing. Your absurdly high student fees at work.
   

Sent Off: Second Bookable Offence

1. The Flat Hat-the Friday issue was unmitigated shit. Whether it was the unusually asinine Confusion Corner column, the pejorative use of the term "conservative" in their staff editorial, or the self-congratulatory "pat on the back" to readers of Mr. Pieprenbring's column, this Friday's issue earned a vote of no confidence from your haughty correspondent. In punishment for your week of FAIL, humanity fines you Z$100 (<$.01).

Straight Red

1. The "Sadler Celebration": My God, ten people sitting in a circle handling themselves would be less of a circle-jerk than the five minutes of that I sat through. Had Sadler been the center of attention, had the emcee not spent his time massaging the egos of the student organizations, had Sadler given a rally-the-troops, my-god-this-is-a-great-place-thanks-for-the-memories speech (which he might have, later, after all 150 spectators not participating left in disgust), there might have been the dignity I expected. Had the "parade of banners" consisted of the banner-carriers escorting Sadler on his ceremonial walk around campus, it may have had dignity. But it didn't. Madame President Hopkins, since you are the captain of the SA's ship, humanity holds you responsible for the EPIC FAIL in the amount of Z$200 (<$.01).

Fair Play/Yellow Card: Week of April 14

First in a new periodic series.

Fair Play:

1. The Flat Hat: Max Fischer may still be on staff for another month, but the editorial page has taken a much more responsible, moderate tone, in keeping with its position as the newspaper of record on campus. One wonders how long such movements will last in an election year, but this is a good change while it lasts.
2. Interim President Reveley: I would hope that the eventual permanent President of the College is paying attention to Mr. Reveley's style of leadership. Rather than using his position to advance a divisive liberal social agenda, Mr. Reveley has concerned himself with the mundane matters of earning College professors necessary raises, lessening financial losses in uncertain economic times, and ending the row over Nichol (who's he anyway?).

Yellow Card:

1. Senator Barack Obama: The emperor's new clothes, uplifting rhetoric and speechification in this case, could not save the Junior Senator from Illinois from himself this weekend when he implied that those not voting for "hope" and "change" were a bunch of bigoted protectionist gun-toting rednecks. If this is "Change we can believe in" I'll settle for carrying a lit lamp in daylight in search of an honest man.
2. The Bias Response Team: It seems that investigating political harassment is either too difficult or not "edgy" enough to warrant their attention. Perhaps this suggests they shouldn't exist.