As a weekly columnist here at The BG News, my hope is always to engage you, my readers, enough to illicit a reaction.
Whether or not you agree with my point of view, if I can get you to talk, write a letter, or even just think about what I have said, I feel like I have accomplished my goal of starting a campus conversation about things that I feel are important.
Well, my column last week about why you should not vote for Mitt Romney as the next president certainly did illicit some reactions.
I expected that what I was saying about Romney’s assumed religious covenant — to turn over all of his time, talent and resources to the LDS church should they ever request that he do so — would make some people mad, and I tried to stress in that column that I harbor no prejudices against LDS church members or, for that matter, those affiliated with any other religion.
Still, however, I was referred to as a “religious bigot” for what I said. I think anyone who knows me will tell you that while I am a lot of things, a bigot is not one of them. And I would like to clarify last week’s point by saying that if a Mormon can assure us (the public) that he or she has never sworn an oath (like the one I mentioned in that column) that he or she would value higher than the oath they would swear to hold the presidency, then I have no objection to their religious affiliation as president.
But if you have already sworn a higher oath, then I stand by what I wrote: You should not be president.
What surprised me the most was a reply to my column from a member of the Wood County Republican Party. This person did not simply disagree with me, but questioned my honor, ethics, intelligence and journalistic chops as a whole. This person of course did not say in his letter that he was a member of the Wood County Republicans, but a little research filled in this blank.
One person said that people can get health care for as low as $70 a month, and alluded that people should purchase these plans to enable them to afford medical costs. Some argued that students don’t need to stay on their parents’ health care plans until they’re 26 years old, they should just purchase insurance and pay their bills.
I think that this is a good example in the difference between Republican and Democratic political theories.
Republicans assume that everyone can just afford $70 a month. Why not? It doesn’t sound like much, especially if you say it fast.
But the fact is, we are living in the remains of the George W. Bush, trickle-down economy and there are a lot of people that cannot afford to shell out an extra $70 a month. And even when the economy was good, there were still poor people who could not afford it.
Why else would someone not have health insurance? Do you think people like not having insurance?
People traditionally do not have insurance because that $70 a month (and usually it is more than that, particularly if you want to avoid a several thousand dollar deductible before your benefits even kick in) may be the difference in buying or not buying groceries that month, or not having a telephone, or electric in the house. When people have to choose between basic survival and health insurance, health insurance loses every time.
The Republican operative argued with every point I made in my column last week, and I don’t blame him. It must be hard to be a conservative and have Mitt Romney as your candidate. When you are afraid to discuss the gubernatorial accomplishments of your ex-governor candidate, I imagine that it is pretty frustrating.
It must be especially frustrating here in Wood County where you also have to try to defend the voting record of Congressman Bob Latta — who has voted against equal rights for women and was recently recorded saying, “The best [kind of] tax out there is one that you pay and I don’t” — and still refuses to debate his Democratic challenger, Angela Zimmann.
All this just serves to make me believe that the local GOP is scared of the potential outcome of the elections here in November. Ohio is, after all, a swing state and thanks to Republican gerrymandering, our congressional district is now a swing district in a swing state.
Our state and our district could go either way in November, and I think that the local Republican Party is scared that both could swing to the Democrats. But they are scared of more than that. They are scared that you — as the next generation of voters — will fundamentally reject their politics of division, obstructionism and making the rich richer and the poor poorer.
Why else would someone disagree with me?
Respond to Matthew at
