I'm not running for president, but...

Citizens need to educate themselves about politics

By Tom Kovach

Buckle up. This will be a long column, but it should be worth your while.

Regular readers to my columns know that, since January, I've been a candidate for the US House of Representatives here in the Nashville area. Although I'm the state PR coordinator for the Constitution Party, I'm running on the Republican Party line. Why? Well, if I had known back in January that the state Republican Party was not going to lift a finger to help me, perhaps I would've run on the Independent line. (So far, the CP is not big enough in Tennessee to have its own line on the ballot. Perhaps my campaign will help to change that before the 2008 elections — regardless of whether I run again.)

If I had known back in January that a political e-newsletter (TeamGOP News) would actually ignore my campaign — while simultaneously urging voters to support candidates on the Republican line — perhaps I would've planned my campaign strategy a bit differently. (Scroll about ¾ down the page for their endorsements.) When I tried to set the record straight, instead of apologizing, "Team" GOP tried to pooh-pooh my campaign by saying that they had "never heard of" me. How does one find out who is running? Simple. Anyone can go to the Web site of the TN Division of Elections and look at the list of qualified candidates. Now, if an attorney and self-appointed political blogger such as Jeff Ward can't figure out how to do that, then why would "Team" GOP's opinion count for anything?

Interestingly, the other half of the "Team" GOP editorial staff is Shirley Ward. In addition to writing for "Team" GOP, she is also the president of the Tennessee Federation of Republican Women. That organization also did not endorse me. In fact, neither their headquarters nor their district officers have replied to my e-mails. In a state where the Democratic Party has controlled the 5th Congressional District continuously since 1875, I would think that the Republican leadership would want to work extra-hard to distinguish itself from the things that Democrats do. Instead, it seems that Shirley Ward has behaved like a Memphis Democrat, having been arrested for violating the state's election law. So, why should it matter that Jeff Ward and Shirley Ward have snubbed my campaign?

The sad fact is that a lot of politics hinges upon who, instead of what. Party loyalists — from both of the Big Two parties — want to make exceptions for members of their own party that do the same thing as members of the other party. That is why our country needs a true multi-party system. Voters should be able to choose something better than merely "the lesser of two evils." Candidates should have better qualifications than merely, "Well, at least I'm not the other guy." Citizens should examine the views of every candidate, and not merely vote for the candidate that is "not a member of that other party." So, when Bubba Doublewide stands at the voting machine, it is unfortunate that much of his voting decision might hinge upon such oversimplified questions as: a) does the candidate "look good"; b) is the candidate "successful"; or, c) is the candidate endorsed by someone that I "like"? Poor Bubba has no idea what the candidate actually stands for. Worse, he really doesn't want to know. And that, unfortunately, is why the endorsements and opinions of "well-liked" people (even if they are arrested for violating the election law) matter to voters and candidates.

It is amazing to me, and also unfortunate for our country, just how uninformed many voters really are. We supposedly live in the most educated society in the history of the world. But, the "leaders" of political parties and news outlets agree that candidate Web sites should not contain "too much information." This year, I have put out eleven news releases so far, and Nashville-area news outlets have published none of that information. So, unless a miracle happens, poor Bubba could look at my name on the ballot and mutter, "Well, I never heard of him." And, why has he not heard of me? Because a few party "leaders" think that, by telling voters exactly what my views are, I've put out too much information!

you're running for what?

One example of how under-informed the voters are can be seen in the question that many voters ask when I knock on their doors. I introduce myself, tell them that I'm running for Congress, and then many of them ask, "Which Congress? The State Congress?" It comes as an absolute shock to some of them when I explain that there is no State Congress. Here in Tennessee, our state legislature (that is the proper generic name, and the specific name in many states) is called the General Assembly. This is the type of information that most Americans are taught in the eighth grade. Liberalism is able to succeed largely because many citizens stop caring about our government once they pass the eighth-grade final examinations.

Of the voters that actually understand that our Congress is located in Washington, DC, and not in Nashville, I'm also surprised by some of the questions that these voters ask me out on the street. The most disturbing is, "What are you going to do for me?" The question reveals an underlying philosophy that government must do something for people — as opposed to people doing things for themselves. Thus, the question is proof that the Leftist indoctrination that surrounds us (in public schools, in the news media, and even in some businesses) has taken hold.

Another type of question that comes up frequently is, "What are you going to do about ________________?" Often, this type of voter shows his own ignorance by filling the blank with issues that are the purview of another branch, or even a different level, of our government system. There is a temptation to be like other "politicians" (in the negative sense of that word), and simply tell Bubba Doublewide what he wants to hear. It would sound something like this. "Why, Bubba, if you elect me, I'm gonna make sure that not only does your honeysuckle get trimmed from around your mailbox, but that it will never grow that thick as long as I'm still in office. Why, I'm gonna invent a way to keep that vine from growing out of control, you just mark my words." Amazingly, that is the type of answer that many voters expect to hear. Never mind that it is a stupid, self-serving, Communist, and un-Constitutional answer. (But, because they've been told that Al Gore invented the Internet, they have come to expect such things from "politicians.")

but, if I were running for president ...

Because of corruption, compromise, and outright Communism in many of the halls of our modern American government, some voters seem to think that any elected official takes on some divine quality the morning after Election Day. History should have proven by now that such is definitely not the case. The closest that anyone comes to having absolute power in this country is the President of the United States. Even the president's power is limited. And, I'm only running for the House, not the White House. But, given that so many people on the campaign trail have asked so many questions that can only be addressed by a presidential candidate, I thought I'd offer some answers.

First of all, assuming that I win the November election for the US House of Representatives, I would only be a freshman Congressman. I would have limited ability to get anything done. Freshmen also gain little name recognition outside their own district. But, let's assume that, because I'm one of the few candidates that speaks plainly about the problem of illegal aliens, I manage to gain some measure of name recognition outside my home district. (In reality, my name would more likely become recognized because of the growing trend toward the smaller political parties. This is a factor that those Republicans that have snubbed me have overlooked.) Regardless of how it happens, let's assume that I get onto the national radar, and am considered for the office of either President or Vice-President of the United States. (The latter is far more likely — especially when considering that the issue of illegal aliens will not go away soon.)

So, with all of that background, here is the answer to what I would do if elected to the White House.

• Secure the borders immediately! I doubt that "politicians" will tackle this matter decisively before the 2008 elections. So, if by some surprising miracle I should get elected into the White House, that would be "Job One". And, as I've written and spoken many times, border security is a military duty, not a law enforcement task. We do not have a duty to arrest those that invade our country; we only have a duty to repel such invaders.
  
  
• Put our troops into Border Security units. As implied above, the government has a Constitutional duty to use the military to protect the States against invasions. (Article 4, Section 4) For the first year, every member of our Armed Forces would serve in a Border Security unit, on a three-month rotation of assignments: Northern border, Southern border, airports, and seaports (in no certain order). There is no reason for any of our troops to guard the border of any other country, until they have spent time guarding our own borders.
  
  
• Bring our troops home from needless tasks. As just stated, the security of our own country comes first. In my opinion, our military is under-manned. Unless our troop strength is raised, we need every available person to help secure the United States. Only then can we fulfill any international agreements with any degree of credibility. Although I supported invading Iraq and Afghanistan, it also seems to me that an American-style government is nearly impossible in any Islamic country, because the culture does not support the mindset needed to make such a government work. Freedom is foreign to their culture; indeed, the very word "Muslim" means "slave." (Or, perhaps more correctly, "bondservant.") Islamic factions have been killing each other since the death of Muhammad, 14 centuries ago. There is no reason to think that our presence in the Middle East could bring the same level of peace as is enjoyed by most modern Americans. The so-called "unity" government was installed in Iraq in May 2006. That fulfilled the stated goals of our 2003 invasion. This is not a philosophy of "cut and run"; this is a philosophy of "good job, and welcome home".
  
  
• Shoot down drug-laden aircraft that invade our airspace. One of the largest sub-economies in this country is the importation and sale of illegal drugs. I'm specifically referring to addictive narcotics: mostly cocaine and heroin. (Marijuana, although psychologically habit-forming — like a recliner chair — is not in the same class as physically addictive drugs.) These drugs drain the life from our people, our culture, and our economy. There was a 1988 plan by the State Department that demonstrated the precautions needed to make a shoot-down strategy work properly, which means to eliminate any threat to non-drug-laden aircraft. This can, and should, be done.
  
  
• Eliminate the threat from foreign-based gangs. Although any criminal enterprise is a threat to and a drain from our society, foreign-based gangs present a much larger threat. This comes from the two-edged lack of regard for our culture, and the alliances they have formed with terrorist groups. In fact, many such gangs have been properly labeled "narco-terrorists," as distinguished from "ideological terrorists." The key difference is that narco-terrorists can be stopped if they are made to realize that coming to the United States has become so costly and dangerous that it is no longer worth their effort. Ideological terrorists do not view their motives in such simple terms as "profit vs. loss" or "supply and demand." But, by combating the criminal gangs, we will reduce a key source of cooperation for the ideological terrorist gangs. Given that the majority of members of foreign-based gangs are here illegally, the gang itself can thus be viewed as an "invading armed force." As such, they can be hunted down with military force, instead of wasting time and money on endless criminal appeals and incarceration.
  
  

Five ideas; five business days. That's how my first week in office would look, if I were elected president. Of course, having made this declaration, I would also need to survive — both literally and politically — until the 2008 elections.

© Tom Kovach