Monday, October 18, 2004

A Tale of Two Men

The Right Angle : A Tale of Two Men - Opinions

All too often, people are elected based on what party they represent. I know people who vote Democrat simply because their parents did so. Whatever happened to voting on the issues, or voting on the person? Why is it Republicans are convinced Democrats are going to ruin the country, and liberals are convinced conservatives want to destroy the environment?

Today I'm going to force you to make a decision. I'm going to give you two candidates and ask you to chose which one you think would make a better leader. We're not going to go by names or parties, just issues and past experience.

Let's begin with Candidate A. Candidate A was born and raised in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. He attended a local university and began a career working for a local company. Candidate A worked hard for 17 years at the local company, with no dreams of political grandeur. He entered politics in 1994 when he realized that rising taxes were crushing North Carolina's businesses. His concern for the welfare of North Carolina families won him a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives in the 1994 elections, and he spent the next few years fighting for fiscal responsibility and affordable healthcare for North Carolinians. Worried that he was not serving his home state as well as he could be, Candidate A decided to run for U.S. Senate in 2004.

Candidate B, the son of a wealthy politician, was born and raised in Greensboro, North Carolina. He attended a business school in New York, and after graduation, he worked at a financial firm in New York City. He did not return to North Carolina until his father ran for governor of the state in 1972. With the exception of working on his father's campaign, Candidate B had basically no political experience until 1992 when he became involved in a fundraiser for that year's presidential campaign. As a reward for his loyalty, Candidate B was appointed to head of the Small Business Administration in 1993, deputy Chief of Staff from 1994-1995, and Chief of Staff in 1996. In 1998, the administration he was serving under found itself in a compromisingly sticky situation, and Candidate B suddenly missed his home state of North Carolina and could not wait to leave Washington. However, he must have started missing D.C., because in 2002, he ran for U.S. Senate. His campaign failed, and he is once again running for U.S. Senate in 2004.

I had the privilege of attending a senatorial debate between Candidate A and B a few weeks ago. Halfway through the event, it was blindingly apparent who the real North Carolinian was. Candidate A showed genuine concern for his constituents as he discussed repealing unnecessary taxes, attracting jobs to the state, lowering health care premiums, and improving education. Candidate B sounded like a tape-recording every time he opened his mouth, except for the few times he tried unsuccessfully to make a joke. Although the jokes were few and far between, they were all painful, as Candidate B apparently found himself much more amusing than anyone else did. The only issue Candidate B could stick to was that, when elected, he would work with both parties in the Senate. He never said what they would work on, but he repeated that same phrase several times. I found this amusing since he lost the 2002 senatorial race because of his lack of bipartisanship.

As a North Carolinian, do you see the predicament I am faced with? Candidate A is a hard-working family man with our state's best interests in mind, while Candidate B is simply trying to gain political power. For me, the choice is a no-brainer: Richard Burr (aka "Candidate A") knows this state, and he knows what we need. I was lucky enough to meet him on two occasions: once when I was 13, and again a few weeks ago at the senatorial debate. He is a genuinely nice person, approachable and very easy to talk to. Meeting him at the age of 13 definitely helped inspire me to go into politics.

On the other hand, I find Candidate B (Erskine Bowles) to be just a little scary. I have a theory that he is robot designed by the Democratic Party. If you think Bowles cares about North Carolina, you're sadly mistaken. It's not a coincidence that he chose to leave the Clinton administration during the middle of the Lewinsky scandal; he didn't want to ruin his future political goals. And if he had really wanted to leave D.C. so badly, why is he suddenly trying to go back? Bowles is no different from John Edwards; he only wants to use this Senate seat as a stepping-stone. He has much higher aspirations.

Take it from me: I've heard the issues; I've met the men. This goes far beyond party loyalty. A vote for Richard Burr is a vote for North Carolina's future. Trust me, North Carolina: when November 2 rolls around, elect Richard Burr to U.S. Senate. You won't regret it.

No comments: