Erik's Rant
 

March 3, 2004

Election Night! Yipee!

Not being a Partisan means that I rarely am at those fun election night parties. I kind of miss them. The speeches degenerate as the evening goes on, the winning side gets rowdier and rowdier, the losing party dwindles down to the glassy-eyed candidate and his stoic wife and a few college-student dingbat volunteers who think it somehow meritorious to hang with a loser until the bitter end. You know it is bad news when the children have gone home before the concession speech.

I never was a Partisan, but in my Commie days in high school I generally supported Democrats, worked for Democrat campaigns, and went to Democrat election night parties. Later I went from Commie to Libertarian (out of the oven and into the Malebolge, and for particularly loathesome reasons too, but more about that later) and changed my general loyalties to Republicans. I was never a really gung-ho Republican and only went to one Republican election night party (couple of State Conventions, though, but that is another story). He lost. He deserved to lose. I did not vote for him. I left early. I genuinely like the guy and did not want to hear the concession speech.

When I slowly realized that I had little in common with either the debased Democratic party or with the Protestant, I mean, Republican party (and as a fervent supporter of Franco, I could never be happy in a party with that loathesome name), I stopped having much to do with any of them (although last General Election for the first time I voted a straight ticket - just held my nose and voted GOP right down the line. The Democrats were that bad). Since non-volunteers, non-contributors, especially those who scoff at the party and the party's name, do not get on the invite list to election night parties, I no longer go to them. I have to say they are the only thing I miss about the Dempublican party.

Perhaps in November I will host a Falange Election Night Party. We can eat tapas and drink Jerez and jeer at the returns as they come in. It just won't be the same without a bonafide candidate, though. Maybe it will be a party for all those who are without bonafide candidates. Dress code: identify your party by your shirt or bandana color. If things get dull, the blue shirts could pound the reds, the greens could organize a sit in, which the black shirts would attack unmercifully. No brown shirts or hijabs, however. Even my intolerance has its limits.

Speaking of not having a bonafide candidate, I would love to be a fly on the wall at a LaRouche election night gathering. That nut has fascinated me for some time. I kind of admire the strong arm tactics he uses on his followers, but his mental health is out of whack. I imagine that his parties are grim, paranoid affairs with most of the loyalists watching for signs of betrayal in every action, word, or gesture of the others. Sort of like Stalin for the new decade.

I wonder, does LaRouche literally froth at the mouth? It is something I wonder about Dean Howard, too. I imagine that as soon as he is behind closed doors, hair sprouts from everywhere, his teeth grow, and he starts foaming. Poor Vermont. I hear that the real Vermonters are not like Dean, that they were invaded by New York Liberals. I have been to Vermont. Pretty place with crappy skiing (slush, powder, ice, barespot, slush, powder...).

What about Nadir? I imagine that he talks incessantly, lecturing himself without end, some mad asetic practice, except that the dirty secret is that he is in love with his own voice, even when it scolds him. "Ralph, you have to understand that when I talk to you, I expect some degree of transparency. Even the private forum must be open and fair. You know, Ralph, I disappoint me sometimes, and I really want to talk about this..." and so on for hours.

I hear that Ralph is back in the running. Should cost this John Kerry fellow some votes. Now that Conan the Governor has won his two measures on the California ballot (both of which I was agin'), he might actually have the clout to deliver California for Bush. It will take some serious Federal Pork (and high profile at that), but I can see it happening. If that happens and Nadir kills Kerry in Vermont and a few other liberal fortresses, then Bush is a shoe-in for another four years. I am not setting odds yet, but I would much rather be a Bush strategist than a Kerry strategist right now.

Of course to pull this off, Bush has to completely betray the Pro-Life cause, because the Republicans in California are the party of Mammon, and if being the party of Moloch helps Mammon, then, so be it.

My prediction is that November is going to be ugly. We are going to see the lowest level of election year politics yet. Kerry is going to be the sleaziest, but many a good Republican is going to be pretty disgusted with Bush (hopefully not, but I am pessimistic). It is going to personalityless ugliness, too. There will be no barking Spiros, no snapping Trumans, no pure raunchy LBJ antics, just the sight of two uncharismatic toads trying to outmanouver each other for an invisible fly.

But anyway, here I sit. Alone. Amalia and Melanie are in bed. I could wake them up to give my victory speech or my concession speech, but they would not appreciate it. I could pace the hall, eyes glassy and slightly wild, tie loosened, half my shirt untucked. I could nervously whisper to an imaginary aide. I could say things like "next year", "in 2008", "from this point on" and "the work is only beginning."

So that leaves you:

My dear readers,

I thank you for sticking by me and seeing us through to this victory. It has been a long road, a tremendous struggle, a battle, but I knew from that cold morning in Omaha, that we had what it took to get here. And I say "we." A candidate is only as good as his team, and you did it as much as I did. OF course the strongest member of my team has been my daughter, Amalia. Without her linguistic prowess I don't think we could have even dreamed of a campaign as powerful as "Look! I am a horse!" Or how about "No nap. It's wake time!" Huh, you guys remember that one? But we cannot stop here. No, there is much to do before November. Fundraising. Fundraising. Fundraising. Fundraising [an aide smacks the Senator]. Fund... and building coalitions. People. Working. Together. Common. Vision. Dream. My great friend and mentor. We will win this thing. God bless and good night!

Posted by erik at March 3, 2004 12:23 AM | TrackBack
Comments

Larouche's "parties" are probably akin to the devils' meetings in The Screwtape Letters (per your description of their likely tone).

Posted by: John Salmon at March 9, 2004 10:33 PM

I think the last time I voted for a winning president was Jimmy Carter. It has been a long time since dem publicans have offered a halfway tolerable candidate.
I love that you have labeled Ralfie boy the nadir. I have despised Ralph Nader ever since I met my husband. You see, John has this great affection for the Chevy Corvair, and Nader killed the car of his youth. Nader may not truly be the nadir of candidates (I think LaRouche or Al Sharpton are closer) but he is damn near the bottom of the sludgepile.

Posted by: alicia at March 4, 2004 8:13 AM

Stephen,

No one was repressed under San Francisco Franco y Bahamonde who did not deserve repressing. Or I should say that peoople weren't oppressed, only evil ideas were repressed. LaRouche, on the other hand, exemplifies the sort of petty personal vindictiveness that one generally finds in a Stalin or Hitler. As I have said many times before, I would live under Franco in a second, would serve him as loyally as I would serve my own family. LaRouche, Hitler, Stalin and Marcos, on the other hand I would not give the time of day to.

Ryan,

For Angela I would suspend my normal prohibition against women running for higher office, IF she were to run on a Falange ticket.

Posted by: Erik Keilholtz at March 3, 2004 8:42 AM

Erik,
I say sir, maybe you could put together a unified ticket, with Angela as your VP candidate.
RAM

Posted by: Ryan Muskar at March 3, 2004 7:47 AM

Erik:
A LaRouche presidency would be a lot like Franco's tenure--just a bit more whacky and a lot less repressive.
SC

Posted by: Stephen Cordova at March 3, 2004 6:40 AM

You, excellency, are a hoot.

Posted by: KTC at March 3, 2004 4:57 AM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?