President’s Message
There is so much information to share with you that I ask that you please forgive me for its length. Karen Weizal, of the Polk Democratic Executive committee, asked that I share with you details of an event as part of Everytown for Gun Safety’s “March for Our Lives Events” campaign at 1 Highlander Way; Lake Wales, FL on Saturday, March 24 at 6 PM. RSVP here to join her by clicking the following link: http://act.everytown.org/event/march-our-lives-events_attend/9766/?source=taf&referring_akid=.6455839.zP7wB6
Our Blue Wave Dance is March 14th in the Ballroom; doors open at 6:30 PM. Music by DJ, Irwin Zalko. Please bring a snack for your table; Cash bar. Tickets $10 per person. DO NOT respond directly to this email to order tickets. Email or call Kate Kohout at katekohout@yahoo.com or (863)-496-0481. Include your name, number of tickets and your phone number.
In his opening statement in a recent email blast, Ryan Torrens (candidate for Florida Attorney Genera) said last week said that “I am ashamed of my party”. We had the pleasure of having him address our club last month, and those in attendance found him to be a compelling and passionate speaker. I feel that he is one of the best candidates that Florida Democrats have had in a long time. His opponent is being backed by the Koch brothers, and has amassed a multi-million dollar war chest.
To quote Mr. Torrens, “I believe that one of the reasons the Democratic Party keeps losing in Florida is because my party has lost touch with working people in our state. My party used to be known as the party who fought for the underprivileged, the forgotten, and those struggling to get ahead. It was my party who fought for everyone to have fair chance to achieve their dreams. It was my party who fought for the laid off factory worker and the single mom, living paycheck to paycheck.” He said that Democratic members of the Florida Legislature voted in favor of payday lenders, and Democratic members of the U.S. Senate voted to relax the rules for big banks instead of fighting for the people who sent them there. And most ironic of all, they did this during National Consumer Protection Week. This is exactly why so many voters have called out Democrats with their talk of fighting for the working man. Talk is cheap. Actions speak louder than words.
Mr. Torrens further stated that “we need to return to the party of LBJ, who fought for health insurance for the elderly and the poor. We need to return to the party of FDR, who fought for the workers who were relegated to a life of poverty and humiliation due to the ravages of the Great Depression. Only when we do this will the voters place their trust in the Democratic Party once again.
‘ It’s time to go back to basics. It’s time to actually fight for what our party claims to believe in. It’s really easy to show up at a fancy party, cocktail in hand, and talk about how progressively-minded you are. When the fight is on, like it was yesterday, our people expect us to to fight for them. Our party let the people down yesterday. What a shame.
‘We’re doing things differently in this campaign. I’m campaigning as the people’s lawyer. It’s who I am and it’s what I do. Fighting for all Florida consumers isn’t Democratic or Republican and it isn’t liberal or conservative. It’s just the right thing to do. We’re going to win this election, but only with your support. I don’t care what your party is. If you believe it’s time to put the AG’s office back on the side of the consumers, join our team today.” Mr. Torrens recognizes that the wind is at our backs, and it’s time to take advantage of that momentum.
Lastly ,Marilyn Shapiro of our club shared with us one of her writings “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner”:
According to the Bipartisanship Policy Center, our country’s history of working across the aisle can be traced back to as early as 1787. Our founding fathers, struggling with congressional representation regarding the populations of the colonies, reached what later was know as the Great Compromise. It was decided that our new government would exist with a proportional House of Representatives and a Senate with equal representation. Once adopted, both sides felt vindicated.
At their best, and despite their differences, presidents and parties have work together to use compromise for the common good of our country. Lincoln created his “team of rivals” because he believed that he had no right to deprive the country of its strongest minds simply because they sometimes disagreed with him. In the last sixty years, the Civil Rights Act (1964); putting man on the moon (1977); the Endangered Species Act (1973); the American’s with Disabilities Act (1990); welfare reform (1996), and No Child Left Behind (2001) all were put into effect because of compromise.
In the current political climate, compromise appears to be all but impossible. Lines have been drawn in the sand, pitting the Republican majority against the Democratic minority with unprecedented rancor. Nuclear options, closed door sessions, and a proliferation of what is regarded as “fake,” exaggerated, and even inflammatory news have torn our country apart in ways that many of us — from gifted historians to concerned citizen—cannot remember.
The battle has spilled over to our personal lives, dividing family and friends. The situation has become so flammable that recommendations on how to get along with family and friends with differing political views have become hot topics on everything from television to newspaper articles to Miss Manners. How do we deal with its aftermath when where one stands—whether to the left, to the right, or in the middle—when politics become personal?
I myself had become caught up in the “us versus them” mentality. In the months before the election, I had spent hours watching television, listening to podcasts, and reading articles—usually with left leaning perspectives. Sharing all this news became my first priority, either through social media or animated, face to face conversations.
And it hurt me. I had cut off contact with a relative after a Facebook fight about the election last fall, reconciling only after four months of protracted tension. One of my new neighbors, knowing how I felt about the November 8 outcome, had purposely avoided me with little more than a smile and hello. Friends invited me to their get-togethers but suggested I leave my politics at the door. As a result, I decided that I could still do what I need to do—stay informed, call my legislators, volunteer to work during the next election cycle. However, as Miss Manners suggested in her June 25, 2017, column, I was no longer going discuss politics in social situations without mutual consent to do so.
While organizing a small dinner party, I realized how difficult the situation had become. One of the guests, whose leanings were unreservedly to the left, called to see if I was inviting a couple known for their strong Republican views. When I asked him the reason for his request, he told me that he recently had had a heated exchange with the couple regarding politics. He and his wife would feel uncomfortable attending if they were going to be there.
Even though the “Republicans” were not on the guest list for that evening, his request troubled me. Since the elections, I had heard similar comments from other friends who had questioned my continued friendship with any of “those people” who didn’t vote the way they had. I also observed many friends drawing lines in the sand. I came to the realization that enough was enough.
I didn’t have a good response for my dinner guests during that phone call, but I do now. When the issue comes up, I tell people, “I will be friends with whom I want. Politics will NOT be a decision in my friendship.”
In Tip and the Gipper: When Politics Worked, Chris Matthews, the former Chief of Staff for House Speaker Tip O’Neill and MSNBC journalist, reported that the political battles between the House Speaker and President Ronald Reagan were “legendary,” but they respected and even liked one another. Reagan often had both Republicans and Democrats—including O’Neill—over for cocktails. “After six,” O’Neill would insist, “we are all friends.”
The only difference with me, the avowed liberal Democrat, and Tip O’Neill is that I won’t limit my friendships to after six o’clock. As Thomas Jefferson so wisely said over two hundred years ago, “I never considered a difference in opinion on politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause enough in withdrawing from a friend.”
So I will continue to have friends for dinner, no matter our political affiliations. We will break bread. We will drink wine. We will laugh and enjoy each other’s company. And maybe, just maybe, once in a while we will “reach across the aisle.” We will discuss politics, learn what divides and unites us, and, if necessary, agree to disagree. I only wish the same for our president and the members of our United States Senate and House of Representatives.
Stanley P. Dillard, Sr. President
Solivita Democratic Club
863-427- 4480
