previous post next post  

Meeting the Enemy...

...as in going to a political function and ambushing your freshman congressional Representative. In this case, Nancy Boyda, Democrat, representing the 2nd Congressional District of Kansas. She who upset Jim Ryun. Not that I mind his departure, he took his constituents for granted, I mind the loss of the seat to the Democrats, though despite some heated rhetoric to the contrary, I don't see Ms. Boyda as quite being "Ms. Boyda (D, KS/San Francisco).

This was a target of opportunity. As related yesterday, I went to the Dole Leadership Prize award for former Senator Howard Baker. On a note unrelated to that, but germane to this - I sent my first email missive to Ms. Boyda on Friday, being supportive of her thus-public stance on the issue of gun control in the wake of the Virginia Tech shootings She didn't jump on the "We must do something!" bandwagon, she said “As tragic as this incident was … I don’t think we need additional federal gun laws,” Boyda said Tuesday. “We need to enforce the laws we have.” Word! More on that later. I decided that was the topic that would open my bouncing off of her email server. SWWBO has already been pinging Ms. Boyda (apparently relentlessly) on the issue of Iraq.

Back to the story - I was sitting in the Lied before the event started, and the people behind me were talking about politics and last year's campaign. At first when I heard them referring to Nancy, I thought they were referring to Senator Baker's wife, the former Senator from Kansas, Nancy Kassebaum-Baker. It became clear they were talking about Boyda, and since they were sitting right behind me, I turned and started talking to them. That discussion would be an interesting post in and of itself, as the people sitting behind me were Owen de Long, Boyda's campaign consultant, who was discussing (quite proudly I might add, deservedly so) of the Boyda campaign's fighting from 15 points behind to a win. Seated with him were two of Boyda's staff, a woman named Kate (I didn't get a last name) and a man whose name completely escapes me. As Kate is one of the people who answers Boyda's mail, we had a chat about some of the responses SWWBO has gotten - and I gave them credit for much better responses in that regard (i.e., the response, while a template, is customized to the question at hand) vice Ryun's operation, which it didn't matter what question you asked on a topic, you got the same generic response, which usually (at least in my case) didn't even remotely address my question. It was as if Mr. Ryun just patted you on the head and said, "Don't worry yourself about that, little man. I've got it under control." I mentioned my email on Friday, in which I said I would introduce myself should Ms. Boyda be coming to the event. They then pointed her out to me, sitting with Navy CAPT (R) Parker, a past President of MOAA (Military Officers Assn of America) just a short ways away.

So, after the event, I did just that. She was working the crowd, greeting the students who also wanted to meet her... I waited my chance and pounced.

And as we and her staff slowly walked out to the cars, I got about 20 minutes of her time. Which, when you think about it, isn't bad at all, and a credit to her that she took the time when she could have had her staff swoop in (they were hovering, listening) and rescue her. If you're reading, guys - thanks!

So, what's my take on Ms. Boyda? She listens well. And she didn't pander, either. We mostly agreed short-term, at least, on this specific incident, on the issue of guns post V-Tech, with her pointing out that the Dems had been working with the NRA on the issue. The one thing she did talk about was looking into how to do a better job of keeping people like the shooter from getting guns legally, and of disarming people who fall into the abyss that the shooter did. There's much room for mischief in there, certainly - but that's a position I can work with.

We are largely in agreement on BRAC-related issues for Kansas, and I know she's been working with the installations and the senior guys like LTG(R) Keller who are the players there. Retired munchkins like me, absent moving into leadership positions in things like AUSA, MOAA, American Legion etc, aren't really players in that arena, nor do I intend to start.

We touched on, briefly, Veteran's Health Care issues which I do have a personal interest in, between my father and myself and may choose to become a player in that arena. Boyda and I have no significant beefs in that regard.

The tension, such as it was, was over Iraq and her sense of military families and their reaction to Iraq. In her staff's responses to SWWBO, and in her personal responses to me, I get the general sense that Ms. Boyda et.cie, feel that military families are against the war and want everybody home right this minute. Boyda alluded to the most vicious email she gets are people berating her for not immediately having the troops redeployed. Seeing the kind of comments and email that SWWBO sometimes gets, I can imagine the tone and quality of some of those emails.

Ms. Boyda related that during some of her "Congress on the Corner" stops around the district, she gets larger-than-expected crowds, full of women who want their husbands, sons, nephews, grandchildren etc, Home Now, and they are vehement on it.

The point I made is of course we military family members want our deployed soldiers home, but for the right reasons, not "just because" - though there are certainly those who do fall into the latter category.

We danced around that issue of the view of military families for a while, until I realized we weren't talking about the same thing. I think that Ms. Boyda and her staff are conflating Active, Guard, and Reserve families into one homogeneous group, and she was talking to, based on locations she mentioned, mostly Guard families.

She understands self-selecting groups and is aware that the ones showing up are the ones with grievances, and that being a Democrat, she's more likely to attract the attention of that group. I do think it caught her by surprise that I suggested she was not only getting self-selected, but self-selected from a relatively specific sub-group of the military family community - and one, like the Reserve families, that is hardest hit by deployments, if only for the simple reason that they are more isolated from the support services built into the fixed infrastructure of military basing.

Not bad for twenty minutes. I did get this email yesterday from a Senior Military Person of my acquaintance (titled "Hob Nobbing with the High and Mighty"), presented here edited to preserve anonymity:

John,

Well, Mike and I missed you at lunch today, but I know how difficult it is for the media elite to manage their time.

I hope your meeting with Her Congressness went better than (his wife's) conversation with her. Perhaps you had time to acquaint her with some of the finer points of the U.S. Constitution such as the organization of the several branches of government, the role of the Legislative Bodies, and the observation that a congressman from Kansas would do well to represent Kansas instead of San Francisco . My brother-in-law (the political pundit) tells me that she snuck under everyone's radar screen in 2006 and that will not happen the next time. He doubts that she's up to the challenge - I'd be interested in your impression.

BTW - that thingy on your blog that is giving everyone fits - Its the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch - Geeze, where do you find these rookies?

Interesting, the comment about the pundit brother-in-law - it was exactly that subject, from that angle, that Owen de Long was chuckling about.

Sadly, we didn't have time for me to lecture the Congresswoman on the Constitution. Nor, in context, would it have been appropriate, as I was a walk-by mugging-by-constituent and I thought Ms. Boyda was honest and forthright with me, on the issues we discussed. Hopefully that is something she will continue to maintain, with all of us during her tenure, and not slip into mindless platitudes ala Ryun. Yeah, I *not* a Ryun fan. I'd much rather see someone else challenge Ms. Boyda next round.

But, I promise the Senior Military Personage that I will bring the issue up if it comes up. Next opportunity - SWWBO and I have been invited to drop by for a chat while we're in DC next week for the Milblog Conference - which I pitched to Ms. Boyda as something to have at least one of her staff check out the live feed from, seeing as how I'm one of the bigger (non-professional media type, anyway) bloggers in her district...

Ms. Boyda listened, defended herself well, and we had a good give-and-take. She knows she can't be Nancy Pelosi and keep her job in this district. But she's not going to be Jim Ryun, either. She's going to come from the center left. Our job is just to make sure the drift further to the left is under control. As she said to me specifically, she's going to listen to all sides, but in the end, she's going to vote as her judgement directs, whether or no the District wants it that way.

I responded that was the way a Republican democracy worked, and she'll get her grade next time 'round.

I wasn't expecting a fight, but it went differently than I expected, and in ways that redound to Ms. Boyda's credit - regardless of your politics. She didn't hit me with platitudes or rote positions, she listened, she discussed, and she stood her ground in appropriate ways. She's a newbie, let's hope she can keep that aspect of things going until we can find someone other than Ryun to take the seat back. But she gave me more respect in that 20 minutes than Ryun ever did in 12 years. But then, I'm in that group whose vote she needs to get if she wants to keep her job - the great mushy muddle. Something to keep in mind, next time around.

1 Trackbacks

TrackBack this entry at http://www.thedonovan.com/cgi-bin/mt41/mt-tb.cgi/7120

A short recon of what痴 out there that might draw your attention. Read More

20 Comments

I hope Senior Military Person comes across better in person....cause he didn't do well in this email. I agree with your overall assessment of your relationship/situation with Ms. Boyda. As long as they are not too "out there" you can talk across the aisle. And having someone from your own party in office isn't necessarily the key to happiness.
 
I'm in that group whose vote she needs to get if she wants to keep her job - the great mushy muddle. Hmmpf. And here I'd allus thought you *had* a great mushy middle. Gotta be *some* reason you stuck halfway through the commander's hatch on that T-72...
 
Maggie - excepting that he's married and a soldier, you'd like the Senior Miltary Personage.
 
I am glad to see she didn't go off the deep end regarding 2nd Amendement rights. As a gun dealer here in western Ks. I have often felt that the question regarding history of mental illness on the 4473 form is somewhat of a joke. Mental illness is a medical condition and covered by the privacy act. (Bill Clinton Really wanted his medical records kept private.) I would be surprised if even the ATF is allowed to see a person's medical history. We rely soley on the person's honesty when filling out the form. To me a history of mentall illness should throw up a red flag as much as if not more than a felony conviction. O.K. I'm done ranting. By the way, did Ms. Boyda basically say she didn't care what here constituients thought but she would vote how She thought best? So much for representing the people.
 
Tim - ditto your first, but about your last... That's how representative democracy works. She takes the input from the district, the inputs she gets from the national party (let's not be naive about the politics of things) and the input she gets from being in the DC area - including lobbyists, the media, etc. She then essentially votes the way she sees best, which isn't always the way the consituents (at least the vocal ones) see it. Then we get to grade her next time around. Ryun got graded out of a job, essentially. What I was trying to convey there was she was staking out some independence for herself, which could work both ways. In context, I didn't have a problem with it, and I didn't mind it, because it really is a complex situation, and I'd just as soon she exercised some judgement and not necessarily always vote with the passion of the day. That said, even if she votes the way I want on all my pet issues, the national politics are still likely to push me to vote for a Republican candidate. Unless it's Ryun. Then I might just sit out the election. I just hope we can put up a credible candidate who isn't Ryun. But it can also mean that I won't be as worried about the overall result if we can't take the seat back immediately - depending on how Ms. Boyda develops as a legislator.
 
Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch?
 
Senior Military Personage Speaks: The Senior refers to age, nothing else. I will be watching with great interest to see if our esteemed Congressional representative matches her stated positions with her actions on the floor of the House. So far, not so good. She has voted with her Party and against the interests of her District on every major issue brought to a vote. She may say that she is on board with BRAC issues, but she voted to remove the Military Construction dollars necessary to build new barracks for the 1st Division at Ft. Riley as they return from Germany. GEN Craddock, EUCOM Commander is so concerned that the Christian Science Monitor is reporting that he is reconsidering the decisions to withdraw all but two brigades of combat troops from Europe. He has several reasons, but one of them is the delays in military construction. I expect that she will pursue a middle ground course on gun control. One, the views of her constituents are quite clear, and her party learned its lesson on this issue following the Columbine tragedy. The Washington crowd was certainly surprised by her victory and kudos to those who pulled it off. Had Jim Ryun been able to find his way to a feed store or a farm auction from time to time, he might still be enjoying the good life on the Hill.
 
The SMP (he is, too, just not Very Senior - except in the passing of chronons...) brings up the point I was going to go look up later - her voting record, vice what she *said*. This dang having a job thing does get in the way. One thing Owen deLong said was that if you wanted to see Jim Ryun's record, all you had to do was read Boyda's newspaper ads. That works both ways. That said, rather than just jump in and start stomping, my preference is to recon and develop the situation. And not always by fire. She is our representative for this Congress. This is who we have to work with. Just being like a full-bore Freeper and DU'er and relentlessly attacking attacking attacking, regardless of the merit of the attack, isn't going to make mine a voice that will be heard. There are plenty of people out there willing to just toss eggs. I've always preferred honey, until it's clear that only sulfur will suffice. That's one of the things that sets this space aside from a lot of others. Which is why this space isn't hugely popular, like Misha's, or LGF. But then they already exist. This place will just try to entail a little more finesse and be something different. If only because the other's exist, and I can't compete (plus I like my real job) and frankly, that isn't me, anyway.
 
Which is why this space isn't hugely popular, like Misha's, or LGF. In other words, we have a very *selective* readership. [breaking open the doggie treats pending possible deluge of rottweilers]
 
That's probably what Packard said, too, as they folded... "We have a very *selective* clientele..." Of course, it does work for Ferrari. Mebbe I should break down and sell ads...
 
Very interesting post about Congresswoman Boyda. My congressman is Ike Skelton and I've been favorably impressed by him when we've met (he remembers my name, which I guess is one of the most important traits a politician can posses.) and he sure talks a good game. What is your take on Ike? Since he's the chairman of the Armed Services Committee I figure you, all of you, must have an opinion.
 
In other words, we have a very *selective* readership
Very true! You have me. Mischa doesn't unless you send me there.
 
I agree on how the representative democracy works,(my uncle is Jerry Morans campaign manager). However, admiting that's how works could come back to haunt her politically.
 
That's probably what Packard said, too, as they folded... They didn't fold, they merged with Studebaker in the late '50s. Problem was, they stopped designing Packards and started designing very nice Studebakers. Very nice, that is, considering that they were still Studebakers. Just don't form an axis with Debbie the Key...
 
This is where I conclude the Compleat Hijack® of this thread to say that while in command in the mid-late 80's, I had a Studebaker-built 2.5t truck... one of the very very few trucks that came back from a tour in Vietnam. That was only because it carried a shelter. Most of our trucks were left behind for the Vietnamese Army. Either one, depending on the year, so to speak.
 
John, I hope you will take this the right way. The actual central issue is "life leadership". Many are saying do this or that, you, on the other hand, are doing it first, then saying, "Follow my example." To me, this is the definition of leadership, military or otherwise. But there is another very dangerous concept lurking in the shadows. The U.S. Contsitution/Bill of Rights gives us the RIGHT of FREE SPEECH. But does that mean we should always say or communicate what we are thinking? Sometimes this communication keeps this country divided. By keeping this country divided, are we not "giving comfort and aid to the enemy?" You took the courage to confront the issue and the enemy. This is not directed at either party singularly, but to every American citizen. Respectfully- Grumpy
 
It is right to engage 'the enemy'. However one thing that I have noticed with regard to Murtha, Reid, Moore and a bunch more is .. when you confront them with the insanity of their position ... they double down. I have never seen more Moonbat politicians paint themselves into a corner and foam at the mouth more. It will be interesting to see where Ms Boyda goes from here. If I were a betting man I bet she gets worse too. The possible upside of it is they may make big enough asses of themselves to stir up a backlash.
 
As observed to me in an email, the Dems especially are very good at disciplining the ranks, and punish members who stray too far from the fold on core issues with the party leadership. So certainly, there will be great pressure on Ms. Boyda to conform. Party politics are party politics, and internal discipline in that regard in a strength of the Dems vice the Republicans. That said, Ms. Boyda is still in the district held by Jim Ryun for 12 years, and she did not sweep him out with a huge majority. That gives us leverage. I know I'm not going to get everything I might like out of Ms. Boyda, anymore than I did from Mr. Ryun. But I'm perfectly willing to be a sounding board, and work on issues where we do have agreement. That's the essence of how the system actually works at the nuts and bolts level. Not that I'm really trying to move into politics in a big way. I'm in a somewhat bemusing situation myself. But on the other hand, I've got real issues and real people, such as Project Valour-It, and military and veteran's health care and such - and odd as it seems to me as I find myself moving in these circles - the blog gives me a platform, seems a shame not to use it, to work to some mutual advantage. Grumpy, I'm not exactly sure what you were after - except that if you think I'm in danger of giving away inner strategies of the Republicans, I assure you I don't move in those circles, and much of that stuff I do publish, such as the stuff from the White House regarding Senator Reid, is provided by the White House with the express hope I'll publish it. But let me be clear - if Ms. Boyda is championing a cause I support, I'll support her in that. I won't withhold support just to try to make her look bad enough to lose her seat. Besides, this place isn't Kos. I don't have that kind of pull, nor do I want to have that kind of pull or exposure. And that's assuming Kos truly has the impact his exposure appears to indicate. One thing I've noticed about blogs - most of the people I know don't read them. The ones among my friends who read Argghhh! do so because of me, and they find it a congenial place - but I'm not their first source for anything. But, one thing about size - it isn't how many read you, but who. And I've caught enough of the right eyes that I am starting to build connections and even have teeny tiny impacts. But I keep my perspective (unlike many of us - precisely because of the ditto-head bubble we can find ourselves in.) On reason I keep this space like it is is for the sole purpose of making it someplace people can come and disagree - without being shouted down, denigrated, attacked. Sites that do that are seemingly hugely popular, but they also alienate a whole lot more - whether they are right or left wing. And I admit, the nature of my work limits what I can blog. I've got lots of inside opinons on lots of things military - which will not see the light of day here - which would not be the case, necessarily, were I to be doing something else... or my investment portfolio having hit that magic number so that I could quit working for anyone other than myself. Ain't there yet, ain't going to get there by selling blogads, either, and so far no sugar-daddy foundation is taking me on. Heck, Jonah likes me but I have yet to make the cut and get something into NRO, not that I haven't tried. But, the more I do this, the more I appreciate that while I can write, and I can analyze, I don't have the touch with words that Reynolds, Frank J, or Cassandra have. That and the fact that I like to have fun teasing you guys with the Whatziss', and Bill does Non-cat Blogging, which detracts from the Serious Wonk side of things. But heck, if I'm going to give up three-five hours a day to keep this up, then dangit, I'm gonna have me some fun! I look at what LGF goes through, etc, and I just don't see any fun in there for me. But if I can be a bellwether for my local politicians on how the center right is looking at things - well, I think that's a net plus. Or am I missing something?
 
I was reading at the milblog and it inspired some thought (right in the middle of our second transition of ownership in six months, but it was a great momentary break from my "Oh, My G_d! What else do you want and when?"). I really do understand what the Democrats' plan is. In some ways, I understand how they derived it, but I have a hard time considering it because it seems to give up, unnecessarily in my opinion, influence and security in the region, not to mention what I see as a serious wont of a "post withdrawal" vision. so, we get an exit plan but we are gambling on the outcome. something with worse odds than our current strategy provides. It is interesting that the Democrats are able to lable the administrations strategy as a "lack of planning" all the while there is no real plan from the Democrats on what we will be doing or experiencing if their strategy is undertaken. It is about short term gain from reducing the cost of the war and number of casualties. The long term sees a very costly effect, but it will be in less tangible areas such as security in the region, security here, influence, and the long term gamble of Iran getting nuclear power or the proliferation of such weapons in the region. People don't understand that the cost of strengthening Iran's hand in the region will lead to very real tangible costs in the future. But we have always been the people who are willing to bet on paying the bill in the future. I think that the lack of tangible costs for the American populace is what makes the withdrawal seem so much more palatable. Better to listen to complaints in the future and deal with security issues in the future than continue the current risk of tangible monetary and human costs. Not to mention that, sadly, the American populace has never seen the loss of Iraqi life and freedom to be a tangible cost to them. They are the "other" after all and it will remain so. The same can be said for Iranian people. They are the "others" as well. For all the lambasting of this administration as causing us to be isolated in the world, it was a false accusation to my mind. It is these last 6 years that we have been the most engaged. It is not the "engagement" that we invisioned post glasnost and perestroika, but it is the most active. Yet, the american populace is, by nature, isolationist and exceptionalist. Something our forefathers struggled with and has waxed and waned throughout our history whether it is the Monroe doctrine or gunboat diplomacy, manifest destiny or pre-WWI and WWII. We say we are the leader of the world, but we eschew the position because the leader of the world entails responsibilities and powers that go beyond our scope or understanding of the exceptionalism of this nation: freedom of and from for those within our borders. To become the leader of anything means that we are responsible for everyone else's freedom and survival. That also goes against our individualism: responsibility for ourselves. But, we don't mind the perks, the economic security or the ability to flex that power when we want to. I often think of it as our "Cain and Able" complex. Am I my brother's keeper? yes, but who is my brother and what if he's an idiot? Or, worse, I'm trying to keep him and I can't even keep myself. Worse, what if it is simply not convenient? Then Able is fed to the wolves because we are sure we can resurrect him when we need to or come up with another brother in the future. We ARE the country of the Yalta conference and 50 years of cold war with the fall of the Berlin Wall under our belt.
 
John, I believe, I owe you an apology. In your mind, I created a wrong view by the use of the word "enemy". I used the term in the context of "...giving comfort and aid to the enemy." I have no problem with what you said. But let me be precisely and emphatically clear, the "enemy" is neither the Democratic, nor the Republican, nor the Independent parties, nor their members. The enemy IS the "terrorist with whom we are at war" with, therefore you begin to understand actual importance. You have shown the importance of actually looking at the issues, separate from the personna. As you wrote, you have shown the importance of meaningful and respectful communication. Thank you, for allowing me to correct my error. Grumpy
 
© 2008 John Donovan
All rights reserved.