Splicetoday

Politics & Media
Jul 02, 2015, 07:17AM

My College Buddy’s a Ted Cruz Supporter

Knowing when to change the topic.

Rsz flights canceled israel lawmaker cruz 09fd2.jpg?ixlib=rails 2.1

Some background on a longtime friend I’ll call Eddie, on the off chance he’d be embarrassed by the following. We met almost 41 years ago, in September of 1974, when he came to Baltimore as a Johns Hopkins University freshman. I was reading The New York Times alone on a quad bench when Eddie approached me, as if we’d known each other for years, and asked, “So, what’re your thoughts on Leon Redbone?” Hmm, I thought, this cat’s on the oddball side, and then replied that yes, Redbone (who hadn’t yet released his first album, but was starting to get noticed) was cool, and that I hoped he’d become a big star. Eddie bobbed his head up and down, barely able to contain his excitement, and proceeded with a monologue about Leon, Charlie Parker, The Honeymooners, Jelly Roll Morton, Arthur Rimbaud and his ambivalence over David Bowie’s sudden fame. It was an extraordinarily entertaining half hour, and although I was a sophomore and lived off campus, we hung out on occasion and he later went on to contribute strange but hilarious shorts to the Hopkins News-Letter, where at the time I was features editor.

Eddie had no interest in politics or sports, and as a math/engineering student was often lost in his own thoughts, talking to himself as he wandered around campus. Where his infectious eccentricity came from is anybody’s guess: I met his folks and they were hospitable straight-arrow Connecticut suburbanites. If he possessed just a modicum of entrepreneurial drive, I’m betting he might’ve been one of those starting-in-a-garage multimillionaires today, since he was writing 1970s code at the school’s computer lab, a building I never entered. I had a lot of pals during my college years, those fleeting four-year friendships that usually vanish upon graduation, but Eddie and I kept in touch, writing letters and making sporadic visits to our respective cities. When my son Nicky was born in 1992, his first reaction was, “Wow, he shares the same birthday as Rimbaud!”

Eddie’s computer skills landed him various jobs at prestigious U.S. universities and then employment abroad, Tel Aviv for a spell and now Japan, where he’s lived for the better part of two decades. He studies languages, stays up for days translating obscure 18th-century Japanese texts and—here’s where we enter really weird territory—has, since the election of Obama, become a birther, truther, wingnut, or whatever word you want to use to describe a fringe right-winger. He’d email me, along with four or five other people, about what he perceived as the dangerous path Obama was leading America down, and at first it was fairly mild stuff. I was no fan of Obamacare either.

Last week Eddie went kablooey, although I hadn’t heard from him in a year, so who knows when he slipped off the ideological cliff. He wrote to inform me that Hillary Clinton was ineligible to run for president, a notion so daft I didn’t open the link he attached. Clinton’s a me-first phony populist, but “ineligible” to run? I shrugged that off, and asked what Republican candidate he’d prefer for next year’s election, noting that Marco Rubio or Scott Walker—despite various failings—would be okay by me. I also wrote that I had no time for moral scolds like Ted Cruz or Mike Huckabee, let alone Rick Santorum, and laid out my own philosophy: a flat tax, an attentive foreign policy, privatization of Amtrak and the U.S. Postal Service, complete overhaul of the broken immigration apparatus (meaning, making it easier for non-criminal residents of other countries to live and work in America) and the federal legalization of all drugs, gambling and prostitution. That was abbreviated, but he got the gist. And how!

He replied: “I’m for Ted Cruz because he’s a Nativist. ‘Moral scold’ coming from you is a compliment. No offense, but you’re the guy who thinks Rudy Giuliani was anti-free speech because he banned that Piss Christ asshole. Russell, you marinated in New York City for too long. I really think you’ve lost your marbles… Immigration is not great for the economy. Where did you come up with that? This immigration thing is all about getting a permanent Democratic majority. Why do you think the Kenyan is so gung-ho about bringing in illegals. If he can get all the wetbacks to the polls, the Republicans will never win another presidential election for the next 50 years. Do you really not see that? Correct immigration policy, at a minimum, is to bar anyone who isn’t likely to vote Republican. And they should favor white Europeans, unless they’re socialists, which many of them are. No welfare types. Immigration is the fundamental problem. It’s the reason we don’t have President Romney today. Once the scum can out-vote you, it’s over.”

There was a lot more: venomous barbs at the “squishy” Rubio and Walker, cheers for Donald Trump and Ann Coulter, but you’ve read it all before. Anyway, I’ve had my fill of Eddie for the time being, and hope the next time he corresponds it’ll be a lengthy appreciation of Billie Holiday.

—Follow Russ Smith on Twitter: @MUGGER1955 

Discussion
  • Maybe Eddie's trying to fill the vacancy in Japan left by Bobby Fisher?

    Responses to this comment
  • That's a shame about you and your friend, but these things happen. Good thing he lives overseas. Cruz scares the living daylights out of me, not only for his rhetoric but because he looks just like Joe McCarthy.

    Responses to this comment
  • That's a damns shame. If nothing else, his tone was no way to address a friend.

    Responses to this comment
  • Russ. That graf you refer to coming from your old friend.... Do you have any empirical data on why he's wrong? Does immigration increase the lower end of low-skill wages? Do the dems not count on immigrant votes? You put out a number of facts which are generally uncontested as if...because you say so, they're ridiculous. These facts are in a category which is called "FNC" facts. Since they're true, and they're inconvenient, you pretend they're ridiculous--"You got those from Faux Snooze, hyuk" because you can't actually address them. What makes you think anybody buys this? Sheesh. Where have you been?

    Responses to this comment
  • I said nothing about Fox. Immigration has traditionally helped the U.S. Economy, and though I certainly won't support Clinton, I'm not concerned about a tipping of new immigrants to Democrats. Immigration has kept this country strong. That's where I've been.

    Responses to this comment
  • Russ. You said nothing about Fox. True. But not the point. The presumption you presumed everybody would presume when you listed your buddy's points is that they are ridiculous on their face and didn't even need to be addressed. That's FNC category. Or, 'You got your Limbaugh talking points, snicker". It's also called "prediscrediting" so that they need not be addressed. Immigration is a good thing, when regulated and kept reasonable and the goal is assimilation. Not la Raza, or keeping kids from wearing American flags to school for fear of annoying Hispanics. What you think, or want somebody else to think, about the dems not wanting latino votes is irrelevant. It's what the dems think that's relevant. Do you think the benefits population votes their benefits...or something else? But, anyway, does immigration of poorly-educated barely-English speaking workers increase low=end wages, decrease them, or have no effect? Why is the Chamber of Commerce for it if it were going to raise wages? Surrounding what Eddy said with a sneered superiority, expecting your readers to go along with it, without actually dealing with his points is.....old.

    Responses to this comment
  • If someone says Hillary is ineligible to run for President, there is no longer any obligation to entertain their political opinions. You can just move on. It really simplifies things.

    Responses to this comment
  • I must have missed it when American kids were wearing American flags to school but had to stop due to Hispanic pressure.Was this on Fox?

    Responses to this comment
  • Jesus, enough of this bullshit: vote for Bernie!

    Responses to this comment
  • The ban on American flag garments took place in San Jose, CA, a couple of years ago, on Cinco de Mayo.

    Responses to this comment
  • Alan. You know it. I know it. Subbeck knows it. But he figured if he mentioned "Fox" it would go away. As I said elsewhere, certain facts are "FNC" facts. They're true. They're inconvenient. So you sneer "you got that from Fox" to make them go away. Subbeck must have thought he was talking to the usual lofos.

    Responses to this comment
  • The school principle said two things by implication: 1. The hispanic students are violent and uncontrollable. 2. He'd get in a hell of a lot more trouble trying to control them than the American students.

    Responses to this comment
  • Í see no reason why children should be wearing "American flag garments" to school, whatever such a garment might be. Flag pants? I don't recall any such fashion during my entire K-12 experience and that's a good thing. This is pretty much a non-issue, and about as serious as the war on Christmas that all the lofos rail about.

    Responses to this comment
  • I seem to recall that it's illegal to wear the flag as a garment.

    Responses to this comment
  • It's illegal to wear the flag as a garment. However, flag-themed garments and depictions of flags on garments are legal. Matter of fact, since you can burn a flag, I suppose the same rights apply to wearing it. Anyway, Subbeck gives us a fashion report to distract from the fact that something we know we're not supposed to know. Try something else. Point is, however, that, whatever sub's fashion sense is, the flag stuff was banned due to potential violence from the hispanic students. The Supremes upheld the ban. Due to the uncontrollable violence of the hispanic students. If a garment has the potential to disrupt the school environment--aka make hispanic students violent--the school may ban it. Principle goes back to anti-war shenanigans during Viet Nam. So, sub, banning somebody's garment because others might get violent is unimportant? I suspect your view would be different if the flag in question had a rainbow. Forget it. Intimidation by the right sort is fine by you. Thanks for acknowledging it.

    Responses to this comment
  • I guess this page is where all the lonely patriots come on July 4.

    Responses to this comment
  • Hmmm, I wonder what you are suggesting with that rainbow flag comment.

    Responses to this comment
  • Sub. FYI. The accusation of homophobia is as dead and worn out as the accusation of racism. But, since you seem unable to grasp the point, I'll put it this way. You initially tried to "fox" your way out of the flag-banning. When that didn't work, you gave us a "who cares" on student clothing. Then it was a "non-issue". All of which because you got busted on the fact--you tried to pretend it hadn't happened in the first place--and were trying to weasel your way out. The point about the rainbow flag is to suggest your concern about flag banning tracks with the flag being banned. US flag, meh. Rainbow flag...outrage. We get it But, anyway, the appeal to "fox" didn't work. Never does, but some folks don't learn.

    Responses to this comment
  • CT. I guess this is where the lonely above-it-all types leave their world-weary....stuff on Independence Day.

    Responses to this comment
  • Never saw you as being above it all.

    Responses to this comment
  • 1. I haven't accused anyone of homophobia.Just thought your gratuitous mention of the rainbow flag was odd. 2. The only actual point I tried to make here was that when someone says Hillary is ineligible to run, you can safely ignore any other opinion they might offer. The rest was just trying to get a rise out of you, which is about as hard as catching a perch in Saranac Lake. 3.You sure do go on and on and on.....

    Responses to this comment
  • Sub. The rainbow flag is getting a lot of ink just now, which is why I picked it over, say, Che tee shirts. I'm certain your responise would be the same. American flag, meh. Uncontrolled violence...meh. Che tee shirt....outrage. But it was a good example of the "fox" attempt at discrediting information you find both valid and inconvenient. Didn't work. Never does.

    Responses to this comment

Register or Login to leave a comment