Northwestern University and Evanston's Only Daily News Source Since 1881

The Daily Northwestern

Northwestern University and Evanston's Only Daily News Source Since 1881

The Daily Northwestern

Northwestern University and Evanston's Only Daily News Source Since 1881

The Daily Northwestern


Advertisement
Email Newsletter

Sign up to receive our email newsletter in your inbox.



Advertisement

Advertisement

Carson: When political disillusionment sets in

Mike Carson: Sept. 13 from Daily Northwestern 4 on Vimeo.

This is probably a hole in the resume of an opinion columnist, but I’m just not the political type.

Some of my lack of interest is a symptom of growing up in the shadows of Chicago, where historically even the dead vote Democrat. Part of it is a measure of political ambivalence – I wouldn’t call myself squarely conservative or liberal. Some of it is apathy.

But with elections heating up, I’ll have at least one good reason to vote. In the U.S. Senate race, I’ll be casting my ballot for Democrat Alexi Giannoulias – and not only because we share some Greek heritage and my Aunt Helen would tell me I should.

I can’t say for certain that his Republican opponent Mark Kirk (R-Highland Park) would make a bad senator. But Congressman Kirk and I have a bit of a history, although he doesn’t know it. Back when he was defending his seat in the house in 2006, he was one half of the debate that snuffed most of my interest in politics.

It was back in high school, when my sense of political efficacy was stronger than it is now. At that point the political world seemed like it was about more than filibusters and bridges to nowhere, and I followed elections closely enough to make the drive to my suburban high school and listen to the local Congressional debates.

The election pitted Kirk against Dan Seals for the 10th Congressional district, which stretched from near my northwest suburb all the way to Wilmette. Kirk had run for years as a moderate conservative, which suited a largely upscale but socially liberal district.

I went to the debate looking to be swayed. I didn’t know which way to lean between a middle-of-the-road Republican incumbent and the fresh young Democrat – I was waiting to hear something that would shout at me, “This is your candidate!” At least until the moderator came to the issue of the war-torn Middle East, at a time when Hezbollah rockets and military retaliation were fresh headlines.

Seals took the question first, and gave a meandering answer about the need to emphasize peace and support efforts for cooperation. He talked for a few minutes, and didn’t say much of anything. It appeared Dan Seals definitively supported the idea of a solution, someday, which would involve doing … something.

Then the moderator turned to Kirk. The Republican stepped up to the mic to address his district, a territory dominated by the North Shore, in a county with more Jewish practitioners than any other religious sect save Catholicism.

At the end of his answer came the quote that put me over the edge. “I am not the candidate for peace. I’m the candidate for Israel.”

I didn’t exactly know it then, but that was the beginning of the end of my interest in politics. I understand that conflict in the Middle East is a tense and divisive issue, one which many Jewish voters consider highly personal. But here was one candidate talking in circles, and the other explicitly renouncing even the theoretical idea of peace to try to get reelected.

Seals dodged the question like it was a bullet in the Matrix. Kirk answered by banging a war drum for the benefit of the biggest available voting bloc. This wasn’t political discourse, it was a PR machine against Gary Cooper at high noon.

This was the first time I really started to think politicians might actually not care about what they were saying – that maybe the Republicans and the Democrats and everyone in between would come out in support of locking dogs in hot cars if they thought it would win the primary. Say what you think people want to hear, and if you can’t do that then say nothing at all.

I don’t have high hopes that there’s anyone I could vote for who would treat the office as a means to a higher purpose, and not an end in itself. Make no mistake – the debate I saw that night didn’t turn me toward Kirk or Seals. Political front-running is a bipartisan trait. But even if my political faith is shattered I still ought to make a choice, right?

Well, it leaves me with a position about as simple as Kirk’s old view on Israel. I am not the voter for the devil I know. So I guess I’m the voter for the devil I don’t.

Mike Carson is a Weinberg senior. He can be reached at m-carson@northwestern.

More to Discover
Activate Search
Northwestern University and Evanston's Only Daily News Source Since 1881
Carson: When political disillusionment sets in