As a frequent reader, I don’t often disagree with you—mostly only on very minor issues like your (archaic?) belief that a man should be in suit and tie to board an airplane (no, I’m sorry—I just can’t live with that one in this heat).
Thank you for voting yesterday. We all should vote; you and I did so yesterday. You voted for Scottie, and I voted for Weston. We both voted our conscience, and we are both (you’ll have to trust this statement where I am concerned, since you don’t know me) patriotic, loyal Americans with the good of our country foremost as opposed to our own self-interests.
My comments do not regard your vote; rather, they challenge some of the stated reasoning upon which it was based.
You say that, “Weston Wamp is too young to have ‘been through the fire yet’ as old-timers say.” As a 54-year-old, I guess I might be in the category that you say uses that expression…but, I find that I have to exercise a bit of caution before I use it, lest I use the phrase too hastily.
For example, you have written of the 750 Texas A&M students that you—I hasten to add, that I, also—so admire for their forming the recent wall to ensure the respectful conduct of funeral services for Lt. Col. Roy Lin Tinsdale. Might I point out to you that the majority of these students are too young to have, “been through the fire yet,” also? But, what a display of rightly placed conviction and leadership. While many older Americans have responded with passive disgust to the actions of this so-called church, these students took the initiative to find and implement a solution to this particular nonsense.
I had only two issues with Chuck Fleischmann at the onset of his re-election campaign, both holdover concerns from his initial campaign, but with recent twists added. Candidate Fleischmann in his first campaign told the CTFP editorial board that he did not differ from any of his opponents in any regard on policy. That left me wondering, “Why then are you willing to spend at least $600,000 of your own money to run against a group of people with which you are in complete agreement? It wouldn’t seem a prudent way to prove that you are a ‘fiscal conservative’.”
Then, there were the charges he leveled against Robin Smith that seemed even at the time to be completely without basis and rooted in political “dirty-tricks.” In fact, the dubious nature of those charges led me to switch my vote from Mr. Fleischmann to Ms. Smith. Recent coverage of depositions by Congressman Fleischmann and Chip Saltsman seem quite damning in that regard, confirming that my vote switch was justified. The dirty tricks have continued. I believe Rep. Fleishmann’s withholding forgiveness after Mr. Mayfield’s son confessed to a stupid mistake was entirely for political benefit. A leader has to be bigger than that. The lack of resolution of these issues prevented my voting for his re-election.
I had only two issues with Scottie Mayfield at the outset, also. The first was the fact that he takes exception to none of Chuck’s (commendably, 100 percent on the job) votes in his first term. Similarly, so why are you running, sir? Is it just because you can, and think you can win, and it has nothing to do with better representation for the district?
Then, there was his stubborn adherence to a course that he best described in an infamous “Nancy Pelosi Moment”. He said that we had to elect him, so that he could then decide what his goals were as a congressman. Does anyone else see the similarity between that statement and the earlier, inexplicable comment by Rep. Pelosi that we had to pass Obama-care in order to find out what was in it?
In contrast to these performances below their experience levels by gentlemen nearer my and your ages, Roy—Weston Wamp has shown remarkable maturity and leadership skill for his, or any, age. He recognized early the need to explain why he is running and has articulated that this includes representing the interests of my 22, 20, 18, and 14 year-old progeny. I do not expect him to ignore me in working to ensure that my sons and daughter experience as good a future as possible, a future in which—wait a minute, let’s think about this together! Since their future really is one of my primary interests, by definition he has to help me as he focuses on their needs. Now, there’s a ‘eureka’ moment.
Foreshadowing his ability to wisely represent the 3rd District in spite of unpredictable circumstances ahead, Mr. Wamp has consciously made no rash pledges committing him to specific future action—come what may. He is prudently keeping his options open to serve us well, regardless of the hand we are dealt in the future. He is speaking clearly and loudly his current positions on issues in candidate debates and other public forums—this evidently less with a motive of loving to hear his own voice, or of advancing his own interests, than of wanting to provide full disclosure, so that our votes can be informed rather than merely acts of blind trust.
Weston Wamp advertises his passion and energy—true enough. But, that is not why I voted for him. I voted for him, Roy, because after giving each campaign a good faith opportunity to convince me that their candidate was best, I became convinced that Weston Wamp is actually the most mature, and will exercise the best leadership on our behalf, of any of these three candidates or the other Republican and Democrats in the race.
Perhaps you’d like to join this old-timer in my conclusion that Mr. Wamp sure performs like somebody that’s ‘been through the fire,’ and that’s good enough for me. I know that you as well as I will support the candidate that ultimately prevails. We are, after all, in this mess together.
Thank you again for exercising your right and fulfilling your duty to vote. May we all do so.