I got a couple of ideas out of this week’s Matter of Opinion podcast from the NYT. I’ll write about the other later when I have more time, but at the moment I’ll just share this little interlude where they asked kids (ranging in age from about 17 to a vague “under 30”) to call in with their first political memories:
And we’re back. So we have something else up our sleeve this week, in lieu of a Hot Cold. We recently asked our younger listeners to send in their political awakenings. So let’s take a listen now….
And the callers weighed in with their thoughts on recent events (one first took note of the political world on Jan. 6, 2021) that to them seem to have happened quite some time ago.
Which got me to thinking back a bit further, although I wish they hadn’t used the word “awakenings.” It has a disturbing flavor of ideological orthodoxy, like asking “When did you get your mind right?” I would simply have asked them to recount their “first awareness,” or simply first memory, of politics. That interests me more.
What is yours? Mine was from 1960, at more or less the very moment when I reached the age of 7. I’ve told it here before, but can’t find it at the moment, so I’ll just tell it again. I watched the presidential debates, and I decided I was for Nixon. That was based on my immature assessment of what I perceived as Kennedy’s aggressive tone on the subject of foreign policy. I don’t recall now what he said about the Soviets, but he sounded a lot more like a guy willing to go to war. And not a cold one. Of course, he may have said nothing of the kind. But that’s the way I heard it.
Thinking back on the impression now, I assume — if I heard it right — he was trying to sound that way because he was very young and widely regarded as inexperienced in comparison to the vice president. Maybe he was pushing the tough talk a bit in an effort to create a visceral impression of being a strong leader. But I didn’t know about things like that. I just knew my father was a naval officer, and Kennedy sounded more like a guy who would send my Daddy off to war.
I was quite serious about it, and took the election result hard, and rather, well, childishly. My mother watched Kennedy’s inauguration on the black-and-white in our Woodbury, N.J., apartment, and I protested loudly that I wanted her to change the station to something else (not that there would have been anything else at that moment). She ignored my requests, so in protest I hid behind a chair where I couldn’t see the screen. My mother told me to stop being ridiculous, but I persisted. Basically, I acted like a Trump supporter, although I didn’t storm the U.S. Capitol.
Anyway, I got over it, just not that day.
Speaking of my Dad, his first political memory was of his own father arguing loudly with a neighbor out on the sidewalk in front of the family home in Kensington, Md. The subject? FDR. The neighbor thought he was great, and I gather from his vehemence (which embarrassed my grandmother and caused her to call out to tell my grandpa to stop and come into the house) that he thought Roosevelt would be the ruination of the country. I’m guessing there, because my Dad was too young to understand and couldn’t explain it to me. I’m guess this was early in FDR’s time in office, so… maybe mid-30s. My Dad was born at the end of 1928.
Anyway, what’s your first political memory?
Related Posts
I like this question. My very first political memory was the election of Eisenhower. It was the evening of Election Day. I was with my father, riding on his shoulders, actually, at a big courthouse in the center of town. There was a festival atmosphere on the grounds with mostly men about talking to each other and the smell of cigarette and cigar smoke. And every now and then someone would come outside the courthouse and yell Eisenhower was ahead. That would have been his first term. I also remember the slogan “ Everybody likes Ike!”
I do remember Kennedy and Nixon, too. We had a teacher who was really enamored with Kennedy. We heard a lot about how smart he was, how many newspapers he read, how many smart men he had around him, etc. Then, most people in the South , I guess I should say most white people, were democrats then. I didn’t have an opinion then, though I think my father leaned Republican. I had a good friend whose parents got in a tiff when her dad found out her mother had voted for Goldwater. I guess that must have been Johnson vs Goldwater. It was so funny!
Thanks for sharing, Pat!
Something about your story — maybe it’s the detail about riding on your father’s shoulders — made me think of another one. And this one wasn’t about something on TV. I was there. Trouble is, it was so early that it’s kind of dim and vague.
There was a political event at the Bennettsville Country Club. I think one of my maternal grandparents took me to it, although it might have been another adult. No one in the family was a member of that club at the time, so we were just there for the event. I was urged to shake hands with “the senator,” and I think I did, although I found the encounter puzzling. I didn’t know what it was all about, which makes me think this was before my Dobie Gillis epiphany regarding the concept of “elections.”
I sorta kinda remember him being someone who looked like Fritz Hollings. And I think that’s because I think of Fritz as having been a senator my whole life, like Strom (OK, not technically my whole life, since I was 1 year old when he was first elected). But he wasn’t. He was elected in 1966. So maybe it wasn’t him. Maybe it was a state senator. Maybe the unfamiliar term was “governor” instead of “senator.” Although I was still pretty clueless about politics at 13, especially when it involved an office other than president.
I don’t know. I didn’t learn a great deal from that incident, and my 1960 memories mentioned earlier are much sharper and clearer…
People used to go to stump meetings. Politicians and voters learned to take advantage of television. We might have lost something there. Good memories with my father, though. My mother wasn’t interested in politics.
Yes, we lost something there. This may not have been immediately apparent, until, over the years, the ads got stupider and stupider…
Actually, I realized thinking further about it, that wasn’t my first awareness of politics, although it was the first time I took interest in a specific, nonfictional election.
Much earlier that year, when I was just a couple of months past my sixth birthday — IMDB says it was Jan. 12, 1960 — I saw an episode of “The Many Loves of Dobie Gillis” in which Dobie was persuaded to run for class president at his school.
Here’s a bit of dialogue from when the idea was presented to him:
I didn’t understand that last line. Well, I probably didn’t understand the “run for” bit, either, and I doubt I had ever heard of the office of “class president.” I was 6 years old. But at the word “vote,” I asked my parents what Dobie was talking about.
They explained as well as they could, and once I understood that for him, the hero of the show, to become president, most of the kids in his class would have to choose him over the other guy (played by Warren Beatty)… well, I thought it was the oddest thing. In other words, he had to win a popularity contest. How could that be?
I don’t know how I thought people became president. In fact, I suppose I hadn’t thought about it. Ike had been president my whole life, and it was just a fixed feature of the universe. I guess I thought it was like being king — that somewhere back in the mists of time, probably thousands of years back, he had become president by the grace of God. I don’t think I knew about King Arthur yet, but if you’d told me Eisenhower had gotten the job by pulling a mystical sword from a stone, that would have made more sense to me than this getting-more-people-to-like-you idea. Either you were supposed to be the head guy or not, right? Why should people liking you come into it?
Anyway, that’s the kind of anecdote I’m curious to hear. When did you first get an inkling of the whole concept of electoral politics? That’s my story, and then the story from later that year is my second…
Oh, and why did Dobie run anyway? Because Tuesday Weld wanted him to…
Here’s the whole episode if you want to see it:
That was an interesting episode.
For 1960, I think “Dobie” had some creative writer who were trying to do something a little different from the typical sitcom. Sort of like the mad geniuses behind “Green Acres” five years later…
Strom Thurmond honoring my grandfather in 1980 in Bamberg naming part of the hospital after him. Storm Thurmond is my political and military hero
Will, I wonder if you and I are related, since I, too, am a Bradley. Who was your grandfather?
If so, did you know one of our cousins — Bradley Morrah — was the Democratic nominee for Senator who ran against Strom in 1966? It didn’t go well for him.
My Grandma ran into him sometime after that and said, “Bradley, you’re a nice boy. But you should never have run against Strom Thurmond…”
I can recall classmates talking about the RFK assassination, though as I reflect on it now, maybe it was MLK. It seems like it was cold out, and northern Virginia would not have been cold in June. We may not have even been in school.
I have memories of newscasts about Vietnam and protests from about the same time.
None of those are electoral politics memories, though, so I guess the 1972 election would have to be it. My eldest sister turned 18 the day before the election, so she was legally able to vote, and would have been one of the youngest to ever vote in an election of that type. I don’t know if she did. I also remember being curious about how one candidate could only get votes from one state.
Of course, not long after that, Watergate completely took over newscasts and preempted after school programming, and that’s my first clear memory of beginning to understand how politics works.
My first political memory was a US President being assassinated. Duck and cover in my school, or build a bomb shelter. MAD. Abraham, Martin and John.
In 1960, the nuns at our Catholic grade school had the classes vote for president. Of course, Kennedy carried the day but one unfortunate boy voted Kennedy for President and Henry Cabot Lodge Jr. for V.P. Poor kid was called out in front of his classmates.
Just months ago I saw where that classmate had a YouTube channel. When contacted, he told me he remembered going to school there but had no memories of classmates or teachers. Those nuns gave us all PTSD!!
Of course, Lodge was the only person on either ticket not become President.
In 1972, I saw the front page photo of the “napalm girl” Phan Thi Kim Phuc and thought how awful it was that she was an innocent victim. Then I learned who dropped the napalm. Richard Nixon tried to claim it was staged or fake. We have killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people. Until we have a government that rejects the profit seeking military industrial complex, we have no moral higher ground.
My first memory is arguing about Carter and Reagan in elementary school to some classmates of the upcoming election. Some thought Reagan would start war with Russia. I seem to remember defending Jimmy Carter and being afraid of Reagan’s talk. But I am sure I was just repeating something someone else had said because I really didn’t pay the news any attention. I think I was probably repeating what my grandfather had told me since my dad and mom never seemed to care about politics- by grandfather cared very little- but more than my dad and mom.
The immediate second would have been sitting on my parent’s bed watching the news coverage of the shooting of Ronald Reagan.
I was wanting to watch my typical after school shows after arriving home from the school bus and instead all the networks broke into coverage. WE only had 3-4 channels.
NBC – Greenville
CBS – Spartanburg
ABC- Asheville
I think I was watching ABC’s coverage.
The first time I recognized the power of politics came, around 1967 or ‘68, when President Johnson interrupted my cartoons to announce something or other. I instantaneously became a right-wing, anti-government Republican. “Waaa! Too much government! I want my cartoons back, now!”
I’ve since matured.
Nunc pro tunc?
Nah, just nunc. Unlike some, I’m not into time travel.
I am a “Traveler.” It’s interesting …
Ar ye a tinker, then?
Or just a potcheen drinker?
Tinker – tá. Potcheen drinker – níl.
I am a Yankee Hillbilly, so I like ‘shine. This time of year the apple cider is more fun, especially if you freeze it. In the middle is some very interesting, keep you warm forever if not careful, spirit.
Nollaig Shona!
Here is a current political memory for everyone.
Who is Bridget Ziegler? Florida school board member, Moms for Liberty co-founder, DeSantis ally…..
Florida Republican political circles were rocked last week when state GOP leader Christian Ziegler was accused of sexual assault against a woman with whom he and his wife Bridget had planned a three-way sexual encounter.
Florida Conservative power couple accused of trying to engage in threesome. Florida GOP Leader also accused of rape. Video in police hands show him entering the woman’s apartment (without his wife)
his wife, a “Mom’s for Liberty “family values” moral crusader in Florida who is worried to death about gay and trans people, has admitted to a same sex sexual encounter with the same woman.
https://www.heraldtribune.com/story/news/politics/2023/12/04/bridget-ziegler-what-know-about-wife-gop-leader-christian-ziegler-accused-rape/71797886007/
These folks are always hypocrites
See, I don’t see folks like that as hypocrites. Maybe because I’m not looking for some way to condemn them.
I see them as deeply conflicted people. They’re obviously struggling with person issues, and that causes them to be so vocal about such things.
To the extent I pay attention to these culture warriors, I find myself wondering WHY they’re so vehement. Then I hear something like that, and I think, “Oh, that’s why.” You can really get worked up fighting with yourself about something.
This is like that “wide-stance” guy a few years back.
I feel sorry for them…
By the way, looking up the “wide-stance” guy for that link, I saw that technically, he himself did not use that phrase. That was a cop’s paraphrase of what he said.
He actually said something much goofier: “I’m a fairly wide guy.”
Maybe that’s what The Three Stooges were always saying: ““>Oh, wide guy, eh?”
Ok, alright, the Social Worker in me “emerges.” I may/may not have multiple personalities.
We all do, as our “narratives” adapt from situation to situation. I was taught to call it “situational awareness” but I like “environmental awareness” better. That leads to biases, two of which are Cognitive and Confirmation. We humans IMHO are very weak in seeing our own biases, indeed even our weaknesses. I was wrong once earlier today. I think.
I had situational awareness in my youth, but it was extremely limited.
It made me, to my amazement, good at wrestling. I discovered in P.E., when we were doing wrestling, that I could beat guys much bigger and stronger than I was. I had no idea what to do at the beginning, before making contact, but once I had a grip on him or vice versa, I had a sure sense of what to do, and sure understanding of angles and leverage in three dimensions all around me. I think some wrestlers call it “body awareness.”
But I was blind as a bat if my opponent was any farther away. I’m probably the worst basketball player ever for that reason. I have no idea where people are around me, or whether they’re about to come up behind and steal the ball from me, or not. And the other guys can sense it.
What do I mean, “guys?” I’m even worse with girls, or at least I was once. I got into a co-ed game when I was young, and found myself playing one on one with this stunningly attractive girl with very fair skin who would probably make me feel awkward in a normal conversation in a social occasion, much less on a court.
She was dribbling and I was defending, face to face, and she was dribbling in such an open, exposed manner that I decided to try to steal from her, and my right hand made a big, awkward swipe at the ball, but I missed the ball and my hand slapped the inside of her thigh. Way up. We wore short shorts in those days.
She kept dribbling, but pointed to her thigh — the most embarrassingly intimate part of her body that was exposed to view — and cried out in a pained and distressed voice — “Look what you DID!”
I mentioned that she had fair skin. It was the kind of fair skin that briefly leaves a red imprint from the slightest touch. Each finger of my hand was imprinted in red on her thigh…
I stood up, forgetting the game, and started stammering, “I’m so SORRY! I didn’t want… I mean, I didn’t mean to…”
But by this time, she had calmly driven around me, gone in for the layup, and scored.
I’m still embarrassed about it.
But that’s not really the kind of body awareness we were talking about. There I go, digressing again…
Makes sense. I was a very good wrestler – balance. Still working on it.
And you know, even though I fully realize she was playing me, if I met her today, I’d probably apologize again.
This is I’m against co-ed competitive sports. Oh, a fun coed game of softball in which you don’t care who wins is fine (I briefly participated in such a league when I was at The State), but if you really want to win, I’m at a terrible disadvantage.
And I’m also OK if there’s no contact involved. Coed tennis and golf — that’s fine. There’s no chance of embarrassing yourself the way I did with that girl. There’s also no chance of hurting her.
And yet I now live in a world in which coed wrestling is a thing. Which is one of many, many reasons I think the world has gone mad…
It’s baffling why you approve Barry’s comments that are completely irrelevant to the topic. What value do screeds targeting obscure Republicans do to advance the civil discourse you claim to want?
Not much. And I’ve tried to dissuade Barry from obsessing about these things that, to me, are all part of the whole ones-and-zeroes talking-points madness that, as you say, I am trying to resist.
So no, they don’t really contribute to the kind of atmosphere I’m trying to build here. I just haven’t decline to approve them because they aren’t as bad as incivility shown to people here in the “room.”
But you’re right, they don’t help. And Barry, I wish you’d talk about other things. But I’ve tried to give people a lot of latitude in their expressions, unless they’re saying “You’re a big idiot” in one way or another to other guests in this forum…
Thank you.
But I wouldn’t describe the Chairman of the Republican Party in Florida, a right hand man to Ron DeSantis who is running for President, as an “obscure” Republican given he’s accused of rape and the fact he’s spent the entire DeSantis administration running on a moral crusade and influencing a serious Presidential candidate who is also running his own moral crusade.
I wouldn’t describe the Chairman’s wife as obscure. She’s admitted to a sexual relationship with another woman while married to her husband, while at the same time she runs a moral crusade against gay and trans people, and “immorality” as she has described it.
These two people are 100% raging hypocrites and are trying to use the government to impose their morality on other people. They are tied to the hip of a Presidential candidate.
Here is how Politico and CNN describe them:
“He and his wife, Bridget, are Florida Republican political stalwarts. The couple rose from their base of power in Sarasota County into significant statewide figures under Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis.
Christian Ziegler, 40, became chairman of the Florida GOP in February after years working in local politics, including as a county commissioner and as state party vice chairman. Bridget Ziegler, 41, was appointed to the Sarasota County School Board in 2014 and has won reelection three times, most recently in 2022 with the backing of DeSantis.
Bridget Ziegler has been on the forefront of the cultural battles DeSantis has waged within Florida public schools. She co-founded Moms for Liberty,”
I know it’s easy for some to try to dismiss these people as if they are John and Sue Doe from Gaston who work at the local plant and are simple country homebodies when they aren’t working, but that wouldn’t be accurate.
If nobody outside of Florida and fewer than 5% of people in Florida would recognize those names, they are literally the definition of obscure. They are political nobodies.
Your rants would be more interesting if you even tried to balance out the subjects across both parties. Apparently to think that hypocrisy is a Republican monopoly. Try broadening your media sources.
In our political discourse, embracing civility is paramount. Recognizing the voices of those deemed obscure fosters a more inclusive conversation. Balancing discussions across party lines is not about rants but about understanding diverse perspectives.
Let’s challenge the notion that hypocrisy is confined to a single party and strive for a broader view through varied media sources. By refraining from toxic language, we can create an environment where empathy thrives. Walking in the shoes of others becomes a pathway to mutual understanding and kindness in our discussions.
Proverbs 15:1 – “A gentle answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger.”
Matthew 26:52 – “Put your sword back in its place,” Jesus said to him, “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.”
Jethro Tull: Wind-Up (1971) – When I was young and they packed me off to school, and they taught me how not to play the game. Oh, I didn’t mind if they groomed me for success, or if they said that I was just a fool. So I left there in the morning with their God under my arm; their half assed smiles and the book of rules.
Then I asked this God a question, and by way of firm reply –
He said, “I’m not the kind you have to wind-up on Sundays.”
And to my old headmaster and to anyone who cares; before I’m through I’d like to say my prayers.
Oh, I don’t believe you, you had the whole damn thing all wrong – And he’s not the kind you have to wind-up on Sunday. Well, you can excommunicate me on my way to Sunday school; and have all the Bishops harmonize these lines.”
I also like Five Finger Death Punch – Born on the Wrong Side of Heaven, but the Righteous Side of Hell.
Go Navy.
Not even close. In fact, it’s the opposite of what you wrote.
Obscure doesn’t = “political nobodies”
Hundreds and hundreds of politically “obscure” people are political powerhouses.
Example – most of us on this blog can’t name more than 1 lobbyist in Columbia. They are obscure. But they aren’t political nobodies. In fact, they are very powerful politically.
Example – many people can’t name the sitting Vice President. They can’t name the House Speaker. They can’t name the Majority Leader in the Senate. They can’t name committee chairpersons. Their names and them individually are quite obscure to tens of millions. But, they aren’t political nobodies. It’s the opposite, they are political heavyweights.
Stephen Miller is obscure. He’s the most influential human being in Trump’s universe and was the architect of most all of Trump’s extreme positions and attempts from 2016-2020. Emails that have been leaked have shown Miller to directly parrot spread white nationalist talking points and policy positions.
Christopher Miller is obscure. Most people even on this blog have no idea who he is – but he’s very influential in Trump’s inner-world. He was the acting Defense Secretary under Trump at the very end of his administration and created a mess.
Christian and Bridget Ziegler are obscure to many. They are political heavyweights in Florida and they are close advisors to a Republican candidate for President.
They are heavyweights because they have made it their mission to talk about and force their version of their Christian faith on other people and insult people that don’t have their morals.
Now they are exposed as flaming hypocrites and that’s worth exposing.
I spend my time talking about Republican hypocrites because that’s who interests me given the focus Republican Conservatives on culture war issues and their focus on trying to turn every topic into a moral debate.
Democrats didn’t target the Lexington County AP Teacher for wanting to talk about a book that discusses racial issues with high school students seeking college credit. Republicans/Conservatives did.
I’m not here and my goal isn’t to make sure Doug thinks I am being down the middle on my posts- just like your posts don’t reflect any sort of down the middle approach on your part.
I started to answer Barry, but it got so long I turned it into a separate post…
Seems like the very definition of hypocrite to me.
Well, perhaps I don’t understand the word.
But to me, it implies that you’re lying in your public statements. You know, someone who says something in a speech, and then as soon as he’s in private, laughs about how he fooled those rubes out there.
I don’t think these people are lying. They’re having a real conflict within themselves…
But maybe not. Maybe they thought they were being clever…
Brad, I am not sure why the word is so confusing to you
Being a hypocrite doesn’t require one to “laugh” about how he fooled everyone. Being a hypocrite doesn’t require one to laugh at others, make fun of them for falling for the gag. It’s not part of the definition. Where in the world did you come up with that at?
Hypocrites don’t have to be “clever” to be a hypocrite.
A husband and wife- a GOP power-couple- that run around moralizing on everything and trying to ram their morals down everyone’s throats while at the same time having sex outside of marriage with another woman (both of them) are hypocrites.
This is not difficult. They aren’t having a conflict within themselves. They want to use the government to force others to do what they say, but they aren’t willing to do that themselves.
hyp·o·crite ˈhi-pə-ˌkrit
1 a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion
2 a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings
Well, I’ll try to keep that definition in mind in the future.
hypocrite:
A husband and wife- a GOP power-couple- that run around moralizing on everything and trying to ram their morals down everyone’s throats while at the same time having sex outside of marriage with another woman (both of them) are hypocrites.
Although that sounds less like a pair of hypocrites to me, and more like the starring couple in a pornographic film — provided, I suppose, that they are reasonably good-looking. Or at least that the wife is. My understanding is that that is generally the important element in porn.
Reminds me of one of the most interesting stories we had during my two years in Kansas. Mind you, not much of interest happens in Kansas, so this sort of thing sticks in your mind.
In one of the smaller counties outside Wichita — and when I say small, I mean small, at least in terms of population (they only have eight players on the field in football there) — the sheriff went to the video store. This was about 1985, and if you’re recall, not everyone possessed their own VCRs yet, so people would rent them. The sheriff was more ambitious, and rented a camera that connected to the VCR.
He then took it home, and he and his wife made a sex tape together. Afterward, the sheriff — being a model of rectitude and enforcer of laws regarding personal property — returned the VCR to the shop.
With the tape still in it.
Of course, the VCR was soon rented out again, and before long everyone in the county was passing around this tape — or copies — and carefully studying what went on at the sheriff’s house.
Word reached us in Wichita, and we sent this rather world-weary reporter who was up for a fresh sort of assignment to saddle up and ride out to that county and see what he could see.
Eventually, he returned with an air of — here’s that word again — world-weary triumph. As in, nothing impresses this guy, but he wanted everyone to know he got the job done.
This guy didn’t work for me, because I was then the news editor, which meant managing the copy, design and national desks. But he was passing by my boring realm right after his return and before the story had made its way to me, and I asked him how it went.
Fine, he said. Of course, he found the tape. Well, how was it?, I asked. Oh, pretty interesting, he allowed. There was the usual bedroom action, but the lady also went about the house doing chores in the nude — putting clothes in the dryer and that sort of thing. As for the esthetics, he was impressed by her. She could be a star, he said. The sheriff himself wasn’t so impressive, but she was.
And the tape seemed quite popular in that county, so that’s where I get my understanding that what counts in a hit porn film is that the female lead is attractive and interesting to watch.
Which has nothing to do with hypocrisy; it’s just a story you got me thinking about. And I don’t know whether the sheriff, or his wife, was Republican. But there’s a good chance.
As to what happened to the couple after that, I don’t know. Did they keep living there? Did they have to make a new life elsewhere? Did she become a star? I don’t think I ever heard…
Not sure it mattered what political party the Sheriff would have belonged to in 1985.
He might not have been a hypocrite- and just minded his own business instead of focusing on everyone’s personal lives and enforced the law locking up horse and chicken thieves and those prone to writing bad checks.
There was a day where a sheriff was just the sheriff. Those days are long gone.
Heck, I can even remember when most politicians and political operatives didn’t go around talking about their vision of the sex lives of others- and no one wanted to know their opinion on it either. Those days are gone too
Thinking about that, I went to check, and I saw this UPI story from a few months after I left Kansas to come here:
Which rang other bells, when I read Bob Stephan’s name. It reminded me that when I talk about how boring that state was to cover, I usually think, “except maybe for the attorney general.” He had his own problems, but they weren’t as… unique… as the sheriff’s…
Or you could require him to post under his own name.. sheesh.. what harm could come from reposting random Republican hate pieces?