You have to admire a guy who, nearly age 70, decides to run for public office for the first time. Even when you know he has zero chance of getting elected and you do not agree with most of his positions, still his taking the plunge demands respect. That’s what I feel for my friend David Slavitt, Republican nominee for the 26th Middlesex District of the Massachusetts House of Representatives.
Before tossing his beret into the bull ring, David consulted me about the wisdom of running. Yes, do run, I advised him, but only if you keep two principles firmly in mind.
First, remember that you have absolutely no chance of winning. And second, you owe it to yourself to have fun while running.
Regretfully, I must report that, as to my first counsel, David has proved inconstant. Like almost every other candidate I have ever known, he sometimes allows himself to fantasize about sitting among the elected representatives of the people. He lapses into the impossible dream that he can upset a Democratic incumbent of eleven years’ standing.
Admittedly, that incumbent, Tim Toomey, eked out a surprisingly narrow victory in last month’s primary over a novice challenger who was not nearly so well known in the district. Clearly David Slavitt has allowed this near miss to encourage fantasies of knocking off the Democratic nominee. But he is also clearly having fun.
Out for entertainment, I attended a debate last week between Toomey and Slavitt. Not being a resident of their district, I felt no personal stake in their contest and could be present in a lighthearted spirit. But I did look forward to hearing some of what I have come to call Slavittisms. David did not disappoint.
As a nonbeliever in political correctness, he can always be relied on to favor wit over tact.
Until recently, this political nouveau venu would have been lambasting Tom Finneran, the erstwhile Speaker of the House. Even now, however, he takes a swipe at the man. Of the former Speaker, Slavitt does not shrink from charging that he “lied to a panel of federal judges.”
By now, however, the position of speaker has devolved to Sal DiMasi whose policies may be similar to Finneran’s. So Slavitt has turned his rhetorical guns on the new speaker, calling him “Finneran’s Rottweiler.”
Like others, I laughed at this characterization, but as a non-dog person I had to look up the term. I learned that these pets are named for a German city. Tall and powerful and mean looking, they often serve as guard dogs. They bite.
Asked what he thinks of the presidential race, David does not hide his own educational pedigree. Speaking of the candidates and himself, he acknowledges: “All three of us are Yalies.” Of Kerry, he says: “I was for him before I was against him.”
Is he in favor of extending the Green Line into Somerville at the risk of furthering gentrification? To this question from Toomey, his challenger replies: “I think gentrification is generally a good thing.” He also makes fun of the station at Lechmere which has been “temporary for the last 80 years.”
Toomey goes after my friend for calling Somerville a suburb of Cambridge. David holds to this position, one that seems hardly attractive to voters from the part of Somerville that falls within the 26th district. Without Harvard and MIT, he believes, Cambridge would offer little more than its neighboring city.
One of Slavitt’s favorite issues is the abuse that he perceives happening under the so-called Quinn Bill. That 1970 legislation provides promotions and other benefits for police officers and firefighters who take courses in public colleges and universities. David complains that “the cops are taking worthless courses.” Worse still is the double- dipping that they practice: “The cops become crooks,” he charges.
About Toomey’s opposition to rolling back the state income tax, David asks the incumbent: “Are you going along with your leadership or are you in economic error entirely on your own?”
Even Representative Toomey smiles at thrusts like this one. He knows that his opponent is enjoying himself and so, no doubt is he. But the incumbent does not appear to underestimate the perils of being challenged by the author of some 80 books.
In a fine frenzy of rhetoric, Slavitt concludes the debate by characterizing what he calls the Democrat Party as “corrupt, complacent, self-congratulatory, and overbearing in its stranglehold on public life in the Commonwealth.”
Early in his campaign Slavitt attended a Republican rally at which Mitt Romney, the current governor, addressed his party’s aspirants for state office. David took inspiration from Romney’s reflections on the meaning behind electoral politics. “You are all going to die,” Romney said, much to David’s astonishment.
With this quixotic saying, Romney was suggesting that one should take risks in a lifetime that does not last forever. Sticking your neck out is worth doing, even when you end up tilting at windmills.
Richard Griffin