Boogie Man hw - A homework assignment following a documentary about Lee Atwater. He came to PDF

Preview

Summary

A homework assignment following a documentary about Lee Atwater. He came to change the way politics is run today and was a big influence in the way things are run today....

Description

Shilan Shilekani

Shilekani

1

Professor Kresse Armour Political Science 1 5 March 2018

The Complexity of Lee Atwater To understand American politics, one needs to understand the complexity of a man called Lee Atwater. His way of challenging the way politicians thought, and worked, would leave a mark for many years to come. He changed the rules. What is equally fascinating and frightening, is the fact that he was able to do so. How can it be so easy for politicians to lie and get away with it? And how much of the responsibility should be put on the media? Lee Atwater was a ’Machiavellian’ in the truest sense, some supported him, some were against him and others, well, they knew him. He appeared to be remorseful for what he had done, after having gone through a series of tragic events, leading up to his death. But the question most people ask themselves is: ”Was it sincere, was he sincere, for once in his life?” Someone once told me, ”common sense is not a common place.” That really applies to the question about whether there should be campaign laws demanding truthful campaigning. It is so obvious to me that there should be campaign laws demanding truthful campaigning, that I actually can not believe that topic is even up for discussion. If politicians are lying, how are we supposed to choose a trustworthy candidate to vote for? And yet, here we are. It makes me think about the title of our textbook: ”The irony of democracy” – the fact that it seems so easy for the elite to get away with lies, is beyond me. Like Abraham Lincoln once said: ”democracy is a government ’of the people, by the people, and for the people.’” Truthful campaigning is not negotiable, it is a must. But, then again, common sense is not a common place. The same thing goes for the media, they hold massive power. Similar to why I believe there should be laws demanding truthful campaigning, I believe there should be laws

Shilekani

2

demanding that the media fact checks on what they report on. In other words, the media should definitely be held accountable if they do not do whatever they can to fact check before publishing a story. If politicians and the media (consciously or subconsciously) are lying, the public is being blindfolded and I would go as far as not even calling that a democracy. There should be consequences for those who do not obey to this. A “Machiavellian” in the truest sense, is exactly who I believe Lee Atwater was. I found the following definition on Google: ”using clever but often dishonest methods that deceive people so that you can win power or control.” Using dishonest methods to deceive people in hopes of gaining power was what Atwater opted to do. He was described as ”part myth, part showman and part political mastermind.” His dishonest methods to deceive people became evident in his attempt to make Dukakis seem mentally unfit for office, it became evident in his attempt to destroy Ed Rolling (Campaign Manager, Reagan ’84) while working on the Bush campaign together and him claiming to never have seen a Willie Horton commercial (only to send a telegram to Horton later on, apologizing for all hiw wrongdoings) before. Rolling actually thought Atwater was trustworthy, and never thought he would go behind his back. Robert Novak, TV host and columnist, said: ”He tried to get me to write about Dukakis having psychiatric problems. He thought my weakness was, if I could get an exclusive story, I would jump at it and bite at it and not be as careful as I should be. Well, that might be true but I was careful enough not to get involved in that one.” If that is not considered a dishonest method to deceive people in hopes of gaining power, I do not know what is. I found Roger Stone, friend of Atwater and a Republican operative, quite the comedian. For Roger to say that the Bush campaign would not put information out there if it was not correct, is nothing short of hilarious and made me think of what Tucker Eskew (Atwater aide, McCain/Palin advisor) said: ”Republicans have often been dismissed as slow,

Shilekani

3

dumb, and it’s one of the fundamental reasons why Republicans are successful. Lee loved exaggerating that image, and just outfoxing everybody around him.” Roger Stone seems to fit the mold, or he is just playing dumb, like Atwater loved to do. Basically, what Republicans were (and still are) doing was playing off of people’s lack of knowledge. The reason they were successful, as mentioned in the movie, was because Democrats did not fight back. They are the more educated group, thinking that no sane person would possibly believe all those lies. Unfortunately for the Democrats, a lot of people did and still do. Not many people bother to actually fact check and further educate themselves. Hence why it is so important with honest journalists who fact checks their reports – and sincere politicians. The world we live in loves to jump to conclusions, it is easier and requires less effort. In other words, we are lazy. I believe Tucker Eskew and Ed Rolling best characterized Atwater. That does not come as a very big surprise to me though, since Eskew was his aide and Rolling worked alongside him. Having worked together through very special circumstances, it only makes sense for them to have known Atwater as well as they did, and unlike Stone, their comments seemed valid and accurate. I do not think it was a coincidence that Rolling ended up being the one Atwater turned to in his weakest moment, asking for Rolling to look out for him, saying that he is the only person he could trust. Throughout the movie, Tucker describes Atwater as this ”insecure kid” with a burning need to ”become something” and to ”show them”. To me, that seems like an perfect description of who Atwater was, based on this documentary. Joe Sligh, friend of Atwater, also said something seemingly accurate: ”Lee’s favorite statement is just to play dumb and keep moving.” As a viewer of this documentary, Atwater came across as someone who was very insecure, to me. Someone who was in a desperate need of validation from others, all the time, willing to do whatever it took to get it. He needed everyone’s eyes to feel seen.

Shilekani

4

At first glance, I would say that Atwater was sincere when he wrote apologetic articles for newspapers/magazines and letters to those he had wronged. I definitely believe life has a funny way of humbling us. There is a reason people say that we learn best through hardships and mistakes, it kind of works a lot like tough love. We learn the hard way. But, in Atwater’s case, I am not so sure whether that applies to him. I thought it was ”nice” of him to send an apology to Willie Horton, but on a second thought… we are talking about Atwater. He planned every single step he took, way in advance. There was no such thing as coinsidences in Lee’s world. I wonder if anyone even knew the real Atwater, whoever that might have been, because he always acted out his public persona. I think there a lot of things were going on on the inside, his little brother’s fate being one of them. His apologies could very well have been one last attempt to ”stay relevant” and being the topic of discussion. I believe it was tough for him to realize that he was not as relevant to the public anymore, and whatever he had to do to stay ”relevant” for as long as he possibly could, he would do. I am almost positive Atwater would have gone back to his old dirty dealing ways had he recovered from his disease. I could be wrong, people tend to always surprise us – for good and bad. The fact that he never opened the Bible makes me question everything he said from his death bed. Why did he tell his friend Chuck Jackson that the first thing he wanted was a Bible when the tumor got the best of him, even though he had never read it before? Was it just for show? Did he make someone else read it for him like he would make someone else read books every month, only to tell him what the books were about? Which, in this case, would not have been a bad thing, but that would require for this special ”someone” to actually open the Bible. It was unopened. Apparently there was one verse of the Bible that ”stuck with Lee”; ”What does it profit a man, to gain the whole world, but lose his own soul?” One thing is for certain, Lee Atwater was a very interesting, special and complex man. Joe Conason, Journalist, said it well: ”W learned that the only thing that really matters is who

Shilekani

5

wins. Whatever really happens doesn’t matter. They create their own reality as people in this Bush, White House, later said.” That was Lee Atwater’s mentality, right there. A lot can be said about Lee Atwater. Smart, dishonest, manipulative, you name it. But one thing is for sure, he played to win and no bets were off. He was probably willing to do anything and everything to achieve that power he so desperately was seeking. It consumed him, literally. Did he change the ’rules’ for politicians? Absolutely. Say whatever you want, but that man left a mark on the political world. One of which we are still seeing the aftermath of, in President Trump. Perhaps Trump actually did his homework for once, and studied the rules off of Lee Atwater’s playbook. Atwater changed the game. While a near-deathexperience would make most people reevaluate their lives and the choices they have made, I can not say I am sure Atwater’s apologies were sincer. For all I know, it could have been yet another one of his mind-playing games. Rest in peace, Lee Atwater....