Several days ago, a column published in this paper accused those who support Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., for the Democratic nomination of being “lazy and cowardly.” Now, being a Sanders supporter — there goes my shot at ever being a public servant — sure, I do not necessarily see myself as brave. I get scared of simple things, like heights, clowns and people with two first names, like Taylor Scott, Jennifer Lawrence or Zachary Lee. But cowardly? I’ll have you know I once had a bowl of nails for breakfast. Without any milk.
As for the laziness? Perhaps accusations of this nature — like accusing me of writing this article in my underpants on my couch while inebriated — are not entirely unfounded.
But cowardly is not the right word. Surely a word like cowardly would be relegated to accusations that don’t talk about issues or policies, but rather, blatantly incorrect concepts like feasibility. Such accusations are as misguided as they are cowardly, because they sidestep substantive discussion on controversial issues.
Moreover, such accusations remind me of those lobbed at socialist President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who did such a terrible job in office that Congress had to enact term limits after he had been re-elected four times by the American people.
So when I read things like this, honestly, very articulate and comprehensive column that accuses Sen. Sanders and his politics of lacking feasibility and or practical knowledge, I can’t help but cringe.
In terms of feasibility, I’m confident when I say Sanders has learned something about legislative compromise in his combined 25 years in Congress — 16 years as a House representative, nine as a senator. He’s actually been nicknamed the “Amendment King” by peers because of his willingness to negotiate with those on the other side of the aisle. These conservatives, mind you, range from the ideological extremes like Jim Inhofe, to truly honorable individuals like John McCain.
With regards to critiques on his foreign policy experience, or lack thereof, Sanders has continually demonstrated competency. In 2003, the senator openly criticized launching Operation Enduring Freedom — the fancy way of saying the Iraq War — since America has not officially declared a war since World War II. Had the United States not engaged in Operation Enduring Freedom, it is frighteningly safe to say ISIS would not exist, and UF students would not be embarrassed explaining what the Integrated Student Information System is to family and friends. Seriously, Jewish parents of mine, I’m switching out of a class, nothing more.
But not everything in that column was claimed undeservedly. At one point, the columnist wrote, “supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., annoy the hell out of me,” and honestly, I kind of agree with this sentiment. I’m often embarrassed by fellow Bernie supporters, the same way I imagine vegans and people who do CrossFit are annoyed by members of their community who come across as rude, obnoxious and oftentimes condescending. I’m also irritated by people who have made his campaign their latest trend, like Beanie Babies or kale.
However, there is nothing cowardly about backing the candidate with more formal political experience than Secretary Hillary Clinton, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, or Asshole Trump. There is nothing cowardly about supporting the only candidate with a police record — granted, he was arrested for resisting arrest during a demonstration against segregation, which isn’t nearly as cool as freeing Pussy Riot. There is nothing cowardly about voting for the man whose constituency wanted him to represent them for 25 straight years, and is now overwhelmingly backing him for the Oval Office. But I’ll give it to you, ma’am. You’re absolutely right that there is nothing “brave” in electing the man who is qualified, experienced, sensible, aware and, most importantly, unaffected.
Zachary Lee is a UF philosophy junior.
