 |
|
Campaign 2006: The VDB Interview with Mark Shepard by Philip Baruth | April 13th, 2006 Excerpts and a linkRepublican Mark Shepard is a two-term State Senator from Bennington, and
when he officially announced his candidacy in early January, alarm bells went
off in Republican strategy rooms across the state. … Shepard and I met at Libby’s Blue Line Diner, an old-school silver model
perched up on a little corporate switchback in Winooski. And I came to the
breakfast with a pretty light spirit: the State Republican Party had recently
snubbed Shepard by directing the national committees to funnel money only to
Rainville — an unprecedented move — and I thought he and I could at least agree
on tweaking the Republican leadership. And we did. But something else happened that took the conversation in a suddenly
queasy direction: Shepard began to lay out views on gay rights that I found
increasingly difficult to process over an English muffin and soft-boiled eggs. SFC Editorial
Note: As you
read the conversation below, you will note that it was Baruth who turned the
conversation to gay marriage. Instead of
disrespectfully dodging the issue, as many candidates do, Shepard respectfully
and honestly discussed the subject with Baruth.
Baruth’s struggle talking about the very subject he brought up indicates
that he never expected an honest discussion. But then again, this was his first
interview with Shepard, who is well-known for engaging in honest and respectful
discussions of the issues, even with the press. And like it or not, I found myself pulled into the sort of gut-wrenching
conversation on social issues that most of us in America have tried assiduously
to avoid since our country became so sharply polarized. SFC Editorial
Note: Baruth’s
editorializing comments tell more than even the interview. This was likely Baruth’s first conversation
with someone who actually dared question one of his extreme-left viewpoints. Indeed it is quite hard to imagine that a
person who claims to be at the forefront of public thought in Vermont, having
never considered how redefining marriage to include gay relationships might
also broaden marriage to other groups.
As you will read in the dialog below, Baruth struggle to answer what
seemed like a relatively simple and even obvious question led him to conclude
the interview defending polygamy. Baruth’s own limited
exposure to and understanding of people who do not embrace his narrowly-held
beliefs clearly short-circuits his ability to report conversations with people
who see things differently, without also adding unrelated nonsensical comments. Perhaps this is his way of copping with
reality on the rare occasions he runs into it. If anyone out there is still confused about the difference between a
journalist and a political blogger, the difference is this: at a certain point,
I could no longer let the tape recorder do the work. I had to put down my
bacon, and pick up my beliefs, such as they are. Which makes for a bad breakfast, unfortunately. * * * VDB: So, first things first, what would you say — if you had to be 100% honest — is your favorite political blog? Shepard: Well, I don’t spend much time looking at political blogs, to be honest with you. VDB: Would you say Shepard: [Getting the joke] Yeah, I guess it would have to be. [Laughing] Really, I haven’t spent a lot of time looking around at the blogs. VDB: Yeah. Bloggers are kind of in a world of their own. A little echo chamber. There’s always this illusion that they’re being read, but clearly no. … … … Shepard: … I want to be accessible to people. You and I, you know, we had an honest, frank discussion. VDB: It was pretty frank. Shepard: That’s the way it should be. … [After we shook hands in the parking lot and headed to our cars, I
realized what had been at the edge of my consciousness during breakfast: Mark
Shepard’s name is about as close to the name “Matthew Shepard” as you can get
without actually being named Matthew Shepard. Earlier in the week I’d been talking with a friend in a same-sex
relationship who was about to move from He was worried, in short, about being killed. Maybe that was why I’d felt especially troubled during and after my talk
with a man who wants to be SFC
Editorial Note: To help put Baruth’s closing remarks in context, consider if Mark
Shepard had made the following remark, which makes about the same sense as
Baruth’s final remark above – but with the tables turned. [After we shook
hands in the parking lot and headed to our cars, I realized what had been at
the edge of my consciousness during breakfast: Philip Baruth’s name is about as
close to the name “Philip Morris” as you can get without actually being named Philip
Morris. My mother-in-law
died of cancer from smoking and so neither I nor my children ever got to meet
her. We are all concerned
about others being killed by tobacco products. Maybe that was why I’d felt especially troubled during and after my talk with a man who wants to be a new source for information, the replacement to the print media. Because for all of his pleasant demeanor and desire to help people understand politics, Baruth strikes me as Vermont’s version of Dan Rather: ambitious, agenda driven, don’t let the facts get in the way of the news, and more than just a little disturbing when you take time to discover that such a simple little question would completely throw him off.] Click
here for the complete conversation and VDB comments http://vermontdailybriefing.com/?p=252
|
"...
many politicians talk the talk about doing something tangible about new
jobs and it doesn't go much further. Sen. Shepard walked the walk." Bennington Banner State Senator Endorsement Editorial, October 29, 2004
Copyright © 2006, Shepard for Congress Committee. All rights reserved. |