FACES AND PLACES: Reflections of a "whiner" (11/24/96)

FACES AND PLACES

by Myron B. Kuropas

Reflections of a "whiner"

Long before the GOP had a presidential nominee, I produced a column titled "Will the comeback kid come back?" The article was about Bill Clinton, written at a time when the president's approval rating was low.

I listed many of the reasons favoring Mr. Clinton's re-election. A growing economy, low interest, a low inflation rate, apparent successes in the foreign policy arena.

I even suggested the possibility that the president might receive the Nobel Peace Prize. Since Nobel prize candidates can be nominated by past laureates, I was convinced that the presence of Elie Weisel next to Hillary Rodham Clinton during Mr. Clinton's State of the Union address was no accident.

Although it was the last thing I expected, Julian Kulas and Andrew Fedynsky wrote a letter to The Ukrainian Weekly using my own arguments to promote Bill Clinton for "four more years." I have to admit it was an inspired "gotcha."

Mr. Clinton didn't win the Nobel Peace Prize, but he did win the election for many of the reasons I listed in my article.

On October 13 I wrote an article titled "Read his pen, not his lips." I compared Mr. Clinton's promises with his delivery. Eugene Iwanciw also wrote a critical article. Even though there was nothing in any of our articles that was untrue, Stephen Wichar of Clinton Township, Mich., was so incensed he wrote a letter to The Ukrainian Weekly calling Mr. Iwanciw and me "bashers" and "whiners."

Dr. William Lazaruk of Fairfield, Conn., also penned a letter to The Ukrainian Weekly. In his letter he wrote that he was upset that The Weekly published my column. He mentioned that he really enjoys The Ukrainian Weekly and he gives his issues to local libraries where they are welcomed. "I could not give the October 13 issue," he complained, "because it would be a disgrace to the Ukrainians to have non-Ukrainians read the trash and lies Mr. Kuropas wrote." Like many of his ilk, Dr. Lazaruk probably supports censorship of contrary opinions.

Later in his letter Dr. Lazaruk wrote: "I am curious to know of the extent of education Mr. Kuropas does have." Next to his signature he wrote: "B.Sc.; B. Ed; M.A.; Ph.D." Since I have a B.S., an M.A. and a Ph.D., I am not any more impressed with Dr. Larzaruk's credentials than I am with his ideas.

What troubles me about the two letters is not that they were written nor that the authors disagreed with me. Many people have taken umbrage with my opinions over the years and that's fine. I don't expect everyone to agree with my views. I have occasionally been accused of being uninformed, biased, homophobic and reactionary. Most of the time, however, my detractors have offered evidence, facts, if you will, to support their perspective.

Unfortunately, neither Mr. Wichar nor Dr. Lazaruk bothered to do that in their letters. Their approach was simply to name-call, a technique used so effectively by the Clinton White House. When you don't like the message, attack the messenger.

In most of my articles I try to buttress my views with facts. Much of the time I cite sources. In my October 13 article, for example, I cited FBI Director Louis Freeh, columnist David Horowitz, and author Ben Wattenberg. I don't write "on my knee" as Ukrainians say. Nor do I succumb to personal name-calling.

The reader shouldn't think that Mr. Wichar and Dr. Lazaruk were the only people to write me about my October 13 article. Olga Kereluk of Plano, Texas, for example, thanked me for writing it. "I have been showing this [my article] to neighbors," she wrote. "Too bad it was not printed in our news media throughout our country." Like Mr. Wichar, she also voted for Franklin Delano Roosevelt. So there you have it. Two Ukrainians of the same generation with two differing opinions regarding the election. America!

Although I have the highest regard for Bob Dole's character and legislative record (I know of what I speak because I was once his legislative assistant), the man lost because he mounted one of the worst campaigns in memory (again I know of what I speak because I've been actively involved in GOP national campaigns since 1960). The ethnic vote was almost totally ignored; the campaign staff was inept; there was no direction, no vision, no coordination, little discipline. As early as late September we in Illinois heard that Dole's people had conceded the state to Mr. Clinton. That's never happened before.

Mr. Clinton, on the other hand, ran a superb campaign. Personally charming, he was surrounded by a disciplined staff that projected confidence and coordination. They wooed the ethnic vote and the Reagan Democrats for almost four years. Every time I turned around, it seemed, there was a picture of Messrs. Kulas or Fedynsky or both with President Clinton or Al Gore or some other high-ranking Democrat. White House officials were visible at Ukrainian functions. That, combined with the state visits of President Clinton to Ukraine and President Leonid Kuchma to the United States, had an impact on our community.

We need to remember, however, that there are two political parties in the United States and it is important that Ukrainians be represented in both. That's been our tradition and that's the way it should remain. We may try to outsmart each other during campaign years but for the other three years we need to work together on issues of concern to our community.

Yes, President Clinton will remain in the White House, but Republicans will remain in command of Congress. Ukrainians need to have a voice in both branches of government.

One final note. When I was a special assistant to President Gerald R. Ford, I went out of my way to make sure that both Ukrainian Republicans and Democrats were represented at White House functions. Why? Because I believed that both parties had articulate leaders that could represent our community. President Ford had an open door for all Ukrainians. In his conclusion Mr. Wichar wrote: "After November 5, Ukrainian Democrats will have an open door. I don't know about the bashers." Does that mean Mr. Iwanciw won't be invited to any more state dinners?