I had the pleasure recently of interviewing Ari David.
Ari is running in California’s 30th Congressional District against 853 year incumbent Henry Waxman.
http://aridavidforcongress.com/
I have gotten to know Ari, and I am proud to call him my friend. He and his wife have recently had their first child, and he is in the throes of new parenthood.
With that, I present my interview with Ari David.
1) What is the Ari David story? What made you decide to enter the political arena?
I am a Los Angeles Native from the entertainment industry. I am enlightened conservative. I decided to run for office because it bothered me so much that Henry Waxman ran unopposed in 2008. To paraphrase John Wayne, that really chapped my hide.
2) What political issues are most important to you?
National security, confiscatory tax rates, and the size, scope, and reach of government into people’s lives.
3) What do you possess that Henry Waxman’s prior opponents do not possess?
Tenacity and persistence.
4) Given that Los Angeles is not known for a large percentage of Republican Jews, or Republicans in general, how can you defeat Henry Waxman?
The way to win any war or battle is to believe and have the will to win. We are in an ideological war in which victory equals legislative power. The left treats elections like warfare. They have the will to win. Too many Republicans don’t. I do.
5) Who are your three political heroes, American or worldwide?
Ronald Reagan, Ronald Wilson Reagan, and RW Reagan. Is that three yet?
6) Without delving too deeply into your personal life, what would you want Americans to know about Ari David the person? 100 years from now, what would you want people to remember about you, and what would you hope the history books say about you?
He was the guy who made us believe we could win and taught us that true principles of conservatism embody individual liberty, American exceptionalism, and the pursuit of happiness, all of which we still have because of the work he did by winning 2010 and being a responsible legislator during his time of service. Because of his core conservatism, we still enjoy the freedoms that we have preserved for 230 years.
I would like to thank Ari for his time, and more importantly, for his friendship. I am glad to know him, and you will be too when you meet him as well.
Now send him money and let’s get him elected.
eric
Wow, a conservative who idolizes Ronald Reagan. How original. That’ll go over really well with the Hollywood folks – you know, the one’s Reagan so un-American-ly ratted on behind closed doors to the HUAC.
Good luck against Waxman. You’re gonna need it. Oh, that’s right, conservatives don’t believe in luck! Good, uh… er… Blessings from the Lord? Oh, I give up.
JMJ
I’m generally extremely critical of Obama’s foreign policy but given that KSM is clearly guilty, a conviction is a forgone conclusion in both cases. Although it could be argued that, as an act of war, a military court (or a special tribunal) is more appropriate, the fact is that the first WTC bomber was successfully prosecuted in 1993 without a mistrial (and the architects of 7/7 and the shoe-bomber were both convicted in the UK courts). More importantly, like Obama’s half-hearted attempts to close Guantanemo, the decision to opt for a civilian trial is a deliberate distraction designed to deflect attention from his refusal to support a surge strategy and his shameful ineptitude regarding Iran.
Unlike the furore over which forum KSM is tried in, Obama’s failure to destroy the Taliban and to rein in Iran’s nuclear ambitions have the potential to lead to the death and/or enslavement of millions of people. They also have the potential to damage American (and Western) national security far more than even the most botched of trials. It should also be pointed out that eighteen months ago McCain believed that “we should close Guantanamo” and Graham initially criticised military commissions, making opposition to civilian trials an especially risky strategy. Therefore, instead of playing into Obama’s hands by focusing on the peripheral issues of detainee policy and terror trials, the focus must be on protecting Israel and the Afghan people.
It was NOT an act of war, tipster. It was a CRIME. Why you guys continue to elevate these religious fanatics to the level of nation-states is beyond me. You’re giving them exactly what they want – credibility. They should be treated like what they are – no better than child molesters, rapists, murderers. That’s what they are.
On top of all that, once you say they committed an act of war, them you have to treat them like POW’s, but you can’t. So what dis the neocons do? Invent a whole new class of detainee – the “enemy combatant.” A new classification, born our of whole cloth, with no substance in law.
And then you have the unmitigated gall to complain that Obama has failed to rein in the Taliban??? Obama??? Were you born yesterday – LITERALLY??? And then you pile on that gall by saying that somehow Obama is unfocused on that stupid war on terror by actuially doing what hasn’t been done in all these years post-9/11 and actually prosecuting these suspects and getting that out of the way! God, you guys really do just make it all up as you go along, huh?
JMJ
” Oh, that’s right, conservatives don’t believe in luck! Good, uh… er… Blessings from the Lord? Oh, I give up. ”
Try “Hope and Change” or “Yes We Can”
Thats did you all a lot of good.
” was NOT an act of war, tipster. It was a CRIME. Why you guys continue to elevate these religious fanatics to the level of nation-states is beyond me. ”
Yes, its obviously beyond you to see that a country hijacked by radicals attacked us and commited themselves to war against us verbally and by invading our shores.
Thats called war.
“the “enemy combatant.” A new classification, born our of whole cloth, with no substance in law.”
Oh bullshyt jersey.
They were soldiers as much as any soldier but they chose to not wear uniforms commiting or defining them to any country. Weve never had to confront this type of enemy before and so theres good reason for creating the new class.
Wise up and stop trying to make weak points that depend on you leaving out half the truth.
“And then you have the unmitigated gall to complain that Obama has failed to rein in the Taliban??? Obama???”
Yes he has failed as they are now boogying back down to pakistan knowing hes going to be a while in making up his mind.
If he reigned them in so well why are casualties greater than they’ve ever been ?
Be nice if once in a while you actually had something substantial to add to the debate along with some facts and examples instead of just demeaning folks for justifiable opinons and perspectives.
“Were you born yesterday”? and bla bla bla does not really refute the mans position
“Yes, its obviously beyond you to see that a country hijacked by radicals attacked us and commited themselves to war against us verbally and by invading our shores.”
What country? What invasion? The Taliban did not attack or invade us. Yes, they were an atrocious regime that allowed Al Qaeda to operate within their borders, and yes, we should have gone after them, and we did, sort of. Bush did it… half@$$ed. Obama is trying to do more now, and all he gets for it is the blame for the casualties from the hypocritical Right. It’s probably too late now. Yet another abject failure of the Bush years.
And the terrorists are most certainly NOT soldiers! How dare you compare them with real soldiers! They represent no nation. They do not act within the rules of engagement. They are not funded by a nation-state’s citizens. They fly no flag, wear no uniform, take orders from loony clerics, commit nothing but atrocities, have no homeland, and on and on. They are INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZED CRIMINALS. You fear-mongering rightwingnuts just drool for war, so you say we’re at war. We are NOT at war. Not constitutionally, not recognized internationally, not with any particular nation-state. The sooner we wake up, act like adults, and realize this, the sooner we can end this sick, stupid “War on Terror.”
JMJ
Give it up Jersey.
The Taliban and Al Queda are one in the same.
“And the terrorists are most certainly NOT soldiers! How dare you compare them with real soldiers!”
Bull.
They train like any military, they are funded like any military, they represent an ideology like any other soldier, they represent the government run by the Taliban.
Take your feigned outrage somewhere else where they’re clueless enough to buy it.
Bt the way. If its not the war on terror as you nincompoops keep crying then why do you keep calling Bush and certain individuals fighting the war “War Criminals ” ?
Cant have it both ways guys.
Pathetic typical liberal double standardized hypocrisy
“Not constitutionally, not recognized internationally, ”
More bull.
The wars are legal and 21 other countries in the coalitions recognize it as legit.
And who gives a rats a$$ what these other countrioes think ?