Better Dead Than Ed III

In the upcoming election for mayor, cast a protest vote against patronage, mismanagement, fiscal waste and Democratic monopoly control of the City of Philadelphia. Write in Frank Rizzo's name on the ballot. Personally I despised the guy, but he's dead now, so he won't be putting forward any more proposals in the guise of "policy initiatives" to intimidate black people. "Why not vote for Republican candidate Joseph Egan?" you ask. He's no more than a sacrificial lamb to be roasted by the Democratic machine. Rizzo stands a better chance of beating Rendell, even from the grave. Rizzo's lingering popularity almost ensures that he will get at least 10 percent of the vote in the election. Those unsatisfied with the prospect of Democratic underachiever Ed Rendell as mayor should send him a message by voting for Rizzo. Show Rendell that he doesn't have an overwhelming mandate to mismanage the city in the same manner as Democratic mayors (including Rizzo when he was alive) have for years past. Show the Democrats that the people of Philadelphia want the next mayor to crack down on patronage and misspending. Besides, wouldn't it be cool if the dead guy won? Think it's impossible? It happened in Delaware County recently when Jay Robert Kershener, dead for several weeks, beat Howard Huber, Jr., who was still quite alive, for Upper Providence Township supervisor. Then there was the case of Bill Barrett, a Democratic congressman for South and West Philadelphia for 30 years. Barrett was loved by his constituents. He would come home from Washington every night on the train to meet with them. In 1976, just 16 days before the primary, he died. Come election day, his name was still on the ballot and, of course, he won. Still not convinced? Well, what if I told you Ed Rendell was actively involved in student government while he was attending Penn. Would that convince you that he's a hack? In fact, in 1963 Rendell was a leader of the Red and Blue Party, the fraternity-supported party that had controlled student government from its inception. In an interview with The Daily Pennsylvanian before the December election that year, Rendell admitted to giving out patronage jobs to his friends before the election had even been held. "Our party is based on friendship," Rendell declared. "I offer patronage to good men and I'm not ashamed of it." Do tigers change their stripes? Is there any reason to believe that Rendell is more of a political reformer now than when he ran for Men's Student Government in 1963? Based on statements like the above and his record of general incompetence, the DP ran two editorials opposing Rendell's election that year. They were titled, "Better Dead Than Ed I" and "Better Dead Than Ed II." In the first, the editors wrote: "We have finally been presented with a meaningful alternative between the two parties contesting for the assembly's seats. One advocates the return to the laughable and idiotic procedures which have characterized Men's Student Government in the past . . . "[These] individuals are to be found in the person of the candidates of the Red and Blue Party, captained by the fearless prophet of the new order, Ed Rendell. Rendell has emerged as the cupid of Locust Street, perhaps better off were he to be placed in a large diaper and allowed to shoot his arrows of verbal tripe into the hearts of the opposition. The cherubic Ed now spends most of his time punching holes in his rep ties, in preparation for the Senior Society pin he hopes to therein insert. He is as much interested in doing a good job in the government as Chiang Kai-shek is interested in erecting a monument of Mao. "Perhaps, the male students want more of the same garbage," the editorial continued. "And if they do, Ed Rendell and company will certainly give it to them." Allow me to bring the rest of the two editorials up to date for Rendell's current campaign: As far as campaign pledges for 1991, the Democratic Party is offering nothing more than it has in the past, which amounts to very little. They are making some vague gestures toward "privatization," whatever they mean by that. The Democrats have retreated to the platitudes brought out every year at this time such as: "Philadelphia's problems are the fault of the state and the federal governments." This is a democracy (despite the fact that there's only one real candidate running). Perhaps the time has come, once and for all, to rid the city of the meatballs, the tools and the Democratic fools. Better dead than Ed. Remember, vote Rizzo in November. Steven Ochs is a senior Economics major from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and editorial page editor of The Daily Pennsylvanian. Whose Dream, This Reality appears alternate Thursdays.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.