Yesterday, Kyle Szarzynski wrote an article in response to an earlier column of mine regarding the subject of illegal immigration. In this response, Mr. Szarzynski accused me of being xenophobic, bigoted and stated that I am most likely the member of a certain race and class based on the opinions present in my earlier statement.

Mr. Szarzynski�s statement reflects a very peculiar sentiment within American society. It is not the sentiment the left-of-center democrat, it is not that of the socialist or the libertarian, nor is it the sentiment of the Republican or the fascist. Rather, it is the bitter rage unleashed by those of all political affiliations who see their most valued principles being left on the wayside of American democracy. It is the hatred of those unwilling to comprehend that there are those who are different not only by virtue of the color of their skin or the wealth of their parents or the foundations of their faith, but by the nature of their convictions.

Mr. Szarzynski states that I am most likely the member of a certain race � yes, I am white. Mr. Szarzynski states that I am most likely the member of a certain class � yes, my father is a wealthy man. I am, and always have been, honored to be his son.

Yet despite the accuracy of Mr. Szarzynski�s accusations, neither my race nor material achievements that are not my own can stand as arguments against my legitimacy, for it is by a man�s ability to defend his ideas that they will be judged, not through the lens of color and money.

So let it be clear.

Let it be clear at this moment, that for the rest of my time at this paper, I will never be so arrogant as to believe I can ascertain the nature of another person�s character based off of the foundation of one opinion defended by reasoned argument.

Let it be clear that I know my enemy. It is intolerance in every form. It is the intolerance of ideas as well as appearance. It is the zealous conviction that all those who oppose one�s vision of progress must be bigots, that they must be criminals against the human race, that they must be a manifestation of evil. It is the intellectual arrogance that festers into political tyranny.

I am honored to have an intellectual opponent so firm in his beliefs as yourself, Mr. Szarzynski, but I recommend you avoid the slippery slope of human character � lest you reveal more about yourself than those you have pledged to oppose.

But this is the first installment of our Guide to Madison Politics - Primary Edition. Consider this more of a retrospective of the last few weeks leading up to the second episode which should come in the next few days.

Untitled from The Badger Herald on Vimeo.

Here's a list of the videos so far in our Guide to Madison Politics. We'll update it as we release more videos:

1. Introduction
2. Covering the Dane County Board

Got in line an hour before the doors opened, and couldn't get a seat: I feel your pain.
We'll even vent about it on your behalf.
Sometime around 5:30, the line broke, and those on the side of the Kohl center nearest to Mifflin Street were only let into the building through two doors. Meanwhile, people who arrived much later came right through the front and found seats easily.

Once inside, these hundreds of unfortunate souls were bounced from Obama staffer to Obama staffer who promised seats, but came up just short. Eventually, we were told to go outside by a police officer and join the overflow room where the projectors were comically dim. These must have been the most depressed souls to ever leave a Barack Obama rally.

Moral of the story? Hire staff to keep any line of thousands of people in some kind of order, and don't antagonize the people who waited by letting in latecomers right before their eyes.

I don't doubt Barack will find a way to cheer everyone up in a few minutes, though.

Final Thoughts Really a great event that captured the campus dialogue — I hope we can present more events like this in the future. A cursory conversation with the crowd showed they thought it was a pretty good way to spend a Monday night - especially since Chelsea Clinton is out and about around the campus at this very moment. Biggest gaffes came when College Democrats Chair Oliver Kiefer gave the stereotypical liberal political answer in response to a question about the true efficiency of Ethanol when you factor in the environmental impact of production. I overhead a number of people in the audience point out that they agreed with Sara’s emphasis on finding new technology. On the other side, College Republicans Chair Sara Mikolajczak stumbled inexplicably over why gay marriage is wrong. She seemed far too uncomfortable with that entire line of questioning. The winner tonight?: There were flaws and good moments for both of them. Nobody changed any minds tonight, but it was a great exercise in public discourse. Thats right, I’m saying it: You won. Correction: Donald Downs, not Oliver Kiefer compared Sara’s claim that she “isn’t an economics major” to John McCain. (now corrected in the text) Closing statements - Sara: We all want a better America. We each individually need to decide in the elections. Thanks for coming Oliver: CDems will answer your questions about voting. Sentimental point about Obama and Clinton being historic candidates. 8:42 AQ3: Why should we follow public opinion in marriage amendment and not on Iraq war? - Sara says “They’re two completely different sets of issues, and its unfair to try and equate them.” Adding that americans don’t understand all the factors at play in Iraq. (but they do in terms of gay marriage?) Oliver responds that Generals are not politicians, and “noone in the military can grasp the issues facing the Iraqis.” (I can think of a few people on the Herald editorial page who may disagree) 8:38 Audience question 2: Competitive advantages and globalization — do dems get it? Should we retrain workers to get new jobs?(They all have trouble reading the card) ( a predictable quandary ) Oliver bats it off deftly, Sara says shes not an econ major, Prompting Prof. Downs to say she sounds like John McCain. Its a big laugh line, and Prof. Downs gives a shout-out to the Ron Paul contingent. - She sees no problem with job training, (if anyone still cares after all that rancor) 8:35 Audience question time! 1: UW madison is at the bottom of its peer group in professor salaries, how can we improve if a professor can make 3 times as much at the University of Chicago. Isn’t the state of Wisconsin neglecting its responsibilty to students? - Sara says no. we have a great university, but it is “awful” (looks toward Downs) that Professors make so little here. Discusses her efforts to find a way to get private funding. Downs asks whether same sex couples should be included: She begrudgingly says yes, adding that UW is not banned from providing benefits under the amendment banning gay marriage Oliver: Strongly supports same sex benefits. “Its a matter of changing our priorities at the state level…” 8:29 Q: Is no amnesty a just punishment for illegal immigrants, how do we pay to deport millions of immigrants? Sara admits that we can’t deport everyone and asserts our need to make it easier to get here legally. Says we need to improve immigration laws toward the future — implying that we shouldn’t punish those already here. A break from GOP orthodoxy inspired by McCain’s rise? Hard to see her saying this with Duncan Hunter as the party’s standard-bearer Oliver : Would support a strong border policy — basically reflects Sara’s beliefs on the issue. The middles of each party are represented here. If only these two could convince the extremes of their respective parties, we might get some immigration reform done in this country… 8:25 Q to Oliver on abortion: Oliver: Americans have a right to privacy, and government can’t infringe on that. Assails abstinence-only education. Points to republicans trying to stop UHS from distributing condoms and the Dems shooting it down. Sara: Roe v. Wade a states rights issue. “A bad decision that needs to be overturned by the states.” Stumbles all over Downs’ follow up question about why abortion is bad. A bizarre gaffe for a cultural conservative. 8:18 Sara says there is too much money in politics, but we should allow limitless contributions with full disclosure. “Not fair” to limit a millionaire’s contributions to hundreds of dollars. Equates money sent in politics to free speech. Oliver counters that every citizen should have the same say in our democracy, noting that a check isn’t a speech. Promotes 100% public financing. Downs asks about McCain Feingold loopholes, and Oliver admits the loopholes. 8:13 Audience Question 1 on torture to Oliver Stresses importance of international law, parries it to a discussion of trade policies and protecting American jobs. Sara: outsourcing “not necessarily a bad thing” … “helps the economy of these countries” “until someone decides (otherwise) .. Thats the way its gonna be” Downs asks Sara what she would say to a laid off worker: “I guess I’ll worry about that when I get laid off … which is bound to happen one of these days” obviously the biggest gaffe of the night, draws audible groans from the polite audience Thats the dismissive attitude that will destroy the GOP in November. Totally antithetical to the views of Wisconsinites on both sides of the aisle 8:06 Sara (CR’s) says she doesn’t believe Doyle will not raise taxes. A populist argument from Republicans here — its extremely hard for people to get to work with our high gas taxes. “Raising taxes hurts the individual.” - Sara says she’s not an econ major, Downs points out Oliver is. A few laughs from a pretty quiet house. He politely brushes aside the compliment. Oliver says Wisconsin should shift the tax burden away from working families, away from small business and toward corporations Downs nails him down on the details of how government decides which companies to tax and which ones to give breaks to. — Oliver was speechless for a few awkward seconds. Sara knocks it out of the park by simply saying “how about lower taxes?” Oliver got caught in the weeds of economic policy there. 8:02 To Oliver: (of the college dems You’ll have to forgive me for the first names) Should we look to Nuclear power? He Is unsure about Nuclear power prospects, and where are we to dispose of the waste. Spends the rest of his time talking about new research, including fusion at UW Sara: Nuclear power more efficient — for some reason she parrys it into a defense of Middle Eastern wars on an anti-war college campus. Brave, I’ll give her that. 7:56 To Sara: How to justify gay marriage ban She responds that voters have had their say, and that must be respected. Downs pushes her on her personal beliefs, (she thanks him curtly) and as a Christian, this is against her religious views, so she voted for the amendment. Oliver: How many marriages were saved by denying 1,200 rights to loving committed couples. Counters her claim that Republicans in the state are not nearly-universally for the ban by citing the 59 of 60 Republicans who voted pro in the Assembly. 7:52 Oliver promotes bill by Reps. Joe Parisi and Spencer Black to make college much more affordable, voicing support for the Wisconsin Covenant — the unpaid-for promise by the Governor to students who keep good grades to guarantee them admission to UW schools. UW professor Donald Downs (Co-moderator) asks Sara if she thinks UW should go completely private She says no, but alumni should continue to help us make up the gap in state funding. CR’s are against increasing the state’s commitment to UW. Accuses UW of fiscal mismanagement. — UW, on the other hand, has claimed the budget is extremely tight 7:46 Q2 for Sara: How do we decide when Iraq is a success? She repeats the classic GOP establishment argument that “If it takes 100 years, it takes 100 years.” Albeit, a lot more clearly and boldly than most Republicans Oliver response: Guarantees time table for withdrawal under Dems. Popular now, but what about in the future? I can’t help but wonder what Dems do if Iraq finally does reach that power-sharing agreement. 7:42 Q1 for Oliver: Should state have health insurance mandate? Who should pay for it? “We need to eliminate the myth about socialized medicine.” Goes on to compare it to other public services such as the fire department Sara response: Republicans (even president Bush) have praised the BadgerCare plan. “Its not that we want to see poeple without health care … but how many decide they don’t need it?” “(Students) don’t get sick” (she later clarifies) and they don’t want to be forced to pay for higher premiums. “Even Jim Doyle thinks Healthy Wisconsin was a bad idea.” - A great line from Sara that couldn’t be countered 7:35 Students will be allowed to pass follow-up questions to ushers in the aisles (including Herald columnist Gerald Cox) If Oliver ( College Dems )or Sara (college republicans ) try to get one past these guys, look for the audience members to call them on it 7:20 What’s the point? Tonight’s debate should be a good chance to see whether the GOP is ready to change the frame of its general election arguments from president Bush to how they can move the country forward. The Democrats need to prove they aren’t as damn wimpy as everyone says they are and stand up for their policy positions. It should be easier for them on a liberal campus, but It’ll be interesting to see if the crowd will respond at all to GOP policies going forward. The state parties better take notice of this, If the GOP wants a shot at staying within a decent margin in college communities in November, this should be their case study for message testing. I’ll be sitting in the middle of the audience today to try and gauge some reactions as well. Should be an interesting night, to say the least.