Guest Post: Evan Queitsch


The Era of Indecision

To paraphrase one of my favorite talk radio hosts and a gentleman whom I consider a friend (though perhaps he should disavow this sentiment if he is ever to be accepted in the political culture of Delaware), Rick Jensen (1150 WDEL 1PM-4PM):





This is how I describe the wild-eyed screamers.  The people who are blind to anything but their own individual needs, wants and desires.  These are the loudest voices in America.  Fortunately, there are very few of them. Unfortunately, they still dominate the conversation.  Whether they are radical leftist pro-abortion activists screaming for abortion on demand at any time, for any reason in one breath and then damning the justice system for daring to execute a hardened criminal found guilty of multiple ritualistic torture and murder or they are on the far right, clamoring for homosexuality to be banned as an individual choice and then in the same instance demanding that their right to self-identify with their religion be protected by the same government that they are demanding take away the rights of the homosexuals, they are equally damaging to the dialogue.  So too are the partisans, blinded by political party, unwilling to hear and unable to comprehend the real concerns and solutions presented by the other side.  Their screams drown out the common, everyday American whose voice speaks with clarity and common sense.

I know this because in the 7 years since I have become politically active, speaking with many people on all sides of the issues, about their thoughts, the most prevalent concern among them has been this:

Why can’t they just work together and get things done?

Whether it was the mother of 3 living in Brookside who was working 3 jobs to make ends meet that I met while out knocking doors during my 2012 State Senate Campaign or the 70-year-old farmer from Georgetown that I spoke with at a TEA Party rally in Dover, they both asked the same question, why?  Why aren’t we electing people who yes, can articulate a position on an issue and convince others to support that position but also who can consider all of the facts and make a decision that makes some common sense, even if it isn’t something that gives one side everything it wants?  The answer is the wild-eyed screamers. Whether it’s Delaware Liberal’s vicious assault on anyone who isn’t toeing the Delaware Democrat Party line on every issue or the over the top rallying cries of some within the 9-12 Delaware Patriots, it’s the wild-eyed screamers that make most rational people just look away in disgust.  I know, because I was one and to some, I will always only be allowed to be one.  I saw what was being done on sites like, the hate that they spewed and it infuriated me.  Then, I became like them, just, on the opposite side.  And now, I see the futility of that idea.  One side always wins the election but America almost always loses.  Predictably, partisans end up being elected from both parties and what do we end up with?  A house divided against itself.  Now, we were warned about that weren’t we?

Now, if you’re still reading this, you’re either a glutton for punishment, seeing red with anger or you’re one of the many people who have thrown up your hands in disgust at the lack of any real progress in America in many years.  I would like to post a disclaimer here for anyone still reading this:

If you are a person who insists that the letter following the name of a candidate is the only determining factor for whom you would support in an election, please stop reading.  If you are a far left liberal or a far right conservative who simply never ever wants to see anything done that isn’t lock step with your own position, please do us both a favor and save your anger for another post where it might be received with some appreciation.  If you match these descriptions, the rest of this post is not for you.

If you’re still with me, you’ve been warned.  This will irritate partisans on both sides. I can almost guarantee that it will elicit a wild-eyed response from the far left and the far right.  But it must be said.  Now, it is the time for the conversation to change.  No longer can it be dominated by those wild-eyed screamers from the far right and the far left.  No longer can the partisans control the debate.  Because if we allow them to continue, debate is all that will ever happen.  From time to time, we will see radical leaders elected to high office and they will use their power to prop up their agendas.  Their base will revel in the dictatorial use of their power to support their ends and inevitably, their detractors will rail against them.  Rightfully so.  Eventually the American spirit of liberty will rise up and it will cause a groundswell of support for the opposition.  Thus the cycle will begin again but this time from the other side.  And the average American will again look away as the vitriol is spewed.

But it doesn’t have to be that way.  There’s another option.  We can stop caring about what political party we are in or the candidates are in and start caring about what they stand for and what they believe in.  Now, we’ve all heard this before, the concept is not new, but practicing it something that we haven’t been able to master.  Now is the time to start mastering it.  If we don’t, well, history is littered with once great societies that were passed by because they refused to work together.  This isn’t about giving up, giving in or capitulation by either side.  It’s about finding a way for all of us to work together in search of a greater goal.  I don’t believe that there are very many for instance, on either side of the spectrum, who enjoy seeing nearly 30,000 Delawareans unemployed who want.  I don’t believe that there are many in either party who enjoy the rampant crime in Wilmington, the home invasions or the depressed property values.  Yet, the wild-eyed screamers never want to focus on these discussions, because there is too much opportunity for compromise and for real solutions.  Instead, they would rather divide us around issues like homosexuality, as if a person’s choice of lifestyle is at the top of our priority list.  I’m sorry to tell both sides, most of us simply don’t care what you do in your private lives.  What we care about is seeing a better future for our kids.  We care about seeing families growing together and thriving, not being ripped apart.  We care about clean air, clean water, open spaces and good schools.  We may disagree on how to achieve these goals but in the end, what we all really want is to achieve these goals.  We can still argue for our desired path to the goals that we seek, but we must recognize that more important than getting our way, is creating a way for others.

So to those on the left, who will litter the comments section with vitriolic hatred and personal attacks, you do your cause a disservice, as I once did.  To those on the right who will call me a coward and a capitulator to the enemy, you to do a disservice to our shared cause.  Yes, this whole experiment can go down in flames, and many innocent people, who played no part in the political games, can and will be hurt.  But is that what you all want?  Is it so important that everyone get everything they want that you’re willing to ruin other people’s lives?  Is a political position reason enough for you to write things about people who their kids cry when they read them?  Is it worth it?  It’s not to me.  That’s something that my extended hiatus from the “blogosphere” and the political circles has really ingrained in me.  It never was worth it.

8 Comments on "Guest Post: Evan Queitsch"

  1. Rick says:

    The people who are blind to anything but their own individual needs, wants and desires. These are the loudest voices in America. Fortunately, there are very few of them.

    Huh? “Very few of them?” The Socialist-Democrats would never win an election without promising endless handouts to their hyphenated-American constituency. Food stamps, government paid student “loans,” free cell phones, subsidized healthcare, free student lunches, free daycare, Medicaid, public housing, endless unemployment benefits…

    Presently, 63% of Americans are in the labor force, and significant number of those are receiving some sort of government handout. Millions of inter-generational unemployed are being carried by the productive, courtesy of the Socialist-Democrat nanny state. Of course, this is a grand scheme- get more people on the dole, get more votes. Simple.

    When the whole Socialist-Democrat-created dependency-state collapses, millions are going to learn that there is no free stuff. At that point, their clamoring for “more, more, more” will go unanswered.

  2. I understand your frustration and your point Rick but I do not equate “blind to anything but their own individual needs, wants and desires” with receiving government assistance. Now, there certainly is a mindset of entitlement that is far more prevalent than we would like in the culture today. My comment was aimed at the people on the left and the right who can only see progress (and both sides want progress, the right towards a society of individuality and personal responsibility and the left towards a society of communal responsibility and shared sacrifice) through the lens of getting everything that they want. For instance, we all know that the datacenter at U of D was a crony deal. Everything in Delaware is a backroom crony deal. The question is, now that it’s been defeated, where is the option for jobs? 30,000 Delawareans are STILL out of work today. Simply destroying the idea that the other side proposes isn’t enough anymore. Now, what’s our alternative? We don’t like the crony DC, fine, let’s create jobs that aren’t done in a crony backroom fashion. Where do we start?

    Likewise, I agree that the left (I say left Rick, because the “Socialist Democrats” aren’t the only ones handing out government assistance…especially things like corporate welfare) has staked its claim to the voting public on handouts and free giveaways. This, in my opinion, is to the detriment of society. Much better, as I see it, would be the option of working together and doing everything that can be done from a policy perspective to make jobs available. So much so that we could then say, as a culture, that the jobs are there, there’s no excuse for people not to work unless they absolutely cannot and then, there would be an ability to offer a true safety net.

    Now, the reality of your last point is what you and I know will happen. We can see over that horizon. The question is this…do we create an exit ramp or do we watch the car go over the cliff? I’ve never really been the type to be able to sit back and watch something crumble, especially if I can do something to stop it from doing so.

  3. anon says:

    In my experience, there hasn’t been a “wild-eyed screamer” in the last seven years who has come close to matching Evan Quietsch’s wild-eyed screaming, vitriolic hatred and personal attacks of 2010.

    Hypocrisy much?

  4. Anon…Is it hypocrisy for someone to admit when they themselves were wrong? To take responsibility for their own actions (it’s in the piece by the way). I take, and said as much in this piece, full responsibility for what I did and said in the 2010 cycle. I’ll say this, I went above and beyond to make sure that what I wrote was backed up with facts. I remember being very passionate about the issues and being very upset at the political games that were being played at the expense of the truth. I’m sure that I did levy some personal attacks, especially at those anonymous individuals who levied them at me.

    But again, I know that there are folks, like yourself I suppose, who will never accept that sometimes people can do things and then recognize later that they went about them the wrong way. My intention with this piece is to convey my experience as a “wild eyed screamer” and the futility of participation in that sort of activity.

  5. delacrat says:


    You make a false distinction between the “wild-eyed screamer” and the “common everyday American” .
    There are plenty of common everyday Americans who are also wild-eyed screamers.

  6. FrankKnotts says:

    Evan, you are correct that some will never allow you to be anything other than a wild eyed screamer. Others however will require a certain amount of time to demonstrate real change.

  7. Rick says:

    I do not equate “blind to anything but their own individual needs, wants and desires” with receiving government assistance.

    I do, although there are, of course, exceptions. But the fact is that a major constituency of the Socialist-Democrat Party consists of those who are on some type of government ‘assistance,’ and the S-D’s seek constantly to increase their numbers. We need less ‘programs’ and more self-reliance, and smaller government is the way to get there.

  8. kavips says:

    Rick, you are completely misguided. Here is the reason so many people are currently getting assistance. And it this way because those who dictate policy to the Republican party, insist on no taxes…

    On the left of the image we have recoveries under sometimes heavy taxation. On the right of the image, we have a recovery in an almost tax-less environment… Those are facts and if you don’t agree, you can take that up with JP Morgan, a private investor.

    When Republicans come to their senses and agree that we should first fund the necessary parts of government adequately, and then control spending, we might have more Republicans. But as along as they cater to myths and dreams like cutting taxes creates jobs( if true we’d be swamped with jobs right now).. they will lose elections because people out there working know more reality than tax cutters seem to….

    Cutting taxes has it’s place, I won’t deny that. But not to the point it kills the host….

    Sorry to the rest of you; Rick DERAILED the thread… It is reassuring to see members understanding compromise was the demand to future generations given to us by our founding fathers… Had they acted as do politicians today, there would be no USA. I would like to offer an answer to the honorable Evan’s question… “WHY?” I have spent many years looking into this. Many years. Since many here are politically active, you as do I, know that this animosity is not often found in local venues but national ones. Even in the state’s general assembly, the actors get along with each other. They vote their conscious, but they get along. It is completely different on the national level. And many old timers will echo me that it is different there than it was before 1992….

    Although a lot of people like to bash Fox News, historically I would have to put the blame squarely on them. Prior to the Fox network, when there was disagreement both sides were explained to the media, which explained it to the populace, Republican papers took the Republican side, Democratic papers took the democratic side. But it is hard to throw tantrums when your medium is the written word. And so great prose was used to explain each side, and if the populace was interested (often they weren’t) they responded back. Even during a very tumultuous time in history, the 60’s thru 70’s, back when we had hate rioting in the streets and college campuses, Congress got along very well with each other. Even during the hard times of Reagan’s first term, gigantic deals between opposites were settled with a handshake….

    What Fox brought, and Rush as well, was the idea of no compromise… When you did compromise, suddenly there was this giant entity castigating you for doing your job. It gave rise to Gingrich, and the gave rise to government shutdowns as a tactic, which backfired. Basically between Fox and Rush, was like having two mother in laws engaged in a husband and wife disagreement, one that normally would be settled quickly were it not for the unstoppable screaming the two accessories were engaging…

    In their defense, it was entertainment, and … for political junkies, it was hard not to watch. Of course, our watching (or listening in the case of Rush), cause the other networks and media who were losing ground, to try and emulate those same tactics. Hardball for example. Then Meet the Press, and the Sunday talk circuit which was not about resolving things, but egging the two sides into battle to maximize an audience….

    The sad after effect, is that we can’t turn it off. I know Republicans very well. I know Democrats very well,… No democrat is a Socialist. That is a fabrication completely made up and spoon fed to any idiot with his mouth open… Likewise, in return, Democrats out of watching the success of Fox and Rush, have taken to the same tactics….

    The answer is to turn off your TV. Stop listening to WGMD….And I’ll include ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, AOL, Yahoo, or anything else that blasts a headline hoping to get you riled up enough to click onto their site. It has gotten so bad for example, that aol, will headline something like Obama takes a huge hit, and like a dupe I get suckered and click in and it was someone out in the Midwest who said something… WHAT? Suckered…

    There is one thing that easily gets forgotten when you have parties that try to find an opening for conflict and squeeze their foot into that crack… That is, if you are like me, you really do have a deep, profound, religious relationship with your God… We are all wise and old enough to know there is only one God, and he is Good, and that someone with a different perspective, is not following an evil God. There is no such thing as an Evil God…

    Second, if you are like me, you really do have a deep, profound, patriotic relationship with your country. We are wise and old enough to know there should only be one America, and it is Good, and someone with a different perspective, is not trying to destroy it… They are trying to correct the problems they see, just like you are trying to correct the problems you see…..

    Therefore, together, not as one side dominating the other (which incidentally only happens when one side loses the trust of its people,), but together we can get more done….

    Thanks for bringing this up…

Got something to say? Go for it!