Ed, Harry, these
are good comments about the nature of politicians and the public’s often naïve expectations
about them and by extension, government. There are
still ‘politicians with principles’ around, and Sen. Bobby Byrd comes quickly to
mind, as irascible as he can be. The trouble with politics is that you do must sometimes compromise
and do business with people or issues that you would generally oppose or care
not to be identified with. Representative
politics is a process, a system, and requires a lot of flexibility to move
forward, as most know, but obviously, some do not. It is much
easier to think of bad examples than good ones, especially because current
politics is framed by the neoconservative principle of Attack Gov’t and by the
media’s propensity for highlighting bad over good. Remember how public servants looked good right after 9/11
when there was reason to honor their sacrifice and work? Because the
business of government is mostly about dispensing money, therefore making
priority decisions, there will always be conflict and plenty of
misunderstanding. We have made
politics another kind of religion, therefore increasing the likelihood of
creating false gods and celebrity impressions, whereas the majority of ‘believers’,
participants in the process, are hard-working and dedicated, if not
spectacularly successful or popular. As amusing and
sad as is Arnold’s ascension, it is not that different than widows who finish
the term of their deceased spouse. He is just very good with the camera and knows how to
manipulate a crowd. He is playing
the “hero comes to the rescue” role.
He has a lot to prove, and no doubt will do his best, but this time the
game is real, as in money and lives through policies that are legislated by compromise
to reach a consensus. It’s
interesting that the two most powerful men in the GOP right now both came from storied
wealthy, political families, both are fitness buffs and have/had more
personality than experience in politics and depend on a bevy of senior advisors
with more brains than brawn to guide them. If these men came from the Democrat party, current political
punditry would be spun much differently.
My grandfather would be shaking his head that this can’t be the
Republican party. I have no doubt
that future history books will continue to emphasize the significance of the
Supreme Court’s intervention in our tale of history, and it may never be known
just how much complicity was involved.
No doubt, it will not be just fiction writers who will speculate how the
US government would be had the outcome been different. - KWC Ed
wrote: Harry,
my problem is that I'm not very sophisticated. I hold to a naive belief
that politicians should operate from a body of principles and not be elected
simply because they project the kind of image that appears right at the moment.
When I was a kid in rural Saskatchewan, there were politicians with principles
around. But that is a bygone era, as long ago as the stone age. Harry
wrote: Ed, Catching
up after completely changing my E-Mail set-up. |
- Re: Re: [Futurework] All the President's votes? Karen Watters Cole
- Re: Re: [Futurework] All the President's votes? Ed Weick
- [Futurework] Bush League Stephen Straker
- Re: [Futurework] Bush League Ray Evans Harrell
- RE: Re: [Futurework] All the President's votes... Harry Pollard
- RE: [Futurework] All the President's votes? Karen Watters Cole
- RE: Re: [Futurework] All the President's votes? Cordell . Arthur
- RE: Re: [Futurework] All the President's votes? Karen Watters Cole
- Re: Re: [Futurework] All the President's votes? Ed Weick
- RE: Re: [Futurework] All the President's votes... Harry Pollard
- Re: Re: [Futurework] All the President's v... Ray Evans Harrell