For those of us who follow
politics as a hobby, this campaign season has felt like the most depressing
period of our lives.
We have big national problems
and we seem to be on the cusp of a critical national debate about everything
American: individual liberty,
communitarianism, personal responsibility, fiscal responsibility, the role of government,
Constitutionalism vs populism and not just the status of the American Dream but
its very definition. So what do we get
from the candidates and the media? Utter
piffle; a near perfect reflection of the
ignorant opinion that dominates the media and the national discourse. It’s sad and it’s boring.
We hear from the experts that
Obama has won the election; his
supporters say it while the Romney crowd denies with a no that sounds like
yes. Of course these folks can’t agree on
anything: money is everything, no it
doesn’t matter; it’s a base election, no
it’s about the independents; the polls
are wrong [nonsense]; the polls are
biased [too often true]; TV ads win
elections, no they’re a waste of money;
the debates are crucial, no they never matter.
In a recent Stossel segment,
he interviews veteran campaign managers and they tell us exactly how they train
their candidates to win. We learn again
that we can never have factual debate during a campaign. As these folks put it, the coming debates
will change nothing as a result of substance;
any serious change in the race will be the result nuance, accident or
even perceived nuance, like a sigh. The
candidates are trained – very specifically and diligently – not to answer
questions but instead beat the talking point drum.
Moderator:
“Sir, does the sun rise in the east?”
Candidate: “Thank you for that excellent question Susie. Let me respond by saying that my plan for
creating jobs in this country is so widely accepted that the birds in the trees
sing Sousa marches whenever I talk about it.”
Moderator:
“But sir you didn’t answer my question.”
Candidate: “Why thank you Susie for giving me a chance to clarify. My opponent has no plan that makes the birds
sing and if he is elected, he’ll destroy life as we know it.” [Rapturous
applause from half the audience if such is allowed.]
A recent George Will column
suggests some serious questions for debating candidates. But the reader immediately perceives that
such questions would turn off the mass audience – when I read the column to my
bride, she said she didn’t even understand some of the questions. But we can dream. Will’s questions ridicule the campaign
substance and the candidates on both sides.
What fun that would be.
Debate
Questions for the Candidates
By
George F. Will, September 28, 2012, The Washington Post
Stossel
Site – the segment I mention wasn’t there yet when I wrote the post.
[Note:
for those who get the links deleted by their networks, try going to my blog
page or Googling the item tiles. The
blog page is here: http://dljsrant.blogspot.com/
or Google DJ’s Rantings.]
I would have my readers look
at this great column by Will and watch the debates to judge the
moderators. Were their questions good or
campaign-like; did the questions address
crucial issues or populist diversions?
Was the moderator able to get answers or did the candidate just change
the subject? If we want change, we’ll
have to pay enough attention to demand it.
I’m disappointed with the
failure of my generation to be anything but greedy and self serving: we demand that the government balance the
budget but scream don’t touch ours; we don’t
care if government, on our watch, made promises that cannot be kept. At the moment, this disgraceful and natural
human attitude appears to have filtered down to my children’s generation
because they seem poised to let President Obama off the accountability hook.
The President can’t do any of
the stuff candidates promise; jobs,
growth, abortion, gay marriage, etc – Congress does that stuff. Presidents lead. A President’s job is to get the public signed
up for the stuff the President bullies and maneuvers the Congress into
doing. President Obama has failed at
this key responsibility because he’s just not a very good negotiator. Success demands accountability and as I see
it, this President must be replaced – as well as many legislators just like him
– or we delay the return of competent government.
I still believe that the
election is for the center to decide.
Forty percent of Americans have still have a brain – that’s far more
than those who are progressives, climate crazies, Bible thumpers or libertarians. Yes, I have to admit that the loonies are 60%
of the nation and otherwise intelligent people are picking sides rather than focusing
on real national priorities.
Just for the record, I am not
signed up for the hysteria that seems to be connected with this election which goes
something like, “If my enemy wins, it’ll be Armageddon.” That’s the stuff cultists and AM radio. I’m with Edmund Burke who is paraphrased as
saying that the individual is foolish, but the species is wise. I agree with that wholeheartedly and I
believe it applies better in America than anywhere else. At the same time, we must remember what Burke
actually said:
“The
individual is foolish; the multitude,
for the moment is foolish, when they act without deliberation; but the species is wise, and, when time is
given to it, as a species it always acts right.”
So. If we can’t get right this time, we shouldn’t
give up. I cling to this optimism in the
face of what I see as growing ignorance of the pending fiscal catastrophe.
No comments:
Post a Comment