JACK'S BLOG
|
|
2/12/2014 2 Comments Wouldn't it be nice if politicians were accessible, even after they're elected?Election 2014Once upon a time, I wrote to my Representatives in Congress. I began when I was very young, just fourteen years old. That's right, just 14. I was a new Sea Scout and had become enchanted with the art and science of navigation. I wrote to my Representative and asked for the charts of the Chesapeake Bay where I lived and sailed. Within days, I received a mailing tube full of them, every chart drawn in every scale, covering the Bay from one end to the other. How about that? The experience encouraged me to write again. I first got the idea when a member of Congress gave our school an American flag that had flown over the U.S Capitol Building. Actually, many flags have flown over the Capitol since the practice of giving them to community organizations began in 1939. The Capitol Architect's office processes more than 100,000 requests from Members of Congress annually. A pair of guards run them up and down the pole all day long. A card is attached to each attesting to its provenance and given to Representatives and Senators to be passed onto constituents. I don't write so often anymore. My Representatives in Congress are ideologues and we are separated by word processors. Our letters are shuffled into piles: For and Against. Our responses are regurgitated from the bowels of machines. Whereas no member of Congress would not allow the sun to set on an unanswered letter in those halcyon days of long ago, they now depart each day as other machines affix artificial signatures to the day's output. Certainly, our population has doubled since I was a 14-year old Sea Scout, but so have the number of Representatives in Congress. Are they so busy, so inundated with requests for flags, that they can't answer a letter from a constituent? Even my beloved President, Ronald Reagan, failed me. When he fired the Air Traffic Controllers for striking, I wrote with an idea to transfer air traffic control from the Federal Aviation Administration, to a private contractor. That way, the cost of air traffic control could be spread among the users (airlines and private pilots) and the FAA could focus on policing the system. It always seemed absurd to me that the same bureau that provided a service policed itself. Apparently, my letter found its way to the stack reserved for those who disagreed with the President's action, and I received the response directed to his opponents. Opponent? Me? Accessibility is the principal thing that first attracted me to Greg Raths who is running for Congress in California's 45th Congressional District. He began his campaign last year when the declining state of affairs in America moved him to action, even before our current Representative, John Campbell, announced that he wasn't running for reelection. He had a banner printed and began meeting people. He's attended every city council meeting in the district. He's joined civic organizations. He's walked door-to-door. I haven't seen or heard of Greg's two opponents beating down any doors to meet me or my neighbors. Greg's campaign reminds me of the campaign that brought Richard Lamm to office as governor of Colorado in 1974 when I lived there. He too won against the campaigns of better known, better financed candidates, by walking from one end of the state to the other, making himself accessible. I can't help but watch Greg with people and think, wouldn't it be nice to know who your Representative is, to at least know his name and what he looks like? Wouldn't it be nice to once again have access to our Representatives so that we can contribute to the effort to help solve our nation's problems? We certainly have enough problems to solve. Of course I don't expect things to return to the way they were when Abraham Lincoln was President and any citizen could walk into the White House unchallenged and request a meeting. Nor do I expect any member of Congress to dictate a personal answer to every letter as they once did. However, don't you wish you had a candidate who is accessible to you? Why don't you go out and find one? Hopefully, they'll remain accessible once they're elected.
2 Comments
2/11/2014 1 Comment How would you describe your ideal political candidate (supposing that you could find one)?Election 2014It seems that everyone is easily offended these days, especially on the Internet. Just follow any discussion following a blog posting. Here come the magic words: "liberal", "conservative", "left", "right", "progressive", "reactionary". Wait for it. Here comes the invective. The ad hominem attacks. The name calling. How did honest debate devolve to this sad state of affairs. So here's the challenge: Describe a candidate in a way that appeals to his constituents while offending the fewest number of people remembering, of course, that some people won't get past the party affiliation without becoming offended. Granted, you won't vote for any candidate based on a catch phrase. You'll want to know more. You'll want to know where they stand on the issues. If you can trust them. If they'll represent you or some special interest. If they'll succumb to the siren call of career politics or remain one of us. Okay, we'll deal with all that. However, first we have to catch your eye. A photograph. A catchy phrase. Something to hook you and make you want to learn more. Without offending you. How would you describe that candidate? Please take our survey: 2/10/2014 2 Comments Career politicians have one talent: Getting reelected. How does that help solve America's problems?Election 2014Seriously, if a person has any real talent for solving problems, building a successful business, creating jobs, why would they want to waste it in Washington? Okay. I'll allow that they might want to serve a term or two in Congress as their civic duty. But, who are these clowns that hang out there for forty years? It's a good bet that Henry Waxman and other key Democrats who foisted the Affordable Health Care Act on us are abandoning ship now only because they fear voters' wrath. If they had any talent for crafting viable solutions, it's an even better bet that they never would have given us that legislation and Obama wouldn't have had the chance to sign it into law. Actually, Obamacare is an excellent case study in how not to craft a solution. It failed at the outset because it was written without first defining the problem accurately. What was the problem with healthcare in America before Obamacare? We could debate that subject all day. In fact, we've been debating it for a half of a century. It was the topic of debate when I joined my college debate team in 1960. It's a shame that Congress didn't before they crafted the Affordable Health Care Act. What did Congress use to guide them if it wasn't an accurate definition of healthcare issues? Simple. Ideology. The Democratic Party followed Bobby Kennedy's famous vision... Sadly, in the case of Obamacare, we're learning the hard way, why not.
One of my favorite reference books, The Search for Solutions, remarks that “Great science is conceived at the boundary where exact observation confronts leaping imagination.” The same may be said of political science. We need a healthy dose of imagination to craft solutions to America's problems. However, we need to temper it with exact observation to insure that we don't leap into the abyss such as we are now doing thanks to Obamacare. Keeping to our case in point, the Affordable Health Care Act should have been crafted beginning with an accurate assessment of the problems.
So why was Obamacare crafted to address all three of these issues? Who would have thought that a government bureaucracy was better equipped to take over the provision, administration, and financing of healthcare than all of the extant healthcare providers, administrators, and insurance companies? Obviously, the Democrats in Washington. Now, even Democrats in state houses don't agree. They're joining Republicans in abandoning Obamacare in their several states. Many of the Democrats, like Henry Waxman, are abandoning their careers rather than face Democrat voters at the polls. Only a few key Senators and the President hold out. I'm beginning to feel abandoned. How about you? Let's hope that we replace all these career politicians with men and women who practice the science of politics rather than the ideology of progressivism. Of course, that depends on us, you and me, to elect people who have demonstrated a talent for crafting viable solutions rather than those whose only talent is remaining an incumbent. 2/9/2014 2 Comments Can an extraordinary citizen beat an ordinary career politician in a race for elected office?Election 2014Yes, the 2014 election has begun. You can avoid it until the primary. You can avoid it until November. Sooner or later you will face a choice, or ignore it and let someone else make it for you. Isn't that what we've all done in the past, and look where it's gotten us. Honestly, I don't know if any citizen can best a career politician in a political contest, but we need to find out. We have state houses and a Congress full of career politicians and look what it's gotten us. Obviously, the Affordable Health Care Act isn't affordable. The government jobs and part time employment they've created are poor substitutes for the millions of jobs we've lost. Now, do you really think that reelecting the same career politicians will produce a better result? I got myself involved in the political process this year for many reasons. First and foremost, I have grandchildren and I'm ashamed that I'm leaving them a far poorer world than the one I inherited. Also, I don't want to again face a choice between dumb and dumber or the lesser of two evils when I cast my ballot this year. Sure, I've done that often enough before, but now there are grandchildren to consider. I hope that, like me, you'll go out and find yourself a better candidate than the career politicians who are clamoring behind the scenes to vie for our votes. Yes, the clamoring has already begun. You should hear the career politicians in California's 45th Congressional District squealing because a mere citizen has thrown his hat into the ring. “But, it's my turn!” they cry and they have supporters who echo the sentiment. Here we have two Republicans who have paid their dues. One is a state senator and the other is a county commissioner. They and their supporters truly believe that only professional politicians are qualified to represent We the People. Do we have to believe that just because they do? Indeed, what are the arguments against sending an ordinary citizen to Washington? They have no experience. Experience may be a factor when comparing incumbents to challengers. Every new member of Congress reports early to Washington to attend classes in the legislative process. I wonder if they are required to view the Schoolhouse Rock episode of “I'm Just a Bill”. Unfortunately, we have been reelecting incumbents regardless of the fact that their experience consists of voting for bad legislation. Interestingly, in the campaign that I've joined, the private citizen has more experience in Washington than all of his opponents – Republican, Democrat, et al – combined. He served for three years in the military liaison office at the White House during the Clinton Administration, working on legislation both there and on Capitol Hill. You probably won't be so lucky to find a non-politician like that, but it doesn't matter. Your new Representative or Senator will have plenty of help learning the ropes. Many career politicians, especially incumbents, use their seniority as an argument against sending novices to state houses and Congress. While it is true that incumbents' seniority entitles them to first consideration for assignment to key legislative committees, the argument fails when we consider that they've used those positions to foist bad laws on us. Also, there is no constitutional basis for committee assignments based on seniority. Maybe, it's time to challenge that. I hope that you don't sit out another election. Maybe you'll be inspired by our experiment in the California 45th Congressional District. Please feel free to follow along. “Like” our campaign page on Facebook. Bookmark our website.
Better yet, go find your own extraordinary citizen. We'll be happy to help your campaign just as you can help ours. BloggingI don't listen to radio as often as I once did before I retired and stopped commuting between clients. I don't miss the commuting, but sometimes I do miss listening to talk radio. Thus, it was a rare opportunity just yesterday when I drove to the store and happened to hear a caller lamenting about the diversity of nations and religions in the world. He opined that life would be far simpler and safer if only we all could agree to pledge allegiance to one nation and pray to one god. When the host pressed the caller to name one of each, he demurred. It seemed that he cared more for peace and quiet than in proselytizing for his religion or his nation. "When two people agree on everything, one of them isn't necessary" Anonymous I once advocated the very same thing, but that was a long time ago when I was a teen high school student. I may have gone further than the aforementioned caller. I proposed a universal law that no two persons of the same race, religion, or national origin could marry. I put my words to paper and submitted them in satisfaction of a tenth grade history assignment. Yes, I was both a sophomore and sophomoric. My teacher seemed amused. He had me read my paper in class. Girls swooned. Boys laughed, except for those who felt that I had damaged their girlfriends. They made threats. Parents objected. I had been born and raised in the south and my proposal amounted to universal mongrelization of the race, a touchy subject in those parts in that time. I believe that the teacher had been reprimanded, but his career salvaged by tenure. I've grown a lot since then. I no longer share the caller's pursuit of peace and quiet at any price nor his fear of diversity. Indeed, I've come to believe that humankind is better for the richness of its diverse tapestry. I no longer tolerate differences, but rather celebrate them. Diversity encourages the evolution of new ideas. People and ideas stagnate when their is a lack of diversity. It appears to me that cloning ideas is no more advisable than cloning living organisms. I've come to accept the words of the man who presided in the White House during the better part of my years in school. “Here in America we are descended in blood and in spirit from revolutionists and rebels – men and women who dare to dissent from accepted doctrine. As their heirs, may we never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion.” Dwight David Eisenhower, 34th President of the United States There's a lot of diversity in thought these days. The American Revolution has detoured down some paths that seemingly lead to the abyss of ruin.
The world's most successful economy is faltering. Racial relations, once improving, are now deteriorating. The shining light on the hill that once served as a beacon for all liberty loving peoples is guttering. Those who have blazed this trail insist that sanctuary is just around the next bend. Their opponents argue that the next bend only hides ultimate ruin and insist that we turn back. Debate has been replaced with entrenched positions and anyone with the temerity to suggest an alternate path finds themselves sitting on the fence between two camps where they serve as targets for everyone's wrath. What is the solution? That is a tale for another day... BloggingPropaganda is most often the purview of government agencies and revolutionary organizations. However, the Internet seems to have made it a public endeavor. Anyone can play. Simply visit almost any weblog discussion thread and you'll easily see what I mean. Hitler assembled his legions in great masses and transformed them into ranting mobs with his propaganda. Stalin used the state-run newspaper, the humorously named Pravda (Truth). In recent decades, ideologues have employed the popular cultural media, electronic news and entertainment, to carry their banners at the head of American political groups. Today, propaganda may be found liberally sprinkled in discussions all over the Internet, especially in weblogs. It is now the purview of the common folk.
To be honest, political discourse in America has never been polite. The Sons and Daughters of Liberty simply tarred and feathered anyone with the temerity to disagree with them. A member of the House of Representatives once beat Senator Charles Sumner into unconsciousness with his cane. However, with the advent of the Internet, anyone can play. Verbal brickbats can be thrown freely without fear of consequences. Even worse, virtual mobs may form to verbally assault anyone who wanders into the weblog of the opposition. Interestingly, these amateurs have learned the rudiments of propaganda with little formal instruction. They're easy to spot.
Unfortunately, not everyone has debate experience and many fall into the trap of lashing out with propaganda while engaged in an Internet discussion thread when faced with opposition, especially well-stated opposition. Generally, I attempt to respond with a question to give the person an opportunity to rethink their words. Another technique is to restate your opponents view in your own words in an attempt to clarify their position (for them as well as for yourself). Sadly, once a conversation has devolved into an argument, there is little to do but walk away. Be prepared. The other party will likely taunt you for your supposed cowardice or claim victory as you turn tail. Never mind. They are beyond convincing and those who choose to lurk on the sidelines while you and they do battle, have already chosen sides and they won't be dissuaded either. BloggingThere are stories that seem explain life better than most. Everyone knows them. The Emperor's New Suit of Clothes and The Little Boy Who Cried Wolf help me understand much of what is happening, especially in politics. However, a tale from The Song of the South by Joel Chandler Harris, “Brer Rabbit and the Tar Baby”, seems especially prescient, especially to those who would involve themselves in any discussion thread on the Internet. Quickly, in summary, Brer Fox [note: “Brer” is Harris' transliteration of the slaves dialect for “brother”] crafts a small human from tar, clothes it in hat and coat, and sets it on a log by a trail frequented by Brer Rabbit in an attempt to trap and capture his prey. Sure enough, Brer Rabbit attempts to engage the tar baby in polite conversation and becomes upset when it refuses to respond to his greeting. When Brer Rabbit attempts to punch the tar baby to teach it to be more polite, he becomes enmeshed in the sticky goo. Isn't this an apt description of many of the discussions you have encountered on Internet discussion threads? It seems so to me. Internet users enjoy the same anonymity as drivers in their motor vehicles. Even the meekest of humans seem to become aggressive when they feel assured that they are immune to the consequences of the words in their postings. Even worse, when they find themselves among like-minded people in a discussion, they quickly form themselves into mobs to attack anyone of a different ideological persuasion. Too often, I delude myself into thinking that I am the conversational equivalent of a Texas Ranger. I suppose that reference requires some explanation... There is a statue in the concourse of the airport at Dallas Love Field. It depicts a Texas Ranger confidently striding into the path of danger. The inscription on the base of it reads “One riot, one Ranger” and honors the true story of a Ranger who arrives in a town just as a mob is rioting in the streets. A local citizen who had sent an urgent plea to the Texas Rangers for help, is surprised to find just one lawman. What he doesn't know is that the Ranger had arrived coincidentally on another matter. When the citizen explains the situation, the Ranger calmly responds, “One riot...”
Thus, I wade into these mobs who are verbally abusing each other on Internet discussion threads and attempt to bring peace and order and end up like Brer Rabbit. Tomorrow, I will comment on what I've learned or should have learned. Today's ChuckleWell, I watched Super Bowl XLVIII. Did you? My wife an I were penalized mostly for delay of game. We're at that age when bathroom breaks occur frequently. Just wait until tonight. I now know what is meant by "the wee hours of the morning".
|
More than 500 postings have accumulated since 2011. Some categories (listed below) are self explanatory, others require some explanation (see below):
CategoriesAll America Army Life Blogging Cuba Election 2012 Election 2014 Election 2016 Entrepreneurs Food Good Reads History Humor Infantry School In The News Korea Middle East Oh Dark Thirty Opinion Sea Scouts Short Story Sponsored Survey Technology Television Terrorism Today's Chuckle Veterans Vietnam Writing Explanations |
Copyright © 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022 Jack Durish All rights reserved
|
Web Hosting by iPage
|