In Anticipation
It's clear that the 2008 election season has begun. Candidates from both parties have declared their intentions outright or established so-called "Exploratory Committees" to determine the manner in which they should declare their intentions.
After six - by then eight - years of the astoundingly bad Bush Administration, I'm sure a lot of us will be looking for a candidate who will 'put things right,' and solve the many problems this current bunch has let fester. While that's all well and good, and there is plenty a President can do to change direction, I think it's important to remember we're not looking for a savior. In fact, it's precisely that kind of thinking that only makes matters worse.
So long as the political involvement in this country is focused on a quadrennial beauty contest, we will not truly have a Republic, but an elective monarchy of a kind. Is it any coincidence that Bush only thought he was accountable when the votes were counted? This, as many of you know, is why I'm skeptical of greater federal government power in general: I think it leads to greater and greater gaps in accountability and honest government.
I urge you to remember that when you consider candidates. Ask yourself if the candidate will, in the long run, grant you more power over not only your destiny, but the destiny of the country as a whole.
posted by Joshua @ 4:48 PM
1 Comments:
I find myself both agreeing, and disagreeing with you.
As I've said before, I believe that the federal government's goal should be to guarantee rights and certain aspects of welfare, including equitable education and health care, while most if not all restrictions should be dealt with by cities and municipalities. I also believe that the less executive power a president claims or CAN claim is all for the better.
On the other hand, as you mentioned in the Hillary thread, you were concerned about the beauty-contest monarchy of the executive branch. I don't think it should be a beauty contest, per se, but I do think that, ideally, the best thing that a president can or should be able to do for his country is to steer the governmental tone. Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton had drastically different approaches to policy, but both managed to convey a tone of laid-back confidence in this country and our prosperity. Dubya and his father had very dissimilar foreign policies, even with the same people in their administrations, but both generally made the public fear for what MIGHT happen. Nixon was fantastic at foreign policy, but created a distrust of government at home. Carter was exactly the opposite. When we think about previous administrations, or even the current one, we think in terms of great abstractions, and that abstraction comes down to the national mood.
I like Obama, and I like Edwards. I would cast my vote for either proudly. I like Hillary Clinton as my senator, because she's passionate about policy, but I'm not excited about her as a nominee. Why? Because of tone. You say you want more freedom, and I say that I want an executive who emits, with everything he says, the feeling that we, as citizens, have that power. Bush has spent the last six years trying to tell us that we're powerless, and that only he can help us. Hillary will say that the country's messed up - which it is - but that she's the one with the knowledge and capability to take care of it. Edwards and Obama both speak in terms that make it clear - without a doubt - that we're all in this together, and that it takes all of us working together to reach our dream.
Think about Kennedy's greatest quote: "Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country." By all accounts, that sort of sound-bite shouldn't play at all. It promises nothing, it asks everything, and it could come off as fascist in the wrong reading. And yet, it works, because American's aren't afraid of responsibility when it's tied to freedom. Kennedy created a national tone with that quote, one which is more memorable than the Bay of Pigs, and which arguably had much greater effect.
Post a Comment
<< Home