On my way to work this morning I listened to a radio station originating from the region's largest city. It is a 5AM - 7AM talk show format covering the local and national topics of the day.
I'm going to preface the rest of my post by saying I'm nothing more than an occasional spectator in the arena of politics. I have tried to be a bit more aware of the issues at hand during the current election year - therefore my tuning into the program mentioned above.
But, as mentioned in other posts, I have subjected myself to the all encompassing hobby of being a volunteer firefighter. With all the things that entails, who on earth has time for serious thoughts about such mundane things as the leadership of the free world?
Back to the radio program: The host commented about the common "talking points" that an election cycle contains, and how they seem to be re-runs of the campaigns years before. What's behind it, is the question he posed. I have recognized the repetition, but because I am so centered in things not political, I never reached a decision of my own. I will try to explain the hosts opinion on this topic.
He began: A candidate or a party will build a campaign around the issues that the candidate/party feels are important. The candidate/party will wave the flag of these issues in front of our faces in a manner that entices us to voice our support for or against them, based on our personal views.
The host of the show indicated his perspective as this: The candidate/party is not even slightly interested in solving the matter in hand, all they are interested in is the ability of using that issue to create a fervor - among those who agree with their position - in order to cause them to open their pocket books and donate to their campaign.
His belief in this theory stems from his perception of the history of the executive and legislative branches of the government - when these branches are aligned by party and supposedly empowered by said alignment - wouldn't we expect them to take action to resolve the things they campaigned about?
Take recent history for example. We are still hearing that the democratic party will solve the health care debacle, but when the alignment existed in favor of the democratic party, no resolution was achieved. That is just one example, and to be fair it's happened during the other side's alignment periods as well.
It does appear to me that effecting solutions to their list of problems doesn't really happen even when these alignments exist. The issues that are always resurrected at campaign stops during each election cycle are not resolved and possibly little or nothing is actually done to solve the problems.
The host continued to say that if they actually solved the problems they campaigned about, then candidates and parties would not have the means to support their next campaign because we would not be inflamed into donating money and other means of support for the candidates who preach cycle after cycle about the very issues they are not really intending to solve.
I may have to consider this point of view further before I totally "buy" into the things the host was saying, but, what if it were true ....? Then, I would have to say that it's a bit embarrassing as a population to allow ourselves to be duped into hitching our wagons of support to their platforms - election after election - only to be left cleaning up after the horses ......
1 comments:
As a Republican, it was really frustrating to see the lack of progress that was made when the GOP had 6 years of total control. However, our system was not designed to lead to the easy passage of legislation, even with one party in charge. The Senate's role is basically to slow things down, and deliberate. This can be good or bad, depending on your perspective.
I think most elected officials want to get things done. But there are some things that have no easy resolution - abortion, for example. Some things are too complicated - the tax code, Social Security. So I think there are multiple reasons why things don't get done, and which reasons predominate depends on the issue.
Post a Comment