The Best And The Brightest

 

I don't really like any of our Presidents. I don't trust them. As a matter of fact I don't trust anyone who's even run for the office. Indeed, I have misgivings about anyone with the hubris to believe that (s)heⁱ can decide who should live or die, and especially those who would fight for such a position. And that's part of the job description – it comes with making wars (yes, I know only Congress is supposed to be able to do that, but I also know better than to believe they are actually meaningfully involved in such decisions), giving or not giving pardons, and a bunch of covert actions that cannot be disclosed for a variety of real or imagined security reasons. Those who got into office by accident – like President Ford – have something of an excuse, as do Vice Presidents who inherited the position when the President died in office. (Unless, of course, they became Vice President after failing in a presidential bid.) And even if they run for a full term afterward, there are often reasons other than conceit for doing so. So I'll give them a pass this time around.ⁱⁱ

Actually, I don't care for politicians in general. President Kennedy,ⁱⁱⁱ in his inaugural address, asked Americans to favor what they could do for their country over what it could do for them. But by and large, all who claim to represent us are in it for the gains.^iv For some that may be glory or the “legacy”; for others it's cash – by bribes, programs from which they can profit – or the benefits of the position, such as pensions, health care, “expenses,” and the like.

That wouldn't be so bad if they also accomplished something that helped the rest of us who may or may not have supported them. Especially if that help were given because it was “right” and not because they gained from it, whether directly or because it helped their supporters. But that's wishful thinking. The most I can hope for is that I benefit from programs brought to my area by a representative who wants to influence my vote in the next election. For politicians are an ambitious lot.

And that's a problem. To win election they have to take positions,^v and having taken such a stand they cannot back down.^vi That would be evidence of weakness – a lack of backbone. Or they are told by their party that a certain view is the “correct” one and that it would be wise (if they ever want to run for another office) to support it. Politics is supposed to be the art of the possible, but politicians make it a way of life to ensure that nothing worthwhile is possible. Their view is “my way or the highway.” Then they try to sell their stand as one of character. They will not compromise with something that is “wrong,” and they should be reelected because they're “outsiders,” and they stood up against the “politicians.“ Somehow I'm not convinced.

So on election day, after we have been forced to endure months of negative advertising, it boils down to a choice between a corrupt politician who has been lining his (or her) pockets (or pocketbook) with taxpayer money, and who is guilty of untold unethical acts and acts of misconduct – usually sexual in nature – or the candidate who brags that he has no connection with the politicians and is not beholden to anyone – even though it's also true that if elected (s)he will have no allies in government and would be totally unable to govern, assuming (however unlikely it may be) that (s)he knew how (or really wanted the position^vii). That's the usual description of third party candidates who want to throw out all the members of the major parties.^viii

But, we're told, it's easy to recognize problems. We're admonished not to raise them, however, if we can't do better and have no solution that is more likely to work. That's silliness. I can't pitch, but I know a weak bullpen when I see one. I do, however, know the solution to the pitching problem. It's money. Buy better pitchers. Buying politicians, though, isn't as savory an endeavor, even if it assures you of the result you want.

So we're left floundering for a solution. In this electronic age perhaps the answer is a computer program that would govern us. Our Constitution is excellent but it requires people to implement it, and people are not to be trusted. A machine wouldn't have that problem. A computer is too stupid to deviate from its program. But, of course, it would take people to write that program. Aye. There's the rub.

Winston Churchill once said “The Americans will always do the right thing ... after they've exhausted all the alternatives." I'm not so sure.

Maybe we should try monarchy.

Next episode: “Klutz Or Kluznik” – Hell freezes over.

i     I don't know why I bother with this PC silliness. But I guess political correctness is appropriate in an essay about politics.

ii     Chances are they don't deserve it but I'm in a good mood.

iii     He was quite a politician himself, coming from a family bent on saving the country. They all believed they were better equipped to do so than anyone else.

iv     They really do represent us.

v     Although some studiously avoid taking positions when they suspect some voters will disagree. They suddenly find themselves otherwise occupied when it's time to vote.

vi     Though, when necessary, they can usually find a way to make reality conform to what they said, no matter how different the two may be.

vii     During the New York mayoral campaign of 1965, when asked what he would do first if elected, William Buckley, candidate of the Conservative Party, said: “Demand a recount.”

viii   If they do manage to get elected, their corruption and misconduct will be demonstrated to the public before the next election.