Thursday, September 6, 2012

Why I hate Politics.


           The one thing I hate about elections is the never ending rhetoric.  The thing that is different this year than from 4 years ago is the profuse use of face book in the campaign.  This means I see a ton of posts attacking each party.  What it comes down to is the fact that there is no real positive message from any candidate.  I have heard a few statements on what they intend to do in office, but usually it is over run by negatives on either side.  It has become of a game of who is less evil instead of who is better and it makes me sad.
         The question is, if a law were passed that required a week of positive messages only during each campaign, would we hear anything from either candidate?  It seems that they have taken the old adage of "if you don't have anything good to say, don't say anything," and turned it around to say, "If you don't have anything good to say about someone, put it on air."  It is a sad state of affairs.  What really makes it suck is that it has become what people expect.  If we got a politician that was honest (yes, I know, honest politician is an oxymoron), I think people wouldn't vote for him on the grounds that he was too different.
       Speaking of honest politicians, growing up, I actually knew one.  He was our local state representative.  The story goes that he was first elected without campaigning because the people in his district knew him and felt he would do right by them.  He was a farmer and was one of the people.  Between sessions he actually returned to his farm and worked, politics was something he did as an extra duty and he claimed his profession as farmer.  You actually had to point out that he was a representative because he looked at it as a side gig.  The funny thing is, he never campaigned but he was re-elected year after year.  One year he even had an opponent.  The funny thing was the opponent got 5 votes, his, his wife’s, his campaign manager, his campaign manager’s wife, and the incumbent.  The sitting representative said he voted for his opponent because he didn't really want the job but would continue to do it as long as the people wanted him to and he was competent to do it.  He finally resigned at 82 or so and it was a loss.
       I used to say I was a republican and would never agree with a democrat.  I have sense come to realize that that mind set is exactly what is wrong in government.  The largest problem we have in our government is that we have become polarized with very few exceptions.  Either you are a republican or a democrat; if you claim to be independent you are labeled as indecisive.  What further complicates this is that if you have convictions and stand by them no matter what, you are a radical and a hatemonger; if you go with the current trends, you are pandering; and if you compromise you are a traitor to your party or an indecisive fool.  We have decided it is better to give negative labels to people rather than look at what their decisions are based on.  I would rather vote for a man that follows his convictions and votes against his party than for a man that follows the party line no matter what.  I would rather vote for a man that compromises to get things done over a man that refuses to listen to the opposing party because they are the opposing party.  We as a people have allowed this to happen and we as a people have directed it.  It is no coincidence that the very people we complain about hold the power to limit what we can do about it.  The saddest part is that the independents have very little influence.  They are such a minority that the only influence they have is when the parties are deadlocked and even that is rare.
            The one thing that makes this worse is that the politicians start looking at the next election almost as soon as they are elected.  Instead of looking at what this country needs, they are looking at what will make them look good for the next election.  The only regular exceptions are a second term president or a senator that has decided to retire.  It is a rare politician these days that repeatedly does what is best for the country over what his party wants. 
               Am I to critical of all this?  Maybe, but then again, if I weren't wouldn't I be like most of us who just take what the media gives us as truth and move on.  Sure, most of what the media says is true, but then a half truth is still true even if it isn't the whole story.  The media takes some flak, but most of it is directed at the "extreme" media.  Those sources that make no secret of their political leanings and jump on anything that helps their party affiliation are targeted most harshly allowing the more subtle sources to be taken at face value. 
               The most interesting part is that, with a little research, you can find the truth and it usually isn't what you are led to believe.  Both sides use statistics and numbers that, while true, only tell a part of the story at best or are downright misleading.  Take the "discretionary spending" argument used to cut the DOD budget.  In budget speak, discretionary means anything not specified by amount to be spent.  In other words, if the amount to be spent is estimated, it is discretionary.  Since caring for personnel (medical, logistical, pay, etc.) is estimated it is discretionary.  This means the department uses its discretion to ensure the people are paid and cared for properly.  So is it right to say that the DOD has a large discretionary budget?  Yes it is very true.  But then, by the budgetary definition of discretionary, teachers, policemen, firefighters, roads, electrical power, and the air traffic controllers are all discretionary as well. 
            The problem isn't what it means; it is how it is used.  The politicians use it knowing that most people will read it as the department has a choice on whether they spend it or not and thus can just cut it.  To most people, discretionary means that part of the budget spent on extras.  Discretionary means to them the excess after bills are paid, not the portion used to pay bills that are in flux.  If we used discretionary the way the government uses discretionary, our electrical, gas, water, grocery, and clothing would be a discretionary part of our budget.  I don't know about you, but I think I would be in a little bit of trouble if I just stopped using or paying for all of that. 
          I guess what I am saying is that we as Americans have to stop looking at the surface of what we are told by the media and politicians.  It is our responsibility to dig deeper and find the truth in what is being said and discover where it is we really fall on the issues.  What is said may be true, but that doesn't mean it is the truth of the matter.  A twisted truth may still be true, but it becomes a lie when it is interpreted wrongly.  Take the time to look into the truth.
        Thanks for reading and, as always, have a great day.

No comments:

Post a Comment