As political as we’ll get

Everyone who knows me knows I abhor all political partisanship. The sad truth is that there is corruption, greed and sanctimonious doubletalk in all parties. I am a raging Independent — disillusioned, frustrated, yet hopeful, just like my Democrat, Republican, and *insert favorite beverage here* Party friends.

Politics is basically a discussion no-no here at RtB, simply because I subscribe to the belief that most often, partisan minds are rarely moved, so all discussing/arguing brings about is acrimony, anger and hurt feelings, while no minds are changed. (Anyone who says politics are not fiercely idealized and romanticized hasn’t been paying attention.) I’m not saying that civilized political discourse cannot take place; rather, I’m saying that doing so is not the general rule. :-) So we will not go there, today or any day. But just for this morning, I will express my distinctly non-partisan incredulity at the Big Budget Powwow people’s inability to reach an agreement, as they are sharply divided across party lines.

Perhaps our politicians are just not skilled enough in the “art,” you know? They need to go somewhere and hone their craft first. In a thought-provoking article at Cato by Boudreaux and Lee (yes, I’ve no life and I’ve been up since 4:00), it’s apparent that being a politician requires definite savvy in several areas, and sometimes it’s a case of getting caught coming and going:

What’s a politician to do? On one hand, voters demand that their elected officials be men and women of principle. On the other hand, the reality of interest-group politics means that politicians must strike numerous unprincipled compromises–both directly with interest groups wielding political influence, as well as indirectly with other representatives beholden to different voters and different interest groups. Appearing to be an uncompromising champion of principle while simultaneously being virtuoso at the art of compromise is a daunting task.

Daunting indeed. But when does it become clear that we must choose between compromising our party principles and compromising our national solvency? I dunno. Maybe I’m looking at the issue with too simple a mind. But it does make me wonder if our elected officials are too vested in the reelection game. From the above article:

Politicians professing no ideology and unreservedly admitting that their highest skill and calling is to compromise with other politicians do not have long-lived political careers.

Ya think?? This “super committee” was likely doomed before it began. Compromise — the bane of every ideologue’s existence — was an option on paper, not in reality. Therefore, to the quotes by politicians on the Committee regarding their resolve to “hammer out a compromise,” I add: “…and by ‘hammer out a compromise,’ I mean ‘they will concede everything on my list or I’ll walk.'”


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.