I am already tiring of the Presidential debates... I ask you; could they be any less Presidential? In fact could they be any less of a debate? I was present at the Charleston Democratic "forum" and I must admit I thoroughly enjoyed the evening. I was entertained by the banter but in terms of debate... as John Stewart might say.."not so much". If anything the questions asked were mainly concrete and frequently impossible to answer in any meaningful way. To her credit Senator Clinton gave the most obvious answer to the now famous "would you meet with the (bad guys) question". Although her answer was cleverly framed to score political points, she accidentally or otherwise exposed the intellectual process actually exposed these "what if questions" as the lowest intellectual common denominator. This type of question seeks to dignify the answer. Remember the "what if" question that hurt the Dukakis campaign? What would you do if Mrs. Dukakis were assaulted? Better yet, do you remember the old Saturday Night Live sketch.."What if Napoleon had a B52 at Waterloo?" Can you explain to me the difference in the two"? What would you do Governor Dukais if your wife were assaulted and you had a flame thrower?
These forums are just opportunities for candidates to state what they say are their beliefs...about everything! Now stating belief is OK to a point; and I guess it is important to know if someone believes in the Easter Bunny (or other myths?)... but I would prefer to hear a debate about the issues of the day. To categorically say you are in favor or against something because of your "beliefs" does little to advance the conversation, in fact; it stifles it. On the other hand to debate the merits of a policy or program, in the context of projected outcomes for the country, forces we the electorate, to think about it. After hearing the arguments we would then apply our own reasoning to these arguments and then decide which candidate we can support. I "debated " this issue with an acquaintance recently. He asserts that these issues are too complex for most people, that they can't make reasonable decisions about these important issues. "That is why we elect politicians" he said.
Every day citizens in this country conduct one of this Republic's most sacred "rites". They sit on juries and listen to argument. They weigh those arguments and then render decisions as best they can - important decisions - life altering decisions. I think we are more than capable of "figuring" out if it is in our best interest as a country to pay for children's health care, to build a wall along the Mexican border or to continue occupying another country.
I would love to see a format of debate where 2 or 3 of the candidates take on an important topic of the day: let's say Universal Health care. They then state the facts (as they see them), the short and long term cost/benefit and any other alternatives. They debate point and counter point, building an argument... and the only real rule would be - you can't just say "because".
Wouldn't hearing this type of conversation, covering all the important topics of the day be a help to us as an electorate? Wouldn't it also give the candidates a chance to think through how the issues relate to each other? And... wouldn't this format expose the "Ideologue"? - The person who really is only interested in cultural manipulation and not the advancement of the state of the Republic and it's people.
Finally wouldn't it be fun! It would invigorate the process. Let me also add that I am not against injecting some "theater" as well. I suspect the Lincoln - Douglas debates had their dramatic and perhaps light moments. Nothing wrong with injecting humor or gamesmanship it is the American way. A sense of humor is not a bad thing either. I think a person who takes the job seriously but not themselves, has a better chance of success during adversity. Entertain me if you like but please give me something to think about... not just something to feel about, because as it stands now we are all certain to be numb by November 2008.
What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment