Remember that sophomoric cheer? “U-G-L-Y... You don’t need no alibi. YOU’RE UGLY... ab-so-lute-ly UGLY!” Granted, even accompanied by a teen chorus, no shreds of wisdom are necessarily evidenced in the previous articulation. But at least as teenagers - even though not the most respectful in regard to semantic selection - we were not afraid to call a spade, a “spade,” and the ugly, “ugly.”
Disrespect.
Chastisement of the poor or disabled.
Celebration of arrogance.
Whatever that was left in my refrigerator last week.
And let me offer one more: polarization.
Polarization is “U-G-L-Y.” Polarization incites, manipulates, and encourages nothing that is good and pure and right in this world. Polarization is a strategic initiative covertly utilized for a person or party’s own agenda. I read yesterday morning where one political party has already created advertising specifically designed to encourage the public to vote against the opposing party. Never mind that the elections will not take place until November of 2010. What is the purpose? How can one accurately assess the credibility of my congressman without discerning the effectiveness of his voting record over the length of his term? The reason is that the party operatives are solely attempting to polarize. Accuracy is irrelevant.
The worst offenders? The U.S. House of Representatives. We have leadership on the Supreme Court. Leadership in the White House. Leadership on many state and local levels. While several of those leaders hail from a specific party, bipartisanship remains a stated goal. But in the U.S. House of Representatives, polarization seems like a celebrated art form. Leadership seems wrought with polarization, and it negatively impacts their daily operations. With terms of service only 2 years, representatives fail to ford one another common decencies... listening, learning, being sharpened by one another. Perhaps they feel they do not have enough time to listen... knowing re-election opportunities will be soon be upon them. Unlike the Senate, no less, where the “good ole’ boys” seem to appreciate one another more and actually work to find effective compromise - the House leadership seems to encourage hunkering down in their ideological bunkers. This weakness in our House is concerning, especially, for example, when they felt called to craft the original stimulus bill. It fails to surprise that said bill included by far the greatest amounts of pet project, “smells-like-pork” spending.
My point? Truthfully, the point exhausts me. Few seem to mind the polarization of the House when their favored fulfills the majority. Yet my point is that it matters not who holds that majority. Our laws would be better crafted if the majority and minority of any tenure would learn to surrender polarization and work together... if partisanship and polarization were set aside in the name of the better good.
Maybe then we would witness less alibis - and ugliness - in Washington.
AR
Posts
2 comments:
I hate it when someone won't cross over for a vote even if they believe in principle for that which the vote is for. Its one thing to stand for a set of philosophies for which you were elected on but to refuse to look at each issue by its individual merit continually wearing party blinders, really bothers me. Nothing is so black and white in politics that it doesn't demand a careful consideration of the intent of the law.
This sounds a bit like political gibberish and it wasn't meant to. I wish people had a stronger sense of accountability to a higher power instead of the people who write the checks.
Good point, Truth Box!
Post a Comment