What I won’t do for an article. What I won’t endure for you, my dear reader.
Given my chosen field of periodic punditry, I signed up for e-mails from the Obama and McCain campaigns. AOL has already called and requested that I ease up on burdening their storage capacity.
Not a day goes by without receiving at least one, nay, two or three, e-mails from each camp.
Both want volunteers. Lots of them. Both want money. Lots of it. And most recently, both camps are slinging the mud and launching the attacks. Lots of them.
What they do not seem to want is to engage you, me – us – in meaningful dialogue.
Talking points. That is all I get. Talking points.
One thing I will say about talking points. Once developed, no one has to think anymore. All the candidates and their adherents must do is pull out crib sheets and repeat clearly and succinctly the speech writers’ words.
Of course, it is immaterial whether the material is material, factually correct, contextually honest, or even valuable in any sort of meaningful political or philosophical discourse.
Yes, this is what I have had to put up with for you. And, yes, you are worth it.
It has been both fun and infuriating. Fun because it represents the theater of the absurd in which this billion-dollar election campaign is presenting itself. It is infuriating for largely the same reason. And it makes me wonder how financially responsible either candidate or party will be once it enters the White House on January 20, 2009.
These are not pretty thoughts, I know. I hate to bring home the bad news. People like me usually get shot for such public service. Messengers with a foreboding bearing do not bear up well.
But now the die is reasonably cast. The contest boils down to inexperience and age v. age and inexperience. Obama-Biden v. McCain-Palin.
Will we get to heart of the matter? Will we see into the souls of all the candidates and understand their intent to govern? Will we ever appreciate what makes them tick and how they think? Will we be able to make an informed, reasoned decision on which team is best suited for our country at this time?
Of course, even if we do have each pair nailed in its philosophy and motivations, there is always the possibility (near certainty) that they will abandon their campaign promises once they are sworn in and realize the extent of the problems facing them, which means facing us and our country.
For many, of course, it does not matter. Democrats will vote for Democrats, confident that their cookie-cutter ideology will be pursued. Republicans will do likewise. It must be difficult to be a true Independent in our country at this time. There is so much partisan vile and bile bubbling about that it is enough to make a thinking person ill.
But there is hope, albeit very slight. In 1991, a group sponsored through Harvard University came up with the “Nine Sundays” proposal, which I, admittedly a political junkie of sorts, believe is brilliant.
For nine Sundays beginning after Labor Day, each candidate from each Party would discuss and debate one – and only one – topic of national importance, e.g., education, Iraq, economy, health care, immigration, etc. They – and only they – with one moderator, would appear on stage for 90 minutes to two hours to discuss in depth this one issue.
The theory behind this construct is that after 10 or 15 minutes of expounding soundbite narratives, both candidates would necessarily expose their reasoning and beliefs on each matter. Through this sort of in-depth discussion, voters would really appreciate whether any candidate seems best suited to lead. Vice Presidential candidates would also be scheduled for one or some of these Nine Sundays.
I hope this will become a reality. It will not happen for this presidential election, but there is always 2012, which would shamefully and amazingly be 21 years after being proposed. Five presidential elections would have lapsed without our country gaining the benefit of more deeply understanding each candidate’s worldview and leadership plan. I am not sure how such a proposal becomes reality. If an institution as august as Harvard has promoted its adoption and it has not yet occurred, what can you and I do to see that it happens?
I suggest you write or call the Commission on Presidential Debates (1200 New Hampshire Avenue NW #445, Washington, DC 20036, 202-872-1020), which seems to own the rights to these quadrennial events. Tell them to sponsor something that is more useful, insightful, and informative. Tell them to give voters something that matters, something that furthers democracy in the country that considers itself the Mother of all Democracies.
Tell them to let the candidates talk with us and describe how they would address the most important issues affecting us and our children today and in the years to come.
Tell them we prefer Nine Sundays to endless e-mails.
++++
Fred W. Apelquist, III, M.Ed.
Approximately 830 words.
© September 14, 2008
+++
YETMO: “You’re Entitled To My Opinion,” A Balanced Point of View
"To stimulate thought, debate, and introspection”