Our National Pageant

Yes, it's been 6 months since I have posted, but we'll leave off discussion of that for the moment.

I've learned a new word this week: quanked.  It means being in a state of extreme fatigue, as in " I packed up the moving van today, and I'm totally quanked!"

It’s taken a week of stringing together moments of lucidity in an otherwise pneumonia-quanked haze to get this out.

'Tis the season for our national political pageant to enter the swimsuit…er…'debate' competition

In the days that follow a debate, we hang on the pronouncements of Nate Silver and other members of the punditocracy.  Their statistics are based on their own models, on relatively small polling samples. Their job is to measure public opinion by telling the public what the public thinks is important. They shape opinion by choosing what questions to ask and who to ask.  

Frankly, I don’t care whether someone ‘looks’ presidential.  I don’t care about previous statistics on the influence height has on ‘electability.’ Age and gender are not litmus tests for me.

The next 12 months are a test for who would be the best candidate for President from the Democratic Party.  How do we as voters measure that?  First, we have to have a sense of what we each want a President to do, and as important, not do.  Here are my own opinions, my own resume requirements.

A President is responsible for:

• Acting as the international face of the United States
• Conducting foreign policy with the State Department and Congress
• Negotiating and upholding treaties in coordination with Congress
• Commanding the troops following Congressional authorization
• Making nominations for judicial, ambassadorial and executive positions
• Providing leadership to the Party

A President is not responsible for:

• Crafting legislation – this is the job of Congress
• Declaring war – this is the job of Congress
• Conducting unilateral foreign policy – this is shared with Congress

With these qualifications in mind, my opinions on a candidate center on:

Is the candidate consistent in his/her opinions and positions, or do they vary with political winds? Is he/she trustworthy?

Have the candidate’s positions on foreign policy, particularly military aid and troop deployment demonstrated respect for the sovereignty of other nations and for international law?

Have the candidate’s positions on treaties, particularly trade, demonstrated respect for the environment and workers’ rights?

Has the candidate opposed unilateral presidential military deployments in the past, and upheld the role of Congress in authorizing military force?

Does the candidate have experience in nominating or approving candidates for high office? Have his/her nominations or approvals been based on merit and experience?

Has the candidate provided leadership to the Party in advancing the traditional constituencies and ideals of the party, such as rights of women, minorities and workers, environmental protection, regulation and restraint of business. In other words, has the course of the debate moved in the direction of these ideals because of the ideals the candidate espouses, and the way in which he/she expresses them?

 and the compromise...

 

Does the candidate have a history of successfully advancing legislation that supports these ideals?  If so, and the candidate is currently serving in the US Senate or House, despite other qualifications, the candidate may be more valuable staying in his/her current position.

I encourage you to come up with your own list, and to trust your own values and instincts rather than the polls and pundits.

Next up:

Informed opinion is vital, but how do you influence the discussion on who the nominee should be?

 

The Spaces in Between

For me, the new year really begins today, what Christians call the Feast of the Epiphany.  While the original feast day comemmorated the arrival of the Wise Men, and was celebrated with gift giving (hence the 12 Days of Christmas), epiphany of course has a different meaning in the present day, of momentous revelation and discovery.

Over the holidays, I finished a book by the late Carrie Fisher, 'Delusions of Grandma.' Fisher had an extraordinary way of writing, of teetering on the edge between prose and poetry, especially in how she described mental illness and human interaction.  The phrase that stuck with me from this book is 'living in the spaces in between.'  Of living our lives from peak event to peak event, ignoring the significance of what happens in between.

This year the eve of the Epiphany coincided with a new moon, a supermoon. New Moons are a time for beginnings. My resolutions are cliche - eat sugar less, work out more, but my resolves are different.   I am starting the year renewing my commitment to writing and blogging, but also in resolving to see and listen to the small, rich, placid moments in which our lives actually unfold.

The Spaces in Between

Living
lies in the spaces in between,
in the patches of sky or dense forest we leave
for last.

We tinker with its edges,
focus on the obvious,
scramble for the easy wins.

The subtle
is relegated to the future,
when our supply of instant gratification
runs dry.

Here the work is slow
our commitment required
but the rewards hard-won and sweet.