« No torture needed to thwart 9/11 attacks. | tpmgary's Blog | 2008 List of Senators And Top Corporate Contributors »
New class of statesmen emerging
In theory, all politicians are supposed to uphold the rule of law and the constitution.
But those few who dare to actually practice what they preach have been traditionally thought of as outsiders, cast aside as fringe; derisively labelled "strict constitutionalists" or "crazy libertarians"; irrelevant to the realities of the modern world.
There are a handful of politicians that have vastly divergent views on a host of issues, but the thread that brings them together is their vow to uphold the rule of law. Ordinarily, you wouldn't put Senator Russ Feingold, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Congressman Ron Paul and consumer advocates like Ralph Nader, all in the same category.
So maybe there needs to be a new category. Maybe those who plan to run for office, those who run on a platform of putting the rule of law first have a more viable chance of winning elections at a time when corruption in government, in all three branches of government, runs so deep and with such impunity.
We always hear that chorus about how Washington will never change. New members of congress promising to change things are dismissed as hopelessly naive. "They don't know how Washington operates, once they get here, they'll change" say political veterans.
But maybe a new class of statesmen is quietly emerging--trumping traditional party line candidates in popularity.
Maybe if your rep or Senator has given up trying to change Washington, it's time to change that rep or Senator.
Advertisement
I agree with the first two you mention. Not sure about the next two. But I agree with what you're calling for - 100%. To me the criterion should be following the Constitution and the Rule of Law, wherever that takes us. To uphold rights and to hold everyone to the same standard.
May 8, 2009 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
I didn't mean to imply that Nader or Paul are among the statesmen that are emerging--after all, they've been around for a long long time. I don't agree with them on many many issues, but there is an underlying "uphold citizen rights or uphold the constitution" fundamental philosophy that they seem to advocate, and it is that philosophy, a high regard for the constitution and the rule of law, that might carry more weight now than it has in the past.
It is a cause in search of a champion. I wish I could say that Obama was that champion, but he's wavering.
We, the people, have to continue to rally and vote more zealously for the cause, and as it becomes increasingly popular, more champions will come.
May 8, 2009 5:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
I just KNEW we were on the same page! (it's just that the last 2 you named, while having some views in common with the first 2, are also off their rockers in some other ways - as I'm sure you know)
May 8, 2009 9:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
536 people make law in this country. Although regs from departments abound.
Too much gaming and swapping, I guess. But how can you get majorities in both houses on any single issue. I know the Dems are in control, but Wyoming may need something and New Jersey something else.
I do not like the lobbying.
I will think about this.
Good post though.
May 8, 2009 7:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
"off their rockers" - nice work, TheraP. I can see you will make a great coalition-builder.
I'm sure if I call R. Feingold bat-s**t crazy you'll really want to work with me, eh? Think before you type. The freedom message should be one that brings us together. There is nothing crazy about support of liberty and individualism. After all, even Marlo Thomas wanted us to be "Free to be you and me" :) I'm going to guess that you know the album.
May 8, 2009 11:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
I do concur that we need 'statesmen' but your examples leave a bit to be desired. Not one could measure up to a Moynihan! lets hope that some heads come through the clouds soon...but I will not hold my breath ...Concept is good though!
May 9, 2009 10:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
yes, I understand there have been some fine statesmen through our history that I didn't mention--but I purposely mentioned some less mainstream less typical establishment people that do have reputations for consistently advocating on behalf of Americans rights, consumer rights and the importance of upholding the constitution--it is that theme, not necessarily their other political views, that I wish would take center stage with newer candidates and current politicians.
May 9, 2009 11:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think you are getting down to responsibility. Our Laws wee designed to protect the majority from the interests of the privileged. This has not been the case with lawmakers for 25 years.
At least.
Who does congress represent? Not the Majority. Some of them see this, and object. It would be great to have a bunch more join those ranks.
May 9, 2009 11:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Bwak, it is, as you mention, about responsibility. 200 or so years ago, the responsibility to uphold the rule of law and the constitution was first and foremost--maybe because it was a fresh new concept at the time. They were not even a generation away from the massive bloodshed of the revolutionary war, they better understood what it took to fight for independence and freedom and democratic principles.
Our government has drifted from that firsthand knowledge and experience.
In another post, I suggested that presently, congress represents corporations, and that perhaps we need a fourth branch of government that represents Americans.
May 9, 2009 11:54 AM | Reply | Permalink