As a prefatory to my article I would like to emphasis the omnipotent steadfastness of an ancient absolute of governing: The rule of unintended consequences.
Somewhere during the second administration of George Washington’s presidency members of his cabinet formally organized political party affiliations as a means of expressing differing governing philosophies. Over the course of governing these political parties have become the ultimate power brokers of elected office, the force behind the throne, the very raison d’être of the will to govern. Political parties have replaced the concept of one man one vote with one party for all those eligible to vote; these parties because of their influence on elected representatives have become the wherewithal of corrupting all covenants of ideals; exchanging these ideals for compromise regardless of result in the interest of either obtaining or maintaining power. Political parties have an indulgence for amoral behavior, they have a Machiavellian urge to act in a self-servicing all purposefulness; for these entities, trust is not an applicable factor of concern.
Via the exceptional organizational networking of political parties and their influence within the elected, want-a-be elected, and the electorate we have a legislative body consciously poised, as a matter of operational flow, to channeling closely held political ideals and beliefs into a perfumery of acceptable smells so that the populous will vote for the candidate’s party; closely held beliefs are edited, decorated, and costumed into a disguise of popular acceptance. Every candidate dances to the tune of the party’s advisors, speech writers, publicists, image directors, and acting coaches.
I do greatly appreciate John McCain’s town hall approach to putting himself in the line of fire; he takes questions and actually answers them. Imagine that he takes great risk in real time to put him in harm’s way; talk about courage under fire.
The accepted golden rule of thumb in politics: Don’t offend anyone. This almost immediately compromises into never say anything of substance or of any declarative definition. Unless of course one is promising to give away some value to a particular voting constituency that one surmises as essential to getting elected. I cannot help my addiction to sarcasm…
The good, the bad, the ugly, we voters want to believe in our candidates and we want to believe in what our candidates say. I do not want a political party official’s word to define an issue I want the candidate’s personal exactness on the issue of concern; but it seems, that is so damn impossible; I have doubts as to the sincerity of politicians in general; however, political parties, now these institutions are scary.
I am a conservative and since the Democratic Party has jumped head over heels into the abyss of socialistic-leftist populism I will vote Republican; nevertheless, I do fear the strength and power of all political parties and their insistence on power at any price.
I do realize an informed voter is critical to maintaining our freedom; I also realize that the mechanics of governing is very complicated, tedious, often disconcerting, and always ambiguous; nevertheless, that is the central task of citizenship, the sword and shield of guarding and enhancing our individual rights. The unintended consequence of allowing political parties to do our thinking and acting is obvious and untenable.