Authored by William Robert Barber
It is so much easier in a dictatorship. Well… probably not: even in a dictatorship one needs to persuade, incentivize, appease, and manipulate. Plus of course there’s always the necessary bureaucracy to convenience and the armed forces to entice with panegyric paeans. Now that I cogitate, in a dictatorship there are princelings to delicately balance, the strong arm dark forces led by a psychotic eager if not anxious to enter any fray, multi-contenders to assuage or all together eliminate; and naturally, there is the one who watches the two, the many who monitor the few and the few who keep an eye on the many. I think a dictatorship is just not going to work.
Governing three hundred million odd people from Washington is not a task where near-perfection is a practical possibility. But the task of governing gets even more complicated when arrogant panjandrums substitute the welfare of the nation for partisan political gain.
As often sighted, everyone takes their cue from the leader. The leader sets the overall standard of operational norm, the moral ambiance, and the obligor of accepting individual responsibility for all actions. It is the leader that establishes a sense of bequeathed authority — an authority derived from the nation’s founding documents, an election, statutory laws that are preeminent and supersede the will of man; the leader of a democratically inspired republic such as these United States does not manipulate the rules of order, breech the spirit of precedence, and regard the other branches of government with intimidation, disdain, and disrespect.
A leader of a free republic does not stoop to contemptuousness when explaining the ideas or ideals of his opponent; he does not reach out with the right hand only to swat with the left. The president is often utilizing bellicose and animus exaggerations either in word or behavior. Such is not conducive to tolerance or understanding. A republic cannot govern without the will of the people and to the people tolerance, and understanding is an intrinsic characterization of Americanism.
President Obama speaks mostly in the putative; he is conjectural instead of objective. The president thrives in the allegorical, to paraphrase an adage of truthfulness: Obama will never ‘slay the beautiful hypothesis with an ugly fact.’
Washington with its president is full of loquacious politicians with fine robes and pretty words; but they are not leaders, often enough they can’t even properly follow. If it wasn’t for tenure instead of term limits we could simply be satisfied with their inevitable relieve. But that is not going to happen. So, like Sisyphus, we have a government that rolls the promises of change up the hill only to find it rolling back down the hill.
The optimist in me is hopeful. But I fear the sea change required of Washington is as impossible as impossible gets.