Pondering Pandering Politicians
By William Bailey (09/28/03)
All across our beloved United States, in cities large and small, you will find people who are actively engaged in what is referred to as “pandering”. . . the “art” of separating you from some of that commodity called money.
To say that it’s an activity regarded with great disdain would be an understatement. The act of “pandering” is (or can be) one in which people engage themselves for a variety of purposes. It is not the intent of this article to conduct insight into either that group or their motives. Rather, the intent of this article is to look at another group who are, just as actively, engaged in the same basic pursuit(s).
First, let’s go about the obligatory business of defining terms. My well-worn, dog-eared Merriam-Webster provides those for us.
“Ponder-to weigh in the mind; to meditate; deliberate.”
“Pander-1) a go-between in love intrigues; a pimp; 2) a minister to the evil passions of others.”
“Politician-One addicted to, or actively engaged in politics as managed by parties; often one primarily interested in political offices or the profits from them as a source of private gain.”
I submit that the consideration of this topic is quite timely since, in just thirteen short months, voters in this country will have the privilege of electing a President, all the members of the House of Representatives and one-third of the United States Senate. Between now and then, there will be countless other elections involving city, county and state offices. In other words, “We the People” will be given an opportunity to choose those who will govern us. And, the result of exercising that privilege will, without question, determine the type of government we have.
Have you noticed how, over the last couple of decades, those who seek public office (with few exceptions) spend their time (and advertising dollars) telling you why you should vote against their opponent rather than why you should vote for them ? (This has been “labeled” as the “politics of personal destruction”). Can you really go to the voting booth knowing, without question, what the candidate to whom you will give your vote stands for ? The incumbent tells you that he/she will stand on their record. Okie, dokie . . . what is that record ? Have you made it your business to “ponder” that record ? The non-incumbent tells you that the person presently holding the office being sought should be replaced, but do they tell you why they should be the ones to whom the office should be entrusted ? How can you cast an intelligent vote without knowing all you can about the candidates for the office ? I submit, you can’t. The unfortunate side of this is that many do.
It is a sad, sad indictment that politicians are “addicted” and/or “primarily interested in political offices or the profits from them as a source of private gain.” “Private gain” can come in a variety of forms: 1) personal agendas; 2) monetary enhancement; or, 3) the acquisition of personal power. Sometimes, it can be a combination of the three. It is interesting to note that the definition of “politician” contains no reference to “serving” those who place them in office. And, this must be said . . . this is NOT party related. The tentacles of this octopus reach into much, if not all, of the political party structure in this country.
We cannot achieve the goal, expressed in the Preamble of the Constitution, with “pandering politicians”. The goal . . . “We the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union . . . “. While perfection is never achieved, we won’t even come close when those who govern do so based on “ministering to the evil desires of others” or those who are “primarily interested in political offices or the profits from them as a source of private gain.” As citizens and voters, it is our obligation . . . our responsibility to insure that those to whom governing will be entrusted do not fall into the category of “pandering politicians”.
There is one final term I submit for your consideration, “statesman”. As with the other terms, I consulted Merriam-Webster for a definition and this is what I found:
“Statesman-a man (sic) versed in the principles and art of government; especially one who shows wisdom in treating or directing public matters.”
It would seem, at least to me, that if we have any hope of getting this nation back “on course”, we can only do so with more “statesmen” than “pandering politicians”. We need government to be in the hands of those who “show wisdom in treating or directing public matters”. Where are the George Washington’s, the Benjamin Franklin’s, the Alexander Hamilton’s, the James Madison’s of today ? Sadly, those “seats” seem to be vacant.
So . . . during the next thirteen months, “ponder” very seriously, the “pandering politicians”.
(Printer friendly version) Email: William Bailey
