?

Log in

I was in Brattle Square today walking from comic store to comic store… - High-Speed Pizza Delivery: A Jack Phelps Production [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Jack Phelps

[ website | My Website ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

[Oct. 16th, 2004|03:49 pm]
Jack Phelps
I was in Brattle Square today walking from comic store to comic store looking for Dream Country (Sandman 3) when I overheard one of the DNC people trying to convince someone to donate money to Kerry's campaign. The person was thoroughly unconvinced, and the DNC chick offered:

"Kerry's not that bad... He's a good guy."

Oh how convincing.

The US presidency has been compromise after compromise for years. It really sickens me. I believe that anyone who is so ready to compromise their beliefs in order to increase their chances of getting elected is not worthy of the presidency. Unfortunately, these days you can't accumulate any decent amount of political power without bowing to a lot of special interests (i.e. not those necessarily in the interests of the American people). I was talking to my mom last night (why, what do YOU do on your friday nights?) and the last example of an uncompromising president I could come up with was Jack Kennedy. And how interesting is it that he was someone who was so rich and such a playboy that he (or his father, anyway) bought his way into political and never had to make any real compromises? He was just an incredibly strong personality with the resources behind him to achieve regardless of whom he pissed off. I think that's pretty interesting.

William Clay Ford Jr, Henry Ford's great-grandson, is another interesting occurence. This is a guy who grew up living and breathing Ford Motor Company in the same way Kennedy grew up presidential, and because of that he's been preparing his whole life to lead that company. It's not unlike that loser whatsisname in Atlas Shrugged (no, I didn't finish reading the book). Ford is doing tremendous things for his company; kudos to him.

I guess I am wishing right now for someone slick with backbone to match his charisma to step in and pull us out of the political messes we're in. Preferably democratic, but republican works too if he's got the balls to act in the best interests of the American people. Someone who can step up to the domestic AND international communities and say that this is America, and that we will not compromise freedom to gain marginal, near-useless protections from terrorists, but instead, we will support the education and prosperity of the entire world, because doing anything else is administering a weak, expensive treatment to the symptoms, rather than curing the disease.

-Jack out
linkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: tekunokurato
2004-10-16 02:20 pm (UTC)
Look, you sound like my mom during our debate. There are different kinds of compromises.

One of the kinds, the compromising that needs to happen between two parties with different opinions in order to collaborate, is obviously a great thing.

But another kind, that where someone who has one job to do (act in the best interests of the American people) and can't do it because in order to get elected they compromised any morals they had in the first place, is a very, very bad thing.

Politicians are in the habit of compromising the interests of the American people to meet the stated, short-term, profit-driven interests of corporations, rich people, and other stakeholders. This is not a compromise by two equally-deserving parties that politician was elected to office to represent equally. No, this is a compromise between one party the politician was elected to represent and one party (s)he was not. Bush and Kerry both make a habit of doing this regularly, and it's certainly not what I am looking for in a President.

Care to elaborate on how, specifically, I am wrong?
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: daisypie
2004-10-16 09:23 pm (UTC)
One of the kinds, the compromising that needs to happen between two parties with different opinions in order to collaborate, is obviously a great thing.

But another kind, that where someone who has one job to do (act in the best interests of the American people) and can't do it because in order to get elected they compromised any morals they had in the first place, is a very, very bad thing.


Okay, in your first post you didn't differentiate between two types of compromise. That indeed makes a difference, but can you offer specific examples of the bad type, in your opinion, of compromises which politicians have made? Because, one persons special interest might well be another person's job, regardless that there might also be a profit driven corporate interest or wealthy people who stand to gain as well.

Now, moral compromise is something different again, in my opinion. I'll come back to this point in a minute, but first I'll offer brief examples of both Kennedy's and Ford's compromises.

Though William Ford Jr spent most of his professional life working in the family business, he was not on a career path which would normally have lead to the head office. Indeed, if Ford Motor Company had not become embroiled in the Firestone tire recall & Explorer roll-over morass, it is quite likely that Jaques Nasser would still be leading the company. Corporate politics are much like government politics, with differing and competing interests (and Machiavellian power struggles), and when Nasser was wounded in that controversy, Clay Ford made his move, forming alliances (i.e. compromises) among Ford Co. executives, and with powerful members on the Board of Directors to assume power of the company.

Kennedy is a better example. When Kennedy offered the VP spot to Lyndon Johnson, he didn't expect (and didn't want) Johnson to take the job. But Johnson was the most powerful politician in the country and Kennedy didn't want to antagonize Johnson by not offering him the spot. Though both Democrats, Kennedy and Johnson were very different politicians and had very different constituencies, and it took a lot of compromise by both men to hold that campaign together.

As for moral compromises, look back to President Lincoln and the many compromises he felt necessary to make in order to hold the Nation together.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: tekunokurato
2004-10-17 12:17 am (UTC)
Good perspectives! I'm too young to really know what the fuck I'm talking about when it comes to kennedy; generally speaking, though, I don't think I'm incorrect in saying that his actions consistently had the best interests of the American people in mind.

Oh, and believe me, I know about Ford. But the point is, he did everything he did with the interests of the company in mind; he identifies with his company in the way few CEOs who aren't founders ever do. It's not his job; it's his life.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)