Presidential Campaign: Facts! Schmacts!
``Practical politics consists in ignoring facts’’
-``The Education of Henry Adams’’ by Henry Brooke Adams
-``The Education of Henry Adams’’ by Henry Brooke Adams
No truer words were written, as far as I’m concerned.
It seems like every other day, another new database pops up on the web, such as Political Fact, or Fact Checker –which tracks whether a candidate is telling the truth or giving us the straight facts.
Isn’t this a little like investigating whether the National Enquirer has an ethics policy?
Of course, we know candidates are prone to stretching the truth, while punching holes in an opponent’s position with half baked truths and distorted facts.
While applauding the public service value of these fact checking machines-I would hate to see our political dialogue reduced to scripted, well scrubbed, finely tuned press releases, free of spontaneity, or playing to voter’s emotions, just to avoid finger wagging from some enterprising organization that discovered a candidate failed a lie detector test on a particular issue.
I would like to think during a presidential season, we’re deciding not so much on positions a candidate’s team has whipped up just to pander to different constituencies, but rather on character issues, like how well they can think on their feet during a debate without a script in their hands; how well they hold up to negative attacks, without losing their cool; and if they’re up to the task of withstanding the rigors of the primary marathon, that’s usually rigged with mines and traps, before reaching the finish line.
These are all attributes, as far as I’m concerned, that not only test the mettle of a candidate, but also gives us an indication of how well they’ll perform in the oval office.
There aren’t many things I can count on in life anymore (can’t throw rice at weddings, the Sopranos is no longer on TV, Don Mattingly has long since retired), but I always thought I could still bank on the theater that goes into watching candidates manipulating the truth, and treating the campaign like they had just entered a boxing ring. Should they jab at an opponent before wearing them down; maybe a nice swift rabbit punch, just when their opponent isn’t looking; or maybe their knees might begin to buckle, looking like their about to go down for the count; only to come back with a left jab, straight right, and left hook-- and knock their challenger flat on their behinds.
If it's facts you’re after, check out your local library, you’ll find plenty to feast on
Just keep them out of the rumble of the presidential campaign.
-Bill Lucey
billlucey@bellsouth.net
It seems like every other day, another new database pops up on the web, such as Political Fact, or Fact Checker –which tracks whether a candidate is telling the truth or giving us the straight facts.
Isn’t this a little like investigating whether the National Enquirer has an ethics policy?
Of course, we know candidates are prone to stretching the truth, while punching holes in an opponent’s position with half baked truths and distorted facts.
While applauding the public service value of these fact checking machines-I would hate to see our political dialogue reduced to scripted, well scrubbed, finely tuned press releases, free of spontaneity, or playing to voter’s emotions, just to avoid finger wagging from some enterprising organization that discovered a candidate failed a lie detector test on a particular issue.
I would like to think during a presidential season, we’re deciding not so much on positions a candidate’s team has whipped up just to pander to different constituencies, but rather on character issues, like how well they can think on their feet during a debate without a script in their hands; how well they hold up to negative attacks, without losing their cool; and if they’re up to the task of withstanding the rigors of the primary marathon, that’s usually rigged with mines and traps, before reaching the finish line.
These are all attributes, as far as I’m concerned, that not only test the mettle of a candidate, but also gives us an indication of how well they’ll perform in the oval office.
There aren’t many things I can count on in life anymore (can’t throw rice at weddings, the Sopranos is no longer on TV, Don Mattingly has long since retired), but I always thought I could still bank on the theater that goes into watching candidates manipulating the truth, and treating the campaign like they had just entered a boxing ring. Should they jab at an opponent before wearing them down; maybe a nice swift rabbit punch, just when their opponent isn’t looking; or maybe their knees might begin to buckle, looking like their about to go down for the count; only to come back with a left jab, straight right, and left hook-- and knock their challenger flat on their behinds.
If it's facts you’re after, check out your local library, you’ll find plenty to feast on
Just keep them out of the rumble of the presidential campaign.
-Bill Lucey
billlucey@bellsouth.net
Comments