HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
July 16, 2003 Senator Peter Fitzgerald has announced he will not run for Senate in 2004. He is leaving Washington and heading back home to Illinois. It made me think of one of my favorite movies. “Mr. Smith Goes To Washington” is a movie made in 1939 in which a young idealistic man, played perfectly by Jimmy Stewart, finds himself immersed in a world of compromise and dirty deals. Frank Capra directed this gem that also included actors like Jean Arthur, Edward Arnold and Claude Rains. Stewart plays Senator Jefferson Smith, an appointee to the Senate. He has been chosen to be an unwitting puppet directed by Jim Taylor’s (Edward Arnold) powerful political machine that has the Senior Senator (played by Claude Rains) in their hip pocket. Smith discovers the truth, defies, and is attacked and nearly destroyed by a clever deception launched by Taylor. He almost goes home with his tail between his legs, but (Jean Arthur) Clarissa Saunders, his assistant, gives him a pep talk and he finds his backbone. The climax of the movie features Stewart conducting an actual filibuster to try to save his reputation, his dream for a boy’s camp and to frustrate the “Taylor Machine” that intended to railroad through a piece of legislation that would line their pockets. The aforementioned picture is “corny” and a bit preachy. On the other hand, it sets forth ideals and adherence to the Constitution as necessary qualities of statesmanship. You can’t help but wish that more Senators were like Jefferson Smith. Interestingly, no party affiliations are mentioned in the movie. It did not target Republicans or Democrats; it targeted graft, corruption, compromise and deception as the enemy. Ronald Reagan mentioned that he first began to consider running for public office after seeing the movie. He said that the movie inspired him. Reagan was not the biggest star in Hollywood, but he would become the Commander in Chief and CEO of the greatest country in the world. It is interesting that the desire to serve was his motivating factor, rather than a desire for power. Statesmanship is sorely lacking amongst our legislators. It seems as if the lust for power and the need to get elected drives men and women to reverse their stands on issues on a regular basis. They try to carefully craft statements on controversial issues to appease both sides without truly taking a definitive stand. They delight in skewering those who belong to the other party, whether or not there is merit in their accusations. They are most often very rich men and women who become even more enriched as a result of their position in government. I see this behavior in both Republican and Democratic politicians; it is not limited to one side. I personally have hope when a well-known athlete or other successful celebrity runs for office. When they run, I do have hopes that they are doing it to serve others and do a good job for their constituents rather than a lust for fame. I have watched with interest as people like Bill Bradley, Jim Bunning, John Glenn and Jack Kemp have attained public office. My hope has always been that they would be honest and true to themselves and their convictions. Even when good men and women disagree, when they are honest and open minded there is hope for our nation. But the best legislators often leave public office for some of the very reasons that make them the best. I lamented when J. C. Watts, the former University of Oklahoma and Canadian Football League star, left congress after just two terms in office. Watts was a rising star, a smart and effective legislator with great leadership qualities. But he voluntarily retired from public office for the sake of his family. I thought he had a chance to become the first Black President of the United States. He decided being husband and father came first. A good thumbnail description of Watt’s career is found at http://www.questeducationalfoundation.org/speakers/watts_2003.html where a great quote is found. When asked about his decision to retire from Congress, Mr. Watts is quoted as saying, "It is time to return home, to go on with other things in my life and assume one of the most honored titles in all of America - citizen. Retiring from Congress does not mean retreating from the public arena. Our democracy is based on citizen participation, and as a citizen, I intend to participate vigorously in the great ongoing debate over the future of the most wonderful nation in all the world." Now another fine legislator is leaving public office. Senator Peter Fitzgerald of Illinois announced that he would not run for reelection in 2004. His motto as a Senator: "I have a simple goal: to work hard and remember, at every step, what a privilege it is to serve the people of Illinois." Fitzgerald, a Republican, was known for not necessarily following the party line and being an independent thinker. He was criticized for not supporting legislature he considered “pork” even if it would benefit Illinois interests. Fitzgerald had spent $13 million dollars in the 1998 Senate race and faced an even greater expenditure in a campaign to be reelected. But he said that he had “no fire in the belly” to face another campaign. The campaign game, something that the Clintons of this world seem to relish, was not attractive to Senator Fitzgerald. A perusal of his website (http://www.senate.gov/~fitzgerald/) gives the impression of an honest, hard working Senator who seems like a pretty nice guy. He will be missed. I admit to being a conservative who tends to vote Republican. But I still look at the character and record of candidates before voting. Integrity means more to me than party affiliation. I value someone who speaks their mind and neither waffles on issues or changes his stance when it becomes unpopular. I have often speculated that Charles Barkley might make a good candidate for political office for those very reasons. When people like Senator Fitzgerald leave public office, it is a loss for all of us. It is one more statesman leaving the scene and creating an opening that is likely to be filled by a politician. Meanwhile, I see the pack of current Democratic Presidential candidates baying like wolves over the statement about uranium in President Bush speech about the threat of Iraq’s Saddam Hussein. They cry about “lies” and “deception” knowing full well that the statement was factual, cleared by the CIA Director Tenant (a Clinton appointee, ironically) and based on British intelligence. It has turned out to be unsubstantiated but the President had reason to believe it was true at the time and the statement may yet prove to be substantiated in the future. But the Kerrys and Grahams of this world make accusations that call the President’s integrity into question. I suspect that if they were all in sixth grade that George would be punching Bob in the nose for talking about him that way. Democratic candidates? Can you quit crying “wolf” long enough to tell us who you are and what you would try to accomplish as chief executive? Don’t you have a message that is compelling enough to make us want to vote for you? Or is your platform so weak that the only way you think you can beat the incumbent is to use any means possible to drag him down? You sound like a pack of wolves, but you look like a bunch of Mondales and Muskies from here. I am waiting………….. ------------ About the author Kimbal Ross Binder: Erstwhile gym-rat, former independent driven by disgust for the Democratic Party into the arms of the Republicans, current parent and expert at puns, jokes that make people groan and eating Debbie's cooking. Mr Binder lives out in the boondocks of NW Indiana. Email Kimbal Ross Binder: radar@eternalisp.com Comment on this column in the forum. ------------ |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
