Saturday, September 11, 2010
Regarding José Pablo Bustamante's actions...
I invite you to take a look.
And seeing as we're on that subject, specifically that discussion:
Firstly, regarding commenter Sage's "Let's face it, incumbents have a HUGE advantage. Generally, they do not have to do anything to get elected just as they did nothing all through their term. All is fair in love and war and politics. Challengers must pull out all the stops to get their message out, and to get noticed by a moribund press and electorate."
What a mess.
1) "Generally, they do not have to do anything to get elected just as they did nothing all through their term." If you seriously believe this...and if you have a substantial number of residents who are in agreement with you...then I truly worry about the state of affairs here in Hamilton. But let's break this down even further. You're suggesting that it's a breeze to get re-elected, even if your performance has been shite. Then this means one thing, and one thing only: the flaw in the system is the voting public. That they're apathetic, that they don't have any interest in local governance...and that they prefer to whine than actually resolve a seemingly deleterious situation. Additionally, the notion that 'they did nothing all through their term' reinforces this apparent truth; if you're representative of the general voting public and they're prepared to re-elect officials who have purportedly done nothing throughout their term, then who's the fool in this picture?
2) "All is fair in love and politics." Are you declaring this to be a truth...or are you merely bemoaning its apparent likelihood? If the former is the case...then you might want to consider putting your money where your mouth is and begin contributing to a rectification. (I'm going to assume that you're not currently investing your energies in this arena. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.) If it's the latter, then I'll still direct you to my suggestion.
3) "Challengers must pull out all the stops to get their message out, and to get noticed by a moribund press and electorate." Hoo-boy. Or as I'm known to say, 'Holy fuckolee.' In the end, a moribund press doesn't matter one whit if you have an informed and engaged populace. Or, as Sy Syms has long said, 'An educated consumer is our best customer.' So forget about railing against MSM; why not concentrate on the only thing that actually matters in the end, the level of qualification of the average voter's opinion, and therefore the acuity of their actual vote.
Bottom-line: until people stop demonizing politicians, and instead start addressing the only factor that has any impact whatsoever in the equation...their own behaviour as citizen-voters...then nothing will ever change. And I don't think anyone wants that, right?
Secondly, it might be an interesting exercise to examine just what Mr. Bustamante's used to in terms of political environment. I'm not talking about his own activities...I'm talking about what has been inculcated in him regarding propriety and expected parameters of play. Take a look at where he lived his life up to becoming a Canadian citizen, and once you've done that, ask yourself just what kind of influences he would have had informing his development, framing his 'political arena perspective'. I'm just sayin'...