One Aesop fable tells of a group of frogs that prays to Zeus to deliver a leader. Zeus playfully throws a log to them as their \king,"" but when they realize it is inanimate, they beseech him anew to provide them a leader. Tired of their nagging and angry that they will not lead themselves, he sends a stork, which eats all the frogs. The moral? We end up with the leaders we deserve.
Anyone who walks on campus sees the degree of dissatisfaction that chalk-wielding town criers feel toward the present administration. While many of Bush's policies are revolting, we have to remember that almost half of our country chose him (Supreme Court influence notwithstanding). There are those who think Bush is not qualified to be president, that he has set international relations back a century and that he has installed a Secretary of Defense and Attorney General who have no regard for American ideals and freedoms. But what can we, on our little island in Madison, do to fix the system? Do we deserve this leadership?
We do if we accept what happens in the Oval Office, if we throw up our hands in defeat rather than take action. If you too are dissatisfied, take action. Yes, there are productive actions we can take, actions that we as responsible American citizens should take. Simply put, we need to do our homework.
Our system for choosing political candidates is seriously flawed. At least as far back as the 1988 election between the elder Bush and Dukakis, voters seem to have a single refrain: ""Well, I don't like either candidate, but I'll vote for X, the lesser of the two evils."" Even now, it is not uncommon to hear people say, ""I'm no Bush fan, but Gore wouldn't have been any better."" How can that be? How can the system present us with two choices that are each so unpalatable that we vote for the less inept candidate?
The current California recall effort provides us a great example. An amazing revolution occurred-millions of people, disenchanted by spurious power deals and bungling budgeting, challenged the status quo. For once, a sitting politician was being taken to task for his performance while still in office. Whether the recall is appropriate or reasonable is not relevant here; the point is, citizens proved that collective discontent could rattle the otherwise sturdy foundation of a state's governorship.
But while Californians were progressive in their initial actions, they seem to be repeating their mistakes. They should examine what went wrong with Davis, and how he got elected in the first place, so they can make sure that they do not elect another Davis. However, Democratic frontrunner Lt. Gov. Bustamante and Republican darling Arnold Schwarzenegger jumped to the top of polls before either had articulated a platform. As long as voters offer their support without full analysis, the candidates can continue their efforts of sound bites and shameless photo ops; we give them no incentive to be more accountable.
The same thing will happen in the next presidential election. Party-line Democrats are already jumping on Howard Dean's bandwagon, but few Dean supporters can say anything substantial about him. But he is a Democrat, and he seems to have the best shot at knocking off Bush, so they support him. Similarly, many Republicans are not crazy about Bush, but they prefer him to any Democrat. And so it happens-we end up with two questionable candidates because we do not hold them to high standards.
We fawn over media darlings, we favor charismatic, telegenic candidates who have the most clever quips, but we don't force them to answer the tough questions. We watch their debates and see them all dance around the issues, and we let them get away with it. Where is the indignation, the demand for accountability?
We do not demand the best candidates because it requires too much work. That would mean we would have to examine each major candidate and understand their record and qualifications. We would have to demand clarity from all candidates and accept no spin from their Public Relations people. We would have to know more than whether they are pro-choice or anti-National Rifle Association-we need to know their actual plans and tangible strategies for fixing problems.
Unfortunately, putting in a few hours of political homework every four years is apparently too much for the average citizen. So the cycle continues-we get mediocre candidates, we grow disenchanted with everyone, we vote for the least of the evils and we spend four years bemoaning the sad state of our country's affairs.
It is time for each of us to demand more by doing our homework, thereby making a truly informed decision. Otherwise, we will continue to be shackled by the leaders that we deserve.
