Has everyone forgotten what representative means?
- 1
- Add a Comment
It seems that everyone in this country today seems to have forgotten what the word representative means. Insofar as government is concerned, it means that our elected officials are supposed to act on our behalf, doing what we wish. Every one of the current candidates for the highest office in the land seems to have forgotten that. They are all so busy blathering about what they stand for that they seem to have forgotten that what they’re supposed to stand for is us.
How different the race to the White House would be if just one of them said that they were going to listen to the wishes of the people. Not what they believe the wishes are but what they are. The whole election process is so drawn out now, with so much expense, that I can’t believe that this is what the founding fathers envisioned.
Just this morning I heard John McCain say that he would continue the war as President, no matter what the feeling of the country was, because his knowledge and experience was superior to that of the country. I heard this and wondered why Tim Russert did not pin him down on this, but it was let go. If I had been channeling Elvis at the time I saw this I’d have shot the television. Since when is any politician supposed to place his wishes above the will of the people? As far as I am concerned, the country as a whole is wanting the war to be over, and, right or wrong, that is what should happen. The election of 2006 should have gotten the point across to the incumbents, but apparently they are a little thicker than we thought. I used to think that Mr McCain was just a nice older gentleman who was brave and courageous in Vietnam, and had tried to serve honorably since in Congress. I disagreed with most of what he said, but understood why he said it. I can no longer say that, and find his change of stance on many things intolerable as an elected official. I certainly hope others do too.
[tags]government, white house, election, representative, politician[/tags]
One Comment
Ernest N. Wilcox Jr.
May 15th, 2007
at 12:14am
I agree with your objections here. I too think our Governmental representatives have forgotten for whom they work, and they have put me in a position I do not like. I firmly believe that war should always be an action of last resort. The only time we should go to war is when we have been attacked, not when we fear we may be attacked. There are never any victors in war, or honor, or glory, only horror, destruction, hatred, violence, and death. War is about killing or being killed, and nothing else. At the same time, we as a nation must remember that we did indeed invade Iraq and remove Sadam Housein from power, eventually bringing about his execution. We can not and should not extricate ourselves until Iraq has a functioning and reasonably stable government in place. Anything less would irresponsible.
The issue at hand is no longer whether we embarked on this mission under false pretenses or even if we should have started it in the first place. We have so embarked, and now we must live with the results. It is too bad if we no longer want to continue with this war. we had the opportunity to change our course in 2004 and we did not. On the contrary, we reconfirmed our support for the course set by President Busch by re-electing him with a majority popular vote. If we pull our troops before the Iraqi government can stand on its own, terrorist organizations will have a new haven from which to plan and launch their attacks world wide. The middle east will further destabilize, and a wider war may become nearly inevitable. I fear the ultimate price may be beyond our capacity to imagine.