Avidly watching the wind sock

I've always given the GOP credit for cleverness,if nothing else, but the latest push for more seats in Congress seems devilishly simple: Using polls to "prove" that the Democrats are pushing through policies that are unpopular with the American people.

For example, I'm sure everyone knows by now that Prop 8 was struck down by a federal court as unconstitutional.  Most people I know are overjoyed about it, because they want equality for everyone under the law, but as the linked article notes, sitting Democrats aren't particularly pleased with the timing because they fear it will bring bigots to the polls and give the Republicans a majority in Congress again.  I understand the reality of that possibility, but should it matter?  Should people be denied their Constitutional rights so one party or another can retain power?

Then there's this jackass.  He claims Obama is the most anti-American president ever because he is enacting policies and laws that aren't currently approved of by a majority of those polled for their opinions.  (I could talk about how political poll results are all bullshit because the only people with landlines anymore are curmudgeons born during the baby boom, but that's another rant.)  That's a pretty big charge to raise against a president, "anti-American."  The author is really only accusing Obama of not doing what the people think they want this week,  but the label he pins on Obama is much more damning; he's implying that our president is not only disregarding opinions, but is actively trying to ruin the country.  That's quite an accusation, one even I never leveled at GWB.  (At least, not that I can remember.)

Does anyone with the ability to think critically actually believe our government's job is to kowtow to our every whim?  I mean, there's the obvious argument that if it did, we'd still have segregated schools and eating places, but even aside from that, do we not elect people for their judgment and knowledge?  Or do we really think that whoever we elect is going to do whatever we want, whenever we demand it?  Isn't that an infantile view of representative government?  Or am I crazy?

Comments

[Terry Bleizeffer]

There's a great scene in a West Wing episode where Toby Ziegler is telling the president that the American people do not want him to go forward with a particular initiative. And the president responds that he has a team of experts analyzing the implications of the policy, and the issues are so complex that even this team of experts can't reliably predict the outcome. And given that's the case, why would he rely on the judgment of the American people, who have their own jobs and lives and have spent no more than a few minutes to understand the issue, and most of that was based on information from special interest groups trying to sell them a position?

Polls have their uses, but governing is not one of them.

And BTW, I agree about Bush. I think he was actively ruining the country, but I don't think that's what he was TRYING to do. Hell, I don't even think Cheney was trying to ruin the country, and I think Cheney was the most malignant politician in my lifetime.