Monday, July 25, 2011

Political Lessons in Compromise and Shared Sacrifice

In the last few weeks we have had the great fortune to bear witness to one of the founding principles in our fine nation's government, that of a two party system of ideals coming together to solve our mutual problems.  The two sides are beautifully represented by the President, who asks for little but will settle for less, and the Speaker of the House John Boehner, who represents the most vulnerable minority in the country: the filthy rich.

I personally find it refreshing to see these two leaders in spirited debate display their graceful back and forth dance of ideas, each rationally considering the other's suggestions before making concessions and finally agreeing.

Holy fuck, I did not intend for the sarcasm to get so thick so fast.  Apologies.

While the whole country sits at the edge of uncertain economic disaster, consider how these tactics could be used in your personal life.  For instance, you could call your credit card company and tell them that you have decided you cannot continue to pay them until you can figure out how to lower your net monthly bills, and get a raise at your job.  That should go over well.

The basic principles are very simple here.  You just take something that you have a shared interest in preserving (the US AAA credit rating) and use whatever available leverage (a house seat majority in the debt ceiling vote) to play a game of "chicken" until one side gives up everything.  No compromise.  No negotiation.  The man with the biggest balls wins.  But sometimes it is hard to distinguish "balls" from a genuine disregard for the future of the country.

For either side's ideal leadership, I think you have to toss out both Obama and Boehner.  Obama is not nearly stubborn enough, and his practical mind accepts when ground is lost too quickly, and Boehner couldn't sell a glass of water to a woman that just finished a bukkake gargle-fest.  I would be surprised if Boehner could get the House Republicans to agree to a lunch order.  On the Republican side, most people are looking at Governor Christie of NJ.  I agree that it has been too long since we have had a white fatass bully in political prominence, and Huckabee isn't pulling any crowds anymore.  But on the Democrat's side I think the option is obvious.  Anthony Weiner for President!!  The stuff he is accused of couldn't even make Bill Clinton stop scrolling on a porno image search.  The only reason he has been made such a joke is because we got to see the pictures.  If we had pictures of that time when John Boehner stomped that homeless child to death he wouldn't still be in Congress, either (that happened, right?).  But no matter what side you fall on, you must admit:  A Chris Christie v Anthony Weiner presidential debate would be epic.

Good thing it isn't a ham eating contest.  For two reasons.

No comments:

Post a Comment