Print this story | E-mail story | This story has 5 comments Add your own | iPod friendly
Politicians should stay home
Published Friday, October 19, 2007
It sometimes seems like there’s this fever of oddness that must permeate the halls of Congress. How else to explain the fervor with which so many representatives were, until recently, signing on to a resolution that would have condemned genocide?
It sounds like a worthy cause, a good stand for Congress and the United States to take — until it becomes clear that the genocide in question occurred in 1915. More than 90 years ago, the Ottoman Empire slaughtered a huge number of innocent Armenians — a horrible thing. But why, one has to wonder, was Congress debating it now?
Of course, there probably wouldn’t have been any debate until the modern Turkish government (none of whose members, it should be noted, were even alive in 1915) got itself into a snit because it thought the United States was about to make Turkey look bad.
It all turned into a big fur ball and, at last count, representatives are backing away from the resolution faster than they signed on in the first place.
I am sure that for at least a few Americans of Armenian descent, this is a hot issue. But I couldn’t help laughing out loud at one news account that noted the resolution would have been “non-binding.” What’s next, a resolution condemning Caesar for invading Gaul? That only happened a couple of millennia ago.
Kidding aside, how did this Armenian Ottoman thing ever get so far down the legislative pipe? Why didn’t someone pop up sooner and say, “Hey, don’t we have some actual business to attend to?” Don’t we have some issues — Iraq, budgets, global warming — on which we could take action that is useful?
It’s just one more reason that Congress — and the state legislature, too — should adopt my keep-the-lawmakers-home plan. Despite the jokey name, it’s a serious idea, but one that is apparently before its time.
Instead of convening hundreds of representatives and senators in Washington, where they spend most of their time associating with each other and with the highly paid lobbyists who are there to influence government, why not make lawmakers work from their home communities? With today’s technology, any member of Congress could sit in a comfy little meeting room in her or his home town, surrounded by big-screen monitors that show all the other lawmakers with whom contact is necessary. And there, in the office, would be a dozen or so comfortable chairs for interested local residents to drop by and keep an eye on things.
It means our representatives would be eating lunch at the downtown diner, attending school concerts and shopping for groceries after work right in the midst of even the busiest legislative periods. Plenty of opportunity for them to hear from those they are supposed to be representing — instead of from lobbyists.
Can you imagine the conversation at the check-out line?
“Hey, Congressman, what are you voting on today?”
“Well, we’re thinking of condemning a 90-something-year-old act of genocide in the Middle East.”
“Huh?”
This stay-at-home plan would definitely keep things focused a little better in Washington — or, rather, in Congress, wherever it happens to be. Wouldn’t be so much fun for those who enjoy the Washington power game, though.
I don’t have any expectation this will ever happen. It makes too much sense.
* * *
A couple of weeks ago, I wrote about my re-usable grocery bag experiment. An update: It works pretty well. Might not be so good for those who need to feed a family of six. But if you’re shopping for a smaller crowd, a couple of re-usable bags will hold as much as a half-dozen of the plastic kind. And they’re much friendlier to the environment.
Give it a try.
Journal publisher Dave Churchill’s column runs on Fridays.
Comments
The Daily Journal is happy to host community conversations about news and life in Fergus Falls and the surrounding area. As hosts, we expect guests will show respect for each other. That means we don't threaten or defame each other, and we keep conversations free of personal attacks. Witty is great. Abusive is not. If you think a post violates these standards, don't escalate the situation. Instead, flag the comment to alert us. We'll take action if necessary. It's not hard. This should be a place where people want to read and contribute -- a place for spirited exchanges of opinion. So those who persist with racist, defamatory or abusive postings risk losing the privilege to post at all.Posted by chipmunk (anonymous) on October 19, 2007 at 3:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The issue of Armenian Genocide has been brought up every year for the past thirty years, it just never made it this far before, and I can see well founded points on both sides of the issue. It should not surprise anyone that this is how congress and the extreme religious right act, because it works and the American public falls for it all the time. Some examples…
YOU…I’m worried about social security and my pension.
POLITICAN…what! Don’t you realize there are two queers in California who want to get married?
YOU…How silly of me. How could I have been so selfish, as to worry about myself, when queers are tearing at the very fabric of the American way of life. What can I do to help, is there a petition I can sign.
Thanks for caring Senator.
Another example….
YOU…All of our good paying jobs are going overseas.
POLITICIAN….Where are your priorities? Don’t you understand that protesters have burned the American flag twice since 1979.
YOU…You’re right, what was I thinking of. My little job is nothing when viewed from the perspective of global flag burning. Keep up the good fight congressman and here is the campaign contribution you wanted.
Suckers deserve what they get.
Posted by bigkahunaburger (anonymous) on October 19, 2007 at 5:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
YOU... I can't afford healthcare for my kids and senior citizens cannot afford medication.
POLITICIAN... True, but if Democrats immediately seize all of your hunting rifles, how will you make it through the winter?
YOU... Thanks for setting me straight. I knew Charlton Heston had more to contribute to society than his chariot racing skills. How much for a subscription?
Posted by raphlemkin (anonymous) on October 19, 2007 at 5:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
the word Genocide was coined to describe what happened to the Armenians. This resolution shows several things:
1. The United States is incapable of standing up to genocide.
2. US politicians are morally bankrupt.
3. Genocide denial is a viable industry (Holocaust is next).
4. America's spine is gone. We now cower to the threats of our own allies. We outsource our values and morals to the genocidal ideology of Turkey.
5. Our real allies (who have long ago recognized this genocide, will never trust our foreign policy again).
Posted by sally (anonymous) on October 28, 2007 at 8:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I did a bit of "research" and foud out that chipmunk forgot to log out as chipmunk and sign in under another of his many alter EGOs... Isn't it nice how he strokes his ego(s)???
Posted by chipmunk (anonymous) on October 14, 2007 at 10:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)
In this debate I’m siding with chipmunk, at least his posts are coherent and original. Whereas GRWhitcop follows chipmunk around these pages like a little puppy, constantly nipping at chipmunks heels, or should I say paws. GRWhitcop’s problem is he never has an original thought of his own, he simply bemoans whatever chipmunk happens to be posting on at the time and if anyone points this out GRWhitcop whirls and turns on that poster as well. GRWhitcop is obsessed with chipmunk in the clinical sense, his obsession appears to be all consuming. He can not get through the day without resorting to his neurosis, and is not fulfilled until chipmunk satisfies his delusion and reason for living.
Posted by chipmunk (anonymous) on October 29, 2007 at 1:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Sally, You should have done a little more research, If you had you would have discovered that I was parroting the same wording GRWhitcop used (against me) in an earlier post on the very same day five hours earlier at 5:22 pm at “Why can’t our troops get to a guy in a cave” I signed my name to it because I wrote it. Once again I was using sarcasm. I wish you would look it up in a dictionary, perhaps if you understood the concept of sarcasm you would not look so foolish now. Never mind, that might be too much research for you, I’ll do it for you “1: a sharp and often satirical or ironic utterance designed to cut or give pain2 a: a mode of satirical wit depending for its effect on bitter, caustic, and often ironic language that is usually directed against an individual b: the use or language of sarcasm”.
I realize I may have confused you again by using another new word (parroting) above. So I will provide the definition of that word also,”2parrot Function: transitive verb Date: 1596 : to repeat by rote” It keeps getting more confusing doesn’t it Sally. I’ll help you again “3rote Function: adjective Date: 1641,: learned or memorized (by rote)” Now write these three new words down on paper so you won’t be so confused the next time you make another wonderful discovery.
Post a comment
(Requires free registration.)