Myth of the Washington insider

[rawstory]

Does being a Washington insider matter anymore?? I don't know that this article totally does it justice, but you can read the whole thing at http://www.rawstory.com . The question that really irks me is, "But what's so bad about business as usual?"



INSIDE THE BELTWAY
Myth of the Washington outsider

By Justin Droms
RAW STORY COLUMNIST

In recent presidential elections, candidates have rushed to identify themselves as "Washington outsiders," promising voters leadership that is free of Capitol Hill corruption and an approach that opposes business as usual in Washington.

But what's so bad about business as usual?

Four years ago, Texas Gov. George W. Bush masterfully wooed voters as a Washington outsider and hee-hawed his way right into the Oval Office. But after the Washington virgin's tumultuous term at the helm, voters in the upcoming election might show that the outsider approach is irrelevant, and that the quintessential insider is the right man for the job. After all, that is exactly what Democratic primary voters already have asserted in effectively nominating Sen. John Kerry.

The most recent (and most unsuccessful) candidates to assume the Washington outsider label were Democratic presidential hopefuls Howard Dean, John Edwards and Wesley Clark. They used their outsider status to define largely their respective campaigns and heavily criticized opponent Kerry for his prolonged experience inside the beltway.

But voters didn't buy into the hype - they vetoed Dean's romp through Michigan, New Mexico, etc. (yeeehaaww!!). They proved that there is, in fact, only one America; and they showed that Madonna has the political pull of a frozen burrito. Essentially, voters overwhelmingly chose the consummate Washington insider over three respectable outsiders, highlighting the desire for a candidate who has the proven ability to get things done within the confines of Washington politics, not just make speeches about why it's screwed up.

[phantom power]

1. it's the wrong question

This entire "insider" or "outsider" issue is a red-herring. As usual, it's being used to distract us all from asking real questions, like:

"is politician-X doing a good job or not?"

It's a lot like the "are taxes good or bad?" question. It's the wrong question. A much better question is:

"are we getting good value from our taxes or not?"

[Classical_Liberal]

2. Dean wouldn't be compromised by business money

He would have been more free to work in the interest of unions, better health care and working people.

He also would have been more free to truly reform our foriegn policy, because he doesn't take money from neocon types.

I think the rank and file were just freaked by the pundits hysterical outburst.

Anyway, we're past it. Kerry won. We're moving on to getting people elected to congress and creating a left coalition like the Goldwater coalition for the republicans. We'll get their someday.