who are the politicians, and who are the public servents?. . .

[OneBlueSky]

there have always been two competing theories about how an elected legislator should carry out the the functions of his or her office (i.e. enacting laws, approving budgets, and confirming appointees) . . .

the first holds that legislators are elected to reflect, as closely as possible, the wishes of his or her constituency in the votes s/he casts . . . as can best be determined from letters, e-mails, faxes, polls, commentary, and personal experience . . .

the other holds that legislators are elected based for their experience, education, insight, ethics, and intelligence and, using those resources, should vote in ways that they honestly determine are in the best interests of both their constituents, the nation as a whole, and the planet . . .

the former are politicians; their primary motivation is to remain in office at all costs . . .

the latter are public servents -- at time statesmen even . . . their primary motivation is doing what's right for the country and its people as they understand it . . .

many years ago, I worked for a Member of Congress who as an honest public servent and, at times, a true statesman . . . though he represented a very conservative district, he regularly voted on highly emotional issues in ways that he knew the majority of his constituents would disapprove of . . . he was, for example, one of the original seven Members of Congress to vote against Vietman War appropriations -- because he knew it was the right thing to do . . . and he was one of only two (the other being Rep. Phil Burton of San Francisco) to vote against a much-discussed and highly inflammatory flag burning bill in the mid-60s -- because he knew it was the right thing to do . . . yeah, he lost his seat in the next election . . . but he maintained his integrity -- and was voted back into office two years after he was voted out . . .

Bill Nelson, Bob Byrd, and others who are trying to determine their constituents' wishes to decide how to vote on Alito are rank policicians motivated solely by self-preservation . . .

this weekend at least, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, and others who understand what's happening in this country (and in the world) and are opposing Alito based on what's best (critical, even) for the nation and it's people are true public servents -- possibly even statesmen . . .

in this year's Congressional elections, we need to vote out the politicians of both parties and start electing public servents and statesmen who will do the right thing -- regardless of the cost or the consequences to their careers . . .

because the cost of continually doing the wrong thing for policical reasons will, in the long run, be far more devastating . . .

[ananda]

1. depends on the level

On the larger state and national levels, there are basically no public servants.
To hold office, state and national officials.. both elected and appointed.. must
serve those that fund them.. meaning corporations, lobbyists, and the rich.

On the local level, officials are trying very hard to serve the real people and
communities around them.. but it's not easy because of the state and national
forces they must deal with, and these forces often attempt to be obstructionary
and not proactive and helpful.

An example is the way that BushInc and FEMA have been less than forthcoming
with promised money and aid for the city of Houston and the Houston ISD, and
Houston took in over a hundred thousand evacuees with the promise of aid and
money from BushInc and FEMA. The mayor of Houston, Bill White, has managed
to make this a public issue; the police chief, Hurtt, has managed to show how many
evacuees were forced into crowded southwest Houston apartment complexes which
are now plagued by crime and gang violence. Thus, some help and money is coming,
but not nearly enough.

Pollution and over-development is a huge problem in and around Houston, and that
is something local officials are trying to deal with proactively while, at the same time,
having to deal with obstructive and very aggressive developers and business owners
who do not want to reduce emissions, pollution, and savaging of wetlands and natural
resources.

The rampant racism and regressive social conservatism in Texas has caused many of
the problems plaguing Houston and other areas. The affluent live in a state of huge fear
and emotional numbness when it comes to black and brown people. All they want to do
is live in gated or affluent communities in their big, ugly, boxy houses and let the poor
and less fortunate congregate in crime infested neighborhoods and apartment complexes
without much in the way of social and city services.

The whole thing sucks.

Sue

[ewoden]

2. It's beyond "sucks" it is a powder keg