Monday, December 5, 2011

Herman in the Lion's Den


Herman Cain, we hardly got to emotionally ravage ye.

The Tea Party darling, the Right’s Obama, Cain was, only a few weeks ago, the leading contender for the center spotlight in next November’s presidential election. But in a decision that should have surprised no one, Herman Cain suspended his presidential campaign last week after his meteoric rise did what meteorites do: burned up on entering the atmosphere of modern media attention.

A successful businessman and small-government advocate, Cain burst onto the scene with presidential charisma. He had the smile, the connections, the voice, the ideas for change. Experience? None, but that appealed to his everyman persona. Intelligence? More common than academic, but everyone agrees we need a good dose of that in Washington. Viability? A black man with Southern roots and national contacts who advocated for all the right issues. He was the poster boy for the GOP’s diversity and had the “it” factor. He even looked presidential.

But just as quickly as Cain became the favorite, the tide turned. Rumors of inappropriate touching and sexual harassment, lawsuits and a longtime affair with a Georgia woman surfaced. Cain returned to Atlanta, his campaign all but concluded, and took his ideas with him.

Cain’s demise is all too common in modern American politics. In an era of round-the-clock news, amateur-turned-professional bloggers, and investigative journalism, a presidential race (or really any political election above the local level) has become more a gantlet of unevenly judged morality than an ideological contest. It is a crucible of ironic proportions: we save the trash – the missteps, political and societal  – and throw out the purified metal, the true value of a candidate.

To be clear, this is our fault, mine and yours. We watch Fox, CNN, MSNBC, and all of their splinter channels. We follow pundits from day to day as they try to find filler for three hours of talk time. We believe their reports and their commentary, trusting them to do the thinking for us. We choose sides (and networks) and only listen to our perspective spun twenty different ways.

We are the lions who crave the flesh of our candidates, who devour the fatty morsels of their personal lives and leave the marrow-filled bones of their ideas behind. The twenty-four hour media is only the zookeeper, cutting apart the public servant and tossing out what they know we will consume.

And by cannibalizing our candidates we limit our political choices. Consider Winston Churchill, perhaps the most beloved British pol of the twentieth century. Would he have a chance at election in modern America as a hard drinker with a face only a bulldog’s mother could love? His caustic wit was so biting it would today be media gold, his quips so politically incorrect they would derail even the most promising of campaigns.

Or Thomas Jefferson, described by some as the smartest man who ever held the office president. Would he survive an MSNBC investigative report into his illicit relationship with slave Sally Hemmings, especially if he were discovered to have fathered children with her out of wedlock? Would we elect John F. Kennedy with Fox News digging into his love life? What about Abraham Lincoln after a CNN report on his repeated failures as a businessman?

In actuality, today these men likely would be smart enough to stay far away from political arena, lest their lives be dissected and the darkest corners of their histories probed.
And there is the real trouble. Imagine all of the would-be leaders who have shuttered their political ambitions in lieu of the scrutiny they would face. Think of nameless, faceless men and women with brilliant ideas for our country’s direction who will not or cannot allow their pasts to be two-week’s fodder for the news networks.

Where are the modern Washingtons and Jeffersons, Lincolns and Roosevelts? Where are our statesmen? They are heading up think tanks in D.C. and serving as political science professors in the Ivy League, unwilling to represent and serve the masses if the masses demand destroyed privacy in return.

Please understand, news organizations play a vital role in creating an informed electorate. We need to vet candidates for their emotional, intellectual, and moral aptitude. We need to know candidates’ positions versus their voting records, their altruistic promises versus their scandals. We need journalists who will fight and dig and publish with impunity. The free press is the cornerstone of a functioning republic. The world is a better place because of Woodward and Bernstein’s investigation into the Watergate break-in.

However, sometimes we need to protect our candidates from the media. In a perfect world, we would look to news outlets and see unbiased anchors, not a troop of analysts who tell us what to think. We would listen to balanced reports, not politically slanted talk radio. And our news consumption would look proportionately much like this paper, heavy on reporting, light on editorials. 

In that world, Herman Cain still may not have been the right choice for Republicans (I was not a fan) but he would have been defeated on the basis of his ideas, not his private life. Unfortunately, we don’t live in that world.

Someone get the next slab of meat ready. The lions are hungry.

Sunday, December 4, 2011

A Matter of Culture - A Letter Published in The Moultrie Observer

NOTE: This letter appeared in The Moultrie Observer on Saturday, December 3, two days after I submitted it and a day following the Packers season-ending loss to the Grayson High Rams. The day it was written, GPB announced it would not air the Colquitt-Grayson game on its flagship station as expected, scheduling it for a smaller network, GPB Knowledge, a channel we don't get in our hometown. Offended, I wrote the following piece. I was surprised at how many people missed the sarcasm and took it at face value. Check out the comments on The Moultrie Observer page. Definitely worth the click. For the record, I love football, probably too much.
MOULTRIE — Dear editor,

I am writing with regards to Georgia Public Broadcast’s (GPB) Friday night television schedule and its decision to air Rick Steves’ European Insights instead of the Grayson-Colquitt semifinal GHSA football game.

Georgians (and Southerners in general) are characterized nationally as backwards and out of touch with progressive culture. We are mocked for our low test scores and high poverty, our accents and our dress. We are called uncultured, illiterate, and, perhaps most commonly, redneck. "Welcome to the South," they joke. "Set your watch back 50 years."
 
So when I saw GPB removed the GHSA football semifinals from its lineup, I was pleased. Georgians need more exposure to the greater world and Rick Steves is just the man for the job.
Rick Steves, looking more
awesome than I expected


This Friday’s episode, for instance, touts Rick’s "travels through Europe [and includes] stops in Pisa, the Mauthausen Concentration Camp, Hitler's Eagle's Nest in Berchtesgaden and the Danish Nazi Resistance Museum in Copenhagen. Also: Europe's ethnic diversity and infrastructure investments are explored."

Fantastic stuff, really, and so much more exciting than a football game between two of the state’s best squads. Rick Steves will provide information so pertinent to daily life, yet  strangely inexplicable to most Southerners. I can't even estimate how often I have attempted to talk to my coworkers about the intricacies of Serbian race relations or the Grecian debt crisis, only to have them look at me as I look at the "art" of Marcel Duchamp (you get the reference, I’m sure).

Simply put, Georgians need more exposure to European culture; GPB on Friday night would be an excellent place to start.

Marcel Duchamp's most
famous "work." For real.

As well, it is past time someone took a stand against King Football in this state. Our obsession with this "game" is astounding and, quite frankly, unhealthy. Consider the scene at Mack Tharpe Stadium here in Moultrie on a football Friday night in the fall. Thousands from Colquitt County, people from all walks of life – blue collar and white collar; white, black, and Hispanic; Republican and Democrat; rich and poor; old and young; entire families – waste nearly three hours of their lives sitting side by side together, watching a high school football game when they could be home reading the latest issue of The Economist or learning about The Netherland's dike systems with Rick Steves.

They scream and chant and sing and laugh and boo, sometimes all in the space of just 10 minutes. They blow obnoxious vuvuzelas, shake cans full of pennies, and contribute to the national obesity rate by snacking on high-fat, low-nutrient foods. They are deliriously elated by a win and ridiculously disappointed with a loss, all over watching high school boys run around with a piece of leather. I bet not a single one of them was that excited after reading Brian Schmidt’s Nobel Prize winning research on universe expansion and supernovae development.

 
A troglodyte
To cap it off, for the next week, that GAME is all these slack-jawed troglodytes want to talk about! Not a single time this fall was I solicited for my opinion on wealth inequality in modern America. Yet, I was asked seven times this past week if I would have made the same decision as Coach Propst to go for two at the end of the Camden game. How sad to take such pride in 48 minutes on a game clock! How hopelessly backwards.

Yes, GPB made the right decision by removing the playoff game from Georgia's televisions. I only hope Moultrians will take this opportunity – this freedom from football's demagoguery – to better themselves this Friday night. I for one anticipate long conversations on Monday about Italian efforts to stabilize the Leaning Tower of Pisa in lieu of the typical Packer-driven water cooler fare, because I know that, even with the game not on, the majority of our town will still tune in to GPB for the fine cultural programming it offers us every Friday night.