Well, I haven't been posting much because I am very busy with my endeavor to attain certification as a paralegal in a 7 month time-frame. So no apologies for not posting, just an explanation. As I'm sure you all know, I'm not short on opinions, even though I may not have been sharing them.
I am not making any direct endorsement for any of the city council candidates. Personally, I believe that all the incumbents should be ousted and the city should hire a new attorney. Knowing this will not happen is a cup of bitter brew I must reluctantly drink from.
Ok. So we know that some incumbents will retain their elected seats. I would like to say, however, that elected officials do reflect their constituency. I urge all voters to carefully read what the candidates are trying to say and determine if they say it effectively and in a literate manner.
Literacy should count! In my mind and experience, a person who doesn't know the difference between "their" and "there" is likely to not recognize many of the subtleties in proposals made to a city council for consideration. So if such a person is elected to the city council, they are far more likely to be lead or mislead by the advice of the city attorney and city staff officials who are not elected, but certainly have an agenda of their own.
Candidates are free to run on whatever platform they wish. In my opinion, "Keep your hand out of my pocket!" is a perfectly valid sentiment for an aspiring city council candidate to advocate. I think this sentiment is adequately represented in the present makeup of the city council, however. I don't care if there is another "libertarian" or "fisal conservative" elected to city council. City council is never going to reflect my values and I will always oppose tax abatements for developers who are perfectly capable of paying real estate, commercial and industrial taxes that our city is in desperate need of.
I will also always object to the notion of people who don't know how to effectively elocute ideas and specific proposals for the people whom they supposedly represent. It is not enough for an elected representative to merely reflect the sentiments of their constituents; such a representative must possess critical thinking skills and have the ability to express the mindset of the people they represent proficiently.
With that in mind, I have serious misgivings about the candidacy of several aspiring city council members of both the incumbent and non-incumbent variety. I urge all voters to consider not only the ideas that candidates represent, but also their ability to express those ideas. Remember that debates and campaign speeches are rehearsed and prepared for and do not in any way reflect a candidate's ability to think critially in a public forum. Almost every individual is keenly aware of the "bottom line" and that family and government purse strings are being drawn closed.
We do not need representatives at any level of government who do not possess the communication skills that are so essential to the efficient performance of their duty as elected officials. Sharing a common belief is insufficient cause to elect someone incapable of the eloquent expression of those beliefs. Don't settle for Elmer Fudd or Miss Piggy as city council members. Sharing their hate of Bugs or their love for Kermie is simply not a good enough reason to vote for an under-qualified candidate.
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)