Wednesday, November 7, 2012

Bipartisanship


Two working together (for the benefit of the whole).

Will it ever happen in Washington, our nations capitol?  I’m going to say, “Of course.  It has to."   It won’t be easy.   I will project optimism.

In a TV interview this morning, Haley Barbour, former Republican Governor of Mississippi as an example of his party knowing how to compromise cited Ronald Reagan as having that valuable skill.  Lyndon Johnson and Bill Clinton are frequently referenced for their reaching-out and working-with-others style. 
  
Actually, I think a mountain of verbal turmoil higher than Mt. Rushmore will have to be climbed before we see meaningful compromise in our Congress these days.  The same is true for conciliatory activity between the President and Congress.

 A view from The William J. Clinton Presidential Library
Why would I think that?  Because it’s a different world from that of Lyndon Johnson, Ronald Reagan, even Bill Clinton.  Too much of our print, radio and TV media seems to incite more than inspire.

In these times, opinion-driven news programming comes to us with a strongly antagonistic viewpoint - entertainment feeding our emotions, not our intellect.   Do viewers mostly restrict themselves to the network that supports their political view?  I think so.  This does nothing to encourage their consideration of the merits in another point of view.

Back in the days of Lyndon, Ronnie or Bill, how prolific was talk radio? Did resoundingly partial TV news talkers keep us, the constituency, tethered to the party line?  

There was no FOX News and its promotion of the conservative agenda.  There was no MSNBC enthusiastically supporting the liberal viewpoint.  Today, disrespectful programming colorful, practically offensive, devalues the objectives of the other political party.  I have a friend who tells me she will not look at FOX News.  “I'm not  looking at that stuff.”  I understand.  I choose to look because I want to know why and how deeply they feel.  In spite of the bruising negativity, there is a chance I might learn something. That’s a good thing.  Once or twice, watching, working through what distressed me; I actually grasped a premise of some merit.  Too bad anyone has to hurt to learn.  

Yesterday we re-elected President Barack Obama, Democrat to serve another four years in the White House.   Election results show the Democrats maintained their majority in the Senate.  Republicans will continue to lead the House of Representatives. 

I’ve just turned on FOX News and shook my head at the relentless combative and negative discussion of what might happen, what is happening and what didn’t happen in Washington these past four years.  Not one bit of positive commentary was offered.  Depressing. 

Bipartisanship in Washington must exist in order to produce legislation important to correct what is broken in our troubled economy.  

Do you think the media helps or hurts achieve quality governance, i.e., bipartisanship?

I’m thinking televised opinionated political news is primarily destructive, gives no added value.  It contradicts any possibility of promoting compromise.  It’s not a good thing. 

Your opinion?

2 comments:

  1. I agree. Most news is provoking. Is that in the definition of news, to provoke rather than inform? I guess I'm confused. If that is the case, that news programs provoke more than inform then it's not news we watch it's entertainment. And in that case I will choose different entertainment and get my news in other ways.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "Provoking", hmmm I like that word assessing some of the news broadcasts these days. And, already some of the ridiculous feedback because Barack Obama was the nation's choice over Mitt Romney has 'stepped over the line' of acceptability for our public airways in my estimation. The FCC is in charge, I'm thinking and may have to initiate an inquiry before it calms down so we can move Forward. Well, thanks for sharing your opinion.

    ReplyDelete