Politicians Cannot Answer A Question
Wednesday, November 28, 2007 Filed in: Events
I watch political debates on television. Have you
noticed that politicians cannot answer a question
with a direct answer?
How hard can it be?
Q - Can you describe your plans for Iraq?
A - The war in Iraq has been mismanaged and is a disaster for the great nation of the United States of America, and a difficult time for the people in Iraq. For any plan to work it must have the full support of the American people, and the full cooperation of the religious and political leaders in Iraq.
See? No plan. No details. Short on substance. Long on wind and generalizations.
Political answers are an art form. Now I understand why they teach political science in college. There's nothing really scientific, of course, but they teach students how to answer without saying anything. The right answer from a politician makes everyone happy and takes up a sufficient amount of time that the questioner doesn't dare ask a follow up question.
Presidential debates this year require a program or a scorecard. I have no idea who's won or how. Admittedly, I keep score on needles, digs, pokes, slurs, and slams. Whichever candidate is ahead in the polls is usually the candidate that the other candidates gang up on during a debate.
I don't understand the CNN-YouTube debates. CNN? Yes. Sure. They're a big cable TV network owned by Time Warner so it seems appropriate for them to host a presidential debate. But YouTube? Google obviously didn't want their brand name associated with something so slimy as a political debate.
From what I can tell, politicians are trained and experienced at not answering a direct question with a direct answer. In an important way, that's sad. In another way, it's hilarious. And that's sad, too.
How hard can it be?
Q - Can you describe your plans for Iraq?
A - The war in Iraq has been mismanaged and is a disaster for the great nation of the United States of America, and a difficult time for the people in Iraq. For any plan to work it must have the full support of the American people, and the full cooperation of the religious and political leaders in Iraq.
See? No plan. No details. Short on substance. Long on wind and generalizations.
Political answers are an art form. Now I understand why they teach political science in college. There's nothing really scientific, of course, but they teach students how to answer without saying anything. The right answer from a politician makes everyone happy and takes up a sufficient amount of time that the questioner doesn't dare ask a follow up question.
Presidential debates this year require a program or a scorecard. I have no idea who's won or how. Admittedly, I keep score on needles, digs, pokes, slurs, and slams. Whichever candidate is ahead in the polls is usually the candidate that the other candidates gang up on during a debate.
I don't understand the CNN-YouTube debates. CNN? Yes. Sure. They're a big cable TV network owned by Time Warner so it seems appropriate for them to host a presidential debate. But YouTube? Google obviously didn't want their brand name associated with something so slimy as a political debate.
From what I can tell, politicians are trained and experienced at not answering a direct question with a direct answer. In an important way, that's sad. In another way, it's hilarious. And that's sad, too.
