Since her Nevada primary victory, once outspoken Sharron Angle has fallen strangely silent. During the Republican primary, Angle proudly proclaimed, “I am the Tea Party.” Running against Sue [chicken-in-every-doctor’s-pot] Lowden, Angle made no secret of where she stood on issues. They were proclaimed on her website and shared with reporters, all for public consumption. Now the website has been scrubbed and reporters, at least of the mainstream variety, are persona non gratis. Her first web based ad focuses on attacking Harry Reid for attacking her.
Yes, I understand not wanting to defend a Scientology based experiment in the reformation of prison inmates that involves a vitamin regimen, saunas and massages. But, many of her now-avoided positions were not beyond the pale. If a candidate sincerely believes in deficit reduction, issues like decommissioning the Departments of Education and Energy are worthy of serious discussion. Privatizing and/or phasing out Social Security fits within that discussion too. And, withdrawing from the United Nations is not a concept that is either new or incapable of being defended.
The political handlers have simply made the calculation that it is better to run “against” something or someone than to stand “for” something. Remember the not-Bush vote of 2008. It is easier to run against deficits than propose specific remedies. It is easier to run against Harry Reid than to address serious policy issues. That’s today’s political calculus; find something to run against, not something to present as a specific forward thinking solution.
Specifics are dangerous. They can be picked apart, criticized. Flaws can be found in any proposal that dares lend itself to specificity. But, the quality of our democracy is diminished when we are reduced to evaluating candidates based on what they oppose rather that what they would do.
Does this mean that I agree with Sharron Angle about Second Amendment remedies or eliminating the IRS in favor of a flat tax? Not necessarily, but I’d be interested in the discussion on both issues and many others that she [previously] had the courage to raise. I’d like to hear specific proposals on deficit reduction that go beyond the fatuous “cutting waste and pork” drivel. What made Sharron Angle interesting and refreshing was that she didn’t back away from issues. She stood for something. At least until she won the nomination.
[Author’s Note: the photo above used to be on Sharron Angle’s website. Looking today, I can’t find it there.]
Cross posted at Elijah’s Sweete Spot.
Contributor, aka tidbits. Retired attorney in complex litigation, death penalty defense and constitutional law. Former Nat’l Board Chair: Alzheimer’s Association. Served on multiple political campaigns, including two for U.S. Senator Mark O. Hatfield (R-OR). Contributing author to three legal books and multiple legal publications.