I will often use a particular dictionary definition to enhance the argument or suggestion I am making on a particular argument. Today’s Magic word is:
LEADER
noun
1. a person who rules or guides or inspires others [ant: follower]
2. a featured article of merchandise sold at a loss in order to draw customers
This definition has a particular second meaning I find curiously apt. However, it’s main is more appropriate to understanding the difference between leading and becoming political. As a leader you are expected to be unique, have answers, find solutions which fit a route you take to “guide” your followers through. The power you wield, is that which is implicitly granted by your followers, who place their trust in your decisions. Trust which you inspire through action and example. ie: If you are a thug, your followers will likely be thugs as well) If you have done it, it is easier for those behind you to accept your command to do it.
Many of our politicians would like for us to believe they are leaders. In Michigan we have many opportunities to select those who would represent us and make decisions on our behalf. Our governor would like us to think her solutions are that which we should follow to succeed in bringing prosperity to this great state. I have no doubt she wishes that the measures she supports would be successful, and that Michigan would thrive. However, this is where my second point must be made, that being political, and being a true leader can be two very different vocations.
A politician can inspire through speech, platitudes, drawing visions of where we all wish to go. A politician however, does not automatically have the skills to LEAD, or the ability to find the correct path to success of the stated goals and wishes. We have discovered this in Michigan by decisions made in the executive, legislative branches, and also in many of our local elected governments. Because of an inspiring speech, or oratorical brilliance unfortunately, we have often selected simply politicians who are bereft of original and realistic solutions as our mastheads. One can be a politician AND a successful leader, but it isn’t always the rule.
Selecting our leaders has continued to be more difficult as the politics and the solutions suggested by those running for office become ever more complicated. Special Interests (of which most of us support at least one) lobby consistently for their place in political planning and implementation. Some require restrictive actions by government, (M.A.D.D., NMEAC, Nearly any Union, etc..) while some lobby for less intrusive controls (Anti Motorcyle helmet groups, Heartland, NORML..) to please their constituencies. Lobbying money can be quite lucrative for campaign coffers of those running for office, and though some politicos might actually carry a minimum of core principles, they are often more interested in maintaining their next paycheck (as are we all) than sticking with the words they use to be elected. Also, lobbyists often… Lie. (gasp)
One can look at some of the laws passed as regards to certain industries to demonstrate the power of lobbying. Have you ever wondered who writes your local fire code? Certainly it’s the fire chief who along with local township or city planners put pen to paper and defined your safety, right? Wrong. Most fire codes in most locales are not similar by chance. they did NOT evolve because of commonalities in our society. They are mostly drawn up from alarm and fire protection specialists such as TYCO, and other alarm equipment installers and providers. How many other laws are drafted by multi billion dollar corporate interests that affect you? Some might be considered benign, yet some cost us dearly, both in money and independence.
A POLITICIAN can claim success through failure, or blame a failure on forces outside of their control. Granholm is purely a POLITICIAN. Again I am sure she would like to do what is best for Michigan, yet her core values and current political ties will not allow her to see it. Her moral compass, guided by liberal policy wonks, and the desire to remain in power at SOME level prevents her ability to enjoy an original thought. Carl Levin likewise, has so abandoned his connection with real life, (30 years in the senate) he has no ability to understand, and then formulate the real solutions that feet on the ground could. (out of touch with those of us who make things work)
But a LEADER can decipher the validity of proposals, and make compelling arguments to support or oppose. A LEADER, by his or her actions proves repeatedly through success of why they should in fact have our trust. A LEADER, has CORE CONVICTIONS, and demonstrates through examples of his or her own, that the correct answers can be found by following those principles which guide THEM. A LEADER also is able to not suffer the intellectual laziness found in those who let the lobbying groups write their opinion, but rather thoughtfully considers cost and benefit to life and liberty.
Having said all this, I would like to add my unequivocal support to Jack Hoogendyk who is running against the incumbent of 30 years Carl Levin. I had not planned on using this particular entry for promoting Jack’s candidacy, however his consistent philosophy of liberty from restrictive government, promoting reduction of taxes, and supporting policies which CREATE growth are arguable more sound than the same old political diatribe that Levin spouts. (And as you know, Levin is still blaming Bush policies for Michigan’s problems)
Jack Hoogendyk would be a fine Senator we could be proud of. A true LEADER with core principles.
And maybe you don’t know what true leadership is, or you aren’t sure what we need to do to fix this country, then just MAYBE you don’t know JACK.