So, no hearings. No ability for the people, again, to say what Frank Costanza said to start the airing: “The tradition of Festivus begins with the airing of grievances. I got a lot of problems with you people! And now you’re gonna hear about it!”
From time to time, readers of this blog will send me compelling views on things, While I, Stan Fichtman, am the primary writer and poster on this site, I am also about expressing other viewpoints that are thought out and provide a perspective that I feel would be valuable to you as the reader.
Such is this piece, Writer chooses to remain anonymous. PHwSF respects that wish.
There are some great ideas out there to entertain and even implement. But perhaps we are too tired from being pushed and pulled by a crisis. Too worn out from being ignored by the political powers. Maybe too cynical that things could change for the better for everyone.
That bold vision is simply this – take whatever is happening at the White House (and Congress if he can) off the front pages of the news. I suspect that the new President, in his folksier ways, plans to reverse the concentration of interest on whatever his office is saying, in the news.
The Democrats, in the end, still stay firmly in charge of Hawai‘i. While there may be new faces in the elected seats, the overall infrastructure of who is running Hawai‘i stays generally the same.
This leads this writer to wonder “was anyone paying attention to what was going on in Washington when it came to CARES and HEROES money?”. It was apparent by at least the end of July if not the start of August, to anyone that was paying attention, that whatever was wished for in April was not coming to pass.
What the virus has shown to so many constituents is that while the “experienced” politician can talk a good game when it comes to managing the state in good times, the ability for them to convert into war-time crisis leaders does not exist. We are seeing now that the leaders we elected, for one thing, are falling apart when the situation has dramatically changed.
So, returning to the question, can these new pedigreed candidates relate to the people that they will represent in their offices like the one I described?
These letters provide a window. What they envision is not business as usual anytime soon. And to boot, many whose livelihoods are based on these jobs may not see them come back for some time.
Is striking fear in people, ramping up their anxiety, showing us that you understand this line in the oath? Does it show that you do have warmth, sympathy, and understanding for people?
Or are you showing us a new form of bedside manner, starting with the declarative statement that jolts the soul followed by a “do as I say, or else” demand to everyone?