Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - Why is the approval rating for Congress so low?

loquitur · 10-19-2007, 06:22 AM

Actually, Albania, it's interesting. By all accounts, the nine members of the Supreme Court get along extremely well and have a healthy respect for one another even when they disagree. That is how adults are supposed to behave. I suspect Congress used to be that way when they weren't under a constant media microscope and thus always under pressure to play to the grandstands. From what I understand, the Intelligence Committees, which for obvious reasons meet behind closed doors, operate in a manner much more similar to the Supreme Court, for similar reasons.

I think of George Washington. If you look at the sort of man he was, part of his leadership ability was his cultivated distance: he consciously set about to be aloof, though still gracious. He kept an air of mystery about himself, serious and solid yet inscrutable. It helped that he was the tallest man in the room, but still - he made himself larger than life by deliberately eschewing petty activity. No one nowadays dares do anything other than be a "regular guy" - plus, TV tends to shrink people's stature by showing their "off" moments - and that has consequences. With the exception of Lincoln, the most formidable presidents all had distance and were larger than life: Jackson, TR, FDR. Modern presidents have been shrunk by TV, even the good presidents like Reagan and Clinton.

I'm not sure what the answer is or if there even is one. I believe in transparency, and I'm not sure how that squares with having formidable leaders. We may just have to live with having a Congress that resembles a gaggle of squabbling children.

10-19-2007, 06:22 AM	#19 (permalink)
loquitur Junkie Location: NYC	Actually, Albania, it's interesting. By all accounts, the nine members of the Supreme Court get along extremely well and have a healthy respect for one another even when they disagree. That is how adults are supposed to behave. I suspect Congress used to be that way when they weren't under a constant media microscope and thus always under pressure to play to the grandstands. From what I understand, the Intelligence Committees, which for obvious reasons meet behind closed doors, operate in a manner much more similar to the Supreme Court, for similar reasons. I think of George Washington. If you look at the sort of man he was, part of his leadership ability was his cultivated distance: he consciously set about to be aloof, though still gracious. He kept an air of mystery about himself, serious and solid yet inscrutable. It helped that he was the tallest man in the room, but still - he made himself larger than life by deliberately eschewing petty activity. No one nowadays dares do anything other than be a "regular guy" - plus, TV tends to shrink people's stature by showing their "off" moments - and that has consequences. With the exception of Lincoln, the most formidable presidents all had distance and were larger than life: Jackson, TR, FDR. Modern presidents have been shrunk by TV, even the good presidents like Reagan and Clinton. I'm not sure what the answer is or if there even is one. I believe in transparency, and I'm not sure how that squares with having formidable leaders. We may just have to live with having a Congress that resembles a gaggle of squabbling children.