Monday, October 08, 2007

Working on the holiday

I thought I'd grab a minute and add to the blog this morning before turning my attention back to work, and hopefully I can get a lot done today this holiday since it is a bit on the quiet side today.

First...a few responses to recent posts by you...

To Mccommas: I thought your response to the question of whether an elected official should vote the way they believe constituents want them to vote, or vote the way based on thier own beliefs was very well put. (And I'll pass on your comments about our new Web page to the appropriate folks.)

To Bill Jenkins: It would nice, in an ideal world, to hold candidate debates in every community we cover. But the reality is, that isn't feasible. We chose Norwich, Canterbury, Colchester and Plainfield because they represent our largest readership areas - and our intent was to be in front of as many readers as we could. It may not be the best plan in some folks' eyes, but that was the rationale in choosing those communities. We did plan - and made arrangments for a debate in Griswold as well, but the two candidates there withdrew after everything was confirmed.

I do agree with you, there are some good races in some of the smaller communities around here, and we hope that voters will take the opportunity to learn as much as they can about the candidates in each.

To dweeb: Thanks for your contributions of questions to ask candidates for the Norwich City Council. Don't worry about the questions being so overly "Norwich," it is, afterall, the town where you live and has the highest interest for you.

And finally to Rags: Chris Dodd does, very much so, believe that he has something worthwhile to bring to this debate over the future direction of this country - and he also believes, very much so, that he can be an effective leader. His position on "some" issues" mirror those of other Democratic candidates, but on other issues he has staked out different positions. As for your comment, that last good idea he had died of lonliness...I wouldn't go quite that far.

When I was in New Hampshire in August with him, he put forth what I thought was a new, innovative idea regarding college education. He would implement a partnership between the federal government and state governments to allow high school graduates to attend community colleges for free. That would enable these young people to earn the credits on basic subjects before transferring to four-year schools and more specialized study on their chosen career paths. And...it significantly reduces the cost of a college education.

That, in my opinion, is an idea that actually addresses an issue with a solution that is workable.

4 Comments:

Blogger mccommas said...

-- And in that vein when an incumbent does not win re-election it’s not always a bad reflection on that man.

Rob Simmons was the best Congressman this state has ever had. Simmons voted his conscience and in the end it cost him his seat.

A lesser man would have cast the easier vote (such a man now holds the seat he once occupied).

Looking forward to the 2010 elections, I think its time to consider Rob Simmons for Governor.

Governors have to make hard decisions and Simmons has proved he does not fear making those decisions even at a cost to himself.

I think Blumenthal having waited for the stars to line up just perfect so he would not have to fight to get the job ultimately will suffer from the Kennelly Syndrome.

9:26 PM  
Blogger dweeb said...

Mccommas,
Very much enjoyed your answer to the delineation of responsibility of those elected to public office. And agree, 'to thine ownself be true.' I wish you every success in your current candidacy.
(I do respectfully disagree with your assessment of both the previous and current 2nd District representatives, but that's the beauty of a free society, divergent viewpoints.)

And Ray, aside from your report on Senator Dodd's college tuition program, I don't think there was as much notice paid as could have been.

Sometimes there's far more focus on sizzle than steak and style triumphs over substance.

Perhaps that's almost a good thing about a (very) long process to select national candidates?

12:40 PM  
Blogger Middle Aged Lunatic said...

Dweeb, I get very discouraged about the abundance of "steak & sizzle" in the presidential campaigns. It's so superficial it makes me wonder how people actually make their decisions when voting. I'd much rather see more substance in the mainstream media, but that doesn't "sell" does it?

3:59 PM  
Blogger rags said...

MAL,

I think, sadly, you're right. Instead of issues and answers, we have glib generalities and drive-by analysis, both from candidates and from (some of) those who are supposed to be reporting on them.

We worry about 'voting for someone who can win' and we never seem to concerned if he/she is the best qualified person for a job.

Our mantra is 'show me the voters.'

We love a 'horse race', and a candidate who doesn't excite and incite us is a 'dead duck' or a 'dog that won't hunt'.

We worry about winning more than about the prize itself and what it should mean for all of us.

Not sure how we can reverse this process or even if we're too far gone to fix it.

6:23 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home