Archive: Opinions

There are limits to many things in life. We are guided by limits such as the amount of fresh tuna we ought to eat each week. Our lives are regulated by limits especially when it comes to acceptable levels of harmful pollutants in our land, water and air. No doubt all of us are directed to observe certain limits such as posted speed limits on our roads and highways. It seems that every facet of our lives contains some limit.

But there in one area that is exempt from any limit. In the political realm, we are expected to exceed the limit. When groups examine candidates, they put them through a series of tests to determine if they meet certain standards that a particular group considers an acceptable level. Often times, a particular group will set a standard of acceptability that far exceeds any reasonable or achievable level.

For example, many groups now examine a candidate's claim to be an adherent of a belief system. They will ask themselves a question such as, "Is this candidate Christian enough for us?" The answer to this question depends upon the standards by which you can objectively define an individual's adherence to Christian doctrine.

How does one go about measuring fidelity to one's faith? Some might examine religious affiliation and try to determine whether they are truly what they proclaim. Is there really such a creature that can assert they believe perfectly and completely as their church teaches? Are Catholics Christian enough? What about Evangelicals? Are they too Christian for our political palate? And then there are the Mormons, Seventh Day Adventists, Jehovah Witnesses, and hundreds of other denominations each with their own beliefs and standards of fidelity.

Once we have determined a candidate as being religious enough for our liking, we move on to other claims they make. From a party standpoint, we explore just how loyal they are to the doctrinal teachings. We demand to know if they are conservative enough or liberal enough or libertarian enough, or feminist enough, or environmentalist enough, or patriotic enough, or just pandering enough to get enough votes to be re-elected.

When it comes to race and ethnicity, some groups excel at defining whether a candidate possesses enough of what makes up a race or ethnic group. African Americans often make the outrageous claim that a candidate is not black enough. Often taken out of context, the remarks have little to do with actual skin tone, but more to the point, they seek to determine whether a candidate is focusing the campaign on issues that directly impact the African-Americans in his or her district. But the issues facing this group-unemployment, education, taxes, and services-are the same ones that all groups hope to be addressed.

I have yet to hear any Hispanic groups asking if their candidates are Latino enough, but I am sure that is just an election away considering the great debate over illegal immigration.

Mic Jagger's song, "Beast of Burden" contains a refrain that asks if he is hard enough, rough enough, and rich enough. My question would be simple: are our candidates honest enough? That is a question which we never have enough of. And that is to the point.

----
v6i39