Internet Link Exchange
Member of the Internet Link Exchange
By Geoff Rodkey
An Interview with Geoff Rodkey
My Grumpy Old Pen Pal
Right Wing Woodstock
Perot Convention
The Great Debate
Great Moments at the Republican Convention
San Diego
ABOUT GEOFF

Geoff Rodkey, a former research assistant with Al Franken, wrote "Slampaign 96," a series of articles about the presidential elections, for America Online. Rodkey, who started his career with the Harvard Lampoon, has contributed to "Lateline" and "Beavis and Butthead." In 1996, he was nominated for an Emmy for his work on Politically Incorrect with Bill Maher. He also sold a screenplay to Universal Studios called "Dave the Ox," about a coach who moves to a small town to coach a sports team.

Intro : Slampaign '96!: More Fun Than Pro Wrestling!


August 1st

Since this column is supposed to be a series of reports from the campaign trail, I should probably admit right up front that I haven't left my apartment yet. However--lest you question my sincerity--I would like to say that while I am not actually on the campaign trail, I have started packing for the campaign trail.

Besides, I thought it'd be a good idea to devote this first installment of Slampaign '96! to a general statement of my political philosophy. That may sound pompous. Which is fine, because to be honest, I am kind of pompous.

I think everybody should pay more attention to politics. Let me explain why. First of all, I make my living by writing about it. And the more people who are interested in politics, the better it is for my career. Of course, unless you know me personally--and I figure that at least half of the people reading this don't--that's a pretty bad reason to follow politics.

Here's another bad reason: concern for the future of our country. This may seem like the only good reason to pay attention to the endless series of petty catfights conducted by middle-aged men in blue suits. It's not. If you're genuinely concerned about America's future, go out and do something, like volunteering in a Big Brother/Big Sister program. But for God's sake, don't pay too much attention to the political arena, because if there is even a glimmer of idealism in you, any careful scrutiny of the political process will drive you to tears of bitter despair.

Why? Because the United States government was consciously designed by the Founding Fathers to fail miserably on a policy level. Not many people know this. But put yourself in James Madison or Tom Jefferson's shoes, circa 1789. Looking back over a few thousand years' worth of political systems, what do you see? Mostly authoritarian regimes. Lots of torture and summary executions. And very few changes of administration that aren't the result of either inheritance, murder, coup, or revolution.

If you're smart--and the Founding Fathers were--you have a profound lack of faith in the ultimate virtue of man. So you design a political system with such diffuse centers of power that it's next to impossible to truly control, and with such a low center of gravity that it can't be overthrown.

Basically, the system works great--unless you want to accomplish something. The federal government, while still the single most powerful institution in the country, is a slow, lumbering beast whose primary characteristic is inertia. The vast majority of bills introduced in both houses of Congress never become law.

This is not necessarily a bad thing, because most legislation is pretty terrible in the first place. As Archer Daniels Midland CEO Dwayne Andreas (who's so powerful that you might never have heard of him) recently told Geor ge magazine, "all the good things that have come out of government have been bipartisan." These days, with partisan voting in Congress at a 50-year high, the word "bipartisan" is about as in vogue as a Roller Derby. And the net result is that 90-some percent of today's politicians are either talking about the wrong problems or offering the wrong solutions.

So why should you pay attention to the fetid swamp of misguided policies and cheap appeals that is today's political landscape? Two words: entertainment value. If you can get beyond the fact that our country's problems are being left to fester, it can be tremendous fun watching grown men and women utterly degrade themselves in vicious battles over silly non-issues like whether tobacco is addictive or the president sleeps around.

When you get right down to it, American politics in 1996 resembles nothing so much as a bloodless version of pro wrestling acted out by former high school debaters with multimillion-dollar advertising budgets. As a spectacle of raw adolescent bitchiness, it surpasses even The Ricki Lake Show.

This year's presidential campaign is shaping up to be a race as ugly and content-free as 1988's flag-burning-and-Willie-Horton debacle. Bob Dole and Bill Clinton, two career pragmatists with no strongly held ideological convictions, don't really disagree much on anything but abortion. Which means the Republican and Democratic campaigns will quickly degenerate into an endless series of vicious personal attacks punctuated by meaningless displays of forced patriotism.

In fact, the only way Dole and Clinton will discuss matters of actual substance is if the eventual Reform party candidate can shame them into it. And the front-runner for that job is a paranoid Texan dwarf with a Napoleon complex.

Yeee-hah! Don't you just shiver with anticipation?