| Posted: 24 September 2008 at 4:14am | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
The qualifications for political leadership that I've seen from different people (online and off) always baffle me. I've heard people (not just Jodi) say that they favor lawyers, I've seen people say (in this election, and the 2000 election) that not having a passport and not travelling extensively was a black mark against a candidate, I've seen people who say there should be an IQ test for anyone entering politics and that only those in the top percentile should be allowed to run (oddly enough advocated by people who would be in that top percentile), I've seen people who say only those who have attended University should be allowed to run, I've seen a lot of that kind of thing and it wears on my patience.
Some people can't afford to travel extensively, so only those who can need apply? Some people have no interest in being a lawyer, they need not apply? Some people are only above average in intelligence, but make up for it with honesty, integrity, diligence and leadership, (not saying more intelligent people don't have those qualities, but I am saying that combination is extremely rare and I want those people in politics, whatever walk of life they come from) they need not apply?
I think teachers are under represented in government, I think that doctors and nurses are under represented, I think that union guys are under represented and I believe that blue collars are barely represented at all. By the people, for the people and of the people. Everybody deserves a voice. And if someone is going to tell me he understands my life, well, by God, I hope he's lived it because otherwise it's just so much bullshit.
My dad was an electrical planner for the city of Calgary, he started out digging electric post holes, then he was a laborer, then he got his electrical lineman apprenticeship, then he became a journeyman, then a foreman, then a crew foreman, then an electrical planner. He designed the jobs for the crews and if any of them had a question, he could answer it, and if anyone had a complaint, he could agree but tell them they had to suck it up, and they trusted him, why? Because he had been what they were and knew the job inside and out. The electrical engineers he worked with had a different skill set, and different knowledge, but there's no doubt that he had the credibility and the respect of the men when often the engineers didn't. Some kinds of knowledge, some kinds of credibility you can only gain from sweat and blood and there's no other way to get it.
Blood? That's not hyperbole. My dad lost his leg when I was two years old. When he was released from the hospital he was offered an office job but chose to stay out in the field to prove that he could. He climbed poles for seven years on one leg.
And then there's my mom, she raised three boys who were way too active, way too dangerous, way too smart, way too big but she was in charge. She had to be tougher than the four men in the house or the house would have fallen apart around her. She had to stop us fighting, had to fix the damage when we got out of hand and through it all she tried to raise us to be the best versions of ourselves that we could be. She is the strongest women I have ever met, and while I am more like my dad in basic temperament I am much better at dealing with people and relating to people than he is, and that's because she took the time to show me how.
Both of them are the type of people that I want to see in politics, and I believe we need to see in politics. But neither went to University. Neither have travelled extensively. Neither are lawyers. Both are very intelligent, so I guess they qualify on that point. But, still, they need not apply.
|