Now that the political campaign season is behind us, perhaps it is time to make sure savvy voters understand what was meant by the some of the posturing by the candidates throughout the campaign.
Number one, when candidates decried the horrid and debasing third party rants that sucked this campaign into the sewer, perhaps at levels never seen here before, what they really meant was, "ho hum". While they giggled at the cheap chops while off screen, candidates truly repulsed could have told the party higher ups and mainland chop shops to simply stop the crap- but they didn't, and so it continued, ad nauseum, and I do mean "ad" nauseum, right up through November 2nd. Yes, by their inaction, the candidates themselves were aiding and abetting the diatribe. Sincerity, move aside.
Number two, when candidates make a pledge about our keiki, and tell us over and over how the children are our future, it really means that things will pretty much remain status quo because it is too difficult or politically costly to recommend shaking things up, but I can always state the obvious when I run for office. Have you ever seen a candidate not talk about education as being a vital force for the future of our aina? Hard to remember the last time a candidate boldly stated, "hey, education is overrated, just like responsibility, accountability, commitment and this whole stronger economy thing. Mediocrity rules!"; not gonna happen, sports fans.
We hear lots of promises every other year- but can these elected officials be held accountable? And if not, will we really get better alternative choices to run against the incumbents if we don't like what we have? Stick around, for we get to ask these questions again in less than two years. Think about it…