We made a list. The War on Terror. Ivy League student leaders. The failing economy and our role as consumers. Sept. 11, 2001. Corporate crime. Ethics and values. Israel. Palestine. Campaign finance reform. While waiting for Senator John Kerry to begin, my friends and I ticked off buzzwords and hackneyed phrases we assumed would be verbally recycled soon. Quickly, our list grew into a bingo card of sorts, complete with wildcards and a free spot. We made bets on which lines would win first.
We expected to see just another politician, just another stream of one-liners and crowd pleasers, but being somewhat nave and idealist, I attended, hoping he would be about less politics and campaigning and more about people and reality. But, if all else failed, I had Bingo.
With fervor, we marked the first hackneyed phrase on our bingo card when Senator Kerry spoke of the Ivy League and related stories of Dartmouth-Yale rivalries from the 1960's. The more I listened in earnest, however, the more my cynicism faded. Phrases and concepts were still continually being checked off the Bingo card, but they were not all discussed in the empty manner in which we expected.
Increasingly, I was struck by Senator Kerry's honesty and ability to talk with us as the thinking humans that we are. I began to notice the differences between what we put on the list and what Senator Kerry discussed. He never once mentioned the word "activism" but the concept was inherent throughout his discussion and much of what I have since learned of his life. After being a highly decorated Navy lieutenant in the Vietnam War, he returned to America to found the Vietnam Veterans Against the War organization. After watching colleagues' partiality fall prey to moneyed interests throughout their careers, Kerry took action himself, cosponsoring the McCain/Feingold campaign finance reform initiative (among other such bills). Furthermore, beginning in his 1996 senatorial election, Kerry and his Republican opponent capped money to be allotted for campaign marketing.
He also never once used the words 'honesty' or 'loyalty,' though these concepts were cornerstones of his opinions and manner of speaking. He spoke openly and frankly about such issues as homosexual marriage, discussing his lack of support for the Defense of Marriage Act (which would limit the rights of same-sex marriage and federally and legally defines such words as "marriage" and "parent").
He is quick to explain his opposition personally to same-sex marriage, however, which is based on his personal moral and religious beliefs. While acknowledging a personal decision with which one may or may not agree, Kerry demonstrated his ability to not only confront such a situation with frankness, but he also demonstrated that he has not let his personal belief outweigh a societal right.
There were numerous topics absent from our list that Senator Kerry discussed during his speech. For example, we never considered including the AIDS crisis enveloping much of Africa and the abject poverty and hunger connected directly to this issue. We also did not consider discussion of the Kyoto Protocol and the irresponsibility of our country to act in concert with the global community. Why did we not expect such a discussion from a man who has a 92 percent rating from the League of Conservation Voters?
My intention is not to canonize Sen. Kerry. I am, however, expressing concern that our Bingo card was not complete -- it was devoid of any hope for discussion of substance from our government representatives. Our omissions demonstrated the poor standards to which we hold our political figures. Tongue-in-cheek wildcard selections on our card contained such phrases as drug dealer, frats, parties and Harry Potter. However, we never thought to include AIDS, hunger and famine, same-sex marriage or Ralph Nader (all of which were mentioned by Senator Kerry).
As we were leaving Hinman Forum, another student took notice of our game and expressed interest in playing in the future. To those interested, I suggest, "Don't." We need to hold our elected officials and public servants to a higher standard. A statement is made about our standards of civics and our involvement as citizens when we cease to expect legitimacy and honesty from our government representatives. We are turned off that our officials do not respect us enough to speak with us as people, discussing issues and not buzzwords. Yet, we fail to expect any statements or actions of substance from these leaders. Our government will continue to be filled with fluff and hollow phrases, and people will continue to turn away until we earn to hold our civil servants to standards higher than a bingo card on the back of a napkin.
