Translate

Friday, March 23, 2007

Public service and charity and thank you

We all serve in our own way. Most service is local, as in church or other type charitable service that is inspirational in its golden rule orientation and limited expectations for a thank you from those that benefit. Most of this service is from a wellspring of good intentions, often with a religious base, and from those who have the time. In most cases all monies go towards the intended people (and sometimes animals and other causes) without any payment to the volunteers. It is enough to make any observer proud. In Aussie talk, they “done good”. This system is as old as history, but is alive and well in today’s times.

Then there are the more business like charities that take a cut of the collections to pay themselves and the overhead. Again, most deserve our support, but the buyer must beware when contributing since some are more money income machines or politically oriented in their distributions. Even our government gets involved in these types of charities if you accept that the old Combined Federal Campaign exhibits such characteristics, or something similar for the old United Fund. That the Boy Scouts have been cut out of the old United Fund unless I take special actions to counteract it, and we have to trust them to do so, is an example of others using my money for their purposes. Suddenly local looks better and better, even if it takes more work on the citizen’s part. By the way, in the case of the Boy Scouts, I have nothing against homosexuality since I know it goes on. I just want to promote citizenship and scout values that I feel benefit our American society, locally, and as a Nation. And those Boy Scout public service leaders need all the financial help we can give them, I think.

Another very admirable group of public servants is those that seek public office. It might be local as in the school board, or county, or state, or regional, or even federal. I admire them all, albeit some more than others. Yes, there are bad apples in the barrel, but the vast majority serve out of public interests, even if it is their version of public interests, but then that is why they ran for the vote, and in turn, why we can vote for the public servants we choose. While I am throwing roses, we should respect those who serve in the more administrative positions to administer what the public servants dictate and vote on. This includes teachers, public, and private. I don’t believe in shooting the messenger. No body wakes up in the morning wanting to do a bad job. So what we voters should do is vote for our public servants. And this is where this article is leading.

Our public servants in Washington D.C. are in a mess. One should not expect any leadership or moral example out of anyone in D.C, other than maybe President Bush. Even his style has been overwhelmed. Some of us more naive types expected the 2006 elections to offer some semblance of our national interests coming back into the game they play there. Alas, it is not happening. In fact, to me, what is happening is third world in quality.

We cannot ignore the whole world going on around us, and we still do have a nation and culture to run, and defend. In this vein, the politics of criminalizing political differences must come to an end if we are to have public service citizens to come forward. This is in our National interest. The tactic of criminalizing politics is a loser, nationally speaking. While it may work in the short run (or so it seemed in the recent past), we are a long run Nation, and “where do we get back our reputation” still applies. We are full of the best and the brightest (and also some the worst and dumbest), and must nurture this wonderful group of public service Americans. Tough love will apply.

No comments: