What to Expect from a Non-Conservative Eureka Leadership

…Lets Find Out and Not Burden Them with Extraordinary Standards.

December will bring a big change in leadership from a conservative business first mentality to a _____ (Edit: previously blank line struck through thanks to anon in comments) governing first mentality.

I don’t know what to expect as Councilwomen Atkins, Arroyo, and Bergel will illustrate their own vision of leadership when we begin to think outside the current governing principle that what is best for a few successful businesses is necessarily best for the community at large.

I’m really excited about the potential, but my expectations are low because the challenges before our community are so high.  Government and leaders alone only have so much influence.  Their positions are obviously critical and they will be determinate in guiding our future, but this response to conservative commenter Just Watching is not right.

Just Watchin:  This will be fun to watch. No more blaming conservatives. Be careful of what you wish for.

Eric Kirk:  You’re absolutely right JW. No excuses two years from now.  The conservative majority on the County Board has also been in place for several years now, but unfortunately the majority of voters don’t hold them accountable for results. But progressives have come to expect double standards, so yes, we had better produce!

What production?  Higher employment rates?  Fewer innocent civilian deaths with no repercussions? (OK, that standard does need to be met.)  Less drug use?  Higher wages?  Reinvigorated and less hostile schools?  I hope these and other metrics increase noticeably, but the thinking that a non-conservative City Council can make measurable or noticeable changes in a community at large in two years, or even four years is setting a governing philosophy up for failure.

Governing is about policy, and the changes that are needed will not take two or four years.  What it will take is constant vigilance, the right decisions, and a belief in government (no, not faith conservatives).  Right now we are under constant threat of electing those who discard the importance of government, and arguably information and education from winning elections.  If we expect to produce noticeable changes in 2 or 4  years as a standard, instead of say, asking our leaders to make decisions and then defending those decisions come election time, we will doom ourselves to play out the political rut we are currently demonstrating at the national level.  There it seems the common wisdom is – if life isn’t currently exactly the way I expect it to be, let’s kick the bums out.

That’s not how change will occur.  Real change, the change we need, takes effort over time – years and decades.  Its a change that requires proactive thinking, a trust in community including both the business and private sector, inclusion instead of exclusion, and fewer political games.

The right thrives on political games.  If we on the left (or ______) (Edit: thanks to anon in comments) unilaterally withdraw from the games, and focus our efforts on explaining exactly what and why we do what we do, trusting the electorate to figure out the gamesmanship of KINS and it’s supporters, I believe those willing to govern and take on hard decisions will win more often than not.

We can start by not setting ourselves up for failure by trying to meet standards set by those wishing us to fail.


One more thing from that thread…

John Fullerton:  “Is it a good thing to have a city council with only one member has ever owned a business?”

Eric Kirk:  “I think so. I own a business and I don’t feel qualified to run a government entity.”

That’s another thing.  We don’t need to hold ourselves up to some extraordinary standard set by our political adversaries.  Eric, you would make an awesome and thoughtful leader on the City Council or Board of Supervisors.  What makes you unqualified but any of the current Humboldt County Supervisors or Eureka City Councilmembers up there qualified outside of personality differences? 

Advertisements

7 thoughts on “What to Expect from a Non-Conservative Eureka Leadership

  1. A Guy says:

    The point of running a business is to make money; that is not the purpose of government. Presumably if these two have different goals there may be a need for different skillsets for those who run them.

  2. Yogi Beara says:

    I disagree on any suggestion of not calling the cons on their bs, that will continue where feasible. You yourself have written often on this, you seem to always want to stay above it all, but I don’t think not standing up and being heard is a good strategy. It looks weak, it sounds weak, and allows the rant and cant to rule, not facts. It is why the Big Lie works, it’s why the nonsense spewed all day by limbaugh and Savage and KINS and all the rightie ranters is so effective.

    In many ways the Tea Party is staged as the loud scary righties, allowed, supported, and well tolerated which conveniently allows the real Republicans and business centrists the means to look Responsible by seeming to reject them. It’s a stunt worthy of Lee Atwater et al.

    Here we have the Greens and Progressives paired with the fake and maybe real Democrats …the Middles…but it’s the same scheme..the centrists business interests trying to co-opt the arguments they think will keep them in power.

    Name calling, hyperbole, and lies aren’t as effective as calm simple well stated facts, that much is proven, but staying silent in the face of the Big Lie gives it credence. That is also proven.

    Those that can stomach the verbal and writing/commenting struggle will continue to do so, those who can’t make many other contributions.

    1. It looks weak, it sounds weak,

      I disagree. Speak softly, and instead of a big stick, carry links to reality and truth – ie the NYT not the NYPost. Information vs infotainment. Education vs propaganda. The way politics is stacked right now, the left wins when we pay attention to reality.

      The big lie works because we are not there reasonably explaining the truth. The antidote to Rush is not more Rush in the form of Ed Shultz. It’s Rachel Maddow (ie schooled, passionate and fun) and Thom Hartmann (schooled, passionate and a scholar of the meta)

      “but staying silent in the face of the Big Lie gives it credence.” Agreed. 100%.

      “Those that can stomach the verbal and writing/commenting struggle will continue to do so, those who can’t make many other contributions.” Also Agreed. 100%.

  3. Anonymously says:

    Eliminating the blanks: “. . . from a [edit] business first mentality to a [edit] governing first mentality.”; and “If we [edit] unilaterally . . . “.

    I agree with YB that simple, well-stated facts work best, but it will take a substantial effort to overcome decades of ‘truthiness’.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s