Truth? Hardly a politick move!

Article 5 Continuation from the last edition.

      Another suggestion is to have federal legislators live in Washington, D.C., family and all.  There is a 60-year history of baseless complaints, by a fringe element of congress, that culminated in the currently disembodied Washington. A minority voice has managed to produce a density of public opinion: our seeing the nation's capitol as the opposite of American values, thus becoming a political peria.
     Fact is, this situation has caused much of the current gridlock in Washington, and a government that knows nothing of the life breath of the country, much less, promotes our international standing. In addition, we find the real work of politics has been replaced by a commitment to campaigning. With campaigning being the perfect vehicle for this minority message, "trust no one, only I am your savior." Really just a snake feeding us a worm ridden apple, slithering out from under a smoke screen of "accountability."
      In reality, we find that vocal minority seeking to do away with a cohesive Washington. Most especially, they look to remove broad-based active dialogue and across-the-aisle peer pressure (our Constitution speaks to one nation, requiring conversations inside Washington, D.C.).  Right-wing elements authored this situation; as they would rather die than moderate a position, god forbid, cooperate?!  We find them questioning one nation, inclusive civil rights, and separation of church and state. Not to mention, accountability hasn't increased, but something quite different has emerged. A deranged sort of populism: branded as "Freedom," this Bolshie attack of liberal democracy is little more than a constitutional convention in a goose step. With the superficial nature of campaigning easily containing the substance of their platform, (sorry, nothing to show you).
      But then, let's get real, everyone has embraced this environment of incessant campaigning.  One might hope, only providing us sound bites and handshakes. But to be perfectly honest, we accept lying, cheating, and stealing if it provides our candidate a win (writing in a very nonpartisan way, perhaps too inclusive).  A moral deprivation that is not solely based on that accepted behavior, but an old adage, "sell your soul to the devil," is becoming much more than a metaphor.  When anything can be the truth.  Must be the truth!
      Nothing in this disembodied Washington, D.C., makes sense, for example, a senator has millions of constituents. Seriously, a lot of handshaking! Despite that, they contend that being 1,000 miles closer to those people is simply heartwarming and deeply engaging.  Whereas, the other 99 senators are too distant a possibility, even for a simple handshake. After all, they are only, god forbid, working together to make laws that control everything.  A move to Washington is also consistent with the military, who move their families All The Time!  
      Context for the above example: 1/10 of one percent of the average Senator's constituents equals six thousand people (for Ted Cruz, it's 30,000 people!). It's a lot to simply shake that many hands, so real conversations, and deeply engaging?  Clearly the only real engagement is with the rich and powerful. Ever campaigning, while filling the coffers, and leaving little time for anything else. 
      More to the point, why would I believe that shaking my hand, an average voter, gets anything done in Washington?  Not the least rational, but rather filling my personal emptiness with tribalizing and self-righteous othering (dopamine inducing, i.e., addictive).
      One can hardly question that a politician's main intent is campaigning. Which, other than fundraising, is merely a facade of personal engagement. Busily spinning the truth, politicians focus on a presence with the local media, free advertising, and shaping the narrative. Which we find both sides of the aisle favoring. Seemingly evenly matched battles, but the right wing is winning the war, redefining truth and power. A disembodied Washington playing into their hands on every level. For example, consider how the challenges of national interests, especially geopolitical, and shoring up nameless people in need, look a lot like major metropolitan challenges. So there is an easier sell to that block.  Whereas, close to home, my neighbors, while shaking everyone's hand, are bread and butter for the rest of the country (think 60/40 results, politically significant). 
      Based on those facts on the ground, it is not surprising to find our election cycles, and anyone involved with that process, skewing to the right. Now finding that our political machine and election results are becoming seriously more conservative than the general population (there is also a psychological component to this, a novel insight, that I'll explore after this series).  And I'm quite certain that this isn't by chance; for example, look at the media and the gradual migration of narratives. Normalizing that right wing, as they decisively take advantage of opportunities that undermine the truth.

      Most media sources are cutting journalism budgets in favor of talking heads. Gotta love that capitalism ($less fact-checking and accountability$).  Plus less diversity, as local media outlets are increasingly owned by right-wing sympathetic business interests.  And that, very likely strategic, a multi-level marketing scheme to move opinion to the right by demonizing the center.  Case in point: the ubiquitous "liberal media" is taking a comparative and stating it as an objectively negative fact (that "media" is in fact modeled after the American demographic, often standing against the ideologues).  Add to that, we have the right wing's entirely superficial address of issues, effectively removing all accountability. They're relying on baseless complaints while labeling anyone who might be paying attention as "snowflakes." And merely their opening volley.
      A subtle alchemy, as found in the Frontline interview of Frank Luntz, three years ago. Luntz firmly described himself as no longer a Republican but now an unbiased moderate voice for the truth.  Yet later, in that same interview, he is gushing over Mitch McConnell, and that is not merely a confusion (pick your lane Luntz).  Rather, he is effectively pushing the actual centrist position to the left, increasingly bad, wrong, and fake news. 
      More so, finding the right wing of that effort depicting moderately conservative points of view as questionable, likely tottering to the left.  With all of this broadcasting a political necessity: everyone is moving away from moderate/bipartisan positions which focus on the country as a whole. 
      And, did you notice how easily I belittled "left" as fake news?  Way past a slippery slope, for instance, that right wing attempting to hang their own Vice President for adhering to our Constitution. More so, an increasing allegiance to their mentor, "a lie told often enough becomes the truth," (V. Lenin). 
(btw, "effectively" might on rare occasions be "inadvertently."  I'm noting how that Luntz interview affected me, realizing we all have mixed motives, much of which is less than obvious.)