07 July 2009

Clowns Are No Laughing Matter


The Jester takes his seat in the United States Senate. A slim plurality of voters chose Al Franken over Norm Coleman to represent them. They did not choose a Businessman. They did not choose a Professional like a Doctor or a Lawyer.

Minnesotans elected a Clown. Mazel Tov, it is a decision which may prove very wise.

A clown does not have the luxury of pretense or hypocrisy. To be successful in the science of humor, the clown is obligated to have integrity, His or her nature is to phrase truth in terms which deflate the disingenuous. Pompous pretexts become ephemeral in the light of motives served. Hidden agendas are laid bare as weak policy.

The skill set of a clown does not normally translate well to politics. Barry Levinson and Robin Williams argued this point in Man of the Year. The honesty required of the clown, the jester would impede the process of compromise needed to govern in the name of the people.

This is not entirely accurate. The atmosphere of fear and ambivalence has engendered an environment of legal, but not ethical leadership. There is nothing acceptable about the family values lawmaker who cheats on a spouse. There is nothing honorable about the legislator denying basic civil liberties to the same people with whom he would tryst, anonymously and gleefully. The defender of decency oftentimes grants special favors to patrons who would destroy the livelihood and security of constituents who do not question the defender's motivations.

The clown is unacceptable to the hypocrite. This is because the clown gains his strength from authenticity. It gives him the latitude to be wrong and the flexibility to make himself right. The clown can disclose and find forgiveness while no such tolerance will be countenanced for the hypocrite.

Laughter is harder to earn than a vote. It resides in the province of surrender more total than that which authoritarians demand, yet laughter can only exist in an environment of liberty and trust. There were/are no great jesters surrounding Hitler, Stalin, Mao, or Osama. Ideologues are serious people with many important, grown-up things to accomplish early in the morning. There is not time nor acceptance of levity.

As a nation, Americans are charmed by leaders with wit. John Kennedy and Ronald Reagan were effective communicators through humor. Obama has shown glimpses of a dry, acerbic and lively sense of humor. As of yet, he approaches this with trepidation. Obama could afford to be more daring. His opponents will find fault regardless, but the candor necessary to face serious issues armed with a smile will reaffirm the wavering and convert quite a few disbelievers.

That is a challenge when carrying the weight of several levels of history. The native intellect which might be prone to a barbed comment is tempered by the knowledge of the potential repercussions on sympathetic people. Taking into account of history's import, Mr. Obama will need time to find a comfort zone which will allow him to leverage his wit. Eventually, a lively intellect will be enhanced by the flexibility and integrity of humor.

Senator Franken does not carry the same set of Samsonites from 1964. He is going where no one has ever been, satirist to senator, mocking the news to making the news. In a Washington of frauds and phonies, hypocrites and liars, the Junior Senator from Minnesota is in a position to clear the mine fields where the President cannot tread.

Obama: The American people need a public option for health care.

Franken: The American people cannot afford to leave their health care in the hands of private insurers. These are people who learned their business pracitices from the same great minds that taught AIG that derivatives were perfectly acceptable because they were legal. Private insurers function under the model that what is legal and what is right are the same thing.

Obama: Cap and Trade will incentivize the development of green energy technologies which will benefit the average citizen.

Franken: Oh, my goodness! Do you really think moving the means of energy production closer to the consumption end might actually lower costs and stimulate the economy? Why, that model has only worked in the passenger transportation and information industries! Energy would be much different!!!

Parodists, satirists, jesters, clowns: why would anyone prefer them to frauds, phonies, hypocrites and liars?

No comments: