It is the beginning of a full-fledged political season. Oh, there has been a good blast of political shenanigans already, but it’s only a warm-up to the real thing. After the September sorting out of legitimate candidates for the parties, otherwise known as the primaries, it becomes open season for behavior that can only be described as nauseating.
Negativity, in the form of candidate outing, demeaning, and outright destruction , is topped only by the other extreme of offensive behavior: sycophantic praise. It is the showering of inappropriate praise upon a candidate with the clear purpose of seeking a favor should the candidate win the election. Sometimes it can be chalked off as typical political rhetoric, well known in the election process. But there are other examples of it being just pure, unadulterated sycophant foot kissing (or some other part of the human anatomy.)
The voting public has become pretty sophisticated at the recognition of this heaping of inappropriate praise upon a person. We are not ignorant of the limitations of persons in the public eye, and the development of 24/7 cable news has made sure that we are not without sufficient examples from which to draw.
Candidates are vulnerable to this sycophantic behavior and are caught regularly in a position where it is next to impossible to shake off the shallow praise coming from a public figure. Sometimes the person “sucking up” to the candidate is not a particularly helpful example of a person with whom one wants their name associated. The awkwardness comes in trying to get away from them, a behavior which, in itself, opens one to criticism from the ever-vigilant eyes of the press corps. A candidate who has a platform strongly supportive of women, for instance, would not want a gushy endorsement by former senator John Edwards at this moment in history. Fortunately, for all his errors, sycophantic behavior was not one of his better-known sins.
It seems apparent to me, at times, that a sycophantic rant by an undesirable character is a “plant” by the opposition. It gives fodder to the opposition, particularly in the absence of legitimate criticism. If someone of questionable character can be convinced to hold a press conference and drop all kinds of flattery on the candidate, there is almost nothing a candidate can do about it, short of sending out a press release rejecting the support. As I said earlier, that can be destructive behavior, as well. The moderate candidate is branded with support from a convicted felon, someone from a blatantly right-wing organization … or the opposite, someone with raging liberal views. The candidate’s hard work to establish a moderate position is damaged, and maybe destroyed.
This 2010 mid-term election season lends itself to sycophantic behavior, as well as to other negative campaign opportunities. The extremes have been well-defined, and the discouraged and angry public is clinging to simplistic, quick-fix solutions, no matter how impossible or unlikely they are to be enacted by an elected official. Paranoia about incumbents is rampant. The cable media is gleeful about the triumph of emotions over reason. It makes for good footage.
Now that you know the word sycophant watch for it. It won’t be hard to recognize. The hard part is sorting it out from the rest of the garbage that flows in such an election season.
Cartoon Credit: 3.bp. blogspot.com
