|
Spencer Tracey, directed by John Ford, played an aging Mayor running for re-election around 1960 (the time the movie was made). I suspected John Ford started this out to be like his "Who shot Liberty Valence" i.e. study on the differences between how things were in the American West and how they are portrayed in stories of the old west. Someone convinced him to change it to be a study of how election were in the early 1960s AND where they were going rather then look back at the past. The past could be seen, for the past political techniques were still is use in the early 1960s thus they was no need to look back, there still existed, but TV was coming on hard and was clearly becoming the most powerful way to win an election.
Anyway, a report was done for the mayor on the candidate selected by the wealthy elite of this "New England" City. The report was very good, but the Mayor comment on it was on point I paraphrase "His life is an open book, filled with blank pages". If you compare the new boy with the old mayor and all the allegations of theft and corruption (that even the opposition in secret admitted were not true) AND the Mayor's efforts to get what was needed for the city (At times unethical, but the job was done) you realize the mayor had a lot of baggage for his "book" was full pages with LOTS of writings. The same observation can be made of any serious candidate for any office, what has he done in the past? Often the good is tied in with the bad (In "The Last Hurrah" the mayor's unethical plot to set up and leave fall the son of owner of the largest bank in the City was tied in with the Mayor's plan to build replace slums ("Cold Water flats", i.e. had cold water but no heat or hot water) with modern public housing. Thus you had the bad (Blackmail of the Banker through his son) with the Good (replacement of slums with public housing). That is NOT unusual for any politician must balance the wants of the voters with what can be done and paid for. I prefer a politicians who had done "bad" things, for it is a test of how he handle those "bad" things. Why did he do it? Was it part of a greater good? Did the good out-weight the bad? Those are the test of a good politician and you can not get that in someone with no baggage.
One last Comment, I properly vote for him unless something comes up for he had Joyce Murtha's support. I have nothing else to go on at the present time and thus her support shows he is most likely to continue her husband's policies, thus he had my vote at the present time.
|