Should we elect people who already know everything and will not change (we know exactly what they will do in every situation), or should we elect people who are still learning and will change their mind (or positions) at times as circumstances dictate?
And if they don't do it correctly and efficiently, fire them and get someone else.
These are not mutually exclusive, so this is not an either/or proposition. We can't be there with our politicians to tell them what to do in every instance, and which constituents would they listen to? This is a false option. That being the case, I assume you are fishing for the "or" option. The "or" option sounds really great, right up until their knowledge, philosophy and skills, and LACK of character tells them to change their stated position, campaign promises, and the will of the people who elected them to represent them.
"Should we elect people who already know everything and will not change (we know exactly what they will do in every situation), or should we elect people who are still learning and will change their mind (or positions) at times as circumstances dictate?"
This is essentially a copy of question #1. The either portion is a false option. So the option you propose, as with the first one, are both designed to absolve certain politicians from crapping all over their supposed principles and the people who put them in their positions, when circumstances dictate it.
No thanks. I've been voting republican since 1988. I've been stabbed in the back by them so many times that it is my fault if it continues.
Go ahead and hate. I am not absolving anyone from anything. If a person steps forward to serve as an elected official they are taking on themselves a duty appointed by God. They will be held responsible.
If we hate the people put in charge by God, they we will be held responsible.
My question is a simple one. How should our political leaders choose their actions? Is it by trying to guess what a majority of voters want them to do? By trying to do as a majority of those who voted for them would have them do? If in congress, should they serve the people from their state or district, or the entire nation?
Do they have the freedom to use their own wisdom and knowledge, or they only to be a mouthpiece for some constituency?
Your mouthpiece comment makes me think that you have no understanding of our representative republic. Representing the wants and desires of the people who put you in office is EXACTLY what you are supposed to do. No matter what the party wants, what your fellow representatives want, what your donors want, or what committee you could be appointed to or removed from. If you are not there to express the will of the people who elected you, you are a fraud, and should be removed from office.
1 Peter 2:13–14 Be subject for the Lord's sake to every human institution,2 whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good.
And yes, no matter the answer to the original question, elected officials (and those they appoint) are to operate within the authority given by constitution and laws.
