Democracy, Youth, and Old Age

          When I was a young man learning about the work-intensive and time-consuming steps required to enact the simplest piece of legislation, the least contentious of new measures, I grew stridently impatient.  It was clearly wrong that good people had to waste endless hours and days and months trying to do something worthwhile.  I couldn't wait so long.  I was desperate for fast action.  I complained bitterly about the mired-down failure of the democratic process.  It was depressing at best, spirit-crushing at worst.
         Now that I'm an old man, I'm much more patient.  Now it seems good to me that change should come slowly, after long and exhaustive debate.  After filibusters.  After compromises.  After presidential vetoes.  I don't want professional do-good Liberals putting their permanent imprint on national legislation; nor do I want selfish Conservatives to close the door on any sort of scale-balancing social programs.  I'm still mostly in favor of left-of-center political agendas, but I don't want the Left making hasty changes—except in the area of human rights.  Speedy action often requires further action to correct problems not seen the first time around.  You know what they say about haste.
          I don't object to change, of course--only quick change.  Slow things down, I say.  Talk it all over.  And then talk some more.  Sleep on it.  God, it should be pointed out, was remiss when He left out the Eleventh Commandment, Thous shalt not rush.  Someone was probably telling him to hurry up, maybe Moses was waiting.