Me, Now, Here

Ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country (John F. Kennedy)

Many of our politicians in Congress would do well to revisit this truth by one of our greatest Presidents. Their vision is limited to ME, NOW, HERE. It should be, of course, THEM, THEN, THERE, wherein Them are the suffering people of this powerful nation, Then is the next 50 years and There is our devastated environment.

The powerful lobbies have taken over our federal government; we have, in effect, ceded the control of all branches to large corporations. Even the Supreme Court is not immune to private interests. Some of its august members dine and play golf as guests of honor of wealthy executives, which makes it difficult if not impossible to remain unbiased when called upon to act on appeals involving large conglomerates.

The President offered during his campaign to eliminate the influence of lobbies and to veto any bill that had special interests attached to it. Alas, he was caught in the web just like any newly minted Congressman. "Do what I say, but not what I do" seems to be the motto on the Hill. Legislators make fiery speeches against legalized corruption, i.e. lobbying all the while opening their coffers to anxious donors.

Their weapons now are BlackBerries and cell phones. But connections, savvy, and fundraising clout are still the keys to the influence wielded by the city’s 50 top lobbyists. (Washingtonian, Kim Eisler, June 1, 2007)

Does the name Abramoff ring a bell?  "We need to entirely eliminate any contribution by those lobbying the government, participating in a federal contract, or otherwise financially benefiting from public funds" says the disgraced lobbyist. He should know a thing or two about how the system works. But unfortunately, Congress is the only organism allowed to make laws and it will never agree to pass anything that hurts its individual pockets. Ideally we should have an outside agency, a sort of ethical watchdog, that forces changes upon the legislative branch, but, again, such agency would have to be set up by the very people it would supervise. No Way, no How!


 We? The People?? Or They, The Special Interests? The Founding Fathers would be aghast at the business-like atmosphere in Congress which apparently has become a branch office of Wall Street. The venerated television program 60 minutes devoted a segment to insider trading by some Congressmen, asking pungent questions to embarrassed legislators who vehemently denied any personal involvement. Or course, they have experts doing the financial work for them and the report from CBS implied that they have advanced knowledge of bills that may impact the value of some companies or portions of real estate. It would be quite revealing to ask Congressmen to publicly declare their fortune at the beginning of their hallowed representation and at five year intervals thereafter. "How did they become rich?" is the burning question in every middle-class member's mind.


"We have the government we deserve", said a wise philosopher and the solution to the present problem is to get rid of every incumbent next November and elect fresh faces who may or may not give us, the people, some hope that Washington will regain the confidence that has been lost. Recent polls indicate a new and shameful low for Congress: 9% of the respondents said that they trusted that federal organism. Wow! Is that a message that will be heard next year or will most of us stay home and then complain that government doesn't work? If you don't vote, you deserve the government that is in place. So stop whining and prepare to act!

Huntsman

I really like Mr. Huntsman, although I regret the fact that he cannot impress his audience when giving a speech. He comes across as soft-spoken, as a moderate, as a nice guy; you know what they say about nice guys coming in last. Obama sent him to China probably because of Huntsman's tact and able diplomacy (Chinese leaders are very sensitive to "losing face".) In this cutthroat political competition, however, being nasty and cunning may well earn you the nomination.



Mr. Huntsman (I'll forgo the nobility titles of Governor and Ambassador since he is presently neither) looks like a president and has the needed executive resume as head of Utah's government; he also has a taste of the private sector which he acquired in his family's business the Huntsman Corporation. He has the right age, 51, and the wrong religion, Mormon. He worked in Taipei (Taiwan) for a year as a missionary, and it seems that he and his wife decided to adopt two children in 1999 and 2006. His family is a composite of various religions, his wife is Episcopalian and his kids went to Catholic schools. A perfect picture of the United States great variety of faiths.

When studying his personal history, there is no doubt he comes across as a good man who not only talks, but also walks the talk. For some reason, the image of Jimmy Carter emerges and we all know what kind of President he was. Given the evils of this world, could Mr. Jon Huntsman pull the trigger if necessary? That is the question that will come up sooner or later in the debates and in the political columns of influential media.

One point in his favor: He is not afraid to go against his Republican party, as he did during his tenure as governor. So may be there is a big, strong backbone in Mr. Huntsman's body, a quality that is not always present in President Obama's decisions. He has been outspoken regarding his belief in science's theories about climate change and evolution, unlike Mr. Perry who stated, wrongly, that Texas teaches both creationism and evolution. Religious beliefs, because creationism is strictly a belief and not a product of scientific research, have no business in schools. Let churches take care of that.





Mr. Huntsman's personal and professional experience in the Far East makes him an ideal candidate to deal with the rising power of China. None of the other candidates has such polished background in foreign affairs. I shudder to think what Michelle Bachmann would do when confronted with a North Korean crisis; ditto for Mrs. Palin, Mr. Cain, and especially Mr. Paul who favors total isolation of the U.S. The only candidate who has a similar experience is Newton Gingrich and we know that he won't get the nomination.

If the ex-governor of Utah is capable of making his name familiar to all American families, there is no doubt in my mind that he will compete a year from now with Mr. Obama. Right now, his main "enemy" is another governor, Mr. Rick Perry.

It all comes down to which Republican candidate is capable of defeating the incumbent President, a formidable foe who campaigns better than anybody else.

RIOTS IN THE QUEEN'S REALM

Burning buildings,  flying rocks, chanting youth, store looting, police taunting, and innocent victims crying, this must be the eastern city of Deir al-Zour in Syria, where the hated regime of  President Bashar al-Assad is mass murdering its own population. Oh surprise! We are actually in the middle of London, the epicenter of riots and violence initiated mostly by young disaffected people. Troubles quickly spread to four other English cities and authorities are baffled as to the causes of this popular uprising.

We cannot blame the weather as the temperature in London hovers around a balmy 70 degrees F. We cannot blame the full moon as it isn't due for another week. There have been 10 riots since 1985 in England, mostly due to police brutality, although a few had to do with increases in taxes and university fees. Indeed, college students have been at the core of the fray a few times, but the finger points mainly to disaffected young people who cannot find a decent job. Street protests usually start peacefully but quickly degenerate in violence caused by those who see an opportunity to loot stores for the rich, Armani's in London was sacked, and by those who enjoy violence (as crazy as this may sound).

The main reason for these riots lies at the heart of the (unjust) capitalist system which creates an abyss between the "have" and "have not". Racism and discrimination against immigrants also play a role. Let's remember the terrible violence that occurred in France in October 2005, where unemployed youths, mostly Arab immigrants, caused hundreds of millions of euros in property damage and thousands of wounded among police and rioters. England is also fertile ground for racial discrimination, as are several other European countries.

Let's remember the Watts riot in Los Angeles in August, 1965, caused by a seemingly innocuous and common event: the arrest of a black man for driving under the influence. The summer heat and years of intense discrimination against African-Americans reach the boiling point and the resulting violence was instrumental in setting up profound changes in the police force and in the perception of minorities.

Many modern Republicans, including presidential candidates for 2012, favor a smaller government and a "laissez-faire" attitude toward the financial forces that move the market. They firmly believe that the federal government should not bail out large companies in danger of failing. "Let the economic and financial factors take care of themselves," they argue, and eliminate all government controls and interference. Maybe we should ask GM's and Chrysler"s employees and workers their opinion. These now very successful enterprises are paying back their official bail-out loans and will soon recover their independence. Thousands of people could have lost their jobs had it not been for the government's intervention.

Are we exempt from more riots in the U.S.? Of course not; what is happening in Britain could very well spill into the U.S., especially since the stock market suffered a huge decline, a potential harbinger of a new recession.

The Republican kind of savage capitalism favors the smart, the strong, and the rich (Bush's tax cuts for example), and leaves the others to charities (tax deductible of course) and to the vagaries of the market. Unless we change the system, we may be the victims of urban violence more and more frequently with the corresponding dire consequences.

TEACHINGS

Buddha once said:"As the rain pours into the ill-thatched house, so lust pours into the undisciplined mind."




Let's interpret "lust" as desire, whether for sex, power, wealth, and/or fame, and we suddenly include all members of Congress, the White House and its various agencies, Wall Street, most CEO's, quite a few movie stars, most governors and mayors, and a considerable part of the general population.

Wow! Buddha has explained in a few succinct words what ails our country in particular and the world in general. If the ordinary citizen allows lust to penetrate his/her mind, nothing of consequence for the nation will result. But when politicians reach a decision based on personal "lust" that affects millions, we all suffer. The recent fracas on the debt ceiling illustrates perfectly the teachings of the Eastern Sage.

Buddha also adds:" Let the wise man guard his mind, incomprehensible, subtle, and capricious though it is. Blessed is the guarded mind!"


It is indeed a full-time job to make sure that our mind doesn't fall prey to unwanted emotions, unwanted when they directly impinge on decisions that should be totally unbiased. The bridge to nowhere, the .50 caliber gun, the war in Iraq, the $500 toilet, the absurdly complex tax laws, the lack of term limits, etc.. are a few examples of politicians voting  with their personal desires and not for rational motives.

Now that President Obama's approval rating is starting to look like his predecessor's, and Congress' image is navigating the sewers of public opinion, one can only ask why we don't have a better government. Did we simply vote (those who bothered to do so) for candidates based on their political campaign spending? Or is the reality much worse and much more frightening?

History has shown that in moments of great crisis, a strong leader emerged to save the day; F.D.R during the Great Depression, Churchill in World War II, De Gaulle saving France from political debacle after the war, Washington of course defeating the Brits, Gandhi in India and Nelson Mandela in South Africa, the list is endless. So where is the great leader that America urgently needs? Some of us thought that Obama was that man, ready to transform our country into a wise and prosperous world power. Alas! No such luck.

A great crisis is upon us and we don't have the kind of government that can solve the problem. Our elected leaders bicker like children on the playground and no visionary leader has emerged (yet) to take over the ship and straighten out its course.

Maybe we should email our elected representatives the teachings of Buddha, every day, every hour, until they start applying his wisdom.

EDUCATION, A MATTER FOR THE STATES AND THE FAMILY

The Constitution clearly states that educating children is the exclusive domain of each individual state. I would add an important phrase:"and of the parents." A friend of many years recently complained to me that he was afraid that if he reprimanded his children the state would intervene and punish him. Such nonsense is the result of bureaucrats encroaching on our privacy and absolute right to punish our children as and when we see fit; the unwritten but well-understood rule is "without harming them."


Today's children know very well that CPS is ready to pounce on "unfit" parents and some of them blackmail their progenitors in order to obtain their wish. The problem is compounded by the laissez-faire attitude of many parents and the fact that so many kids come to an empty home after school.  Without a guide and a moral example at home, boys and girls tend to be influenced by older confused children and misguided peers. The television fare to which they suscribe for at least 4  hours a day certainly doesn't help them form a healthy criteria.


Many of today's successful and model citizens felt the caress of their dad's belt occasionally as children or the good spanking given by their loving mom. Fifty years ago, the corporeal punishment was routinely administered even in schools without any interference from the government. Nowadays, young people, with some notable exceptions, feel that they are entitled without having done the work to deserve it. "Give me" is a common phrase heard in many families rich or poor. In order to have peace at home, parents give in and satisfy the material request.


"Punish with love" is a phrase my mother often repeated as she metered out my well-deserved slap. That is the key that parents would do well to remember. A child is fully aware that he or she has misbehaved and that consequences must follow. That is just! Nothing riles up kids more than injustice; they complain loudly when their siblings seem to receive a more favorable treatment. A wise parent talks to all of them frequently and patiently, explaining the circumstances and the decision. Many teachers try to help parents in instilling moral values to their students. Only one big problem: They have between 25 and 150 kids to take care of every day. Nevertheless, their role as surrogate parents is essential in making a difference while there is a chance to mold a young mind.

Interference by the state government in family affairs should be limited to serious cases of criminal behavior such as leaving kids in a hot car, physical violence between parents, drug use, prostitution, sexual abuse and neglect. A simple phone call by an 11-year old claiming abuse should not result in a show of force by law enforcement and CPS. It should be handled discreetly, so as not to publicly humiliate innocent parents. We often forget that the media sometimes contributes to the public condemnation of innocent people by publishing their photos on the front page. Let us work with local agencies and law enforcement to determine whether a child has been criminally mistreated before we splash the case on the local television channel.


We have become a complacent nation with regard to education; we forget that kids need strict guidance and superior role models. We are limiting the power of parents and teachers to enforce discipline, a value that is essential in a successful adult life. It is natural for kids to test their boundaries, to explore, to talk back, to disobey their elders, to misbehave. We have to show them, with love and care, that there are limits and that society expects them to follow certain rules. Parents, teachers and local agencies should all work together to make sure the message is understood.