Search This Blog

Showing posts with label Paul. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Paul. Show all posts

Monday, September 26, 2011

Where is the Savior?


Be not concerned with other men's evil words or deeds or neglect of good: look rather to thine own sins and negligence (Buddha)


Quite a few times in history, the right man (or woman) has appeared during national crisis to save the day; Winston Churchill comes to mind immediately. A great orator and motivator, he faced the Nazi threat with bravery or maybe bravado, considering that the only factor that saved England was the Channel and the famed British navy. JFK appears next as the handsome President who in all probability saved this country from WWIII by calling Kruschev's bluff. The relatively unappreciated Truman took over from a very sick FDR and had the guts to order the nuclear bombing of Japan, a valiant decision that shortened the war with the Nippon empire and saved untold thousands of GI lives. He then found the strength after the war to recall General MacArthur from his position in Korea when the immensely popular old soldier criticized Washington for not using the A-bomb against China. General Marshall proposed the Plan that bears his name and will always be remembered as the man who saved Western Europe, including our former enemy, Germany.

A portrait shot of an older, bald man with bifocal glasses. He is wearing a blazer over a collared shirt and tie. In his hands, he is holding a set of papers. Nikita Kruschev

Portrait of President John F. Kennedy by Bachrach Matted PhotoLet us not forget the great men who founded this nation and defied the mighty British Empire. Nowadays, however, the United States is searching in vain for the man (or woman) who will put order in this confused and bickering nation. Our present politicians in Washington cause both hilarity and furor through their childish behavior and lack of vision. It is indeed a tragicomic situation that affects millions of Americans looking for a job and trying to save their home and their health plans. Savings are disappearing and retirements are postponed indefinitely. 

The present batch of Republican contenders, as I have said before (and I know whereof I speak ), does not satisfy their own party. The two leaders, Romney and Perry, exchange insults instead of offering concrete plans to improve our economy (By the way, Mr. Romney should get rid of the sardonic smile he seems to exhibit permanently. One gets the impression that he is mocking his opponents on a permanent basis. Does he have image advisers?). Mr. Cain won Florida, a deciding state in many elections. Does that mean anything? Yes, it means that he is the only one who seems to maintain his composure and avoid personal attacks. Does he have a chance? No, of course not.

Some Republican honchos are getting so desperate that they have asked, apparently, Gov. Christie of New Jersey to jump into the fray. He says no with the look of a cat that just caught the mouse. He feigns modesty, not one of his better qualities, and affirms that he is not ready, yet. Note the pause before "yet." His message is clear:" I am the man the country needs, even if I take the police helicopter to go to my son's game at taxpayer's expense." Do we know who he is really? No, he hasn't done enough to satisfy us. Strong personality? Yes, but can he stand the intense scrutiny of a presidential campaign? Only he knows.

While this immensely rich country can afford to spend $2 billion dollars PER WEEK in Afghanistan, the financial crisis worsens. The infrastructure weakens; bridges, schools, highways, dams, are all at risk of causing a major catastrophe. Do you think we could do a lot of rebuilding with $104 billion, the amount we spent this year on corrupt Kabul?  Why is it that not one of these Republican candidates, with the exception of Ron Paul, has suggested getting out quickly from Iraq and Afghanistan, thus reducing the deficit WITHOUT increasing taxes? We have military bases in 150 countries including Germany and Japan, two rich countries. Why has not one leading Republican candidate suggested we bring these troops home and save a ton of money?

Could it be because a Republican President started the whole mess? 

Tuesday, September 6, 2011

To Be or Not To Be

Honestly and without bias, with no party preferences, whether male or female, conservative or liberal or moderate, using only your objective senses, who, among the presidential candidates, has the best profile to occupy the White House? Whom would you like to see as commander-in-chief, as exalted leader of this powerful nation in January of 2013?

I bet you have never heard of Roger Gary, of Stewart Alexander, Gary Johnson, or of Fred Karger; yet, all of them have the absolute right to compete in the 2012 election, even though none of them has the slightest chance of winning the coveted position. There are quite a few more names but it would be tedious to name them all since the national media will not waste any air time on them. I will therefore stick to those whose names appear daily in newspapers and television programs.

1. Mitt Romney

Admittedly, Mr. Romney does have the presence and intelligence to become President. He speaks well in public and has a certain charm that appeals to ladies. Against him: his religion, which the more popular Protestant churches view with suspicion. Also against him: his constant changes of position on crucial issues, including of course his Obamacare-type of health insurance in Massachusetts which he now says cannot be applied to every state.

2. Rick Perry

Another male candidate with physical presence and good masculine looks, the way we imagine our President must look like compared to other heads of state (of course, it could well be a lady with a strong personality). In his favor, a relatively low unemployment rate in Texas, ten years as chief executive which means he is quite electable, a strong Christian with conservative values and an avowed enemy of big government. Against him: some of his more extreme views (Social Security as a Ponzi scheme, term limits for the Supreme Court judges) may alienate quite a few more moderate voters.

3. Ron Paul

Extreme ideas as a libertarian and much too old to be elected (he is 75), Mr. Paul knows he can't win;
 he only wants his suggestions to have a large audience, hoping that some of them will be taken up by the winning candidate.

4. Sarah Palin

Even though she has the best name recognition in the country and though she hasn't thrown her hat into the ring yet, Ms. Palin is the subject of some national polls. Strangely enough, she fared the worst when compared with President Obama. Mitt Romney and Rick Perry on the other hand stood neck and neck with the Chief Executive among probable voters. It doesn't seem possible for her to overcome the leading Republicans and get the nomination of her party.

5. Michele Bachmann

Another lady who has struck hard in the preference of tea party members, Ms. Bachmann apparently only attracts the more extreme voters. She won't get the nomination because she fails to attract moderates, but her influence in the campaign will certainly be felt. Vice-President??

6. Newton Gingrich

A fighter and a strong debater, Mr. Gingrich, just like Ms. Bachmann, seems set on earning a position on the winning ticket, whether as Secretary of State or chief of staff in the White House. He won't become president, but his intelligence and wide experience could be exploited by whoever ends up on top.

7. Jon Huntsman

If you read my article on Mr. Huntsman published a few days ago, you'll know that he is my favorite by far as a future leader of this country. He is smart, good looking, and has the credentials in the Far East to deal with any crisis that may emerge from China. He may not win because he is too nice, too polite toward his opponents. If we compared him to a boxer, I would say that he doesn't have the killer instinct. He doesn't debate well and speaking in public requires firing up the crowd, a skill he does not possess. Yet I am convinced that he would make the best President.

I now ask you, my occasional readers, to given your opinion in this very informal poll. Thank you!

Saturday, August 13, 2011

A REPUBLICAN FIESTA

One candidate stood out amongst the Iowa's debate participants: Ron Paul. As usual, he deviated from the Republican policy in foreign wars, advocating a new type of Isolationism. He was the target of Santorum's acid criticism laced with a strong dose of sarcasm. Ron Paul shouted the most, knowing full well that, in spite of a decent poll number, he has no chance to win the primary. Bachman rarely showed the usual passion, except when she vigorously defended her role in Congress: "I was against raising the debt ceiling." Mitt Romney, as the present favorite to win the primary, maintained his distance from everybody else to avoid a verbal confrontation; he of course hasn't shown that he has the skills to fight in the trenches. His perpetual sardonic half smile doesn't serve him well, as if he were making fun of his colleagues.




So much for the most active debaters; in their shadow, Pawlenty seemed a little more animated, but as usual he keeps the title of the Prince of Monotony. If you can't sleep, there is the cure for you; tape his speeches and play them back in a loop at night. Hermann Cain showed poise, common sense, and self-assurance: He gets the nomination for Mr. Sense & Wisdom. Newton Gingrich, by far the most experienced and astute participant, let his tongue get the better of him as usual, bashing the Fox News hosts even though he once worked with them. He gets the nomination as Mr. Ungrateful. Huntsman, our ex-ambassador, well, the less said the better. He clearly deserves the title of Mr. Disappointment.

The real winners are the candidates who were not at the debate, but whose invisible presence dominated the event: Sarah Palin and Rick Perry, the Texas governor. Even though Mitt Romney kept a straight face when asked about Perry's entry into the fray, his response welcoming the fact betrayed his inner turmoil: His worst nightmare has just proven true. Perry is a serious contender, much more than any of the other candidates and he knows it. Romney firmly believes that it is his turn after losing to McCain three years ago and Perry, more so than Palin, represents the dark horse in the race to the White House. I nominate Romney as Mr. Déja Vu.

Michele Bachman is intense, no doubt about it; she is a real "damn the torpedoes" warrior, unlike Romney and that's what makes her a formidable and dangerous opponent. As a de facto leader of the Tea Party, she represents the extreme right views of the Republican Party, which, in my opinion, disqualifies her as a winner of the primary. Few independents will vote for her. Her followers are not afraid to elbow CNN anchors out of the way, which leads me to name her Miss Get Out Of My Way.

Rick Perry took his time to declare his candidacy to the White House, hoping to emulate his predecessor in the Texas Governorship. He acted wisely in not jumping into the race early; he wanted to see what the others had to say before deciding. He apparently feels that the competition is not that strong and that he has a good chance to prevail. Governor since the year 2000 (when Bush was elected the first time), he surprisingly began his political career as a Democrat and switched in 1990. As the longest serving governor in Texas, Perry is known among the locals as a man who follows the political trends as long as they favor his personal goals. This factor may hurt him when his opponents look for ammunition to attack him in the campaign. He is therefore my favorite for the title of Mr. Ride With The Wind.

Who will attempt to defeat Barack Obama? If you know the answer, please let me know!!