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.

 Nikita Kruschev

Let 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? 

Heavyweight Fighters

The main bout seems to take shape; in the left corner, the current national champion, who has not convinced in his last fights against second-rated opponents that he is ready to keep his crown. In the right corner, two heavy weight contenders who will soon meet to determine who is more qualified to meet the champ. The current odds are almost even, with a slight advantage for either opponents of the title holder.

                                                                           

The blue corner is trying desperately to convince their followers that they should bet in his favor; the red corner, though divided on who the better man might be, throws caution to the wind as they use unorthodox training strategies to rattle the champion. One thing is certain: There will be no knock-out! The promoters are expecting 40 million fans to place their bets next year during the first days of November, and maybe 200 million more spectators will watch the fight till the the wee hours of the morning.

In reality none of the three deserves the crown; Obama, Romney and Perry all have serious weaknesses that will certainly result in a poor showing of the electorate. None has that "leader" aura, that irresistible charisma shared by John Kennedy, FDR, Lincoln, Churchill, and more recently, the great charmer Ronald Reagan. They are all wafflers, following what they think is the current popular wind. Romney doesn't convince anybody when he tries to defend his "Obamacare" in Massachusetts; Rick Perry first approved of gay marriage but changed his mind when the religious right pressured him. President Obama showed uncertainty and lack of firmness when he agreed to extend the tax cuts for the rich even though he had the majority in both houses.

True, it is hard to imagine any politician resisting big lobbyists' pressure to push legislation that  favors their cause. Governor Perry was accused by his own colleagues in the Republican party to promote a certain vaccine and take campaign money from the pharmaceutical company making that product. Obama's campaign promise to get rid of powerful lobbies was just that, a populist commitment to get votes. Romney suffered in his first presidential campaign when he hired lobbyists who represented important industries asking for the demise of the EPA.  Under the present system, it is impossible for a candidate to obtain sizable contributions without making promises that favor the donors. Why else would they forgo so much money? Stupid they are not. They even hedge their bets by giving to both sides..just in case. It's called legalized corruption, and until we change the electoral system - getting rid for example of the now inane and obsolete electoral college, unsavory actions will remain the norm.



Let's make it clear; all three men are good citizens and successful professionals, good fathers and husbands, with the qualities and weaknesses that compose a typical human being. They are all strong patriots, college graduates, intelligent, and the only one that has served his country in the military is Rick Perry; strangely enough, he, just like Bush, was a reserve pilot in the National Guard. Romney has an extensive experience in the private sector and represents the perfect candidate for Wall Street. Both he and Perry have been governors, a useful background for anybody wanting to be president. Perry is, right now, the candidate of choice for the religious right. Obama, of course, is supported by unions, and by centrist left voters.

This next presidential election could very well end up in court, just like the 2000 contest between Bush and Al Gore. That's why each candidate is touring the country 24/7 trying to convince independents like me to vote for them.

I don't know, lots of time left. What do you think?

In Government We Trust?

Our motto "In God We Trust" is available on any banknote, a phrase that has provoked the ire of a few atheists. Can we say however the same for government? More important, perhaps, is the question of whether we trust our company since our paycheck depends on it. Look at GM in 2008, a bloated elephant that made quite a few high executives very rich, while wasting enormous resources on unsellable cars and projects and leading the venerable car manufacturer straight to bankruptcy. Banks? Don't even mention the word trust in the same sentence.

What about the Bernie Madoffs of this world, the ones who were caught and the ones who still roam free on their luxurious yachts. How can they abuse our trust and our savings on such a grand scale without government agencies paying attention to their blatant lies? Is there a relationship between our television taste for cop shows and handsome doctors, and our need to trust somebody who tends to our basic needs? Are we essentially trusting human beings in America, ready to be swindled by the first fast talking salesman or broker? Or are we making a mistake in believing that Government (with a big G) will protect us from professional con men and women who often operate under the mantle of respected companies?

We all know that Congress, a body composed arguably of elected officials whose only job is to watch over our welfare, has an approval rating of about 12%, the lowest it has been in decades. The President and his cabinet do not fare much better with only 19% approval rate according to the Rasmussen Reports. Even the Supreme Court rate hovers around 50%, not a good number if we remember that the Justices have a profound impact in our daily lives through their decisions.



Do we have to become, as has already happened in the last 3 months, a nation of cynics and skeptics? If that's the case, who will we vote for in the next elections? Shall we continue to favor those with the biggest campaign war chest or are we capable of filling Congress and the White House with ordinary but honest citizens? How many years will pass before we, the people, (the phrase sounds familiar) demand term limits from legislators who often have lost touch with every day life after 30 or 40 years in office?

Some naysayers will argue that only candidates with experience should be elected, "because they know how to get things done."

Hum, I wonder if George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin and other Founding Fathers had any experience in nation building. Yet they did a pretty good job, don't you think?