Shortly after President Obama was elected, I asked a friend why he had voted for him. He replied, "I just like him". When I pressed him as to why,he seemed stymied but finally said he just liked his personality. Elections, like first impressions are clearly won or lost on the bottom line---we have to like before we can love--or vote for you. But based on what??
It's still very early, but one would think the 2012 election was next month, according to much of the media, and as far as they are concerned, it's pretty much a done deal. Every day brings reports of Obama already on the campaign trail, raising money, talking the talk, greasing the right palms, and setting the stage for 2012. But the other day, he sat down for a little chat with the Prime Minister of Israel, Netanyahu, who as it turns out, can talk pretty well, himself. Mr. Netanyahu didn't take kindly to the remarks of Mr. Obama regarding how Israel should return to the old boundary lines of 1967, thereby giving up some of their land to the Palestinians. It was a teachable moment for both Obama and us who were watching, the Prime Minister proceeded to look Obama in the eyes and tell him in no uncertain terms how he felt about this issue. He later spoke in front of congress with great diplomacy, tact, and confidence--and received much applause. Here, at last, was a man who worked the room---and it wasn't President Obama. A shift had occured---there are others out there who can speak well and capture an audience. I hope the Republicans were taking notice---
Will it be possible that the Republicans could bring forth someone who might have Netanyahu like qualities?? Someone who has presence, confidence, sincere convictions, a certain savoir faire, a sense of having lived long enough to have a more seasoned, mature, balanced world view and our place in it. The meeting between these two men was a rare moment--Obama looking more like a student, than a leader. The Republicans should be looking for such a nominee---but are they? Why is nobody grabbing the same attention that Netanyahu caused? Likability wasn't this man's goal---persuasion by reason and conviction was.
The choices as they appear now, are interesting, but not arresting. Let's just look at the top candidates according to a recent Republican poll: Mitt Romney with 30%, Newt Gingrich at 15%, Michelle Bachman (surprise!)dropping to 7% and Tom Pawlenty at 5%. No one stands out or up with seemingly the "right stuff"----let me re-phrase that---they may have the right stuff, but they aren't blessed with the right look---yes, sad, but true that we put a lot of emphasis on outward appearances. But wait--- if that were all we wanted, why aren't we more excited about Mitt Romney? The guy is movie star, and hunk handsome. He's also Morman, a possible negative with some voters, and on top of that, he instituted a health care bill that bears a too-close-for-comfort resemblance to Obama's plan---"Romneycare", and not a good thing in many conservatives' minds.
Next, we have a man who probably has much of the right stuff, a memorable name, Newt Gingrich, and most notably a previous Speaker of the House. His stuff may be right, but it's packaged wrong. He will not win any Mr. America beauty contests. The media likes to play up his "baggage" of divorce and adultery history---I doubt the average American cares much about that, but they don't like his "image"---what's that? Middle aged white man with a slight paunch--boring, and not at all cool. We like 'em cool and "hot" these days. Smart counts, but only if it's in a handsome box.
Michelle Bachmann, Minnesota member of the House of Representatives and the lone female candidate so far, is hanging in there with 7% of voter polling, and certainly would pass the camera test, but seems to lack depth of knowledge. Is she another Sara Palin, who speaks to the hearts of Republican voters, but not to their minds?
Tied with Bachmann at 7% ---is a new kid on the block, Herman Cain, former CEO of Godfather's Pizza. What makes him an interesting contender is that he is an African American---the Tea Party likes him, and so does the media. But will they cast him and the Republican party as a "copy cats",trying to cash in on the race card?
Tom Pawlenty, preceding governor of Minnesota, is running surprisingly behind with 5%. He is plenty qualified, nice looking enough, but does not seem to have that "it" factor, the mojo that says, "Look at me, I'm up to the job, and further more I can beat Obama". He simply doesn't have it going on.
There are other candidates who make up the remainder of this poll's percentages, such as Ron Paul who keeps popping up in the news with his Libetarian ideas, but no one seems to be paying much attention--maybe it's his non-commanding voice, or his milque toast demeanor--he's like the smart little kid in the classroom who keeps putting his hand up with the answers, but nobody cares. Maybe his light is just too bright for these dark times--we're not in the mood for radical change, and just want to veer away from the cliffs of economic disaster, not jump across the chasms.
Of course, the liberal slanted media loves that the Republicans seem unable to come up with a winnable, wannabe presidential candidate. For the most part, Obama's their guy, and they want to keep him for another four years. Have they scared off potential possibilities who view this race too unwinnable to win? On the flip side, beware of any Republican candidate the media claims to like very much--think John McCain. It sounds paranoid, but it's called politics in action. The media is a big time player, and they are not above stratigery.
It will be a tough mountain to climb, with an encumbent president who even now in the midst of very serious world problems is on and off the campaign trail, bouyed by a rich Democrat party money chest, and his recent Bin Laden conquest. But is there more to the almost intractable popularity of Barack Obama and historic election? Is it a love/hate dynamic that keeps his poll numbers north, even though some of his decisions would sink way south for other presidents? Do we hate what he does sometimes, like the forced into law health care bill,his refusal to drill domestically, even in the face of rising gas prices, the Libyan mess, but continue to tolerate him because he's just so cool, urbane, and well spoken? Some suggest that we love the fact that he's African/American and that very thing speaks well of us and our enlightened evolvement. Whatever it is, there are many who predict Obama is unbeatable---and unless the Republicans can offer up someone who has "winner" written invisibly on his forehead, i.e. has the Romney good looks, the Gingrich intellect, Bachmann's passion, and Netanyahu's "don't mess with me" attitude, they should put away their party hats and get out their handerchiefs.
And how about us? Who do we like, and why? Are we guilty of a certain complacency, a sort of vicarious approach to all things politic? Do we passively watch, but do not more actively seek out our choices for at least the Presidential nominees? Should we be making our voices heard more loudly for people we admire, and should we put less stock in image and more in what it will take to offer people a clear choice come the 2012 election? Some say Republicans are too gentile to come out fighting for their ideals, that they are running scared, and that they are too split within their party to form a strong platform. All this may be true, but if it is, then the country will surely suffer from the result of the ruling party's will, therefore an atrophy of new ideas, absence of guts to speak of them, and a general lack of Republican backbone expected by the voters.
The 2012 election is still a ways off, but the Republicans need to begin shaping their lineup of nominees. And we must begin to focus on all of them with more than a casual observer's eye. First impressions count, but I used to like diet cola and cigarettes---
Thursday, May 26, 2011
Saturday, May 14, 2011
FINDING BIN LADEN---LOSING PART OF OURSELVES?
And so,predictably, the national conversation was filled with conflicting opinions on the capture and death of Osama bin Laden. One of the main talking points seems to be whether interrogation methods were key in finally putting enough pieces together to locate the hiding place---and whether we, as a country, should condone this method of interrogation---otherwise known as torture. Waterboarding is supposedly the technique used to induce information which finally led to the capture of Osama bin Laden. Though unpleasant and quite awful, it seems the mildest among an array of torture methods. We abhor the thought of torture, even in a war situation---but this wasn't and isn't your grandparents war---this enemy is different and everything about them and their war strategies were completely foreign to us. We were not sure where they were, who they were, or when they might strike next. And the worst, perhaps most unsettling and bewildering of all --- they played by different rules, even willing to blow themselves up for their cause. Beheading, torturing, and killing innocent people were totally within their game plan. This was and is a different war,and unless we found a way to retaliate, we were sitting ducks for more attacks. Our very survival as a country was at stake-- we had to learn fast. We had been reluctant to recognize the danger signals that had been flashing for years with the previous bombing of the World Trade Center, and other attacks around the world of our U.S. embassies and the attack on the USS Cole in Yemen. Awakened literally overnight on the morning of 9/11---we finally realized we could no longer passively resist or labor under the illusion that this strange enemy could never over power us. Who could have even imagined the commandeering of our own air planes being flown into our magnificent buildings? It was unthinkable, but it was done---and it could well happen again. Game on--but how? Where was the enemy,and who was their leader? His name was Osama bin Laden, and he took full credit for 9/11. He had no actual army, just "cells" of people all over the world. It was only a matter of time before they would strike again.
Already fighting a group known as the Taliban in Afghanistan who supported terrorists and oppressed their own people, our President Bush and our military now turned their sights on Iraq, who was also suspected of being a terrorist-sympathetic country---and one which by all accounts were hiding weapons of mass destruction. "Either you are with us", Bush threatened, "or you are against us". He meant it, and we went to war against Iraq. We won, and today Iraq is on its way to becoming a democracy of sorts. George Bush lost his credibility, his popularity, and the respect of many when weapons of mass destruction were never found---but in return, his greatest achievement and gift to us was protecting us from further attacks during his presidency.
The search for Osama bin Laden, however went frustatingly on and on, and the terror continued unabated, as his videos and speeches continued to taunt and threaten us with more attacks to come. We had to find this man---our enemy number one. He seemed invincible and invisible. But if we couldn't find him---- we did find and detain many of his followers and leaders. One of them, a Khalid Sheikh Mohammed,supposedly talked via methods of interrogation,which some call unacceptable torture. His information undoubtedly led to the eventual capture of Osama bin Laden. The military and the politicians claim it was a "mosaic" of information which when put all together pin pointed the unlikely hiding place of this most wanted of men---but it is widely accepted that the key piece of information came from this captive and his distaste for waterboarding. There seemed to be no other way to locate bin Laden---he was rich enough to buy his invisibility and clever enough to escape a whole world of hunters.
Hiding in plain site, it seemed, in the middle of a Pakistan city, questionably near a military base, Osama bin Laden finally met his inevitable fate. It had taken nearly 10 years since he brought his war to us and killed 3000 innocent people on a sunny day in New York. He ran, but he couldn't hide forever---or could he have--- without the very serious use of the interrogation technique called "torture"? We will never know. President Obama has outlawed any further use of torture, saying "that's not who we are". But nor are we who we were. The events of 9/11 changed us in many ways, and perhaps one of them is that we could no longer afford our usual rules of engagement or our same views of morality. Rule number one had become---something called survival. We survived and outlived bin Laden---but there are others like him out there, still plotting our destruction. Will we manage to survive them and/or ourselves in our struggle to remain moral, fair, and above the disturbing, but often effective means of obtaining information that could save our lives? Time and history will tell---
Already fighting a group known as the Taliban in Afghanistan who supported terrorists and oppressed their own people, our President Bush and our military now turned their sights on Iraq, who was also suspected of being a terrorist-sympathetic country---and one which by all accounts were hiding weapons of mass destruction. "Either you are with us", Bush threatened, "or you are against us". He meant it, and we went to war against Iraq. We won, and today Iraq is on its way to becoming a democracy of sorts. George Bush lost his credibility, his popularity, and the respect of many when weapons of mass destruction were never found---but in return, his greatest achievement and gift to us was protecting us from further attacks during his presidency.
The search for Osama bin Laden, however went frustatingly on and on, and the terror continued unabated, as his videos and speeches continued to taunt and threaten us with more attacks to come. We had to find this man---our enemy number one. He seemed invincible and invisible. But if we couldn't find him---- we did find and detain many of his followers and leaders. One of them, a Khalid Sheikh Mohammed,supposedly talked via methods of interrogation,which some call unacceptable torture. His information undoubtedly led to the eventual capture of Osama bin Laden. The military and the politicians claim it was a "mosaic" of information which when put all together pin pointed the unlikely hiding place of this most wanted of men---but it is widely accepted that the key piece of information came from this captive and his distaste for waterboarding. There seemed to be no other way to locate bin Laden---he was rich enough to buy his invisibility and clever enough to escape a whole world of hunters.
Hiding in plain site, it seemed, in the middle of a Pakistan city, questionably near a military base, Osama bin Laden finally met his inevitable fate. It had taken nearly 10 years since he brought his war to us and killed 3000 innocent people on a sunny day in New York. He ran, but he couldn't hide forever---or could he have--- without the very serious use of the interrogation technique called "torture"? We will never know. President Obama has outlawed any further use of torture, saying "that's not who we are". But nor are we who we were. The events of 9/11 changed us in many ways, and perhaps one of them is that we could no longer afford our usual rules of engagement or our same views of morality. Rule number one had become---something called survival. We survived and outlived bin Laden---but there are others like him out there, still plotting our destruction. Will we manage to survive them and/or ourselves in our struggle to remain moral, fair, and above the disturbing, but often effective means of obtaining information that could save our lives? Time and history will tell---
Thursday, May 5, 2011
DETAILS, DETAILS---WHO CARES?
In the middle of Donald Trump's "Celebrity Apprentice" last Sunday night, the alert bulletin flashed across the TV screen--"News Alert from the White House". "Gotcha'", I thought--Obama is getting even with Trump's audacious remarks regarding Obama's qualifications. But it was the real deal, the biggest deal of the year--Osama bin Laden was not only found, but captured and killed---details to follow. The devil may be in those details, but let him give it a rest for now. It was a rare moment of stunning news----good news, grateful news, relieving news. We had waited a long time for this, and had all but given up hope that Osama, the man who became the face of terrorism and who had changed this country overnight with the attack on 9/11, would ever be brought to justice. President Obama gave a short speech---he asked that we rejoice together and remember how it is to come together as a united country. We did and we do---but probably not for long. We are united in our ability to divide over anything at all, and this was no exception. The details coming out will give us much to opine about---but do we have to? Apparently so.
For starters, who was this man--and why did he hate us? His message was murky, but his methods were deadly. He denounced our way of life, and took it upon himself to change it. But who was he to judge and take us on as his enemy? It was always a tricky thing---what did we call this rogue muslim who had somehow managed to wage war against the most powerful country in the world? He had no army, no uniforms, no rules of engagement, and no respect for even the lives of his own followers. He was responsible for many attacks prior to 9/11, but that one got our full, stunned attention---we were in the cross hairs of this one man and his scattered "cells" who were hell bent of destroying, if not all of us, enough of our security to rattle our national phyche ,dramatically change our life style, and alter many of our freedoms. We were now not so free, and sadly watched as we sent our men and women off to fight this phantom enemy called Al Queda. Their numbers seem to multiply and morph until finally they were here among us, like a contagious disease, infecting even some of our own citizens who were wooed at the prospect of becoming a martyr for a cause they thought was worth dying for---extreme jihadists, or lost souls, doing the bidding of a man and his hatred for "infidels"---or so he proclaimed.
Like most other cult figures, Osama bin Laden was a false prophet, an arrogant, egotistical, but rich and charismatic leader who used religion as a cover and an excuse to murder and gain notoriety for his own political/religious views. In the end he was nothing but a pathetic old man, an outlaw on the run and forced to hide for the rest of his life, and finally in a "mansion", which turned out to look more like a cold, fortressed prison. He could trust no one and ultimately was betrayed by others of his "troops" who had been captured and interrogated. He died at the hands of his self made enemy, having not accomplished much but chaos ,mass murder, and a terror which did indeed change, but did not bring us to our knees. He would never accomplish his goals, but he paradoxically managed to cast a shadow upon his own Islamic religion, even as we struggled to separate it from the extreme and perverted beliefs that he touted.
The great irony is that as his quest ended to conquer the world with his version of a fringe, religious society, where freedom and democracy would no longer exist, the opposite has begun to flourish in the middle east, known now as the Arab Spring. Egypt was the largest explosion of the thirst for democracy, and other Arab countries will surely follow in her wake, as the youth in their ability to connect with freer nations will rise up and demand their freedoms. Iraq has already been unshackled from the constraints of a oppressive, despotic rule, and Afghanistan is slowly finding its way to a democracy, as we help it along. Perhaps technology and its wide spread communication effects was and is the real enemy to those who would attempt to stifle and over power whole countries with their ideologies and exclusionary religions. The light of a free people shines brighter than of those who must bow and subjugate to other mens' wishes---and that light will draw and warm the world as more and more people see it shining brightly via their television sets, their cell phones, and their computers.
Before this week is out, there will be many conflicting opinions and debates regarding the killing of Osama bin Laden. As usual we will turn ourselves inside-out arguing and debating as to whether it was right and just, or wrong and illegal. There are those who say the body should not have been given even the dignity of a Muslim ceremonial burial at sea, that the gruesome photos should be made public, that we should have co-operated more with the Pakistani government, ya-da, ya-da. But for most of us, the deed is thankfully done, the witch is dead, and hang the details.
Terrorism will no doubt live on for awhile, but we know the enemy now, and it knows we will fight back hard and long. We have toughened as a nation and perhaps in our awareness of those who would harm us, we have become less self absorbed and more resolved to spread and encourage democracy, so that others may enjoy our freedoms and not be caught in the paralyzing grip of those who would enslave them to their particular beliefs and agendas.
I was proud of President Obama the other night as he approved the plan and gave the order to finish the hunt for Osama. That couldn't have been easy and was fraught with the possibility of failure. I have always been proud of George W. Bush for leading us through one of the most tumultous, frightening times in our history . But I was most proud of our brave military men who pulled off a highly skilled military manuever and risked their lives for us all. All of them deserve our respect and gratitude for performing their most solemn duty--to keep us safe. They kept their promise, and it would seem fitting that we dispense with hair splitting details and the bickering among ourselves.
To those who wish to pick over the minutiae and find fault with the execution of the plan to capture and possibly kill upon certain orders the man who thought nothing of beheading, bombing, and burning those he hated, may I say--- get over it. Was he a criminal, deserving of a trial, or a militant combatant, who was sought and killed as any other enemy number one would be? That may be up to a higher authority than ours. Either way, his guilt was self confessed many times over, and he wasn't done with us yet, as evidenced by material from his computer files taken during the raid. This was a man who willfully chose his fate. May God have mercy on his soul--and may there not be a virgin in sight.
.
For starters, who was this man--and why did he hate us? His message was murky, but his methods were deadly. He denounced our way of life, and took it upon himself to change it. But who was he to judge and take us on as his enemy? It was always a tricky thing---what did we call this rogue muslim who had somehow managed to wage war against the most powerful country in the world? He had no army, no uniforms, no rules of engagement, and no respect for even the lives of his own followers. He was responsible for many attacks prior to 9/11, but that one got our full, stunned attention---we were in the cross hairs of this one man and his scattered "cells" who were hell bent of destroying, if not all of us, enough of our security to rattle our national phyche ,dramatically change our life style, and alter many of our freedoms. We were now not so free, and sadly watched as we sent our men and women off to fight this phantom enemy called Al Queda. Their numbers seem to multiply and morph until finally they were here among us, like a contagious disease, infecting even some of our own citizens who were wooed at the prospect of becoming a martyr for a cause they thought was worth dying for---extreme jihadists, or lost souls, doing the bidding of a man and his hatred for "infidels"---or so he proclaimed.
Like most other cult figures, Osama bin Laden was a false prophet, an arrogant, egotistical, but rich and charismatic leader who used religion as a cover and an excuse to murder and gain notoriety for his own political/religious views. In the end he was nothing but a pathetic old man, an outlaw on the run and forced to hide for the rest of his life, and finally in a "mansion", which turned out to look more like a cold, fortressed prison. He could trust no one and ultimately was betrayed by others of his "troops" who had been captured and interrogated. He died at the hands of his self made enemy, having not accomplished much but chaos ,mass murder, and a terror which did indeed change, but did not bring us to our knees. He would never accomplish his goals, but he paradoxically managed to cast a shadow upon his own Islamic religion, even as we struggled to separate it from the extreme and perverted beliefs that he touted.
The great irony is that as his quest ended to conquer the world with his version of a fringe, religious society, where freedom and democracy would no longer exist, the opposite has begun to flourish in the middle east, known now as the Arab Spring. Egypt was the largest explosion of the thirst for democracy, and other Arab countries will surely follow in her wake, as the youth in their ability to connect with freer nations will rise up and demand their freedoms. Iraq has already been unshackled from the constraints of a oppressive, despotic rule, and Afghanistan is slowly finding its way to a democracy, as we help it along. Perhaps technology and its wide spread communication effects was and is the real enemy to those who would attempt to stifle and over power whole countries with their ideologies and exclusionary religions. The light of a free people shines brighter than of those who must bow and subjugate to other mens' wishes---and that light will draw and warm the world as more and more people see it shining brightly via their television sets, their cell phones, and their computers.
Before this week is out, there will be many conflicting opinions and debates regarding the killing of Osama bin Laden. As usual we will turn ourselves inside-out arguing and debating as to whether it was right and just, or wrong and illegal. There are those who say the body should not have been given even the dignity of a Muslim ceremonial burial at sea, that the gruesome photos should be made public, that we should have co-operated more with the Pakistani government, ya-da, ya-da. But for most of us, the deed is thankfully done, the witch is dead, and hang the details.
Terrorism will no doubt live on for awhile, but we know the enemy now, and it knows we will fight back hard and long. We have toughened as a nation and perhaps in our awareness of those who would harm us, we have become less self absorbed and more resolved to spread and encourage democracy, so that others may enjoy our freedoms and not be caught in the paralyzing grip of those who would enslave them to their particular beliefs and agendas.
I was proud of President Obama the other night as he approved the plan and gave the order to finish the hunt for Osama. That couldn't have been easy and was fraught with the possibility of failure. I have always been proud of George W. Bush for leading us through one of the most tumultous, frightening times in our history . But I was most proud of our brave military men who pulled off a highly skilled military manuever and risked their lives for us all. All of them deserve our respect and gratitude for performing their most solemn duty--to keep us safe. They kept their promise, and it would seem fitting that we dispense with hair splitting details and the bickering among ourselves.
To those who wish to pick over the minutiae and find fault with the execution of the plan to capture and possibly kill upon certain orders the man who thought nothing of beheading, bombing, and burning those he hated, may I say--- get over it. Was he a criminal, deserving of a trial, or a militant combatant, who was sought and killed as any other enemy number one would be? That may be up to a higher authority than ours. Either way, his guilt was self confessed many times over, and he wasn't done with us yet, as evidenced by material from his computer files taken during the raid. This was a man who willfully chose his fate. May God have mercy on his soul--and may there not be a virgin in sight.
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)