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.
.
Friday, April 29, 2011
TAKE NOTICE---A PRINCE, A PRINCESS, AND PERSPECTIVE
Have you ever noticed how some people seem to float through life with the greatest of ease---and others are constantly caught up in this drama or that trauma? What's the x factor, the thing that allows some to rise to or above challenges and pitfalls while so many seem barely able to survive what life throws at them. Is the ability to remain steadfast and even cheerful in the face of adversity a learned trait, or is one born with it? Studies show that while money certainly helps, it does not completely insulate from life's hard balls. So consider for a moment one young man's stellar, but not always happy journey and his happy "ending" ---so far.
This weekend we saw a prince marry a commoner in Great Britain. That used to be the stuff of fairy tales, and if done, not at all amusing---now it's a welcome sign of a more modern ,reasonable, and far more acceptable monarchy. Opinions and perspectives have changed. We remember Prince William as he marched with his younger brother and father behind his mother's casket 30 years ago and how sad he looked. We grieved with him and wondered if he would survive that tragedy. Would it define him, force him to see the world as an ugly, mean, and dangerous place---or would he manage to move on healthy and strong? Of course, he had many advantages, but still one wondered if the sadness would color his life and keep him from reaching his full potential. Would that we could all have the riches and entitlements that Prince William was born into, yet a recent poll found that human happiness does not come necessarily from wealth---much of it comes from intangible things--like good relationships, health, exercising, helping others---but falling in love tops the charts. All the world loves a lover, and the lover's world turns from black and white to vivid color over night. But everything is really the same---it's the beholder who has changed.
In the book, "The Noticer", by Andy Andrews, the author tries to show that it's all about one's perspective that can make the difference between a life spent struggling and complaining, or one which sails and soars in spite of one's circumstances. It all has to do with how you look at things, and whether you are noticing the right things at the right angle. The author used a character by the name of "Jones" to bring perspective to the lives of those living in a small town. Jones would show up out of nowhere and help a man about to commit suicide,a husband about to leave his wife, or a discouraged business man. In every case, Jones, who seemed to resemble a spiritual being,but without any obsequious mention of it, managed to adjust their vision, so that they began to see their lives differently. It has to do with values and attitudes, of course, but it was a good reminder that how we respond to events has much more importance than the events themselves.
At the end of the book, the author asks whether the reader has ever had a "Jones" in their life,someone to show them the way when inevitable darkness descends. I could not say that I had. But then I began to remember times in my life when there had been isolated incidents-- and one might say, a "Jones" appeared out of nowhere to help me find the way, or to look at the situation from outside my isolated lens. For me, they have usually been strangers, who once having come to my aid, have disappeared never to be seen again. There was the reputedly rude, uncaring cabbie in New York, who loaned me $3.00 for his fare, when I was dead broke as a young flight attendant, the unapproachable looking nun on a train in Italy who seemed to arrive out of thin air and showed my friends and me where to safely sit when we were totally confused, the overly friendly gentleman I was sure had ulterior motives, but who guided me through the of streets of Venice to my hotel when I was lost, and asked for nothing in return, a wise old window washer who spoke words of comfort to a pain I had buried and thought out of sight, until he addressed it quite out of the blue and lifted my spirits, and on and on, sign posts along my way, held by people I didn't notice or expect answers from until they helped me to find and to view things differently. Andy Andrews' message is that, contrary to what we have been told, it is the small stuff in life that matters---not the big job, the fancy car, the ideal marriage, the perfect children,etc. The woman who referred this book to me told me that it had changed her life. It did not change mine, but it reminded me to look at things from all sides, before locking into one view point.
I hope as I have been helped, I have been someone's Jones or simple sign post along their way. Could it be that's our real lesson, the thing we need to notice most? That what is the most important in this life is to take the focus off of self and direct our gaze at the beauty that is always there, the peace that floats all around us even in the midst of turmoil, the wisdom that is inherently deep inside for the tapping, and most importantly, the person in our life who may be in need of a different perspective---or a hug. Look around, take notice, and see beyond to a place called understanding--or heightened perspective. You will sometimes see it in the eyes of children---they have not yet been blinded by the abrasions of the world. You may also find it in the the very old---some lucky ones rediscover their sight again as they see the circle of life coming back around to complete their journey, and they finally gain a new appreciation which eluded them in their pre-occupied lives. That appreciation is a perspective free of what ifs, should haves, fear, pride, greed, or anxiety about the future---it doesn't agonize over the past, it moves forward, it forgives, it submits, it accepts what is,it changes what can be changed, it keeps trying, it bows gracefully and finally to fate, and it has faith in a higher power. It continually tweaks the cloudy prism through which we see, until we see, not up against, but beyond to clarity and hope . It shimmers with a knowledge that speaks to the soul, and silently whispers--- all will be well, be still, and see the light that shines even on the darkest days.
This weekend as the world watched Prince William marry his love, Kate, we felt what we all hunger for---a fairy tale love story and respite from all the dreary world news. May they live happily ever after and may we see if for just for a moment, an example of a perspective that perhaps we could not see when Princess Diane died, and everything about her and her family seemed dark and overwhelmingly sad ----that all things do indeed pass, and joy returns to live another day. While watching the royal couple today, as they settled into their horse drawn carriage, Princess Katherine, as she will be called from now on, turned to William and seemed to say, "Are you happy?" Smiling back at her, he seemed to be saying, "Yes, are you?" "Yes", she replied. And the world seemed to smile upon them. Long live the prince and his princess---and their new found happiness. And may they find the perspective to make it last---because even fairy tales don't always have final happy endings.
Now, no one has to remind me that the life of a prince is no proof that we can all rise above the adversities of a life more common--but this weekend's story book wedding was a shining example of triumph over sadness and happy re-beginnings. We kind of needed that, but we ordinary mortals also know that many of us suffer much worse difficulties than the prince---and still manage to overcome and live life to the fullest. I think of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords who was shot by a would be assassin, and is battling her way back, perhaps never to be quite the same, but unwilling to give up. There are people in my own family who, against all odds, have come out the other side of tragedy, perhaps scarred, but stronger and smiling. The point is that the human spirit is an awesome thing, and if fed ,nurtured, and disciplined, it will see us through to the end---because the x factor is the soul that knows it is built to last, even without royal blood---or maybe because it is of the most royal of all.
This weekend we saw a prince marry a commoner in Great Britain. That used to be the stuff of fairy tales, and if done, not at all amusing---now it's a welcome sign of a more modern ,reasonable, and far more acceptable monarchy. Opinions and perspectives have changed. We remember Prince William as he marched with his younger brother and father behind his mother's casket 30 years ago and how sad he looked. We grieved with him and wondered if he would survive that tragedy. Would it define him, force him to see the world as an ugly, mean, and dangerous place---or would he manage to move on healthy and strong? Of course, he had many advantages, but still one wondered if the sadness would color his life and keep him from reaching his full potential. Would that we could all have the riches and entitlements that Prince William was born into, yet a recent poll found that human happiness does not come necessarily from wealth---much of it comes from intangible things--like good relationships, health, exercising, helping others---but falling in love tops the charts. All the world loves a lover, and the lover's world turns from black and white to vivid color over night. But everything is really the same---it's the beholder who has changed.
In the book, "The Noticer", by Andy Andrews, the author tries to show that it's all about one's perspective that can make the difference between a life spent struggling and complaining, or one which sails and soars in spite of one's circumstances. It all has to do with how you look at things, and whether you are noticing the right things at the right angle. The author used a character by the name of "Jones" to bring perspective to the lives of those living in a small town. Jones would show up out of nowhere and help a man about to commit suicide,a husband about to leave his wife, or a discouraged business man. In every case, Jones, who seemed to resemble a spiritual being,but without any obsequious mention of it, managed to adjust their vision, so that they began to see their lives differently. It has to do with values and attitudes, of course, but it was a good reminder that how we respond to events has much more importance than the events themselves.
At the end of the book, the author asks whether the reader has ever had a "Jones" in their life,someone to show them the way when inevitable darkness descends. I could not say that I had. But then I began to remember times in my life when there had been isolated incidents-- and one might say, a "Jones" appeared out of nowhere to help me find the way, or to look at the situation from outside my isolated lens. For me, they have usually been strangers, who once having come to my aid, have disappeared never to be seen again. There was the reputedly rude, uncaring cabbie in New York, who loaned me $3.00 for his fare, when I was dead broke as a young flight attendant, the unapproachable looking nun on a train in Italy who seemed to arrive out of thin air and showed my friends and me where to safely sit when we were totally confused, the overly friendly gentleman I was sure had ulterior motives, but who guided me through the of streets of Venice to my hotel when I was lost, and asked for nothing in return, a wise old window washer who spoke words of comfort to a pain I had buried and thought out of sight, until he addressed it quite out of the blue and lifted my spirits, and on and on, sign posts along my way, held by people I didn't notice or expect answers from until they helped me to find and to view things differently. Andy Andrews' message is that, contrary to what we have been told, it is the small stuff in life that matters---not the big job, the fancy car, the ideal marriage, the perfect children,etc. The woman who referred this book to me told me that it had changed her life. It did not change mine, but it reminded me to look at things from all sides, before locking into one view point.
I hope as I have been helped, I have been someone's Jones or simple sign post along their way. Could it be that's our real lesson, the thing we need to notice most? That what is the most important in this life is to take the focus off of self and direct our gaze at the beauty that is always there, the peace that floats all around us even in the midst of turmoil, the wisdom that is inherently deep inside for the tapping, and most importantly, the person in our life who may be in need of a different perspective---or a hug. Look around, take notice, and see beyond to a place called understanding--or heightened perspective. You will sometimes see it in the eyes of children---they have not yet been blinded by the abrasions of the world. You may also find it in the the very old---some lucky ones rediscover their sight again as they see the circle of life coming back around to complete their journey, and they finally gain a new appreciation which eluded them in their pre-occupied lives. That appreciation is a perspective free of what ifs, should haves, fear, pride, greed, or anxiety about the future---it doesn't agonize over the past, it moves forward, it forgives, it submits, it accepts what is,it changes what can be changed, it keeps trying, it bows gracefully and finally to fate, and it has faith in a higher power. It continually tweaks the cloudy prism through which we see, until we see, not up against, but beyond to clarity and hope . It shimmers with a knowledge that speaks to the soul, and silently whispers--- all will be well, be still, and see the light that shines even on the darkest days.
This weekend as the world watched Prince William marry his love, Kate, we felt what we all hunger for---a fairy tale love story and respite from all the dreary world news. May they live happily ever after and may we see if for just for a moment, an example of a perspective that perhaps we could not see when Princess Diane died, and everything about her and her family seemed dark and overwhelmingly sad ----that all things do indeed pass, and joy returns to live another day. While watching the royal couple today, as they settled into their horse drawn carriage, Princess Katherine, as she will be called from now on, turned to William and seemed to say, "Are you happy?" Smiling back at her, he seemed to be saying, "Yes, are you?" "Yes", she replied. And the world seemed to smile upon them. Long live the prince and his princess---and their new found happiness. And may they find the perspective to make it last---because even fairy tales don't always have final happy endings.
Now, no one has to remind me that the life of a prince is no proof that we can all rise above the adversities of a life more common--but this weekend's story book wedding was a shining example of triumph over sadness and happy re-beginnings. We kind of needed that, but we ordinary mortals also know that many of us suffer much worse difficulties than the prince---and still manage to overcome and live life to the fullest. I think of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords who was shot by a would be assassin, and is battling her way back, perhaps never to be quite the same, but unwilling to give up. There are people in my own family who, against all odds, have come out the other side of tragedy, perhaps scarred, but stronger and smiling. The point is that the human spirit is an awesome thing, and if fed ,nurtured, and disciplined, it will see us through to the end---because the x factor is the soul that knows it is built to last, even without royal blood---or maybe because it is of the most royal of all.
Friday, April 22, 2011
EASTER BREAK and A TRUMP CARD TO PLAY!!!
I can't take it anymore---politics, that is. I used to enjoy it all, but it's getting curioser and scarier all the time. Now we have the S&P (Standard and Poor credit rating system) warning us that our credit is in jeopardy. No kidding---I'm surprised they haven't said so sooner. Maybe it's a conspiracy to keep us all dumbed down until it's too late. We're almost broke, and about to raise our debt ceiling into oblivion. No surprise either that Obama shook his oratorical finger at S&P for having the audacious nerve to announce this bit of unsettling news---just after his speech which was supposed to lift our spirits, and set the stage for his re-election. We're really in trouble if S&P or anyone else not directly under Obama's thumb must seek permission before speaking out to the public. Last time I checked, that is their job---unless we are becoming an ipso facto dictatorship. Perhaps that's too strong a term. So far, the most visible punishment to those who incur the presidential wrath is public humiliation, the latest victim ,that of Paul Ryan who was invited to Obama's ho-hum speech, only to be excoriated for his revolutionary 2012 budget proposal, while sitting in the front row. How dare he upstage the president---does he not get it? Obama won.
So, let's take a little break from it all---and decide to look at the bright side. Uh, where would that be exactly? We're in debt up to our eyebrows and no one is even going to want to loan us any more money. The USA is now thought of as a bad credit risk---sorry, Uncle Sam, but your debt to income ration is, well, in the tank. What does this mean? Will we have to go begging, print more money, or sell ourselves off to China and start learning to bow in more ways than one? We could all move to Denmark, as a suggested better place by one of our readers--but before long, I'm afraid we might start a revolution,because we wouldn't be able to stand the lack of variety and challenge. We need motivation, incentive, and risk. to be really good. It's called competition and without it, excellence usually takes a back seat to acceptablity or mediocrity.
But just when I'm craving peace and quiet-- along comes Donald Trump---yes, the Donald! Who in the Sam Hill does he think he is, anyway?? He's not a politician,at least in the strict sense of the word, and he's not even a community organizer. What he is, however, is a very successful business man, uncannily likeable, unless you don't like his hair cut and his swagger, but then a bit of swaggering often comes with earned confidence. He is also a celebrity of sorts, a sort of popular icon, due to his high profile business acumen, not to mention his TV show, "Celebrity Apprentice", and his relentless branding of the Trump name. Like him or not, Mr. Trump has now garnered a lot of attention and is one of the current poll favorites for a possible run as presidential nominee for the Republican party or possibly as an Independent. This man has Chutzpah--who else would dare to take Obama on as he has, bringing up the old birth issue and saying that Obama may be the worst president in history? If he's not careful, he could find himself sitting in the corner of the Obama classroom. Whether he has what it takes to be president or even a respectable nominee remains to be seen, but it makes for good political theatre, and is a refreshing break from the every day political predictability and constant media down playing of the Republican party. Donald Trump says we still have the power to make a come back if only we will assert ourselves by demanding higher paybacks from the Chinese and other governments with whom we do business. In other words, he's claiming that we still have the bigger stick, and we should use it, while we can, and not be so concerned with being thought of as big bossy Americans anymore. Interesting approach in this day of diplomatic ultra-nicey-niceness. Whether this brash man will be a wild card among the professionals and trump all, split the party ala Ross Perot, or simply be a 15 minute distraction, nobody knows just yet, but Mr. Donald Trump of "you're fired!" fame is all over the news, and his numbers are phenomenally climbing.
I once met the Donald at a charity ball. He is an imposing man, polite, and rather--- well, extra confident, but what did I expect? Mr. Trump does not believe in false modesty. We had a very short visit, but I gathered my nerve and suggested he use more women on his show, which at the time, was predominately populated by men. I'm not even remotely insinuating that that is why you now see an even number of both sexes on his show---I'm just sayin'. Anyway, I liked him---I still do. Anybody who has the courage to speak up against popular power and media slant, and has some new ideas, gets my attention---maybe not my vote, but definitely my attention. Who knows? Perhaps he'll even change that comb-over hair-do if he decides to run for president,and that could make all the difference. The temptation is to follow a man who acts like a leader; the caution is to make sure he isn't just acting.
So,as we prepare for an Easter week-end, may we pause to reflect on what we do have, rather than what we do not. One piece of very good news this week was that the oil disaster of last year turned out to not nearly as devastating as once thought---things are returning to normal quite nicely. The earth takes amazingly good care of itself, in spite of our dire predictions and over wrought concerns. Now let's get rid of the moratoriums, resume pumping our own oil--- and watch the price of gas go down. There is still time to work out our problems and become financially healthier. There is an election coming up, and we can still vote our minds. There is also the outside chance that luck will play a part in our destiny and either the present leaders will experience an epiphany moment and be blessed with uncommon wisdom, or someone will come along to lead us out of the wilderness. After all, it is Easter weekend.
President Obama, perhaps sensing the collective despair, seemed to "get religion" this week and spoke of Jesus Christ and how "there is something about the resurrection" and vaguely left it at that---not sure what he meant, but at least he was trying to infuse our spirits with a bit of inspiring spiritualism. Maybe that's our best hope for finding a brighter side---there's always room for a miracle, a re-birth, a salvation of a nation who at the moment seems terribly lost.
Easter is all about taking a break from the mundane, second chances, and realizing there is a much bigger picture, but we must not speak of it too freely in public places. There's a viral internet story going around about a Seattle school who, in the interest of secularity, re-named Easter eggs "Spring spheres"---how very self-consciously anti-religious. Guess we're above and beyond any kind of religious association as a nation---much too sophomoric--- and certainly asking for heavenly help these days would be seen as weak, but I'm grateful that every presidential speech, including Obama's, still ends with "God bless the United States of America"---I hope He's listening. But I wonder how long before somebody removes that phrase from our speeches---and replaces it with, "May the Force be with us", or "May we get really, really lucky".
Have a happy Easter--may your proverbial cup of joy over floweth, and may your baskets be filled with lots of colorful, spring spheres!!!
So, let's take a little break from it all---and decide to look at the bright side. Uh, where would that be exactly? We're in debt up to our eyebrows and no one is even going to want to loan us any more money. The USA is now thought of as a bad credit risk---sorry, Uncle Sam, but your debt to income ration is, well, in the tank. What does this mean? Will we have to go begging, print more money, or sell ourselves off to China and start learning to bow in more ways than one? We could all move to Denmark, as a suggested better place by one of our readers--but before long, I'm afraid we might start a revolution,because we wouldn't be able to stand the lack of variety and challenge. We need motivation, incentive, and risk. to be really good. It's called competition and without it, excellence usually takes a back seat to acceptablity or mediocrity.
But just when I'm craving peace and quiet-- along comes Donald Trump---yes, the Donald! Who in the Sam Hill does he think he is, anyway?? He's not a politician,at least in the strict sense of the word, and he's not even a community organizer. What he is, however, is a very successful business man, uncannily likeable, unless you don't like his hair cut and his swagger, but then a bit of swaggering often comes with earned confidence. He is also a celebrity of sorts, a sort of popular icon, due to his high profile business acumen, not to mention his TV show, "Celebrity Apprentice", and his relentless branding of the Trump name. Like him or not, Mr. Trump has now garnered a lot of attention and is one of the current poll favorites for a possible run as presidential nominee for the Republican party or possibly as an Independent. This man has Chutzpah--who else would dare to take Obama on as he has, bringing up the old birth issue and saying that Obama may be the worst president in history? If he's not careful, he could find himself sitting in the corner of the Obama classroom. Whether he has what it takes to be president or even a respectable nominee remains to be seen, but it makes for good political theatre, and is a refreshing break from the every day political predictability and constant media down playing of the Republican party. Donald Trump says we still have the power to make a come back if only we will assert ourselves by demanding higher paybacks from the Chinese and other governments with whom we do business. In other words, he's claiming that we still have the bigger stick, and we should use it, while we can, and not be so concerned with being thought of as big bossy Americans anymore. Interesting approach in this day of diplomatic ultra-nicey-niceness. Whether this brash man will be a wild card among the professionals and trump all, split the party ala Ross Perot, or simply be a 15 minute distraction, nobody knows just yet, but Mr. Donald Trump of "you're fired!" fame is all over the news, and his numbers are phenomenally climbing.
I once met the Donald at a charity ball. He is an imposing man, polite, and rather--- well, extra confident, but what did I expect? Mr. Trump does not believe in false modesty. We had a very short visit, but I gathered my nerve and suggested he use more women on his show, which at the time, was predominately populated by men. I'm not even remotely insinuating that that is why you now see an even number of both sexes on his show---I'm just sayin'. Anyway, I liked him---I still do. Anybody who has the courage to speak up against popular power and media slant, and has some new ideas, gets my attention---maybe not my vote, but definitely my attention. Who knows? Perhaps he'll even change that comb-over hair-do if he decides to run for president,and that could make all the difference. The temptation is to follow a man who acts like a leader; the caution is to make sure he isn't just acting.
So,as we prepare for an Easter week-end, may we pause to reflect on what we do have, rather than what we do not. One piece of very good news this week was that the oil disaster of last year turned out to not nearly as devastating as once thought---things are returning to normal quite nicely. The earth takes amazingly good care of itself, in spite of our dire predictions and over wrought concerns. Now let's get rid of the moratoriums, resume pumping our own oil--- and watch the price of gas go down. There is still time to work out our problems and become financially healthier. There is an election coming up, and we can still vote our minds. There is also the outside chance that luck will play a part in our destiny and either the present leaders will experience an epiphany moment and be blessed with uncommon wisdom, or someone will come along to lead us out of the wilderness. After all, it is Easter weekend.
President Obama, perhaps sensing the collective despair, seemed to "get religion" this week and spoke of Jesus Christ and how "there is something about the resurrection" and vaguely left it at that---not sure what he meant, but at least he was trying to infuse our spirits with a bit of inspiring spiritualism. Maybe that's our best hope for finding a brighter side---there's always room for a miracle, a re-birth, a salvation of a nation who at the moment seems terribly lost.
Easter is all about taking a break from the mundane, second chances, and realizing there is a much bigger picture, but we must not speak of it too freely in public places. There's a viral internet story going around about a Seattle school who, in the interest of secularity, re-named Easter eggs "Spring spheres"---how very self-consciously anti-religious. Guess we're above and beyond any kind of religious association as a nation---much too sophomoric--- and certainly asking for heavenly help these days would be seen as weak, but I'm grateful that every presidential speech, including Obama's, still ends with "God bless the United States of America"---I hope He's listening. But I wonder how long before somebody removes that phrase from our speeches---and replaces it with, "May the Force be with us", or "May we get really, really lucky".
Have a happy Easter--may your proverbial cup of joy over floweth, and may your baskets be filled with lots of colorful, spring spheres!!!
Monday, April 18, 2011
OBAMA'S VISION---TO FIX, TRANSFORM---OR GET RE-ELECTED??
So now the real budget battle begins---President Obama threw down his first gauntlet last week, as he gave a speech, which was strangely timed right after the conciliatory, 2011 budget agreement the week before. Not to be undone or outshone by Paul Ryan,author of the new sweeping Republican budget proposal, Obama finally came out fighting, and made it clear he's in the hunt this time, big time. Perhaps feeling, it was time to shut Ryan up or down before it gets out of hand and people actually start listening to it, the president presented an outline of his budget proposal, which in comparison to Ryan's is tepid at best, and which will never pass the House. At the same time, he tried to come across as a centrist, referring to Lincoln and Reagan, as reasonable and compromising men and even talked about "rugged individualism". Really? But as he gathered steam and hit his stride, the truth became clear---he does not believe in a smaller government----especially not now," as long as I am President". It was a confusing speech, designed to present himself as a believer in a traditional America, where independence and free markets rule, yet trumping all of that with the umbrella of a more expansive and expensive government budget--- needing, demanding more of its citizens' income---especially the "wealthiest among us". Of course, he also talked about eliminating some discretionary spending in domestic programs, cutting back on military spending, and how his healthcare plan will help reduce the budget. His overall budget would cut 4 trillion from the budget in 12 years. However, there were, notably and regretfully, very few specifics on how all this could possibly achieve enough reduction in the budget to make up the monstrous deficit and continued spending. And he knows it.
Obama is betting on taking a softer approach in hopes that the people of this country are too reluctant or ill informed to do more, even if it means disaster in the future for us and our children. He knows very well that more dramatic steps need to be taken in order to rescue us from financial disaster, but with the second biggest election of his life approaching in 2012, he is not about to rock the boat with massive entitlement cuts. He's gambling that the old "soak the rich" refrain will play better with the masses, and that the Republican/Ryan plan will be viewed as the machete wielding, evil, and uncaring enemy of his more "socially responsible" vision of an America. Casting himself as the guardian of all that he claims we hold near and dear, namely medicare, medicaid ,education, cleaner energy, and scientific research, not to mention our security, though that will be trimmed, Obama wants to have it both ways----be the generous benefactor (by spending for all of the above), yet mentions no specific ways to generate the cash---except for vague references to some minimal cutting, and higher taxes, especially for the rich, who will probably find other ways to structure their income, in order to avoid being taxed to the hilt. According to a recent article in the Wall Street Journal, which quoted figures from the IRS income tax statistics for 2008(the most recent year for available data), the top 10% of income earners already pay 69% of all total income taxes. The top 1% (earning over $380,000.00) pay 38% of their income to taxes. President Obama said they should be expected to pay a little bit more--how much more is fair?
In the meantime, the Ryan bill, which claims to cut the federal budget by over 6 trillion in 10 years, mostly by making drastic changes to medicare and medicaid, has passed the House, and though it will never pass the Senate, at least it's a starting point for the Republicans and a clear signal that they are sincere about actually wanting to do something major and bold to fix the sick state of our economy and not just apply band aids of rhetoric and ineffective cuts.
President Obama's poll numbers are once again slipping into the 40's, perhaps a sign that Americans are more than a little concerned. And while he may think that his vision of America is what all of us, or even a majority of us share,he may have under estimated our zeal and passion for independence from an over powering, over taxing government. And while we may value health care, education, scientific research, and welfare needs for the truly needy, we do not wish to sell our souls in order to be kept by a "big brother" government---or as some might call it a "nanny state". As much as Obama tries to portray himself as in alignment with our founding fathers, he is hardly that. His own choice of words, such as "progressive", "investments", and "personal sacrifices" reveal that he and his followers believe in quite a different America---one in which government is central to the lives of its citizens---or put bluntly, they believe in Socialism, or a close version of it. It would be far more admirable for Obama and his ilk to admit this, than to deny and shroud their purposes, for there are those who believe as they do, and would like to come out of the closet; and those of us who do not, are not fooled.
And so, the battle begins for the future of this country---who knew it would come down to a budget and not a philosophical debate? But,entitlement programs cost money---lots of it, and so we must decide how much of our money we are willing to spend in order to support everyone, and yes, how much we are willing to demand of others to give to support all of us.
There is an angst, a sorrow, and almost palpable mourning going on in this country for those who feel its very foundation and underpinnings are slowly being dismantled, piece by wrenching piece, in order to make way for a new America---one in which her greatness will only be a memory, but one in which the new way will be to take care of everyone's basic needs first. A truly lovely idea. The problem, of course, is that there is nothing new about this "new" way. It has unfortunately been tried, tested, and overthrown or discarded many times by other countries---even China, after many years of communism, is reveling in its new capitalistic freedoms. And closer to home, one only needs to look at Europe and its crumbling financial structure. We were actually the "new" way of doing things. Nowhere and at any time has there ever been a country as successful as ours, as strong, or as rich.
The coming months and next election will determine who and what we will choose to be--the choice for a debt free and robust economy should be clear, but the path is not. President Obama would have us believe that we can keep spending and taxing. That's not sustainable, and we all instinctively know it. We cannot keep spending and hoping that taxes are the answer. We'll either run out of rich people, they'll run out of money---or out of town. Consequently, sooner or later, the middle class will have to take on most of the burden. The other approach is to cut until it hurts and we return to a more balanced budget---but then, there's at least a chance we'll recover. Take your choice. This is getting serious---Obama may have an election to win or lose, but our stakes are much higher---we have a country which is in profound trouble. In the days to come, we need more specifics from President Obama, as to how his plan will work towards a long term fix, or will he simply put off what will need to be done later. Ryan's plan is more extreme, but at least recognizes the size and scope of the problem and offers possible solutions. There appears to be no easy cure , and much has to do with ideology and agendas---so we all must enter into what is sure to become the next great national conversation, and be prepared to make the necessary sacrifices.
A president's vision is only as valid as the people who stare back at him---may we let him know what we see, and may we somehow manage to merge our differing visions and rise up---leaner, wiser, but not transformed beyond recognition.
Obama is betting on taking a softer approach in hopes that the people of this country are too reluctant or ill informed to do more, even if it means disaster in the future for us and our children. He knows very well that more dramatic steps need to be taken in order to rescue us from financial disaster, but with the second biggest election of his life approaching in 2012, he is not about to rock the boat with massive entitlement cuts. He's gambling that the old "soak the rich" refrain will play better with the masses, and that the Republican/Ryan plan will be viewed as the machete wielding, evil, and uncaring enemy of his more "socially responsible" vision of an America. Casting himself as the guardian of all that he claims we hold near and dear, namely medicare, medicaid ,education, cleaner energy, and scientific research, not to mention our security, though that will be trimmed, Obama wants to have it both ways----be the generous benefactor (by spending for all of the above), yet mentions no specific ways to generate the cash---except for vague references to some minimal cutting, and higher taxes, especially for the rich, who will probably find other ways to structure their income, in order to avoid being taxed to the hilt. According to a recent article in the Wall Street Journal, which quoted figures from the IRS income tax statistics for 2008(the most recent year for available data), the top 10% of income earners already pay 69% of all total income taxes. The top 1% (earning over $380,000.00) pay 38% of their income to taxes. President Obama said they should be expected to pay a little bit more--how much more is fair?
In the meantime, the Ryan bill, which claims to cut the federal budget by over 6 trillion in 10 years, mostly by making drastic changes to medicare and medicaid, has passed the House, and though it will never pass the Senate, at least it's a starting point for the Republicans and a clear signal that they are sincere about actually wanting to do something major and bold to fix the sick state of our economy and not just apply band aids of rhetoric and ineffective cuts.
President Obama's poll numbers are once again slipping into the 40's, perhaps a sign that Americans are more than a little concerned. And while he may think that his vision of America is what all of us, or even a majority of us share,he may have under estimated our zeal and passion for independence from an over powering, over taxing government. And while we may value health care, education, scientific research, and welfare needs for the truly needy, we do not wish to sell our souls in order to be kept by a "big brother" government---or as some might call it a "nanny state". As much as Obama tries to portray himself as in alignment with our founding fathers, he is hardly that. His own choice of words, such as "progressive", "investments", and "personal sacrifices" reveal that he and his followers believe in quite a different America---one in which government is central to the lives of its citizens---or put bluntly, they believe in Socialism, or a close version of it. It would be far more admirable for Obama and his ilk to admit this, than to deny and shroud their purposes, for there are those who believe as they do, and would like to come out of the closet; and those of us who do not, are not fooled.
And so, the battle begins for the future of this country---who knew it would come down to a budget and not a philosophical debate? But,entitlement programs cost money---lots of it, and so we must decide how much of our money we are willing to spend in order to support everyone, and yes, how much we are willing to demand of others to give to support all of us.
There is an angst, a sorrow, and almost palpable mourning going on in this country for those who feel its very foundation and underpinnings are slowly being dismantled, piece by wrenching piece, in order to make way for a new America---one in which her greatness will only be a memory, but one in which the new way will be to take care of everyone's basic needs first. A truly lovely idea. The problem, of course, is that there is nothing new about this "new" way. It has unfortunately been tried, tested, and overthrown or discarded many times by other countries---even China, after many years of communism, is reveling in its new capitalistic freedoms. And closer to home, one only needs to look at Europe and its crumbling financial structure. We were actually the "new" way of doing things. Nowhere and at any time has there ever been a country as successful as ours, as strong, or as rich.
The coming months and next election will determine who and what we will choose to be--the choice for a debt free and robust economy should be clear, but the path is not. President Obama would have us believe that we can keep spending and taxing. That's not sustainable, and we all instinctively know it. We cannot keep spending and hoping that taxes are the answer. We'll either run out of rich people, they'll run out of money---or out of town. Consequently, sooner or later, the middle class will have to take on most of the burden. The other approach is to cut until it hurts and we return to a more balanced budget---but then, there's at least a chance we'll recover. Take your choice. This is getting serious---Obama may have an election to win or lose, but our stakes are much higher---we have a country which is in profound trouble. In the days to come, we need more specifics from President Obama, as to how his plan will work towards a long term fix, or will he simply put off what will need to be done later. Ryan's plan is more extreme, but at least recognizes the size and scope of the problem and offers possible solutions. There appears to be no easy cure , and much has to do with ideology and agendas---so we all must enter into what is sure to become the next great national conversation, and be prepared to make the necessary sacrifices.
A president's vision is only as valid as the people who stare back at him---may we let him know what we see, and may we somehow manage to merge our differing visions and rise up---leaner, wiser, but not transformed beyond recognition.
Thursday, April 7, 2011
FOLLOW THE MONEY-----UNTIL IT'S GONE
Money makes the world go round,but in the case of the national budget---it may be the reason the United States government will not go much at all and may ,in fact,shut down. Unless the Republicans and the Democrats can come to terms with each other by midnight Friday night,consider us closed for repairs. Faced with a horrendous debt overload of over 14 trillion dollars, something has to be done---but where, who, and what? The Dems have timidly offered 30 billion in cuts, and initially, the Republicans offered 65 billion---both a mere pittance, and hardly a demonstration of leadership from either party. But, hey---election year is coming soon, and neither party wants to be the punching bag and hated villian for the other. It's politics as usual, even as our ship is sinking---does anyone have the courage to do something besides bail water with a hat, while the waves of bankruptcy loom in the horizon?
At this point in time, the two party representatives are still behind closed doors, quibbling over a few billion dollars---none of which is going to make a whole lot of difference. The budget needs a complete overhaul, whether by spending less, or taxing more; and here's the kicker--- this is just for openers---the real battle lies ahead, as we shall discuss later. Obama seems to have stepped away from this one, leaving the dirty work to his senate soldiers, and admonishing both members of congress to behave like adults. May I remind the president once again, that he is not our father, and congressmen and women are not his children. Perhaps Mr. Obama should decide to get his hands dirty and enter the "sausage making" debate, rise above both party's ideologies and lead us away from shut downs, political threats, and inevitable bankruptcy. But that could mean big compromises, which could mean political suicide, and Obama is not about to become a loser. As he once said, "I won", and he intends to keep it that way.
In the meantime, however, along comes Paul Ryan, chairman of the House budget committee, who yesterday unveiled a new plan for 2012 ---one which would cut the budget, not by a few billion, but over 6 trillion! Of course, the Dems went apoplectic before the plan was even rolled out, accusing Ryan and the Republicans of all manner of viciousness and draconian measures. But, unbelievably, this plan is out there, standing bravely and brashly, election or not---predicated on the hope and presumption that Americans are ready to at least listen to a possible solution, a path out of the wilderness of unsustainable debt,hard core though it may be. A huge gamble for the Republicans,it will mean a dramatic overhaul of our Medicare and Medicaid system---but that's where many say the main hemorraging of the budget is located. It will also mean that we will have to take more responsibility for our own health needs--what a concept! Will it work? And most importantly---will the American public go for this extreme and audacious plan? Or will we once again, succumb to the easy "kick the can down the road" game, and be lulled back to sleep by the groans and moans of the Democrats, who insist we must keep spending to stay afloat. We shall see---but for now, we are in limbo, as both parties posture, pull, and politic over billions, instead of the trillions needed to make a significant difference. Kudos to Paul Ryan for exhibiting uncommon valor and bracing truth in a political world of mostly smoke and mirrors.
It is disappointing that so much of our lives depend on the whims of political sway, and so much of what comes out of Washington is influenced by partisanship, not real solutions. But in the case of this budget crisis and the future battles ahead, there is much more profound issues at stake that transcend mere budgetary concerns. It has to do with the core differences between the two parties, and they are glaring and more polarizing than what this country has seen in a very long time. When taken down to the bare bones of it all, the Republican party believes in cutting the deficit by reducing the size of government and entitlement programs, and the Dems will never be convinced that anything other than more and higher taxing is the only way to run a country. One party believes in individual, self-supporting people allowed and expected to care for their own needs; the other believing the government should play a much larger role in caring for the peoples' basic needs. Somewhere there must be a balance, which is why we all believe in our two party system--we are not inclined to left or right extremism. As we wait for this current budget crisis to reach a compromise, we will see what awaits in 2012, when the going will get much tougher---and we get much closer to economic disaster . Some are predicting that this country will not survive past 2037 if we don't come up with some serious solutions soon. That is a more than a sobering thought---one that should give all of us pause and reason to perhaps do more than just observe.
For those who think higher taxes for the rich, is the answer---math and data show that there are not enough rich people to close the huge gap between what it takes to run our ever burgeoning government and what such taxes would bring in--- therefore the bulk of taxes to pay for all the government expense would come from the middle class---another sobering thought,as we consider that much of our earnings will be taken just to run the government. For those who think we should dramatically cut and change our current system---good luck. Change will not come easily or be all one sided---but come it must, if we are to survive and thrive. Don't necessarily pick a side--but do look at what's happening and vote your conscience and your informed mind. It isn't just about donkeys, elephants, tea parties or unions---it's all about us and how we want to live--with more freedom or more entitlements.
Money may make the world go round, but there's only so much to go around---do we want to become a "nanny state" where the government takes more and more of our money to care of more and more of us and our needs, or be allowed to keep more of what we make, and in turn create more revenue for the government? Do we want to "spread the wealth" by taking from those who made it? And is that moral? Or do we believe that it is immoral for a few to have so much more than so many others? Are we a nation or a "family"? Those are the ultimate questions---and one which we will be forced to come to terms with in the very near future. They have been asked before--and answered before by other countries. The spectre of Europe and their failing economies hover and haunt as examples of welfare gone to extremes. As we struggle to find our balance and our compromise with each other,the future of this nation is in great jeopardy---will we rise again, or will we drown as we pull each down into the riptides of disagreement and irreconciliable differences?
For now, we all wait to see what a handful of politicians decide regarding how our money should be spent or not. Ironically, we're close to broke, and yet the argument continues as to whether to spend more or less.
These are perilous times for the United States of America, and perhaps a wake up call to all of us that thought we could just "leave things to the politicians". But where to start? Follow the money? How about follow the leader---if only we had one. Keep your eye on Paul Ryan and those like him who will risk their careers to speak the harsh truth of reality. No more money, honey---time to get tough, as the clock ticks toward midnight.
At this point in time, the two party representatives are still behind closed doors, quibbling over a few billion dollars---none of which is going to make a whole lot of difference. The budget needs a complete overhaul, whether by spending less, or taxing more; and here's the kicker--- this is just for openers---the real battle lies ahead, as we shall discuss later. Obama seems to have stepped away from this one, leaving the dirty work to his senate soldiers, and admonishing both members of congress to behave like adults. May I remind the president once again, that he is not our father, and congressmen and women are not his children. Perhaps Mr. Obama should decide to get his hands dirty and enter the "sausage making" debate, rise above both party's ideologies and lead us away from shut downs, political threats, and inevitable bankruptcy. But that could mean big compromises, which could mean political suicide, and Obama is not about to become a loser. As he once said, "I won", and he intends to keep it that way.
In the meantime, however, along comes Paul Ryan, chairman of the House budget committee, who yesterday unveiled a new plan for 2012 ---one which would cut the budget, not by a few billion, but over 6 trillion! Of course, the Dems went apoplectic before the plan was even rolled out, accusing Ryan and the Republicans of all manner of viciousness and draconian measures. But, unbelievably, this plan is out there, standing bravely and brashly, election or not---predicated on the hope and presumption that Americans are ready to at least listen to a possible solution, a path out of the wilderness of unsustainable debt,hard core though it may be. A huge gamble for the Republicans,it will mean a dramatic overhaul of our Medicare and Medicaid system---but that's where many say the main hemorraging of the budget is located. It will also mean that we will have to take more responsibility for our own health needs--what a concept! Will it work? And most importantly---will the American public go for this extreme and audacious plan? Or will we once again, succumb to the easy "kick the can down the road" game, and be lulled back to sleep by the groans and moans of the Democrats, who insist we must keep spending to stay afloat. We shall see---but for now, we are in limbo, as both parties posture, pull, and politic over billions, instead of the trillions needed to make a significant difference. Kudos to Paul Ryan for exhibiting uncommon valor and bracing truth in a political world of mostly smoke and mirrors.
It is disappointing that so much of our lives depend on the whims of political sway, and so much of what comes out of Washington is influenced by partisanship, not real solutions. But in the case of this budget crisis and the future battles ahead, there is much more profound issues at stake that transcend mere budgetary concerns. It has to do with the core differences between the two parties, and they are glaring and more polarizing than what this country has seen in a very long time. When taken down to the bare bones of it all, the Republican party believes in cutting the deficit by reducing the size of government and entitlement programs, and the Dems will never be convinced that anything other than more and higher taxing is the only way to run a country. One party believes in individual, self-supporting people allowed and expected to care for their own needs; the other believing the government should play a much larger role in caring for the peoples' basic needs. Somewhere there must be a balance, which is why we all believe in our two party system--we are not inclined to left or right extremism. As we wait for this current budget crisis to reach a compromise, we will see what awaits in 2012, when the going will get much tougher---and we get much closer to economic disaster . Some are predicting that this country will not survive past 2037 if we don't come up with some serious solutions soon. That is a more than a sobering thought---one that should give all of us pause and reason to perhaps do more than just observe.
For those who think higher taxes for the rich, is the answer---math and data show that there are not enough rich people to close the huge gap between what it takes to run our ever burgeoning government and what such taxes would bring in--- therefore the bulk of taxes to pay for all the government expense would come from the middle class---another sobering thought,as we consider that much of our earnings will be taken just to run the government. For those who think we should dramatically cut and change our current system---good luck. Change will not come easily or be all one sided---but come it must, if we are to survive and thrive. Don't necessarily pick a side--but do look at what's happening and vote your conscience and your informed mind. It isn't just about donkeys, elephants, tea parties or unions---it's all about us and how we want to live--with more freedom or more entitlements.
Money may make the world go round, but there's only so much to go around---do we want to become a "nanny state" where the government takes more and more of our money to care of more and more of us and our needs, or be allowed to keep more of what we make, and in turn create more revenue for the government? Do we want to "spread the wealth" by taking from those who made it? And is that moral? Or do we believe that it is immoral for a few to have so much more than so many others? Are we a nation or a "family"? Those are the ultimate questions---and one which we will be forced to come to terms with in the very near future. They have been asked before--and answered before by other countries. The spectre of Europe and their failing economies hover and haunt as examples of welfare gone to extremes. As we struggle to find our balance and our compromise with each other,the future of this nation is in great jeopardy---will we rise again, or will we drown as we pull each down into the riptides of disagreement and irreconciliable differences?
For now, we all wait to see what a handful of politicians decide regarding how our money should be spent or not. Ironically, we're close to broke, and yet the argument continues as to whether to spend more or less.
These are perilous times for the United States of America, and perhaps a wake up call to all of us that thought we could just "leave things to the politicians". But where to start? Follow the money? How about follow the leader---if only we had one. Keep your eye on Paul Ryan and those like him who will risk their careers to speak the harsh truth of reality. No more money, honey---time to get tough, as the clock ticks toward midnight.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)