Sunday, October 28, 2007
Candidates
I’ve stated repeatedly that I for one am not real impressed with the Presidential candidates currently parading themselves before the voters. For the most part they strike me as being little more than a mob of Ho-Hum “kinder, gentler” wimps with not a lot of leadership traits, which, considering the global mess we’ve managed to get ourselves into during the course of the last few regimes is about the last thing we need in the White House! The concept of a kinder, gentler world is all well and fine I suppose, and would probably be a very nice place to live, as long as they leave the socialism part out of it. But to make that happen, the rest of the world has to agree with the idea, and everyone would have to work towards that lofty end. Unfortunately, human nature being what it is, it’s also an unachievable goal, and will continue to be so in the foreseeable future for that matter. Comparing today’s geopolitics to the sea, those are shark infested waters out there, and certainly no place for a peaceful little sardine to be swimming around in if he hopes to survive. In today’s world you had better be the biggest shark around if you don’t want to be somebody else’s supper! As a sop to the bleeding hearts among us I’ll add that the big shark doesn’t necessarily have to be an aggressive bully either, just big and bad enough that nobody else wants to pick a fight with him. Unfortunately the United States no longer meets those standards, instead we’ve become little more than the biggest, fattest, juiciest sardine in the sea, and the real sharks are quickly gathering ‘round.
The president of the United States is inevitably faced with two broad categories of problems, usually defined as Foreign policy and Domestic policy, and he’d better be an expert on both subjects. Then of course he has a few other concerns such as a congress that seemingly can’t agree with anybody about anything, bloodthirsty political opponents, a sensation seeking media that has learned to make immense mountains out of minor molehills, a politically ignorant population, special interests, and a bureaucracy that’s out to grab everything they can. To be successful he’s got to be brilliant, courageous, a master of diplomacy, an expert in the military sciences, an economist, a world class administrator, an accomplished public speaker, and a “man of the people” preferably with the Wisdom of Solomon. I also think it would help to have an extensive background in tightrope walking.
All the current candidates claim to have “experience” of course, although none of them have ever occupied the Oval Office, or faced the problems that come with the job. Instead we get some with experience in congress to one extent or another. A few have been the governors of their home states or big city mayors. Some have assorted corporate executive experience as well. One is even a medical doctor. Hillary is the only candidate that’s actually lived in the white house, but as “co-president” she seemed to spend most of her time firing the travel office people, and apologizing for Bill’s interest in interns and his difficulties in understanding the simpler words in the English language. None of the candidates are very charismatic, and for the most part are hardly known outside their home states. While I hear a lot of talk about how they’re going to do this, that, or the other thing, I don’t hear much about the important things, like how they plan to get all these bright ideas past congress and other special interest groups, nor of how they figure to finance things.
I found an interesting internet website that’s a computerized matrix combining the various candidates and their stance on the primary issues. It’s open to the public, wherein you can “vote” on how much you agree or disagree with the particular position of any candidate. On a scale of nine, with “one” being strongly agreed with, “five” being indifferent, and “nine” being strongly disagreed with, all the candidates were rated at a more or less “Blah” four, five, and six by the respondents, with some being only a bit more popular on certain issues than others. For viewers with a mathematical bent the voter statistics are given, but for the rest of us the results are color coded, with bright red being strongly disagree, and bright green being strongly agree. The five issues considered are; the economy, energy, health care, immigration, and the war in Iraq.
The condition of the national economy generates a lot of bright ideas and instant cures among the candidates, but the respondent rating is a more or less indifferent “five” in all cases. Energy independence seems to be about the same, with Bill Richardson’s ideas being the most popular at a three. The response to health care proposals is also rather indifferent, with Chris Dodd being the least popular by a very small margin. The immigration issue is much the same, with Ron Paul having by far the most popular stance at a resounding three, and Chris Dodd the least popular. Despite all the media coverage, the proposals for ending the war in Iraq can only be analyzed as varying levels of indifference! Here, Joe Biden and Ron Paul’s ideas are tied for being the most agreed with, and Tom Tancredo leads the pack in disagreement. Keeping in mind that the ratings change with every vote, Obama is the most popular Democrat at the time of this writing, and Ron Paul is the leading Republican. However, no candidate is yet a clear winner on any issue.
Perhaps these presidential hopefuls should start looking for a different set of issues to pillory their opponents with? How about things like the burgeoning bureaucracy, looming national bankruptcy, public education, tax reform, our worn out highways, and the rather run down condition of the military? Perhaps they could explain their position on homeland security, domestic spying, constitutional law, and our slowly disappearing Bill of Rights. Personally I’m very interested in what we’re going to do about manned space development as well, although I don’t hear much from any candidate on that subject.
All in all I guess the somewhat mediocre quality of the candidates we’ve been offered over the last few years is really a blessing in disguise. If we think about the congressional powers that have been meekly surrendered to the president, along with the powers of the Patriot Act and the long standing Executive Orders law, it’s not the least bit unimaginable that a strong and ambitious president could make himself dictator in short order. Nor is that unprecedented, remember that Adolf Hitler went from being the lawfully elected Chancellor of Weimar Germany to absolute dictator of the Third Reich, completely in accordance with existing German laws, and seemingly did it overnight.
As the great hot air machine on capitol hill seems to be little more than a debating society nowdays, perhaps our next President should make an issue of insisting Congress repeal some of those laws, and take back the authority granted them by our constitution.
The president of the United States is inevitably faced with two broad categories of problems, usually defined as Foreign policy and Domestic policy, and he’d better be an expert on both subjects. Then of course he has a few other concerns such as a congress that seemingly can’t agree with anybody about anything, bloodthirsty political opponents, a sensation seeking media that has learned to make immense mountains out of minor molehills, a politically ignorant population, special interests, and a bureaucracy that’s out to grab everything they can. To be successful he’s got to be brilliant, courageous, a master of diplomacy, an expert in the military sciences, an economist, a world class administrator, an accomplished public speaker, and a “man of the people” preferably with the Wisdom of Solomon. I also think it would help to have an extensive background in tightrope walking.
All the current candidates claim to have “experience” of course, although none of them have ever occupied the Oval Office, or faced the problems that come with the job. Instead we get some with experience in congress to one extent or another. A few have been the governors of their home states or big city mayors. Some have assorted corporate executive experience as well. One is even a medical doctor. Hillary is the only candidate that’s actually lived in the white house, but as “co-president” she seemed to spend most of her time firing the travel office people, and apologizing for Bill’s interest in interns and his difficulties in understanding the simpler words in the English language. None of the candidates are very charismatic, and for the most part are hardly known outside their home states. While I hear a lot of talk about how they’re going to do this, that, or the other thing, I don’t hear much about the important things, like how they plan to get all these bright ideas past congress and other special interest groups, nor of how they figure to finance things.
I found an interesting internet website that’s a computerized matrix combining the various candidates and their stance on the primary issues. It’s open to the public, wherein you can “vote” on how much you agree or disagree with the particular position of any candidate. On a scale of nine, with “one” being strongly agreed with, “five” being indifferent, and “nine” being strongly disagreed with, all the candidates were rated at a more or less “Blah” four, five, and six by the respondents, with some being only a bit more popular on certain issues than others. For viewers with a mathematical bent the voter statistics are given, but for the rest of us the results are color coded, with bright red being strongly disagree, and bright green being strongly agree. The five issues considered are; the economy, energy, health care, immigration, and the war in Iraq.
The condition of the national economy generates a lot of bright ideas and instant cures among the candidates, but the respondent rating is a more or less indifferent “five” in all cases. Energy independence seems to be about the same, with Bill Richardson’s ideas being the most popular at a three. The response to health care proposals is also rather indifferent, with Chris Dodd being the least popular by a very small margin. The immigration issue is much the same, with Ron Paul having by far the most popular stance at a resounding three, and Chris Dodd the least popular. Despite all the media coverage, the proposals for ending the war in Iraq can only be analyzed as varying levels of indifference! Here, Joe Biden and Ron Paul’s ideas are tied for being the most agreed with, and Tom Tancredo leads the pack in disagreement. Keeping in mind that the ratings change with every vote, Obama is the most popular Democrat at the time of this writing, and Ron Paul is the leading Republican. However, no candidate is yet a clear winner on any issue.
Perhaps these presidential hopefuls should start looking for a different set of issues to pillory their opponents with? How about things like the burgeoning bureaucracy, looming national bankruptcy, public education, tax reform, our worn out highways, and the rather run down condition of the military? Perhaps they could explain their position on homeland security, domestic spying, constitutional law, and our slowly disappearing Bill of Rights. Personally I’m very interested in what we’re going to do about manned space development as well, although I don’t hear much from any candidate on that subject.
All in all I guess the somewhat mediocre quality of the candidates we’ve been offered over the last few years is really a blessing in disguise. If we think about the congressional powers that have been meekly surrendered to the president, along with the powers of the Patriot Act and the long standing Executive Orders law, it’s not the least bit unimaginable that a strong and ambitious president could make himself dictator in short order. Nor is that unprecedented, remember that Adolf Hitler went from being the lawfully elected Chancellor of Weimar Germany to absolute dictator of the Third Reich, completely in accordance with existing German laws, and seemingly did it overnight.
As the great hot air machine on capitol hill seems to be little more than a debating society nowdays, perhaps our next President should make an issue of insisting Congress repeal some of those laws, and take back the authority granted them by our constitution.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment