International Interest in US Elections

I was aware of how much hatred and disgust other nations had for Bush and his policies. Never before has the United States been an object of such disdain. Low opinion polls have been consistent for years after Bush decided to go against world opinion and invade Iraq.

But now, there is genuine world-wide interest in our elections. Roger Cohen discusses his observations that find foreign reporters heavily invested in watching how our democracy is working. There is a realization, now stronger than ever, that the person who is the US President does make a real difference in the world. They are excited with possibilities that the US would again project those values and ideals that have been the hope of others fighting for the best in their nations. While our nation may be losing its economic power, it does remain strong to the point that our health does influence the world economy. More importantly, even if China, India, or whomever were to assume the role of the largest economic power, it is implausible that they would capture the imagination of other nations in terms of ideals and values.

Of personal interest, Cohen indicates that Obamania is real for many in other nations. To think of such beautiful people of color in the White House would send such a powerful message to other nations struggling to deal with ethnic and racial tensions.

"House of Bush, House of Saud" by Craig Unger

I have read many books regarding Bush and/or his intervention in Iraq. "The House of Bush, House of Saud" was bypassed since I figured that it would only irritate me more.

However, my sister-in-law thought that I would "enjoy" reading the book. She gave it to during our New Year's visit.

The bottom line is the conviction that Bush should not only be impeached. He should be jailed!

The author's narrative essentially was triggered by the question: When all air traffic was suspended after the 9/11 tragedy, how was it possible for the Saudi family members and the members of the Bin Laden family to be picked up at various sites throughout our country and permitted to leave for Saudi Arabia without even being questioned by the FBI?

He then details with numerous citations the linkage between the Bush family and the Saudi royalty that originated more than twenty years ago. The political connections were cemented by heavy investments in the Bush family's political aspirations and their businesses, e.g., Harken energy and the Carlyle group. The linkages are so intimate that the level of Saudi's influence on our political actions are enormous. And, in addition, the influence resulted in the inability to pursue leads of Saudis who were, minimally unknowingly, involved in the support of the Osama Bin Laden.

Reading the book will test anyone ability to tolerate great pain!

"The Savior" by Eugene Drucker

Eugene Drucker is a successful violinist who has written his first novel, “The Savior”. It is a powerful story built somewhat tangentially on his father’s history.

The main character, Gottfried Keller, lives during the Hilter regime in Germany. A prominent graduate from the Hochschule in Cologne, Keller begins a promising career and starts a relationship with a young pianist who became his accompanist. As he develops a love relationship with her, his first conflict emerges as he deals with the fact that she was Jew. His naïve perception that the differences between Jewish or Aryan were minor and inconsequential became shattered when he was unable to identify openly with her status.

But this conflict was minor compared with the role he was enlisted to adopt, viz., a violinist serving the German military effort. First, he was assigned to play for Germans wounded in conflict. Going from one hospital to another, he faced the faces that seemed so distant. But, the unbelievable then occurred when he was ordered to come to one of the concentration camps to participate in an “experiment” to determine whether music would stimulate the hopeless to adopt some hope.

The horrors that he witnessed and the conflicts he experienced are exquisitely captured by this author’s ability to penetrate the ugly dismantling of humanity of the Jewish prisoners and the evolving strength of this musician who stands up against the Kommandant of the camp.

"The Scandal of the Season": by Sophie Gee

Sophie Gees’ first novel, “The Scandal of the Season”, has been well received and rightfully so. Dealing with the circumstances in England in the early 18th Century, she uses the political and religious controversies dealing with the establishment of a Anglican Church and the fears of Catholicism, he provides a story centering of Alexander Pope.

What struck me as unusual is that the author’s ability to use language typical of the upper elite of society. The language is so different from what has become common to us. But, what was so interesting to me is that I recently read “Pride and Prejudice” since I had never read any of Jane Austen’s works. Without knowing who the author was, I would have thought that Jane Austen was writing the story. I am so impressed that the literary style is so similar.

Bush, Again Acting Unconstitutionally!

How the man sleeps amazes me!

Again, Bush signed the National Defense Authorization Act for 2008 with signing statements indicating that he was not bound by language restricting his power, viz., "a statute that forbids spending taxpayer money 'to establish any military installation or base for the purpose of providing for the permanent stationing of United States Armed Forces in Iraq' or 'to exercise United States control of the oil resources of Iraq.'"

He is setting up a major confrontation with Congress as he proceeds to negotiate an agreement that he claims is not a treaty and not subject to Congressional approval.

Wow! What gaul!

I hope that this will cause some to call for his impeachment even if the time remaining is limited. At least, the initiative to proceed with impeachment will support a historical perspective that such signing statements imperil our democracy.

Congress was designed to limits the powers the Executive. If Bush gets away with his signing statements, he will erode any meaning to the separation of powers.

Stupidity: the Outcome of the "War on Terrorism"

Simon Jenkins has a distinguished history as a journalist (1). Writing for 15 years in Guardian, his columns have an advantage of a wide perspective.

“The 'war on terror' licenses a new stupidity in geopolitics” rightfully attacks the verbiage of “war on terrorism” used by governments (United States, Great Britain, Pakistan) to the point of distorting the threat and promising the impossible from military action.
Stopping the few committed to terrorism by using weapons of destruction, e.g., suicide bombers, will not stop through military intervention. In fact, it seems clearly to exacerbate their occurrences!
The policies based on the erroneous concept of “war” on terrorism represent a misfit. War cannot control individuals; in fact, it creates its own enemies, e.g., I must be considered an enemy of the “war”.
Having created an enormous disaster, changing the verbiage will be insufficient to alter the course of our gruesome history. But, it will be a start and will initiate changes in policies that will be more in line with dealing with terrorists, viz., through police and legal interventions.

(1)
Per Wikipedia, Sir Simon Jenkins (born 10 June 1943) is a British newspaper columnist currently associated with The Guardian after fifteen years with News International titles. He was educated at Mill Hill School, the Beechen Cliff School in Bath, England and St John's College, Oxford.
A former editor of The Times newspaper, he received a knighthood for services to journalism in the 2004 New Year honours. Among his many other awards, he was named What the Papers Say Journalist of the Year in 1998. He also holds an Honorary Fellowship from the University of Wales, Lampeter.

My Man Won Again!

Obama's victory speech epitomized the reasons for my supporting his candidacy. He is backed with years of experiences that portray a person with commitments to make this world better. Granted, no one is clearly prepared to deal with the aftermath of Bush's administration, but, if anyone can address the multiple problems confronting our nation, I believe he can.

Caroline Kennedy's endorsement was perfect. She said that Obama reminded him of her father's ability to attract the best in young people and inspire this generation as he did in the 60's. More specifically, she said the democratic candidates are not that different in terms of policies. But, being competent or knowledgeable are not enough at this point in our history. We need more.

It was a most thoughtful, well-crafted, and detailed statement for her reasons why he should be president. Clearly, I cherished the words!

Unpleasant Scenario: Two Clinton Presidents!

I have repeated my fears of having the former president once again ensconced in the White House. I cannot imagine his being able to live within the constraints of the role of a "First Lad". Over these past few weeks, the former president has demonstrated behavior that may reflect a future reality.

I cannot imagine that the former president will be quiet about anything that is going on. A second aspect of this perception is that the impact his statements will have on those in the Executive Branch. Having heard the opinions of the former president, who could promote policies at variance with his?

Gary Wills has succinctly placed my fears within historical context. The framers of the Constitution wrestled with the problem of minimizing executive powers while maintaining the need for accountability.

You can imagine the problems of attributing accountability to Hillary when Bill was the actual culprit!

I wish that my fears would go away. Other commentators, however, keep me focused. Bruce Feirstein and Ronald Brownstein discuss the implications of how the Clintons are behaving in the current primary races. Colbert King draws some ominous inferences about the prospects of a Billary Administration. Frank Rich also portrays a rather ugly picture of what could happen if the two Clintons were candidates for the president. In short, my fears of their joint occupancy of the White House are shared by many others. I hope that the Democratic voters will see this clearly during the primary season and vote for Obama. If not, it would not surprise me that the anti-Clinton vote will doom prospects of a Democratic election. And lo and behold! the once scenario of the inevitable win for the Democrats could sink into oblivion.

I may have to live with them. It does look as though the Clintons will overwhelm Obama.

P.S. Rather than start another item, I am going to add columns that support the need to consider the downsides of another Clinton in the White House.


NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF directs his question to the wisdom of supporting a dynasty. He is not directly questioning the phenomenon of two Clinton presidents in the White House at the same time. Rather is looks back to our early history and the wisdom they had about the need to introduce new leaders rather regularly. while it may not be unconstitutional, it is clearly an issue worthy of much consideration about its wisdom.

Into Great Silence

The documentary about the Grande Chartreuse Monastery in the French Alps lived up to reviews. The silence associated with the lives of these monks was captured by the endless silence (2:40 hours) of the film that in itself is a story.

Apparently, the film maker went to the abbot to discuss his idea of a film about the monks. The abbot responded somewhat positively and said that he would get back to him. He did ... 16 years later!

The German filmmaker Philip Gröning apparently spent about six months living as a monk before attempting to capture their lives in film.

Why would anyone want to watch such a film that is long and with little sound (some chant, one dialogue with a senior, blind monk and a few moments of a distant conversation).

One reason would be to get a glimpse of the lives of an order of men (Carthusians
is the most strict order of Catholic men, initiated in 1040). But, the other reason is the actual filming. Gröning captured light and darkness, color and shapes extraordinarily well. It was like watching an infinite number of slides merging one into the next effortlessly.

I close with a comment about the life-style of these monks by sharing my desire to join the Cistercian monastery when I was in my early 20's. Whether I could have survived (most that enter such monasteries never last but a few years) is one question, but the more pertinent question is, could I have survived psychologically. Given the fact that I ultimately found life as a secular priest to be a major problem for many reasons, one could only speculate what would have been my experience as a monk. Having said that, contemplation remains a positive dimension in my life. Silence has never been a problem for me. However, the extremes depicted in this film would more than test my ability!

"His Excellency: George Washington" by Joseph Ellis

Joseph Ellis continues to weave history via wonderful segments that capture the progress of time in the context of the person. In “His Excellency: George Washington”, the first president comes through as an ambitious, self-interested person who was able to harness his emotions for the sake of a higher goals, including his personal interests.

The gems that I got from the book are two:

(1) Even in the earliest part of our nation’s history, he recognized that problems only get addressed when a crisis occurs (“the people must feel before they will see”). Even then, today’s inability to deal with problems that are relatively conceded as urgent, e.g., health care, Medicare, seems to be consistent with his views that people must feel the problem before accepting a solution. In health care, there has been a change since 1992 when Clinton’s attempt failed miserably. Increased costs for the individual policy holder, increased number of those without insurance, and the foreseen increases in the future have softened people’s resistance to change.

(2) George Washington understood power and its correlative self-interest. He recognized that no one or nation is ultimately motivated by anything short of self-interest. For him, treaties were valid only as long as those signing the treating saw its terms meeting their needs. Given Washington’s perception that our nation would be singular by virtue of putting the national good above the interests of individual states, it did not take long of such partisanship to emerge.

Through life, this has been a hard reality to swallow. I still hold on to the naïve notion that ideals motivate people to rise above their self-interests. In terms of today’s political races for the presidency, it is hard for me to see that only self-interests will motivate people to action. I still nourish the hope that the rhetoric of Obama will cause people to give up some personal gains for the sake of the nation.

Begging for a Leader

One of my high school classmates sent a message with excerpts from Lee Iaccoca's "Where Have All the Leaders Gone?".

"Am I the only guy in this country who's fed up with what's happening? Where the hell is our outrage? We should be screaming bloody murder. We've got a gang of clueless bozos steering our ship of state right over a cliff, we've got corporate gangsters stealing us blind, and we can't even clean up after a hurricane much less build a hybrid car. But instead of getting mad, everyone sits around and nods their heads when the politicians say, "Stay the course"

Stay the course? You've got to be kidding. This is America , not the damned "Titanic". I'll give you a sound bite: "Throw all the bums out!"

You might think I'm getting sen ile, that I've gone off my rocker, and maybe I have. But someone has to speak up. I hardly recognize this country anymore.

The most famous business leaders are not the innovators but the guys in handcuffs. While we're fiddling in Iraq , the Middle East is burning and nobody seems to know what to do. And the press is waving 'pom-poms' instead of asking hard questions. That's not the promise of the " America " my parents and yours traveled across the ocean for. I've had enough. How about you?

I'll go a step further. You can't call yourself a patriot if you're not outraged. This is a fight I'm ready and willing to have. The Biggest "C" is Crisis! Leaders are made, not born. Leadership is forged in times of crisis. It's easy to sit there with your feet up on the desk and talk theory. Or send someone else's kids off to war when you've never seen a battlefield yourself. It's another thing to lead when your world comes tumbling down.

On September 11, 2001 , we needed a strong leader more than any other time in our history. We needed a steady hand to guide us out of the ashes.

A Hell of a Mess

So here's where we stand. We're immersed in a bloody war with no plan for winning and no plan for leaving. We're running the biggest deficit in the history of the country. We're losing the manufacturing edge to Asia , while our once-great companies are getting slaughtered by health care costs Gas
prices are skyrocketing, and nobody in power has a coherent energy policy. Our schools are in trouble. Our borders are like sieves. The middle class is being squeezed every which way. These are times that cry out for leadership.

But when you look around, you've got to ask: "Where have all the leaders gone?" Where are the curio us, creative communicators? Where are the people of character, courage, conviction, omnipotence, and common sense? I may be a sucker for alliteration, but I think you get the point.

Name me a leader who has a better idea for homeland security than making us take off our shoes in airports and throw away our shampoo? We've spent billions of dollars building a huge new bureaucracy, and all we know how to do is react to things that have already happened.

Name me one leader who emerged from the crisis of Hurricane Katrina. Congress has yet to spend a single day evaluating the response to the hurricane, or demanding accountability for the decisions that were made in the crucial hours after the storm. Everyone's hunkering down, fingers crossed, hoping it doesn't happen again. Now, that's just crazy. Storms happen. Deal with it. Make a plan. Figure out what you're going to do the next time.

Name me an industry leader who is thinking creatively about how we can restore our competitive edge in manufacturing. Who would have believed that there could ever be a time when "The Big Three" referred to Japanese car companies? How did this happen, and more important, what are we going to do about it?

Name me a government leader who can articulate a plan for paying down the debt, or solving the energy crisis, or managing the health care problem. The silence is deafening. But these are the crises that are eating away at our country and milking the middle class dry.

I have news for the gang in Congress. We didn't elect you to sit on your asses and do nothing and remain silent while our democracy is being hijacked and our greatness is being replaced with mediocrity. What is everybody so afraid of? That some bonehead on Fox News will call them a name? Give me a break. Why don't you guys show some spine for a change?

Had Enough?

Hey, I'm not trying to be the voice of gloom and doom here. I'm trying to li ght a fire. I'm speaking out because I have hope, I believe in America . In my lifetime I've had the privilege of living through some of America 's greatest moments. I've also experienced some of our worst crises: the "Great Depression", "World War II", the "Korean War", the "Kennedy Assassination", the "Vietnam War", the 1970s oil crisis, and the struggles of recent years culminating with 9/11. If I've learned one thing, it's this:
"You don't get anywhere by standing on the sidelines waiting for somebody else to take action. Whether it's building a better car or building a better future for our children, we all have a role to play. That's the challenge I'm raising in this book. It's a call to "Action" for people who, like me, believe in America . It's not too late, but it's getting pretty close. So let's shake off the crap and go to work. Let's tell 'em all we've had "enough."

Lee Iaccoca's words are relevant to my support of Obama since I think that he has the qualities of a leader. Having said that, I realize that there is an underlying problem confronting any leader in the current environment.

I preface my remarks with a quote from George Washington (Ellis' book, His
Excellency), where he said that "... people must feel before they will see"
referencing the fact that things have to get worse before they could get better
(in Ellis' words).

Even before he was designated president, Washington saw what appears to be a
historical reality in this country, viz., we wait until there is a CRISIS, in
fact a MAJOR CRISIS. We don't deal with Social Security, Medicare, Healthcare in
general, until matters begin to intrude on the lives of so many people that it
becomes a crisis. Some commentators, for instance, indicate that the Iraq fiasco
would never have happened and surely, never have last this long, if there was a draft where every able-bodied young
person was involved. The current armed forces are so skewed that most people
have no contact with any family with a person involved in the conflict.

And, the problem is compounded by the fact that if any politician were too
honest, as a leader would be, he/she would never get elected (at least until the
MAJOR CRISIS or CRISES emerged).

I would like to think that the American public would respond to intelligent
proposals addressing problems. But, I am sure that there is any evidence of this
being true.

Opportunities for Obama

While Obama's loss in New Hampshire was unexpected, resulting in a real contest for the Democratic nomination, there is an opportunity for Obama to develop a real and significant coalition.

Until now, rhetoric and charisma were the driving force igniting the feelings that he could really make a difference. Proposals for change were relatively few and most often, were not that different from other candidates.

If he really wants to make a difference, he may well benefit from more detailed proposals, even some which are a reach for the American public. Should he then get nominated and elected, he could assume a mandate for more extensive changes that, in fact, would make him truly historic.

My Man Lost!

While the outcome of the New Hampshire primary was consistent with my "prediction" of the final outcome of the entire process, I admit to be sad that "my man" lost. It appears that the undecided went more for Clinton as well as women, in general. If the results of Manchester and Nashua could have been reversed, Obama may have made it.

At any rate, there is now more politics to entertain us. The winter is terribly long (apart from this current interlude) and it is great to have some political theater to entertain us.

More importantly, it will give Obama a chance to deal more specifically with some of the goals he wants to achieve. That will be good for him and, if enough support those actions, then he more than like will win.

The conundrum for the Democratic candidates is how to portray their differences without being too personal. And yet, there are minimal differences in positions among the three top candidates. The major differences are personal! It really is a bona fide conundrum!

:"American Creation" by Joseph Ellis

Joseph Ellis is a gifted historian by virtue of his ability to articulate history through detailed stories that make the reader understand the movement of time as it most likely occurred. “American Creation” comes to grips with the evolution of our nation through the struggles and disagreements with a set of unusually intelligent and committed individuals of great talents.

Having miraculously defeated the British, attributed in no small part to the ineptness of the British leaders who had no insight into the actual conditions of warfare in the fledging states, various leaders worked for a few years to develop a Constitution. Even when being written, there were major disagreements and after its passage by the necessary number of states, some either still not understand all that was written or disagreed with some aspects of the document. In addition, many glimpsed into the dark side of the nation that would be tested in time, viz., slavery and treatment of Native Americans.

Decisions on slavery and the Native Americans were consistently temporized by the inability to figure out how to maintain a unified nation if actions more consistent with the understanding the Constitution and Declaration of Independence were adopted.

These leaders would enter old age and approach death with fear that the major discrepancies between ideals and reality would wreck the nation.

Somehow or other, we made it for over 200 years.

Reading American history helps me to place my strong views into perspective. I surely have no stronger views than Jefferson did, for example, relative to the role of federal government. Hamilton and Adams, among others, were in total disagreement with him. Yet, when Jefferson became president, he deviated totally from his own personal views to arrange for the Louisiana Purchase.

I advocate for a strong role of the federal government to counter the excesses of the free market and to ensure that the needs of the common good are met, e.g., education, health. In principle, Jefferson would align himself with today’s Republicans who focus more on individual rights and responsibilities rather siding with the people like Paul Krugman!

So, the morale of this reading is to take and deep breathe, hold your convictions while listening and often disagreeing with those holding opposing views, and yet realize that our nation somehow has a history of holding itself together, making progress here and there, in spite of bad decisions and actions.

We too may enter old age (may be there?) and approach death with some of the same fears that our Founding Fathers had. Let’s hope that we do our best as they did.

Calculations Backfired!

One of the negative aspects of the Clintons (both Bill and Hillary) are their heavy dependence on pollsters. I sent money to the Democratic National Party with a message that I hated the extreme calculations of Bill to ensure that his policies and decisions were meeting the majority of the public. Obviously, one cannot cause much harm if they meet the majority's expectations, but I was angry that we were missing the opportunities to lead the public to places they did not want to go, but needed to go if we were to address some of our immense problems. And, I felt that Bill Clinton had the intelligence and charisma to be such a leader. His talents were wasted, from my point of view, when he relied so heavily on his pollster, Mark Penn.

Hillary's dependence on the same pollster was a hallmark of her campaign. She talked little with the press, answered few spontaneous questions from the crowds, and adopted a script designed by Penn to focus on her "experience", the defining element in what would be her inevitable nomination as the Democratic Candidate for the presidency.

Well, the strategy backfired!

Change, not experience, is the defining component of this primary season. Hillary cannot compete with Obama when change is the defining issue. She, with Bill, have been around too long, have done too much as well as well as too little in other areas, for her to be perceived as a change agent.

While no one would count someone out as this point in time, it will be interesting to see how she will ever overcome the liabilities associated with her calculating message based on experience.

My Man Won!

I thought that Clinton's organization, manpower, and the weight of her husband would help her to win the primaries, but I may have been wrong. At the moment, I have a chance to rejoice in the victory of the person that I wanted to win. Obama did better than any pundit thought (although one must give credit to the Des Moine Register's poll that came close to being exactly right). Seldom in history have I ever backed a person who won! I cannot help but feel good that he may be on his way and, if so, it will indeed by historic!

The biggest surprise, apart from the large turnout, is that Obama won in all categories except senior women, i.e., all other age and gender groups, including women.

David Brooks paid Obama a great complement:

Barack Obama has won the Iowa caucuses. You’d have to have a heart of stone not to feel moved by this. An African-American man wins a closely fought campaign in a pivotal state. He beats two strong opponents, including the mighty Clinton machine. He does it in a system that favors rural voters. He does it by getting young voters to come out to the caucuses.

This is a huge moment. It’s one of those times when a movement that seemed ethereal and idealistic became a reality and took on political substance.