I think there is a facile misnomer in Washington, of late, wherein the debate isn’t about right or wrong; but rather about who is right and who is wrong. Right now G.W. wants to be right and everyone that disagrees with him, inherently, is wrong. He knows the best way for the country to go and plans that are not directly connected to his are, under his definition of right and wrong, bad. Take, for example, the desire and drive to put the principle of Democracy into a dominantly Muslim nation. This goes against hundreds of years of tradition (within the religious beliefs) and thousands of years of tradition in the regional structure.
Apparently, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was on the Capital today. She was talking to lawmakers and the essence of her message: If you ain’t following Bush and his plan, you are counter-democracy and freedom.
What this really does, for me, is to throw me, mentally, into a maelstrom of thought that swirls around a lot of ideas that have been presented during my adult lifetime. (Note: adult equals 18.) Let’s step back, in time, to the Ross Perot debate when he ran for President the first time. I voted for him. I’m not upset or sad or ashamed for having done that. At the time, with the understanding that I had, he was the best choice, in my opinion. I doubt that I’d’ve voted for him again, and I didn’t; but that first year he made sense. Then, as happens, he sort of became a part of the establishment, had this political party that you haven’t heard of, and he was less interesting.
Perot posited that a business man would be a better leader (for this country) than a politician. The reason (as I remember) was that there were certain real economic principles that were becoming more and more necessary to follow than politicians generally followed. Because they were economic principles you can, accurately, read into this money and the way our government doles out the millions and billions of dollars. To give you and idea of what a billion is… well, if you were given a stack of a billion one dollar bills and told to count it, you’d be counting non-stop for the rest of your life and not make a significant dent in the stack.
So, Ross wanted to be president, felt that as a successful billionaire businessman he was suited to the job, started a grassroots campaign, got out the activist vote; and, in the end, had the Republicans calling him a shill candidate for the Democratic party because he split the vote just so so that Bill Clinton won the presidency, twice, and the Republicans lost. Ralph Nader (who I would’ve voted for in the last elections had he been on the New Hampshire ballot) allegedly did the same thing to the Democrats, Republican shill.
However, the outcome of those two men, Ralph Nader and Ross Perot, is that there have been some rather drastic economic reforms in the way the government appropriates and spends money; not that you’d really have any chance of seeing or experiencing any of that because they still spend more money than anyone on the planet is going to see in many lifetimes … well, that is except Sam Walton, if he were still alive.
Then there is John McCain, the Arizona Senator that might as well be a Democrat as a Republican. He is one of those people that make you look at modern politics and think, “There really is no difference between the parties. It’s all in what you choose to call yourself.” John McCain is like a star bellied sneetch. If you have a star you are cool until everyone has a star and then you have to not have a star to be cool, and then two stars, and then three until, in the end, no one knows how many stars it takes to be cool or popular or… whatever. McCain is a star bellied sneetch – and he’s running for president.
A couple of elections ago he flew onto the national stage with his pet project: Election Reform. You know what happened? He succeeded… well, sort of. There are laws passed, they placate the masses, McCain can declare victory with whatever party holds the majority in the senate; and if anyone decides to point at him and say something like, “Traitor,” he can point to his war record and explicate how he was imprissioned in the Hanoi Hilton as a Prisoner of War during Viet Nam. I am not undermining that service, merely pointing it out as a measure that can be (and is) used to deflect criticism of his patriotism.
McCain is all about changing the way we elect our officials. He is a senator. Senators, originally, were appointed by individual state legislative bodies to serve six year terms. They are now a popularly elected position. McCain wants to further change the way our election system works. McCain is a product of our election system. McCain is a senator. Are you following the pattern here?
Okay, I admit, there really wasn’t a discernable pattern. The point is that for McCain to substantively change the system he has to be a part of it, but the moment he changes it he also puts his job into jeopardy so changing the system he is party to would be tantamount to firing oneself from a very cushy job you can’t be fired from. Not quitting – FIRED.
Let’s see, this year, already trying to run, we have Hillary Clinton who is too connected to Bill Clinton (husband and President); Barack Obama who is, according to the news, the first black man who could be president – except the black community in the United States thinks he’s too white…. He’s too white? How does that work? I’d make some comments, but they are inherently inflammatory and I will refrain.
Anyway, then there is John McCain… hrm, common man on the ticket; and with McCain is Rudolph Giuliani, ex-mayor of New York, hero of 9/11, recipient of a knighting by the Queen of England, and, like McCain, someone who could swing either way in the political battlefront. And then, last on my list, at least, is Mitt Romney.
All of that to get to all of this: Mitt.
Mitt came into real national attention when he was hired to be CEO of the 2002 Salt Lake Winter Olympics Committee. He is a businessman that has, allegedly, turned a lot of organizations around and has been successful at venture capital. From what I understand, that’s where his money comes from. He was very successful. He then launched his fame (in Utah) to a successful bid for governor of Massachusetts where he served one term and lost reelection. Now, he has thrown, officially, his hat into the arena for president.
Mitt is a bad choice for president; but is he a bad choice that is worse than, say, Hillary or Barack, McCain or Giuliani? Is he the worst choice we have running for president? Is it possible we could have a good choice that decides to run and just hasn’t officially declared that he (or she) has decided to run, yet? G.W. was an underdog that no one (Texas?) took seriously; he’s now the leader of the Free World.
Mitt is LDS. I am LDS. Mitt is a business leader. Perot was a business leader. Mitt has been a governor. Clinton and Bush were both governors.
The things that are getting to me are:
a) the 2002 Olympics couldn’t have gotten worse and a monkey could’ve led them in a better, positive direction; that is a bad example of leadership.
b) being governor of Massachusetts isn’t, necessarily, the best way to advertise your qualifications for President; especially when, in a second term bid, you lost; it would be better to be governor, now, and throw hat in than to be ousted governor and throw hat in.
c) being LDS is going to be a huge anchor around the man’s throat; Orin Hatch is LDS and he’s well known, and he’s well respected (by a lot of people, though not by me); and the outcome is that he cannot win the nomination for president… why would Mitt think he has more political sway that Orin?
d) the American people have shown time and time again that they don’t want a business leader coming in and taking over the helm of a political body; business is business, it’s important; but politics is politics and it is really important (think entitlements).
Maybe I am biased against Mitt because of the 2002 Winter Olympics. It is no secret that when they happened, I left the state. Granted, there were other reasons and circumstances for me leaving the state, but, I sure didn’t look back and wish I could still be in Utah during the madness. Maybe I am upset at Mitt because he is a part of the political establishment; he wants to be a part of the political establishment; and, in truth, as a part of the establishment he becomes just another one of them. Maybe I’m upset at Mitt because, in becoming one of them, he also became one of them in Massachusetts which, whether he likes it or not, connects him too closely to the Kennedy’s. Barack Obama is being likened unto Jack Kennedy; talk about political suicide. All you can do is go downhill from there and everything I’ve read about Jack Kennedy makes me wonder how the nation became enamored with him – or his family – or how Teddy keeps getting re-elected.
I keep hoping that we haven’t seen the next President of the United States throwing their hat in the ring yet; but my fear is that we have. The plus side is that G.W. has done enough damage to the nation that whomever is elected, next, will probably be a four-year lame duck president that will have history look back at his/her track record and will have something like raising the cost of peanuts as their sole accomplishment for four years (well, that and a semi-nice pension and Secret Service detachment).
Jimmy Carter (followed Nixon and Ford) has done more as an ex-president than he ever did before becoming that. And the only thing the next president REALLY gets to look forward to is what Jimmy Carter has done since being president: humanitarian work.
To finish: I think a part of me is rebellious against the idea of someone of my faith running for president. I think that it is a good thing; but, the problem I encounter isn’t that it’s a good thing, but rather that the people I’ve seen doing it are not always the best examples of moral character or what it means to be LDS. I, admittedly, don’t know Mitt Romney. I don’t know his character. I don’t know his children or grandchildren. I don’t know the man. All I know is that he is associated, irrevocably, in my mind with an Olympics that was wrought with scandal and no matter how the press (or his machine) tries to spin it, was still wrought with scandal when they happened; he is associated with Massachusetts and The Big Dig project, also wrought with scandal; he is associated with Dot Com and the bust and even though he’s made money, a lot of other people lost their shirts; and the outcome of these three areas is that he can be morally upright and a good Mormon, but he will always have the pallor of scandal surrounding him.
Maybe all of this is coincidence. Maybe he is the best man for the job. Maybe everything he’s done, until now, has led up to a successful bid for president. I don’t know. I am willing to say that I open to him changing my mind about who and what he is and represents; but, Mitt has a long, hard road ahead of him before I walk into a polling station and cast my vote to any ticket with his name associated with it. Right now, the only person that would cause me to do that is Hillary Clinton and I don’t, honestly, think she has a prayer to make it through the primaries.
Heaven and Hell are about to fall down upon that ladies head. Every act, word, deed, innuendo, everything she has ever done, thought, suggested, or said is about to be dropped on the American people and she will wish and rue the day she decided to run for president. Mitt and his family are about to find out their foibles as are other candidates. I think, and nothing more, that we are about to see one of the nastiest elections in U.S. history and when we come out the other side I think the American people might be ready for real change.
However, going back to where I started: I don’t think it is a bad idea to leave Iraq to the Iraqi’s. Enough of them are adamant about our not being there that it is a good idea. Let them fall into civil war. Let Iran deal with them. Get us out. If we’ve created an unstable world because G.W. has to be right and we should trust him, then I say we may deserve the consequences; but at present, for the moment, I think sending Condoleezza Rice to Capital Hill to berate elected representatives who are doing what their constituents tell them to do, that is GET OUT OF IRAQ, is an abuse of power. And that is what this president is going to be known for.