Although I am very liberal, and favor President Obama’s
views on many things, he is not as creative or as original a thinker as I would
like to see in a leader, especially in these times. He seems rather tied to thinking
that is pedestrian rather than imaginative or creative, which is a
disappointment from someone who I thought would have a sharp and incisive mind
that could see beyond bullshit and orthodoxy and the excuse of ‘tradition’.
Two examples of his ‘status quo’ thinking are his comments
about gay marriage and his comments on what he says the economy needs to help
it.
His ‘evolution’ (his term) on his view of gay marriage was just
so lame! He sounded like such a ‘typical guy’ about gay marriage before finally
concluding that, hey, maybe it’s a human rights issue and he shouldn’t let his
emotional reaction cloud his judgement! He first said he agreed that marriage
should be between a man and a woman, at some point he said he had wrestled with
the issue many times, and when he FINALLY figured out that without the right to
marry, gays would not actually enjoy the same rights as heterosexuals, he said
he was for it. He really didn’t seem to come to this conclusion with his own thought
process; it seems he had to be told again and again by friends/family/staff
members that civil unions did not guarantee them certain rights, and heartache
and inequality would ensue. Really? I mean, he has a law degree, doesn’t he?
And he didn’t know that a civil union did not bestow all of the same rights and
privileges and tax breaks and whatever as marriage? Or did he just think that a
civil union was ‘good enough’, gays shouldn’t want more? Or did he just not
want to think of gay marriage at all because – well, because he’s a typical
GUY!
I’m pissed that a smart man could be so dumb about this. I
get so tired of testosterone trying to substitute for brains. I should be used
to it by now; after all, the whole world is in the mess it is PRECISELY
because that’s what testosterone does best and almost constantly. These guys
seem to conclude that their strong feelings must be for a reason, therefore those
feelings are right. Right? BZZZZZZZZ – WRONG! Strong feelings can be
dysfunctional as well as helpful, so they have to be analysed and – here’s a
tip – weighed against the FACTS and REALITY! What a novel idea! (I doubt it
will catch on, though.)
And the economy – well, I’m not sure that President Obama is
really unaware of some of the creative thinkers on the economy and why it is in
trouble, or whether he just doesn’t want to frighten the public into hysteria.
I mean, it didn’t take me long to find some people who seem to make a lot of
sense, and who have some solutions to offer, and some suggestions for changes
that should be made, and I am not paid to find out these things or lead the country! I was just doing an internet search after catching the end of an interview on Public Television, and from there I looked
around and found others talking about the economy and why we are going through
these times. Some have been sounding the alarm for 10 years or so – I find it
suspicious that our ‘leaders’ don’t have anything new to say, or don't seem to have a
clue that the ‘same old, same old’ may not work this time around. Maybe they don't watch Public Television. Maybe they
know what is likely happening, but they don’t want to cause panic. I don’t know. The people who I
believe have it right are people like David Korten (http://neweconomyworkinggroup.org/),
and Martin Ford (author of ‘The Lights in the Tunnel’) and Chuck Collins
(author of ‘99 to 1’). To hear President Obama spout tired lines about what the
economy needs is disheartening when you believe that this time is different due
to changes that have been coming for the last 40 years or so – and ignored. No
one prepared for what many saw coming. (I am talking about things like the rise
of technology and the rise of huge corporations that own more and more of our
world; technology has reduced the number of workers required, while the
corporations have funneled wealth to fewer and fewer. We have seen some ‘waves’
of adjustments, but the housing bust was a GIGANTIC wave - that should not have
been ignored and should have been handled far differently so that people did
NOT lose their homes - and I fear that
the tsunami is still to come.)
So, President Obama’s unoriginal ways of thinking and
addressing huge issues have left me disappointed in him, although he is still
liberal enough and humane enough in many ways to be acceptable to me.
Which brings me to the Romneys because I have looked at them
and listened and tried to see what a conservative type would like about them –
and all I can guess (besides ‘conservative values’, I suppose) is that they are
successful and good-looking, and many conservatives imagine that they themselves
will end up more like the Romneys if they vote them in. OK, do we really want
wealthy people who seem to be out of touch running the country? I don’t. Being
a ‘nice’ person in some people’s eyes does not make you a good leader, nor does
it mean you are ethical.
And I am highly suspicious of things like these:
-
Mitt Romney ran Bain Capital which ‘raided’ some
businesses and closed them down, evaporating health plans and retirement plans
for workers who deserved them. I understand that Bain Capital did more than
just this, and some takeovers were probably good, but screwing workers out of
what they have earned is immoral, even if it is ‘legal’ because that is what
big money corporations have successfully lobbied for. Anyone who seriously
thinks that a guy like Mitt Romney worries about how he gets his money for
himself or his investors, and anyone who thinks he does NOT have substantial
money stashed in offshore accounts, ought to be whacked upside the head until
they can think more clearly. Most rich (or, pardon me, even merely ‘wealthy’)
people don’t get that way by caring much about what ways the money comes to
them. When getting and having that money is a priority, a lot of other considerations
get tossed by the wayside. To let Mitt Romney off the hook because Bain Capital
did some other things that may not have been so heartless and/or because
Romney’s name was ‘mistakenly’ on it for certain years, is to be stupidly
gullible. Such gullible people should not be allowed to vote if they are that
stupid. (New law to propose: make voters take IQ tests. Now THAT could be
interesting!)
-
Ann Romney doesn’t consider herself to be wealthy.
Really? Isn’t that a bit clueless, or maybe a LOT ?
Shouldn’t that be categorized under ‘out of touch with reality’? You know, I
already know that most MEN are clueless and macho, but if his WIFE does not
realize their relative economic level in this country, who the hell will bring
pressure on him to make sane policies? How the hell can they make good
decisions for the majority, then, who are NOT in the same bracket as they and
their friends are?
-
A darling (retch) interview I saw on NBC with Romney’s
sons made my hair stand on end. (http://video.msnbc.msn.com/rock-center/48252615#48252615)
While I have no problem with them defending their dad, and no problem with
their work, the answers they gave about why they have not served in the military
were a GREAT example of dodging and doublespeak. Look, they didn’t serve
because they didn’t want to and they could get out of it, like most well-off
folks. But wait! They ‘have a tremendous amount of respect’ for those guys in
the military, and Ben (the doctor) – verbally stumbling a LOT – sidestepped a
direct question about whether he regrets not having served in the military by
saying that he gets to ‘work with vets’ at the VA hospital, and he hopes that
‘I get to serve them a little bit, too’. Well, that’s OK then!! Of course,
their comments did not answer the questions put to them, but they sounded so
nice to people who just want to gush, “Oooh, such nice young men, listen to how
caring and respectful they are about our troops – such fine boys!” (All I could
hear in my head while they were desperately trying to deflect the questions
were 5 guys yelling, “We didn’t want to get KILLED, that’s why we didn’t go!
You think we’re CRAZY?? That stuff is DANGEROUS!”)
Sorry, I think they sound
privileged but quite clueless about it, and insincere and self-serving. Of
course they know how to be NICE about it, but I wonder what brilliant policies
they and their father would come up with to help the economy, to help those who
have lost their homes, to help create a new system if the one we know is broken
beyond the usual ‘fixes’. I suspect they will try to help their wealthy pals
more than they will us working-class rubes. And I’ll bet they believe ANYONE
can get where they themselves are with hard work and a commitment to God and
family. So really, nothing needs to be changed, poor people just need to work
more!
Excuse me while I gag.
And when I’m done, I nominate Jim
Wright of Stonekettle Station blog as our new leader. (http://www.stonekettle.com/)
