Many of us laughed hysterically at the antics of Jim Carey and Jeff Daniels in the movie “Dumb & Dumber” as they engaged in a slapstick series of mishaps that celebrated cluelessness and stupidity. The US public loves to be entertained. And it seems that being entertained by characters of weak intellect and lack of direction appeals to a very large market segment. Both Jim Carey and Jeff daniels are talented actors. Carey clearly is not the fantastical moron that he has played in numerous movies like “Dumb & Dumber,” “Ace Ventura” and “Liar, Liar.” Most viewing audiences can distinguish fantasy from the real thing. However, the voting public will be faced in November with a test whether it can distinguish fact from fantasy in perhaps one of the most important decisions it will make this century, selecting the next President of the United States.
A nationally recognized political commentator recently noted the celebration of “know nothingness” that seems to be running rampant in US politics. It is being touted by GOP campaign managers and old school politicians. The idea is that it is somehow good to be ignorant or anti-intellectual. If a candidate speaks in articulate phrases and deals with complex issues, he is accused of being "out of touch" with average Americans. Even Hilary Clinton allowed her campaign strategists to lead her into the trap of referring to Obama's articulate speeches and preference for thoughtful deliberation as “elitist,” and it backfired. Now the McCain campaign seeks to brand Obama as out of touch with average Americans because he sometimes uses big words and careful reasoning. The critical question is whether the US electorate really want or need someone who is clueless, inarticulate and of mediocre intelligence in the White House at this critical time in history.
The current state of affairs is largely a result of eight years of failed leadership by an “average” guy with a poor academic record and an even poorer track record in every position of leadership he has held. This is not hyperbole; one need only look at the historical record of George W. Bush in each company or enterprise he has led since his “Animal House” days in the Ivy League frat house at Yale. Ignorance of material facts and a lack of comfort with complex issues and higher order thinking skills are often associated with arrogance and stubborn resistance to self-examination. George W. Bush has shown himself to be a prime example of a person with limited intelligence that refuses to examine his own actions and decisions, and who changes course only when forced to do so. A more intelligent person examines the facts, arguments and nuance and then makes deliberate decisions that are calculated to achieve optimum results with lasting benefits.
The US electorate has a clear choice in November. Barack Obama is an admittedly deep thinker and active intellectual challenger. He questions the status quo, based upon careful analysis and intellectual curiosity. John McCain is a candidate of undistinguished intellect, a traditionalist willing to follow doctrinaire policies without thinking through the implications of decisions. McCain has taken very contradictory positions on issues based upon the need to pander to constituencies. All candidates shift positions to appeal to varying constituency demands, but the more intelligent candidates are able to provide a logical and persuasive rationale to support the differences beyond simple pandering.
Obama, a former law school professor with distinguished post graduate credentials, has employed his intellect in both the classroom and on the streets of Chicago’s disenfranchised communities. Obama worked in the finance sector for a time doing research and writing for a publication providing sophisticated market advice. Obama has a record, not as long as McCain's, in legislative work. He has shown the ability to translate inportant governmental and social issues into legislative initiatives.
In contrast, John McCain graduated number 894 out of 899 from the US Naval Academy after getting admitted based upon connections of Admirals in his family. His primary claim to fame is as a Navy pilot getting shot down during the Viet Nam conflict and spending years as a prisoner of war. McCain divorced his wife and married Cindy Hensley, heiress to a Beer distributor fortune, and entered politics with that financial backing. Thus, McCain went from the bottom 1% of his class at the Academy to the top 1% of the wealthy class in this country. While publicly professing to be a "maverick" in Congress, he has a rather consistent record of backing corporate intests and initiatives favoring the extremely wealthy [like his own family] over initiatives that would support middle and lower class families.
McCain’s military experiences may show service and patriotism, but they are hardly examples of intellectual depth or qualifications for leadership in high office. There are tens of thousands of veterans of the Iraq conflict who have been injured in action. They are stolid patriots and many are fine men and women. Yet most voters would agree that more is expected and required of a capable Presidential candidate than just honorable military service. Indeed, many of those veterans have far superior academic credentials than John McCain.
And lest strength of character be presumed from military experience, we need only examine John McCain's history after returning from the POW experience in Viet Nam. He abandoned the loving wife who had courageously waited for him, suffering through a near fatal car accident that left her with a permanent limp. Rather than stand by this woman, McCain got involved in an affair with a legislative aide–lobbyist while still married,and then divorced his loyal wife. Even McCain now says that his actions at that time were an example of moral weakness in his past. McCain then married this much younger and beautiful woman, who incidentally was from a very rich family. It proved a great boost to his political career. But Nancy and Ronald Reagan never forgave McCain.
Few would or should condemn McCain for living a cliché life of a typical shallow politician. Most average guys would jump at the chance to marry a beautiful woman who controls a business with a 2/3 market share that earns her more than $5 Million every year. And if the price of that opportunity was to go into politics to champion the interests of the hand of large corporate business that provides that wealth, the average guy would consider it a small sacrifice. But the question is: Do such “average Joe” experiences represent the kind of credentials that are needed in the Oval Office of the White House in the next term?
The United States has suffered through eight years of “leadership” by a President who is an "average guy" with relatively weak intelligence. The stakes involved in what type of person sits in the White House are immense. Bush leadership has gotten the US into a quagmire in Iraq that is costing US taxpayers billions of dollars every month, which McCain wants to continue indefinitely. The stature of the United States has been irreparably tarnished by the authorization of torture by the White House, Justice Department and Department of defense. The US economy is in serious decline or recession. Lack of enforcement and removal of regulations have led to corporate scandals robbing millions of pensioners and shareholders of billions of dollars. Unemployment has reached levels not seen in decades. Fraud and mismanagement in the housing and finance sectors have led us to the point of unprecedented government bailouts at taxpayer expense. Failed management in critical emergency preparedness agencies have left New Orleans and the Gulf Coast areas in shambles that the areas may never recover from. Criminal misconduct and violations of the law have been found or linked to virtually every major federal government agency, including the Office of the Vice President and other offices in the White House.
Now the GOP and McCain campaign are asking the US electorate to continue with another US President who shows the same lack of intellectual depth and moral fiber as George W. Bush. The voters need to ask whether they really want to take that risk. Perhaps they should put the movie “Dumb & Dumber” on their DVD players, watch it very carefully, and then decide whether they want such mentally deficient characters running the country for the next four years, or would they rather confine their entertainment to the movie screen.
Before making a choice of the person who will lead the US for the next four years or more, I would want to carefully examine their credentials and intellectual capacity. It will take someone much smarter than the average guy to dig us out of the terrible mess that the current administration has created. I, for one, would prefer to check to see if there is water in the pool before diving in. And even then I would prefer to dive into the deep end of the pool. It is safer and there are far more options for success than diving into the shallow end.
No comments:
Post a Comment