The Face In The White House Is Ours

It's times like these that I really miss ole Bacchus and our daily walks.  It was during the quiet of the early morning and my mind was fresh.  I allowed it to wander along with the dog.  I had the time to sort through things that puzzled me or bothered me or just interested me.  I've been too long without.  That once luxurious time is gone now, put to other less compelling uses.  My ability to reason things through is more constrained now and I find myself more and more confounded.

For instance, today, as I brace myself for one more debate, I wonder what more can be said that hasn't already been hashed to death.  Will the two little boys once more take their balls and go home while the other two languish in obscurity?

Watching the Republicans implode has made me wonder just which is the face we want in the White House?  Which face would put the best face on the nation?  For that is exactly what the Occupy the White House movement is all about.  Us.  And what the world thinks of us.

Forget the President for the moment.  We already know what he is and what the world thinks of him and therefore us.  Let's think about those who would replace him, particularly the leaders at the moment.  Romney and Gingrich.

Neither are off to a very good start by virtue of the activities of their surrogates - the super pacs.  It seems a shame the candidates can't win the voters with solutions to our problems rather than having to diminish one another.  But diminish they do.  That tells me they don't have any solutions to begin with.  Just rhetoric.  Empty at that.

Beyond the questionable accuracy of the attack ads we have to sort through the padded resumes that are put before us.  Had any one of us in the real world padded our resumes like the candidates do we'd never have worked a day in our lives.  That is if a potential employer had the sense to see through our bloviating.

Why are we so gullible?  Why are we swayed by mean spirited half truths such as the ones continually coming from Gingrich?  Do we really want to sign off on these 'fundamental' changes he's so fond of touting?  If we do, can he deliver?  Is this personality of extremes in both ideas and temperament really representative of us?

Mr. Romney is another issue.  We're to believe that his 'experience' is the elixir of success.  In actuality his proposals differ little from what we already have. Tentative and vague.  This isn't the face of America of the past, though it seems common place now.

We tend to forget that none of the fixes proposed are going to happen over night and I don't think we're prepared for that truth. We seem to be drawn to the outrageous rather than the pragmatic.  We're in search of instant gratification where none exists. We're not listening to what the candidates are really saying nor are they listening to what we're asking of them.

The end result will boil down to the media.  They giveth and they taketh away.  They made Obama and as happens with all administrations, they are now reviled when they finally do their job.  Gingrich hasn't even waited to gain the office before he beginning his repudiation.

It makes me wonder if it matters at all who is elected.  People like me will continue to have blog fodder because promises are being ignored.  The whole process reminds me of any number of evening gab fests where the host and guests shout at one another incessantly, no one listens, no one hears and the segment is a total waste of time.

What can be done to change the tenor of the discussions so sorely needed?  I haven't a clue. Even if Bacchus were still here and we were still walking, I don't think we could go far enough to sort it out.

Newt and Barack - Brothers Under The Skin?

One is a shade taller and darker, one is quite a bit heavier but that's all superficial.  They have more in common than not.

Both love to hear themselves talk.  Both think they are far more brilliant than the rest of we mere mortals.  Both think it's their destiny to be President and have their way with us.  What a choice.

Obama will stake his claim tonight.  It will be political theater to be sure.  There will be applause lines, lines for which to cheer.  Hearty handshakes and hands being sat upon.  This of course will be the State of The Democratic Campaign speech.

Newt too needs this type adoration to flow his way.  He was in a snit today because the audience was asked to remain silent during last night's debate and did so.  Now Newt says he'll do no more if that is to be the rule.  Oh, my.

Bret Stephens asked in his Wall Street Journal column this morning  that if this election is as important as everyone is saying, where are the Republicans who could actually win it?  Could reluctant wives not be convinced the future of country is worth it?  I know how grueling the campaign can be.  Heck, we wallow in it or it wouldn't be such.  Still, the country needs better than it has or is being offered.

Michelle Obama has allegedly said that our country doesn't deserve her husband.  I actually agree with her but for the exact opposite reason than she intended.  I can say the same for Newt, Mitt, Rick and Ron, too.  We don't deserve them.  Or do we?  I'd like to think we deserve better but maybe we don't.

When even the top tier of individuals who could win with good reason refuse to step up to the plate, something is being said about the will of our country to regain it's stature in the world.

If leaders aren't willing to lead, who do we follow?  That which is left.  The Newt's and Mitt's and Obama's who's interest in the office is more for personal glorification than the forwarding of a nation.  One used to be a business man.  How does what he did at Bain work for the country?  How does a man who is reputed by people of his own party to not have the temperament nor ability to lead going to fix anything?  Especially when there are no applause lines.

Maybe, as Stephens suggests, the worst of all in this election scenario are those who could run and should run yet refuse to do so.

Is patriotism being redefined as well as the Constitution?

Does Ambition Trump Morality?

I have never witnessed anything quite as bazaar as this primary season!  It is driving home the idea that I am a dinosaur, my ideals belong to another era long gone.

Okay, Perry is gone.  Was he ever really there?  Who's left? Romney, Paul, Gingrich and Santorum.  Why is it I'm not feeling any better about the field?

I've been listening to the talking heads dissecting Marianne Gingrich's expose.  It really isn't news except for the details.  Everyone knows Newt is a philanderer.  It has always been part of his baggage.

So why is everyone so surprised that the former Mrs. has chosen this point in time to make an issue of it?  Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned!  What I don't get is why the 'Christian Conservatives' who are so against abortion for any reason and gay marriage seem willing to give these politicians a pass on their personal morality?

I was astounded when I heard Dana Perino and Monica Crowley defending him to Megan Kelly today.  Crowley suggested it's not the scandal that's the issue but how the candidate handles it. Besides, they said, this happened long ago.  So did the alleged transgressions by Herman Cain yet they weren't as benevolent to him.  Is it that he denied it rather than admitting it?

Gringrich himself even said his infidelity at the time he was hammering Clinton on his wasn't the same because he didn't lie under oath.  Clinton did.  Back to the definitions I guess.  It depends on what the definition of infidelity is.  I didn't know there was more than one.

I guess I could say that to expect lies from politicians is a given.  That to expect many are less than morally unimpeachable is a given. Is it a given this is the new normal?  Or the long standing one for that matter.

I know I'm from the age of Ally Oop, the time traveling prehistoric from Moo, when I'm offended by a candidate that can look me in the eye and say, "So what? It's a given."

The moralists scream bloody murder when our Marines show the poor taste of urinating on the corpse of an enemy who moments before tried to kill them yet where are they when a serial adulterer and advocate of 'open marriage' wants to be President of our country?

Is there a high ground any more?  Or is it a given that there isn't?  These men running for President should be the ultimate role model.  Instead we are presented with liars and cheats.
It's no wonder so many unions, politicians, even clergy and police, let alone Hollywoodites and mega athletes behave with impunity.  The moral compass no longer exists.  Maybe it's back in Moo with Oop and me.

I Dreamed A Dream

I'm depressed.  I'll admit it.  As Newt Gingrich has crept to within two points of Mitt Romney in the polls, my depression deepens.  The best candidate is gone. Jon Huntsman.  He wasn't conservative enough.  Pragmatic didn't count nor did the most reasonable and doable tax plan nor a real foreign policy based on actual experience.

For a long time I thought it would be rather cool if we could take the best from each candidate and stitch them together into some sort of lovable one.  In reality, though, we'd still have gotten  the Frankenstein monster.  It depresses me.

I find myself a voter without a candidate.  I have doubt that Mitt Romney can beat Obama unless something catastrophic should happen that would finally persuade people enough is enough.  Turning down the pipeline to favor the environmentalists isn't going to do it. Even if Iran would be foolish enough to actually torpedo one of our aircraft carriers, as they're threatening, it would do nothing but start another war.  In our convoluted way of thinking we'd no doubt re-elect Obama to lead it - from behind of course.

The remaining Republicans, other than Ron Paul believe it or not, don't show me anything in the way of leadership or ideas that make sense if they even have any.  Their expertise seems to be in tearing one another down which does nothing more than plant more doubt.  Of course that's the intent, isn't it?  Mr. Paul, too, has weaknesses that shouldn't be overlooked.

I don't think any of the third party movements have a chance.  They'll pull voters away from the two parties; who they'll hurt the most depends on who they run.  But they will pull votes.

So what is a person like me to do?  I cannot vote for Obama.  I cannot vote for Gingrich or Santorum and would have to close my eyes and hope for the best if I went for Romney.  We still have no idea exactly who and what he is.  He just looks better than the others. I'm depressed.

I'm more than depressed.  I'm angry.  Michelle Obama has nothing on me.  I'm an angry white woman.  Angry that Congress still doesn't get it and doesn't care.  They mock us with their behavior.  The administration mocks us with their defiant trashing of the Constitution.  The media mocks our intelligence. Our enemies mock our very existence.

The election should be our out.  Unfortunately it won't be a mock election for even the candidates mock us with their exaggerations and half truths.

I dreamed a dream in time gone by, when hope was high and life worth living.               Les Mis

Whatever happened to those times gone by?

Boring As A Disqualifer?

Desperate times call for desperate measures.  The candidates will do anything to dissuade the electorate from selecting Romney as the Republican candidate.  Even to the extent of calling the kettle black when they're the pot!

Consider Rick Santorum calling him "bland and boring" , therefore we should not vote for him. After all, McCain and Gore were boring and they both lost!  Now there is sound reasoning.  This from Rick Santorum?  I hadn't noticed that he was Mr. Excitement.  Mr. Odd perhaps, but hardly Mr. Excitement.  Besides, what is more boring this day and age than a sweater vest?

On the other hand, Romney himself is caving to pressure on his impeccable three piece suit image.  He's taken to dressing in jeans and button downs for campaign appearances.  Is he defeating his own intent by wearing Tommy Bahama jeans rather than Wranglers?  I will certainly keep that in mind when I'm ready to pull the lever.

Newt isn't to be forgotten either.  His bone to pick as all else is failing is the idea that Romney  (gasp) speaks French!  Just like John Kerry, that Liberal elitist who also lost! Jon Huntsman speaks Mandarin.  What does that make him?  I stumble with high school Spanish - but then I'm not running for anything.

Santorum suggested Romney, with his perceived stand offishness, too resembles Obama to be electable.  Here I thought Obama was the epitome of hope and change and his following  was  cult like in its fervor.  Well, that may have been true during the campaign but since being in the White House his stand offishness is self evident.  It seems to me he's never really stopped stirring the pot in campaign mode.  If there's anything he's standoffish about it's governing.

There are reasons I'd prefer another candidate than those above.  As far as those are concerned, however, this man who seems bland and boring has been successful in business to the point where he can buy and sell most of us.  Forget, for a moment how that was achieved. That's another subject entirely.  This man who is bland and boring turned a failing Olympics into a dynamic success.  This man who is bland and boring has put together a political organization that is leaving the other candidates in the dust.

If this man who is bland and boring can put his nose to the grindstone and govern the country with a steady hand and a meaningful, if not perfect, agenda can he be all bad? Sorry Mr. Santorum and Gingrich,  there are scores of differences between Romney and Obama that are actually meaningful. Perhaps you'd be better served by pointing out the same about yourselves.