Politics And The Red Carpet Factor

I've come to the conclusion we go about deciding who our leaders should be in exactly the wrong way.  It's what happens when you get old and things have changed to the point you no longer want to keep up.  You give in to being judgemental and un-hip or whatever the current term may be.

We should be looking at the awards shows and process. The Emmy's have just concluded.  There are so many categories it's hard to keep track, yet there are a set number of nominees for each.  Rather than the nominating and electing bodies let's substitute the American voter.  In this system we'd be able to vote for not only President and Vice President but also the supporting cast.  We'd get to vote on the quality of their policies and the people who frame them.  Actually we should be doing that now but it's been lost in the foot lights.

The lead actors and more noticeable supporting actors make the rounds of the talk shows.  Not unlike politics.  Forget the Sunday talking heads, real talk shows.  You know, like The View.  Who ever gets booked the most will of course win at the polls because it's the self promotion that counts.  Not the quality of the production.

It's no wonder the President is leading.  He wins the slobber factor - you know, when the hosts slobber all over you.  Consider candidate and spouse as interchangeable now because both are often interviewed and the judgement on one carries over to the other.

 So who has been where lately?  Obama and Michelle, of course on The View.  The Eye Candy Award consideration here. Forget that he himself suggested it.  That's part of the self-promotion.

Ann Romney on  Live! With Kelly and Michael  went for the Boxers or Briefs Award in her discussion of what Mitt wears to bed and how they squeeze their toothpaste or Michelle's being ready to be tucked in.

 Honestly, have these people no pride?  No sense of privacy? No dignity?  Do we really care?  Does it make them worthy or unworthy of the office depending on how they answer? Well, of course it does.  Why else would they do it?  It's all part of the busy schedules that preclude meeting with world leaders.

We hear about Mitt singing on horse back and are to privy to Obama singing a ditty.  We see them both on Letterman, Leno, Fallon, Entertainment Tonight and in People Magazine.  We listen to them discuss Snookie and what kind of chili they like and peanut butter and chocolate milk. Ah, it makes them more like us, more real.

They do have their limits however.  Obama refused to appear on Saturday Night Live  because it's un-presidential and Romney refused The View until pressure made him succumb.  His reluctance was most likely because he knew they like Obama better.

One last criteria to be considered is the Red Carpet Factor.  Who looks the best on awards night.  That's a tough call.  Both couples are quite stylish.  I'd guess it would boil down to a matter of taste.  Not like Hillary who often looks like she killed the drapes.

That makes it really tough when you walk up the red carpet and the polls are tied. What will break it?

It obviously won't be opinions on substance like terrorism or jobs or the economy.  It's just too tough to ferret out the truth, to think things through and make an informed decision.

More likely it will be, "He looked hot on The View" or "Piers Morgan didn't have him on", things that really matter.  Why sweat the small stuff?

Mr. President, What About US?

As the President made his speech to the U.N. today I wondered how many of the world leaders in attendance were feeling miffed by the lack of his personal attention.  Maybe what they might have wanted to say face to face is just some of that noise he prefers to block while he tries to avoid more bumps in the road.  After all, Whoopie, Babs and company make for much smoother travel.

That being said, he really missed a great opportunity in talking with the ladies of the day.  He could have taken his U.N. speech and parsed it for domestic consumption and explained a few things to us.

Let's take his comments about Islam and interject the good ole U.S. of A. into them.  I'll take a portion of his statement and put my terms in parentheses.  For instance:

Let us remember that Muslims (American voters ) have suffered the most at the hands of extremism.

A politics based only on anger - one based on dividing the world (country) between us and them - not only sets back international (political) cooperation, it ultimately undermines those who tolerate it. All of us have an interest in standing up to these forces.

Maybe most importantly:

Together, we must work together towards a world (country ) where we are strengthened by our differences, and not defined by them. That is what America embodies, and that is the vision we will support.

Mr. President, listen to your own words - and mine and apply them to your country before trying to apply them to the entire world.  If you still don't get it I'll post a video.

The $70,000 Denial

It's true, some times, that desperate times call for desperate measures.  But this?

The entire middle east plus has been erupting in a wave of anti-American rage for better than a week now.  We've gone from blaming it on the video the Islamists say they are protesting to admitting that at least the attack on the consulate in Libya was indeed an act of (gasp) war.

Still the video is being used as the excuse for the rampages that are still taking lives. What to do to?  How do we convince the angry mobs that the United States government was in no way involved with the making of the video and that it deplores the disparagement of any religion?  Are we missing a point here?

Why bother?  They aren't going to listen number one.  Number two, 99% of those protesters haven't, and never will, even see the video.  It seems just a few words from their Imams is enough.  What might those words be?  Protest the video?  Protest against the Americans for they have insulted Mohammad? Probably neither.  I'd guess more likely it's something along the lines of,  "We've got the momentum - keep it going!  Death to the infidels!  Death to America!"

With that in mind, why in the world did the State Department spend $70,000 to produce a video reiterating the joint statements of President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton and distribute in Pakistan alone?

Well, they had to something, right?  Actually I thought the whole idea was border line groveling. It will fall on deaf ears and actually I think it makes us look less than sincere. Besides, isn't it time to accept the video for what it is - an excuse to riot!  Put out a video on the unacceptability of that!


 

 Even though it's an exercise in futility I'd like to think we could have produced something that smacked of something at least approaching sincerity! Neither Obama nor Clinton have one iota of passion in their voices as they speak.  Well, it was a quick and dirty.

Then why bother?  It's not the money.  $70,000 is chump change.  It's the embarrassment of trying to do something in seconds that hasn't been done over centuries and missing the point to boot.  To add insult to injury, it was done on the cheap.  Just hope this is another video the Pakistanis won't see!

Romney - Why I Wonder

I've spent the last several years articulating why I don't think President Obama is suited for his job.  I haven't changed my mind.  Today, however, I'm going to share a few thoughts about Mitt Romney.

First, what doesn't matter to me.  The fact that he's wealthy or Mormon or not very warm and fuzzy doesn't matter to me at all. That he had his own version of Obamacare doesn't matter nor does his flip flopping on issues.  All politicians, except tea party types, flip flop when it's expedient.  He doesn't speak particularly well, but neither does Obama without his teleprompters.  Doesn't matter.

What I do wonder is really pretty basic.  It goes to his ability to lead.  Does he have that skill or would he be just another leader who governs by sound bite?

He is reputed to have been a highly successful businessman.  Perhaps his wealth is testimony to that but I don't see his success in business translating to success in politics.

He may have been able to create  business plans to save troubled companies but he has yet to lay out a plan to save a troubled nation.

As is true with most politicians, he is loyal to those who have stuck with him through thick and thin.  However, if those advisers he would have to choose as President are no more astute regarding what's going with the country then his current advisers are with his campaign I've no reason to have faith in his  ability to choose top notch cabinet members.

The race is virtually a dead heat.  He is correct about one thing, a recent revelation that has come about purely by accident - whether or not we want to be a nation driven by individual effort and the freedoms that allow it or a nation driven by government demanded distribution of that which the successful have earned to the less successful.  On that matter, to me, there is no choice.  And it scares me.

Elections these days are poll driven.  Romney has his pollsters.  Are they finding different results no one knows about?  If not, why aren't the polls being paid attention to and adjustments made?  Why are the same advisers kept on?

If Romney runs his campaign with a deaf ear will he not run the country the same way?  If he makes gaffes week in and week out why would we expect them not to continue into his presidency?  How bad does one need to be to cause similar unrest like we're experiencing at the moment?

He ran for the presidency four years ago and lost to a weak candidate.  I'd like to have seen some evidence that he learned from what cost him the nomination then.  I've seen no evidence that he has.

I'm really disappointed with the Republicans.  I'm disappointed in the men who have led in other venues and could lead this country who chose not to run.  I'm disappointed in the slate of candidates they put before us.  I'm disappointed in the candidate that has been chosen.

I don't know if I have another four years, but Hub and I are already in our  'how are we going to make do' mode.  It is not a comfortable place to be.  There are innumerable reasons I want to see a Republican victory and yes, it has to do with ideology.  I just don't see the current crop of candidates, be it House, Senate or the presidency being able to carry it off.

How I wish there was a 'none of the above' to vote for by default.

Will Satire Prevent Violence?

Friday 20 French embassies in Muslim countries will be closed.  It is a precaution because the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo has published illustrations of a naked Prophet Mohammad including a reference to the film that is causing the current unrest.  Why Friday?  After Friday prayers is the usual time to call for protests.  Tell me these events are unplanned!

Actually, the magazine takes jabs at just about everybody, including Mohammad, all the time.  It's what they do.  Needless to say the French government isn't too keen on the idea because of the current climate across the Muslim world.  Especially considering just last November the Paris offices of the publication were firebombed after a front page assault on Mohammad.

Man, I can just see the editorial staff sitting around with a couple bottles of fine French wine coming up with this.  The timing to create more chaos is perfect.  The French do require some understanding!  Or maybe it's just satirists.

In a way, however, I admire their courage. It's a delicious poke in the eye to the mobs of radical Islams who respond like Pavlovian dogs to whatever they're told to protest. This does not diminish the tragedy of the lives lost in Benghazi nor the property lost in all the other countries that have endured these outbreaks of savagery.  But it does let them know we're sick and tired of these tantrums every time they claim to have their feelings hurt.  I cannot think of one other religion in the world that reacts in this manner.  These people who kill and maim and basically  enslave their own, especially women, for infractions not even considered wrong doing in the rest of the world.  If they'd grow up and behave like civilized human beings, perhaps the poking would cease.

I hope no more are killed over the protest of French satirists, though I doubt the world will be so lucky.  We need to remember the beginning og the Serenity Prayer ~

God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change; courage to change the things I can and the wisdom to know the difference.

Accept that we cannot change the way these people act upon every preceived insult. But to go groveling for their forgiveness every time it happens solves nothing. They are never appeased.  They over react because they get world wide attention.  We over react hoping to calm them, which we can't.

That poke in the eye though, no matter how unwise, just feels darn good.