Ferguson burns, the national media has a collective orgasm

So another day, another riot in America. The dust had far from settled on the decision of the Ferguson grand jury when the rioters were already out on the streets of the small town in Mo. vented their collective distaste for the Jury's decision. I can easily understand the frustration of the protesters. But it seems to me that there is a more serious issue to address here, and that issue if media complicity in the fires that are raging in Ferguson.

I spent most of the day yesterday watching the coverage of the events in Ferguson from the safe vantage of my bedroom television and frankly, what I saw disgusted in ways that surprised me. Sure, this is an important news event that is being closely watched all over the United States, and even in places abroad. But the coverage of Ferguson yesterday begs the question: when is enough enough?

The press seemed to be collectively salivating like hungry lions at the prospect of a savage riot breaking out if the Jury's findings "went the wrong way." Apparently the media got its wish, because hours later Ferguson was on fire, a fire that the media must take more than a little responsibility for. Let's call it the fire of the agitated broadcasters...

Should We Send Troops to Battle ISIS?

The talk these days is about boots. Boots marching off to foreign soil, yet again. Boots on the ground. Boots in the trenches and alleys on Iraq, where the terror group ISIS has made headway in the wake of an Iraqi army that was obviously asleep at the wheel.

Boots on the desert soil of Iraq fighting ISIS. Not a good idea. There are any number of other, far better options open to the U.S. and it’s “allies,” which these days seem to include a lot of very strange bedfellows.

If the U.S. wants to accomplish something against ISIS it would be well advised to arm the Kurds to the proverbial hilt, who know the enemy, who understand what it takes to fight them , and most importantly, how to defeat them. And up-to-date weaponry must be rushed to these fighters. We’ve been ignoring the Kurdish fighters for too long. ISIS informs us now that we have been ignoring them at our own peril.

While America Sleeps

President Obama has been playing a lot of golf lately and he’s been getting plenty of criticism for it. But is his attention really elsewhere? Or is he feverishly trying to figure out what the deal is with ISIS and Iraq/Syria?

Last night he appeared at a press conference and informed the world that he is not about to “put the cart before the horse,” in dealing with this horrific problem. He’s too busy trying to understand the subtleties of the question.

Well, maybe I can offer some help. It’s the same help we’ve been offering for weeks now (along with politicians on both sides of the aisle, and a busload of editorial page writers). Mr. President, this is not our war yet. So it isn’t time to send in hundreds of thousand of troops to defeat the ISIS threat. But it will quickly become our problem if you do not ARM THE KURDS of northern Iraq right now, this minute. As we speak.

The Kurds are loyal and trustworthy American allies but we have not always returned that trustworthiness and loyalty. It is time to take the battle to ISIS by helping the Kurds with money, weapons and support. The American people are behind that move, Mr. President. You should be, too.

Fergsuon; death and devastation vs soccer and world peace!

Forget Ferguson, ISIS and Putin...Soccer is what we should be thinking about!
The death of Michael Brown in Ferguson...the march of ISIS in Iraq and Syria...the push of Putin in Ukraine... These are days when I can’t help wondering where the smiles have gone. And we’ve been thinking a lot about...soccer.

Maybe it’s time for everyone all over the world to lay down their arms and their agendas and concentrate on the only thing that seems to bring everyone, all over the world, together–soccer.

Yes, you read that right. So much of the world loves the sport of soccer and the U.S. has been slow to join the rest of the globe’s fascination with the flying white ball. But, it’s a fact of life that when people are playing soccer, they’re generally not killing each other. A good thing.

Maybe we should think more about the rumble of the crowd and the flight of the ball into that far-off goal post the next time we’re inclined to concentrate on the death and devastation that seems to be the only thing on our plates these days...

Don Lemon of CNN pushed around in Ferguson...

A few days ago I was sitting around, watching the festivities in Ferguson, MO. when we saw the spectacle of CNN reporter Don Lemon being pushed back behind a barricade by what seemed like a very angry Ferguson police officer. The look on the officer’s face suggested that Lemon would be well advised to listen to the officer’s instructions.

Now, it turns out that this very officer has been suspended, following the reveal of a videotape in which said officer rants and raves about gays and women and the generally good idea of “killing people.”

We’re not taking sides in the Ferguson debate because, like everyone else, we’re waiting to see the results of what will be a very careful (and media scrutinized) investigation. But the news that this particular toxic cop has been on the job for thirty years seems especially distressing. How can a police department claim to be working for the benefit of its citizens when behavior such as this is tolerated, if not embraced, by the supervisory staff and government officials of Ferguson? Just thinking about that...

What really happened in Ferguson?

Days and days of protest and violence in Ferguson MO. have resulted in a better understanding of racial prejudice and intolerance in America...or not.

What I have witnessed over these last two weeks is a wild media frenzy and a widening gap between the parties in the confrontation. Each side blames the other for transgressions–supposed “proof” of police brutality or “proof” of the culpability of the dead young black man surfaces almost on a daily hour. Videotapes furnished by both sides demands attention and these tapes are dutifully offered for public scrutiny by a hungry press corps, eager to hand us the next “major break.”

The Chief of Police of Ferguson releases a store video revealing someone who “looks like” the dead black man, robbing a convenience store. There was no choice but to release the tape, he tells the press. The carnival rolls on. Al Sharpton is already in MO. “helping” the family of the dead man. The Governor of MO. has already apparently decided where the blame lies.

And the process of investigation has barely even started. Isn’t this the time for everyone to step back a pace and let the truth bubble up to the surface? Do any of us really know yet what happened that terrible night in Ferguson? Do any of us really want to know? Or are we all too busy pushing our own agendas? It’s time to let the process play out and see where it goes. That just might be satisfying to some. Or it might lead to even more confusion. But we owe it to the facts to wait and see where this goes.

The beheading of James Foley in Iraq...

Now I have to report the news that an American journalist has been beheaded by forces aligned with ISIS in Iraq. What do we think about this? What can any sane person think about a political movement that would resort to such a barbaric act for no other reason than to make a statement to its enemies?

And what exactly is that statement? It is nothing more than a show of power, an exhibition of brute force to be used whenever the mood fits. We are supposed to respond to this thuggish, execrable act by being cowed (as the troops of the Iraqi army were cowed when they were called upon to defend their own nation and their own people against the Isis forces).

What should our response be? At first, the West should respond by recognizing this act for what it is. And then it should respond by letting ISIS know, in any and all certain terms that this sort of behavior will not be greeted with diffidence. Instead, the West must do everything it can to cut off any, and all economic chains that support and finance this group. Let us not be confused. ISIS is now a state, and states require funding. We must insure that no further funds are siphoned off by this group, and that no Western nation allows their money to find its way to these barbarians–savages who are, indeed at the gates of democracy.

Shep Smith of Fox takes a stand on Ferguson

I was watching the spectacle of events going down in Ferguson, Mo. the other night and I was appalled at the carnival that this tragedy has become. I have seen plenty of public tragedies turn into circuses before but this one seems to carry with it a special tint of sadness. That’s because the Press has turned out in droves, in numbers we haven’t seen before, to cover...what exactly?

A group of angry protesters, incensed at the shooting of a black man by white cops, all flanked by a coterie of reporters that would seem more appropriate at a major war scene.

And into the fray has stepped the estimable talking head, Shep Smith of Fox News, who surprised everyone last night by asking the unaskable question: are the reporters and their presence doing more harm than good at this event?

At one point Smith pointed out that those with a vested interest in the riots had mostly gone home. Who was left? The police, National Guard, a few protesters and very many reporters, whose sole function seemed to be fanning the flames of an event that required their presence in the same way a flame requires the presence of a moth.

It was refreshing to hear the brave Smith opine such a thing on national television. On Fox News, no less.

Should Obama go to St. Louis?

I have some thoughts on this subject today. The rioting in Ferguson is now in its second week and show no signs of abating. Despite the pleas of community organizers and Missouri politicians, including the democratic Governor, rioters continue to set the agenda in the small city of Ferguson. Such is the anger than has taken hold following the shooting of an eighteen-year-old black man by Ferguson police.

What can be done to stop the looting and destruction?
How about a visit from the President of the United States, who, after all, was elected because he held out the promise of a nation undivided by racial animosity? Isn’t this the time–the moment for a Roosevelt-like fireside chat–when presidential leadership might actually have an effect on the heated events of the day?

A personal plea, an in-person pleas–from POTUS might be just the thing to show protesters and police, alike, that the time for reconciliation has arrived. The people of Ferguson and the people of the United States are wary of the unrest that has befallen the small city in Missouri. The president can do something about it. He should act immediately to quell the fires of outrage, and to calm the mood of the nation.

Zelda Williams bullied on social media following the suicide of her father...

America, You’ve Got Way Too Much Time on Your Hands.
This morning I woke to the news that Zelda Williams, the twenty-five year old daughter of actor Robin Williams has deleted her Instagram and Twitter accounts after users posted disturbing and offensive reactions to her father’s death.

Yes, I’m not making this up. 

How could anyone make up something as vile and obnoxious as that? I realize that the internet is supposedly anonymous, and that it’s there so users can do basically whatever they want. But do these people know no constraints on their personal behavior whatsoever? Are they just immature or is it simple stupidity? Or is it boredom? Or is it a toxic combination of all of the above? 

At any rate, there is absolutely no excuse for behavior like this, and unfortunately, this sort of thoughtless activity on the web has already caused many deaths (and will cause many more in the future). Web bullying is exactly the same as bullying. And bullies need to look in the mirror more often, if they’re looking for someone to bully.

I Remember Robin Williams

This morning I sadly–and happily–remember the great actor, Robin Williams. And I remember him personally because he played a part in my life, far away from the glitz of Hollywood television and movie studios.

 When I was a young man, growing up in New York City, I used to sit on the steep steps out in front of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, along with hundreds of Sunday strollers and tourists. There, slightly uncomfortable with my back wedged against the stiff stone of the steps, I would pass the time watching a young mime perform his smooth magic. At the end of his brief show, he would pass the hat and the people who had been watching his amazing work would eagerly support him with their quarters and dollars. The mime was always gracious, always appreciative, and he would go on to do many shows for the rest of the long afternoon. And then, the next Sunday, he would be back in the same spot.

 Robin Williams made people feel good about life, and about themselves; generations of people laughed and cried along with him. But before the big TV break, or the Academy Award, Robin Williams performed live and made people smile.

 That mime in front of the Metropolitan Museum, all those years ago, was Robin Williams. Good Night, Robin.

Mr. President, SAVE THESE PEOPLE!

I have just witnessed something that will stay with me for the rest of my life: the evacuation by helicopter of a few “fortunate” Yazidis from the mountaintop in Northern Iraq, where they have been hiding for seven long days and nights from the savage, detestable forces of ISIS below. The face of a fifteen year old girl spoke volumes about the plight of these people. I have never seen such abject terror in the face of a young child. And she was one of the “lucky” few who made it off that mountain.

A CNN reporter was on one of these helicopters helping with the evacuation. But the whole process, as he reported, was somewhat futile, since there are just a few helicopters and thousands of stranded human beings, pleading and weeping for help.

This is a holocaust in the making, President Obama. Sixty years ago the Jews of the world pleaded with President Roosevelt to take the thousands of Jews that Germany offered America and Europe. The world turned away. Six million men, women and children were slaughtered in death camps.

 And now, the same thing is happening and once again the world is being asked–begged–to come to the aid of desperate, doomed human beings. Where is the support? A few planes of relief cannot save these people. Mr. President, it is time to take the leadership in this humanitarian catastrophe. Nothing less than full commitment to save these lives will work, and history will not look kindly on America–and the world’s–failure to act. Now.

 Please pass this comment on so other people will take up the cause of these desperate people.

Will Russia invade Ukraine...?

NATO has said that they see a high probability of an outright Russian invasion of Ukraine. What is the reaction to this? This morning, I am very anxious about the state of the world, and if Vladimir Putin has his way (as apparently, the West is allowing him to do so) things are not going to get much better in the foreseeable future. The nations of the NATO alliance simply do not seem to have the stomach to stand up to Putin in any substantive way, and it’s easy to see why they don’t. Putin is a bully and he is about to bully his way into a sovereign country for one reason only–because he can.

Why is the West at such a loss to handle Putin? The reason is simple. It needs him. There are Russian oil demands to be met in Europe and the nations of Nato are reluctant to make Putin mad. America has been suffering from war-weariness after more than a decade of foreign conflict and its people are in no mood to take on the mighty Russian Bear.

So…clear field for Putin to do pretty much whatever he feels like doing. And this, friends, is exactly what he’s going to do.

 Why? Because there don’t seem to be very many reasons not to.

Should the US get involved in Iraq?

There has been a debate ongoing about whether or not we should get involved in any substantive way– in any military way–with Iraq and the present problems with the marching “armies” of ISIS. This seems to me to be a no-brainer.

There are forty thousand civilians trapped on a mountaintop in Northern Iraq and their life-choices are as follows: stay on the mountaintop and die of starvation and dehydration, or come down from the mountaintop and face certain slaughter by the ethnic cleaning maniacs of ISIS. If this situation were happening in Europe and forty thousand Americans were at risk, the planes would already be headed to the conflict area.

I’m not suggesting that we need to send the cavalry in. Modern technological warfare has produced enough planes and drones and computer systems to be able to render ISIS DOA from a relatively safe distance. We need to get those planes over ISIS NOW.

And we need to arm the Kurds IMMEDIATELY. This is their country and they want to defend their own land. They are not asking for American boots. Just American support from the air and American guns for self-defense. We either choose to help now or face the prospect of battling a terror state later. Three thousand American casualties after 9/11...lessons have been taught. Have we learned them?

Where is Lindsay Lohan when we need her?

I have been wracking our brains lately, wondering where the previously ubiquitous Lindsay Lohan has been hiding during all these terrible days and nights.

While the world seems to crumble before our eyes–the Mideast is exploding with violence and death, the Russian Bear is once again on the march, doctors are catching Ebola from patients in Africa and on and on...where is the girl everyone seems to love to hate and love and hate and love?

Lindsay, please let us know what you think about the on-going crisis in this country and that country. We need to hear your opinions again, because, frankly, we no longer trust CNN and Fox to give us the fair and balanced view of things. And lets face it, we’re tired of all the grit and gore. We long for the good old days when “news” consisted of nothing more devastating than your comings and goings–and also the comings and goings of your great contemporaries, the Kardashians and the Hiltons. Come to think of it, all this international news has pretty much pushed the Kardashians to the back pages, too.

Please ladies (and the gentlemen who stand behind you), come back to the front pages and the nightly news broadcasts, and the pages of our favorite blogs. We won’t put you down anymore or call you vapid and meaningless. These headlines are giving us a headache, ladies. We need you now. Please, it’s a matter of international consequence...

Anti-Israel Boycott By Celebrities

The Anti-Israel Boycott by music and movie personalities is again in the news.
I've been mulling over the recent spate of celebrities who have joined (or supposedly joined) a well-organized boycott of The State of Israel.

Many of these performers have cancelled dates in Israel after being pressured by pro-boycott groups.
The list reads like a what-the--#@@# of well-known singers, writers, actors and performers, including Elvis Costello, Carlos Santana, Alice Walker and others.

The news isn’t that these performers and artists have supported the boycott. The news is the number of performers who have not. Elton John appeared in concert recently in Israel and proclaimed that “no one” is going to tell him where to play. Ditto Neil Young. And Madonna. And the list goes on.

Why the divide? Artists have long argued that art must stand above politics and many artists today seem to have forgotten that notion. 

The latest laugh from the anti-Israel boycott crowd is that scientist Stephen Hawking has endorsed the boycott. After learning of his own participation, Hawking made it clear that his supposed membership in this fraternity had come as news to himself. Another day, another boycott...or not.

The Impeachment of Barack Obama: 2014 campaign strategy for the Republicans.

I have been following the latest strategic moves by the Republican Party and I’ve got some interesting observations for this spanking new Monday morning.

It’s not secret that the Republicans are poised to make a big splash in the midterm elections, in less than a year. The Obama administration is mired in the usual second-term blues and the nation seems ready to throw anyone associated with that administration to the political wolves.

But, like Richard Nixon, who was on the cusp of a historic second-term victory in 1972, the Republicans just can’t seem to take their imminent victory for granted. They need something more, something big, something that will assure their history-making victory.

And that thing they need is called impeachment of the president. Many Republicans think that a big, public show–impeachment–will give them the edge they need to assure that victory. Look for more and more talk of impeachment as the election draws closer. And more and more talk of the present administration’s “impeachable offenses.”

This is, of course, nonsense. Obama may not be the greatest president in U.S. history but has he committed...impeachable offenses? Impeachment has become a political tool, not a stop-gap against criminal offenses. That’s not what the founding fathers intended it to be. And using it for political purposes is not only dangerous. It’s...silly. And it may backfire on those who decide to jump on the bandwagon.

Who was America’s Best President

If you ask me–that is one of the most ridiculous questions making the rounds of the TV politico-chat fests these days. That question is everywhere, as if things are so bad in this country that the only logical questions is: when, in our history, did we do so much better, when was our judgment so much better tuned to the times?

Washington? Check. Lincoln? Check? Reagan? Check, if you sit on the right side of the national divide. Clinton? Check if you sit on the left side of the national divide? Obama? This is probably a bad time to ask.

But that’s the problem, and that’s why the question is totally irrelevant. The times are the times, and the times are special to the times. One era’s president is another era’s disaster. If you take one of these supposedly great presidents and give them a whole other set of problems, their reactions might be altogether unsatisfactory. Wars, technology, culture–they all change with the times and presidents react to the times they’re serving in, and also to the people they served. Opinions change, outlooks change, politics certainly changes. We need to start looking at presidents in the context of their times and stop wondering what it would be like if they were still around to steer the wobbly ship of state.
It wouldn’t be that surprising to find that one of those “great” presidents from a hundred years ago would today be attacked and reviled for being ineffectual, confused, do-nothing, do too-much, socialist, communist, fascist etc.
President Obama, anyone?

Where is Hillary?

I have been wondering about this. There have been reams and reams of newsprint, and hours and hours of airtime spent dissecting the whereabouts of the President of the United States during the recent spate of world catastrophes. The polls have not been kind to President Obama, as he seems to put the war in the Middle East, the bombing of the Malaysian plane, and numerous other serious world events, on the back-burner, travelling the country from one end to another, raising funds for the Democratic Party and seeming oblivious the sound of Rome falling.

But another questions arises: where is Hillary Clinton, the presumed party nominee in 2016? Clinton was all over the map before all these word events took center state. Out in the field in what looked very much like a campaign offensive, Clinton was selling her new autobiography and sounding very much like a candidate. But now, the Clinton camp has gone seriously silent.

And that’s good news for the Clintons, and good news for the country. Because, at a time like this, candidates for president–presumed and not–should not be debasing the national and world conversation with selling points for a presidential campaign. Clinton is doing exactly the right thing by remaining quiet–in the same way that former president Bush has refused to comment publicly on controversial Obama administration decisions.

If Clinton really wants to be President of the United States she would be well advised to keep out of the fray for a while. Because, as they say in TV land, everything you say on the campaign trail can, and will be used against you.

Raising the minimum wage...?

America always prides itself on being a generous country. Americans are always willing to to do their best when people around the world need help. We're the first with supplies and manpower when disasters of all severity and variety come to foreign lands. Well, I have some news for you. When it comes to helping our own people? Not so much. The "debate" over raising the minimum wage has taken on a peculiarly nasty tone of late and Republicans, in particular seem to think that people should kind of appreciate working for starvation wages in this richest of nations. Maybe its time to reduce the Congressional pay down to minimum wage and see how the Representatives and Senators feel about the issue then?

Where are the Republican front runners?

The presidential campaign of 2016 is upon us  - I realize that this is hard to comprehend–when did presidential elections start three years in advance?) and the Democrats clearly have their candidate in place (barring the appearance of some “other” candidate, of course: place smiley, winky, lol here).

Where is the Republican who will lead the conservative charge into the next election? The Republicans would seem to be in a good position to challenge the Dems. They are poised to take control of both house of Congress in the next off-year election. The popularity of the president is at all time lows. The country appears to be in somewhat of a war-weary, economy-strained funk.

According to Republican-watchers, the time is right for a change in the White House. Yet there seems to be no serious contender for the throne. The party is fractured in a way that recalls the glory days of the Democrats. Dems are famous for fighting within their own ranks, but this “civil war” between Republicans is really something dramatic and new. With each passing day, it seems less likely that the Republicans are going to fall behind a single banner carrier. And their time is passing quickly. 2016 is around the corner, just three short years away. The Democrats are already drawing up the blueprints for eight fresh years at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

What makes Washington tick?

I have a proposal to make. I want to give a million dollars to the man or woman who can explain what makes Washington tick. I write about the upside down universe of D.C. politics. There’s never a shortage of things to skewer. D.C. is the most dysfunctional place in America, maybe the world. That million dollars will only be awarded if the man or woman who takes the challenge can explain to our liking exactly how things got so screwed up in the Capital. And the million will be awarded only if some super rich donor comes along and is willing to give me the big bucks so that I can pass it on to the worthy winner. All right, so all of the stuff you’ve just read it baloney, nonsense, untrue. There is no billion, there will be no million. I just made it all up, out of thin air.

Just like all the stuff you read about Washington and it’s pols. Wouldn’t it be nice if, just for one day, everything about the workings of D.C. became super transparent? If we were able to really understand the way the mechanisms work? If the politicians on Capital Hill acted like the grownups the nation so desperately needs?

Dream on. And don’t cash that million dollar check. It ain’t coming...

Israel is GUILTY!

Israel is guilty! This morning, I have something really important to say. Israel is guilty! It is past time to admit what we’ve all been thinking. Yes, it’s true that Hamas has been raining down bombs on the cities and civilians of Israel for years and years. And, yes, it’s true that they are responsible for the deaths of three innocent young Israeli boys. And, yes it is true that they have consistently refused to negotiate in good faith with Israel because, as they have stated again and again, their goal is the destruction and disappearance of the Israeli state.

Still...

Israel has no right to carry on a defensive war against Hamas. It has no right to engage in rude behavior with it’s supposed “enemy,” an enemy that does nothing but attack it on a daily and hourly basis. Israel has shown no inclination to let its cities be successfully attacked by Hamas bombs, which are, after all, nothing less than deeply-felt presents from Gaza. How incredibly nasty of Israel, and how very unappreciative these Israelis have proven to be. After all these years.

So now, as Secretary of State Kerry has said, after Israel has shown itself to be unwilling to carry on a TRUE pinpoint operation, it is time to face the fact that Israel is guilty. Think about that for a moment.

Israel, it is time to own up to your culpability. Lay down your weapons, bring back your troops, and nullify your Iron Dome against oncoming Hamas rockets. It’s the only decent thing to do. Everyone will feel a lot better when you do these things. The world will respect you more than it does now.

Putin and World War III

Ok...Oh no. Seems like Vladimir Putin is deeply afraid of the West. In the wake of increasing distaste from the civilized world over the downing of the Malaysian airliner last week, Putin has announced that he will increase the strength of the Russian military to “counter” the threat posed by the Nato Alliance.  I have been writing about Putin and his hysterics. Please visit us there.

Puhleeeze... Is Putin the most deluded leader on the world stage? Or is he speaking to his constituents? Or both? It is likely that this statement is designed to placate the Russian oligarchs, who have placed their dirty bets on Putin’s staying power (despite their recent queasiness over Vlad’s warmongering overtures). Putin needs the oligarchs to stay in power and if there’s one thing the world has learned, it’s that Putin will do anything within, or without of, the bounds of decency to keep his gold-leafed throne in the Kremlin.

Is Vlad really looking for World War Three, or is he more sensible than that? Look at history, folks. Sensibility might not be foremost in Putin’s mind.

Russia, Putin, and Malaysia Airlines MH17

Did you ever have the feeling that the trusted Uncle who told you he would “take care of all the details” wasn’t quite to be trusted with all those details? That’s the way I feel this morning, looking at the handling of the Ukraine crash site by the Russian-sympathizing “separatists.”

I’ve written about the crash of the commercial Malaysian airliner that took the lives of nearly three hundred innocent civilians from all over the world. It’s pretty clear who has his name on the rocket that killed all those people, and that very culpable leader is sitting pretty in the Kremlin, telling the world that everyone but he was to blame. Expected. Sad.

But now we have the ridiculous pictures of the cleanup being taken care of the very people whose hands are so soaked in the blood of three hundred people. Who’s kidding who? The international community is not being allowed to properly survey and investigate the crime scene; instead the perpetrators and their minions are taking charge, apparently, and the likelihood of getting the proof that Putin will soon be calling for, is getting slimmer by the hour.

Look for Vlad to insist on a “full and thorough investigation,” and to promise that “those responsible will be brought to justice.” Sounds pretty much like every other rank third-rate political hack. Vlad, seller of clichés in a time of terror and tragedy.

America 45 years after the first moonwalk...

The first moonwalk took place forty five years ago and I think it’s a perfect time to reflect on where America was four decades ago, and where it is now.

When the moon landing took place all those years ago, America was in the midst of the biggest upheaval since the Civil War–an unpopular war in Vietnam was raging, the struggle for civil rights was marred by assassinations of major black and white leaders, and the nation was on the verge of its own civil destruction.

In the midst of all that, Neil Armstrong focused the attention of the nation and the world on what seemed to be the most important moment in the life of our country. And for that moment, we forgot about the strife that was threatening to undermine and destroy everything we had fought for all those years.

Today, we find ourselves similarly separated by internal and political strife. Our divided nation yearns for that one moment when we can all set aside our differences and look to a common future. Where is that moment?

Increasingly, we look away from Washington D.C. for solutions to our problems. Politicians have disappointed us one time too often and we are unable any longer take their promises of a rosy future with any seriousness.

Years ago when Richard Nixon was running for president, a desperate citizen held up a placard, begging the presidential candidate to help the nation in its hour of challenge. “Bring us together,” the placard implored. We know what followed. If the political parties of this country intend to regain any of their viability, they’d best remember that placard and what it meant–and could mean–for the good of this country.

Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17

Vlad, Vlad, Vlad. Is this any way to run a country? I have some unpleasant things to say today.
So here we have three hundred innocent civilians killed today when a Malaysian Airlines jet is shot out of the sky by what seem at the moment to be Russian separatists in Ukraine. Immediately Russia claims to have nothing to do with the downing of the plane and Vladimir Putin is on the spot once again for behaving like...the tyrant we’ve come to know and love.

Even if it turns out that the whole thing was a terrible mistake, the onus for the three hundred deaths must sit squarely on Vlad’s well-oiled shoulders. Russia has been arming these separatists for a long time and anyone with any knowledge of these punks understands too well that these are not...brilliant minds with unlimited resources for training and military expertise. The chances of something going wrong, for example accidently blowing a civilian jet out of the sky, was always present.

Give these weapons to the untrained and overeager and this is what you have. Sleep well tonight, Vlad. Your finger is on yet another tragic, world-shaking atrocity.

 

Derek Jeter's last all-star game

The All-Star game has just taken place and finally, America has something to feel good about. Derek Jeter has played his final All-Star game and this may have marked his last appearance before a national gathering, unless the Yankees make it to the World Series (that would be Jeter’s sixth sojourn). I take off my hat off to Number 2.

Jeter is everything most of our politicians are not, and this has not escaped the attention of fans of baseball and fans of sportsmanship. In all the years of Jeter’s storied career he has never been caught with his pants down, his finger in the cookie jar or any of the other embarrassing pastimes so enjoyed by many of our national political figures. He’s human just like they are, but he has found a way to present a dignified persona to the public, and for this he has been honored with the unreserved enthusiasm of baseball fans across the nation.

Jeter will go on to a fabulous post-career, whatever that turns out to be. But we will be losing a real, true spokesman for the National Pastime. That’s baseball, not politics...

The Supreme Court's supreme f***-up

A few months ago the Supreme Court of the United States issued what was probably its most asinine, idiotic and downright troubling decision in a very, very long time. It allowed organizations and individuals to basically raise and distribute unlimited amounts of cash to any and all political causes.

Of course, this has, and will, open the floodgates of special interest money to all political parties and candidates in the future. Campaign reform? Forget about that. The Court has decided, for whatever reasons, that it is in the best interest of the country that powerful, moneyed and very activist individuals and groups be permitted to hold complete and unfettered sway over the political processes of this nation.

The reaction from “the little guy?” Silence, not a peep. The reaction from the nation’s media? Silence, not a peep. The media, in fact, couldn’t have been happier with the decision because the more money injected into the process, the more colorful the process, the more interest from the voters, the higher the ratings.

As for the people? The average Joe has no idea about how his politicians get where they are–he’s got his own problems to deal with. Washington sucks etc. etc. etc.

Want to run for office? Need cash? No problem anymore, thanks the to those terribly intelligent Supremes. It’s all there for the taking. And you count on this: there will be plenty of takers...

America and soccer

Why Has America resisted the lure of soccer for so long? Suddenly Americans appeared to embrace the sport that is the most popular in the world, and the reason for that is so very simple. The United States team seemed to have a realistic chance to give a performance that would not embarrass the nation. That hadn’t really happened before.

Of course, our patriotic fervor was quickly dashed, as the American team went home, the somewhat satisfied loser. It had performed admirably, even bravely, and come thisclose to showing the world that soccer was OUR sport, too. Thisclose but not Thatclose.

Why has it taken America so long to jump on the international soccer bandwagon? Well, I’ve taken this break to look at why America has been immune to the pleasures of soccer for all these decades. And I think it all comes down–as so many things do–to politics and nationalism. America loves all things American and soccer is just not an American thing, never was, never will be. Unless we’re real contenders. This year we seemed to be.

A lot of pundits speculate that we’ve finally joined the rest of the world in our love for the sport, but that’s wishful thinking. Unless Americans have a team to cheer for, the color and fascination with soccer will abate by next year. Swish, bam, dunk, gone. Baseball, football, basketball, hockey, anyone?

Vanilla campaigns and voter apathy

Why do political parties and politicians insist on running the same deadly vanilla kind of campaigns year after year, campaign after campaign? Why do they focus on the same “safe” issues, attack the same supposed enemies, say pretty much the same thing over and over again, even when it’s apparent that nobody is listening? And why is it that, with each election cycle, we find fewer and fewer people bothering to go to the polls on election day?

The answer is boredom. 

And that boredom is the result of a voting pool that no longer cares about the message and certainly, doesn’t care about the messenger. Everything we read tells us that the great center of interest is no longer where the interest of the public lies. People want answers the the issues of 2014 and beyond. They are not finding leadership in their politicians because their politicians are following a template that has been out of date for about twenty years.

People are interested in specific questions, not generalities, and today’s politicians are responding in exactly the way their predecessors did–with turgid, stock answers, and generalized pabulum. Voters are responding by decrying all parties and all present leadership, Democratic and Republican.

Until politicians recognize that voters are living in a digital world where information is easy to get and almost impossible to hide–and until they realize that engaged citizens want specifics, not fairytales–the numbers of registered party members will continue to decline, and voter apathy will continue to soar.

Scandal?! What Scandal?!

A lot of people are dithering about all the supposed “scandals” of the Obama administration but I think it is time to put all this scandal blather in perspective. I’ve never been a big fan of the Obama administration, to start. I think Obama is a bit in over his head and the people surrounding him seem to believe that the key to crisis management is one long siesta or, maybe, a few games of golf. Which isn’t to say that things would be better if the president were out bombing every country on the map, as some of his critics loudly and obnoxiously charge.

Blasting the president has become the national rage. When did this begin? To be precise, it began forty years ago, with the Nixon scandals and the threat of presidential impeachment. Well, dear readers, that was a REAL scandal and America, a scandal tha...t rocked the core of America and the truth is that we all got so used to the idea that the president might not be a knight in shining armor, that we began to suspect–in fact, EXPECT–that our Executive was filled with connivers, plotters and downright dishonest men and women. 

Today, the idea of an administration engaged in one scandal after another seems normal, but is it really? Sometimes, it might help to search back in history and reflect on what a real scandal looks like. Watergate was not Clinton, and it isn’t Obama, either. We all need a sharp dose of perspective–something we’re certainly not getting these days from Cable News.

John Boehner needs to get a life!

John Boehner is becoming the master of the Capitol Hill stunt. In recent days the Speaker of the House has suggested that President Obama had exceeded his charge and become a kind of democratic dictator, skirting the desires and intentions of the Republican House by resorting to “executive orders” to govern unilaterally. Now Boehner has announced plans to “sue” the president over these orders.

The truth for all to see, is that Boehner has an important off-year election coming up–perhaps the most important off-year election in fifty years, for the Republicans. For the first time in a very long while, it is entirely possible, even probable that the Republicans will take charge of the House AND Senate, formally putting the final nail in Obama’s lame duck presidency. 

So why is Boehner so anxious to go after the teetering Obama in such a public arena as the courts? Does he believe that a frivolous lawsuit like this is going to go anywhere at all? Of course he doesn’t. If he was so convinced of Obama’s culpability he would be calling for impeachment. But, of course, a controversial call like that would put the expected election surge in November in danger because the American people have had enough of impeachment for the moment.

No, a better road to walk down is the tried-and-true public relations play, and that alone accounts for Boehner’s silly, time-wasting and potentially harmful-to-the-public’s-interests ploy. Maybe the Speaker of the House needs to find something a bit more serious to do with all that time on his hands.

Midnight Express 2

Remember the movie “Midnight Express?” Remember the drug smuggling silly American who thought it would be a good idea to smuggle drugs out of Turkey? Remember the horrific story of the events that followed, as the young Billy Hayes was subjected to the terrors and travails of the Turkish prison system? Remember how the United States government, through then Senator Jim Buckley finally got on Hayes’ side?

A perfectly innocent American former decorated Marine finds himself sitting in a Mexican prison. THIS American citizen was NOT trying to smuggle drugs into Mexico. He simply got confused at the border and accidently found himself on the Mexican side of the checkpoint. He immediately volunteered to the Mexican authorities that he had three weapons (all legally registered in the U.S) and that he had accidently strayed across the border (this happened mere yards from the American side of things). He was arrested and sent to one of Mexico’s worst prisons, where he was threatened with rape and murder.

On top of all this, the American marine, Tahmooressi, suffers from PTSD and brain trauma because of his two year service in Afghanistan. He has been in prison for weeks now and the American government has done...exactly nothing to get him out. Even Hilary Clinton has said it is time to “turn up” the volume on the Tahmooressi affair.

Where is the president? Where is the Senate? Where is the House?

It’s time to write to your representatives and to POTUS and tell them all that it’s PAST time to get our POW out of Mexico. And its time to tell our neighbors to the south that kidnapping American citizens is not going to do much to increase that tourism they so depend on.

John Boehner is a closet democrat

Flash!! John Boehner is a closet Democrat. And what’s more? He has a secret plan to get Hilary Clinton elected President of the United States. Want the proof? Look no further than his “stance” on the subject of immigration reform. 

In the last few weeks Boehner and his Republican associates have made it clear that they have no intention of tackling any kind of immigration reform in the next few months...or years...or ever. The numbers of immigrants to this country (you know...”give me your tired etc. etc.) have swelled during the last decade and real problems have accompanied the benefits. The Republican answer? Send troops to the border and shoot to keep away.

Immigrants tend to favor the Democrats, anyway. So what is Boehner’s solution to this obvious problem for the Right? Offend the immigrants at every turn and make sure they understand that if it were up to the Republicans they’d be turned away at the gates.

Is that any way to run a caucus? You betcha it isn’t. Just ask Hilary Clinton, who is going to be the beneficiary of all this Republican largesse.

Money makes the world go around....

Not that your humble servants in Washington D.C. have ever made a point of being honest, sincere, incisive and helpful but I can’t help laughing when I see where the current thinking on Hillary Clinton is heading. What? Hillary is rich? Bill Clinton earned tens of millions on the lecture circuit?

Hillary Clinton got tens of millions for writing her autobiography (actually it was just around 13 million)? The Clintons have made over one hundred million over the last ten or so years? How can that be? I thought they were little people, just like us? The right wing blitz machine has had a good old time these last few weeks “bringing the Clintons down a peg,” as one of the subtle commentators put it, and now we must all face the fact that the Clintons are doing a lot better than we are.

Well, isn’t that just the shock of the year! Is Hillary still planning to run for president after this unsettling reveal? I could have guessed that all sorts of sticky mud would be thrown early on in the 2016 race, which, let’s all face facts, has already started. But this particular issue is just way beyond the pale. Sober up, ladies and gentlemen. The Clintons are rich. They’ve been rich for a very long time. You’ve always known they were rich. Now can we discuss whether or not Hillary Clinton is really suitable to be president? You know what I mean? Does she have the qualifications and temperament to lead the nation? Maybe yes, maybe no. Oh, do you find that a little too boring?

Is there hope for Washington and the Supreme Court?

Is it possible? The Supreme Court (yes, THAT Supreme Court) finally seems to have gotten something right! And it was a UNANIMOUS decision, no less. It’s enough to make us think there may be hope for... Washington, after all.

The State of California and the Obama administration wanted police to have the right to search a person’s cell phone, as if it was a business card found in a pocket, after an arrest. The case went back and forth a few times and finally ended up with the Supremes. The thinking on this subject (and I figured the general thinking was correct) that the court would side with the State of California and rule against those who argued that cell phones contain so much critical data these days they should be looked at as unique vessels. 

Yes, said the Court in this rare unanimous decision, cell phones ARE unique repositories of scads of information and should be accessed only when a warrant is issued.

Now if only the Court could get unanimous on other issues that are tearing the country apart...

Remember the good old days when Bill Clinton ran for president?

Remember how you couldn’t turn on the radio or the television without hearing or seeing something really awful about the campaign? Remember the soft, thoughtful words of talk radio hosts who sometimes seemed to be in a twenty-four hour a day Bash Bill and Hill competition?

Well, good news, folks, those grand old days are back and wouldn’t you know it, the target of all that bile is none other than that other Clinton, you know–the female one. If you’ve been paying attention during the last few weeks you’ve noticed a determined uptick in the number of negative stories about Ms. Clinton and her supposed campaign 2016 kick-off. And what has been the proof offered that Hillary’s popularity (and therefore campaign chances) aren’t what they used to be? 

Why, it’s not this purported scandal or that supposed excess or that insinuated rumor. It isn’t Bill’s celebrated extra-marital love life or past impeachment hearings. It’s book sales. Yes, you heard that correctly. The right wing blogosfolks have been inundating us with sales figures for Hillary’s new autobio, “Hard Choices” and these sales figures apparently tell a story of faded reputation and hopeless unpopularity. I mean people had high hopes for this book and what happened? A hundred thousand hard cover copies in a week? Not very impressive. I mean any of us out here in the real world could sell than many copies of our daily diaries, right?

This is, of course, just the beginning of what promises to be the most targeted and attack-happy campaign for president in the history of targeted and attack-happy presidential campaigns. A lot of time and money and effort is going to be spent to savage the reputation of Hillary. Because, after all, her last name ends with that seven letter name.

Are we still trying to "win" the war in Iraq?

So...another day, another shot at “winning” the Iraq War. Is this some hallucinatory nightmare? Yesterday President Obama announced that we are going to be sending 300 “advisors” to “advise” the Iraqi military on how to defeat an “enemy,” who is not exactly the “enemy” but plays one on TV.
Does anyone understand what is going on in Iraq? Not exactly. The politicians don’t. The leaders of Iraq don’t. Dick Cheney doesn’t. The current President of the United States seems to be a little confused, too. And easy to see why. This conflict has been going on for few thousand years and it’s always looked pretty much the same.

So we gave it a go ten years or so ago. Bush Two announced that we were going in to give freedom and liberty to the poor Iraqis. And how did that work out? Ask the hundred thousand or so dead Iraqis and the almost five thousand dead Americans. Ask the thousands of Americans who were lucky enough to come home from Iraq alive–give or take a few limbs.

So...another day, another shot at “winning” the Iraq War. And finally, we have something Democrats and Republicans seem to agree on: this is a very bad idea at a time when we should be thinking about doing just about anything else. Another POTUS was once faced with a similar dilemma. His name was Lyndon Johnson and his dilemma was called “Vietnam.” How did that one work out? We’re still dealing with the results of that one and we’ll be dealing with the results of this one for just as long. Maybe forever.

Hillary-watching; the American answer to soccer!

As the world stage is awash with turmoil and confrontation (Is Iraq still standing) there seems to be one question that is consuming the thoughts of every American (or is it?) The question concerns the political future of one Hillary Rodham... Clinton. Is Hillary running for president or not? Come on, Hillary, you can tell us... All the obvious indicators are at play: her public presence has lately been ubiquitous. A doorstop autobiography has just been released and the book is selling briskly (though many pundits have noted that, since the book is not the fastest selling celebrity book ever written in the history of publishing, it must be a colossal failure and hence, a marker for the number of voters who would likely support a Clinton candidacy.

Of course books sold do not translate into votes and all of this early speculation does nothing to advance...well, anything at all. As we all well know, Hillary Clinton is one of our shrewder politicians and she knows better than anyone that, in politics, short of being indicted for this or that, there is really no such thing as bad publicity. The fact that her name is being mentioned every second of every hour does nothing but advance the notion that she is running for the White House but, of course, we are in position to know. And all the speculation, so early in the game, that she is thinking of NOT running is quite ridiculous.

Only she understands what her political intentions are, and only she will tell America what that decision is. For now, the talk of a Hillary candidacy–or not–is nothing more than feeble guesswork. In a nation obsessed by sport, Hillary-watching is the American answer to soccer. Just a little more exciting.

DOES HILLARY CLINTON FEEL YOUR PAIN?

You would think that seasoned politicians wouldn't be thrown for a loop when asked obvious questions by known-quantity interviewers but it goes to show that the present state of politics in this country have tossed a heavy ball to everyone-even the practiced and polished politicians like Hillary Clinton. These days, every politician is a target and there's not much any of them can do to protect themselves.

Here were were with the practiced and polished Diane Sawyer asking a very obvious question about the years after Clinton's presidency and what do we get? A wan and nervous Hillary dodging the Q with a silly, "we were broke when we left the White House" to explain the background to Sawyer's charge that the Clinton's had made tens of millions of dollars in speaking and book fees.

Instead of saying that they didn't steal the money, that the money was exchanged freely and voluntarily by organizations that were salivating at the prospect of having the Clintons speak at their gatherings, Mrs. Clinton came off sounding lamely apologetic. Republicans predictably pounced, as they will when Mrs. Clinton says ANYTHING about ANYTHING. 

It sounds almost hard to say, but Mrs. Clinton is going to have to develop a much thicker skin if she's going to go for the gold. There are thousands of hungry crocodiles waiting to pounce.

MITCH MCCONNELL AND THE REPUBLICAN PARTY'S NEW STANCE ON "OBAMACARE"

Speaking of the flip flops of our esteemed Washington politicians, this might be a good time to reiterate my position about term limits.

It's no secret to anyone who follows me that I am no fan of lifetime politicians. That McConnell, who has been around longer than most of our readers have been alive, which is to say, a very, very time, is still in the game strikes me as somewhat obscene. It is not a healthy thing for the politics of a nation, nor for the general well being of its voters, that politicians like McConnell, and all the rest, Democrat and Republican, don't just pack their bags and get out of town after their sell-by date has arrived.

What possible reasons could these lifetime pols have for staying around the Capital except for the pleasure of exercising their accrued power and influence? Give it up, boys and girls. It's time to go back to those constituents you claim to care so much about.

Fox–Finding its Audience or Manufacturing It?

A lot of people are dazzled by the success of the Fox News Network; they see it as a juggernaut of conservative thought that has taken the nation (and the ratings) by storm. But a closer look at the numbers reveals a story that might seem a little strange.

Fox was founded by the indomitable Rupert Murdoch, who hired the indomitable Roger Ailes to put things together, on his supposedly conservative behalf. Ailes, a TV veteran with a resume as long as his girth is wide, promptly assembled a group of mostly unknown talking heads from around the country (and around the world–Murdoch is Australian, after all, and there were a few early nods to the Queen’s Empire) and almost overnight transformed the sleepy aspiring network into the conservative alternative to what it likes to portray as the “mainstream media.” (Slyly hinted to be “left wing media”).

But there are two problems with this picture. Or at least there are two questions that should be asked.

Firstly, is Fox really “conservative?” or does it just play conservative on TV? A close look at Murdoch reveals a man whose political leanings tend to favor whatever political party is in office at the time. This is the man, after all, who became an American citizen because he wanted to buy a New York newspaper, the Post(at the time, he was forbidden to do so unless he became a citizen; he already owned a New York TV station and there were limitations on foreigners owning both.)

How conservative is Rupert Murdoch? According to sources, he seriously considered endorsing Barack Obama for his first term as president.

The second question concerns ratings. Is Fox really as big as it seems when the numbers are tallied.

The size of a network’s worth is usually measured in the profits on its bottom line. Here Fox seems to have some problems. Yes, it makes a lot of money, but it also, apparently, misses a lot of money because its ratings tend to skew to a much older, and less advertiser-friendly audience. Simply put, a lot of the Fox viewers are old. Very old. They’re not the audience advertisers crave. This puts Fox at somewhat of a disadvantage against those younger-audience networks–you know, the ones that are part of that “mainstream media.”

Fox will soldier on, certainly. There’s a hot presidential election coming up in a few years and there will be plenty of explosive fodder for conservatives and Libertarians. For those of us in the middle of that great political American road, we’ll just have to look at the vast power of the Fox Network with a few grains of salt.

Who was America’s Best President

If you ask me that is one of the most ridiculous questions making the rounds of the TV politico-chat fests these days. That question is everywhere, as if things are so bad in this country that the only logical questions is: when, in our history, did we do so much better, when was our judgment so much better tuned to the times?

Washington? Check. Lincoln? Check? Reagan? Check, if you sit on the right side of the national divide. Clinton? Check if you sit on the left side of the national divide? Obama? This is probably a bad time to ask.

But that’s the problem, and that’s why the question is totally irrelevant. The times are the times, and the times are special to the times. One era’s president is another era’s disaster. If you take one of these supposedly great presidents and give them a whole other set of problems, their reactions might be altogether unsatisfactory. Wars, technology, culture–they all change with the times and presidents react to the times they’re serving in, and also to the people they served. Opinions change, outlooks change, politics certainly changes. We need to start looking at presidents in the context of their times and stop wondering what it would be like if they were still around to steer the wobbly ship of state.

It wouldn’t be that surprising to find that one of those “great” presidents from a hundred years ago would today be attacked and reviled for being ineffectual, confused, do-nothing, do too-much, socialist, communist, fascist etc.

President Obama, anyone?

Vladimir Putin Go Home!

Vladimir Putin is one angry Russian. Talk about frustration; this old KGB hand is so mad that Mother Soviet Union had to come crashing into the twenty-first century that he has decided to make believe the whole thing was just a big historical mistake.

The Soviet Union lives! And if Putin can make that a reality he will go down in Russian history as the greatest leader since...Stalin?

What does Putin really think he’s going to accomplish by marching into Crimea, ala the Soviet march into Czechoslovakia in the sixties? Exactly the same thing, that’s what. The world stood silently by as the Soviets annexed Czechoslovakia and they will stand by again as the Russian Bear grabs at its “rightful” territories that were split apart “by mistake.”

Why will the West stand by, as it always does when Russian leaders flex their Empire-building muscles? Because there never seems to be that appetite for another World War. Everyone knows that a bully with atomic bombs is a bully better left to his own devices.

Is there anything the West can do to head off further Russian expansion into former Soviet bloc territories? That’s a question that foreign leaders from Obama to Merkel don’t really want to deal with, and that’s exactly the way Putin is playing the game. When you hold the cards, you don’t forfeit the game. This is a very hard set of problems to deal with and the West is doing what it seems to do best in situations like this. It’s punting.

Unless there is a unified strategy coming out of Brussels in the next few weeks (there won’t be) we can look forward to a rebirth of something that looks very much like the old Soviet Union–and that’s always been Putin’s dream. Really, what good is being a brutal Russian dictator if you don’t have a Soviet Union-style geography behind you?

Why I’m Running for President

Let’s just say that I was in the right place at the right time and I heard the following conversation between a possible 2016 Presidential candidate.

Candidate: I’m thinking about running for president.

Friend: Are you close to making a decision?

Candidate: Yeah, I think I’ll run.

Friend: Do you think you have the qualities and qualifications needed to seek the highest office in the land?

Candidate: What kind of question is that?

Friend: Just asking. I figure you should have experience, have new ideas, be open to discussion and be willing to change your mind about important issues, when its necessary to be flexible.

The Candidate flexes his muscles and shakes his head.

Candidate: I have no idea what you’re talking about. Really.

Friend: I’m just saying that this is an important decision you’re going to make and you might want to consider that you have very little experience. You just got to the Senate a few months ago. You’re a novice. Maybe it would be better to wait a while and accumulate some important skills.

Candidate: I have lots of skills.

Friends: But they’re not skills associated with running the greatest country in the world.

Candidate: That’s ridiculous. Who have you been talking to?

Friend: No one. I haven’t been talking to anyone. This conversation is just between you and me.

Candidate: I didn’t say I was running.

Friend: You said “I think I’ll run.”

Candidate: Why is everyone always twisting my words?

Maybe It’s Time to Limit Presidential Terms

Being president of the United States is a lot like being the neighborhood used car salesman. You may be very good at what you do; you may have graduated from the Senate or the State house with all kinds of experience and knowledge and friends; you may be wildly popular at the time of the election.

But it’s that rare president who manages to keep the allegiance of the voters after the first 365 days in office. There’s something inherently rotten in the set up. Let’s face it, even the most accomplished of men and women seem to be no match for the  kind of work that demands the right decision one hundred per cent of the time. They don’t call it the World’s Toughest Job for no reason. It’s not just tough, it’s incomprehensibly impossible to pull off with any real measure of success.

Name the two or three best presidents in the last fifty years, then look closely at their records and their poll numbers. Reagan suffered in office, Bush suffered in office, Clinton suffered in office–they all did; they all had wide swings in popularity and long, drawn-out, awful periods of challenge they just didn’t seem up to. Iran-Contra, Monicagate, Iraq. Yet all of these presidents were around for eight years, two terms, an eternity in political years. And maybe that’s the problem.

We let our Chief Execs hangs around long past their sell-by dates and that’s no one’s fault but our own, because we could change the law that lets them do that. It wouldn’t be an easy process but maybe its time to consider the efficacy of just such a sweeping modification to our Constitution.

Four years in the kind of high-pressure cooker that is the White House is more than enough for any reasonable, solid citizen. You can only ask so much of your public servants and four years is about right. If you have any doubts about that, take a look at the second terms of even our most accomplished presidents. Second terms are infamous for the toll they take on our leaders, the psychological and emotional tax. In the recent past, there no longer seems to be any such thing as a successful second act in the president business. It’s just a fact.

Maybe it’s time to give out those mandatory fifth year vacations. We’d all probably feel refreshed. That is, if we can figure out a way to stop those three year presidential campaigns...