Are these really the best America has to offer? (Campaign 2012)

By | January 3, 2012, 5:00am PST

Summary: Seriously? This is it? This is the best of America? These are the best possible leaders we can field when America so critically needs leadership?

One candidate not showing up for the caucuses is Herman Cain.

Wow. Romney, Gingrich, Paul, Bachmann, Perry, Huntsman, Santorum — and Obama. Are these really the best America has to offer?

Seriously? This is it? This is the best of America? These are the best possible leaders we can field when America so critically needs leadership?

Look, don’t get me wrong. When one of these people walks into the White House on January 20, 2013, I will support him or her. I believe Americans need to stand behind their President. But wow. How demoralizing is this bunch?

What got me thinking about this, beyond today’s Iowa caucuses, was a deeply depressing editorial out of the UK’s Mail Online. In it, Dominic Sandbrook writes:

Today, American voters looking for alternatives are confronted only with a bizarre gaggle of has-beens, inadequates and weirdos, otherwise known as the Republican presidential field. And to anybody who cares about the future of the Western world, the prospect of President Ron Paul or President Newt Gingrich is frankly spine-chilling.

Has-beens. Inadequates. Weirdos. Wow. What’s sad is it’s hard to refute his biting words.

Mitt Romney

Take Mitt Romney, for example. Romney may seem the most sane of the bunch, and he certainly looks like someone in Hollywood pulled him out of central casting for the role of president. But Romney has changed his position on everything he possibly could, in order to appeal to certain groups of GOP voters.

After just two years as governor of Massachusetts, and after failing to be elected for anything else, Romney decided he wanted to become President. He’s been wanting to become President ever since — and that, apparently, is his greatest qualification.

Newt Gingrich

Or, take Newt Gingrich. I like Newt. He and I both appeared on the History Channel special The President’s Book of Secrets, and he’s undoubtedly a very smart man. But shortly after becoming the first Republican Speaker of the House in decades and architecting the Contract With America, Newt got drummed out of Congress on ethics charges. And this was after screwing around on his wife, while making political hay out of investigating a President who was also screwing around on his wife.

Newt’s a visionary, but if you listen to him for too long, you’ll start to think he’s just a little out there. And I don’t mean left-wing wacko out there, or right-wing religious out there. I mean little green men out there. I have a lot of affection for Newt, but I’m not sure America really wants to hand him the world’s largest nuclear arsenal.

Ron Paul

Then there’s Ron Paul. I want to give Ron Paul a bear hug. I do. I often want to stand up and applaud what he says. I agree with his non-interventionist stance, I agree with his belief in the Constitution.

But… once you start reading what he’s written in the past, you start to get the shudders. Now, to be fair, if I were running for office and all my writing had to represent me, you probably wouldn’t give me the keys to the nukes.

The difference is, I commit my writing sins wearing sweatpants and a T-shirt on a couch in Florida (and I mock Apple fanbois on alternate Tuesdays), and Ron Paul wants to be the leader of the free world and has published blatantly racist statements in his newsletters.

Michelle Bachmann

Most of the time, Michelle Bachmann sounds completely loopy. The weird thing is that there’s also something there, there. For example, back after President Obama’s State of the Union address, Michelle Bachmann was the only person of either party to mention how important it was for America to rebuild its manufacturing prowess.

But then she starts going on about something weird here or something strange there. I honestly think she’s sincere (unlike Romney, who does not appear to have a single sincere bone in his body), but I can’t see Michelle Bachmann as Commander-in-Chief.

Speaking of someone no one should want to see as Commander-in-Chief, there’s …

Rick Perry

Seriously? Have you listened to this guy for more than five minutes? The reason he fails the debates is he can’t even seem to remember his own talking points. Then there’s the campground he leases, named something so racially charged I won’t even repeat it.

Rick Santorum

Proving you can’t have enough Ricks in a presidential campaign, there’s Rick Santorum. Yeah, I keep forgetting he’s running, too.

The most interesting thing about the former senator is the friends he made while senator. All you have to do is Google the word “Santorum” to see just how much certain members of the population like him. In 2002, he equated Democrats debating in Congress to Nazis (proving that Godwin’s law applies to Congress-critters as much as to bloggers).

Jon Huntsman

It’s a shame that the most qualified man in the current crop is the guy we never talk about. Jon Huntsman may actually be qualified to be president, is a centrist, has served two successful terms as a governor, and has been ambassador to China — arguably the most important nation we’ll be dealing with this century.

He’s also a successful businessman, and understands making payroll, making compromises, and doing deals. The only problem with Huntsman is that this dog won’t hunt. He’s managed to inspire absolutely nobody, and it’s unlikely he’ll make it past February.

Barack Obama

While everyone else on the list aspires to the GOP nomination, President Obama has a lock on being the 2012 Democratic nominee. As a sitting president, the election is his to lose.

Sadly President Obama is no great statesman. He was an incredibly inspiring candidate, but is an equally uninspiring leader. The nation, while not in worse condition than it was when he took office, isn’t much better. Our national malaise is ongoing, unemployment is still too high, we’re far deeper in debt, and we still don’t appear to have either a workable plan or a clue.

While it could be argued that the Republicans got in his way at every turn, that’s not what you want to hear from your President. What you want is for the job to get done (without the “Mission Accomplished” sign, hopefully). With Obama, the job is far from done, and it’s questionable whether he is capable of the heavy lifting necessary to pull us away from the brink.

The best of America

Sure, we’ve had our fair share of disappointments, from old Zachary Taylor to Herbert Hoover to Millard Fillmore. But we’ve also had George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, and FDR. We’ve had towering heroes as President, men who embodied all that America was, all that we could be, and all that we dreamed of.

As we begin the election season in earnest, I’d like you to engage in a little exercise. You know how it is with President Obama. If you’re thinking of hiring his replacement, say the following names out loud: President Romney, President Gingrich, President Paul, President Bachmann, President Perry, President Huntsman, or President Santorum.

Now, ask yourself these questions. Do I trust this person with America’s nuclear (or “nucular”) arsenal? Can this person go face-to-face with Vladimir Putin or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or even Angela Merkel? Will this person put Americans before politics or political gain? Does this person truly understand all the interconnections and implications of governance and policy?

The fact is, we’re stuck with one of these completely unimpressive figures for 2013 through 2016. That’s pretty much a done deal, despite whatever fuss Donald Trump is making this week.

But let’s start thinking towards 2016 and let’s remember the presidency isn’t a prize, and it isn’t something that should be given to the person we all would most like to have a beer with. The presidency is the single most important job on the planet.

It should be a job held by the single most capable person in America. It should be held by someone who can be compared with Lincoln and Washington and Jefferson and Roosevelt, and be someone who would clearly be able to stand in their company.

Let’s start now, looking for someone who doesn’t just look presidential, but someone who is presidential. Maybe, if we make it successfully to 2016, then we’ll be able to choose from the best of the best, and not simply the least worst of the what’s left.

Maybe then, we’ll be able to ask “Are these really the best America has to offer?” and have an answer that doesn’t make us feel sad or embarrassed for our nation.

When the primary comes to your state, vote. It’s all you can do now, so go fulfill your civic duty.

In the meantime, be all you can be.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

David Gewirtz, Distinguished Lecturer at CBS Interactive, is an author, U.S. policy advisor, and computer scientist. He is featured in The History Channel special The President's Book of Secrets.

Disclosure

David Gewirtz

At various times during his adult life, David has voted for both Democrats and Republicans, and has been disappointed by both. He is deeply disturbed by how partisanship has come before patriotism in America, which gives him the freedom to pick on both sides.

David is a frequent guest on TV and radio stations across America and can usually be heard or seen on-the-air at least once a week. He writes weekly commentary and analysis for CNN’s Anderson Cooper 360 and has been interviewed by Fox News, CNN, various ABC and NBC affiliates, and Canada’s Global TV. He has been a featured guest on National Public Radio and has also been featured on Voice of America, Radio Free Europe, and Radio Liberty where his commentaries on technology, industry, and emerging nations have been broadcast into 46 countries (all in their own unique translations).

David is the executive director of U.S. Strategic Perspective Institute, a nonprofit research and policy organization. He is the Cyberterrorism Advisor for the International Association for Counterterrorism & Security Professionals, a columnist for The Journal of Counterterrorism and Homeland Security and a special contributor to Frontline Security Magazine. He is a member of the FBI’s InfraGard program, the security partnership between the FBI and industry. David is also a member of the U.S. Naval Institute and the National Defense Industrial Association, the leading defense industry association promoting national security.

David is an advisory board member for the Technical Communications and Management Certificate program at the University of California, Berkeley extension. He is also a member of the instructional faculty at the University of California, Berkeley extension.

David’s “day job” is as publisher and editor-in-chief of ZATZ publishing, an online publisher of technical magazines. Other than than his ownership stake in Component Enterprises, Inc. (the parent company of ZATZ), David has no additional industry investments.

ZATZ has many advertisers who do, in part, provide for David’s lush income and extravagant lifestyle. Most of them are IBM and Lotus aftermarket suppliers, some of them make goodies for Microsoft Outlook, and a few make all sorts of strange mobile devices and add-on products. David has been a regular judge of the IBM Awards, but has no formal financial interest in or with IBM.

Because the ZATZ online magazines often review products, David and ZATZ are sent an overwhelming stream of unsolicited, silly, and often useless products to review. Because they’re such a pain to track and ship back, these products often wind up in a dumpster or fill up the corner of a large closet. Although David has no plans to review products in connection to his ZDNet blog, if he does do a product review, he will disclose any relationship completely in that posting.

Both through ZATZ and independently, David derives a small income through various advertising and sales relationships with Amazon.com and Google. These are minor relationships and they will not impede his willingness or ability to chastise either company should they deserve it.

David has many other business relationships, but none of them relate to anything he covers in his ZDNet blog. David does have a bit of the sales-guy bug and if he’s not doing a sales deal with someone at least once a month, he goes through withdrawal. He has a number of consulting clients, but none of them relate to anything he covers for ZDNet (and if they ever do, he will either disclose that fact, or decline to write about them).

Back in the 1980s, David held the unusual title of “Godfather” at Apple. He has written and published 40 incredibly simplistic applications for Apple’s iPhone.

Although David is forbidden to disclose the terms of his iPhone developer agreement, he isn’t drinking the Apple Kool Aid, will never be confused with a metrosexual, and feels free to mock Apple, and Apple users, any time the occasion permits, on alternate Tuesdays, or if he’s bored.

Biography

David Gewirtz

In addition to hosting the ZDNet Government and ZDNet DIY-IT blogs, CBS Interactive's Distinguished Lecturer David Gewirtz is an author, U.S. policy advisor, and computer scientist. He is featured in The History Channel special The President's Book of Secrets, is one of America's foremost cyber-security experts, and is a top expert on saving and creating jobs. He is also director of the U.S. Strategic Perspective Institute as well as the founder of ZATZ Publishing.

David is a member of FBI InfraGard, the Cyberwarfare Advisor for the International Association for Counterterrorism & Security Professionals, a columnist for The Journal of Counterterrorism and Homeland Security, and has been a regular CNN contributor, and a guest commentator for the Nieman Watchdog of the Nieman Foundation for Journalism at Harvard University. He is the author of Where Have All the Emails Gone?, the definitive study of email in the White House, as well as How To Save Jobs and The Flexible Enterprise, the classic book that served as a foundation for today's agile business movement.

48
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Are these really the best America has to offer? (Campaign 2012)
timaru 24th Jan
"Obama is loooking pretty good
Agree that Obama has been less than inspiring. A wholly "adequate" president but nothing more. But I say that as a liberal who can't see any daylight between him and Romney. I would like more of the things that many Americans would like less of from him. That said, if these are the criteria:"

OMG! U have got to be kidding! "A wholly "adequate" president"............ IN WHAT WAY?
HOW MANY TRILLIONS OF DEBT DOLLARS DOES IT TAKE? OBUMMER IS ALL BLOW AND NO GO!
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
The evil of multiple lessors...
David Chernicoff 3rd Jan
Makes you wish for the "None of the above" option, doesn't it?
Hi David,

Too true. So many times I step into the voting booth and just shake my head in dismay. These are the offerings? I deeply wish for a 'none of the above' or even a more direct 'try again' option on the ballot, to show my party I want a *real* choice. I want to vote *for* someone, rather than *against* the lesser man... because it is getting harder and harder to to tell which man is lesser as the parties (yes, both of them) keep scraping the bottom of an empty barrel.

Regards,
Jon
@David Chernicoff Beat me to it happy Well my policy for this years voting and probably for the next six years, do not vote for incumbents, time to throw them out.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: the "None of the above" option
Rabid Howler Monkey 3rd Jan
@David Chernicoff Not a bad idea, but it would just put those not selecting this option in charge of electing a president as there is no value for this option which would require a new election.

Other options do exist such as supporting a 3rd party candidate or writing in the name of one's choice for President, if not present on the ballot. We really do need a credible 3rd party to emerge that represents ordinary Americans instead of corporations. We were almost there in 1992 and 1996.
@Rabid Howler Monkey ... Third Party. Well, that is a vote for a Democrat. Just sayin'. A third party vote in the national election is a throw away which improves the chances of the Democrat.
@notme403@... Paraphrasing Jim Hightower: "we don't need a 3rd party, we need a 2nd party".

Had Ralph Nader not run as a 3rd party (Green Party) candidate in the 2000 U.S. presidential election, Al Gore may very well have won Florida and, therefore, the election. As it was, Al Gore did win the popular vote, but lacked the electoral votes to win the election.
@Rabid Howler Monkey

We could have a new election every single day, and it still wouldn't rack up a trillion dollars a year. Meanwhile, electing lesser evils seems to overbudget that much year after year after year.
@Rabid Howler Monkey

Seriously? You have the audacity to suggest that the Green Party cost Gore the vote? You had people so disaffected that they were supporting NADER. To suggest that the Green party voters would have supported Gore by default is not just a logical fallacy, it's actually really stupid. Turnout in the Bush elections was at an all time NADIR. Nader actually got the college set to start paying attention for the first time in a decade. If anything he generated votes for Gore that wouldn't have voted at all, ended the "slacker movement" which advocated not voting at all because all the candidates suck, and started the movement of young, energized, community volunteer campaigning which ultimately resulted in Obama's victory.
@tkejlboom wrote:
"[Nader] ended the "slacker movement" which advocated not voting at all because all the candidates suck, and started the movement of young, energized, community volunteer campaigning which ultimately resulted in Obama's victory.

Obama? Seriously? You just lost all credibility.

Are you Rip van Winkle in real life? Go back to sleep.
@David Chernicoff

If only the alternative was better... but it's not. We need real change not speeches.
0 Votes
+ -
The evil of multiple lessors...
klumper Updated - 3rd Jan
@David Chernicoff
Makes you wish for the "None of the above" option, doesn't it?

Your point is well taken, as long as it extends to the other side of the aisle as well. Something about Obama and Hillaryous keeps me thoroughly unimpressed, and equally uninspired -- like the taste of morning after a hard night of drinking.

I'd vote once again for an indie like Perot if he rose from the shadows, likewise for Trump out of desperation (mostly by way of my middle finger, ditto for when [or if] I press the voting machine button).
Call him insane. Ditto Lincoln. FDR, you would still like.
0 Votes
+ -
when
oneleft Updated - 3rd Jan
you have a congress that is filled with people who have no idea what they're doing beyond a sophomoric battle cry (smaller government! less spending! liberals are evil!) then it's pretty tough to govern. all of history tells us that in times like this less spending is exactly what is not needed. instead we have record filibusters (hundreds and hundreds of times greater than the average) that amounts to nothing but obstructionism. we have "leaders" so simple minded that they are comparing a nations budget to a family's budget. ridiculous.
@oneleft

The global economy is unprecedented in scale. History offers few easy answers to how to deal with contemporary problems. What it does offer is guidance on principles. The bankers committed fraud, and real investment isn't going to resume until they suffer serious consequences. Retail investors are going to keep pumping the gold/silver bubble until IT freezes and pops simply because they can't TRUST anyone.
0 Votes
+ -
Agree that Obama has been less than inspiring. A wholly "adequate" president but nothing more. But I say that as a liberal who can't see any daylight between him and Romney. I would like more of the things that many Americans would like less of from him. That said, if these are the criteria:

"Do I trust this person with America???s nuclear (or ???nucular???) arsenal? Can this person go face-to-face with Vladimir Putin or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or even Angela Merkel? Will this person put Americans before politics or political gain? Does this person truly understand all the interconnections and implications of governance and policy?"

then Obama and Huntsman are clearly the only good choices.
@jdakula putting Americans first leaves Obama out! And it is Iran he needs to go to the matt with it is the Chinese Currency Manipulators! Take care of that and Iran looses half the political backing they have.
I get so tired of political doublespeak and bullcrap. Obama is just as two-faced as Perry or Romney. Gingrich is the worst, I wouldn't trust him an inch. They are all puppets who change their minds based on which way the wind is blowing.

The only candidate who will do what he says and not be swayed by corporate interests or lobbyists is Ron Paul.

If you don't care about integrity, by all means vote for any of the others.
@wendellgee@... the problem Paul would face is that Congress and the Senate would never pass his ideas.

I agree on Obama as well... he bad mouthed everyone going in only to find out he didn't know anything and was forced to change his position on many things like Gitmo! What did he say about Bush after several months in office? President Bush had some tough decisions to make! Clearly, he saw the role wasn't as easy as he made it out to be.
If you researched Ron Paul you would see he didn't write those articles... In fact the belief was that the Libraterian Party embraced the idea of creating those articles to, "Entice Rednecks" to join their cause... Now because Ron Paul's name was on the report, it clearly threatens to exile the very people they were trying to draw in with their manipulation.
@Peter Perry

Ron Paul used his position as a congress critter to publish a lot of things. One of them advocated a return to the gold standard. My objection wasn't that he argued for the gold standard(though the gold standard was and still is a REALLY stupid idea), but that the publication itself wouldn't have passed muster as an undergraduate term paper. It was completely lacking in fact or research. Paul has published a lot of crazy stuff, and he gets to do it because congress critters get an oft overlooked power to print.
Obama will win this election, not because he's a good president, but because his opposition is full of non-starters. The evil you know is better than the one you don't and all.

Basically the Bush/Kerry elections all over again. All the Dems had to do there was field a semi-respectable candidate to win, and they couldn't. Us Republicans have that ball now.

Next 4 years are going to hurt regardless.
So I asked myself, why would a blog writer deliberately insult every candidate in an election year. After answering that, I wondered why he would quote a British journalist jeering at American politics. Oh yeah, same reason.

Anyway, you asked why the best people don't run for president? I think we've created a process paradox where the most qualified people are much too well-balanced & intelligent to be interested in the job. Nobody is perfect, yet any imperfection is treated as a fatal flaw. As long as politicians continue to be elected because they are excellent salesmen, we will get what we get.

By the way, I'm hoping Mit wins. Not only is he an excellent salesman, but he also seems interested in process details.
Wow, you went down the road of mixing IT and Politics. Now that you did it, you will obviously have the most comments of any article in recent time.
First, you statements about is this "the best" clearly points to the Republican Party more so than the Democratic party. Other than Romney, NON of the Republican candidates seem to be electable (they are too busy being devisive !). Even then Romney seems to struggle to have an original idea in his head. May very well be that he is GW's long lost cousin (although the first George Bush was fairly intelligent. Not sure what happened).
Second, what you and many people fail to see is that the U.S. is NOT a business.
The President must work with a Congress that is there specifically as a counter-balance to the power of the Presidency (as opposed to a board and other minor execs who are usually just there to provide some periodic advice and implementation support). They are not expected to challange the business CEO/President and if they do, they often don't last long.
Mitch McConnel, John Boehner, and Grover Norquist have pushed the Republican party so far to the right on many issues that they cannot perform the comprimise functions that are required to allow them to make any meaningful legislation come out of Congress. As a result, President Obama can only lead so much and he had indicated the remainder of his first term will primarily be an effort to move forward on those things that he can move forward within the Executive Powers granted to him (what any CEO would do).
President Obama went "toe to toe" with Bin Laden. I don't doubt for an instant that he would do "everything" in his power to keep the oil flowing in the Middle East should Iran have any thoughts to the contrary.

By orchestrating the auto bailout, he kept the State of Michigan from going bankrupt. And, in a somewhat ironic turn of events, Chrysler's profits are helping Fiat's European "bottom line" this year.

Would I vote for President Obama in 2012 if the Republicans or Independents had a credible candidate? No. (The Nation's current debt and Congress's inability to handle that debt indicates a lack of leadership on his part.) But, as it stands right now, President Obama is the best person running for President this year. (Yes, I know, he hasn't officially declared himself a candidate yet but that assumption is a pretty safe bet.)
0 Votes
+ -
Strong disagreement on this statement
Rabid Howler Monkey 3rd Jan
From the article:
"When one of these people walks into the White House on January 20, 2013, I will support him or her. I believe Americans need to stand behind their President.

I was one of a number of Americans that opposed the Iraq war from the beginning (actually, from before the beginning when the war drums were rumbling). And once started, I was one of a number of Americans that called for the impeachment of the President for the lies that dragged us into the war:

o lie no. 1: Iraq had weapons of mass destruction
o lie no. 2: a linkage existed between Saddam and bin Laden

If it were possible, I also would have supported the removal of those members of Congress that voted for the war (actually, those who voted to let the President 'decide', effectively ceding their vote).

UNSCOM defanged Iraq after the 1991 Gulf war. Saddam hated bin Laden and al Quaeda, for obvious reasons. And the northern no-fly zone in Iraq, enforced by the U.S., also protected a group with known al Quaeda ties, Ansar al Islam, along with the Kurdish population in northern Iraq. In fact, there were periodic skirmishes between the Kurds and Ansar al Islam during this time.

We need to be watchful for similar shenanigans from our government with regard to Iran and other sovereign nations.
0 Votes
+ -
Standing behind the President
John L. Ries Updated - 3rd Jan
@Rabid Howler Monkey
I don't think that means accepting all his proposals uncritically or assuming that he's always right (Congress isn't doing its job if it is). What it does mean is accepting his legitimate authority, treating him with respect (even if you think he's a fool), giving him the benefit of the doubt, considering his proposals on the merits (rather than on how they affect the election prospects of one's preferred party), and otherwise allowing him to do his job without undue harrassment or obstruction. I think any U.S. President deserves that from both his constituents and from Congress; no more; no less.
0 Votes
+ -
...Vladimir Putin or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or even Angela Merkel?

How about this person going face to face with some big shot CEO's and do what Brazil started doing, probably to be followed by Argentina and very likely the rest of South America?
What does Brazil do? Slap one huge tax on imported goods. Let me demonstrate.
1 16GB WiFi only iPad2 = 1629 Brazilian Real or US $873. Unless such goods are manufactured in Brazil. I heard that Foxconn will open up a factory in Brazil recently.
Now let's see one of your above candidates, including Obama, do that to Apple, Oracle, Microsoft or other tech giants that have setup shop in Asia.
0 Votes
+ -
We are getting exactly the kind of candidates the people deserve.
I think that what's important to keep in mind is that the current leader lacks any kind of leadership and we need to replace him. At the end of the day I think that the choice will be clear: real change vs more of the same...
I think that what's important to keep in mind is that the current leader lacks any kind of leadership and we need to replace him. At the end of the day I think that the choice will be clear: real change vs more of the same...
0 Votes
+ -
David Gewirtz for president! (2016)
recurvebowyer 3rd Jan
You are just as (or better) qualified!
0 Votes
+ -
I, for one, like David's position on Linux
Rabid Howler Monkey 3rd Jan
@recurvebowyer

[Hides under desk] happy
Well, President Obama had a fully Democrat majority in the House and Senate for his first two years, and that didn't help much. In fact, the Senate had a filibuster proof majority up until Scott Brown won his seat. It is hard to lay blame at Republicans who only took majority of the House last January. You could say that they are a "do nothing" congress, but the Senate hasn't passed a budget in over 1000 days. That is unforgivable. The more bills Congress can pass, the worse our lives typically are. I'm cool with stalemates. I'm also cool with the new Republicans who are willing to stand on principles. In the past, Republicans and Democrats would pass each other's pork in return for votes. You can't buy off the new guys... yet anyway. I wish they would just look at the math of it all and leave emotions out. We can't tailor a solution for each little special interest. We need to have the federal government do only what it was supposed to do. Federal money shouldn't go to help with local issues. Maybe we should offer stock options or a bonus to the President and Congress people if they can get things to run more efficiently. Anyone who gets voted out, and not retire, should be considered fired. Pensions don't go to people who get fired.
0 Votes
+ -
I think your assessment is essentially correct
John L. Ries Updated - 3rd Jan
And I'm glad that whatever infatuation you had with Newt Gingrich has passed (he's been my least favorite politician for a quarter of a century; I consider him to be an unprincipled demagogue, completely unfit to hold public office at any level). I would vote for Huntsman, but he won't get the nomination. I might vote for Romney (but he has a lot of explaining to do). I won't under any circumstances vote for Gingrich, Perry, Bachman, or (as much as I respect him) Paul. The other Republicans I don't know enough about to say.

The big question party leaders need to be asking themselves and each other after the election is over is how to improve the process and encourage their best and most respected politicians to run for President. What we have doesn't strike me as it (true for both major parties). Unfortunately, I expect no changes.
You say: "Most of the time, Michelle Bachmann sounds completely loopy." Not so. The media extracts the most goofy stuff she says and capitalizes on it. Not so with Obama. He is still the messiah to them, but he has learned a little about the real world since his inauguration, while the media have not.

You say of Obama:"The nation, while not in worse condition than it was when he took office, isn???t much better." Not so. His collusion with greenthink racketeers like Al Gore, and his Fascist operations including the alliance with the unions in the takeover of GM, and the increase of the US debt to an unimagined level are just a few of the indications that his administration is bad for the USA. We are worse off with him, MUCH worse.
0 Votes
+ -
I'm an independent
John L. Ries 3rd Jan
David says:

"When the primary comes to your state, vote. It???s all you can do now, so go fulfill your civic duty."

I'm not allowed to vote in my state's caucuses because I'm politically unaffiliated and am happy to remain that way (I'm not a good match for any party I'm aware of and I intensely dislike partisan politics). I do intend to vote in the general election, come what may. Do you really think I should bite the bullet and pick a party, even though I've been a ticket splitter my entire adult life?
If I was given a choice of all the candidates today I would vote for the prejudiced person who's isolationist views are impractical in 2012. Paul's explanations don't fly and he was defending his "non writings" up to 2001. It is a matter of priorities and rolling back the creeping police state is number 1 with me. From giving the President unlimited power to decide who (even an American Citizen on US soil) gets indefinite detention to the TSA to local cops with predator drones" to kettling and pepper spraying non violent demonstrators we are a fascist police state. I am no peace-nick, I supported the Vietnam War back in the day who believes assassination is the moral choice over "regular" military tactics. But now we are throwing drones around like toys. People are upset that Russia is getting uppity. What are they supposed think when for the privilege of helping us with the Gulf War and the war on terror, we knock off their allies one by one, surround them with bases and propose to surround them with nuke missiles (they are meant for Iran of course)? Probably the war against the nuke mullahs in Iran is necessary but we have zero credibility to make these accusations and probably not the money for it (ok not true we will just print some more). Paul has been consistently against all of this and truth be told too extreme on the other side but this is about getting our constitution, our rights and who we were (greatest country in the world). Back to the core topic this "choice" is sick.
0 Votes
+ -
Isolationism might be impractical, but...
John L. Ries Updated - 3rd Jan
@edkollin
... I don't there's any question that the President has the authority to abrogate every alliance to which the U.S. is a party and to order all U.S. forces stationed abroad home (I'm under the impression that Dr. Paul favors doing both). If elected President, he could do those things immediately upon arriving at the White House after the inauguration and there would be absolutely nothing Congress could do about it.

He might be compelled later to decide it was a bad idea, but the damage would already be done. The biggest problem with Dr. Paul is that (like any good ideologue) he thinks he has all (or nearly all) of the answers already; I prefer my president to have a little humility and a lot of pragmatism because all theories are flawed.
@John L. Ries I meant impractical as in 2012 no country can hide themselves from the world so if he did that it would do damage. But he would also try and repeal and certainly not enforce the fascist police state laws. Given the choice between the damage from withdrawing from the world and restoring the constitution and the rule of law or engaging the world while letting the police state at home increase its power I choose the former. Can't begrudge anybody choosing differently
When did Americans can get so picky?? You guys watched G W Bush run the country into the ground. Do you think Mc Cain/Palin would be doing a better job than Obama/ Biden is currently doing? I was told during the Bush presidency when people were losing jobs that it wasn't the president/government's responsibility to create jobs? Why is it the Presidents responsibility now?America is dying because Americans don't stand for anything, they stand by and let Dems and Reps, ruin our lives over petty bickering. They win we lose. We need people who care about America and Americans and not lining their own pockets!!
@drayphly

"You guys watched G W Bush run the country into the ground."

I wouldn't blame Bush entirely. The banks with their bad loan practices were much to blame as well. And Obama, even when he had congress on his side, wasn't much help.

"Do you think Mc Cain/Palin would be doing a better job than Obama/ Biden is currently doing?"

Dunno about them, but I'm confident Donald Trump would wink. He'd be great for our economy - I just don't know about anything else. He'd be a big question mark when it comes to social issues.

"We need people who care about America and Americans and not lining their own pockets!!"

Agreed. Totally agreed. Why do we keep electing these fools?
"Are these really the best America has to offer?"

No. I'm really disappointed. This can't be our best. I'll vote, but I'm not terribly fond of the choices I have.
NO! Absolutely NOT! The best we have to offer do not want the job.

Even if their motivation is public service, the best and the brightest could not survive the public scrutiny. Even if they were willing to put up with the public scrutiny - and they survived it, the electorate does not want to hear the truth the best and brightest would speak.

Instead, the electorate want to be told exactly what they want to hear. No more, no less. Were the Press interested in enlightening the electorate about the issues at hand, maybe we would choose our candidates more wisely but that is not going to happen either.

At best, we are stuck with mediocrity!
0 Votes
+ -
Just a little Anti-Trust and enough conservation to guarantee life for our grandchildren, you know, the traditional Republican Party planks?
0 Votes
+ -
Not worse???
JJMach 11th Jan
I don't like to troll, but, come on: "The nation, while not in worse condition than it was when he took office, isn???t much better."

By any number of statistics (unemployment, government debt, government spending relative to GDP), short of the point value of the Dow Jones Industrial Average, the nation is clearly in worse condition now than when Obama took office. What's more, the trajectory of increasing, self-perpetuating bureaucracy that over-promises and under-performs, does not bode well.

Complain as much as you'd like about the spending and failed policies under G.W. Bush's presidency (many Conservatives were with you in jeering), Obama appears to have doubled-down on the worst ideas of his predecessors. Extend unemployment compensation to sap businesses and the will of the unemployed looking for work? Bloat Medicare already careening towards insolvency? If you thought GITMO was bad, how about indefinite detention of terrorism "suspects" by the military? I could go on....

As uninspired as I am by the current field of Republican candidates, and doomed as I am by living in California, where our vote usually comes long after the Primary race is over, frankly I'm with Mallard Fillmore in thinking a grilled-cheese sandwich could give Obama a run for his money in the general election.
Look at what happened to Herman Cain. Most people aren't going to subject themselves or their families to the kinds of hatchet jobs they have to know they are going to be subjected to.
Best you could do is "Ron Paul's Racist"? Maybe you might wanna re-read that situation. Someone else wrote that stuff in his name, he never even wrote it. Can you say the same about your Apple fanbois comments?
"Obama is loooking pretty good
Agree that Obama has been less than inspiring. A wholly "adequate" president but nothing more. But I say that as a liberal who can't see any daylight between him and Romney. I would like more of the things that many Americans would like less of from him. That said, if these are the criteria:"

OMG! U have got to be kidding! "A wholly "adequate" president"............ IN WHAT WAY?
HOW MANY TRILLIONS OF DEBT DOLLARS DOES IT TAKE? OBUMMER IS ALL BLOW AND NO GO!

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix