Obama's Gay Marriage Announcement

Yesterday (May 9, 2012), President Obama stated in an interview with ABC Television that he thought gay couples with healthy long-term commitments should be allowed to get married. What may have been lost in the reporting of this comment is that he called it his personal viewpoint. What he said is not official policy of the United States, but only a personal view that undoubtedly will influence many other people to have either a more positive or more negative opinion of the President. This was a classic Damned if you do and damned if you don't moment. It did show a lot of courage, but it may turn out to have been foolhardy from the viewpoint of political success in the next election. So long as Obama didn't define his stance, it was open to interpretation by all shades of the political spectrum. By declaring his position, he enhanced his standing with half of the voting public, but alienated the other half. This would have been true even if he had declared himself as being on the other side of this thorny debate. Therefore, I have to believe that Obama's public support of gay marriage has to be a statement of his conscience rather than being a political ploy. He gains nothing from it and may very well lose a lot. Whether or not this President gets re-elected, he has shown that he will take a stance on issues that most other politicians would remain ambiguous about.

The Abuse of Power

Power can be defined as the ability to exert one's will over another. Power is addictive, and those who have it seek to maintain it or keep it for as long as possible, regardless of the personal or material cost. One of the problems of the possession of power throughout history has been the "might makes right" syndrome. People who have the power to control others believe that they are right because they have the power to control others. Hence the old adage: Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Anyone who thinks he or she is wielding power for the sake of good rather than evil needs to be willing to accept a check and balance system that allows others to alert the person in power of a deviation from the path toward societally approved goals. Is power assumed for the sake of efficiency justified? Sometimes, but only in pursuit of very limited and well-defined goals. The problem often lies in determining what goals are worthy of granting power to a leader, and whether that leader feels that the end justifies the means. One who assumes power should take a sunset pledge to agree in advance to yield that power when the approved limited goal has been achieved or when a designated date has been reached. The addiction of power causes a leader to feel unique and irreplaceable, a situation that causes other viable leaders to protest and rebel.

How to Handle the U.S. Debt Deadline

Enough, already!
The USA has to get the two houses of Congress and the President to agree on measures to avoid a debt default next week. Don't look now, but the NFL Football owners and players managed to solve their lockout fiasco and save the football season. I suggest that the politicians, who obviously don't know how to do the jobs for which they were sent to Washington, should act more like athletes, albeit flabby ones. Let's just get this all over with a tug-of-war between the Fat Cats on one side and the Pompous Pigheads on the other. At this point all we need is a mechanism to get them to stop talking and do something. Just line them all up and let either side drag the other across the line that wins the tug-of-war. The country will survive whatever is decided; just demonstrate the ability to make a decision. I know that the voters will know how to decide that we need two entirely new tug-of-war teams when the next election comes. That's an easy decision.

Friends and Enemies

Which of these do you believe?

• The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
• The enemy of my friend is my enemy.
• The friend of my enemy is my enemy unless he/she belongs to my political party.
• The friend of my friend is my friend unless his/her political party is different from mine.
• What's good for the country is more important than what's good for my political party.
• What's good for my political party is by definition good for the country.
• What's good for me is by definition good for my party and country.
• Who cares about anyone else? Do what will get me reelected.
• I love everyone until after the votes have been counted.

Middle East Solidarity and Fragmentation

The winds of change that are sweeping middle eastern countries may be just the beginning of turbulence with unknown consequences. It is relatively easy to get a population fired up against the status quo and an unpopular, authoritarian leader. During the process of such an attempted or successful overthrow of a government, the populace is essentially united because everyone wants the current situation to change. As soon as such a movement becomes successful, however, it becomes dangerous to all concerned, because unity will disappear as different segments of society push for their own agendas. This is the point at which power grabs and civil wars develop. The initial jubilation at overthrowing an authoritarian regime may be replaced by a lengthy period of groups jockeying for position and attempting to manipulate each other. External governments would be wise to be nonspecific in their gestures and declarations of support because they will not know nor be able to influence the final configuration of power centers for a long time to come. Enthusiastically backing a losing group may be at least as unwise as taking no public stance on the political upheaval process.

A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Super Bowl

News Items:
The Chicago Bears will play the Green Bay Packers in the NFC Championship football game.
President Obama begs for more civil discourse among politicians and others who disagree.

I have been a Chicago Bears fan ever since I moved to the Chicago area many years ago. I have accepted and enjoyed the traditional rivalry and buildups before battles between the Bears and the Packers, two teams that consider each other hereditary enemies. Nevertheless, I have to admit that I respect the Packers and their traditions. Over the years, a significant number of Bears players have moved on to the Packers, and the reverse is true also. On occasion, I even root for the Packers when they are playing someone other than the Bears.
In political, religious, and economic matters, why can't we respect the opposition even though we disagree with them? One of the differences and problems is that in football both sides play by the same rules. If one side tries to gain an advantage over the other, it has to work within the framework of those rules. In politics and economics there are too many opportunities for people to go outside the very minimal framework of rules to gain advantages by making false and misleading statements, inciting an emotional population, and branding someone as an enemy. Maybe we need more referees and fact-checkers in our national discourse and our media as well as in our sports. There are many reasons to stick to the facts when debating our future. Too many times we have trouble even sticking to the facts when we discuss our past.

What Would Will Rogers Say?

As the pre-election idiocy winds down, each of the candidates is filling the TV airwaves with commercial messages lambasting his or her opponent as being completely unfit for election...My solution is to always hit the mute button when any political commercial comes on. Will Rogers said that he never met a man (or presumably a woman) that he didn't like. The current political commercials have the effect of having us voters not like any of them. None of the Above would win the election in a landslide. However, in keeping with the Will Rogers motto, I feel that I should have something positive to say about this election process. About all I can come up with is the suggestion that high-powered lawyers try to get a temporary injunction to delay the election for another month. The way these people are spending money on negative commercials, the economy would be in great shape after another month of this.

In the Kingdom of the Blind...

The old saying says: In the Kingdom of the Blind, the One-eyed is King. I always thought that saying was a bit wrong. I think it should be: In the Kingdom of the Blind, the One-eyed is Crazy.
Wouldn't the blind people think that the one-eyed person was talking about unbelievable things? I bring this up now because there is either an election or a mutual massacre about to happen. All the candidates spend all their time tearing into the opposition with false and misleading and outrageous statements. What would happen if one candidate actually spoke about what he or she would do to accomplish something for the people if he or she were elected? Would all the people rally to that candidate in relieved support? Would all of the political aggressors turn against such constructiveness? Could such a constructive candidate survive?...probably not. Just remember that we will be stuck with whomever wins. At this point I think that the American people and the country are going to lose no matter which backstabbing candidates win. Who wants to join me in organizing the None of the Above Party?

Two New National Political Parties

I have become very disillusioned by the political atmosphere in the United States. For many years the outlook has been that anyone who doesn't agree with my viewpoint is evil and should be slandered. I feel that it is time to do whatever is necessary to bring back the spirit of compromise and tolerance of the other person's viewpoint as worthy of logical debate and discussion. Accordingly, let's shuffle up the players in the Democratic and Republican parties so that people on both sides of the aisle have to talk and live with each other. I recommend that we mix the more conservative Democrats with the conservative Republicans to form the Demoblican Party. We should also mix the more moderate Republicans with the progressive Democrats to form the Pubrats Party. You have your choice whether you want to be in Demob or whether you want to be a Pubrat. Either way, we should have more intelligent conversation and more of a party.