It is with a
great deal of curiosity and amusement that I sit back and watch as one
Presidential hopeful after another declares their candidacy for the
2008 campaign. With more than a year and a half to go before election
day, many have had their hats in the ring for quite some time. Rush
Limbaugh refers to the "drive-by media", and although I take whatever
any of these talk show pundits say with a grain of salt, nevertheless
it's impossible to turn on the TV or radio on a daily basis without
being bombarded with the "news" of the day regarding any of these
"would-be" Presidents, and one has to wonder how these news
organizations will find enough fodder to feed us for the next
eighteen months.
Yet, in
reviewing the list of contenders, it struck me that we Americans once
again are being forced to make a selection based on "schmaltz" over
substance. Hillary Clinton was named the front runner before she even
announced her candidacy. Her main claim to fame seems to be the fact
that she's a woman. Now there's a reason to vote for someone! Yessir,
what this country needs is a woman President, if only because we've
never had one before. And who can turn on the TV without seeing Barack
Obama on the nightly news? The attraction here is obvious; we've never
had a black President before either. Given these two parameters, it
only seems logical that the ideal candidate would be a black
woman! That's covering all the bases! And hasn't John McCain been
around forever? Rudy Giuliani, the so called "People's Mayor", was
great in the aftermath of 9/11, but who wouldn't have been? What did he
do to prevent it?
So far I
haven't heard any new ideas being proposed by any of these contenders,
regardless of their political party affiliations. We are just supposed
to believe that the current
administration is no good, and that these folks will make everything
better. If I sound skeptical, perhaps it's because I've seen this same
scenario played out every four years for most of my adult life. So I
decided to take a look back, and see if in my memory, things were ever
any different.
My early
childhood years were in the 1950's, a decade most historians will agree
was probably the most tranquil period in the last century. I wasn't old
enough to fully understand the political arena at the time. All I
knew was that Eisenhower was President for what seemed like forever.
Times were good. My old man had a job, and so did everyone else's I
knew. Other than a mini "incident" in Lebanon in 1958, there wasn't
much happening on the international scene. The Cold War had been an
accepted way of life since the end of WW II, and really wasn't much
cause for alarm by the general public. The launch of Sputnik by the
Soviets in 1957 caught most of us by surprise, but even that only
served as a wake up call to a country and scientific community that had
become complacent concerning advances in our own space program. We
used that as a catalyst to get into the "space race", and in the finest
sense of American tradition and ingenuity, found a way to eventually
prevail.
But the
"business as usual" running of the country, mostly by men who were
considered grandfatherly types, all changed in 1960 with the election
of a young, handsome, articulate Senator from Massachusetts, John F.
Kennedy. Here was a guy who was a breath of fresh air, who could think
on his feet, and hold his own on almost any topic. His Presidential
news conferences were instructional lessons in all things political,
and I can remember playing sick, just so I could stay home from school
and watch them. The man had charisma and captivated the nation,
regardless of one's political persuasion. He was a visionary who
talked about putting men on the moon, and even beyond.
He started the Peace Corps, an organization dedicated to going
into foreign countries in a helping capacity, not as enforcers of
whatever form of government we deemed to be in the best interest of
those countries. He had his failures, to be sure. The most glaring was
the disaster at the Bay of Pigs in Cuba, yet he stood tall in 1962 when
he faced down the Soviets in the Cuban Missile Crisis. But
regardless of the political slant historians of today will put on his
short-lived Presidency, what cannot be denied is the sense of rebirth
he gave to the country. Nothing seemed impossible with him at the helm.
That all came to a screeching halt that awful day in Dallas in November
1963, and in my opinion, this country hasn't been the same since.
Lyndon Johnson's decision to escalate
our involvement in Vietnam was just the beginning in what has been a
litany of reasons for the American public to mistrust our
elected leaders and divide the electorate. We went from Vietnam to
the Watergate era in the 1970's, and a President forced to resign after
going on TV and assuring us that he "wasn't a crook." From there
we went to double digit inflation during the Carter years, Iran Contra
and the S & L debacle in the 1980's, the misadventures of Bush I in
Iraq in the early 1990's, the Lewinsky mess with Clinton, and
continues up to today with what is fast becoming one of the most
unpopular wars in this country's history.
This is not
meant to be a condemnation of either political party. There is plenty
of blame to go around on both sides of the aisle for what's gone on in
the past forty-five years. But what is lacking with today's field
of Presidential "wanna be's" is a candidate who will foster that
same sense of enthusiasm, that same optimistic outlook as that man who
stood at the podium all those years ago and uttered that famous "ask
not what your country can do for you" line. We are once again being
asked to accept a choice between a bunch of uninspiring individuals who
are being fed to us in sound bytes by Limbaugh's drive-by media. Have
we become a country that doesn't have the right to ask for, and
demand, more than that? What has happened to statesmanship? Today
we look to Hollywood for our inspiration, so much so that one of our
states now has a governor that can't even pronounce it, and I'm still
trying to find "Kahleefornya" on the map! But that's okay, at least
with Conan running things, they'll never have to worry about a
Barbarian invasion!
Sadly, I
don't see anyone on the political horizon who will step up to the plate
next year and inspire us with the same sense of rebirth and optimism
that young Jack Kennedy did almost fifty years ago. We are a country
that begs for new leadership, from either political party; continuing
to become involved in unpopular military conflicts on foreign soil,
trying to come to terms with the new threat of global terrorism,
importing more than we make, and faced with an illegal immigration
problem so out of control that we are now forced to press #1 on our
telephones just to speak in our native tongue. And yet we are a country
that seems to be stumbling into its future, instead of being guided by
the political wisdom, ideas, and vision of a new and inspiring
candidate. Next year looks like it will be another re-run of past
election years, and be just another campaign of name calling and mud
slinging, without any fresh new ideas being put forth, or "ask not what
your country can do for you" challenges issued. In a country that
has been divided in one way or another since that November day in
Dallas, the day America died, it is long overdue.
Indeed,
where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio?
Bob Gloor
March 2007