"Taking himself seriously, so you don't have to."

Talking to the Chair

How about I write something happy?

 

Listening to Boston! What happiness! Here’s the deal – everything that I’ve hoped for us, for us to see and change and think and ponder of, all the changes, all of the adjustable states, the changeable mindsets that have all seemed so concrete, all of those proclivities for selfishness, dubiousness, corruption, war, hatred, fear, status-quo enforcement for tradition’s sake over our better interests (suddenly, no, there are still some things not quite changing, such as the prevalence of military technology, the recent abuse that the Euro [and thereby the future of Europe] has taken, continued reliance upon police state working, and still the lack of universal healthcare), but especially the willingness of politicians to address actual issues. Obama, you glorious man. You have addressed and engaged more than could have been expected. Well done sir. But with a little more courage, a bit more bite on the issues of military actions, that is, restricting them, and reinforcing a “common sense” approach to military action; not denying a position as global police, but being more “lenient”, so to speak, would do wonders for our planet’s coming together. But this can only ever come with a sense of “we will not lower ourselves to the enemy’s level”. With democracy so prevalent, we have become a village of individuals, one of which (being the U.S.), must be better, must not engage in petty actions, must not enforce that which is vague. But reserve its actions for those moments of absolute certainty, and have leniency for those punishable offenses that are inconsequential (when in doubt, don’t). A law-like (personal scale) attitude would greatly endear us to the rest of the world.

 

At that, however, taking this position as guardian, protector, “king” if you will, being a superpower, requires that we not only show deference with military action (benevolence in those matters), but great strength in economic, political, and educational institutions. We cannot keep our position without holding those highest ambitions, those most recent developments, the most “progressive” and sustainable policies in the highest regard, as top priorities. We KNOW what needs to be done in regard to global warming and fossil fuel use. However one decides to “go about” effecting the change is for another essay. There are obstacles to hurdle, surely. A slower approach is best, though I think your healthcare reform bill was far too weak, and in fact pandering. There is no moral base upon which to stand that allows anything other than universal healthcare for everyone. How to go about it (I understand that this might be one little step, amongst many more, but at this point, on this issue, it is a waste of resources to go so slowly. It might be effected quite quickly [though I understand that it must pass the congress and the senate, were it to be a direct democracy on issues like this, I think it would get a majority. But as it is, you need the approval of those, for the most part, cunts.]), were you to really put your balls out there, we could have it. This is one of the reasons for my disappointment. And if you were not thinking of the end-goal of universal healthcare, but were instead trying to increase health insurance industry’s bottom line, then.. well… I hope that was not your intention. Okay, that’s enough “talking to the chair”. (But seriously, who doesn’t dream about talking to the president?)

One Comment

  1. Taking the overeivw, this post hits the spot

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>