Boxer vs. Fiorina & Brown vs. Whitman
Studies in the Devil You Know and the Devil You Don’t Want to Know
Barbara Boxer is the like the smart mom on the block who really cares about others but doesn’t actually trust or believe in anyone. This creates a dangerous internal duplicity that is not unlike someone who lovingly pats you on the head after you fall while muttering, “I knew you couldn’t do it”. As a politician she is a strong spokesperson for the less fortunate without actually having the strength of heart to do something for them because she doesn’t believe they deserve it or thinks they will just mess up any advantage they are given. This makes it unlikely that she will ever back any real fundamental change in society. She is not a bad person per se, she is just not a great person either.
Carly Fiorina reminds me of an alien entity that would care for her progeny until she felt they were no longer essential and then she would eat them. She is a person of affable demeanor, but most unpleasant character. It is hard to feel positive about her because she has such a dark disposition. Sadly she is one of those people who believe the end justifies the means. She is not empathically capable of understanding the full extent and implications of decisions she makes. This is a good quality in a ruthless dictator but not so good in a trusted civil servant.
Jerry Brown is like the wimpy kid who always wanted to get respect and became expert at conforming to the zeitgeist in pursuit of popularity. This is one reason he has been so successful in winning elections in the past. Unfortunately he does not have the strength, or courage to do what is needed to bring a nation-state like California back to full healthy functionality. He is like a TV show version of an expiring politician scrambling for the last hurrah that has always avoided him because he has lived a life of form over content. Like Senator Boxer he is also not a bad person, but he is certainly no civic hero.
Meg Whitman is such an off the charts negative person it is hard to know where to begin. She has many of the indicators on her face of person with antisocial personality disorder. She could be the poster child for the Nuovo School of Fascism. It is perfectly understandable why she would make an excellent CEO. Most corporations are essentially institutionalized forms of authoritarian, totalitarian states that have little interest in pluralism, egalitarianism, or rationalism; making Meg Whitman an ideal candidate to run such a state. It might not, however, be such a good idea to put her in charge of a republic that still has democratic ideals. It’s very poor thinking to assume that what makes a good C.E.O would translate into a functional civil servant. Ms. Whitman is the antithesis of what a political leader should be.
To learn more about face reading visit, ‘How to Read Faces’.
May 9, 2011
Obama does Osama
Posted by Atma under Commentary | Tags: obama, osama, political commentary, social issues, terrorism |1 Comment
This is why I didn’t vote for Obama and why Hollywood scripts should not guide foreign policy
First two personal assertions:
1) Barack Obama is not the pathetic and intellectually incurious enabler of criminal doctrine that his predecessor G.W. Bush was. And he is certainly not the dark and Machiavellian spook that Bush senior was. Cleary Obama is more affable and intellectually competent than GW.
Consequently, I prefer him over Bush the way I prefer a cautious panther to a rabid hyena. In other words, I find Obama potentially dangerous, albeit more reserved. After all in voting record and substantive policy practices Obama is not widely different from his predecessors. And he is arguably not bucking the status quo and putting us on a more humane and compassionate path.
2) Neither this article nor any of my convictions have a disparaging attitude against soldiers who risk their lives to protect the lives of the innocent. It has always been my hope to use my research and work in industrial psychology and stress management to support and improve the way in which the warrior class is trained up. A class I believe will always be needed even in the best of times. But there are rules to war and the way we abide by them defines us as people.
That said I can make the unpopular suggestion that the raid against Osama Bin Laden is nothing to cheer about. Yes, he was a bad man. Yes he deserved to be punished for exploiting religion to justify violence and murder. But there is a reason why we don’t approve of other governments illegally assassinating unpopular personalities. It is because contrary to the hormonally stimulating depictions in many Hollywood films, we as Americans (at least an overwhelming majority of us) do NOT believe in the doctrine that might makes right. We want to be the land of the free, not the home of the Stasi or the KGB.
Each time we surrender to the emotionally appealing but ethically destructive lure of the ‘might makes right’ mentality, we take a step on to a slippery slope that ends in the destruction of the humane and uplifting fabric that if not in practice at least in principle has always been our defining value as country.
The concept that might makes right is central to any totalitarian regime and anathema to the land of they who would be free. It is the foundation of all racist movements and almost always leads to oppression and then genocide.
What makes us strong and free is our ability to be just and fair by resisting the emotionally easy displays of violence as a means to solve our problems. Destroying your enemies is understandable. Destroying your enemies without becoming them is venerable. This is why we win when we put off revenge for justice, and overcome rage with wisdom.
Remember we were the country that put off Stalin’s show trials and Churchill’s summary executions and brought the perpetrators of the Nazi regime to stand relatively bona fide trial in the city of Nuremberg. We set an important standard in that era, we were not afraid to be better than our enemies.
When we rally around the simplistic devices of a Hollywood action film as a means for assuaging our political fears we do not become stronger, braver or freer. Instead we are diminished; reduced to cowering animals that lash out at what they fear. Courage requires compassion or else it becomes just a subterfuge for despotism. This is why assassinating Osama was wrong and capturing him would have been the far more American thing to do.
As a people we should remember that (at least) philosophically we have always championed the opposite of might makes right. We are Americans and we have a duty to be the best example of all the important virtues; courage, kindness, and wisdom.
As Abe Lincoln said, “Let us have faith that right makes might, and in that faith, let us, to the end, dare to do our duty as we understand it”
Share, tweet, Digg, etc: