Keywords
or Term: Iowa Republican Freedom Summit; Field of Dreams; Republican Hopefuls;
Lampoon or incoherent speech of Governor Sarah Palin, Governor Chris Christie;
Eloquence, Leadership, Congressional Republican Leadership, Prime Minister
Bibi Netanyahu, US House Speaker John Boehner, Dick Cheney; Donald
Rumsfeld, Communication, and Immigration.
The
Republican Party had a freedom summit in Des Moines, Iowa this weekend;
probably with the intention of preparing for 2016 general elections.
Considering the number of hopefuls on the speaker’s list of the local
organizing committee: Jim DeMint, former U.S. senator from South Carolina; Newt
Gingrich, former US House Speaker; Donald Trump, real estate mogul and TV
personality; Sarah Palin former 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee
and former governor of Alaska; Steve King, Seventh term Congressman from
Iowa and host to the summit;, Scott Walker, Governor of Wisconsin; Rick
Santorum, former US Senator from Pennsylvania and Republican winner of 2012
Iowa caucus; Rick Perry, Governor of Texas; Reverend Mike Huckabee, former
Governor of Arkansas; Carly Fiorina, former CEO of the computing giant, HP; one
is apt to believe the congregation provided a spectacular contrast to what
Democrats are anticipating.
The
dozen or more Republican hopefuls advanced several theses as to how their party
will win back the White House. Out of the twelve fields of dreamers, probably
only three actually have the backbone of their party’s leadership, the rank and
file; and or, the loyalty of the far- right group, the Tea Party that is
weighing heavily on the direction of the party. Absent from the meeting were
Jeb Bush and Mitt Romney, whom some polls say are probably the party’s front
runners. The Republicans prided themselves on being the favorites of the
American people based on the 2014 mid-term election successes. Apart from the
usual Obama’s Administration’s bashing and hammering, immigration became the
main topic of their discussion. And, if an assessment of the accomplishments of
the meeting is to be written, there is none more telling than the headline: GOP
has a Sarah Palin problem!
The
Republican Party sent across the nation or probably the world, that at least
one of their potential candidates is predictively hardly eloquent. It wasn’t
that the field of dreamers is hardly energetic enough. It wasn’t the jumbling
together of the definition of what is meant to be conservative for a Republican
Party aspirant, it was the fact that Sarah Palin, being Sarah Palin, had a long
and unyielding speech which even by Republican Party’s standard, was considered
meaningless, incoherent and disjointed. Her speech and other unfounded
criticisms by other speakers made observers say, if this group is the field of
candidates Republicans are offering in 2016, baring the inclusion of Mitt
Romney and Jeb Bush, Republican Party has now set the standard for nomination
or inclusion so low, potential candidates attempting to seek the Republican
Party nomination need no political laurel to jump into the race or bandwagon.
In
2012, the crucial downfall of the Romney-Palin candidacy was how light-weight
Sarah Palin was with her interview with then, CBS Katie Couric. Her speech at
the Iowan Republican Party Freedom Summit was likened to a buffoon’s and truth
be told, early elimination of the former governor of the State of Alaska, is
justifiably prudent based on her performance. Further, some newspapers likened
her statements to those most familiar with FOX News audience, like John
Stossel’s: “No good data proving second hand smoke kills nonsmokers”; and,
Mayor Giuliani’s: “President Obama has issued a statement asking everybody to
hate the police.” In addition, Her Iowa Freedom summit speech was not only
incoherent, Republican reviewers themselves agree that it was close to being
given by an idiot! That is telling enough of a candidate Republican Party’s
leadership once considered a Vice-Presidential material; and now, a potential
candidate for nomination as the party’s flag bearer in 2016. With former
Alaska’s governor’s performance at the Iowa’s Republican Party’s Freedom summit
this weekend, Republicans will invariably come to a realization that poor old
Sarah isn’t only incoherent, she has no business ever seeking to become
anything at the national level.
Eloquence, leadership and
the Republican Party
One
Republican aspirant, Governor Chris Christie, made an argument for leadership
quality for potential inhabitant of the Office of the Presidency. This
agreeably is credible; however, his technique of communication proved to be
rather in your face or with that torch of New Jersey brashness that many across
the nation hardly buy. Governor Christy who argues much for leadership in that
office came across as insulting when he said, if Iowan’s are not so much into
his candidacy why do they continue to invite him to this type of forum. By the
last time I checked, one of the qualities of a good leader is the ability to
communicate effectively with people; including not talking down or up to the
people you are leading. If Christie does not articulate this simple philosophy,
either he is disingenuous in arguing on the point of leadership in the
inhabitant of the office of the Presidency; or, he hardly understands what is
appropriate before a host.
Over
the intervening years of President Obama’s leadership, America saw how eloquent
and dynamic a leader he has been even when some disagree with his handling of a
few foreign policy issues. By contrast, Congressional Republicans have been
either staid, almost stodgy, on what type of leadership is necessary in working
with the opposition party; and, what exceptions are essential in communicating
with the incumbent of the White House. With the exception of probably a few
Congressional Republicans, the choice has either been to embarrass, insult or
ignore protocol as regards communicating with the White House. A recent example
is the US House Speaker invitation to Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu to speak
to combined body of congress without the normal protocol of communication with
the White House. A few of us take away from such congressional Republican
leadership’s action, an incurable ignorance of what leadership entails at the
national level.
When
the Republican Party entered the post-Reagan Era, the party inherited some
brilliant ideas that offered great promises and were vigorously debated and
sometimes accepted by Democrats as viable options of dealing with some thorny
national issues on wars and the promulgation of wars on behalf of the people of
America. At some point, Democrats were sold on the two doctrines of American
nuclear preeminence and military superiority, doctrines developed during the
1950’s and which had been administered and followed by various Republican as
well as Democratic Administrations, as documented in Spring 1986 issue of
Foreign Affairs by Casper Weinberger, US Secretary of Defense during Reagan
Administration. Nuclear deterrence, strategic stability, counter insurgence and
extended deterrence were part of that strategy. Some of these ideas and
strategies were unfortunately bungled under Republican Administration’s
leadership. The first Republican Bush’s administration Noriega debacle, when
the 41st President of the United States secretly encouraged a
covert operation to simulate a nascent guerrilla movement in Panama; and,
turned around to invade Panama. Second Republican Bush’s Administration
leadership failure, where the 43rd President of the United
States used American military interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan under the
pretext of overthrowing a dictator and or assuaging the September 11, 2001
World trade Fair bombing, to create a huge mess that the current Democratic
Administration is cleaning up.
Some
people believe some of these misplaced direction or bungled national strategies
and or policies are traceable to failure of Republican leadership under the
guidance of two men, or with implicit recommendation to Republican White House
from the two: 1) Dick Chaney, Chief of Staff under Republican Gerald Ford’s
Administration and Vice President to George W. Bush (Bush II); 2) Donald
Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense for Gerald Ford and President George W. Bush
(Bush II). Donald H. Rumsfeld took over from Dick Cheney who was second Bush’s
first Secretary of Defense. These two Republican men or bureaucrats probably
created more challenges for America on issues of national security and foreign
policies than anyone you may know. A few believe both were foreign intervention
cabals that were on the pay role of the military industrial complex.
The
argument is not that Democrats haven’t had their bad days while occupants of
the White House or executing; however, over the past six decades Democratic
Administrations have fared better on question of leadership and have swayed the
nation towards economic progress and national stability more than Republican
Administrations. Those aside, the current hot button issue of immigration, is
one that has been tackled by both Republicans and Democratic Administrations in
the White House. The current surge of opinions to look at the problem once
again, has been met with proclivity of Congressional Republican leadership
recalcitrance. No longer are the debates over executive order taken by the Obama’s
Administration to do something about the issue of immigration confined to
Congress, aspiring Republican candidates for the 2016 general elections are
already creating divisiveness regarding action taken by this administration to
address an ongoing problem that US Congress have failed to take action on; or,
waited until the problem blows in the face of the occupant of the White House,
before taking responsibility for what taxpayers already paid lawmakers to
complete or execute. Today, Republicans are in the majority in Congress and
everyone is looking at what their accomplishment is going to be in the next two
years of President Obama’s Administration.
President
Obama has said he no longer has a campaign to run. In that event, Democrats and
Republicans of goodwill are welcomed to run for his office in 2016. As we can
tell, or as thing stands today, there is a unique opportunity for anyone who
meets the constitutional stipulated requirements of a candidate for the oval
office. Also, with some degree of certainty, Governors Sara Palin and Chris
Christie will not be the nominee of the Republican Party for numerous reasons,
one or two of which have been covered here. By the way, going by the
Constitution, Texas Republican Senator Ted Cruz, the Canadian born politician
who has turned a power broker in the Republican Party and a darling of the Tea
Party, is unqualified. The flow of power sharing or brokerage within the
Republican Party, lends itself to such exploitation of people of ill-will
parading as potential candidate; these people know they are unqualified based
on the provisions of the constitution; however, they will continue to stir the
pot. As scornful as some of us are of Rumsfeld and Cheney’s leadership, those
Republicans had some brazen leadership qualities, for better or worse, which we
do not see; or are yet to find, in the twelve that came unto the podium in
Iowan Republican Party Freedom Summit.
One
final word, In case Boehner and Netanyahu missed it, the people of Israel are
already befouling the campaign stunts of Bibi; and, some American lawmakers,
Republicans and Democrats alike, are keeping tabs of Boehner’s leadership
failure on the issue of communication and more!
No comments:
Post a Comment