The GOP has begun its unofficial process for selecting its next standard bearer. Over the weekend Governor Chris Christy began his quest with an appearance before the Republican Jewish Committee. Some consider it Sheldon Abelson’s cattle call because he has promised to pledge so much money to the one candidate he things can win. I wonder why?
If one considers only Governor Christy and President Obama, the Chinese symbol of “yin and yang” comes to mind. Christy is a shoot from the hip, take charge, personality who exudes the message “I can get it done”. President Obama, who cannot run again, is almost the opposite. Obama thinks about things and seeks information when his facts are not sufficient. Obama speaks a great game but somehow seems to move onto the next issue leaving the last one to flounder under insufficient management control.
The question this begs is under which type of leadership would the country be better off?
For the past 6 years, the GOP has never failed to inform the public that the America as we know it, was about to end. The deficit was out of control and the resulting debt would sink America’s greatness within the next generation. “Tax and spend” democrats need to be kicked out of office for the good of America, they said. Hmmm. While the economy is not great by US standards, it is by world standards.
In addition, the GOP formula for success, when tried elsewhere in the world, have had awful results. Austerity which is a by product of the GOP wishes to shrink government spending has lead to no growth and increased unemployment where ever it has been tried (following the 2007/8 economic recession).
Entitlements reform, another GOP mainstay, has exposed either a naivete or outright cruelness. GOP proposals about how to reform entitlements patently favor the wealthy (no new taxes) and suggest a class distinction (lower Medicare, Medicaid, and safety net programs) on where the American dream should be focused.
From the public record, there is no basis for any Republican to think they deserve election. The public record, however, holds also the Democrat’s accomplishments. Not much.
With the primary exception of the Affordable Care Act, “a lot of hot air” and not much else could sum up Democrat proposals. While Democrats have fiercely defended entitlements, they have also not offered any ideas on how to fund or how to ensure entitlement spending was wisely being spent.
Yin and Yang does not have to reflect only the differences between a Barack Obama and Chris Christy type of individuals. A thoughtful President does not have to an ineffective executive, nor does an effective President have to be a thoughtless person either.
What has been missing from both Parties has been a holistic approach. The need for entitlements signals a greater problem within the society. While every society will have poor, uneducated, mentally ill, and the sick citizens who cannot provide for their own well being, the size and scope of US entitlements may go well beyond this number. Why?
I cannot recall any discussion by either Party which dissects entitlement spending, assigns a cause for the various needs, and offers alternative ways to eliminate these needs. (This is not a bad approach for all government spending including defense.)
I wonder whether who ever represents the Democrat or Republican parties in 2016 when viewed side by side will look the same or as yin and yang?