I saw a bit of your speech in Kansas today, Mr. President.  Just so you’ll know, I campaigned for you a bit in 2008.  I’d never done that before in any presidential election year.  I believed in the hope that I felt coming from you.

In some ways, I’ve liked what I’ve seen out of your presidency.  You’ve driven home some key initiatives — both in domestic policy and in foreign policy.  On the same night you showed some real courage in looking Donald Trump in the eye and poking fun at his “birther” beliefs at the last correspondents’ dinner, you knew that a special force of troops following your orders were going in to rid the world of Osama bin Laden because he was finally found.  That was cool!

There have been other areas I haven’t been so joyful about.  The health coverage — I refuse to call it health care — reform legislation was a major step forward for this nation, but it wasn’t enough and it gave too many concessions to pharmaceutical companies and health insurance weasels.  I can only hope that this “Obamacare” measure gets strengthened in the years to come.

Despite what so many conservatives say, I know for a fact that you are not “the most liberal President in the history of the United States.”  I know you’re more moderate than that, and I knew that going in to the 2008 election.

But, for cryin’ out loud, Mr. President, when Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-Ohio) can stand in front of a bank of cameras, recorders and reporters and smirk while saying he got 98% of what he wanted out of those debt reduction talks a while back, something is wrong.

Negotiation and compromise doesn’t mean you give away 98% of your house to the other side when they gripe and moan that you’re not doing a thing for them, and hope they’ll give 48% of it back the next time they come knockin’!  I’m all for compromise, but I’ve seen a few too many times when your sense of compromise has reached a bit too far to the conservative extreme.  Many people think you’re so liberal?  At times, I’ve felt like you’ve been the second coming of Ronald Reagan!

I know, I know, it isn’t easy dealing with a bunch of Rush Limbaugh-led, Fox-News-is-the-gospel-truth-so-help-me-God believin’ nincompoops whose only business plan for the U.S. is to oust you in the next election by filibustering damn near every major attempt at doing something constructive in America — like creating jobs — but let’s see some more guts out of you from now on!  I know you’ve got it in you!

So, your speech on Tuesday that devoted so much attention to the middle class and income inequality and tax reform … it was good.  But give more specifics.  You wanted to come across like Teddy Roosevelt?  Be more like Teddy Roosevelt!  Charge up Washington, D.C.’s version of San Juan Hill!  Have the courage to weed out some of those people you have in your Cabinet who helped get this nation into the mess it’s in now before they even made it into the White House!

Be like Teddy!

Practical equality of opportunity for all citizens, when we achieve it, will have two great results. First, every man will have a fair chance to make of himself all that in him lies; to reach the highest point to which his capacities, unassisted by special privilege of his own and unhampered by the special privilege of others, can carry him, and to get for himself and his family substantially what he has earned. Second, equality of opportunity means that the commonwealth will get from every citizen the highest service of which he is capable. No man who carries the burden of the special privileges of another can give to the commonwealth that service to which it is fairly entitled.
“I stand for the square deal. But when I say that I am for the square deal, I mean not merely that I stand for fair play under the present rules of the game, but that I stand for having those rules changed so as to work for a more substantial equality of opportunity and of reward for equally good service… When I say I want a square deal for the poor man, I do not mean that I want a square deal for the man who remains poor because he has not got the energy to work for himself. If a man who has had a chance will not make good, then he has got to quit… Now, this means that our government, National and State, must be freed from the sinister influence or control of special interests. Exactly as the special interests of cotton and slavery threatened our political integrity before the Civil War, so now the great special business interests too often control and corrupt the men and methods of government for their own profit. We must drive the special interests out of politics… For every special interest is entitled to justice, but not one is entitled to a vote in Congress, to a voice on the bench, or to representation in any public office. The Constitution guarantees protection to property, and we must make that promise good. But it does not give the right of suffrage to any corporation. The true friend of property, the true conservative, is he who insists that property shall be the servant and not the master of the commonwealth; who insists that the creature of man’s making shall be the servant and not the master of the man who made it. The citizens of the United States must effectively control the mighty commercial forces which they have themselves called into being.”
— Theodore Roosevelt

There ya have it!  Just my $.02 worth.

Thank you, sir!


7 thoughts on “Mr. President, may I have a few words for you?

  1. Other then killing Osama, can name any other achievements of Obama in his 3 years of presidency? Me neither.
    As for Obamacare/debt reduction et. al. It hurts me to say this but America is BROKE. More broke then any other legal entity in the history of mankind. Maybe even more broke then all other entities combined. All the ‘healthcare’/’tax cuts’ are meaningless unless this elephant in the room is dealt with.

    1. Oh, one more thing. That debt you’re talking about? How many years did it take to accumulate that? When did it begin? Under which presidency/presidencies did that debt increase the most? And how about taking tax rates back to the Clinton era, at least, to try and correct that?

      Your turn.

  2. Here’s something i’d like to see Obama do, but i won’t hold my breath.Let him grow some balls and take the point in proposing to abolish Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthy.These tax cuts were set to expire at the end of 2010 but he cut a “deal” with the Rethuglikans to extend the tax cuts for a couple more years.

    The right wing will fight tooth and nail to keep the tax breaks for the rich intact(big surprise);let Obama channel some of Teddy R’s grit and fight the good fight for the rest of us poor saps.

  3. The American Electorate has sacrificed its better self at the altar of tax cuts. Selfish, short-sighted, instant gratification. The average American couldn’t speak for 30 seconds on the history of the relationship between business and labor, on the sweeping social improvements brought about as a direct result of the people (in the form of their government), getting regulations in place to ensure fair practices by business. As a result of that lack of awareness, the American Electorate has become a pawn of the propaganda engine that wants to sell them a bill of goods under the banner that “government is bad” – and the propaganda has become so effective that politicians quake in their boots and fail to demonstrate the value of government by governing. The prophecy becomes self fulfilling – and has given us Barak Obama. Our President is reluctant to govern, and even at that, he is the only thing standing between us and total takeover of the corporatocracy. Lesser of two evils. Sad, but true.
    Of course, there is the “elephant in the room” to deal with. Unfortunately, the “elephant”, in the form of the GOP, has become even more the tool of the corporatocracy than its sycophantic historical record could have predicted. The difference is the new, “global economy”. For the majority of the history of the USA, and specifically the 20th century, whichever way the pendulum swung in American governance, there were coincidental benefits for both sides – policies favoring business would (even if accidentally) benefit labor to some extent due to growth of business and vice versa due to better wages and benefits resulting in increased in consumerism of the labor class . Today, that symbiotic relationship has been broken. Laissez Faire policies result more in reducing domestic jobs and wages and less opportunity for the middle class. This is a new development, and if those who represent the average american don’t realize it, and fast, then a third world USA is not only possible, but inevitable.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s