CIAO DATE: 05/2010
Volume: 0, Issue: 18
Spring 2010
Flashpoint: Iran (PDF)
Barak Obama was swept into the presidency on a tidal wave of anti-Bush sentiment. At the moment, it seems that he soon could be swept out on a similar wave. Getting beyond the strong partisan divide, Americans as a whole are united in the belief that most, if not all, politicians are corrupt, unethical, and clueless or perhaps just indifferent about the solution to America’s problems. In truth, this has been the state of affairs ever since the presidency of John F. Kennedy. But this attitude is steadily getting worse, and the expressions of distrust becoming more vitriolic. Indeed, prior to JFK’s assassination, Camelot was becoming tarnished. JFK’s death changed all that – a modern day inversion of Mark Antony’s observation about Caesar that “the evil that men do lives after them; the good is oft interred with their bones.” Kennedy’s successor, Lyndon Johnson, chose not to run for a second term because the public sentiment was so viscerally anti-Vietnam. And what was at the root of the sentiment? Distrust – the belief that our government was lying to us. The distrust became more severe under Johnson’s successor. Richard Nixon was so maligned he got the nickname “Tricky Dick.” The quote that became his public epitaph was, “I am not a crook.” Carter was not a crook. He was, however, totally incompetent. America lost tremendous international standing during his tenure. Our embassy in Tehran was overrun, and all we could do was count the days. Carter’s impotence was the genesis of our problems with terrorism today. Ronald Reagan was swept into office on a crest of anger against the Carter administration. He proved to be a successful President. It was not that there wasn’t a significant effort to vilify him. It just didn’t stick, earning him the title “Teflon President.” Yet there were still moments of great distrust, such as Iran-Contra. The George H.W. Bush years were defined by competent mediocrity. Bush I’s was a colorless administration, devoid of what the President himself called the “vision thing.” After Bush came the President who will be remembered most of all for his extracurricular activities. President Clinton had the image of an amoral, more likely immoral, person. Then came Bush II and Obama. According to a survey by the Rasmussen polling group taken after January’s State of the Union, the vast majority of Americans did not believe most of the assertions made by President Obama during that address. We are in a crisis of leadership and it is devolving. In the past, in other settings, these kinds of crises have resulted in either the emergence of a dictator or revolution. Fortunately for us, we have a built in revolution every four years – a safety valve, so to speak. We don’t need a revolution to “throw the bums out.” But the United States is also the leader of the free world, and its so-called “policeman.” In that role, we have prevented Europe from being overrun by the Third Reich, and subsequently by Communism. We are now engaged in a struggle with the forces of militant Islam – who, if not for U.S. power, would similarly seek to conquer the world. World War I was fought to “keep the world safe for democracy.” That theme and purpose have not changed. We are still seeking to do so. And it is for this reason that a vacuum of leadership in the United States is perhaps a greater international threat than a domestic one.