Letter 2 America for June 24, 2014

Dear America,

There is a folksy expression for unfortunate people: they can't win for losing.  It means that even in a contest to determine the worst loser, they can't win.  That is the position that our president finds himself in now.  And it isn't all because the Republicans have been out to sabotage his presidency from the beginning.  They have even admitted it over and over again, but for some reason, the voters don't seem to hold that against them.  But even with that unfathomable anomaly in tow, The President hasn't done himself any favors in at least one way.  The problem in Iraq is an example.  He deliberated for a bit too long, but that's what we need in this country as opposed to someone like John McCain who's answer to every foreign problem is military intervention of some kind...the Iraq problem not being an exception.  So it wasn't that aspect of the way in which The President chose to act that is the problem.  The problem is that when he made his decision, he announced it in the press room at the White House in the middle of the day.  I don't remember the last time President Obama had a press conference at night when a voter might actually see it, and after all, isn't that the point.  I have registered this plaint before, but obviously, President Obama doesn't read this blog.  Or perhaps he just doesn't want the American people to see and hear his position statements first hand, I don't know.  But in my opinion, the slump in his approval among the American people is a function of his being undermined constantly by the Republican Party, and by his diffidence when it comes to speaking to his people first hand rather than letting everything he says be filtered through the major news casts every night.  Film at eleven is no substitute for direct communication, and as a politician, Mr. Obama should know that.  Here's an example of how that kind of camera-shyness affects the electoral process.

Last weekend I was at my brother-in-law's house where he was having a pig roast in honor of his daughter's high school graduation.  During the festivities I sat down next to one of his neighbors who always comes to these events and we began to talk, waxing more political as we went.  The neighbor complained about having to pay taxes to support all those people who don't want to work.  He noted that there are jobs going unfilled and that the unemployed could have them if they would just relocate...if they wanted to work...but they just sit at home and collect.  That is the Republican-conservative trope today; the unemployed are just lazy.  Well, there is a limit as to how political you want a discussion to get when you are talking to your brother-in-law's neighbor and you are going to ride home in the same car as your borther-in-law's sister, not to mention get into the same bed with her later on, so I kept my responses very low key.  But not two nights later I saw a news item about a program that prepares high school kids to work in business, and in the course of that piece it was mentioned that there are only a million of those jobs that are going begging while there are ten million unemployed.  And it has occurred to me also that relocation isn't a good alternative to jobs in Seattle going begging when there are unemployed people in Connecticut who are unemployed.  One parent goes to Seattle to get that job and the other wants to go with him, not to mention the children.  And if the employed parent does so, then he or she is unemployed in Seattle instead of Connecticut even though his or her spouse is no longer unemployed in Connecticut but is rather employed in Seattle.  And what about the house they had to sell.  Can they get a mortgage in Seattle when only one of them is still working, and can they wait for their house to sell when there is a glut of existing housing on the market back where they came from.  It is a concatenation of circumstances that every unemployed person faces...one thing after another.  Yet Republicans don't even acknowledge the complexity of unemployment and relocation in response to it, and no one calls them on it.

The next time I sit down with my brother-in-law's neighbor, I am going to try to raise those points in a cordial manner so that he understands that, contrary to the opinion that he expressed to my wife, he isn't likely to change my party affiliation to Republican by repeating the same old canards that have left President Obama and the Democrats in this deep hole in which they now find themselves.  But my brother-in-law's neighbor is hardly the point.  The point is that I have to make these arguments for his benefit because our leader-in-chief isn't doing it.  I'd rather be in the position of sitting across from the guy and just smiling at the folly of his thoughts in the knowledge that my president will disabuse him of his erroneous notions any minute now, but I can't get that comfortable because there is no assurance, and maybe not even a likelihood that President Obama will defend himself...and me.

Your friend,

Mike