It's Time For An Intervention

Because of the divide that both the Republicans and the Democrats are experiencing during this, the most interesting Presidential Primary Race in American history, we hear the term "qualified' a lot. Bernie says Hillary isn't 'qualified' to be President, and a slew of Republicans accuse Trump of being 'unqualified' to become the Republican Standard Bearer, let alone the President elect.

This is astonishing because for the average voter, most of the candidates who are presented to us as 'leaders' who could take the office of the 'most powerful leader on earth,' are politicians. And surveys continually point out that Americans simply don't trust politicians, period.

Why should they?

Like Laurel and Hardy, America finds itself in 'Another Fine Mess.' We are addicted to spending ourselves into oblivion, the world is on fire, our infrastructure is crumbling from neglect, our cost of living is in the stratosphere, and our ability to unite over social and civil issues has all but been abandoned, and robots are rapidly replacing middle class jobs. Millennials think capitalism is unfair and socialism may be preferable. Women feel under siege, as do most men. Our business community is shrinking as is our job base. The list of challenges is endless, so much so that the establishment, on both sides of the isle, recommend we turn it over to one of those career politicians who got us into this mess in the first place!

Isn't that the definition of insanity?

So just what 'qualifies' a man or woman to be the leader of the modern world? Is it political experience? If so, how did Dwight Eisenhower get elected? Is it charm? Dick Nixon was elected twice, so I don't think that criteria is important. Is it intelligence? According to Democrats, it can't be because they lost to George Bush twice! Is it expertise in a certain area such as foreign policy? Nope, because no one knew what Barack Obama stood for regarding that when he ascended to the Oval Office in 2008.

For example, in a conversation between prominent journalists Tom Brokaw and Charlie Rose recorded in November 2008, just a few days before the election of Obama, the men admitted they knew little about the Democratic candidate, his policies on China, terrorism or the Middle East, or what he thought about NATO or Iran. They admitted that the press had all but ignored those issues, instead they were focused on the idea that a Black Man could actually win the Presidency.

They noted he had attended Harvard, so he must be intelligent!

The point is, in the history of our country, the diversity of the candidates for the Presidency has been fairly homogenous. They have been near unanimously former legislators or Governors. They have been consummate insiders, establishment operatives, part and parcel of the system. Even with his brief political history, other than a stint as an Illinois Congressman, Obama was essentially a community activist and organizer. He is highly educated and very articulate, but his worldliness was non-existent. He had no military experience, no management experience, and some would say no business background.

But he said all the right stuff, and he was not George Bush.

So what is it about Trump that indicates his inability to effectively lead a nation in distress? How is it that the backgrounds of other candidates qualify as adequate? Hillary has experience in the Senate, and has worldly exposure as the Secretary of State. But she has no business or financial background, other than amazingly accumulating nearly 100 million dollars since leaving the White House, while working primarily as a public official. Actually, that is nothing short of miraculous!

Kasich suggests only he is qualified, because he has been in national political office most of his life! He has balanced budgets, born legislation, and wolfed down massive varieties of ethnic food during his travels. Cruz is a former Deputy Attorney General and an active third year Congressman for Texas, while Bernie has 34 years of elective office from Mayor, Governor and now Representative. By that measure, he is by far the most 'qualified ' candidate of them all! His solution? Make America like Cuba!

Trump, on the other hand has built an International business empire. He owns and operates some of the world's most premium resort and business properties. He has interests on several continents, and has negotiated contracts with all variety of governments and cultures. He has interests in multiple industries from food, travel, sports, entertainment and publishing, and is considered a genius in branding. He has operated his companies with thousands of employees, primarily in the multicultural and politically diverse milieu of New York. He has successfully navigated every extreme form of political regimes known to America, from Dinkins to Bloomberg, Cuomo to Giuliani to Pitaki to de Blasio, Trump has thrived.

So along comes critics, George Will for example, who says the idea that an outsider should even consider running for the penultimate public office, would ruin the delicate balance of our representative style government, wreck our ability to lead the world, to preserve the peace and to provide security and an environment conducive to economic expansion and improved opportunity for everyone on the planet.

The question is, if that were true, why are so many people so anxious to see Trump succeed at 'Making America Great Again?'  Trump is telling anyone who will listen that our leaders are not doing their job. That in fact, they are incompetent and dangerous. Sometimes, within a family, the hardest thing one member can do, is to tell another member that their behaviour is out of line.

Trump is recommending an intervention, and the career politicians, the embedded establishment of autocrats in Washington, don't want to hear it.