« How To Cope When Something Goes Terribly Wrong | Home | The 5 Greatest Albums to Listen to in the Morning »
Why The ‘08 Election May Be The Most Important EVER
By Todd | January 16, 2008
I do not follow politics very closely and like many people, my impression of politicians is negative. I think of them as people who spend most of their time figuring out what “the majority” wants to hear, and crafting careful messages to get what they want personally—more money, more power and more votes.
Perhaps I am grossly generalizing, but I feel as though most of the present-day politicians are much more concerned about their image and their success and their “place in history” as opposed to the future they have a major stake in determining.
Although it is certainly not my intention for WTC to be a political depot, my gut instinct is telling me that we are at a critical point in human history, and we are in dire need of special leaders—people who are willing to step away from the current tide of corruption, negligence, and selfishness and who are willing to make tough decisions.
We require leaders who are willing to challenge what has become “traditional” ways of doing things and set the pendulum swinging in the direction of more realistic and sustainable platforms.
Here are 6 additional characteristics of a leader, or leaders, that we so desperately need:
They Have Incredible Perspective
And I am not talking in the 4-8 year timeframe, but in the 100, 500 and even 1000 year timeframe! Who is smart enough, and brave enough, to look beyond tomorrow’s approval poll, stock market performance, and wartime death count? We desperately need someone who will stand up and admit that many of our current social, economic and political structures are completely unsustainable, and spark the creation of more sustainable and realistic solutions!
They Perservere Through Major Conflict And Even Upheaval
We need people who are not afraid to go against the flow, and have perseverance to get through initial struggle. Why? Because changing fundamental systems is a daunting task, and there will be resistance and conflict. That is why we need someone special—a leader who has the uncanny ability to explain to the world why such steps are necessary.
Willing to Speak the Truth
Its time for our leadership to step to the plate and talk to the world honestly. There is way too much ambiguity and deception in politics (perhaps there always has been), and fundamental change can happen at a faster rate when the people with the biggest microphones are the ones initiating it! People want to hear the truth, and its time that our political leaders start telling it to us.
Willing to ACT and Make Tough Decisions
We require leaders who are not afraid to take action. When in candidacy, aspiring political leaders seem to promise the world to everyone and then deliver very little when in office. It’s time for the charade to end as there are way too many political, social and economic systems falling apart all around the world. Whoever wins the next U.S. election should be prepared to address the most critical issues humanity has ever faced.
Not Afraid to Really Address The Environmental Issue
To take the last point a step further, it is clear that Planet Earth is sick and human activity is a major cause. Even though encouraging strides are being made, and the issue has gained considerable momentum, it necessitates a much greater sense of urgency. Will we be looking back one day, not many years from now, asking ourselves “man, there was so much more we could have done to prevent this”? We need leaders who are willing to do whatever it takes, right now, to address the environment on a more global scale.
They Have a Spiritual Understanding of the World
Lastly, it would be refreshing if our political leaders would integrate a bit of humanity and spirituality in their communication with the world. For too long the ancient and timeless connection between all people and things has been ignored by modern-day politicians. And I am not talking about religion, which seems to be used as a tool by political candidates. I am talking about spirituality and consciousness.
Perhaps in 2008, some individual or group of individuals will come along and prove to have some of these valuable and unique traits. We desperately need it.
Subscribe Free
| |||
|
Topics: Perspective, Environment/Sustainability, Alternative and Holistic Healing, Business |
I hope there is a candidate who can rise to the challenge; its difficult though in American political system
Posted by: Tejvan Pettinger on January 16th, 2008 at 10:57 amTime will tell Tejvan…and you are right, this IS a difficult task. But we’ve got to be honest and put it out there…
Posted by: Todd on January 16th, 2008 at 11:47 amTodd
The one major candidate that you didn’t put in your picture at the top is the exact one you’re looking for: Ron Paul.
Posted by: Jessica on January 16th, 2008 at 2:02 pmI think calling this the most important election ever is a real stretch.
Don’t forget the Reagan win over Carter. Where Carter drove the country into Stagflation. Going against all the economic progress Gerald Ford did in his short stay.
Or the John F Kennedy election.
These are 2 elections which really turned around the country. By strong men.
None of these candidates will fill the shoes of great people. Look at Barack Obama. He had missed 166 votes (37.6%) during the current Congress. Whoopee!
However the best candidate has dropped out, Bill Richardson.
Posted by: Greg on January 16th, 2008 at 4:45 pmI agree with most of your points, but I think that the environment is one place we probably disagree… I think that environmental progress is helped most by accelerating technological progress, not by inhibiting it, and I find that most people who put the environmental issues in the terms you did (”We need leaders who are willing to do whatever it takes, right now, to address the environment on a more global scale.”) have a different focus.
That being said, I strongly agree with your first four points, and to a slightly less extent, with your last.
Posted by: Jason on January 16th, 2008 at 4:55 pmGreg– I still contend that what previous elections/candidates dealt with is nothing compared to the current state of affairs. A myriad of our social structures are on the verge of collapse, and the health of the planet that we all thrive is in serious jeopardy.
“Stagflation” is like an ant compared to the mountain of fundamental issues that are potentially at stake.
Jason– Thanks for the feedback, and fair enough about the environmental issue…
Posted by: Todd on January 16th, 2008 at 5:15 pmWhile this is not the place for a debate, and everyone is entitled to an opinion.
I would not put the problems of today being anywhere near what the U.S. was like in the 60’s. The racial problems that existed. The racial inequalities that existed.
And in the late 70’s there was rationing of gasoline. Drivers of vehicles with license plates having an odd number as the last digit were allowed to purchase gasoline for their cars only on odd-numbered days of the month, while drivers of vehicles with even-numbered license plates were allowed to purchase fuel only on even-numbered days.
In addition, the prisoners that were held in Iran for 444 days.
These are just a few items the world was dealing with.
Posted by: Greg on January 16th, 2008 at 5:47 pmHi Todd,
Again great post with some fantastic insights. I agree on each of your points except one. I do not think this is a pivotal election.
I just finished reading a great book called Founding Brothers. One of the things that struck me is American survives despite the narcissistic ambitions of politicians. The Founding Fathers were indeed great men.
I think there have only been 3 maybe 4 pivotal elections in this country. The first being George Washington. The second being Truman. The Third being JFK, and the Fourth being Regan.
Do I think one candidate will do better than another. Yes. But I also believe that any of the current candidates will do an adequate job and 4 years from now America will still be strong.
Shoot if we can survive Bush. We can survive most anything. And this coming from a guy who voted for Bush. Twice.
Posted by: Kristian on January 16th, 2008 at 9:47 pmYou are right Greg…and thank you for sharing your opinion!
Kristian– Again, thanks for the great comments.
It is SO interesting to me how political issues almost automatically bring about staunch differences of opinion…even among “like-minded” people.
Posted by: Todd on January 16th, 2008 at 11:30 pmTG
You mean this kind of candidate?
Time Magazine -Obama’s Political Experience
Wednesday, Jan. 16, 2008
Obama’s Varied Record
By AP/CHRISTOPHER WILLS
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1704117,00.html
(SPRINGFIELD, Ill.) — By some measures, Barack Obama has a thin record. He’s a Senate newcomer who has never worked in the White House, governed a state or run a business.
Democratic presidential rival Hillary Rodham Clinton points to his resume as evidence that Obama is not ready for the White House. “He was a part-time state senator for a few years, and then he came to the Senate and immediately started running for president,” she says dismissively.
Obama’s accomplishments are more substantial and varied than Clinton suggests. And he has a longer record in elected office than she does, as a second-term New York senator.
Obama was a community organizer and led a voter-registration effort in Chicago that added tens of thousands of people to the rolls. He was a civil rights attorney and taught at one of the nation’s premier universities. He helped pass complicated measures in the Illinois legislature on the death penalty, racial profiling, health care and more. In Washington, he has worked with Republicans on nuclear proliferation, government waste and global warming, amassing a record that speaks to a fast start while lacking the heft of years of service.
The Illinois Democrat likes to quote something Bill Clinton once said: “The truth is, you can have the right kind of experience and the wrong kind of experience. Mine is rooted in the real lives of real people, and it will bring real results if we have the courage to change.”
After college, Obama moved to Chicago for a low-paying job as a community organizer. He worked with poor families on the South Side to get improvements in public housing, particularly the removal of asbestos.
“Nobody else running for president has jumped off the career track for three or four years to help people,” said Jerry Kellman, who first hired Obama as a community organizer.
Obama also fought for student summer jobs and a program to keep at-risk children from dropping out of school. More importantly, say those who worked with Obama, he showed people how to organize and confront powerful interests.
“He had to train residents to stand up for their own rights,” said former organizer Loretta Augustine-Herron, who was part of Obama’s Developing Communities Project.
Obama left that job to get a law degree. Afterward, he returned to Chicago and ran Project VOTE. The organization recruited hundreds of registrars to sign up new voters, particularly within the city’s black population. Registration jumped nearly 15 points between the 1992 primary and the general election.
The registration wave was credited with making Carol Moseley Braun the first black female senator and helping Bill Clinton carry Illinois in his first presidential race. It also got insiders talking about Obama as a political candidate.
Obama then spent several years focusing on the law, both as an attorney at a small firm specializing in civil rights and as a lecturer on constitutional law at the University of Chicago.
As an attorney, he was on the team that successfully sued the state of Illinois for failing to implement a federal voter-registration law. Obama also worked on case of a whistle-blower who lost her job after exposing waste and corruption in a medical research project. The whistle-blower ended up with a $5 million settlement.
Obama was elected to the Illinois state Senate in 1996, when Democrats were in the minority. He proposed hundreds of new laws, including universal health care, tougher gun control and expanded welfare, but saw most of them spiked by Republican leadership.
He did have some successes, though — particularly in passing legislation sharply restricting the gifts that Illinois politicians could accept from lobbyists. Illinois has notoriously weak government ethics laws, and the Gift Ban Act was the first major new restriction since the Watergate era.
Obama also helped set up Illinois’ “KidCare” program that provided health care to children in families that did not qualify for Medicaid.
John Bouman, president of the Sargent Shriver National Center on Poverty Law, said Obama’s work helped make the program more consumer-friendly. He also said Obama was often willing to give up credit for the legislation if that helped win Republican support.
“It tells you something that as a relatively junior member in the minority party, he was an important negotiator,” Bouman said.
When Democrats gained a majority in the Senate, Obama’s political mentor, Senate President Emil Jones, gave him high-profile assignments, including two contentious issues involving police — videotaped interrogations and racial profiling.
Police weren’t happy about recording their interrogations of murder suspects or having to study racial bias in traffic stops. Initially, they opposed both pieces of legislation.
But Obama made clear that something was going to pass with or without their support. Ultimately, police groups endorsed both bills and they won unanimous approval in the Senate.
Obama was generally regarded as an effective and practical, although decidedly liberal, state lawmaker. One of his Republican colleagues was so wowed that he has appeared in an Obama campaign ad, but others aren’t impressed by his legislative record.
“I would say it was run of the mill, honestly,” said Sen. Christine Radogno, R-Lemont, who entered the legislature at the same time Obama did.
Obama was a part-time state senator in that he served in the Illinois legislature at the same time he practiced law. He became a state lawmaker in 1997, four years ahead of Hillary Clinton’s entrance into elected office, as U.S. senator.
When Obama was elected to the U.S. Senate, he said he wished to get things done rather than grab headlines, and cited Hillary Clinton as the sort of workhorse he wanted to be.
He teamed with Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., to study the dangers of nuclear proliferation and pass legislation meant to keep nuclear material from falling into the hands of terrorists.
Obama also joined with Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., after Hurricane Katrina to improve oversight of federal spending.
And he shared billing with a Republican presidential hopeful when he joined Arizona Sen. John McCain in sponsoring legislation that called for sharp, mandatory cuts in greenhouse gas emissions. The effort failed.
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1704117,00.html
Posted by: Dan on January 17th, 2008 at 4:26 amHi. How come that you miss stars of internet and free people and constitution?
Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul ?!?!
Nice page btw.
Posted by: Lemurian on January 17th, 2008 at 8:34 amthe leaders you seek will NOT come from the political class
there is only ONE party
government is not important, they are only reactive, cannot BE proactive
ignore it, do your work to the best of your ability
and when you say “we”, mean the whole world
anything less, and you are part of the problem
enjoy
Posted by: gregory on January 17th, 2008 at 12:22 pmGregory– well said my man…that is exactly how I feel
and thank you for stating it so simply,
Posted by: Todd on January 17th, 2008 at 1:22 pmTodd