NY Times 9.26 Will Sanctions Work?

The obsession driving Iran’s leadership has never been the development of peaceful nuclear energy for their consuming public. In spite of strategically designed stalling tactics on their part, the immediate goal is the development of nuclear weapons, export of nuclear technology and ultimately destruction of the state of Israel. The Iranians are rank amateurs at deception as this latest fiasco of the extra nuclear facility so vividly demonstrates.

In spite of president Obama’s reminder to the U.N. General Assembly that America can no longer act unilaterally in solving international problems, this latest Iranian example demands a U.S. response that exceeds weak sanctions. Israel will not remain idle, ignore the threat and allow its own destruction. Most Americans, when asked, support the Jewish state in defending its nation. Obama’s healthcare, cap and trade, and other minor program priorities have now been placed on the back burner. The president will either forgo diplomatic fantasy or the Israeli’s will destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities, hopefully with U.S. support and assistance. The problem of Israeli settlements is at best a distraction from the real threat to middle east peace.

The American presidency has always been a powerful position of public representation, strong informed decision making, and use of force in the defense of vital national security interests. Munich proved in the later 1930’s the utter bankruptcy of appeasement. Sanctions alone when instituted by the U.N. with dictators in the past have been totally ineffective.

This ongoing nuclear challenge from Iran threatens the peace of the region and holds the entire world hostage to their fanatical whims. I personally will support presidential toughness and resolve in eliminating Iran’s nuclear facilities. In the words of an old oil filter commercial, “pay me now or pay me later.” These facilities need to be destroyed before they mature into incubators for weapons of mass destruction, to be used on Israel and other nations, no alternative exists.

Dr. Phillips
Illinois

The Washington Imes 9.18, Haley Barbour: It's about Policy not race

Governor Barbour is right concerning issues, as far as he goes. Jimmy Carter was totally off the mark and should now realize that it's truly time for him to retire. The administration is wise to steer clear of comments from Carter on racism which is at best without analysis or foundation in fact. It might come as a revelation to Mr. Carter that many whites voted for the new president who previously had rejected him. As an American, a conservative and former administrator, I object to Carter's divisive comments and generalization on racism. My mother was a phenomenal woman, born in the south she was one of the most caring and accepting people I have ever known. While in her late years, teaching elementary school in Illinois, she taught a fourth grader who would eventually play basketball in the NBA and set many records. She loved this young man, his parents and family very much. She lived in a community, south of Chicago, which was overwhelmingly white and middle class, yet she often had this young African American’s parents to her home for dinner in spite of personal threats and anonymous objections. One night, someone knocked down her side door and broke windows in an attempt to intimidate her. None of this mattered, up until the time she passed away she viewed her many friends of color as wonderful people, family and great Americans. As a conservative, I will not be lectured by a former president who chose to ride with a KKK leader to a meeting in Georgia, during a campaign for governor, perhaps seeking a political endorsement. It's my understanding that the former president in commenting on representative Wilson's comment in the house supposedly said "I think it's based on racism...There is an inherent feeling among many in this country that an African-American should not be president...Those kinds of things are not just casual outcomes of a sincere debate on whether we should have a national program on health care...It's deeper than that!" Yes, it is deeper than that Mr. Carter but it is issue based not racism. So many mistaken voices have tried to characterize concerned Americans with serious reservations about healthcare reforms as simply mobs, even Nazis. These Americans are not mobs and the town hall meetings simply reveal the deeper problem you have erroneously attempted to identify. One of the problems appears to be lack of credibility resulting from administrative incompetence and a lack of transparency. Since it is much deeper than simply issues, Governor Barbour should realize that the main issue, whether correct or incorrect, seems to be one of concern on the part of many Americans, namely that our constitutional principles, in fact the American way of life, including entrepreneurship, freedom and individualism may be in danger of elimination.

NY Times 8.21 Obama's Trust Problem, Paul Krugman

Dr.Phillips
Bloomington, L
August 21st, 2009
6:43 am

Paul Krugman's article Obama's Trust Problem identifies a major policy need in the President's leadership. Inconsistency coupled with lack of follow through on most any proposal does not contribute to building trust. Although I do not support a public option for healthcare, the President has been influenced by the noise and clamor from progressive and conservative voices. One of the principles which emerges from Paul's article is that trust is not automatically conferred, it must be earned.

Republicans in their platform have often taken this basic approach toward health care, As consumers of health care, individual Americans and their families, should be able to make their own choices about health care protection. We propose to assist them...through tax and financial incentives. ...We must maintain our commitment to the aged and the poor by providing quality care through Medicare and Medicaid.

There are elements of these Republican suggestions which need careful, detailed evaluation by the administration. Leadership takes action, reviews policy suggestions, discards, modifies, or improves ideas presented, sells them and moves on, Trust comes from any leader's action and resolve after gaining a measure of consensus from all parties. Why not pull in the leadership of the insurance industry and challenge them to provide the many facets which the administration states are included in a public program, like lowering costs, dropping pre existing conditions, and encompassing those without coverage.

If these goals can be reached with strong leadership, hard work and around the clock negotiation, why not undertake the mission. Results coming from this type of meeting would build trust whether or not the effort was entirely successful. Share the results of such a meeting by all parties with the American public through a prime time news conference. Action, substance, results from leadership and hard work will build trust in a healthcare program formulated in this way.

Trust must be earned from leader's leading others and producing measurable results, I believe healthcare issues can be solved to most everyone's satisfaction only with major effort. The concept being circulated, that Democrats can pass and institute this healthcare program on their own, does not mean it will ever work.

Finally, clear, succinct, communication with the public is essential in building trust. The President and his administration need to stay on message, modify the program when needed and speak to the American people with a simplicity that's easy to comprehend. Lack of two way communication, fuzzy presentations will continue to build frustration not trust. My thanks to Paul Krugman for an article which provokes thought and examination of "trust."

Health Care's Historic Moment

Tim Egan is a good writer who did a most comprehensive treatment of the health care debate in “Health Care’s Historic Moment” on July 15. His latest missive however entitled “Palin’s Poison” is a bit uncharacteristic for a good writer”" read his book The Worst Hard Time.”, a great work!

Tom reminds us in “Palin’s Poison” that town hall forums on healthcare, should be sharp debates on something that affects all of us, it appears obvious however that Congress, the Executive Branch and Supreme Court will have their own unique healthcare plans–a slight journalistic oversight by Tom perhaps?

Yet, to refer to Palin and most citizens as part of the “lunatic fringe”, town meetings as “mauls”, is just not reality. When Tim reminds us that the House Bill would pay for counseling for terminally ill patients and seniors over 65, mandates go unmentioned. Frankly, we refer to the House Bill because at the moment it is the only one available to the public for review.

Most of us can only read the House Bill, but those of us who have studied it are taking part in spirited debate, without being irrational, nationwide.

Our President wrote a book entitled “the Audacity of Hope,”
Yet Thomas Jefferson and the founding fathers remind us of government’s limitations, the need for it to represent the people and provide for the common defense. Failing that, he reminded the people that they have the right to review governmental performance and if it is totally off track constitutionally, to do something different.

My personal phrase for today and the future is very simple in view of “audacity’s” meaning (Webster, (a) intrepid boldness (b) disregard of normal restraints ( like defying the boss). My phrase and creed to claim when defending our constitutional rights as a nation is based on, THE HOPE OF AUDACITY! rather than the audacity of hope. It fits these times far better!

Dr.Phillips