|
|  |
|
|
|
| |
| Jan 25, 2008 1:57 am |
|
re: Dennis Kucinich |
John James O'Brien
| |
21? Argh...I crine at some of my earnest naivte in my 20s ;-) Personally, I go by the view that the only job one is ready for is the one you already have (maybe). Every new job is a stretch to draw one's best into it and learn through and out of views that fit earlier experience and don't fit the coming challenges. We're all works in progress.
For me, Kucinich fairly reeks of integrity and a common sense clarity on the issues that goes beyond a PR maven's "common sense" and grips hard on my experience of having to actually achieve outcomes through systems. That's what government is all about.
So, if ready to lead the nation is a factor of playing the game, I'd agree with you. If it is a matter of changing the game, well, not so sanguine. At the same time, I know first hand how difficult it is to bring change into organisations with a long established way of being. One hopes to leave a legacy that moves it a step or two along the way...real change takes time and there is rarely enough continguous time to realize the change.
There would be ramifications of a Kucinich presidency. Forces would fight back, and perhaps not in obvious or straightforward ways. Disasters might arise, attributed to A, but secretly caused by B. Would a fickle public remain firm? Unlikely. Nonethless, it would be a step to restore the integrity of the USA--and that embodies a host of other issues..is there a more important contribution to make?
Maybe he'll go independent. Or maybe he'll fcus on getting his colleagues to remember their oaths and do their jobs.Private Reply to John James O'Brien (new win) |
|
| |
|
