MORE Than Just a Chance

In 1983, Donald Rumsfeld, a special envoy of President Ronald Reagan, shook Saddam Hussein’s hand as he supported Iraq’s war against Iran by supplying Mustard Gas, Sarin, and other poisonous chemicals and deadly biological viruses, such as anthrax and bubonic plague and other chemicals produced by Dow Chemicals and Monsanto. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2013/09/04/history-lesson-when-the-united-states-looked-the-other-way-on-chemical-weapons/).

Twenty years later, in 2003, President Bush said, speaking of the coming American war against Iraq, "We gave peace a chance . . ." then he paused, raised his eyebrows and clenched his fist, the glare in his eyes implying that peace didn't work. 

But Peace is more than just a game of chance, it needs a home, a place to grow, somewhere it can be cared for, watered, fed and cultivated. It needs to be protected and cherished and it needs to be shared. Too many times people work hard for war, spend money for war, train young men and women for war, are always ready to fight, and then will give peace just "a chance." While wars are caused, peace is left to happen by accident. If we are ever to have real peace it will have to be wanted, prepared for, paid for, trained for and we will need specialists who can become experts in the arts and sciences of peace. Impossible? Not really. What if we did create a Department of Peace in our national government? Just started it off and gave it a place to grow, supported it and shared it? We might find a miracle there someday, instead of just more "consekquences".  How do we get such a radical thing started? It really begins at home, right here and in the other small towns of our country. Peace is not a game of chance at all, it's more like planting a garden, or raising a child. Peace must be caused to happen.

I congratulate President Obama and his team, especially John Kerry, for ploughing back into all this mess and giving peace more than just a chance, and for moving it into the front stage of the world.

Who Can Afford to Run for Office in America?

One of the problems faced by any government that elects their representatives concerns WHO is it among their population can actually afford to run for office and then serve if elected?  

Certainly not a person who is working for a retirement, or someone who needs that next paycheck to pay family bills, or who has a family to help raise or works for a boss who might put pressure on him or her.   

So . . .  we need to find someone who doesn’t have a full-time job?  Or somebody who has a job but also has a lot of time off?  We are really looking for lawyers or insurance salesmen, maybe a Realtor who already has an office and can begin from there.   Or . . . if you could find someone who has a LOT of money already, and doesn’t need to work, then perhaps he or she would be able to run.  

So we are really “requiring” anyone who wishes to run for congress to be People Of Money, and thus we have to select people who are not of the same class as those they will govern. 

Once in office they will need even more money to stand for election again.

So someone elected to office in America will need to represent two constituencies:  1) those who cast the votes  and who may or may not vote, and 2) those who provide the money.  And those who provide the money expect results – to them it is not an expenditure, it is an investment in the future.  An investment in THEIR future.