Editor’s note: This op-ed by Don Keelan, a certified public accountant who lives in Arlington, first appeared in the Bennington Banner.
President Obama recently announced the kick off of his 2012 campaign for re-election to a 2nd term as president. Along with the announcement as well as who will be in charge, came a further announcement—the price tag, $1 billion. Frankly, I have a problem with the president’s announcements. However, I will comment on the cost at a later time.
The first issue is with the timing, 21 months before Election Day 2012 and with so many issues still unresolved. And even more disturbing is the fact that many of the issues are accelerating towards disastrous conclusions.
One would think that with the price of oil closing in at $115 a barrel and gasoline projected to be at $5 a gallon within months, launching a campaign at this time is a reflection of how out of touch the president is with the daily struggles of Americans.
Here in the Northeast many are not interested in an election that is a year and a half away. Instead they are deeply concerned with deciding if they should lock-in next winter’s fuel price having just come out of a winter most would soon like to forget. For many of these homeowners they still have to deal with the fact that their homes are not worth the value of the mortgage that was once below the home’s fair market value.
The ability to obtain credit for many of these homeowners has been a difficult task these past three years. How they must feel now that it has become apparent that their country’s credit rating has sunk, to negative, only adds to their despair.
It is hard to believe that anyone would be interested in the president’s campaign kick-off knowing while many are struggling to secure a job—and for others, wondering if their jobs are safe.
If the president does not wish to wrap his arms around the issues facing millions of individual Americans—maybe, just maybe, he would postpone campaigning and assume leadership of the issues before Congress—the budget, debt limit, healthcare and energy policies all of which require his direct involvement—as well as developing the strategy for the withdrawal of troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. What is needed today in Washington is a bold, passionate and involved leader—not a campaigner who four years ago wrapped himself in banners with the word “change.”
If the president was so fortunate to have had his domestic agenda in order—once he left our country’s shores, he would encounter chaos in so many places—each and everyone having a direct or indirect bearing on the United States.
At least a half dozen Middle East countries are in revolt: Tunisia, Egypt, Bahrain, Libya, Yemen and Syria. Our only true ally in the region, Israel, must wonder how it will all end and can it still count on the United States for protection. And all the while, Iran stays quiet—contemplating how it will take advantage of the region’s chaos.
And then there are the other two “sleeping giants,” China and India, who are staying out of the fray but are not at all embarrassed to take economic advantage of the turmoil in the Middle East or the economic crisis here in the United States.
If Obama has heeded anything from what is taking place in Libya it should be that no NATO, African Union or Arab League member states are prepared to assume a leadership role. The recent elimination of Osama bin Laden brought home to us two salient points—the president was hands on from the White House Situation Room for the mission’s planning and execution—as well as the fact that these are times when the United States must “go it alone”?
Now is not the time for the United States to abdicate its leadership—nor is it the time for Obama to be out campaigning and fundraising—there will be plenty of time next year. He should take a page out of Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s 1944 campaign—don’t campaign, during troubled times—instead be the president — not a campaigner.
