Bob Meade - Where's the donkey stick?
There's an old farmers story about a donkey. It seems that farmer, Ezra, had a donkey that was extremely useful. It plowed the fields. It carried the hay from the pasture to the barn. It pulled the wagon with supplies and even carted the family to Church on Sunday. Other farmers admired how much production Ezra's donkey was able to provide.
One day another farmer, by the name of Elmer, came to see Ezra and offered him a good price for the donkey. Ezra thought for a moment and then accepted the offer. The next morning, Ezra brought the donkey over to Elmer's farm and collected his payment.
The following Sunday, after Church service, Elmer approached Ezra and said that he wanted his money back, the donkey was useless. It wouldn't plow. It wouldn't pull the hay wagon. It wouldn't even pull the cart for the family to go to Church. Ezra agreed to go over to Elmer's to see what he could do.
When Ezra got to Elmer's barn, sure enough the donkey was sitting on its backside, doing nothing. Elmer saw Ezra arrive and headed out to the barn to meet him. As he was coming out, Ezra yelled to Elmer to pick up that 2x4 piece of lumber that was leaning against the fence, and to bring it to him. He did.
As soon as the piece of lumber was handed to him, Ezra hauled off and whacked the donkey right between the eyes. This stunned Elmer and he yelled, "Why'd you do that?"
Ezra looked at him and said, "If you want the donkey to do something, first, you need to get its attention!"
Keep that story in mind for a few minutes.
How often have we heard politicians talk about "Eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse"? Probably too many times to count. And how many times have they told us what waste, fraud and abuse they eliminated? I'll wait while you count to none.
Back in 1977, our government formed the Federal Department of Energy for the express purpose of reducing our dependency on foreign oil. Here we are, 35 years later, with 16,000 employees, an annual budget of over $27 billion, and we haven't reduced our dependency on foreign oil. Where's the donkey stick?
Back in 1979, our government formed the federal Department of Education. Education is not mentioned in the Constitution, it is one of those things that was left to the states. So, here we are 34 years later, spending more per pupil than every country in the world except Switzerland (they spend less than $200 per pupil more). Our results in math, reading, and science are mediocre, our overall graduation rates are in the low 70 percent range (50 percent in most urban areas), and our Federal Budget is over $77 billion a year (does not include state and local spending). Where's the donkey stick?
Today, we are spending over $1.2 trillion more than we take in. We watch as the Legislative Branch attempts to rein in spending and is repeatedly rebuffed by the Executive Branch. Is consideration given to eliminating either or both of the departments mentioned above? No! Where's the donkey stick?
A few weeks ago, we watched as the House of Representatives proposed to increase tax revenues by eliminating loopholes in the tax laws that mainly benefited the wealthy. The proposed changes would have resulted in $800 billion in additional tax revenue, primarily from the wealthy. That plan was rejected by the Executive Branch as they insisted that tax "rates" be raised on the so called rich. The Executive Branch won that battle and instead of tax revenues being increased by $800 billion, they only got increased by about $640 billion. Where's the donkey stick?
This administration routinely states how it plans to achieve some purpose by by-passing the Congress, essentially ignoring the Constitutional process of enacting federal laws. Where's the donkey stick?
This administration announced that it would not enforce a law enacted by Congress and signed into law by a previous (Democrat) president. Where's the donkey stick.
This administration made "recess appointments" when the Congress was in session, in violation of Article 1, Section 5, of the Constitution. (Note: Article III of the Impeachment of President Andrew Johnson was for the same cause.) Where's the donkey stick?
At some point we the people have to determine whether we want to scrap or keep the Constitution, and the operating principles it provides, or if we want to be ruled by edicts issued by the Executive Branch.
Do you want to be the recipient of the donkey stick? Or, do you want to wield it?
(Bob Meade is a resident of Laconia.)
One day another farmer, by the name of Elmer, came to see Ezra and offered him a good price for the donkey. Ezra thought for a moment and then accepted the offer. The next morning, Ezra brought the donkey over to Elmer's farm and collected his payment.
The following Sunday, after Church service, Elmer approached Ezra and said that he wanted his money back, the donkey was useless. It wouldn't plow. It wouldn't pull the hay wagon. It wouldn't even pull the cart for the family to go to Church. Ezra agreed to go over to Elmer's to see what he could do.
When Ezra got to Elmer's barn, sure enough the donkey was sitting on its backside, doing nothing. Elmer saw Ezra arrive and headed out to the barn to meet him. As he was coming out, Ezra yelled to Elmer to pick up that 2x4 piece of lumber that was leaning against the fence, and to bring it to him. He did.
As soon as the piece of lumber was handed to him, Ezra hauled off and whacked the donkey right between the eyes. This stunned Elmer and he yelled, "Why'd you do that?"
Ezra looked at him and said, "If you want the donkey to do something, first, you need to get its attention!"
Keep that story in mind for a few minutes.
How often have we heard politicians talk about "Eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse"? Probably too many times to count. And how many times have they told us what waste, fraud and abuse they eliminated? I'll wait while you count to none.
Back in 1977, our government formed the Federal Department of Energy for the express purpose of reducing our dependency on foreign oil. Here we are, 35 years later, with 16,000 employees, an annual budget of over $27 billion, and we haven't reduced our dependency on foreign oil. Where's the donkey stick?
Back in 1979, our government formed the federal Department of Education. Education is not mentioned in the Constitution, it is one of those things that was left to the states. So, here we are 34 years later, spending more per pupil than every country in the world except Switzerland (they spend less than $200 per pupil more). Our results in math, reading, and science are mediocre, our overall graduation rates are in the low 70 percent range (50 percent in most urban areas), and our Federal Budget is over $77 billion a year (does not include state and local spending). Where's the donkey stick?
Today, we are spending over $1.2 trillion more than we take in. We watch as the Legislative Branch attempts to rein in spending and is repeatedly rebuffed by the Executive Branch. Is consideration given to eliminating either or both of the departments mentioned above? No! Where's the donkey stick?
A few weeks ago, we watched as the House of Representatives proposed to increase tax revenues by eliminating loopholes in the tax laws that mainly benefited the wealthy. The proposed changes would have resulted in $800 billion in additional tax revenue, primarily from the wealthy. That plan was rejected by the Executive Branch as they insisted that tax "rates" be raised on the so called rich. The Executive Branch won that battle and instead of tax revenues being increased by $800 billion, they only got increased by about $640 billion. Where's the donkey stick?
This administration routinely states how it plans to achieve some purpose by by-passing the Congress, essentially ignoring the Constitutional process of enacting federal laws. Where's the donkey stick?
This administration announced that it would not enforce a law enacted by Congress and signed into law by a previous (Democrat) president. Where's the donkey stick.
This administration made "recess appointments" when the Congress was in session, in violation of Article 1, Section 5, of the Constitution. (Note: Article III of the Impeachment of President Andrew Johnson was for the same cause.) Where's the donkey stick?
At some point we the people have to determine whether we want to scrap or keep the Constitution, and the operating principles it provides, or if we want to be ruled by edicts issued by the Executive Branch.
Do you want to be the recipient of the donkey stick? Or, do you want to wield it?
(Bob Meade is a resident of Laconia.)
Last Updated on Tuesday, 22 January 2013 00:53
Hits: 282
2012 Year End Waterfront Sales Report
December was another strong month for waterfront sales on Winnipesaukee with a total of 15 properties changing hands which is the same count as last December. The average sales price of $1.043 million is up considerably from the $675,300 average posted last year bolstered by the fact that five of the 15 sales exceeded the million dollar mark. That's an outstanding December and a great way to finish off the year.
The least expensive sale on the lake was at 482 Rattlesnake Island in Alton where a seasonal, three bedroom, A-frame cottage built in 1975 found a new owner. This cottage needs some upgrading unless the 70's vintage paneling and green carpets are your taste, but I am sure the new owners looked past that and saw value in the 1,724-square-feet of living space, the flat 1-acre lot with 108-ft. of frontage, the sandy beach, and the great views. I bet plans are in the works for a spring makeover. This property was listed in June at $310,000 with a deal struck at $275,000 after being on the market for 121 days. The current tax assessed value for the property is $322,100 which is up slightly from the $311,700 shown last year. See, the buyer is making money already...
The highest sale in December on the lake was also the second highest for the year and is located at 268 Route 109 in Tuftonboro. The property consists of an 1800's vintage post and beam cape located at the entrance to a 40 acre parcel of land. A winding drive leads down to a seasonal cottage at the water's edge. This rustic structure has two bedrooms, a large living room with stone fireplace, and a great screened porch. With 1,450-feet of sandy waterfront, dock, great views, and no development restrictions it wouldn't surprise me to see a few new homes built on the property. Time will tell. This property was listed at $4.3 million and sold for $3.4 million after almost a year on the market. No assessment data was listed in the MLS. This was a great investment for the new owner.
This has been a pretty darn good year for waterfront sales! We finished out the year with a total of 130 sales on Winnipesaukee. That's a 22 percent increase from the 107 sales in 2011! The average sales price bumped back up over the million mark at $1,017,367, up from the $994,688 posted last year. The sales price averaged 89 percent of the list price at the time of the sale. Moultonborough had the most sales with 43 homes changing hands at an average price of $925,779 (that's up from 32 sales last year). Wolfeboro had the highest average sales price at $1.6 million with 13 sales. That's also up from the $1.2 million average for the 14 sales in 2011.
The highest sale of the year honors goes to the property at 440 Edgewater Drive in Gilford on Governor's Island. This magnificent Craftsman-style home has a touch of Adirondack flair with six over one pane windows, custom built-ins, and coffered and wood ceilings. Built in 2007, this fine home has 6,575-square-feet of space, five bedrooms including a main level master suite and two en-suites upstairs, six baths, a country kitchen, private media room, four sided fireplace, library, private office, and two family rooms. There are multiple decks and patios outside from which to enjoy the views. The 1-acre lot has expansive lawns, 188-feet of frontage, a sandy beach, docks, and a jetty. This property was listed at $4.395 million and sold for $3.5 million after 241 days on the market.
There were no waterfront sales on Winnisquam in December, but we did finish the year with 16 transactions at an average price of $502,125 which is not too, too, bad. That total is down from the 23 sales posted last year but equals the 16 sales in 2010 and the average sales price is up from the $480,536 average posted last year. The highest sale on Winnisquam for the year was at 438 Shore Drive in Laconia. It is a custom built, 3,700-square-foot, contemporary style home which was built in 2000 and has four bedrooms, three baths, a custom kitchen, a formal dining room, family room, gas fireplace, cathedral ceilings, hardwood and tile floors, and great westerly sunset views. The home sits on a .66-acre lot with perennial gardens, 150-feet of frontage, and a 40-foot dock. This property was listed at $989,000, reduced to $795,000, and sold for $765,000 after 618 days on the market.
Squam Lake also drew a blank in December but finished off the year at six sales at a whopping average price of $3.151 million! There were five sales in 2010 and seven last year so sales are okay but far off the peak total of 15 in 2005. The high average sales price is due to the mega sale last month at 92 Unsworth Road in Moultonborough which was listed at $9.95 million and sold for $8.7 million. This property consists of a 4,400-square-foot, five bedroom, six bath Adirondack home and guest house built in 2004 which sit on a mere 32.5 acres of privacy, fields, woodlands, and shorefront with Southwesterly exposure. There were no photos shown in the MLS and not much of a description of the property other than the terms "unique, extraordinary, and exquisite" but I think we can all get the picture...
So, 2012 was a great year overall for both sellers and buyers on the area lakes. The sales numbers were up tremendously on Winnipesaukee, the numbers are a little better, and the other area lakes are holding their own. So we're looking forward to a great 2013 on the lakes just because, as the saying goes, "they ain't making anymore waterfront ya know..." and we've got some of the best around!
Please feel free to visit ww.lakesregionhome.com to learn more about the Lakes Region real estate market and comment on this article and others. Data was compiled as of 1/15/13 using the Northern New England Real Estate MLS System. Roy Sanborn is a REALTOR® at Roche Realty Group and can be reached at 603-677-8420
The least expensive sale on the lake was at 482 Rattlesnake Island in Alton where a seasonal, three bedroom, A-frame cottage built in 1975 found a new owner. This cottage needs some upgrading unless the 70's vintage paneling and green carpets are your taste, but I am sure the new owners looked past that and saw value in the 1,724-square-feet of living space, the flat 1-acre lot with 108-ft. of frontage, the sandy beach, and the great views. I bet plans are in the works for a spring makeover. This property was listed in June at $310,000 with a deal struck at $275,000 after being on the market for 121 days. The current tax assessed value for the property is $322,100 which is up slightly from the $311,700 shown last year. See, the buyer is making money already...
The highest sale in December on the lake was also the second highest for the year and is located at 268 Route 109 in Tuftonboro. The property consists of an 1800's vintage post and beam cape located at the entrance to a 40 acre parcel of land. A winding drive leads down to a seasonal cottage at the water's edge. This rustic structure has two bedrooms, a large living room with stone fireplace, and a great screened porch. With 1,450-feet of sandy waterfront, dock, great views, and no development restrictions it wouldn't surprise me to see a few new homes built on the property. Time will tell. This property was listed at $4.3 million and sold for $3.4 million after almost a year on the market. No assessment data was listed in the MLS. This was a great investment for the new owner.
This has been a pretty darn good year for waterfront sales! We finished out the year with a total of 130 sales on Winnipesaukee. That's a 22 percent increase from the 107 sales in 2011! The average sales price bumped back up over the million mark at $1,017,367, up from the $994,688 posted last year. The sales price averaged 89 percent of the list price at the time of the sale. Moultonborough had the most sales with 43 homes changing hands at an average price of $925,779 (that's up from 32 sales last year). Wolfeboro had the highest average sales price at $1.6 million with 13 sales. That's also up from the $1.2 million average for the 14 sales in 2011.
The highest sale of the year honors goes to the property at 440 Edgewater Drive in Gilford on Governor's Island. This magnificent Craftsman-style home has a touch of Adirondack flair with six over one pane windows, custom built-ins, and coffered and wood ceilings. Built in 2007, this fine home has 6,575-square-feet of space, five bedrooms including a main level master suite and two en-suites upstairs, six baths, a country kitchen, private media room, four sided fireplace, library, private office, and two family rooms. There are multiple decks and patios outside from which to enjoy the views. The 1-acre lot has expansive lawns, 188-feet of frontage, a sandy beach, docks, and a jetty. This property was listed at $4.395 million and sold for $3.5 million after 241 days on the market.
There were no waterfront sales on Winnisquam in December, but we did finish the year with 16 transactions at an average price of $502,125 which is not too, too, bad. That total is down from the 23 sales posted last year but equals the 16 sales in 2010 and the average sales price is up from the $480,536 average posted last year. The highest sale on Winnisquam for the year was at 438 Shore Drive in Laconia. It is a custom built, 3,700-square-foot, contemporary style home which was built in 2000 and has four bedrooms, three baths, a custom kitchen, a formal dining room, family room, gas fireplace, cathedral ceilings, hardwood and tile floors, and great westerly sunset views. The home sits on a .66-acre lot with perennial gardens, 150-feet of frontage, and a 40-foot dock. This property was listed at $989,000, reduced to $795,000, and sold for $765,000 after 618 days on the market.
Squam Lake also drew a blank in December but finished off the year at six sales at a whopping average price of $3.151 million! There were five sales in 2010 and seven last year so sales are okay but far off the peak total of 15 in 2005. The high average sales price is due to the mega sale last month at 92 Unsworth Road in Moultonborough which was listed at $9.95 million and sold for $8.7 million. This property consists of a 4,400-square-foot, five bedroom, six bath Adirondack home and guest house built in 2004 which sit on a mere 32.5 acres of privacy, fields, woodlands, and shorefront with Southwesterly exposure. There were no photos shown in the MLS and not much of a description of the property other than the terms "unique, extraordinary, and exquisite" but I think we can all get the picture...
So, 2012 was a great year overall for both sellers and buyers on the area lakes. The sales numbers were up tremendously on Winnipesaukee, the numbers are a little better, and the other area lakes are holding their own. So we're looking forward to a great 2013 on the lakes just because, as the saying goes, "they ain't making anymore waterfront ya know..." and we've got some of the best around!
Please feel free to visit ww.lakesregionhome.com to learn more about the Lakes Region real estate market and comment on this article and others. Data was compiled as of 1/15/13 using the Northern New England Real Estate MLS System. Roy Sanborn is a REALTOR® at Roche Realty Group and can be reached at 603-677-8420
Last Updated on Saturday, 19 January 2013 00:10
Hits: 398
Michael Barone - Ivory-tower Obama can't abide contrary views
To judge from his surly demeanor and defiant words at his press conference on Monday, Barack Obama begins his second term with a strategy to defeat and humiliate Republicans rather than a strategy to govern. His point blank refusal to negotiate over the debt ceiling was clearly designed to make the House Republicans look bad.
But Obama knows very well that negotiations usually accompany legislation to increase the government's debt limit. As Gordon Gray of the conservative American Action Network points out, most of the 17 increases in the debt ceiling over the last 20 years have been part of broader measures. Working out what will be in those measures is a matter for negotiation between the legislative and executive branches. That's because the Constitution gives Congress the power to incur debt and the president the power to veto.
Obama supporters like to portray Republican attempts to negotiate as hostage-taking or extortion. But those are violent crimes. Negotiations — discussions attempting to reach agreement among those who differ — are peaceful acts.
What we do know, from Bob Woodward's "The Price of Politics," is that Obama is not very good at negotiating. He apparently can't stomach listening to views he does not share.
Perhaps that is to be expected of one who has chosen all his adult life to live in university communities and who made his way upward in the one-party politics of Chicago. Thus on the fiscal cliff he left the unpleasant business of listening to others' views and reaching agreement to Joe Biden.
Obama has laid down another marker in his puzzling nomination of Chuck Hagel to be secretary of defense. As the Washington Post editorial writers pointed out, Hagel — though a nominal Republican — has stood way to the left of Obama on whether a military option to stop Iran's nuclear weapons program is feasible. Obama has said repeatedly that that option, however risky and unpalatable, is on the table. Hagel has said it shouldn't be. It's not at all clear that Hagel has the experience and temperament to head the Pentagon. His vocal defenders tend to concentrate on attacking his detractors rather than make the affirmative case for his qualifications.
Hagel seems likely to be confirmed given his endorsement by Sen. Charles Schumer yesterday. But it's interesting that no Republican senators have spoken up for him and that liberal Democratic senators like Bob Menendez and Ben Cardin have declined to do so.
As defense secretary, Hagel seems likely to cut military personnel and capabilities. There's undoubtedly some detritus that can be swept away. But his nomination seems less aimed at managing the military than tormenting the Republicans.
Then there is gun control. Some recent media polls show majority support for further restrictions on guns. If you phrase the question the right way, you tend to get that kind of response, especially after a horrifying crime like Newtown. But new restrictions are unlikely to have any significant practical effect. The ban on assault weapons — a category defined mostly by cosmetics — certainly had none in the 10 years it was in effect.
The fact is that we have many more guns and many fewer murders than we did 20 years ago. Allowing law-abiding citizens to carry concealed weapons, as most states do, has not resulted in the street shootouts some predicted. Strict state gun control laws did not stop the carnage in Newtown or the frequent killings on the streets of Chicago. The push for gun control is more a symbolic gesture than a serious attempt at governing.
Something better can be said about Obama's call for immigration law changes. The need for some change is clear.
That was also true in Obama's first two years, when he did nothing to advance legislation on the subject when Democrats had a solid majorities in Congress. The question is whether Obama wants legislation or to stick it to the opposition. Many Republicans, like Sen. Marco Rubio, are ready to support legalization of those brought here as children but not immediate legalization for all 11 million illegals. Negotiations and compromises will be needed to get a bill through Congress. A president interested in governing would not insist on getting his way 100 percent. Whether Obama is such a president is far from clear.
(Syndicated columnist Michael Barone is senior political analyst for The Washington Examiner, is a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a Fox News Channel contributor and co-author of The Almanac of American Politics.)
But Obama knows very well that negotiations usually accompany legislation to increase the government's debt limit. As Gordon Gray of the conservative American Action Network points out, most of the 17 increases in the debt ceiling over the last 20 years have been part of broader measures. Working out what will be in those measures is a matter for negotiation between the legislative and executive branches. That's because the Constitution gives Congress the power to incur debt and the president the power to veto.
Obama supporters like to portray Republican attempts to negotiate as hostage-taking or extortion. But those are violent crimes. Negotiations — discussions attempting to reach agreement among those who differ — are peaceful acts.
What we do know, from Bob Woodward's "The Price of Politics," is that Obama is not very good at negotiating. He apparently can't stomach listening to views he does not share.
Perhaps that is to be expected of one who has chosen all his adult life to live in university communities and who made his way upward in the one-party politics of Chicago. Thus on the fiscal cliff he left the unpleasant business of listening to others' views and reaching agreement to Joe Biden.
Obama has laid down another marker in his puzzling nomination of Chuck Hagel to be secretary of defense. As the Washington Post editorial writers pointed out, Hagel — though a nominal Republican — has stood way to the left of Obama on whether a military option to stop Iran's nuclear weapons program is feasible. Obama has said repeatedly that that option, however risky and unpalatable, is on the table. Hagel has said it shouldn't be. It's not at all clear that Hagel has the experience and temperament to head the Pentagon. His vocal defenders tend to concentrate on attacking his detractors rather than make the affirmative case for his qualifications.
Hagel seems likely to be confirmed given his endorsement by Sen. Charles Schumer yesterday. But it's interesting that no Republican senators have spoken up for him and that liberal Democratic senators like Bob Menendez and Ben Cardin have declined to do so.
As defense secretary, Hagel seems likely to cut military personnel and capabilities. There's undoubtedly some detritus that can be swept away. But his nomination seems less aimed at managing the military than tormenting the Republicans.
Then there is gun control. Some recent media polls show majority support for further restrictions on guns. If you phrase the question the right way, you tend to get that kind of response, especially after a horrifying crime like Newtown. But new restrictions are unlikely to have any significant practical effect. The ban on assault weapons — a category defined mostly by cosmetics — certainly had none in the 10 years it was in effect.
The fact is that we have many more guns and many fewer murders than we did 20 years ago. Allowing law-abiding citizens to carry concealed weapons, as most states do, has not resulted in the street shootouts some predicted. Strict state gun control laws did not stop the carnage in Newtown or the frequent killings on the streets of Chicago. The push for gun control is more a symbolic gesture than a serious attempt at governing.
Something better can be said about Obama's call for immigration law changes. The need for some change is clear.
That was also true in Obama's first two years, when he did nothing to advance legislation on the subject when Democrats had a solid majorities in Congress. The question is whether Obama wants legislation or to stick it to the opposition. Many Republicans, like Sen. Marco Rubio, are ready to support legalization of those brought here as children but not immediate legalization for all 11 million illegals. Negotiations and compromises will be needed to get a bill through Congress. A president interested in governing would not insist on getting his way 100 percent. Whether Obama is such a president is far from clear.
(Syndicated columnist Michael Barone is senior political analyst for The Washington Examiner, is a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a Fox News Channel contributor and co-author of The Almanac of American Politics.)
Last Updated on Friday, 18 January 2013 01:00
Hits: 195
Froma Harrop - Can Hillary pace herself?
The football helmet that State Department staffers presented Hillary Clinton upon her return to the office was cute, but only sort of. Same went for the "Clinton" football jersey bearing the number 112. That's how many countries she's visited since becoming secretary of state.
Clinton had been away sick for a month. She had suffered a stomach virus, which dehydrated her, which made her woozy, which led to a fall, which caused a concussion, which landed her in a hospital with a blood clot in her head.
No secretary of state had gone to that many countries. In her nearly 1,500 days as America's top diplomat, Clinton traveled on 401 of them. During one famous 48-hour period, she met with Palestinian officials in Abu Dhabi, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Jerusalem and, after doing an all-nighter in Morocco, a group of Arab leaders.
Of course, she got sick. Who wouldn't? Lots of otherwise healthy Americans come down with a nasty bug after just one transatlantic fight to London. Add to that constant time-zone changes, rich banquets, minimal exercise, lack of sleep and stress-filled meetings. Clinton wasn't there to stroll around museums.
What's not cute about all this is the underlying — shall we say? — irresponsibility of so overstuffing the agenda. This blows against Clinton's reputation as the ultimate Responsible One. It's thus disturbing that many of her admirers portrayed the resulting sickness as a tribute to her work ethic.
Melanne Verveer, a longtime Clinton aide now at the State Department, meant only praise when she said of the secretary of state: "So many people who know her have urged me to tell her not to work so hard. Well, that's not easy to do when you're Hillary Clinton. She doesn't spare herself."
Yes, she works hard, but doesn't working smart mean pacing oneself so that you don't fall apart in the last mile of the marathon? People do get ill through no fault of their own, but Clinton was asking for it.
All that racing around Mideast capitals sometimes took on the air of a personal endurance test rather than effective management of foreign policy. (You'll note that the Arab-Israeli conflict remains unresolved.)
Make no mistake: Clinton has been a fine secretary of state. Few would argue otherwise. Still, we're kind of lucky there wasn't a major new international crisis in December.
It pains me to bring up the woman angle here, but you wonder whether a man would have overscheduled to the point of collapse. (Only one secretary of state exceeded Clinton in the number of miles traveled: Condoleezza Rice.) President Obama tries to make time for exercise and rest, as did President George W. Bush before him. They understand the importance of maintaining their health.
It's no small irony that Clinton's recent illness has led some Democrats eager for a strong female presidential candidate in 2016 to start looking beyond Hillary. It may be true that Clinton says she's not interested in running again, but her medical scare is making some supporters think she means it.
The let's-find-a-woman people are misguided. I don't believe in backing candidates on the basis of gender (or race, religion, height or eye color). Hillary Clinton became one of our era's great political figures for other reasons.
While she will never embody the cool and outward serenity of Barack Obama, Clinton didn't have to become the spinning top that put her in a sick bed. Even there, she noted — not without pride — her difficulty in becoming a "compliant patient." If Clinton does run for president, she must show more dedication to self-preservation. Martyrs don't necessarily make great managers.
(A member of the Providence Journal editorial board, Froma Harrop writes a nationally syndicated column from that city. She has written for such diverse publications as The New York Times, Harper's Bazaar and Institutional Investor.)
Clinton had been away sick for a month. She had suffered a stomach virus, which dehydrated her, which made her woozy, which led to a fall, which caused a concussion, which landed her in a hospital with a blood clot in her head.
No secretary of state had gone to that many countries. In her nearly 1,500 days as America's top diplomat, Clinton traveled on 401 of them. During one famous 48-hour period, she met with Palestinian officials in Abu Dhabi, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Jerusalem and, after doing an all-nighter in Morocco, a group of Arab leaders.
Of course, she got sick. Who wouldn't? Lots of otherwise healthy Americans come down with a nasty bug after just one transatlantic fight to London. Add to that constant time-zone changes, rich banquets, minimal exercise, lack of sleep and stress-filled meetings. Clinton wasn't there to stroll around museums.
What's not cute about all this is the underlying — shall we say? — irresponsibility of so overstuffing the agenda. This blows against Clinton's reputation as the ultimate Responsible One. It's thus disturbing that many of her admirers portrayed the resulting sickness as a tribute to her work ethic.
Melanne Verveer, a longtime Clinton aide now at the State Department, meant only praise when she said of the secretary of state: "So many people who know her have urged me to tell her not to work so hard. Well, that's not easy to do when you're Hillary Clinton. She doesn't spare herself."
Yes, she works hard, but doesn't working smart mean pacing oneself so that you don't fall apart in the last mile of the marathon? People do get ill through no fault of their own, but Clinton was asking for it.
All that racing around Mideast capitals sometimes took on the air of a personal endurance test rather than effective management of foreign policy. (You'll note that the Arab-Israeli conflict remains unresolved.)
Make no mistake: Clinton has been a fine secretary of state. Few would argue otherwise. Still, we're kind of lucky there wasn't a major new international crisis in December.
It pains me to bring up the woman angle here, but you wonder whether a man would have overscheduled to the point of collapse. (Only one secretary of state exceeded Clinton in the number of miles traveled: Condoleezza Rice.) President Obama tries to make time for exercise and rest, as did President George W. Bush before him. They understand the importance of maintaining their health.
It's no small irony that Clinton's recent illness has led some Democrats eager for a strong female presidential candidate in 2016 to start looking beyond Hillary. It may be true that Clinton says she's not interested in running again, but her medical scare is making some supporters think she means it.
The let's-find-a-woman people are misguided. I don't believe in backing candidates on the basis of gender (or race, religion, height or eye color). Hillary Clinton became one of our era's great political figures for other reasons.
While she will never embody the cool and outward serenity of Barack Obama, Clinton didn't have to become the spinning top that put her in a sick bed. Even there, she noted — not without pride — her difficulty in becoming a "compliant patient." If Clinton does run for president, she must show more dedication to self-preservation. Martyrs don't necessarily make great managers.
(A member of the Providence Journal editorial board, Froma Harrop writes a nationally syndicated column from that city. She has written for such diverse publications as The New York Times, Harper's Bazaar and Institutional Investor.)
Last Updated on Wednesday, 16 January 2013 23:34
Hits: 200
