Here’s Looking at Carly

My instinctive, visceral reaction to Carly Fiorina’s presidential aspirations was to dismiss her out of hand. There were two reasons for this.  

Number one: I have grave reservations about the presidency being anyone’s first political position. While I don’t like giving the nomination to “the next person in line,” and I find that career politicians frequently lose touch with life outside the Beltway, going straight to the presidency seems too big a jump.

Number two: I despise any argument that begins with, “This will be a good way to get the (fill in the blank) vote. I actually believe in certain principles, among them supporting policies that help America.  I abhor the idea of passing legislation that is wrong for the country in the hope of getting women, African-Americans, Asians, young people, citizens of a certain state, older people, Hispanics etc., etc., to vote for you. Aside from being wrong, I also think it is foolish as there is no way to out ‘identity politics’ the Democrats.  The number of people who were promoting Carly Fiorina because, “We need a woman to go against Hillary,” primed me to dislike her campaign, even if she did not make that argument herself. 

What changed?  A friend told me to take a look at a speech Carly (I never know how to refer to candidates. Are we on a first name basis?) delivered. I did and was impressed. Then I clicked on a few links and saw her go on the offensive when media tried to make her defensive about abortion. Little makes me angrier than Republicans slinking around with their tails between their legs, so that got my attention. 

I have signed up to follow Carly on Facebook and have given her campaign the green light to send me emails. There are too many candidates in the race to be able to pay attention to all of them, but I am going to start looking more closely at her. She is joining the ranks of those I am most interested in as I seek someone with principles, guts and the ability to communicate. 

It is early and my antipathies and allegiances are fluid, so I’m interested in hearing who is causing you to take note.  Is there anyone whose campaign has attracted your attention?

23 thoughts on “Here’s Looking at Carly”

  1. Lynn, I missed both debates and posting a Musing. I am way more out of internet range than I thought I’d be this week. We are boating and having an amazing time with one of our daughters and two of our grandsons joining us but we are way more out of touch than we expected

  2. Did not get to see the earlier debate tonight but have read that the pundits feel Carly won it nicely. I hope you got to watch. I’m being entertained now with the main event debate. Very interesting. Dr. Carson hasn’t disappointed.

  3. Lora, I agree with you on both Cruz and Carson. I am beginning to feel excitement over this race after two elections of really being unhappy. My concern is a Bush nominee

  4. So far, I have found myself leaning towards Ted Cruz or Ben Carson. I have been watching what candidates say about the Constitution, the natural family, childhood education, taxes and budgeting, and hot-button topics like abortion and Islamic terrorists. That’s quite a range, and it can be so very hard to determine what a man actually says, because it gets so mangled by media. It reminds me of those times when my dog would get ahold of something she wasn’t supposed to have, and if she was sneaky enough, by the time we found it, we couldn’t even identify it. I do understand that by their fruits ye shall know them, so I am looking at what fruits different candidates have so far produced in politics or business or elsewhere.
    In the meantime, I will look into this Carly Fiorina. I hadn’t heard about her. I read through the comments section and there were many insights there, so I have to think and feel my way through to my inner feelings of a woman president. I do get tickled thinking of Republicans producing the first woman president instead of the Democrats. That aside, I think I would be willing, because I do feel as though so many of the men in politics have seriously disappointed me.
    Oh- I so wish Mia Love would run!! I really like her.

  5. I have spoken to a couple people who worked at HP while Carly was CEO and they do not like her because of how she managed things while she was in that position. I listen to what they are saying but haven’t closed the door on her because I often think that those in the top position have a different view of what is happening than the rank and file simply because they are in the top position. I want to see more of her. I love how Mr. Trump is stirring up the GOP. Absolutely l-o-v-e it! The GOP needs a good shake down to get rid of those who do not adhere to the party’s platform and there are many. I admire Dr. Carson a great deal. Especially his calm, unflappable demeanor. He isn’t ruffled easily and ponders answers to problems by seeking Wisdom from God. Senator Cruz is a wonderful man of knowledge of our Constitution and I don’t think he will fall under the spell of DC. I’m don’t see Mr. Rubio as a strong canidate. His dabbling into amnesty with the Gang of Six (or was it eight?) left me not trusting his decision making ability. Governor Walker seemed good but has waffled on some issue and that shows weakness. We do not need another willy-nilly, lick my finger and hold it up to the political winds and I’ll tell you how I stand, canidate. The debates this week will be interesting and I think if anyone who is concerned for the direction our country is going to take, needs to sit down and pay attention. Then I hope ALL the GOP candidates will unite and stand firm against the run away progressive machine that is taking down our freedoms before our eyes. Prayer. We need to start meeting and praying together for our country. In our homes and in our places of worship. Prayer to God Almighty, Creator of the Universe, will do more to set our country back on its rightful path than anything else.

  6. Good to know that I am not the only one having reservations about a woman president even though I am not entirely sure why I feel this way….time for a little more self examination,,,I realize that there have been great women leaders,,,,if Carly was to get the nomination I would most definitely support her…..maybe my “stubbornness” is just an old fashioned mindset,,,
    It is still very early in the campaign, will have to wait and see how it all shakes out…

  7. I am just enjoying seeing Trump continually push the conversation away politically correctness , I really doubt he is actually running for president ,I think he is a rich man having the time of his life ! and I wish I didn’t have to see the Republicans falling all over the place apologizing for everything he says…he has opened gates for people to actually discuss the issues , and they are mostly acting like sissies, running away , making me want to vote for NO ONE.

  8. English history is replete with woman who ruled more wisely than men, going back to Queen Elizabeth and including Queen Victoria. Margaret Thatcher was part of a British tradition.

  9. Hear hear! Bravo! Your comment on Deborah leading the Israelites was spot on. Better a woman with her eyes open and her head screwed on properly than some ineffectual and ‘politically correct’ male nincompoop who abandons ship at the sound of the first cannon! I have not lived in the UK during her administration, but from this side of the Pond, Margaret Thatcher appears to me a brilliant case in point. In particular I treasure her principled opposition to socialism. She said: “The problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of other people’s money.”

  10. I do think this group of nominees is laying bare the split in the Republican Party. Does that mean inevitable failure or can someone pull us together? I don’t know.

  11. Yes, we face a bewildering choice if we would topple the Socialist Babelites (viz. Tower of Babel) now in the ascendancy, who are turning the core values of our nation upside down and inside out, to the utter revulsion of those who fear the Lord.
    There are aspects of the ‘Tea Party’ chosen few newcomers that I admire, of Ted and Marco, who are unafraid to step up and call a spade a spade. Cuba libre! Add to the mix the financially independent Donald, who brazenly counters vile liberal epithets of attack and muck with bitter doses of verbal (and truthful) retaliation. The Republicans, if they are wise, will stop their slinking, wake up, pay attention and discern the reason why Donald is top of the poll. He seems to have his finger on the pulse of our values. A radical adjustment and reboot of Republican attitude and policy is in order.
    Yet I share your enthusiasm for Carly, whom I have heard discourse on Hannity’s show and elsewhere. She is articulate, coherent and well-informed. She ignores the social ‘soft issues’ and ‘fluff’ that float the boat of many brain-dead Obamanoids. And let those who deride women as flighty emotional creatures BEWARE, for Carly is rational and calm as she identifies the REAL issues that confront us. I too will keep my eye on Carly.

  12. I mostly agree with you, Jana. I do not feel confident that Trump’s principles are in sync with mine, so I am wary of him even as I appreciate that he is forcing the discussion on issues and I appreciate his dismissal of what the establishment media thinks. I am interested in Walker though I only know of him in respect to his own state and don’t feel that I yet know what his views on broader issues are. At least this time around, I am hoping that the RNC is going to be shaken up and actually be forced to listen to those of us they usually despise.

  13. Ginny, I too am strong on Trump in spite of the fact that he is full of himself. I love hearing someone state both their opinion and the truth without dancing around. And Ted Cruz is strong, brave, honest, smart and just plain good.
    I’m also interested in Scott Walker because he is not intimidated by political correctness or the media.
    In thinking about a woman president, I’m reminded of Golda Meir, Indira Ghandi and of course, Margaret Thatcher. Their strength, respect in the world and wisdom causes me to examine my own unsupported hesitation of a woman president.
    (Good words about Deborah and women as leaders when men won’t lead, Susan – thank you!)

  14. From my viewpoint, I look at the prophetess Deborah in the Bible. I think, as ancient Jewish wisdom says she knew, that it is better when men lead honorably and competently. But when they fail to do so, women must step into the breach. I have no problem with that aspect of the Fiorina campaign.

  15. I had to think about this ….I guess it goes back to the bible where God created man to be he the head of the household and family, so I guess I am transferring that to also mean the head of the country…leadership…although different countries do have Queens and women rulers…
    I would not be opposed to a woman vice president…

  16. Peter, I will look into this. It’s a little too late at night for me to read the whole thing you’ve posted, but I will come back to it. If it is an accurate report, I’d love to see her asked about it. I knew I could count on Musings readers to bring up interesting points.

  17. Ginny, thanks for commenting this time! I agree completely with you that I want someone who will be outspoken and firm in what he or she believes. I have liked Ted Cruz for a long time for that very reason. What concerns you about a woman president?

  18. Hi Susan
    Right now I am favoring Donald Trump and Ted Cruz, simply because they are outspoken and addressing the issues that need to be addressed. I like the fact that they are not worried about being “Politically Correct”….I grew up in an era where we were taught to “call a spade a spade” and to my knowledge that wasn’t a racial slur…basically tell it like it is.
    I am hoping that with Trump and Cruz being so outspoken that the other candidates will stand up and actually say what they believe instead of the political rhetoric..
    I have not taken a look at Carly Fiona but I will, just not sure if I am ready for a woman president….
    I enjoy your “musings” although I seldom comment..

  19. Hi Susan:
    This is from an article that I read in May of this year . . .
    Lots of people are losing their minds over Republican presidential candidate Carly Fiorina, but apart from her terrible record at Hewlett Packard, the 60-year-old seems to believe the Islamic Ottoman Empire civilization was the greatest in the world.
    Americans, and people in general, often have short memories. This is why it is important to remind people of those who are asking for your vote. While the majority of Democrats at the federal level are not worth mentioning simply because they are so far from being worthwhile candidates, those that claim they love the Constitution and America under the Republican banner should warrant extra scrutiny. Fiorina is one of these candidates.
    In a speech that was given a mere two weeks after Islamic jihadists attacked America, the former HP chief executive officer gave a speech on technology, business and our way of life. She concluded her speech with the following:
    “There was once a civilization that was the greatest in the world.
    It was able to create a continental super-state that stretched from ocean to ocean, and from northern climes to tropics and deserts. Within its dominion lived hundreds of millions of people, of different creeds and ethnic origins.
    One of its languages became the universal language of much of the world, the bridge between the peoples of a hundred lands. Its armies were made up of people of many nationalities, and its military protection allowed a degree of peace and prosperity that had never been known. The reach of this civilization’s commerce extended from Latin America to China, and everywhere in between.
    And this civilization was driven more than anything, by invention. Its architects designed buildings that defied gravity. Its mathematicians created the algebra and algorithms that would enable the building of computers, and the creation of encryption. Its doctors examined the human body, and found new cures for disease. Its astronomers looked into the heavens, named the stars, and paved the way for space travel and exploration.
    Its writers created thousands of stories. Stories of courage, romance and magic. Its poets wrote of love, when others before them were too steeped in fear to think of such things.
    When other nations were afraid of ideas, this civilization thrived on them, and kept them alive. When censors threatened to wipe out knowledge from past civilizations, this civilization kept the knowledge alive, and passed it on to others.
    While modern Western civilization shares many of these traits, the civilization I’m talking about was the Islamic world from the year 800 to 1600, which included the Ottoman Empire and the courts of Baghdad, Damascus and Cairo, and enlightened rulers like Suleiman the Magnificent.
    Although we are often unaware of our indebtedness to this other civilization, its gifts are very much a part of our heritage. The technology industry would not exist without the contributions of Arab mathematicians. Sufi poet-philosophers like Rumi challenged our notions of self and truth. Leaders like Suleiman contributed to our notions of tolerance and civic leadership.”
    Though Fiorina did acknowledge Christianity and Judaism in culture, she did not call them “a civilization that was the greatest in the world.” She failed to recognize the long track record of Islam and its culture in the Middle East. In fact, understanding that we are a Christian nation, one would think that she would reference the rich heritage of Europe or even our early founding, but instead, two weeks after Islamists attacked America, she decided to praise the culture that spawned them.
    Not only that, but she apparently has bought into the lie that it was Islam was very important with regards to mathematics. Nothing could be further from the truth.
    Enza Ferreri points out:
    The word “algebra” stems from the Arabic word “al-jabr”, from the name of the treatise Book on Addition and Subtraction after the Method of the Indians written by the 9th-century Persian mathematician Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi, who translated, formalized and commented on ancient Indian and Greek works.
    It is even doubtful whether al-Khwarizmi was really a Muslim. The Wikipedia entry on him says:
    Regarding al-Khwārizmī’s religion, Toomer writes:
    Another epithet given to him by al-Ṭabarī, “al-Majūsī,” would seem to indicate that he was an adherent of the old Zoroastrian religion. This would still have been possible at that time for a man of Iranian origin, but the pious preface to al-Khwārizmī’s Algebra shows that he was an orthodox Muslim, so al-Ṭabarī’s epithet could mean no more than that his forebears, and perhaps he in his youth, had been Zoroastrians.
    In all likelihood he was a Zoroastrian who was forced to convert (or die) by Muslim rulers because Persia had been conquered by the Islamic armies, and that was what Muslims did (and still do wherever they can). That could easily explain the “pious preface to al-Khwarizmi’s Algebra”.
    Ferreri goes on to list the fact that algebra has its roots in ancient Babylon and later developed in Egypt and Greece. Advances were even made among the Chinese and Indians in algebra.
    Even Bertrand Russell wrote in The History of Western Philosophy:
    Arabic philosophy is not important as original thought. Men like Avicenna and Averroes are essentially commentators. Speaking generally, the views of the more scientific philosophers come from Aristotle and the Neoplatonists in logic and metaphysics, from Galen in medicine, from Greek and Indian sources in mathematics and astronomy, and among mystics religious philosophy has also an admixture of old Persian beliefs. Writers in Arabic showed some originality in mathematics and in chemistry — in the latter case, as an incidental result of alchemical researches.
    Mohammedan civilization in its great days was admirable in the arts and in many technical ways, but it showed no capacity for independent speculation in theoretical matters. Its importance, which must not be underrated, is as a transmitter. Between ancient and modern European civilization, the dark ages intervened. The Mohammedans and the Byzantines, while lacking the intellectual energy required for innovation, preserved the apparatus of civilization — education, books, and learned leisure. Both stimulated the West when it emerged from barbarism — the Mohammedans chiefly in the thirteenth century, the Byzantines chiefly in the fifteenth. In each case the stimulus produced new thought better than any produced by the transmitters — in the one case scholasticism, in the other the Renaissance (which however had other causes also).

Comments are closed.

Shopping Cart