America the Beautiful: Rediscovering What Made This Nation Great (17 page)

Our corporate tax rate is the second highest in the world. The only country with a higher corporate tax rate is Japan, which just so happens to also be the only country with a greater national debt than we have. Is that coincidence or evidence of cause and effect? I suspect the latter. By being shortsighted and greedy, our government is driving businesses to other countries, which deprives our people not only of jobs, but our government of vital income. If a low proportional tax rate is applied to everyone, including corporate entities, the flow of jobs and income would be into our nation rather than out of our nation. This is not complex economic theory, but rather common sense.

In my many years as an academic physician, I have had the opportunity to hear many lectures by intellectuals from all over the world. Invariably, the best talks are not the ones that use complex terms and theories to demonstrate how brilliant the presenter is. Rather, the very best, most profound lectures are the ones that can easily be understood — even by those who are not experts in the field. I find that one has to have a very deep understanding of
their subject matter in order to be able to break it down into commonsense language that anyone can comprehend and appreciate. The same is true of economists and politicians. Those with logical plans and straightforward common sense are easily understood. Meanwhile those who have no idea what they’re talking about frequently make things far more complex than they need to be, and tell the people that they would understand it if only they were more knowledgeable and sophisticated.

Our founders knew that a slick politician can easily pull the wool over the eyes of an ignorant population, so they emphasized the importance of a broad, general education among the populace in order to maintain our freedom. I also believe, however, that legitimate political leaders have an obligation to explain their positions in a way that the common people can easily understand. As a neurosurgeon, I too have an obligation to explain the rationale for a complex operation that I propose in a way that allows the patient to make an intelligent decision. Any surgeon who cannot do that should not be operating, and the same is true of those running for political office.

Undoubtedly some critics will try to discredit me by saying, “He is a brilliant surgeon, but he knows nothing about politics, law, and economics, and should confine his opinions to medicine.” As I already mentioned, however, five physicians signed the Declaration of Independence and several were signatories for the Constitution of the United States of America. In addition, physicians are the most highly educated group in the nation, trained to make decisions based on facts rather than emotion. They tend to be excellent with numbers, very concerned about the welfare of others, and accustomed to hard work. I speak at many medical school commencements and always encourage physicians to get involved in community affairs and in politics. In fact, I would love to see scientists and engineers get much more involved in the political process, bringing their no-nonsense common sense and logic to the table.

I am certainly not saying that people who are not physicians and scientists lack logical thinking skills — and it’s sad that I even have to make such a disclaimer, but in our social milieu today, people who do not have very good arguments themselves tend to dissect every word of someone with whom they disagree in an attempt to make themselves look smart while discrediting someone else. Such tactics can be quite effective on people who do not think for themselves. This is another reason why our founding fathers placed so much emphasis on education for the common people — particularly on establishing values and understanding civics. They envisioned a government
that was constantly changing its members, because by avoiding entrenchment you disempower special interest groups and ensure fresh ideas. Since working for the government as a senator, representative, or staff person back then was not lucrative and required personal sacrifice, they never suspected that the system of government they put in place would be distorted by career politicians.

When our nation was rising rapidly to the pinnacle of the world, we were not ashamed of our relationship with God. In fact, reading from the Bible was not only common, it was expected in early public schools. The founders wanted generally accepted religious values to be taught in our schools without favoring any particular denomination, but they never intended to exclude God from the classroom,
¹⁰
because they knew that you had to have something upon which to base your system of values. If we only believe in evolution and survival of the fittest, whose values do we use to govern society?

Our society has become so paranoid about being politically incorrect that many people are afraid to say “Merry Christmas” simply because it contains the word
Christ
. Rather than spending so much time trying to figure out how not to offend people, it would be wonderful if we expended energy on teaching people not to be offended when someone offers a different opinion. Our emphasis should not be on unanimity of speech and thought, but rather on learning to be respectful and courteous to those with different opinions. I am fond of saying that if two people think and say the same thing about everything, then one of them is not necessary. Also, if people can’t hold honest conversations and are afraid to express their true feelings, conversations will necessarily be artificial, and it will be very difficult to have a meaningful discourse and solve problems.

It is my hope and prayer that we will vigorously protect the rights of individuals and communities to live and believe as they please, as long as they do not infringe upon the rights of others. I hope we continue to protect the rights of our citizens to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, not micromanaging their lives and imposing societal standards of political correctness that impinge upon their liberty. These principles have nothing to do with liberalism or conservatism, but rather are the foundation that paved the way for the creation of the most successful and productive society the world has ever seen. We have had the opportunity to witness what works,
and we have seen historically many examples of political systems that do not work.
¹¹
Hopefully we will be wise enough to step back, take a deep breath, and critically analyze the triumphs and mistakes of our nation, and to use what we have learned to take another gigantic leap forward with liberty and justice for all.

W
HEN I WAS AN UNDERGRADUATE STUDENT AT YALE,
the Vietnam War was still raging. Many students, frustrated by our nation’s involvement in that war, referred to members of the military — including the National Guard — as “pigs,” and anything having to do with our national defense as part of the “military-industrial complex.” Even local police were generally regarded as part of the oppressive “establishment.” This antigovernment attitude was so pervasive on the Yale campus that ROTC cadets were not required to wear their uniforms because officials feared they might be physically attacked.

The Vietnam War was, in retrospect, not a noble conflict. It brought shame to our nation because of both the outcome and the cause, and many people continue to bash the military and want to ban ROTC (Reserve Officers’ Training Corps) from their college campuses. They believe the military is immoral and intellectually inferior. If they were a little more open-minded, however, they might realize that it takes tremendous intelligence and leadership to effectively command and control the massive global military infrastructure responsible for their freedom. Fortunately, we as a society have matured some since then, and even many of the far-left progressives commend the men and women of the military while condemning its actions. I speak at many college graduations and am proud to see the standing ovation that almost invariably occurs when graduates of the ROTC are recognized, something that never would have occurred three or four decades ago.

Except during the summer months, I am on a college campus almost on a weekly basis, and I greatly enjoy interacting with the bright young people
who represent our future. Recently, I was thrilled to be invited to give a special lecture at the US Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland. The facility was immaculate and the cadets’ demeanor was one of dignity, respect, and confidence. After interacting with several of them, I was very impressed with their knowledge and ability to express themselves. I subsequently discovered how rigorous the admissions process is, and I began to understand why so many of our military leaders are historically so intellectually accomplished. Seeing that sea of dress white uniforms was awe-inspiring, and the cadets were extremely attentive and receptive as I spoke. The pageantry I have witnessed over the years at Army, Navy, and Marine reviews is no façade, but reflects the pride and competence that characterizes our military.

My fascination with the military and its relationship to governing powers, along with my desire to wear the uniform, played a major role in my joining the ROTC back in high school. My brother, Curtis, who was a couple of years ahead of me, was a captain and company commander of our school unit when I joined, and his many ribbons and medals gave him universal respect both inside and outside of the ROTC world. I already had a great love for reading before involving myself in ROTC, so I was absolutely thrilled with all the books and manuals available to cadets — books on military strategy, martial law, explosives, map reading, and a myriad of other topics. I quickly rose through the ranks because of my acquisition of knowledge and observance of military protocol and dedication.

Because Baltimore is located so close to Washington, DC, the Pentagon, several military bases, and the Department of Defense, my wife and I have had the opportunity to befriend many military families. I love to play pool (billiards) and consider myself a pretty good player, but one day we were playing in the basement of my home when General Krulak, Commandant of the Marine Corps from the mid- to late 1990s, arrived. “What is that game you guys are playing?” he asked innocently. He then proceeded to clear the table without missing a single shot. He is an extremely bright, tactical, compassionate, and practical individual. He served in various commanding positions from Counter Guerilla Warfare School in Okinawa to Combat Development Command in Quantico, and after retiring from the Marine Corps, he successfully led the European division of MBNA, the nation’s largest credit card company. He and his wife, Zandy, are great supporters of our Carson Scholars Fund and are wonderful role models for our young people. With leadership of his caliber, I am greatly comforted knowing our country is in great hands.

I first met General Colin Powell at a national conference in Detroit for which we were both keynote speakers. At that time, he was Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs and was already quite well known throughout the world. He was alert in noticing every detail about his environment and the people around him at every moment. His dignified but relaxed demeanor, and ability to speak competently to anyone on a wide range of subjects, inspired awe in everyone around him. I subsequently became a board member of his “America’s Promise” organization and became even more impressed with his organizational skills and vision for our nation. Many of our former presidents, including George Washington, made their initial contributions to our society through their military participation, and I believe Colin Powell could probably have become the first African-American president of the United States.

Another admirable leader I’ve had the privilege to get to know, General Clara Adams-Ender, is a nurse who became the first African-American female to command a major Army base.
¹
She may be short in stature, but she was a giant presiding over ceremonies at Fort Belvoir just outside of Washington, DC, a premier installation whose duties include entertaining visiting international dignitaries, such as Israeli military leader Moshe Dayan. It was thrilling to see this young woman review the troops, especially when her second-in-command was a young man appearing to be twice her height! When she retired from the military, she and her husband went on to establish their own successful business, and she continues to make her presence known. General Adams-Ender is yet another example of excellence at the helm of our military establishment.

One experience I lived through captures the clash in America regarding attitudes toward our military. In 1967, during my high school years in ROTC, the Detroit riots erupted, which were among the worst our nation has ever seen. Tanks rumbled down the street and squadrons of heavily armed soldiers stood guard on street corners to prevent looting. Some of the soldiers were even attacked and shot at. I, on the other hand, was delighted to see the military, because they were able to restore a semblance of peace and calm to the area. For those who wanted to continue looting and rioting, the soldiers stood in their way and were therefore seen as bad. For the citizens who desired restoration of law and order, the soldiers were seen as good. The former group began to characterize the latter group as racist, and for many the term
law and order
became synonymous with racist attitudes. This is what happens when people begin to polarize themselves based on phrases used by rabble-rousers who for the most part are only interested in their own positions. I think in the long run almost everyone was happy with the performance of the National Guard and with the return to normalcy on the streets of Detroit.

Although racial tensions were explosive in 1967, just one year later the city was a picture of harmony, not because of great political leadership, but rather because the Detroit Tigers were about to win the World Series for the first time in nearly four decades. Everyone was so caught up in the excitement, they forgot their differences and reveled in their common pride. What an incredible testimony to the power of creating common goals and desires — which is, of course, a hallmark of outstanding leadership.

When I was a college student at Yale, the military draft for the Vietnam War was still in effect. People felt that favoritism played a large role in who was selected; therefore, a system was implemented in which a lottery determined who was drafted. All eligible men were assigned a number between 1 and 365, depending on the date of their birth. The lowest numbers were drafted first and the higher numbers were drafted last or not at all. My brother, Curtis, got a very low number and realistically assumed he was going to be drafted, even though he was in college at the time. He decided to at least apply for the military branch of his choice, so he enlisted in the Navy, where he trained as a nuclear atomic submarine operator. I, on the other hand, was dealt lottery number 333, which virtually assured I would not be drafted.

Although I would have readily accepted my responsibility to fight had I been drafted, I found myself wondering why in modern times we are still running around killing each other. Over the course of thousands of years, why has the human race failed to make meaningful strides toward peaceful coexistence? I think the answer is contained in the story of “The Scorpion and the Frog”:

A scorpion was trying desperately to reach the opposite bank of a river, but he could not swim. Then he saw a frog swimming leisurely along the shore. He implored the frog to give him a ride on his back to the other side of the river.

“Are you crazy?” the frog said. “Or maybe you think I’m crazy. What would keep you from stinging me, causing me to drown?”

The scorpion answered, “If I sting you while we’re in the river, and I cannot swim, I will also drown. Therefore, I have great incentive for keeping you alive.”

The frog saw the logic in the scorpion’s argument and he agreed to shuttle him across the river on his back. When they reached the deepest part of the river, the frog felt a painful sting on his back. As sensation began to leave
his body and he began to sink he asked the scorpion, “Why did you sting me? Now we’re both going to die!”

“I’m sorry,” the scorpion answered, “but I couldn’t help it. You see, it’s my nature.”

Throughout history, mankind has behaved like the scorpion, and, unfortunately, we can assume that our natural, pugilistic tendencies will persist into the foreseeable future. For that reason, it is important to fortify ourselves against attack and maintain a state-of-the-art military apparatus. Many pacifists among us would strongly disagree, believing that if we are nice to everyone, that everyone will in turn be nice to us, and that peace will reign supreme throughout the world. I would love for that to be true, but in our world pragmatism generally wins out over idealism. I do, however, believe we should continue to work toward the goal of world peace. If we don’t set a target, we certainly will not hit it.

Being prepared to protect ourselves does not mean endless expansion of the military budget or insinuating ourselves into every conflict around the globe. One only need look to the history of the Roman Empire to learn significant lessons about what happens when military forces are stretched too thin. The Romans suffered many humiliating losses as a result, which affected the esprit de corps, leading to further erosion of a once fierce fighting force. Also, their need for ever-increasing funding led to burdensome taxes and trumped-up reasons to confiscate private property, particularly that belonging to the wealthy. The loss of a national vision, erosion of morality, and totally irresponsible fiscal policies led to the destruction of what was perhaps the greatest empire the world had ever known. Our nation should keep this in mind when evaluating trouble spots around the world and considering our level of involvement.

There are ways to affect outcomes of such conflicts without investing large amounts of money or engaging the military overtly. I believe it is unwise, however, for us to talk too openly about our political and military objectives because it unnecessarily constrains us and provides our opponents with early warning and the opportunity to prepare. I’m talking about things that have unwisely been criminalized or demonized that are better left undiscussed in a public forum. When dealing with corrupt and evil forces that are bent upon the destruction of our nation, we would be wise to keep them in the dark regarding our intentions and capabilities. For quite some time now, it seems we’ve lost our grasp on the simple logic in this as we pay too much attention to a vocal, well-meaning, but naïve group of people who insist on transparency in all of our policies. Others will agree with me
that integrity and morality are considerably more important than transparency when engaging in military conflicts.

But, some may ask, how are the people to know there is integrity without transparency? Do I have logical, mutually agreeable solutions to satisfy both sides? No. But if the American people know our goals and philosophy, I would expect that they would agree that relating all the details also alerts our enemies. For the sake of our military strategists, soldiers, and the common good, I believe most would be willing to give up a few public details for the sake of better protection.

From the time of its inception until now, the United States has been involved in many military conflicts, but by the early 1900s, we were beginning to be wary of the consequences of war, particularly when there was no direct threat to our nation. While World War I raged, President Woodrow Wilson was determined to maintain US neutrality and allow our economic prosperity to continue. He was strongly supported by his Secretary of State, William Jennings Bryan, many other government officials, and public opinion. But on May 7, 1915, the Lusitania was torpedoed by a German U-boat off the coast of Ireland, killing almost 1,200 people, more than 10 percent of whom were Americans. People around the world expressed great outrage, but particularly in Great Britain and America. Nevertheless, despite sending a series of semi-threatening letters to Germany, President Wilson tried to maintain calm, and discouraged our entry into the war. Although the Germans moderated their U-boat attack policies, US commercial business interests eventually prevailed in advocating war on Germany. America was not prepared for war and contributed little to the effort when we entered in 1917, but by the spring of 1918, very successful recruitment efforts led to the influx of hundreds of thousands of American troops, with more than one million American troops in France by early fall of that year. The Germans, who had been in the driver’s seat before the entrance of America, could not match those numbers; therefore, they backed down, and in November of 1918 the Treaty of Versailles was signed, ending the war. Although America was a fledgling superpower in the first part of the twentieth century, it demonstrated great flexibility and cunning military prowess that altered the rest of the world’s perception of the US as an isolationist nation, changing the global power dynamics.