RUNNING FROM THE MEDIA

I have been thinking a lot lately about the legitimate role of the media in this country.  While I have to admit that I am no media expert, I have been around a while and have been through quite a few election cycles since I was among the first in the country to vote at eighteen years of age during the 1972 national elections.

There is no doubt that the media has evolved since that 1972 election.  At that time we got most of our information from one of the major news organizations that broadcast on public television or from hometown and major newspapers.  In the region where I lived we got our print news from either the San Gabriel Valley Tribune or the Los Angeles Times.  Major magazines fulfilled a small role in providing us with information but even at that time, if we wanted relevant, timely information we turned to nightly news programs or the “morning” paper.

With regard to the world of politics, the role of these media outlets was to report events as they happen, to seek truth,  expose hypocrisy, and question the validity of statements and actions of those seeking to persuade the electorate to vote in a certain way.

The press has a responsiblity to the American people.  They had this responsibility in 1972, they have the responsibility in 2010.  In the political realm, for the most part, that responsibility is to keep the dialogue between those running for office and those who will make the decision to put them in office, truthful and honest.  Since I cannot be at every political rally, every news conference, every debate, it is the job of the press to go there for me, and accurately report the events of the day. 

The advent of cable television and the internet has resulted in significantly increased exposure for those who seek political office.  Candidates are under more scrutiny now than at any time in my lifetime.  As a result of this increased scrutiny by the various media outlets covering their campaigns, we have seen candidates being more selective about those they allow to interview them. 

During the 2008 electoral season, John McCains’ political machine restricted the exposure of their Vice Presidential nominee to the press.  Sarah Palin was almost completely hidden from the prying eyes and ears of media outlets that were not seen as favorable to their campaign.  In essence if Sarah was going to answer a question it was going to be one that was generated by the Fox News organization.  Basically, other news outlets were shut out of the process.  After seeing the performance of the Governor of Alaska during selected non-Fox News media encounters it is difficult to argue with their selective exposure of their candidate.  Their candidate was a political neophyte with limited political background and an even more limited knowledge of the issues that the American electorate were concerned about.  

The American people deserve to know the whole story.  They deserve to know if a candidate is legitimately prepared to perform the job of the office that they are seeking.  We deserve to know about a candidates background.  If there is something in a candidates  background that would cause the electorate to question their suitability for office, the American people deserve to know about it. 

We deserve to know regardless of our political affiliation.  Conservatives deserve to know if a candidate agrees with them on any and all issues.  Liberals and Progressives deserve the same.  Those not associated with either of the major political parties deserve to know the truth.  Shutting out media outlets that are deemed to be “unfriendly” towards a certain candidate contributes to an uninformed electorate.

The United States of America deserves an informed electorate.  To those who vote strictly among party lines, information is not critical.  Unfortunately, there are those among us who would vote for a toaster oven if it was considered to be aligned with the political party of their choosing. 

Democratic candidates should relish the opportunity to be interviewed by anyone associated with Fox News.  If they are not intelligent enough to see through the obvious political bias of the organization, they shouldn’t be seeking an office which requires legitimate and reasoned debate prior to making decisions.  Republicans and Tea Party candidates should absolutely be thrilled with the opportunity to be interviewed by individuals associated with MSNBC, ABC, CNN or any other outlet that they consider to be part of the “lamestream” media.  It is their opportunity to state their case to those whose political leanings are in alignment with the media outlets political philosophy.  If they disagree with the nature of a question, challenge its’ validity.  Let the people watching see that you have enough integrity to see through obvious political bias.  We are not talking about brain surgery here!

That being said, why is it that so many of the so-called “Tea Party” candidates are literally running full speed away from the press?  Sharon Angle of Nevada, Joe Miller of Alaska, and Christine O’donnel of Delaware among others have made every attempt to hide from the inquisitive eyes of the press.  Why would Sharon Angle literally run away from reporters trying to ask questions?  (Although it was an amuzing scene).  Why would Joe Miller refuse to answer questions about his personal background?  What is up with poor Miss O’donnel cancelling visits to the Sunday morning talk shows?  The answer is clear.  They don’t want people to discover what some already know and others refuse to believe.  The candidate has political and personal issues that when discovered would make them look unqualified.

When Christine O’Donnell claims that if elected, the Constitution will be her guide, and then proves that she doesn’t have the faintest idea of what the Constitution says, I think that is something that the good people of Delaware need to know about prior to casting their vote.  Is she qualified?  Listen to her responses and then make an informed decision.

When Sharon Angle’s history in Nevada includes an absolute unwillingness to work with other legislators she was elected to serve with, that is something the people of Nevada should probably understand before voting.  Do we really need another Senator who refuses to work with others while representing our interests?  You decide.

When Joe Miller decides not to “illuminate” the people of Alaska about certain events in his personal and professional life, Alaskan’s are faced with making a political choice based upon half-truths.  How could that possibly be good for the people of Alaska?  Seriously, folks, what do you think about the fact that so-called “security guards” for Joe Miller handcuffed a reporter over the weekend for trying to ask questions of their candidate?  Does that give you any indication that someone is hiding the truth?  Politician’s have made a habit of hiding inconvenient truths.

To those who would vote for the toaster oven as long as it is associated with their political party nothing they could say or do would matter anyway.  To those of us who are not associated with either party, a candidates refusal to answer questions from “unfriendly” press creates doubt that they are in any way different from the politicians that they are trying to replace.

Tea Party candidates make the claim that electing them will make a difference in the direction of the country.  We have more than enough politicians in office now who operate in the shadows and do their best to hide their personal lives, their political contributors, and their voting records. 

At best, candidates who hide from the press during the process of seeking public office, while claiming to be different from those they are seeking to replace, are really no different from those they want to replace.  In that regard, Tea Party candidates offer nothing new to the American electorate.  Their oft-repeated claims that they will “shake things up” in Washington D.C. are no different than the claims made by those who have gone before them.

I can’t vote for a candidate who refuses to allow me to see who he or she really is.  They keep hiding, to the peril of the American electorate.  A candidate who runs from the press is making every attempt to hide their qualifications from the American people.  Doing so while claiming to be different from those already in office, is at best disingenuous, at worst it is lying to the people they claim to want to represent.  In that regard, those hiding have already learned lessons from those who have gone before them.  Despite their claims to the contrary, there is nothing new here!

A Real Example Of Big Brother Taking Away Our Liberty

There have always been individuals and groups of individuals that make it a point to proclaim their fear of the government.  There are always people who make claims that “big government” is out to get them.  These days that seems to be all the rage.  Whether it is members of one of the various “tea party” groups or other individuals who make such claims, the claims are loudly proclaimed for all to hear.

For the past year, individuals with the belief that the government is taking over their lives have used every opportunity to state their case or make their claims, while loudly protesting every perceived slight as brought to them by this “liberal, leftist, socialist, administration”.  “They are taking away our liberty!”

While there can be a real fear of government intrusion into the lives of the people it is supposed to be serving, I perceive that most of what we hear now is political noise without much merit.  

The Bush Administration was in power for 8 years.  During this time they responded to the 9-11 terrorist attack on our country in ways that have been determined to be unlawful.  To put it simply, the Bush Administration broke the law.  Repeatedly.  They did it by granting the National Security Agency (NSA) the right to take away the liberty of American citizens by listening in on their phone conversations without warrants.  The NSA’s  ”warrantless wiretapping” program is a real example of ” Big Brother” stomping all over the liberty of the citizens they were supposed to be protecting.  This is a verified example of governmental intrusion. 

The Bush Administration, in their infinite wisdom, decided that they could ignore the FISA requirments for listening in on phone conversations of the citizens of the country they were charged with protecting.  The Bushies made the claim that they could break the law by invoking the  use of “state secrets privilege.  Basically, they stated that they were above the law.

Yesterday, a Federal Judge determined that the Bush Administration acted illegally and that the “states secrets privilege” did not apply.  You can tear into the legal arguments of both sides all you want.  You can argue that the intent was to protect the country from further terrorist attack.  Perceived intent does not lessen the fact that the law was broken, and a government agency intruded into the lives of American citizens.

 Interestingly enough, the Bush Adminnistration acted illegally by completely ignoring the rights of the American people to privacy.  The law they broke was written to keep Americans free from illegal government intrusion into their personal lives.

I have one very legitimate question to ask of all of you who recently have been making so much noise about  your loss of liberty and the intrusion of the government into your lives.  

WHERE ARE YOUR VOICES NOW?

Why is it that I hear no calls for “liberty”  today?  Where are the complaints about the “constitutionality” of the governments actions?  There just doesn’t seem to be any noise coming from anyone who have been making the claim that government intrusion into their lives is ruining the country.  It seems that your requests that you “want your country back” don’t take into account the fact that the “country” you want back was being governed illegally.

Based upon the fact that you didn’t complain about the Bush Administration’s illegal instrusion while it was going on, while it was being investigated, and after it was deemed illegal, I offer a few possible explanations for your inconsistent rants.

• You believe the Bush Administration’s  intrusion into your life was necessary or ignored it because it was coming from an Administration you supported.
• You believe the Obama Administrations so-called intrusion is far more serious than the government listening to your personal phone calls without a warrant.
• As is often the case, your cries relating to “fearing the government intrusion into your life” are phony.  When you disagree with an Administration’s legislative agenda you cry for “liberty” and make claims of “unconstitutionality” because you think it makes your argument valid.  You just don’t have any other way of expressing your dislike for an Administration that was voted into office against your will, even though the will of the people was heard.

If you were politically consistent in your outrage, you would have spoken out against the policies of the Bush Administration that have been proven to be illegal over and over in the courts.   And yet, I hear no echoes of your voices from that time.  Why?  Because you didn’t use them then.  And yet, you use them now.

Either way, your claims are falling on ears that can discern the difference between your rhetoric and the beliefs that generate it.  Your inconsistency is on parade.  Interestingly enough, most of you have not realized that your ideas on the way things should be were rejected by the American people in an overwhelming fashion in the last two elections.  Yet, you continue the use the same tactics that were completely rejected. 

Repeating the same tactics over and over and hoping for  different results might just be the best definition of political insanity.  Interestingly enough, in America, you have the liberty to make your claims while others have the liberty to see through it and completely reject them.

Is Perception Reality?

This cartoon makes a very profound political comment about the very real perception that is “in the air” about the Republican Party.  You may or may not agree…. but the perception is out there based upon behavior.

 

Cartoon by Joel Pett – Lexington Herald-Leader  March 24, 2010

Fear 101 – More Lies To Tolerate

Are there specific categories of lies that are more acceptable than others when it comes to the health care (insurance) debate?  All we have heard from Republicans for the past couple of months is how passage of the health reform was going to bankrupt the country.  Lets take a look at what the Congressional Budget Office says about this one.

 

First, a word about the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). The CBO employs about 250 people. The agency is composed primarily of economists and public policy analysts. About three-quarters of its professional staff hold advanced degrees, mostly in economics or public policy.

 

*CBO’s mandate is to provide the Congress with:

• Objective, nonpartisan, and timely analyses to aid in economic and budgetary decisions on the wide array of programs covered by the federal budget and
• The information and estimates required for the Congressional budget process.

*Taken from the Congressional Budget Office website.  (www.CBO.gov)

Congress relies on the CBO to study proposed legislation and report the costs of legislation. 

 

If you look at the three major pieces of legislation passed during the recent  Bush Administration you will notice a very significant trend.  Each of the three pieces of legislation made significant negative impacts towards the country’s growing deficit.  The 2003 Bush tax cuts (for wealthiest Americans) was projected by the CBO to add over 1 TRILLION to the deficit.  Look at the numbers folks.  Who do you think pushed for the passage of those three pieces of legislation?

 

I will give you a hint.  They are the same folks who have been complaining the most about the negative impact of the proposed health care reform legislation.  Now take a look at the impact of the health care legislation recently passed  (as determined by the same CBO).   I won’t bring the numbers up here….rumor has it that you all can read a chart.

Thank You To Rachel Maddow For Bringing This To Our Attention

So who are we to believe when it comes to the information being spread by the Republicans.  Are we to believe the Republicans who fought so hard for, and were so proud of their big pieces of legislation during the recent Bush Administration.   Or are we to believe the Democrats who fought those pieces of legislation? 

You decide.   Truth is folks, this is just one more example of Republicans spreading lies and fear in an effort to win a political battle.  Are you used to it yet?  Does it bother you at all?  Are you beginning to get the picture?  Did it work? 

Yes it worked!  Look how many people believe the lie!  Of course you might expect that the Republican leadership would face a serious backlash for their tactics, and their failure.  Fat chance.   I am sure that whatever defense they come up with in the court of public opinion will just be more lies.  You see….. they think you don’t have the guts to question them. 

Republican tactics can best be described as fear-mongering, and after their own spectacular defeat, they still don’t fear for their jobs.  Only in America.

Fear 101 – The Tolerance Of Lies

As I mentioned in yesterday’s post “Fear 101″ the leadership of the Republican Party has spent much of the last year using tactics that raise the level of fear within their constituency for the purpose of inciting them to action.  Today I want to talk about the basic concepts of fear mongering and how it is used for political advantage.

The key to using the “fear card” is to clearly identify your most important political goal and develop and infuse your political action plan with behaviors and statements that incite fear in your constituency.  If you can not follow this important step, you have little chance of success.

If your stated political goal is to stop the Obama Presidency  in its’ tracks, you must convince your constituency that any legislative effort supported by the current Executive Branch will be a disaster for the American people.  Clearly, John Boehner, and Mitch McConnell, leaders of the Republican House of Representatives and Senate have stated loudly and often that their goal is to keep the Obama Administration from experiencing any success in their legislative agenda.  However, legislative stalemate is never something that advances the fortunes of the American people.

Republican attempts to block the recent healthcare legislation and thus halt the Obama Presidency in its’ tracks are nothing more than an effort to thwart the will of the electorate.  Republican tactics impede the possibility of moving the country forward in the direction emphatically declared by the last two elections.  Let’s take a look at one of their attempts to spread fear through the electorate during the health care debate.

Republicans have exhibited a propensity to use false statements to create fear in their political base.  In other words, they tolerate lies.  The tolerance of lies will always cast seeds of doubt about any message the lies are used to support.  I find it interesting that the Republican leadership has such a low value of the intelligence of their constituents.

Big Lie #1 – Death Panels

The fear of premature death is real and it is something that affects all of us from time to time.  Premature death that can be attributed to the actions or policies of the government is something that creates a whirlwind of political response.  If there is one thing the Republicans needed to meet their goal of killing health care reform it is a large group of vocal activists making a huge noise about government intervention into their lives.  Belief that the government is out to kill you stirs some very significant passions.

The belief that the government was going to “kill Grandma” if healthcare reform was enacted might be the biggest lie ever presented to the American people during my lifetime.  (As long as I don’t count the “mushroom cloud” agenda of the Bush Administration in the buildup to the Iraq War).  

To quote Sarah Palin “Seniors and the disabled will have to stand in front of Obama’s ‘death panel’ so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their ‘level of productivity in society,’ whether they are worthy of health care.”  

Never mind that one of the country’s most prestigious truth-seeking organizations (Politifact) has given this lie its highest rating when it comes to political lies.  (Pant’s On Fire! truth-o-meter rating)

(http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/rulings/pants-fire/?page=2)  

Politifact called Palins comments “a sci-fi scenario not based in reality”   I am not shocked by any comment coming from the former Governor of Alaska  that are “not based in reality”.  She still believes the lie to this day!

What an awesome way to get individuals to believe in your political stance.  Present them with ideas not based in reality and expect them to respond in ways that make sense.  Yet, the sheep followed along and believed her…and the lie began its worm-like expedition through the hearts and minds of members of the political right.  Even Chuck Grassley, one of the individuals the Obama Administration consulted with during the preparation of the proposed legislation came out with the “government wants to kill Grandma” routine.  It was an absolute crock of political crap that was designed to elicit fear in the hearts and minds of the people.  To this day, people still believe it. The gullibility of the American electorate is amusing.

The “death panel” debate has been analyzed to death since it was brought to the American people by our friends in the Republican Party.  Suffice it to say that section of the legislation was designed to give individuals the right to counseling about options that are available with regard to taking control of choices they can make during this most expensive and heartbreaking time for individuals and families. 

Somehow the Republican leadership took it upon themselves to take an optional valuable service and turn it into the government sticking a needle into Grandma to eliminate the cost of keeping her alive.  That is about the most pathetic exhibition of spreading a big lie to gain political advantage as you can get.  Believe it at your party’s peril.

This is just one example of the use of lies, tolerated by the electorate, to gain political advantage.  I have three questions for those who believed this garbage without examining the reality of the legislation: Once the statements being made were proven without a shadow of a doubt to be false, why do you still believe it?  Secondly, why do you tolerate this kind of behavior from your elected Representatives?  Thirdly, if they lie to you and you accept it, how can you tell when they are telling you the truth?

Tolerance of lies is a “YOU PROBLEM”!  With all the recent talk of “throwing all of the Democrats out of office” I hear no talk of punishing those that formulated the lies, used them for political advantage, and then lost the battle for health care reform.

If I were to predict the future I would predict that the Republican base will not make much of a fuss about the fact that they were lied to during the health care legislation debate.  If their leaders are not confronted with their lies, and their failure, there isn’t much chance that they will change their behavior.  Republicans are stuck with individuals whose lies incite anger, and whose tactics have resulted in colossal failure.  Until they are called on the carpet, very little will change.

Fear 101

Nothing motivates like fear.  If you don’t believe me, think about how fast you would run when confronted by a bear, or other large animal while walking down some mountain trail.  The human body does amazing things when presented with a fearful circumstance. 

Fear has a habit of causing atypical reactions in individuals.  Those who peddle fear, fully understand and depend upon the fact that fear will make people sit up and take notice, and react in ways that they would otherwise never consider.

No one group of individuals is more calculating and persistent in their use of fear to motivate individuals than the Republican Party.  Unfortunately, those who consider themselves “conservatives” have only one political party that they can align with.  As many of you know, nothing influenced my decision to leave the Republican Party more than the absolute revulsion and disdain for the tactics my party used to motivate and stimulate me to action.  While I still have fairly conservative political values, I left the party to become an Independent because I no longer found a legitimate connection between my conservative political values and their conservative behavior.  While I find that being a member of the Independent Party allows me to disassociate from morally inconsistent behavior exhibited by those in “the right’s” leadership, it places me in fairly inconsequential political position. 

The Republican Party has taken a major hit in the last two national elections.  This isn’t the time to go over the reasons for the spanking they received by the American people.  Suffice it to say that they got handed their walking papers in overwhelming fashion. 

For those in leadership roles within the Republican Party, the only question that mattered after the last election was not centered on why they lost power.  The question that mattered most is how they could get it back.  Based upon the actions and reactions of the Party of Lincoln since the last election, it has become clear that the only legitimate weapon they had a belief in was to use fear to scare the hell out of their constituents.  The problem with using fear to motivate is that  it is counterproductive because it leaves their message prone to attack by others who deal in reality.  After a while, people just get sick of it.

The debate on health care that we have experienced over the past year or so probably has no equal in our lifetime when it comes to using the ”fear factor”.  What has become increasingly clear to me over this time is that solid, intelligent, well-meaning individuals can behave in ways that are totally inconsistent with their projected core-beliefs if they are made to fear something or someone.  In other words, good people act in ways that are a complete embarrassment and there is nothing you can do to persuade them otherwise.  

Fear causes reaction.  Reaction in the political world can generate political noise.  Political noise can generate confusion.  If a group cannot garner support by legitimate discourse, the only option is to operate in ways that call attention to the electorates deep-seated fears.  Republican fear-mongering over the past year has definitely stirred up the electorate.  Their electorate reacted in spades!   Certain portions of the electorate have behaved in ways that cast serious doubts on the validity of their stated conservative ideals. 

You have to look no further than this past weekend for explicit examples of how fear causes moronic behavior.  If you doubt that fear works, take a look at the following examples of behavior and come up with a different explanation.

Feel free to explain to me how a white man can call a distinguished African-American member of Congress the “n” word as he is walking in to listen to debate and cast his vote on the health care bill?  Let me suggest two possible explanations.  This fine upstanding  conservative is a racist or he is so overtaken with fear about the upcoming vote that he acts in a way that betrays his conservative values.  If fear is the issue, he has the actions of Republican leadership to blame.

Explain to me how an individual can verbally abuse a distinguished member of the House of Representatives by using vulgar terms to describe this persons sexual identity.  Go ahead, try to justify the behavior.  If you can rationalize public homophobic behavior in your own mind, check your conservative credentials.  If you can justify it, it won’t take too long for anyone to take a hard look at your heart and not find that fear has taken over.

Is there any action that can be more vile and hateful that spitting on another human being?  It happened this weekend as members of the House of Representatives were walking in to their chambers.  

The problem with fear is that once it is unleashed, there is no ability to call it back.  Fear spreads like a wildfire.  Fear consumes.  Fear demolishes.  Fear rips open old wounds.  Fear causes people to act in ways that are absolutely in opposition to their core beliefs.  Or could it be that fear brings people into the political discourse whose core beliefs are not betrayed by their obscene  behavior?

I believe that the Republican leadership made the decision to do whatever it took to explode the Presidency of Barack Obama.  When they looked at their arsenal, they realized that fear was their most effective weapon.  In fact, it was their only weapon as their ideas had been recently rejected by an overwhelming majority of the American electorate.  Never mind that they had to generate this fear by using half-truths and false statements.  It is not currently clear where they participated in “Fear 101″ courses as they learned how to lead.  It is totally clear that they learned it well and that on many levels it worked for them.

Unfortunately, in the end, their tactics didn’t result in a victory for them with regard to health care reform.  But they do get the credit that comes with the knowledge that their tactics stirred up the darker side of human nature in the process.   Just what we need in the political arena…the dark side of human nature.

In my next post I will be looking at some of the most controversial statements emanating from the right during the health care debate and how these statements fit perfectly into the “Fear 101″ course description.

LIZ CHENEY AND THE AMERICAN WAY

I submit to you the following statement:  “Despite her oft made claims that she represents the beliefs of the ‘Real American People’ , Liz Cheney’s thought processes are as un-American as the terrorists who threaten our way of life”.  Now that I have gotten that off my chest I will try to back my claim with legitimate thoughts and ideas.

The American system of justice was founded on the premise that individuals are presumed innocent.  This isn’t something that deserves a newsflash folks.  Even the most hardened, and sickening individuals have the right to the presumption of innocence. You may not like this, but it is the American way.

The American system of justice grants every individual the right to legitimate legal representation.  Again, this isn’t something that will make banner headlines across the newspapers throughout the nation.  Individuals that we know committed heinous crimes are given the opportunity to a legitimate legal defense.  It’s the American way.

The American system of justice requires that the “state” prove without a shadow of a doubt that an individual is guilty of a crime, before declaring them guilty and proceeding with punishment.  It’s the American way.

The American system of justice requires that evidence against an individual be gathered in ways that do not stomp all over the rights of the accused.  You might remember the first Simpson trial in Los Angeles.  One of the major issues argued during that  trial was the validity of the evidence and the validity of the methods used in collecting it. We may not have liked it, but it was the American way.

The American system of justice places huge requirements upon the prosecution to prove its’ case and almost seems like it favors the accused at times. 

Do you know why our system is designed this way?  Basically, it is designed to ensure that innocent individuals don’t get thrown in jail for crimes they did not commit.

Better to let the guilty go free because of the prosecutions inability to prove their case than let the innocent be convicted and jailed.  It’s really very simple.

The concepts I have mentioned are as American as apple pie, baseball and the ability to make an idiot of yourself on the national stage.  Liz Cheney lives in a country that grants her the right to be Liz Cheney.  She seems to be taking advantage of her rights regularly.

The political right tends to make a lot of noise about being “truly American”, “the only Americans”, “real patriots”, and “defenders of the Constitution”.  Since I am not a member of the political right, I guess I can’t qualify.  By the way I think I qualified until I left the Republican Party years ago.  Now, I am not so sure.

Do I hate the fact that those who are currently incarcerated and accused of acts of terrorism against the United States of American are granted certain rights?  You bet I do!  I hate it!  I would rather that we just take them to the execution chamber or lock them away for life right now.  However, as an American citizen, I also have to accept the fact that they deserve a legitimate defense.  I have to accept that the government has to use legal methods to make their case against them. 

Granting the accused certain rights is the American way.  Our justice system is one of the things that separates our country from the countries that would try to destroy us with their terrorist activity.

Liz Cheney has recently taken it upon herself to demonize a group of Justice Department lawyers who were asked to provide legal representation to a group of GITMO detainees.  Never mind that the American justice system requires it.  Never mind that they were providing services at the behest of others.  Liz has decided to demonize the Justice Department for hiring them.  In fact, she identifies them as the Al Qaeda 7.  Basically she is trying to get the Justice Department to identify individuals who represented detainees at GITMO and are now working on Justice Department detainee policy.  In fact what she did in typical fashion was to word her comments in such a way as to get certain reactionary members of their base political support to think of these lawyers as Al Qaeda sympathisers or American lawyers who think like terrorists not like Americans.  (An interesting little factoid here for Liz…”Al Qaeda” means “the base”.  You spend a lot of time spewing words and ideas designed to stir up “your base”.) 

In 2007, Ted Olson, former solicitor general of the United States – contributed to an article for Legal Times in which he said that efforts to demonize detainee defense lawyers are antithetical to American values.

If there is anyone in this country who could be excused for harboring a fierce sense of hatred towards any terrorist it would be Ted Olsen.  Ted’s wife was on one of the planes that flew into the World Trade Center.  I don’t know how one lives with that.  I can’t imagine the pain and suffering that man has had to deal with over it. 

When a man living with the knowledge that a group of terrorists took his wife’s life, and destroyed their life together, can stand up and denounce anyone and anything that cheapens the political discourse by behaving in ways so absolutely opposed to American ideals, I have to stand and applaud his American ideals.

As for Liz Cheney, our country grants you many rights, including the right to make a complete idiot of yourself on the national stage.  Since you have taken the initiative to take advantage of this right, I guess we can say that as an American, the right to spew words and ideas that offend us is something this country we have to put up with.  In that regard you are as American as anyone else.

The American lawyers that actually worked to insure that the rights of detainees were not trampled on, are patriots whose lives cast a significantly larger shadow than the woman living in the shadow of her fathers’ less than tolerable imprint on American values.

The Political Folly Of The Health Care Summit

I spent Friday evening reading the transcripts of Thursday’s healthcare summit between leaders of both parties held at Blair House.  I attempted to watch the proceedings on Thursday but couldn’t bear the thought of spending 7 hours or more watching two groups of politicians who already had their minds made up on the topic before the meeting even started.

As I read through the transcripts (yes every word), a clear pattern emerged.  Basically, the right wants to scrap the bill and start over using a step-by-step process to make changes.  The left believes they have already done enough work on the subject and its time to press on.  Nothing said or done during the proceedings will make the opposite side change their views.  In that respect, the summit was a failure.

In other respects, the summit was a complete success for each party.  The left was able to show the entire country that they at least appeared to be willing to listen to what the right had to say.  The right got one last opportunity to show members of their constituency that they were not in any way interested in allowing President Obama to claim a political victory.  In those respects, each party accomplished their stated goals. 

Since the summit, the political pundits have bascially made the case that either one or the other side should claim victory.  After all, political pundits aren’t necessarily neutral observers.  If you listen to Fox News, the right should claim victory.  If you listen to MSNBC, the left can claim it. 

After studying the transcript of the summit, it is clear that neither side did much of anything with regard to compromise.  But then, we should realize that both the House of Representatives and the Senate have already passed Health Care Reform bills.  That process has already taken place.  All of the noise about “Death Panels”, “Government Take-Over”, “Socialism” and the like was generated during the process of hashing out the two bills that are already on the table.

With that said, what is it that political leaders of the right and left said during the summit?  Did they say what we thought they would say?  The answer is a resounding YES.

What did you expect Republican’s to say?  If you have any realistic understanding of the Republican political machine, you understand that they, once again, have put all of their future political viability into one common tactic. Republicans can not afford to allow the President of the United States to claim any legislative victories during his Presidency.  Their goal is to do everything they can to tarnish his reputation and damage his credibility.  If President Obama is successful in the eyes of the voting public, the Republicans have a very limited shot at winning back the Presidency in 2012.  It’s very simple, he loses or they lose.  By the way, this is not a new tactic.  The right has used this strategy successfully in the past.

The Democrats, on the other hand, have to appear to be listening.  Interestingly enough, they have already gained a huge victory by passing the two versions of the health care reform bills.  The reason they have to appear to be listening is that the Republicans have done such a good job of convincing their political base that everything in the health care bills has come from the mind of a Democrat.  The Democrats have to fight the perception that the bills are totally of Democratic origin.

So how did each side do?  Let’s start with the Republicans.  Republicans made it perfectly clear to their base that they are trying to get the President to scrap the previous bills and start over with a step-by-step process.  Republican talking points evolved around various terms that all center around “starting over”.  Republican participants requested that the President “start over” 16 times during the proceedings.  The concept of “starting over”, “shelving the bill”, “starting with a clean sheet of paper”, and proceeding with a “step-by-step”  process was brought up 32 times during the 7 hours of meetings.  That works out to about once every 13 or 14 minutes.  This was the dominant theme of the Republican presentation. 

The Republicans have so “demonized” both the process and the results of the health care legislative efforts that they can not in any way appear to agree with anything in the bill.  One could go on for hours about the tactics they used.  Now that they have used their typical “slash and burn” tactics in an attempt stop the process, they can not afford in any way to agree with the results.  If anyone reading this post thinks that their are any Republicans in the Senate who would vote for this legislation, you are living in a dream world.  I find it totally amusing that a Democrat would put efforts into winning over Republican votes by including their ideas into the legislation and then be shocked when they didn’t get any Republican votes.

Interestingly enough, the Democrats placed close to 150 amendments into this bill that are Republican origin in an effort to garner Republican votes.  Republicans fought for their inclusion, and then refused to vote for the bill.  Are any of you shocked by this?  Any attempt to gain support from the right on this bill has in its origins, a lack of understanding of Republican tactics.  There was never going to be support for health care reform from the right in spite of the lefts efforts to be inclusive.

So how did the Democrats perform?  First of all, they did not show the same unity and drive as the Republicans.  Democratic speakers called attention to the fact that the two sides were “close” or “not far apart” to each other on health care reform 7 times.  It was is if they believed that minimizing the differences between the two sides would somehow work towards gaining the support of the Republicans.  Most of the efforts made by Democrats involved convincing the unconvincable that they could “come together on health care reform”.  Do you honestly believe that the Democrats think there will be a “meeting of the minds” on health care reform?

I for one believe that any Democrat who has been battered and bruised by this process and believes that Republicans will ”work with them”  is living in a dream world.  It’s the same dream world that individuals who have experienced  repeated abuse live in when they believe that their partner will “change” and suddenly become a loving, giving, considerate person.  In the words of Steven Tyler of Aerosmith, “Dream On”!  Aerosmiths “Janey Got A Gun” might be more appropriate here.

Even if there are Democrats who believe this, they must appear to believe it or they risk alienating more of the Republican base.   I find it totally unreasonable for any Democrat to believe that “working together” with their opponents will persuade their opponents to vote for them, or for their legislation. 

There were other topics discussed during the summit but, honestly, they were not discussed in a way that would do anything to persuade anyone to change their opinions.  The Democrats brought up several times that the American people do not care about the process used to bring about health care reform.  Obviously this was done to counter the Republican efforts to cast a negative light on the process of  “reconcilliation” they fear will be used to “slam legislation” through.  Never mind that “reconcilliation” is a process used by Republicans to pass significant legislation when they didn’t have the 60 votes required to break the Democratic fillabuster.

There were efforts by Republicans to call attention to the massive nature of the health care reform bills.  Typically, Eric Cantor brought in a stack of paper to make the point that this was a massive government takeover of the health care industry.   The Democrats countered by asking if anyone remembers the number of pages in the original legislation that put Social Security into law.

Other than that, there wasn’t much said that will contribute to an understanding of health care reform legislation.  The Republicans got to make one last grand effort to win over their base by calling for starting over.  The Democrats made one last grand effort to win votes they will never win by appearing to listen and to take more Republican ideas into consideration.  With that respect, each party did nothing that was unexpected.  

During this political theater,  583 people lost their health care each hour of the summit.  In other words, 4372 Americans lost their health care coverage while our politicians, once again, tried to exert their political wills on each other.  Both parties are dreamers.  It’s time to quit dreaming and get on with it.

“I Will Stop This Car!”

You know you have said it at one time or another!  You have heard just about enough of it.  The more miles you drive the worse it gets.  Finally, you just explode and let the kids in the back seat know that you are done with it.  Enough of the bickering.  Enough of the arguing.  Quit touching one another!   You know you have said it….if you haven’t you have heard it from your own parents.

“I WILL STOP THIS CAR!”

All I want is just a peaceful quiet drive to wherever it is we are going.  Let me enjoy the ride.  Yet, 10 minutes later they are at it again.  Nothing seems to get them to keep from trying to exert their will or gain the upper hand.  The real question to ask yourself is whether or not the kids really think you will pull off to the side of the road.  Once you stop the car, what are you going to do?  Honestly, the kids don’t think you will pull over.  Are you going to drop the kids by the side of the road and drive on without them?  I think not!  But it’s a thought.

So it is with the health care debate in this country.  On a day when individuals from both sides of the political spectrum are getting together to discuss where they go from here it is important to remember what got us here.  Frankly, I am ready to stop the car, and leave them all by the side of the road.  I can hear it now as I drive off.  “Is he really leaving us here or is he going to turn around and open the door and let us back in?”

Here is the problem with the children we have placed in the back seat.  Each has its own will and neither is all that interested in having a peaceful drive in the country.  Each wants their own way.  Each believes their way is the only way.  Neither kid wants to give in.

The tea party movement with all of its inherent inconsistencies, is an attempt for angry parents to stop the car and leave the kids by the side of the road.  On my part, I don’t blame them one bit.  These kids never shut up!

Sitting in the left hand seat we have the completely incompetent Democrats.  There are more of them than there are Republicans.  The electorate overwhelmingly gave them the reigns to power.  Even when they had an unstoppable majority they could not quit arguing among themselves.  They worked for years to get to the place where they could exert their will in the backseat argument and yet, they are not intelligent enough to pool their resources, become of one mind, and pass legislation. They are a fraudulent majority without a common will.

Sitting in the right hand seat we have the Republicans.  Their only hope to return to the majority is to make those in the left hand seat look so incompetent that people decide to give the majority back to them, knowing full well that they completely screwed it up when they were in power.  They are hoping that the parents will forget their past behavior.  Never mind that their history includes case after case of governing in such a way as to completely ignore their stated beliefs.  Never mind that the things they complaign about the most, are things that they regularly and consistently did when they were in power.  The less government, reduced spending, family-values Republicans became the more government, increased spending, valueless Republicans.  Their behavior during their time in power completely disregarded their core beliefs.  Now that they are out of power, claims around their core values are not believable by any stretch of the imagination. I don’t even think they believe their own words.  Their behavior makes them frauds in the mind of many of their supporters and they have basically admitted it.

We are tired of them all.  Hence, there are tremors of change once again vibrating throughout the country.  There is not a thing wrong with that.  It is time to pull the car over and give them all both barrels.   So if I were to pull the car over, stand them by the side of the road, and give them the business, what would I say?

I would tell them that they have worn out their welcome.  I would tell them that their behavior is a terrific reason to leave them by the side of the road and drive off.  I would tell them that all I want is for them to shut up, get along, and do their job.  Of course once I put them back in the car, we will drive in peace for a while, but only a short while.  After about 5 miles I will look in the review mirror and notice that they are at it again.  One touching the other in a antagonistic way, and the other yelling out “he touched me!”

So today, the two incompetent and unruly children will be meeting to discuss ways to move forward.  Never mind that the party in charge can’t even come up with a plan that they all believe in.  Never mind that the minority party doesn’t want a plan in the first place.  Their claims that they want health care reform are betrayed by the fact that they had the power to do something about it for 40 years and never even brought it up!  It will be interesting to watch the two of them in the back seat to see how well they get along.

Never mind that the country needs health care reform.  The only thing that matters is who gets the upper hand.  So what is it that I want from them today?

1. I want medical insurance available for all.  I don’t care how it happens, I just want everyone covered.
2. I want it to be impossible to drop someone from coverage because of their medical conditions.
3. I want it possible to get insurance regardless of past medical problems.
4. I want the cost of health care to be reduced.
5. I want care givers to be able to do their job without fear that they will be sued for malpractice over someone who has discovered a new freckle on their leg and it is surely the care givers fault.
6. I want small-business owners to be able to offer medical insurance to their workers without bankrupting the company that they worked so hard to establish.

If the individuals that are supposed to work towards improving the lives of the people they represent can not work together on this, it may be time to stop the car and leave them by the side of the road.  After all, we have threatened to do just that.  Maybe the problem is that we have used the words “I WILL STOP THIS CAR” so ineffectively for so long that the kids in the back seat don’t really believe us.  Maybe it is our fault for leaving them in power in the first place.

Questions and Comments Always Welcome!

Predictable Behavior…..Well Of Course It Is!

As the NFL regular season comes to an end this weekend, literally millions of fans are wrapping up their “fantasy football” season.  Fantasy football is basically an opportunity for all of us who play to select certain players and assemble a team.  The selection process involves researching past performance and predicting future performance.  It’s a lot of fun.  Last year I was league champion, this year I was beyond horrible in two of my leagues.  However, I am leading the pack in the league where all we have to do is predict the winner of the game…. over 71% this year!

A thorough knowledge and understanding of past events is usually a good place to start when trying to predict future events.  Predicting behavior of those in the political arena is significantly easier than predicting winners and losers in athletic contests. 

The actions and reactions of our elected officials are not restrained significantly by competition.  What they do, or what they say is not immediately opposed by a 235 pound linebacker who is in a very bad mood.  Politicians don’t get immediately thrown to the ground as they make their way through the games they play.   Usually, the game of politics has no immediate repercussions.  I don’t recall reading any article calling attention to the fact that a politician received a concussion for wandering unprotected into dangerous territory!

Let me give you a perfect example of the “freedom” with which our politicians play their game.

About 3 months after 9/11 on December 22nd, Richard Reid attempted to blow up a plane full of American citizens by using a very specific type of explosive liquid.  Richard is now known as the “shoe bomber”.  You can thank him for the fact that you have to take your shoes off when you are being screened prior to boarding an airline flight.

The similarities between his failed attempt and the December 25th attempt on a Delta Airlines flight headed to Detroit are really amazing.  Take a look at the similarities in these two events.  There are, however, differences that should also be pointed out.

The explosives used in both attempts were similar if not exactly the same. In addition,  both culprits were apprehended by a combination of civilians and airport security.

At the time of the attempt, President Barack Obama was on vacation in Hawaii.  At the time of the previous attempt,  then President George Bush was on vacation in Texas.

President Obama made a same-day statement about the “attempted terrorist attack”.  It does not appear that President Bush made a similar same-day statement.

President Obama made  significant public statements after evaluating the events and conditions that led to the attempt.  He made his statements within three days of the event.

President Bush made his first public statement after evaluating the events and conditions that led to the attempt six days after the event.

President Obama specifically addressed the situation and specifically noted that there had been a failure in communication that allowed the incident to occur.   President Bush mentioned the attack only in passing.  There was no significant attempt to address the causes or place blame.

President Obama made his statements while on his holiday vacation.  President Bush made his limited statements only after returning from his holiday vacation.

Richard Reid was tried in Federal Court, convicted, and currently resides in Federal prison.  President Obama intends to put the most recent culprit in the Federal Courts, convict him, and send him off to Federal prison.

Now comes the fun part.

While researching the history of Democrat responses to the first attack, there has been no discovery of any attempt to complain about the actions of President Bush.  No comments about waiting so long to respond.  No comments about trying the individual in Federal Courts and placing him in Federal prison.  There seems to be no attempt to gain any type of political advantage during the situation from Democratic circles.  There is nothing atypical about the Democrats lack of response.  Democrats tend to be more reserved and timid about using national security issues for political gain than the Republicans.

This is where the similarities end.  Tom Ridge, who served a very significant role in our post-9/11 government has slammed President Obama for stating that our latest attempted terrorist should be tried in Federal Courts.  I will remind you that Tom Ridge, was Director of Homeland Security and as such was involved in the efforts to put Richard Reid on trial in Federal Courts and sentence him to Federal Prison.  Let me get this straight Tom, it was right for you to do as you did, and wrong for President Obama to do the exact same thing when presented with nearly identical circumstances?  Do I have that clear in my mind Tom?  Of course you expect the terrorist to be sent out of the country to a location where American law is not in effect.  Oh that’s right Tom, you helped to set that place up didn’t you? 

Dick Cheney is following a similar pattern of attack. Well of course Dick!   Once again, he is complaining about President Obama’s stance on trying the culprit in Federal Courts.  Cheney is continuing his ranting about President Obama’s weakness on national security issues in spite of the fact that while as Vice President he agreed with the exact same course of action as undertaken by the Bush Administration.  Do you think we don’t remember?  Or do you just hope we don’t? 

There are two Republican congressmen who have been particularly critical of President Obama, Reps. Pete Hoekstra (R-Mich.) and Peter King (R-N.Y.).  Both complained bitterly over the airwaves that President Obama waited three days to make his comments about the latest incident.  Basically, he took too long to respond, he is weak, doesn’t he realize we are at war?  He responded from Hawaii a region that some people barely consider a state.  President Bush responded from Texas, where men are men and politicians are tough.  Republican Administrations are tough!  Oops, he didn’t respond from Texas!  He waited until he was back in Washington.  Sound familiar?   They did this even though “their” President, George Bush took twice as long and made a statement of very little significance.  Pete Hoekstra went so far as to use Obama’s “tardiness” as the centerpiece for a significant fundraising effort calling on his base to send money to his campaign.  I wonder Pete, if the plane had crashed, would you still have used the event to raise funds?

If anything, this is an example of the political inconsistency that has plagued our leadership for so long.  However, anyone who even remotely understands the nature and intensity of current public debate could have predicted this with ease.  It is easier to predict the responses of political operatives than to predict the outcome of any football game. 

The performance of those who make their living in the political arena is predictable because it is rarely opposed in ways that have immediate and meaningful consequences. 

In football, a linebacker in a bad mood can impose his will in a matter of seconds.  Stray into his zone with the ball and face the consequences.  Trust me, you will pay a heavy price for not paying attention!  Politicians rarely have immediate and meaningful consequences.  Unless you consider the disgust their behavior brings to those watching to be meaningful.  Quite honestly, they could care less about our disgust.  Until they want our money to re-elect them!

Here are a few possible reasons why politicians behave in ways that are so absolutely transparent and predictable. 

1. The payback for a politicians behavior is often delayed and probably nonexistent.  There are no political linebackers ready to exert their will into their existence. 
2. Politicians have a lack of regard for the ability of their constituents to think rationally about any issue.  Basically, they think we are ignorant.
3. Politicians are so enamoured with their position in life, and their political power, that they forget prior statements and events that, when brought to light, make them look ignorant and unfit for office.
4. Politicians think no one is looking.  (Basically, very few are looking)
5. Politicians will use any issue, regardless of effect, to score political points. 

We are the referee’s in this game.  Referee’s throw flags and blow whistles when the rules have been broken.  Those that we elect to represent us, rarely acknowledge our presence.  Truthfully, they think the referee’s are stupid.  I can think of no other explanation.   If you have one, I would love to hear it and consider its validity.

Was “the right’s” response to the December 25th attempted terrorist attack  predictable?  Anyone who doubts that fact just isn’t paying attention.  I would be a rich man if I was able to lay money down on their behavior.  I dare say that I would have 100% accuracy.  Rarely do they fool me with their responses.   Alas, I am constrained to competing with my friends to predict the winners of football games.  The games have no real consequences.  But then, neither do the actions of certain politicians.