Real Time Musings - Thoughts on the January 25, 2008 show with guests Richard Belzer, Herbie Hancock, Martha Raddaz, Merle Haggard, and Amy Holmes

On the talk about the candidates:

Re: Hillary Clinton

When the economy is bad, people turn their concentration toward basic concerns like money, jobs and health care. People have a sense that the Iraq situation is beyond their control and have to cope with rising gas prices and job concerns.

Hillary Clinton recently started a new ad here in Arizona. The line I remember from it was "People want to be able to fill their gas tanks without draining their wallets." Hits home with me.

Re: Rudy Guliani

Skipping the earlier primaries may have hurt Rudy Guiliani, but did leave his campaign with millions in reserve while minimizing opportunities for gaffes.

Endorsing someone for mayor does not mean an endorsement for president. In 1997, the New York Times did not know about the mis-steps in funding the communication systems that cost lives on 9/11.

The ladies Bill talked with cited the mis-steps in planning that came to light in the years after that endorsement, so surely the NYT has heard about them, too.

Re: Mitt Romney

When saying that when things get scary in the markets, he puts aside his fear and buys, from whom does Romney think the profits come from when he can swoop in and grab undervalued assets? This fits well with Belzer's definition of a successful businessman. Why is this optimism missing when consumers seek credit at reasonable rates?

A recent article in the New York Times Magazinedescribed reasons why overcoming resistance to Romney's Mormon religion might be difficult.

According to the article:

"But most Mormonism-related discomfort with Romney may, in fact, reflect less a view of religious truth than a sense that there is something vaguely troubling or unfamiliar in the Mormon manner or worldview. This latter possibility presents Romney with an especially tricky political problem. For such reservations are not simple prejudice; they are a complicated outgrowth of the tortured history of the faith?s relationship to mainstream American political life over the nearly two centuries since God first spoke to Joseph Smith."

It went on to describe the concept of "esoteric public speaking: the attempt to convey multiple messages to different audiences through the careful use of words," as a strategy that is used to communicate one thing to those who share one's views, while appearing to convey a different meaning to outsiders. This is a concept that seems illustrated in many of the carefully crafted statements in this campaign.

Find more articles here.

Re: Clinton and Obama's chances with women

Amy Holmes' Oh! My Nappy Hair segment was interesting, although it seemed as though there was a little bit of leading going on in the questioning. The answer to the main question of how these women will actually vote, particularly if Obama is not the nominee, remained a little murky.

Bring back Dan Savage!

The whole question of race versus gender is somewhat insulting in that it assumes that voters would use only the race or gender of a candidate to decide.

As the ladies in Bill's earlier segment showed, women are not opposed to electing a woman.

Richard Belzer is right in that OJ's support was largely based on the demand for proof beyond a reasonable doubt within a judicial system that is often challenged in that area.

On the state of the surge

Thanks for pointing out that although early reports showed Al Qaeda at 2.5%, now all strikes are reported to be against AQ targets. New names for the enemy that Martha Raddaz mentioned meaning that there are new enemies does not sound like a positive thing. It would be interesting to hear the percentages of "other extremists" to understand how the situation has changed since the "surge."

Classic quotes from this week's show":

From Richard Belzer: Re: Guiliani - "Fascist thug with a comb-over trying to suppress his speech impediment."

From Merle Haggard: "Good evening, friends and conservatives." "I am rarely in Muskogee." "We met Hillary, she came in Willy's bus and I think she inhaled."

--
Edited by SusanSFH at 01/25/2008 9:45 PM

While Bill's monologue had a definite stand-up in a club feel, his extemporaneous TV work was the better for his years of experience on stage. His panel tonight made up for any lack of polish in the opening segment.

To open the new season, Bill assembled a super panel. I was particularly happy to see Mark Cuban on the panel.

Mark was right in his assessment about the problems that exist with voting machines and the need for accountability in the counting of the votes. As he mentioned, if we can't trust the count itself, none of the rest matters.

Mark was also right in his thoughts about corporations and the effects that higher corporate taxation or expenses have on the workers when corporations have to maintain expectations for their bottom line and EPS figures.

Tony Snow is wrong in his attacks on people like Matt Taibbi who question the credibility of the administration and showed the typical administration tactic of spinning the discussion to put the burden on those not responsible for the mis-information.

It's very true that the common person often does not vote in his or her self-interest. I also believe that Mark's observation that Americans don't have a solid understanding of the issues to be valid.

Catherine Crier's warning about the impending fall-out from the sub-prime mortgage crisis was right on target, particularly given her experience during the S&L crisis.

Love the Blogga Please segment, even if my questions never get asked...

Missed New Rules, but I can understand that writers would need to support it, so am happy to wait for them to get a fair deal before it comes back.

Bill Maher's live special The Decider used the same opening theme as Real Time, so I suppose it's OK to blog about The Decider in this blog.

Live from Boston, Bill brought in the Bush colonoscopy, noting that it was the first time that Bush, operation and success were used in the same headline.

Sort of disconcerting to see his casual side. Not sure what the graphic on his t-shirt is supposed to be--It sort of looks like a lizard king with a bong in its hand?

Fly at your own risk airlines sounds like something I've thought of before…

Favorite quotes:

"Pull over, I wanna kill that."

"Thinking outside the box is for smart people, the box is for you."

"Nostradamus, hand over the Magic Eight Ball, you've had enough shots at this."

"...a theory I found laughable at the age of eight when I saw it on The Flintstones."

"The Republicans think sex is bad for you, because for them it always is."

"He would try to sell the Red Cross to Dracula, if it brought in campaign cash."

Overall, some good new stuff, and lots of familiar riffs.

On the Nature of Terrorism

Thinking about whether it is possible to have a "war" against "terrorism," the thought "the only thing we have to fear is fear, itself" came to mind. If the term "terrorism" describes the use of fear to motivate and control, aren't we obliged to make war on it by refusing to be controlled by illogical fear? Isn't terrorism at its essence really the rule by fear, whether in supervising, advertising, lawmaking, or for whatever minor or Machiavellian motive?

Who "wins" if we succumb to terror of paranoia, refusing to insist that our leaders bring our troops home, because we are unquestioningly cowed by the illogical assertion that if we accept the hard truth that there is nothing to "win" in Iraq, "they" will follow us home and blow us away by the thousands?

In contrast to the vague threat of unknown violence, the there is no doubt of the lethal consequences of staying. The longer we remain, the number of dead and wounded among our bravest and brightest will continue to rise. Ironically, evidence suggests that resentment of the US military presence may be a factor motivating terrorist involvement.

Don't believe the Iraqis would be able to handle or would even welcome US departure? Think about this. How would we feel in America if military forces from another country decided to use violence to overthrow our existing leadership (no matter how much we might disagree with its policies?) then ransacked the Smithsonian, told the army to take their guns and go home without jobs, cut off our basic needs like utilities, food and shelter, then tried to tell us how to run our country, even though after four years we still didn't have water and electricity?

I'm just saying…

On Poisoned Food (a rather lengthy cat story…)

Thanks for finally mentioning the situation that has scared, sickened and appalled me for more than a month. Waiting for discussion of this issue to hit the Real Time radar may has given me too much time (about 7 weeks since the initial recall announcement) to think about it, so this part's a little long…

While poisons in their food sickened and killed thousands of pets (or in the opinion of Menu Foods, sixteen test subjects,) our "kitties in the coal mine" have been warning us of a far greater dangers yet to be discovered.

Of course, the FDA assures us that human food is safe, although new reports emerge nearly daily with evidence that the contamination of one of the staples of our pets' packaged food supply has been an open secret for some time in those markets from which manufacturers have chosen to source grain glutens, despite the fact that it would seem that farmers in this country could use the business. Not only have dangerous chemicals entered the food supply with seeming ease, dumping them on the market has hurt our farm economy in the process. Ironically, one of the first plants known to have processed the tainted pet food was in Kansas, too. What's wrong with this picture????

As more pets suffer with crystals in their kidneys, more brands of food are still being recalled almost daily, along with the new warnings about more ingredients, possibly only hints of just how deep, and (the FDA wants us believe "diluted") the contamination really is. (Read this transcript to see just how far this went--Don't miss pages 30-31.)

Fortunately, our three cats are very smart and had variety in their food, although according to Petsmart's database, they were fed more than thirty assorted pouches and cans of potential poison over a month and a half, not counting what we bought at the grocery store.

At first, we thought their increased thirst was because of 100 degree March Phoenix weather. Our smallest cat, eight-year-old, six pound, Mrs. Dorothy Parker (aka Meep) was throwing up, too--We thought she might be a little bulimic because of stress, or coughing up hair from her winter coat..

Fortunately Wiley, our nine-year old tortie cat and mother of the other two knew better. She refused to eat certain foods, and began to make sure her children didn't either. When she got tired of chasing the other two cats (both her kittens, now 8 years old) away from tainted food, which we later learned were from the recalled lots, she actually barfed on it on at least two occasions. Several times she even put her little toy shaped like a vet right by the food bowls when they contained certain kinds, and by Meep when she got sick.

Of course, this all made sense to us in retrospect, Good thing Wiley was paying attention. It probably saved Meep, who could barely keep food down at one point. Even her 20 pound brother Mercury got sick on the stuff, even on the small amount of his share of the two cans a day split among the three cats he managed to sneak by Wiley.

After we humans finally caught on and recognized the threat, the cats enjoyed a couple weeks of indulgent human foods like tuna and mussels, while we, wracked with guilt that we had poisoned our beloved pets, wondered if any cat food was safe, did extensive research and thorough label checking and tried to keep up on the latest additions to the recall list. Fortunately, social media sites like Dogster, Pet Connection and itchmo have empowered pet parents who refuse to ignore this threat.

On the importance of logic and information

To add insult to injury, we as pet parents had given our furry family members the poison thinking that we were doing the right thing because we were feeding them the expensive brands touted as "premium" and "nutritious" by trusted vets, some of whom (not ours) sold the food themselves.

Turns out, the premium quality of these brands was limited to the price, since the cuts and gravy in the pricey packets, turned out to be the same stuff from the same plants as the stuff in the generic packets sold at a big box store chain at which we would never shop.

Twenty-some years ago, I worked myself out of a four-day summer temp job at the Purina plant in Davenport, Iowa in a record two days by apparently figuring out the fastest way ever to count stacks of coupons into bundles of 100, a step designed to make it easier to account for them before they were dropped into bags of freshly made Dog Chow. The reason I mention this is that remembering that temp job prompted me to draw the distinction between two business models in use in the pet food industry.

Purina runs its own 17 plants in the US. The most memorable thing about the Purina plant in Davenport back in the late 70's (and my motivation for counting quickly) was the smell. That pervaded even the office areas of the plant. The smell was not only from the Dog Chow production--The factory was located near the Oscar Mayer kill floor facility, enabling the plant to use by-products of the hot dogs, ham and bologna processed for humans to make food for the dogs.

On the importance of following the money

Although a somewhat gross memory, recalling that smell was a reminder that Purina is a food company at its core, and that it runs the majority of production in its own plants, with components of its business model designed to best use by-products of human food production, ideally using by-products produced nearby.

A similar stench surrounds industry response to this issue. Take this document, for instance. Over the past 7 weeks, reports have trickled out of new recalls. Several major premium pet food brands have recalled numerous varieties of tainted foods and expanded their lists as time passed. Is it a coincidence that the largest of these premium brands are owned by multinational soap and chemical companies?

Purina says it had only outsourced production of one type of canned dog food to Menu Foods, which it voluntarily recalled. Purina has proactively communicated with pet parents and the company has posted its policies recently enacted for testing purity of ingredients on its Web site.

A particularly reprehensible aspect of this latest inexcusable failure by government to recognize which threats are real, the failure to protect our food supply from contamination, was again followed by another attempt to hide the truth about the true nature and extent of the threat.

The idea that the government is not protecting us from contaminated food that could poison my family and my loyal pets who trust me to take good care of them. (and of eating plastic chicken, myself) scares me far more than the potential for swimming terrorists.

On Dem Debate 2.0

One Democrat who was hearing clearly during last week's debate was refreshing in his candor, voicing the words that many Americans undoubtedly wanted to when he confessed that he found some of the folks with whom he shared the stage scary.

"Who are you afraid of?" the gentleman from Alaska challenged.

After Senator Mike Gravel of Alaska essentially invited us to notice the emperor's nudity during the Democratic debate last week, I've enjoyed watching his interviews on Real Time, the Colbert Report and other talk shows. (It seemed that he was on nearly as many talk shows as Bill, last week -- BTW Scarborough really should at least let guests finish a sentence when they attempt to answer a loaded question...)

Watching Gravel's unapologetic run at the "Colbert bump" it occurred to me that he and Sean Penn are two of the guests best at getting the better of Stephen on the Report and at connecting with the lucrative, intelligent and engaged target audience of Report fans..

Gravel is beginning to appear on social media sites, too. Just this Friday evening, for instance, I noticed the start of a meme on Digg designed to unseat Stephen Colbert for the highest search ranking for the phrase "greatest living American" by linking the phrase to his Web site, www.gravel2007.us..

Real straight talk -- and already working Colbert, Digg and MySpace, too. Imagine the possibilities.

Since I've just recently become aware of him, I'm not ready to commit to Gravel as my favorite Democratic contender, although Gravel's pull-no-punches style might be an effective complement to my current favorite, the hard-working and increasingly polished http://www.squidoo.com/Dennis_Kucinich/Dennis Kucinich.

With engaging banter that actually answered questions, Kucinich got much better play on the pre- and post-debate shows (including his Real Time appearance last week,) than during the debate itself. It was so much more effective to see a candidate live in the studio versus via satellite, too. But I digress.

Undaunted by the campaign stuff, haircut controversy and wardrobe planning issues that have challenged other candidates in recent weeks, Kucinich continues to show up on the Hill to do his job.

Demanding accountability on tainted pet food from the FDA, advocating his plans for peace and health care and introducing articles to impeach the VP for the machinations that precipitated US involvement in Iraq are among the action items Kucinich is currently executing in Washington.

Instead of working the phones and functions for special interest funds, the Kucinich campaign used the Web to ask a million Web contacts for $50 each and Kucinich worked on the issues.

Here is a politician who is not afraid to use common sense and recognize that using social media and PR to create conversations to engage and empower voters to take action based on a solid agenda can be the most sustainable, effective and honest way to win votes. Plus, communicating using these low-cost tactics means candidates need not spend months with their hands out so that they can pay for thirty seconds of airtime to berate the opposition.

Authentic communication stretches the real impact of every dollar and million raised much farther than any TV ads, since conversations with people we trust delivered in context are no comparison to thirty seconds of buzzwords and noise interrupting the talking heads in Scarborough Country or the Situation Room.

Kucinich - Gravel?

If the idea were to catch on…might the bees be persuaded to return?

On Blaming the French

It was the they who forced me to turn this post into a novelette.

All I can do at this point is quote the late, great Warren Zevon and say:

"So long, Nor-man."

as I leave to go place my bets on Cowtown Cat and Scat Daddy in today's Kentucky Derby.

On the nature of protection

Barney Frank's observation that risk is part of the price of freedom was right on target. If we as Americans want to live in a world free of risk (as if that were even possible) it could only be at the cost of the very freedoms that define our nation.

Not all Democrats were timid about opposing the war or cowed by the fear of appearing un-American. As Barney Frank noted, he did not vote for the war.

In the House, Dennis Kucinich was another Representative who did not vote for the war or the authorization to wage war. Kucinich is also a Democrat who has a plan to get us out of the war and should get more attention for his efforts. Kudos to Newsweek for its recent profile of Kucinich and his platform.


On apologizing for telling the truth

As Bill mentioned, talking points drive policy in this administration. Yes, slogans do get people killed.

There are still people who believe that if we weren't fighting "them" over there, "they" would follow us home.

While it is true that sensitivity to the families of fallen soldiers is a concern, it's important to remember that apologizing for telling the truth perpetuates the illusion that a war is always justified and noble when good people with good intentions die in it.

Sacrifice is a word that, by definition, implies loss for the advancement of a noble cause.

The Americanization of Emily, a 1964 movie starring James Garner and Julie Andrews, has a great scene describing why glorifying war perpetuates war. It's a movie worth checking out.

Why is honesty and candor a "gaffe" when what is being said is difficult to take?

When will a candidate step up and stand behind his or her words without apology when the words deal with painful truths?

On Muzzling Whistleblowers

As Joe Scarborough mentioned, not allowing discussion about the state of affairs in parts of the organization at Walter Reed Medical Center belies the very freedoms that our country stands for.

By denying the very real concerns about the treatment of the wounded veterans who should get only the very best care, the administration does a far greater disservice to those who have fought bravely than any "gaffe" by a politician ever could.

It seems that based on Friday's news about shakeups in top Army leadership that the administration appears to have realized that it needs to pay attention to concerns in this area.

On Whether it Would be OK for Jesus to Have a Family

A cottage industry in ticking off Christians? Is criticizing the way that some people interpret Christianity necessarily an indictment of Christian faith? Is Joe Scarborough confident that every title on this list has been written from an open-minded perspective and carries a message of tolerance toward those who do not share the authors' ideas about or definition of Christian faith?

Why is the notion of adding scientific exploration to our understanding of Christianity necessarily mutually exclusive with the concept of faith in Jesus? Why is the (sometimes conflicting) dogma perpetuated by 2000 years of humans with their own agendas necessarily the "real" interpretation of faith? Can’t faith stand the test of critical thinking?

Lots of good stuff on the 23rd.

On dumbing down the American people

Sen. Joe Biden's observations about the issues that are important and his assessment of the mood of the American people reflected his experience and understanding of what readers and critical thinkers want from a candidate. His description of the model of representative Democracy and the citizens' expectations of the roles of federal and local government that we should be fostering in the world would be a great goal for America, too.


On the emperor's wardrobe

Nice tie--great joke in the monologue--Now if I could get the mental picture out of my head...


On whether we are a nation of babies

One factor in the difference in attitudes of average citizens is that those who are not terrorists are too trusting of the processes that they believe were used to back up the assertions that those imprisoned by the US are.

Habeas Corpus is the key to that process. Without the need to prove accusations that it necessitates, there is no basis for the processes that create citizen trust. There is also no protection for citizens who are wrongfully detained, because there is no chance to prove their innocence.

Unfortunately, unless a person has been wrongfully accused of a crime or knows someone who has, it is likely that he or she would feel confident that only terrorists will be detained and be unaware of the lack of options for the innocent should that not be the case.

The label "babies" fits to some extent In the sense that babies are naïve and trusting. If that is the case, adolescence is going to be a nightmare.


On Airline Customer Bills of Rights


Rep. Issa's comment about the airlines may have been extreme in labeling them terrorists, but the basic thought was grounded in truth. To round up all of the usual suspects, we include the local airport authorities controlling gate access, big airlines with business models that were in a tailspin even before the 2001 terrorist attacks and the air traffic control issues that have only grown thornier because of higher air traffic and the knowledge and experience gap the industry has attempted to reclaim since Reagan broke the air traffic controllers'; union in the 80's.

Common sense shouldn't make an Airline Customer Bill of Rights necessary, but JetBlue (http://www.jetblue.com/)
should be commended for taking the lead in identifying its shortcomings and working to eliminate issues that are in its control that affect customer experience. JetBlue may have been the youngest carrier with the fewest airline gate spaces, and what many say the best customer experience among the airlines recently challenged by passenger delay issues, but it was the only one to immediately and proactively take responsibility for the elements of the situation it could have controlled, and those that were exacerbated by limits in JetBlue resources, human and otherwise.

The Customer Bill of Rights was also a message that JetBlue quickly deployed to its customers, using social media like its CEO blog (http://www.jetblue.com/about/ourcompany/flightlog/#5) and a YouTube video (http://www.jetblue.com/about/ourcompany/promise/index.html)
to create a conversation with concerned travelers.

Another big the consideration may be that perhaps after giving up their privacy, time and even their lotions and lattes without question, air travelers just don't like being trapped on runways in planes with wheels frozen to the ground and toilets overflowing when they can look out the window and see the warm terminal.

Had the issue been merely the time delay, the backlash wouldn't have been so harsh.

Roll the stairs out, already...

On cameras in the courtroom

Before deciding whether to allow cameras in court we should first examine some false assumptions in the current debate, then we should consider who is likely to watch the content, why they will watch and how they will watch.

The first false assumption is that the Court proceedings would necessarily The key difference between Congress and the Supreme Court is that Supreme Court Justices are appointed for life, so the huge motivation for playing to the cameras that exists on C-Span would not exist. I'm surprised that no one on the panel picked up on that detail. (No jury there, either.) Broadcasting doesn't have to be done on TV only, anymore. Streaming Online video would be less expensive, too.

The popularity of daytime TV judges with their own "brand of justice" suggests that watching trials appeals to a predictable number of viewers with predictable demographics in afternoon time slots. Does that necessarily suggest that watching live court procedures would appeal to these viewers? Or that viewers who find no reason to tune in to these shows would not find?

Do viewers find Judge Judy's judicial thrashings to wayward parties appealing for the same reason they watch Simon's brutal candor on American Idol or because of interest in litigation? Is it the fine points of estate law or morbid fascination with the tragic story of the mysterious death of a celebrity sex symbol that compelled every major news network to not only broadcast the details of last week's trial, but to spend more time analyzing it than they ever spend analyzing what is being said by our Congress every morning on C-Span.

Court proceedings can be very boring, and rarely involve emotional outbursts or sarcastic lecturing from judges (although as a check and balance on judges' competence, they can be a real eye-opener.).

Opponents of cameras in court must concede that the potential disadvantages they pose presume a media circus atmosphere in the courtroom for virtually every televised proceeding. In real life, court is boring. Would cameras in the actual courts have a chance at capturing our attention without scripted banter ending in a moral admonishment (official or otherwise,) lurid details and celebrity notoriety or appeal?

No doubt, in the "real life cases" court shows, where whatever "celebrity factor" exists is provided only by the judge, cases are carefully selected by producers to fit the target audience demographic group preferences. A pending court action fitting the judge's soapbox preferences, with sufficient levels of stupid and/or bad behavior by at least one of the parties appears to be the norm.

In exchange for a trip and a pass on the consequences (since the show pays the winning party) defendants and plaintiffs fly to TV court to drag out all the dirty laundry surrounding the alleged wrong. Once the judge has set the hook on which to hang a suitable message, demanded accountability of the guilty party and affirmed the moral authority of the court in general, he or she sometimes even asks the audience to vote before rendering a verdict reflecting his or her wisdom, the gavel seals the deal, then dismisses the litigants, who are accosted in the hall for comments to the quick "moral of the story" sound byte chaser.

Did the judge in FL get emotional to lessen the chance that the parties would do it?

"Ten minutes to Wapner!" (Rainman)

On the Overtime and HBO.com user experience

The HBO site has greatly improved the Web video experience since last season. The video streams well and the video window offers relevant links to other videos. Much better than having to close the video window and open another. (Probably why it's working more smoothly, too.)

In the spirit of helping HBO make viewers happy, (and helping HBO sell more DVD's) here's a Web marketing-related:

New Rule - Just because you can dynamically change the anchor text to the DVD collection for sale on your Web site to match each section doesn't mean you should.

A "Shop Bill Maher" link in the Bill Maher section of the HBO site should lead to a page that has at least one Bill Maher title.

The first of the three Bill Maher DVD titles offered doesn’t even appear until page three of the list of 95 HBO Comedy DVD's for sale. Unfortunately three pages deep is two pages too many for visitors who thought they were shopping Bill Maher when they clicked, but

Either call the links "Shop HBO Comedy" or at least update the order in which the titles are presented to first show the titles related to the section I clicked from. (Offering the option to search by related programs rather than just by price would be good, and displaying the store in a new window or providing a link back to the referring page would be good, too.)

Not only would visitors get what they expect, just think how much more HBO could make selling DVD's.

After three months off, Bill seemed a little tentative taking the stage on tonight's season premiere of Real Time, but warmed up as the hour progressed, despite the almost too politically correct restraint of his panel.

The most interesting topic was about the findings on the likelihood of people voting for a Mormon candidate. This is a topic that could be expanded way beyond the magic underwear and the DNA evidence in questioning the credibility of the candidate.

A somewhat schoolmarmish Carly Fiorina used the words pragmatic, real or some form of these words at least fourteen times in a ten minute span, even chiding Bill for his injection of "worse" after Fiorina's statement that for better or worse, Bush is the president. At times she appeared to be channeling Martha Stewart in identifying "good things" and "bad things."

Craig Ferguson provided some great lines, "Don't call me sweetheart, I thought you were cured" and kept the tone from becoming too serious.

The Overtime Web segment tonight was the best yet, running nearly eight minutes and covering three audience questions with no technical problems.

And yes, the chimp is way lamer than Barbaro.

On Responsible Journalism

When Helen Thomas was kicked out of the press room just before the war in Iraq started, it was a big signal for the tone that was to come. Now that we know the results of this approach, it would seem that we would understand the need for change.

There are numerous reasons why enforcing checks and balances, both the formal ones built in to our government system, and the informal one granted the Fourth Estate, is not easy or popular. Even PBS and C-Span seem neutered recently. It has never been more necessary.

The perception of credibility that used to be part of Americans' image of the media has been damaged.

On why Mark Cuban could be the Rich Mo... Bill Wished For

In discussing the consolidation of media ownership, Bill's wish for a media owner with the FU money to make real news a priority could be answered in Dan Rather's partnership with Mark Cuban's HDNet.

Any doubts about Mark's willingness to question the status quo and the drivers behind should be eased with a quick read of his blog, said to have 6 million regular readers. A pioneer in Web audio, Mark's purchase and management of the Dallas Mavericks has proven his willingness to take on even the NBA's sacred cows.

Even more important, Mark understands the power of social networking and the use of the Web to drive action. He also has some provocative and pragmatic thoughts on content protection and digital rights management as well as a grasp of the importance of common sense.

Mark would be a great guest. He would probably want to do the show in HD, though.

On Why Americans Aren't Shocked Enough

Footage of officers beating a suspect on YouTube may only be confirming personal observations and suspicions of those who view them. As Tom Morello noted, Americans have become jaded to this type of image. We know this happens, and, maybe on some level, some people feel protected by it and perceive it as necessary.

Another reason that this film sparked conversation rather than controversy is related to the next point--Americans don't understand what questions need to be asked or how to ask them. How does the average American fight "the system?"


On Confusing Melodrama for Meaning

In mentioning the idea that Scott Peterson was the top of mind story when he returned from Britain, Richard Dreyfuss threw in a reference to another troubling aspect of the case in noting that Peterson was sentenced to die based on circumstantial evidence.

One follow-up question could have compared the investigative style used in the Peterson case to Fox journalism.

In compiling their case, it's hard to understand why other instances of apparent ritualistic killings of pregnant women and their unborn children, particularly around holidays, in that part of the country, were not relevant as even potential leads.

Thinking about the power of melodrama, it shouldn't surprise anyone that the Peterson jury apparently didn't find the lack of non-circumstantial evidence troubling in finding him guilty and sending him to death row. After all, Peterson lied to his father-in-law about having a stripper girlfriend.

We and those whom we entrust to represent us, see what we want to see until the truth of a situation becomes impossible to ignore. Or, if that doesn't happen, someone can fly to Thailand to extradite a purported suspect in another melodrama to shift the focus.


On Why Richard Dreyfuss is Right About Civics

Citizenship and civics evoke images of Leave it to Beaver and mock senate competitions. Dreyfuss made excellent points on the importance of owning the personal responsibility that is the cornerstone of democracy.

If I wonder why so many people today lack the fundamental frame of reference necessary to not only believe it's our responsibility to question authority, but understand the system under which the authority operates by our authority as participants in our form of democracy.

On Fooling Us Once

Thinking about when Civics disappeared from the classroom, it strikes me as about the time its pretense was largely abandoned by government. The Viet Nam War and the Watergate case played out under the looming shadow of potential nuclear destruction caused Americans to lose blind faith in government.

Not surprisingly, this passive aggressive mixed message has resulted in the feeling of powerlessness that can opens the door to manipulation. Each American can choose how to react and when to trust if information is available.

Only by insisting on the real story can we personally and collectively close the door to manipulative messages that miss the real issues. Looking to the guy reading the goat story for the answers when the crisis hits isn't enough.


On the Need for Engaged Educators

Even a couple of decades ago, those of us in high school competing in debate and mock Senate were the definite minority. Of all of my educational experiences, debate and critical thinking are the skills that have served me best.

While civics was still part of the name of the class that was required to graduate, the class study topics consisted mainly of American history and government.

A student could be scheduled to take the class taught by one of two teachers. One was an exceptional scholar in matters of civics and governments who understood the importance of giving students the tools to ask questions and the understanding that it is not only our right but our responsibility to do so.

The other teacher was the football coach (and our school had a great team.) Students eagerly hoped they would be lucky enough to draw him as their teacher for this required class.

Coach could be counted on to fall asleep during the class, which consisted mainly of screenings of movies about government made in the 50's and 60's and multiple choice tests that had contained the same questions for years.

Sadly, the students then were left unsupervised in the dark, both literally and figuratively, instead of becoming enlightened about civics. Now, even the pretense has been dropped leaving students more in the dark than ever about civic responsibility, since most schools have abandoned the exercise of teaching the subject, altogether.

The reality is that when teachers are teaching to standardized tests on which they and their schools and districts are judged (and funded) the resources are not put toward fostering the development of this type of empowering knowledge.


On Teaching Civics

It would have been good to learn more about the program at Oxford on teaching civics and on the conference that Richard Dreyfuss mentioned. It was difficult to find more information Online, but I managed to come up with a couple of relevant links that might lead interested educators to more information.

Here's some stuff I found on "the Google":

More about Richard DreyfussMore about Richard Dreyfuss from The Media Center at the American Press Institute

Lies My Teacher Told Me author James Loewenauthor James Loewen is a tentative speaker at the conference Richard Dreyfuss mentioned.

(The conference promotion would definitely benefit from some search engine optimization.)

On Where Bloggers Really Get Their News

To assert that bloggers merely regurgitate talking points promulgated by the mainstream media was disingenuous to say the least. Those types of bloggers are not the type that add the value that brings readers back or motivates them to syndicate the content or subscribe by RSS.

Bloggers I read regularly (and there are too many for me to even read all of the ones Google grabs for me each day, let alone the ones I've added to MyYahoo!) find stories from the same sources as the mainstream media, sometimes from better ones.

One great source of information if one has the patience and bandwidth to navigate its vast virtual labyrinths is the government, itself.

The value-adds of good blogs are their authors' ability to discover information from seemingly disparate sources. Good bloggers find the patterns in disparate data, then create and share new perspectives and knowledge as well as raise the pertinent questions that need to be asked.

Sometimes, finding information only leads to the need to find out more by asking more questions. Blogging creates a conversation that can be a uniquely valuable way to find the answers.

On the Future of Blogs

Most blogs outside politics are surprisingly focused. Those which earn loyal readership are consistently remarkable and fearless. No wonder the mainstream media tries to discredit them, even as it so recently embraced them as the latest fad.

With the rise of Web 2.0, content can easily be syndicated and shared. Think of the contrast between the way a newspaper column would be sold for syndication and the ability to syndicate content in minutes at virtually no cost. Scary stuff for business models based on revenue from content.

Bloggers can also take advantage of the same tools mainstream news producers use in finding original sources. Bloggers are increasingly the focus of strategic PR efforts, so their influence is likely to grow.

On the American Way

Norman Lear provided an excellent example of why liberal and conservative don't work well as labels. What is liberal socially is likely to be conservative politically.

Too bad the film of the Rather's interview with him wasn't available. It would have been interesting to see that bit of history.

Post-Election Musings from Arizona


On Arizona's Election Outcomes

As an Arizona voter, I found the comment in the monologue about the paradox posed by the apparent tolerance in Arizonans voting down the ban on gay marriage and passing the several "immigration reform" bills was right on target.

On the Impact of Tolerance versus Pragmatism

While I'd like to believe that the outcome on the gay marriage bill was the result of a wave of liberal tolerance sweeping the Arizona desert, I suspect that the motivation behind the rejection of Prop 107 may have come from significant votes from another source, cohabitating couples, especially senior citizens, who would have lost benefits under the proposed law.

In the final weeks before the vote, the ads opposing this bill did a super job of highlighting the risk. How did the social conservatives miss that one?

On the Unintended Consequences of Knee-Jerk Reactions

The sad part is that the immigration bills proposing requirements and procedures that already exist in effect or require significant taxpayer support, played on emotional hot buttons of fear and intolerance rather than logic to persuade.

Upon full reading, the implementation of these bills serves to limit the options available to deal with immigration issues rather than expand them. The ramifications of implementing these laws will emerge after the news reports and jokes are over. The links between the actions mandated and solving Arizona's immigration challenges aren't likely to be as clear-cut as they looked in the political ads.

What, for example, is the impact of prohibiting courts from awarding punitive damages but to reward the evil-doers who would otherwise deserve to be punished for their criminal negligence or harm to others, no matter who the victims are? How does one use only English when teaching it as a second language?

If a state votes to ban smoking in public, why does it also vote to rely on a cigarette tax to fund early childhood education?

Of course, it may not be over, yet, at least for the props that passed. The Arizona legislature has a history of deciding that voters don't mean what they say, as evidenced by its reversal of voter decisions to legalize medicinal marijuana in 1996 and 1998.

The million dollar voting lottery didn't pass, either.


On Checking Eminent Domain Abuse

While the propositions on the hot button social "issues" got the attention of the media, Arizona voters scored a huge victory on a real issue, passing Proposition 207, The Private Property Rights Protection Act.

This Proposition was clearly a response to the Supreme Court's controversial Kelo decision for which Arizonan and Former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote the dissenting opinion. Also fueling turnout was outrage at the examples of average people losing their property by eminent domain so that the property could be sold to private developers. Proponents of the bill put a human face on the somewhat obscure and confusing, but vitally important issue by sharing real home loss horror stories in ads and campaign materials.

The Act applies strict requirements defining the circumstances under which government can use eminent domain to acquire property, requires individual decisions when condemning property in a neighborhood, and requires fair compensation if eminent domain is necessary.

Why isn't this clear response to the Kelo decision being widely reported?

On Arizona Congressional Races

Still down by nearly 6000 votes as of the Friday after the election despite picking up 23 votes, J.D. Hayworth was still holding out petulant hope that there had been some grand mistake in his defeat on Tuesday. In his indignation at losing in a district where Republicans outnumber Democrats among registered voters, he must have missed another group--the Independents.

It might have dawned on Hayworth that although there are more Republicans than Democrats registered in his district, the second largest group there is Independents. Combined, Democrats and Independents outnumber Republicans by nearly 30,000 voters in AZ District Five. That's not even counting the Libertarians.

Congratulations to Harry Mitchell for running a classy and effective campaign.


On the Arizona Senate Race

If Senate-hopeful Jim Pederson had started running his body armor demonstration ads two weeks earlier, he might have closed the gap against Jon Kyl. Pederson ran a good race and won several major counties in the state.

One Republican I wish could have stayed in the Senate (instead of one of the others, of course) is Iowa's Jim Leach. His experience, proven willingness to call for discussion instead of disrespect and his knowledge of the issues will be missed on the Hill.

On Defining Liberal and Conservative

The mistake many people make when thinking about the definitions of liberal and conservative is thinking that these terms have any real meaning without context. Social conservatives cannot be assumed to advocate conservative thinking in government.

Most true conservatives want to minimize the intrusion of government into personal taste and belief issues. This could be called liberal thinking in the social context.

There is also a level of tolerance in the Midwest and the Western Mountain states that could be called live and let live. The people in these regions think for themselves rather than simply swallowing and regurgitating a set of talking points every day. To try to classify people based on where they live can lead to incorrect assumptions as Carl Rove and crew found out last Tuesday.

Remember, Iowa is Purple.


On the Plan for Iraq

The Gates nomination for the role of Secretary of Defense is the new Senate's opportunity to put the ball back in the Bush court in defining a plan to manage the end of the war. The confirmation hearings are the perfect opportunity for the new Senate leaders to work with the White House to begin actively engaging in crafting a viable exit strategy.

Those who watch C-Span regularly can tell that Congressman Dennis Kucinich should get more respect. If there is one Congressperson who demands accountability, its Kucinich. If named Chairman of the Government Reform Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats, and International Relations Kucinich could further the goal of a realistic foreign policy by getting the real story.

On Voting Machines

The last way that the Republicans should have wanted to win on Tuesday was to squeak by to a Senate majority win based on a vote recount. If that had happened, there would have been no trust left in the voting process for 2008.

Since voters used machines, not paper ballots in Virginia, how would there have been a re-count, anyway?

If Americans can bank, renew car registrations and manage investments Online, why can't we vote Online?

On the Future of Political Campaigns

If political ads were banned on TV, which candidates would understand how to leverage social media while avoiding its potential pitfalls and temptations? (My guess is that the LAPD wishes that YouTube weren't so easy to use.) Will future voters look beyond Wikipedia to research the real story on the issues, or will they be easily fooled by half-truths and manipulation of information in this new realm?

Given the results of the recent Harvard study about the voting habits of 18-24 year-olds, as well as the phenomenal rise of the use of social networking on the Web, which party is better poised to leverage Web marketing tactics ethically? How can political campaigns use these tools to motivate the voters who need to be motivated, and to persuade those who need to be persuaded while maintaining integrity?


On Swaying Voter Opinion

The apparent contradictory responses to propositions on the Arizona ballot initiatives shows that a liberal social view can be and often is a clear conservative view from a legislative perspective. As younger voters enter the conversation, it won't be long before their Web-fueled networks become a significant influence on the outcome of elections.

How will politicians classify a generation of voters if they prove unwilling to fall into a neat party line to practice red herring talking points as they swallow the Neocon Kool-aid (r)?

Who will most effectively show voters of the future what's in it for them in voting for a candidate?


On Fire and Rhinestones

Thank you for observing the positioning setting up the battle between good and evil that's likely to be blamed in the aftermath of the Ted Haggard fall from grace. For a person as "holier than thou" as he to succumb to the temptation of gay sex and hard drugs can lead to only one conclusion as to the reason.

Could it be...Satan???

Hey, whatever happened to Jeff Gannon?

On Democrat Contenders in 2008

Joe Biden's work has impressed me since 1988, when I met him at a small "meet the candidate" event in Davenport, Iowa. Dusting off the old Biden campaign button wouldn't be the worst thing that could happen.

Could the Democrats' answer to finding the middle ground actually be found in the middle of the country? Announcing his bid for the White House on Friday, Iowa Democratic Governor Tom Vilsack showed his willing to gamble that they just might.

Some random thoughts after this week's Real Time:

On War Profiteering:

* Wouldn't the simple step of withholding the budget for new spending for defense contracts until the money is accounted for and the spending approved go a long way in driving accountability in cases of war profiteering?

* What if the DOD and other government spending units were made to adhere to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and basic financial procedures that govern private sector businesses such as Sarbannes-Oxley regulations (especially if the trend is to privatize?)

* When specifications for government contracts are written by suppliers, is it more likely that those suppliers would be the only source able to provide the products or services to meet the specs?

* Since when is the role of CEO phrased as "been associated with?"

* Did the French contractor mentioned fraudulently over-charge the US?

* "Of all the Thompson gunners, Roland was the best.." (W. Zevon)

On Partisanship:

* Why do Republicans always seem to be the ones who try to shift the conversation back to partisan snipes? (Willingness to hold hands aside, why was it so noteworthy that Kingston felt he needed to notify the audience every time he "agreed" with Alec Baldwin?)

On Tax Cuts:

* Why is it that some in government have no problem deficit spending to the tune of trillions of dollars, but refuse to pass legislation prohibiting predatory credit card and mortgage practices?

* Rosanne was right, families like the Conners are endangered. (It's not because of gay marriage, either.)

On Kerry, et al:

* Why does a speech at a community college need get on the national radar?

* Yes, candor and calling BS need to happen more often.

* It was obvious that Kerry meant Bush in his statement. Kerry almost looked effective in the first press conference after the joke failed.

* It was an astute personal political move by Hillary Clinton to call for the Kerry apology, although the apology was not a move I would advocate for a strong candidate.

* Alec Baldwin was right about Kerry's campaign weaknesses. Kerry is much more effective in the Senate.

* Why does everyone forget where Trent Lott landed after his "fall?"


On Political Advertising:

* If political ads were banned from TV, how many of the smart politicians (oxymoron?) would truly leverage the Web ,particularly Social Networks , as a form of conversation about real issues with their constituents?


On the Election:

* What don't the political pollsters know or want to admit about 18-24 year old voters that could significantly change the outcome of the election?

On Government's Role in Sex Ed:

* Bill was right in identifying the need to question the validity of the underlying goal in thinking about abstinence education.

* What are the breakouts of the "out of wedlock" birth numbers by age, sexual orientation and status of relationship of the birth parents? What percentage of these pregnancies were unplanned?

On Responsible Reproduction Education for Young Adults:

* In the 1970's and early 1980's, public birth control clinics like Planned Parenthood were a way for teens and young adults to learn about the responsibilities that go with sex and their options for protection (including abstinence.) These clinics made it easy for them to obtain unbiased information. The clinics provided condoms, foam, birth control pills, IUDs and diaphragms to patients who chose to use them for protection from disease and unwanted pregnancy.

* Patients were required to sit through several films and discussions about responsible reproduction and prevention of disease, including a personal talk with a counselor, before obtaining birth control pills, which were offered at a sliding scale price. Condoms were free and easily obtained. Regular check-ups were required. Teen pregnancy was not a huge issue in my school. Why was this a bad thing?

On Abstinence Education:

* Does abstinence education inherently demonize healthy human sexuality or those who have had sex? How would an event like a rape affect someone indoctrinated to believe sex outside of marriage is unacceptable?

* Preaching abstinence after the age of 20? Where is the reality check here? Is the jury still out on the power of hormones?

* Why is this type of education the role of government at all for any age target audience?

* What is so bad about sex, anyway?

On Two-Parent Families:

* What happens when parents die or go to war? Are their children inherently doomed? (Personal experience says no.)

* How many teens get pregnant on purpose thinking they will escape bad situations at home, where there are two parents who are abusive or neglectful?

* What message does this debate send to the children now being raised in single parent family homes or in non-traditional family situations?

* Would Kingston go all the way to Quayle-land and next blast Murphy Brown?



On New Rules and Other Random Thoughts:

* Who was the model for Log Cabin Republican on Freak Show?

* Would the Little Mermaid release have been better with the "subliminal" cover art it had when the video was originally issued?

* Roseanne rocks!

* Don't be an enabler on Tuesday, let the emperor know you know he's naked.

* Congress is for Closers -- Democracy is for Voters.

* Get out there and vote!


Visit my Bill Maher Fan lens on Squidoo.