Exploiterroration

Listening to the right-wing talkers this week, it's pretty obvious that the cheat-sheet, their all taking their talking points from, invloves defining the Ft. Hood incident as terrorism. If you invest the time to take in information from multiple media sources can see this pattern. This happens with every news story, and it happens on the left and the right. Conservatives happen to be much more organized about getting the word out.

In this case, I predict that this effort to paint this tragedy as terrorism is premeditated, and that come election time we'll hear how this horrible TERRORISM happened on Obama's watch. Never mind that 9/11 happened on Bush's watch, or that this latest nut-job showed signs of his ties to radical Islam for the past several years dating back to 2007 when he gave presentations to his colleagues about the opression of Muslims worldwide, in the guise of an environmental health issue.

Hear me now, believe me later!

Rules for Engagement

Friends, colleagues and relatives often send me forwarded propoganda and hate-mongering fear messages. As I’ve probably already said, I’ve grown intolerant of listening to the endless spin, drivel, half-truths and outright lies, perpetuated by PR firms operating covertly as grassroots players, and putting the interest of corporate profits ahead of the life, liberty and happiness of “we the people”. I have been on a quest to become more informed and more involved. I write to my congressman and senators frequently. I call the White House and I contact the majority leader in both houses as well as recalcitrant members of congress on both sides of the aisle. I rarely get direct responses, but I do believe that my position is being recorded and is having an impact on the decision making of my representatives. I feel better for doing it and not sitting on my hands. I may be delusional for thinking that I’m making a difference, but I’m doing it anyway.

I often take the time to reply to some of the aforementioned emails and go to great lengths to debunk, point out the flawed logic and otherwise call "bullshit". It seems at times, that it may be a worthless enterprise and that I'm never going to move any of these entrenched foot-soldiers to a new position. For the most part I can't even convince them to look or listen to other viewpoints. I'm not on a mission to convert people, but I would like to influence others to be more thoughtful and to not blindly accept viral email information. That said, I find it theraputic to work through my own thought process by responding in a very deliberate way. I often spend more time than I should researching the sources and opinions on all sides of a particular issue. Sometimes, rarely I expose a crack in the defenses and let in a glimmer of light. I'll get a polite "thank you", or an "interesting point" response.  

I am watchful for viewing the world through my own prisms as well. Becoming too convinced about being absolutely right on any issue is a surefire sign that I’m missing something, or choosing to discount the reasoned position of others. An article I received this week, from a right wing blog called American Thinker, is indicative of the divisive nature of the public debate today. It’s troubling that so many people, speaking in public forums, do not possess the civility and intellectual wherewithal to be able to put forward their point of view without making ad hominem attacks, on those who are ideologically opposed. Differences of opinion are cultivated by any number of factors. Believing a different thing does not make you a bad person. We all arrive at some place with our beliefs, based on personal experience, the beliefs of our parents, friends, and teachers. We often arrive at an issues debate with a predisposition towards one side and rarely give quarter to the other. I’ve been working very hard at taking in the entire picture and remaining calm under fire.

Recommended viewing

Regardless of political affiliation, Americans would be well served to watch the HBO documentary film, "By The People: The Election of Barack Obama". It's a behind-the scenes account of the 2008 Obama campaign. The filmmakers were granted almost unlimited access, and as a result captured some really great moments with the candidate, his family and campaign staff workers.

There's lots of little after-hours, one-on-one, hotel room interviews with Obama, David Axelrod and David Plouffe that shed some light on the men and their thoughts as they speak openly about their strategy, hopes and fears in surprisingly unguarded moments.

We grow so accustomed to the blue lit, flag-draped video images of the people in this film that it's refreshing to see them just chatting, eating pizza or hugging their kids and wives. There is a candor and charm shown here that's absent in the highly produced, 24-hour news cycle, sound bites and TV moments.  It's easy to be distracted from the mundane reality of these real people with real lives.

Most Americans are well aware that TV  interviews and debates with a presidential candidate are highly rehearsed affairs. Peeling back the curtain to see the actual process is compelling.  There is much good humor exchanged between the campaign senior staff, but the thing that really shines through is the fatigue factor, as the team seeks to achieve the near impossible task of getting their man elected.  

What struck me most was the youth of some of the biggest players in the campaign. Of particular note was Jon Favreau, Obama's chief speech writer. This 28 year old kid (I can call him that because he's only six months older than my son) has been instrumental in some of the great public speaking moments in modern American political history. Obama call's him his mind-reader, for good reason, he is absolutely dialed in on what to say and when to say it.

Watching the film brought me back emotionally to the moment that Ohio was called for Obama and I realized that this was actually happening. He was going to win. Being an eye-witness to history is a rare privilege.

Independant's Day

Much ado is being made of the gubernatorial election results today in Virginia and New Jersey, as well as the congressional contest in upstate New York. Inside-the-beltway pundits and spinmeisters have analyzed the significance of these races and results ad nauseum. The cable news networks provided coverage of these relatively small, off-year, local elections as if it was general election night. All overdone to the point where I would have welcomed several hours of "balloon boy" coverage or a slow-motion police chase.

What may prove to be the important take-away, is that there are now more Independant voters than either registered Democrats or Republicans. The results in 2008, and again on this morning-after, may be more indicative of our collective disenchantment with either party and a desire to remove entrenched incumbents, than it is a referendum on Obama or a surging conservative movement.

There exists a disturbingly small number of eligible voters who actually make their way to the polling places. However, it appears that those who do vote may now be more engaged and more aware than ever. I view the events of yesterday with a mixture of hope and skepticism. Hope in the American electorate and skepticism about whether the "yes we can" enthusiasm was left at the end of the campaign trail.

Repairing our Broken Government

I've just finished reading "Broken Government" by John Dean, self-described recovered Republican and Watergate-era legal counsel in the Nixon White House. In the preface, Dean asserts that "this book is hard on Republicans", because "they have demonstrated during the past several decades a remarkable incapacity to govern at the national level and should accordingly be held responsible for the damage they have done to democracy."

Dean observes that with a Republican in the White House for 28 of the past 40 years, presidential appointments have shifted the government to a more conservative position in an attempt to cater to those with the same philosophical bent, and not for the greater good of all Americans. He then asks the inevitable question, How did we get here?

Modern conservative Republicans tend to relate to some common themes and principles. Defining government as the problem, tops the list of persistent complaints. Why therefore, do zealous conservatives seek public office? The answer would appear to be a Trojan-horse style attack from the inside, to dismantle and break the thing they despise. Contempt for the system makes it easier to ignore or defy the process therefore destroying the system all along the way. Ultimate destruction would prevent them from enriching themselves, so they are compelled to leave some semblance of the system in place. Just the hind quarters, that can be thoroughly pounded into submission.

In contrast to the scorn for the system, is the desire for authoritarian power and rule, as witnessed by the Bush/Cheney administration's efforts to build upon the theme of the unitary executive powers of the Oval Office (and the office down the hall). We remember the adage that absolute power corrupts absolutely.

In addition to the expansion of the executive branch, Republican presidents in recent history, have sought to transform the judiciary based on their own ideology. This has left us with a diminished federal justice system, and a highly politicized bench. Checks and balances be damned. The appointment of justice Sotomayor is a small reclamation of a tlted federal bench. There's still a long way to go to undo the long list of presidential appointments from Nixon through Bush II.

The Republican led Congress threw out notions of civility and bicameralism in favor of  closed sessions and last-minute votes on huge bills loaded with earmarks. How ironic that they they now find any hint of being shut out of the process as totally unacceptable. They created and perpetuated this unconstitutional broken system in the House and now want to decry it when it doesn't work in their favor. Democrats have made moves to correct the ship of state, but without reform efforts, limiting the influence of lobbyists and campaign contributions, the problem will persist for some time.

The prevailing assumption, particularly within the media, has been that Americans suffer a serious ignorance of civics and governmental process knowledge, preferring to focus on character, celebrity and personality over the more mundane day-to-day aspects of how the government actually works to get things done, or not as the case may be. The media has responded to survey data, by minimizing their focus on process issues, indicating that most of us are confused by the intricacies of process but able to grasp policy. However, when polled in greater detail on this topic, Americans show a surprising grasp of process and have trouble digesting policy issues.

An apathetic electorate permits the most egregious offenders to remain in power year after year. It seems that with the election of Barrack Obama, and the enforced majorities in the House and Senate, the pendulum has swung and the fear of a completely broken governmentthat Mr. Dean envisioned, when the book was published in 2007,  may have been staved off for the short term.

Republicans seem to operate best as the minority, where they can whip up a fervor of emotional outpouring from supporters driven by a fear of big government. The party is now dividing itself along conserrvative and moderate lines. This would appear to be a further weakening and an indicator that it will be quite some time before a phony "Contract with America" can sway the idependant voters to put Republicans once again in charge of our beloved democracy.

The accounts in this book gave credence to my gut feelings about many issues and crystalized what I already knew to be true. I'll recommend this to my conservative friends, but doubt that I'll get any takers.