I read David Brooks column in the New York Times this morning. The Times still gives me plenty of material to analyze and consider, even if it is only a vestige of its old 'get them the objective news and get it to them right now' self. David Brooks wrote a very fetching article about dignity and manners, and how we have, as a culture lost both of those things. He used the incidents of Governor Sanford's blatheringly stupid comments about his own infidelity, Micheal Jackson's conduct of a child-like life, and finally Sarah Palin's applied confusion about life itself, as his examples of a culture gone to the dogs. There is no dignity left, he asserts. There are no manners, public or private, which are consistently followed or applied. It is all out here right in front of us. Brooks rails against self-promotion, even to the extent of running for the office of President of the United States (that insults the dignity of the candidate). But then he turns, in typical, and very modern Republican form, to use Ronald Reagan as an example of a relatively current public figure who had dignity. A bigger self-promoter there never was, except maybe P.T. Barnum, but that is ignored by Brooks.
The entire neo-con rant by Brooks is about being wealthy. You can ignore everything if you are wealthy. You do not need help, or money, or even much in the way of relationship, if you have enough money. That is the man's basic forlorn tenant. He harkens back to a day, George Washington's, to be exact, when a man like our first President could exercise all of the well-mannered characteristics of not promoting himself or herself, speaking when spoken to, standing when spoken to, and, of course, not requesting or even accepting help from anyone. That George Washington was extremely wealthy is not mentioned at all.
You read an article like the one I am discussing and the material almost sounds rational. You almost pine for those old days when such great-seeming principals of conduct supposedly ruled all of social life. Until you begin to think about it. Washington's family had droves of slaves and tons of servants. I wonder how they conducted themselves with respect to the 'rules of dignity.' There were throngs of struggling new Americans trying to barely get by or survive on subsistence farming or in slave-like manufacturing jobs. We still had bond-servant versions of slavery all over the countryside. What a load of dignity they possessed, and displayed.
Today, we are all trying to make it. We are trying to feed our families, just like before. There is absolutely no dignity whatever in not paying your bills or being foreclosed on. None. Not one shred. Try it, if you think there is. I encourage anyone in dire financial straights to self-promote the hell out of him or herself. I absolutely encourage them to ask for assistance from their friends and family before putting their children in shelters or onto the mean streets of our downtown cities. Dignity be damned.
David Brooks is wealthy. Can you tell?
http://www.jamesstraussauthor.com
http://www.themastodons.com
http://www.from-the-chateau-dif.blogspot.com
Stephen Views the News March 11, 2009
http://stephenviewsthenews.blogspot.com/
ACRONYMS and Abbreviations
* IWD ~ OMG – March 8th marked the 98th anniversary of International Women’s Day. Sue Katz, at her blog Consenting Adult, offers insight and history of this annual event celebrating women’s independence economically, politically and socially. The Vatican, OTOH (On the Other Hand), offered a SNL (Saturday Night Live) viewpoint of a woman’s place. “The Vatican had a novel message for the women of the world: give thanks for the washing machine. This humble domestic appliance had done more for the women’s liberation movement than the contraceptive pill or working outside the home, said the official Vatican newspaper, Osservatore Romano.” One reaction to such reactionary hyperbole is Oh My God! I was equally disappointed in the short-sightedness of the Vatican’s remarks. The contributions of the clothes dryer and laundry detergent with optical brighteners were totally ignored. Perhaps this faux pas will be rectified when the individual who invented the CWD (combination washer-dryer) is nominated for sainthood.
* ONUG ~ One Nation under God – I thought of this patriotic-spiritual slogan while reading a report by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). Apparently not all Americans have read the press release about the US of A being spiritually unified. The SPLC has identified 926 active hate groups in our nation, a 50% increase since 2000. California “leads” the nation with 86, followed by Texas with 66 and Florida with 56 hate groups. Interestingly, the linked map shows that Hawaii and Alaska have zero, which leads one to several conclusions: The two most recent states have not been members of the confederation long enough to develop really good hate; extensive surfing and sledding channels positive energy; these states are too hot or too cold for hate groups to hold their outdoor cross burnings to really get the group vitriolic thing going; or, the groups in the nascent states are more stealth than their continental execrators.
* TIM - When is a tax cut for 98% of American tax payers called a tax increase? It is when the spokespeople for the other 2% generate a disproportionate amount of the rhetoric. The TIM (Tax Increase Myth) is spun by some congressmen, some ideologues on the right, organizations that serve the interests of the wealthy and some media. The TIM was created by the amalgamation of interests we can identify with the acronym GUITPOM (Got Us into This Pile of Manure).
* HUOA – This is not a US Marine shout out. It is descriptive of American foreign policy in recent years where large numbers of troops and U.S. treasure were committed to an effort before reason and strategy were promulgated. This Head Up One’s Ass approach has caused unnecessary American loss of lives, loss of treasure and loss of international credibility and stature. It is important that President Obama keep such folly in mind as he deals with the situation in Afghanistan. The caution flag has been raised since he has committed 17,000 more troops (for a total of 35,000) to this incredibly troubled region BEFORE any statement of objective, goal or strategy. This is reminiscent of the BA (Bushed Approach).
In an October 2008 article in the Christian Science Monitor, Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) says, “We need to ask: After seven years of war, will more troops help us achieve our strategic goals in Afghanistan? How many troops would be needed and for how long? Is there a danger that a heavier military footprint will further alienate the population, and, if so, what are the alternatives? And – with the lessons of Iraq in mind – will this approach advance our top national security priority, namely defeating Al Qaeda?” A read of this article offers a better understanding of the dynamics of one of the significant challenges of our times. LBWL (Looking before We Leap) will help prevent FOOA (Falling on Our Ass).
* PMS – The concept of “win” in context with Iraq was achieved within the first week of the Iraq invasion. Since then HOBSH (Hanging on By the Short Hairs) is the operative phrase. It is due to Patriotic Message Syndrome (PMS) that certain interests continue to misleadingly discuss “winning” the war in Iraq where, as in Afghanistan, there is no military solution. This is not to say that there is no role for the military in protecting American lives and interests. It means that like feminine PMS, national PMS can cloud judicious decision making.
* LOL – In email and text messaging shorthand LOL means Lots of Love. In political parlance, rather than a warm emotional connotation, LOL (Look Out for Liberals) embodies fear, hatred and dread. What are those Commie bastards trying to do to our country? Repair bridges, roads and ports that enable commerce and the working population access to jobs. Fix a healthcare system that excludes almost 20% of the citizens (48 million uninsured) and where increasingly high costs dramatically reduce adequate care for many millions more whose insurance is inadequate. Improve education as a means for young people to achieve a meaningful life and contribute to society. The fact that previous efforts have underachieved is not reason to legislatively play hooky. And with great audacity the CMSL (Commie Meets the Socialist Libralator) want The Haves (TH) to pay a fairer share of the cost for these and other programs. Incomes for the average citizen have been flat or declining for three decades while the wealth has continued to grow and concentrate in the wallets of a few. This trend occurred because TH not only controlled the economics but also the politics. The average American has become SOL.
* EIT – Enhanced Interrogation Techniques is one of the most creative marketing terms devised by the Bush administration and this is considerable praise given that they tossed the BS better than all previous presidencies. This sophisticated nomenclature was used to mask the illegal and immoral use of TORTURE. I have noted in a previous blog that I would not be surprised if a world court addresses such inhumane and treaty-breaking acts, even if our own country proves not to have the courage to investigate this appalling period in our history. By “own country” I refer to President Obama, Congress and the Department of Justice. One of the ways that the CIA attempted to get off the hook for its role in torturing was to destroy 92 tapes, many depicting EIT. SE (Situational Ethics) is a societal malady that has afflicted politics, business, government and a broad swath of individuals. TAQ (There Are Consequences). Some we are experiencing and some yet to be encountered.
* OK ~ OMG – In the state of Oklahoma the corn may grow as high as an elephant’s eye but objective truth is experiencing a severe drought. State representative Todd Thomsen has introduced legislation that would deny the “teaching of the theory of evolution at the department of Zoology at the University of Oklahoma.” Rumor has it that the next step is to move the Department of Obstetrics from the med school to Zoology in order to study the role of the stork in delivering babies. Research will also include pre-natal cabbage patches. One wonders if the nickname “Sooner” means AH (Asshole) in Cherokee.
* ??? ~ OMG – I have been critical of the religious right for some of the stands they have taken on gay rights, women’s rights and their penchant to tell others how to live their lives. I cannot wait to see how they will deal with this one. Female Iron Chef Cat Cora is pregnant and her female wife Jennifer is also pregnant. Both women utilized the same sperm donor, NPA (Now Pay Attention), the same donor for the first two children that the ladies have. NPCA (Now Pay Closer Attention). For the first two children Cat carried Jennifer’s embryo and Jennifer carried Cat’s embryo. Phew. I could certainly use an IVF (In vitro Fertilization) flow chart. Regardless of how it occurred I wish the women and their offspring well. To members of the 700 Club I suggest Xanax, a proven treatment for panic disorder
* WIVO – One of the reasons Why I Voted for Obama concerned his predecessor’s politicization of science and objective fact and an unsound policy that negatively impacted the wellbeing of citizens. Obama campaigned to reverse such foolishness. This week Obama announced a dramatic change in the federal government’s support of stem cell research and he went even further by reaffirming the importance and integrity of science. An excerpt from his speech at the announcement: “It is about ensuring that scientific data is never distorted or concealed to serve a political agenda and that we make scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology." The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) provides an A to Z Guide to Political Interference in Science. The link for the full text of Obama’s Memorandum: Scientific Integrity
* BTDT – The bigger they are the harder they fall. Competition results in better performance. Absolute power leads to abuse of power absolutely. All of these well-used expressions came to mind as I read about the merger deal between mega pharmaceutical companies Merck and Schering-Plough. Been There Done That (BTDT) describes America’s historical experience with industry consolidation that leads to monopoly or oligopoly within an industry. It rarely serves the common good. This was realized almost 100 years ago when a more intelligent/alert Congress enacted laws to prevent such consolidation. In recent decades such wisdom has been lost on the conventional wisdom as dominating companies have emerged in energy, drugs, agriculture and finance while our legislators experienced ADD (Attention Deficit Disorder). We are all going to need regular doses of ASA (aspirin).
* TAFNF – That’s All for Now Folks
* “I'll be scared later. Right now I'm too mad.” Bugs Bunny
John Wayne's real name is Chesley Sullenberger. The pilot of that airplane which went into the Hudson river yesterday. Sullenberger, like those astronauts in the Apollo 13 capsule that time, or Neil Young flying that first shuttle back into the atmosphere without power, or a parade of wonderful characters before him, demonstrated one of the most wonderful qualities a person can possess. Absolutely cool competence. It is so uncommon. We have such a wonderfully trained, capable and well equipped person at the stick of a commercial airliner, yet here we are, paradoxically, watching an incompetent clown leave the position of leader of the free world. The key to our economic turnaround is the celebration and reward of competence. Yes, it is about science. It is all about cool rationality in the face of outrageous fortune. Our struggle up from the muck over the past three million years has been exactly, and only, about that. I doff my hat to Chesley and hope that I will see his presence on Letterman and the other talk shows. I hope that our culture smiles at him in such a way that his fortune is vastly increased. In rewarding such performance, such rationality and such presence, we are turning away from the night with a haughty disdain (although we never really lose our fear) and stepping another baby step into the light.
Brooks was at it this morning in the Times. He is blaming the investors for the economic crash. He is using his gift for subtle misstatement to infer that it is the willfully deliberate stupidity and strange foundational nature of the investors which took everything down. Brooks sits right there, just off stage, from the Donkey Kong members of our United States Supreme Court. They, in there ludicrous leftover black robes, have decided that willful police incompetence, in gathering and preserving evidence against a suspect, any suspect, does not mean that the judge should not consider the, until now, illegally gathered evidence in convicting that suspect. Let's give more power to these sitting "Jobba The Huts" we have appointed to dispense our brand of American justice. A justice that is feared around the world. A prison system that is feared all over the world and at home, if one has a brain. Brooks is right there with them in their prejudicial application of the law, except he he is writing of economics. Never ever punish or impede the pursuit of idiocy and theft on the part of the leadership. Never go after the banking executives for theft. Yes, outright theft. That is the sole element that has brought down this economy. The taking of the money and the lies and frauds in support of that. When we do figure it out, let's pull the "we have to pay attention to the road ahead and not concentrate on the road behind," kind of garbage to preserve what they stole. So they get to keep it. The hedge funds (use Ponzi, whenever you see the word hedge or derivative) were led by people that got to take as much as a billion dollars a year in compensation for 'investing' people's money. All they had to do was produce statements which indicated that the fund was doing wonderfully well. So they produced those statements. Bernie Madoff was an expert on producing phony statements. He had no honor, however, as all of his victims have discovered. Nobody measured him with respect to his potential to have honor. He was even busy telling everyone who would listen that he lacked this minor element. But he could make money for them hand over fist. Say what? What does it matter if someone can make a hundred percent a year on the investment of your money if he does not have the character and responsibility to hold and then give it back to you? Trust was the only stupidity of investors across this land.
We need to trust people like Sullenberger! Yes, I will put money in his hedgefund or derivative. I have a pretty good idea, that if the 'plane' crashes, I will at least have a place, standing out there on the wing, waiting for a passing ferry to pick me up. Madoff would have bailed out (with a parachute he told all the rest of us was merely decorative!) just after the first birds hit the engines. We need to measure people better. We need to look into their hearts and study their backgrounds. We need to rediscover, through reading and association, what the meaning of real honor is. Then we need to select wisely, with a demanding presence, from the small pool we end up with. Finally, we need a large clear mirror to look into. One that reflects our image back in true form. One that allows us to gauge our own honor.
from-the-chateau-dif.blogspot.com
Those two newspapers were leaning against my front door this morning. I can't find the envelope with my cash tip inside. What am I going to do? I stood, newspapers in hand, and looked down my long driveway. It is a white nightmare down at the end of it. Overlapping plows in unwitnessed combat have crisscrossed the cul-du-sac and left jumbled 'Tiger Teeth' of piles strewn everywhere down there. I cannot imagine making my way into that mess to find my papers. I have got to tip this mysterious elusive newspaper person. Christmas stress. I read Judith Warner, a replacement columnist for David Brooks in the New York Times. Where is David? Oh, he needed a break for Christmas, I guess. These 'princes of press' must have their rest. I mean, after all, it takes intensive labor to sit and write something interesting. Another Christmas crock. Like the garbage Judith wrote this day. Brainless. Let's see, she writes about the fact that reason and logic are triumphing over the forces that make Christmas what it should be...wonder, marvel and faith. I am paraphrasing, as her stuff is not worth memorizing. She calls this the 'Woody Allenization' of Christmas. I do like that line, however misplaced and addled it is. You see, Judith is lost in the combating and overlapping mythologies of Christmas in our culture. She is all caught up in the Santa Claus thing, I guess. I am so very sorry Judith, but even though Norad has been tracking Santa's Christmas Eve flight ever since 1955, he is not real. We made it all up to have fun with our kids...and quite possibly for control and discipline purposes as well.
Christmas is filled with wonder, marvel and faith. You just have to look beyond the mythologies. The wonder that people can take a bit of time and think about the plight and condition of others around them. The marvel that they will go out and spend time and money to get something for somebody else that is just right, just to have that person feel a little bit better about life, and maybe them. The faith that something is at work of goodness, driven by, well, you don't have to know. You just have faith that there are more people like you out there, buying stuff not totally out of obligation but because you really want to get stuff for them. There was an old school joke about faith that always liked, even thought the underlying premise was discomforting. Johnny is sitting in the back of his grade school class when his teacher asks the big question. what is faith? Johnny raises his hand, which the teacher tries to avoid, as Johnny is a notorious trouble-maker (i like that part as I was always in that coat closet in my Catholic School for shameful questions). But the teacher caves in when there are no other hands. "Alright Johnny, go ahead...," the teacher says, with disappointment and a bit of trepidation. "Faith is believing in something that you know is not really true," Johnny responds, in his normal fashion. Johnny went, of course, straight to the coat closet, to inhale the aroma of all the little girl's coats hanging there, if he was like me. But the premise of that story is not true. You can have faith in any number of things that may or may not be true. We just don't have enough data or life experience to know. God is like that too. Is He there? Is He a He? What is the deal? I think He is, but I am not sure. I am beginning to sound like Woody Allen, who I never liked, although he is funny...but with some real bad personal habits.
About teaching. The Times had an article about teaching in it. The writer combined the plight and conduct of my beloved auto workers with that of teachers. They are unappreciated. That part is true. But auto workers do not stay up nights working on their stuff, worrying about their charges and taking extra time and effort to help a small person who really needs it. Teachers are different. I know one well. I mean one right now, sleeping and shopping away because she is off for the holiday (one of the few small benefits of the profession). This teacher is kinda normal I think. She asked me to write a short story for her grade school classes. So I wrote The Treasure Pool, which is found somewhere back there in these blogs. She gave out forty-nine copies and then had all the students write reviews back to me. She copied and stapled, read the story to make sure I had not slipped in any filth (I am, after all, an ex-Marine!) and then spent time and trouble helping these kids to come to terms with the plot, the theme and the elements of English such necessary educational arrows to have in their quivers. The critiques came back, and they were wonderful. Oh, I got dinged pretty good on my grades in certain areas. I wrote back to those kids who had given me bad grades for the most minor of things. I was stung. I was nice, but I had to say something! But the story is not about me. It is about the extra time and effort this teacher, Mrs. Machado, takes to really help and advance her students. She is an example of what it is all about out here, and in this holiday season. She follows Sister Sarah Fogarty (my fourth grade teachere) and Sister Michael Marie (my fifth grade teacher) in being one of those unknown and unsung saints. Maybe here, in this lonely blog, she will get the only public recognition she ever gets. But she is all about Christmas. The embodiment. And she is filled with reason and logic and understanding the universe. But she is also a thing of wonder, marvel and faith. Merry Crhistmas Anise Machado. We love you.
David Brooks, in today's NYT (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/28/opinion/28brooks.html?ref=opinion), you give a magnificent explanation for an obvious logical conclusion you refuse to reach. You point out a widely realized aspect of our limited or sometimes faulty individual perceptions, and that this has the effect of making the markets imperfect in effecting the individuals' self interest. Just take the extreme example of methamphetamine use. Somebody into that market will spend resources (his or his neighbor's) to procure something available in the market (albeit the black market) for a price. No amount--small or large--- would make that investment in the user's self interest. Rational minds know this. There are myriad other examples where markets do not serve the interests of the individual. Okay, you recognize this, and stated as much in your assessment of widely shared blame for the financial crisis, but then you point out that government officials are even less apt to perceive reality correctly. So that leaves us where exactly?
At the collective end of things, it's far worse. Because if a collective decides that rampant oil use is bad for society, but does nothing about it for fear of some other response from a controlling plurality of voters within the controlling party, or they fear responses from oil companies, then the collective understanding means nothing in terms of enacting anything of practical benefit to everybody. In other words, a fairly small minority of people responding to misperceptions of their best interests (a very narrow tunnel vision sense of need for immediate gain) causes government inaction; then everybody suffers--including that small minority of people who effectively derailed any action.
These people likely will say, under a faulty economic model, that the markets will correct the problems. Translate: individual action will move the system to address the problem. But it will never happen like that. The great vast majority of individuals with the financial ability will say, "my child is safer in a car three times as big as it needs to be, so I will stick with my Hummer or Excursion." This individual, and tens of millions of others, will see personal advantage in continuing their personal contribution to exponentially rising resource consumption, because they can afford what the market charges (and the market will ensure that millions can afford it, so as to sell the product), and that person will be content with his contributions to depletion of nonrenewable resources. That very same individual may lament what's going on globally, but he acts so locally that it amounts to acting only for himself and his family for immediate needs. That's what the gene pool leaves us-- a lot of self-interested people trying to behave as a collective. This doesn't mean they are bad or evil people, it just means that they are trying to get out of whatever system there is as much as they can. Of course that's how it will be. Geneticists and evolutionary biologists and theologians all have a ready answer for it, and it's essentially all the same. It's how we're constituted. Such an ill-disciplined, incoherently acting collective of individuals then simply behaves as an individual magnified many millions of times over. We're like the primordial ant, tugging different ways on the same grain of wheat. In more efficient ant colonies, like the harvester ants in my region of Arizona, the ants all march together; it's pretty obvious why these ants dominate in my region. We're ill disciplined because we're evolutionarily or God-coded that way (take your pick). It doesn't mean we're bad. We're just simply not a giant any colony of selfless automatons marching together. We're much more like the ants tugging every which way. OK, we built a colony. But how much greater we could be. We don't need to be selfless automatons. But we should have our individual reflexive impulses organized, at least to such a level that things that are really very, very bad for all of us are not encouraged. Otherwise, we're going to be the colony that disappears next.
Surely, as society and our economic structure has evolved (even as individual humans have not evolved very much in the 10,000 years of civilized living), there is a clear role for collective assurance that everybody's self interest is promoted in cases where individual interest multiplied 300 million times works against all the individuals. This is where your commentary may have been edited short, or needs to be continued another day (or else you're simply missing the point). Market capitalism is great-- my daughter sells a great cup of coffee on Railroad Avenue in Bellingham, WA, and I am really glad that the government neither told her to do that nor tells her not to do that. I want her to make a profit, but I recognize that if somebody else sets up a shop next door and can somehow do things better, my daughter will find another line of work where she fits more efficiently (so far, I think she has the right niche). I want me to make a living, and I'd like you to make a living. But we're all part of a collective; not automaton ants, but of human individuals whose needs as a collective have clearly evolved to a point where collective security and collective reduction in resource usage (among many other collective decisions) are needed. The unfettered markets will not do this for us efficiently. We can and must use the markets, but the market forces must have critical inputs from the collective in order to achieve what is best for all us us. It;s not that we'd just be turning over the house keys and the car keys and the business keys and our wallets to the government. The individual people--at least the voters and the money makers-- still have a voice in the matter. We can tell the government officials to change course, or to keep on going, or whatever, or replace the officials (in a democratic society). But laissez faire market economics will not dig us out of the financial crisis, the energy crisis, the climate crisis, the security crisis, and all these other crises that have manifested in a cancerous mass in our society's bones and vital organs. We need government interventions in market economics if we are to save market economics and democracy.
So David, I'd really like to see you reach logical conclusions from what you wrote today. You're halfway there. If you can just close the loop of logic, you'll be a guiding force. Otherwise, you're just one more Republican, or one more laissez faire Democrat, and for sure one more same old same old.
The news lately about Christopher Buckley (conservative writer, son of National Review founder, the late William F. Buckley, Jr.) is a welcome statement about the decay of Republican conservatism into a morass of pseudo-moralistic blather on a mish-mash of "wedge" issues. The younger Buckley's endorsement of Barack Obama-- and the quality and enthusiasm of that endorsement and issue-by-issue statement of support both for Obama's positions and his personal character--is a signpost that the Republican Party as we have come to know it this generation may have reached its end. Premature pronouncements of an opponent's doom can do no good if they are based on wishful thinking, but the writing seems to be on the wall and in the nation's ledger books. But equally, the latest turn of events in the nation's economy caps a complete revolution in the Democratic Party as well. Neither party can continue as though it is 1980. The Democrats, starting with Bill Clinton, came to this recognition early and have evolved in a more-or-less graceful way, and under Barack Obama, the Democrats are now poised to complete the transition to the 21st Century. As of now, they are what passes for the only major true fiscal conservative party of the U.S. and the only major party with global strategic thinking that makes any sense. No wonder they are about to inherit the reigns of power in such a massive way. (Though I will try not to be over-confident.)
In the soul-searching that will begin November 5, Republicans would appear likely to fracture into a Party of the Moral Morass and a Party of Functional Conservatism or what we might call the New Republicans. Frankly, I'd really like a functional, appropriate, smart opposition to rise up, as any long-lasting dominance of all branches of government by one party is never a good thing either for that party or the nation. This is why I have called on one of the smartest Republicans around (not quite an absolute oxymoron, just a very uncommon thing these days)-- David Brooks-- to come out of the closet. He is hiding in some imaginary concept called a conservative Republican Party. I know there are true conservatives there, but they have been nowhere visible on the national scene in terms of implemented policy. Those multi-trillion-dollar tax cuts are the farthest thing from conservatism, as they have driven up our national debt by taking a huge budgetary surplus, inherited from Bill Clinton, and multiplied it by -2.
Christopher Buckley has come out of the closet. Why not you, David Brooks? Or take a different step and create a new party, not one controlled by the Moral Morass, but a New Republican Party-- or call it what you like. If it is based on solid thinking, I would bet quite a handsome sum that it will transform the Democratic Party as well and usher in a new 2-party system after a brief period of establishing the New Republicans.
The other option: just come and join us in the Democratic Party. Sooner or later, if the Democrats dominate all rational thinking, there will emerge a schism within the Democrats, and we will again have a 2-party system. In any case, I long for a 2-party system where one of the parties is not controlled by Sarah Palin's Wing of the Moral Morass. David Brooks, if that is your wish, you can help make it happen.
Open Letter To David Brooks:
David, in your Sep. 29 piece in the NYT, you seem to say that John McCain was at the fulcrum of defeat on the bailout, and that both he and the GOP will take the heat for this. Sounds like you're saying that they SHOULD take the heat. You say that some help for homeowners is due on a revised bailout plan. You say, "The American century was created by American leadership, which is scarcer than credit just about now." You say that the GOP is lost in some flashback to a 1984 sense of Democratic Party liberalism, which no longer is a dominant component of the 2008 political economic landscape. The more you say, the more I am convinced that you actually belong in the Democratic Party. Either help the Democrats do what we, of late, do quite well: be fiscally conservative. Or be a miracle worker and transform your party back to its fiscally conservative roots. John McCain won't do it. George Bush has been the least fiscally conservative President-- I think ever, in all of American history. David, the writing is on the wall. You're no Republican. Just say so. You think the GOP is hopeless, and so do I. That's why I left the GOP 2 decades ago. You're just a bit slow, but you're coming around. Seriously, Mr. Brooks, we need a visionary person as President, somebody with a solid sense of the world around us. John McCain got out of his bamboo cage, but the GOP might as well still be in one. But look even at John McCain: he is beholden to those to whom the GOP is beholden-- the NRA, the multinational oil companies, Walmart and China, the private militias and global gangsters they have set up, and others who are unaccountable to the voters and most of whom are unconstrained by Constitutional rule of law. David Brooks, you can actually help save America, if we can save ourselves from the defeat track the GOP has set us on. You should cross the line you've been nearly tripping over: you should endorse Barack Obama for President, and then decide whether to join us, or, as Sarah Palin would say, do some shakin' on your present side of the line. Frankly, I think the GOP is well beyond shakin'. You need a magnitude 10 earthquake, and they just don't make earthquakes that big. We need two viable political parties; make a new one, if you think that the ghost of Walter Mondale is still too much a presence in the Democratic Party. It's time to bury the GOP before they bury America.
Stephen Views the News 9/24/08
* The real Reality Show - You get home after a long day, enter your house and find that the TV, stereo, jewelry and paintings are gone. You stagger for a moment and then reach for the telephone to call the police. Before you can dial, a voice from behind you says, ”Put the phone down and raise your hands. I still want everything that is left in your wallet.” Welcome to Wall Street, Bush Boulevard and Paulson Highway to Up Yours – I’ve Got Mine. The financial industry bailout proposals this week by the Bush administration made the Savings and Loan failures of the late 1980’s look as harmless as a broken piggy bank.
The bailout proposals being discussed will cost taxpayers amounts so far projected to be between $700 billion and $1.8 trillion. The initial Bush plan proposes that the Secretary of the Treasury, an unelected official, would administer the funds with no congressional or court oversight, his decisions can never be questioned or reviewed by any authoritative body and there will be no penalties for the previous actions of the Wall Street bandits. This next part is a classic: if financial industry executive compensation is restricted, it would be a deal breaker. Bush and Paulson then dust off the Iraq invasion marketing campaign: FEAR. Accept this proposal immediately because if we delay there will be a mushroom cloud over Wall Street.
As the crook takes the money from your wallet the police arrive, having been alerted by your silent alarm. The first thing they do is sit everyone down at the kitchen table and serve coffee and Cheese Danish. Then they let the perpetrator walk away with your TV, stereo, jewelry, paintings, cash and a wink.
Update: After Paulson was excoriated by Republicans, Democrats, the media, and public watchdog organizations for requesting a bailout plan with no oversight by anyone but himself he has changed his tune. Testifying before the Senate Banking Committee Paulson said, “I didn’t suggest oversight in the bailout plan because that would be presumptuous.” This is in contrast to almost every other sentient being who feels the plan as a whole is presumptuous. And, Paulson perjured himself when he made this statement. Paulson’s plan released last weekend explicitly denied any review at all of his actions: “Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.” What else would one expect from a Bush appointee but lies and arrogance?
* King Bush does cares about his subjects ~ at least the Barons of Industry – He is treating the greed-bloated conniving crooks and manipulators on Wall Street as if they were his close buds at Exxon Mobil, Hess, Chevron et al ad nausea. Run your businesses in a manner that will suck every dollar possible from the consumer, function with inadequate oversight toward the common good, be protected by the government regardless of the offense and if you get in trouble the taxpayer will cover your ass. And who is the taxpayer bailing out? “In 2007, Wall Street’s five biggest firms — Bear Stearns, Goldman Sachs, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, and Morgan Stanley — paid a record $39 billion in bonuses to themselves... Those 2007 bonuses were paid even though the shareholders in those firms last year collectively lost about $74 billion in stock declines — their worst year since 2002.” But then again, George is not big on accountability.
*The sound of silence – There is one benefit to the financial crisis. Republicans have finally shut up about their flagship demand for free and unregulated markets. Abject failure will do that to soapbox charlatans.
* Ka-ching – One would think that with the billions of dollars lost by financial institutions there would be no resources left for political contributions. Wrong again! The LA Times is reporting that contributions from financial companies and their lobbyists to Obama amount to $22.5 million and to McCain $19.6 million. Additionally, the industry has given heavily to members of the congressional committees in charge of legislation and the bailout. Recall a previous time in American history when the battle cry was “No taxation without representation?” Can you say, “Public financing of elections?”
* Derriere Orifice of the Week 1 ~ and maybe the month – “Neil Cavuto, host of Fox News' Your World, conflated giving home mortgages to minorities with risky lending practices, suggesting that efforts to increase homeownership among minority borrowers contributed to financial problems at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.” I am not sure if he is just stupid or a stupid racist. For those of us who are not challenged intellectually or morally, here is what did occur: “But even if 100 percent of bad debt had been produced by people of color, the reason for the financial collapse is that debt was chopped up and marketed as mortgage-backed securities to financial institutions all over the world. If the debt hadn't been sold, making many people very rich, the bad debt wouldn't have been integrated into the rest of the financial system and it would have just led to the collapse of the original institutions providing mortgages. In other words, it wasn't the debt itself; it was the very lucrative selling of the debt that got us where we are today.” Conservatives using white resentment as a political tool may have worked for Ronald Regan and George Bush but, I for one resent it. Mr. Cavuto, FOX you.
* “Good” is a relative concept –On Friday night I spilled a glass of 2005 Cline Zinfandel with dark fruit flavors on myself. It was a result of laughing at NY Times columnist David Brooks’ comment during PBS’ News Hour. He commented that Bush has had a pretty good past 3 years. Excuuuuuuse meeeee! If one considers that Bush has not been impeached, imprisoned or institutionalized for incompetence one can say he has had a pretty good 3 years. If one considers the state of our country…
* Poor judgment or dishonesty? – McCain’s campaign manager is Rick Davis, a lobbyist who fought regulation of financial institutions. This week McCain was adamant that Davis had no involvement with mortgage giant Freddie Mac for the last several years and said, “I'll be glad to have his record examined by anybody who wants to look at it.” The NY Times and Newsweek did look at it. Until last month mortgage giant Freddie Mac paid a firm owned by Davis $15,000 per month. The payments stopped when the federal government took over Freddie.
David Donnelly, director of the watchdog group Campaign Money Watch, said: "John McCain's campaign manager and Freddie Mac essentially had a secret half a million dollar lay-a-way plan. For almost three years, they made secret, monthly payments of $15,000 to Rick Davis for apparently no other work than for him to provide special access to a future McCain White House in exchange. If McCain knew about this, his presidential campaign should be over. If he didn't know about it, he ought to fire Rick Davis immediately."
* Shooting from the lip – In recent years the National Rifle Association (NRA) and the Republican Party have bonded like a high-power scope on a sniper rifle. “The NRA is circulating printed material and running TV ads making unsubstantiated claims that Obama plans to ban use of firearms for home defense, ban possession and manufacture of handguns, close 90 percent of gun shops and ban hunting ammunition.” At the above link you can see details of how disingenuous these claims are as well as how the ad is designed to appear to be coming from the Obama campaign. Watching the world of politics and governance leaves one with a soiled feeling. It is the reason that most of us would rather watch Dancing with the Stars than a bunch of power hungry and less than honest leaders of what was once something close to a Great Society. The Great Tragedy is that by chasing us away they further empowered themselves.
* You can run but, you can’t hide forever – “A federal appeals court on Monday ordered the Bush administration to hand over photos depicting abuse of prisoners held by the US military in Iraq and Afghanistan.” ACLU staff attorney Amrit Singh said, “These photographs demonstrate that the abuse of prisoners held in U.S. custody abroad was not aberrational and not confined to Abu Ghraib, but the result of policies adopted by high-ranking officials. Their release is critical for bringing an end to the administration’s torture policies and for deterring further prisoner abuse.” It would not surprise me if one of these days an international authority investigates the possibility of war crimes committed by the United States. What is astounding to me is that I would ever imagine such a thought.
* A religious experience at the U.N. - On Tuesday President Bush gave his last speech to the United Nations. Those in attendance heard “Thank God” whispered in 102 languages.
* “The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted."
James Madison (1751 – 1836) a Founding Father of the U.S. and its fourth President (1809 – 1817)
Here's a quote from a NY Times Op Ed post by David Brook's--
"Sarah Palin has many virtues. If you wanted someone to destroy a corrupt establishment, she’d be your woman. But the constructive act of governance is another matter. She has not been engaged in national issues, does not have a repertoire of historic patterns and, like President Bush, she seems to compensate for her lack of experience with brashness and excessive decisiveness."
And Brooks is a conservative! To read his entire Op Ed piece: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/16/opinion/16brooks.html?ref=opinion
The world's news media has chimed in on Barack's selection of Joe Biden to be his running mate, and it is highly favorable - even from stalwarts on the right such as David Brooks.
Biden is steady. He acquitted himself well in his brief presidential run. He did well in debates, intelligent and witty and he off some nice zingers, like that line about every sentence uttered by Rudy Giuliani consisting of "a subject, a verb and 9-11.” Biden can say of John McCain, in a way most other pols can't, "Just because John served five years in POW camp doesn't mean he understands healthcare policy better than the rest of us, and he doesn't." – The Guardian
Barack Obama's campaign for the White House was back in its groove yesterday, when he called upon the political equivalent of Big Bertha by naming Senator Joe Biden to be his vice-presidential running mate. – The Independent
He has disdain for privilege and for limousine liberals – the mark of an honest, working-class Democrat. – David Brooks, New York Times Columnist
Picking Biden is a solid choice that adds political savvy, national security experience and a pit bull campaigner to Obama’s ticket. – Des Moines Register
Mr. Biden is a foreign policy heavyweight with a decade longer in the Senate than the seasoned Republican presidential candidate, John McCain. – Globe and Mail
Delaware Senator Joe Biden brings the foreign-policy expertise and gravitas that first-term Illinois Senator Barack Obama appears to need in his presidential battle with Republican John McCain. – The Toronto Star
It looks as if the team is off to a solid start.
In today's New York Times, David Brooks opined on the so-called disconnectedness of Barack Obama. At first I was ready to get my hackles up, anticipating another negative observation from my favorite conservative. While the opposition will be able to pick things out of it to use against Obama, I'm more interested in the larger issues raised by Brooks.
He refers to Obama being involved with places, people or institutions but never "a part" of them. He was never disliked, he was always respected, but he wasn't in whatever "club" you mean. A lot has been made of his refusal to join the University of Chicago Law School club of professors or the Illinois State Legislature or the Senate. As I thought about what he was saying, I realized that I understood Obama more.
While I can never understand Obama's direct experience, I do understand "other." I grew up in a deeply-red Christian rural area, raised by liberal college professors. "Other" followed me throughout my adolescence. I too adopted Obama's tactic of dealing with it. I stepped a little bit to the side and watched what was going on. There was a segment of the population that wasn't going to like me because of my otherness. There was another segment that enjoyed my company but didn't understand me. And, there was a segment that was attracted to me because of the "otherness" alone.
Obama has a much more romantic, exotic "otherness" than I did. The result of stepping to one side for me is that it has allowed me to be a better artist. I believe strongly that for Obama, it means a deeper understanding of the world around him. By not thoroughly joining the "clubs," he's able to maintain a pragmatic objectivity that is desperately needed. He is a black man raised by a white family, living in Hawaii and then Indonesia. Reading his books, you know that he tried to understand the world around him in order to understand his place in it. In some respects, he found that he didn't thoroughly belong anywhere, but he effectively belonged everywhere. It is that perspective that has given him his strong judgment. He has never been inculcated into any instition: not church (Bush), not ideology (Cheney), not the war machine (McCain), not race (Jesse Jackson).
It's difficult to talk about such nuanced things in a country with a really short attention span. It doesn't sound good, that he doesn't belong, but it is, I imagine, a tremendous strength for him as a leader. He owes no group anything. He belongs to all groups. Obama needs to remember that. Instead of dealing in nuance, he needs to emotionally connect to these folks, even if he doesn't belong. This is when he needs to show that he understands, not intellectually but emotionally. Think of these folks as your family in Africa, think of them as the matriarchs of the southside of Chicago. Be outside, sure, but show your love of the folks on the inside, honestly and openly.
Conservative political commentator and New York Times op-ed writer David Brooks a few days ago wrote a piece in the New York Times in which he said that the Republicans are largely irrelevant to the national debate and proposals on what he termed America's biggest issue: early childhood education. David Brooks is one of those rare so-called Conservatives who is actually worth listening to closely. He often comes around to conclusions in the most round-about ways, and he doesn't often miss a chance to push a usual type of so-called Conservative agenda. But he also has a brilliant mind, and, anyway, I actually do read his stuff with interest. So when he says that John McCain is "oblivious" to key research on childhood education, and the Republicans are "largely irrelevant," I certainly listen. In this case, not surprisingly, I actually agree with David Brooks. If this is America's most important issue, then I wonder whether David Brooks may surprise us all and endorse Barack Obama, despite disagreements on many other important issues. But let that speculation rest. I have been away in Alaska's wild lands for 4 weeks, having just reappeared from melting glaciers into the news-reading world just in time to read David Brooks's piece; maybe I have something out of a larger context. Even so, his arguments seem persuasive enough.
So how many other Republicans are going to parse the candidates' statements and policy speeches, consider current events, evaluate long-term trends and strategy and the global competitiveness of the U.S., and actually get past the sound bites and the swiftboating and the Barbie Doll-esque political sales ads, and actually consider issues seriously?
The "irrelevance" of the Republicans on this or any other issue depends on how the vote in November goes. We could have imagined, as many of us did, that the Bush Administration's first 4-year debacle was enough to marginalize the Republicans in 2004. Logic and earned relevance versus deserved irrelevance, however, often do not correspond to electoral outcomes. We remain concerned about electoral fraud, swiftboating, some gaffe by Obama (he is world-class, but not perfect), or some convenient nukular threat at the midnight hour. The Republicans have learned that they do not need to win arguments and they do not need to use logic; they only need to cloud the issues to prevent people from making up their minds and going with the familiar, just long enough to pass on election day, no matter how untenable the "familiar" has been these past 8 years.
Ironically, the deterioration of critical thinking skills among Americans is largely what has propelled the Bush/Cheney/McCain Regime into power. The very education that David Brooks calls for would tend to produce a new generation of people who are less likely to be hoodwinked by the architects of non-reality-based power. So what new and ominous cloud is in the planning stages? Barack Obama needs to be ready for some weather. I hope and believe that he'll be ready. I cannot imagine a more easily rejected and throughly repulsed ad campaign than this week's effort by McCain to cast Obama as some semi-brained cutesy doll. The Bush-Cheney-McCain regime's record is there for all to see. But Obama needs to make the public see the Bush record for what it is. The problem is, we have to go to political war with the electorate we have, not the electorate we would like to have. So whether the Republicans will be largely irrelevant on early childhood education, or on any other issue, remains to be seen. They could eek out a win of the White House, use the power of Commander In Chief to hoodwink us again, and then take back the Congress in 2010 and 2012; then whose ideas are irrelevant?
David Brooks would seem to have an endorsement job to do, if his perception of America's biggest issue and the shaper of the America of the mid 21st Century, would trump other issues. Will America cede this Century to the Chinese? I wish the Chinese the greatest success in moving onward and upward, but I do not believe in simply handing over the baton of Democracy to a nation who finds it to be in their interest to send a blogster/photographer to prison because he posted internet photos of an earthquake-collapsed school building. It would seem that the Chinese government is pulling the wool over 1.3 billion pairs of eyes, just as Bush, Inc. has done to America. As much as I feel that Iraq and global climate change and nonrenewable resource depletion and the needless wanton bleeding of our financial resources to ideological adversaries are epochal issues for our country and the world, I have to agree overwhelmingly with David Brooks that early childhood education--especially planting the seeds of critical thinking-- is the biggest issue upon which America will rise again or continue to fall. We need to get this right.
David Brooks: put your cards on the table to be counted. Tell us where you disagree with Obama, but explain to America--on Obama's website and in the New York Times and next Sunday morning-- why you plan to vote for Barack Obama. We don't need or want you as a Democrat; we need you to be as honest as you can be, and to help turn the Republicans back into a responsible political party. But first, vote for Obama.
On tonight’s NewsHour program, David Brooks repeated his critique of Obama’s Berlin speech, that it was Disneyesque. He complained that it did not contain any policies unlike those of JFK's and Reagan’s in Berlin that did. Uh, can someone remind David Brooks that Obama is not President…yet!
At one point, Jim Lehrer reminded him that before Obama left, many were saying the trip was risky with the potential for gaffes. But Mr. Brooks could not bring himself to admit that Obama’s trip has been flawless. All he could point to was Obama calling the Senate Banking Committee "my committee" even though he is not a member of that committee (more on that here). Here is the exchange that took place:
JIM LEHRER: You said he didn't make any mistakes. Going in, that's what everybody said, that it was a high-risk thing, because he could say the wrong thing or do the wrong thing that could cause problems. You say he was flawless, right? DAVID BROOKS: And that's not -- I mean, he made the one mistake where he claimed to be chairman of the Senate Banking Committee when he's not even on the committee. That was a little bizarre. But you walk through the issues like the divided status or non-divided status of Jerusalem, that's actually a tough thing to do. Presidents have to do it every day when they go to the Middle East. He did that fine.And so to the extent that people get used to the idea this guy could plausibly be president, just from the images, the images were great for him. I have problems with the Berlin speech and other things, but as far as a political effect, it was a good week for him.
JIM LEHRER: You said he didn't make any mistakes. Going in, that's what everybody said, that it was a high-risk thing, because he could say the wrong thing or do the wrong thing that could cause problems. You say he was flawless, right?
DAVID BROOKS: And that's not -- I mean, he made the one mistake where he claimed to be chairman of the Senate Banking Committee when he's not even on the committee. That was a little bizarre. But you walk through the issues like the divided status or non-divided status of Jerusalem, that's actually a tough thing to do. Presidents have to do it every day when they go to the Middle East. He did that fine.
And so to the extent that people get used to the idea this guy could plausibly be president, just from the images, the images were great for him. I have problems with the Berlin speech and other things, but as far as a political effect, it was a good week for him.
(Read full transcript here)
Joe Klein has a discussion of columnist David Brooks' analysis of "the Surge":
http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/06/surge_protection.html
Also, a brief piece on top McCain strategist Charlie Black's gaffe about how a terror attack would help McCain (said during an interview in Fortune magazine).
Huffington Post claims that although McCain almost immediately disavowed Black's comments, he has made similar comments himself in the past. Can anyone independently verify this?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/24/mccain-in-04-bin-laden-th_n_108939.html
I was in Dulles yesterday watching the breaking news that Tim Russert died. For many years now, like many of you, I have tuned in to Meet the Press as a normal part of my Sunday mornings (or afternoon or evening thanks to Tivo).
Following the Don Imus comments on the Rutgers Women's basketball team, on April 15, 2007 Tim Russert had a panel on that was supposed to talk about Imus's hateful commentary as well as the presidential primaries. The panel consisted of John Harwood, Glen Ifill, Gene Robinson, and David Brooks. Russert saw that the discussion among the two black and two white commentators was so important and insightful that he skipped the primary conversation and stayed with the race in America conversation. Russert also stayed out of the way and allowed the conversation to flow naturally.
To my mind this was the best 20 minutes of television commentary I have ever seen. I still have it recorded and hope to continue to watch it for the rest of my life. I'm grateful to Tim Russert for having the ability to see that the conversation between Ifill, Robinson, Harwood, and Brooks was important to the country and to allow it to continue. The transcript can be found here. The full text is below.
We've lost a truly compassionate, thoughtful, and principled human being. Sundays will never be the same for me.
