A POLITICAL BLOG

WHAT’S UP WITH OBAMA?

Sun, 7 Aug 2011 10:42:26 -0400

As most readers of MillersTime know, I have long been a supporter of Barack Obama. On the Home page of this blog, I wrote, prior to his assuming the presidency, “I am an Obama fan. I believe Barack and Michelle are the real deal. Whether he can lead as well as he ran his election campaign, only time will tell us.”

Elsewhere on this blog, I wrote (not an original thought I’m sure) that I thought Obama was a Rorschach candidate/president: people project(ed) onto him what is basically their own view of how they see the world, politics, politicians, as well as their wishes, hopes, fears, etc.

Well, we are now more than two and a half year into his presidency, and I often hear the question about ‘what’s up with Obama?” His popularity ratings are at an all time low. We’ve heard consistent bashing from the right. And now many Democrats and Independents express disappointment with what they see as his inability to follow through on the promise they thought he offered.

I think it is unwise to draw conclusions about what kind of president an individual is while he is still in office and particularly unwise to do so in the midst of ups and downs that affect all presidents.

But there was an opinion piece published this morning in the NY Times -- “What is Wrong with Obama” -- that I think is worth reading for those of you, of us, who are trying to understand Barack Obama and his presidency.

CLICK HERE to go directly to the article.

If that link does not work for you, CLICK HERE.

And I would be very interested in your reactions to the article. As always, please keep your comments respectful.

THE NEW YORKER: GETTING BIN LADEN: A TERRIFIC READ

Tue, 2 Aug 2011 14:25:10 -0400

I’ve just spent the last 30-40 minutes reading Nicholas Schmidle’s Getting Bin Laden: What happened that night in Abbottabad. In this just published ‘Reporter at Large’ piece in the August 8, 2011 The New Yorker magazine, Schmidle details the events leading up to the raid, the raid itself, and the events following the raid.

It’s a good read, well written, and tells you more than you know and somethings worth knowing.

And while I probably put myself amongst those who generally look askance at assassinations of any sort, I have no doubts about this one.

As I am preparing this post, NPR informs me that President Obama has just signed the debt ceiling bill. Obviously not the finest hour for any of our leaders.

But even though it took ten years, one can’t help but give credit to all who had a part in finally getting bin Laden.

Read it when you have at least a half hour to spare. Once you start the article, you will not be able to put it down.

You can get to The New Yorker article by using one of the two links below:

CLICK HERE for The New Yorker site.

If that doesn’t work, CLICK HERE for another link to the article.

* * *

Update 8/5/11 - Two ‘alert’ MillersTime readers wrote to tell me of a possible controversy brewing about Schmidle’s article.

ET wrote to say he saw Schmidle on the PBS NewsHour and thought the author was evasive when asked how he came by his information (Schmidle apparently had not interviewed any of the Seals involved in the raid).

EO sent a link to The Schmidle Muddle of the Osama Bin Laden Take Down, a critical and skeptical view of Schmidle’s article. Click Here.

DEFINE AMERICAN: JOSE ANTONIO VARGAS’ STORY

Wed, 22 Jun 2011 12:54:53 -0400

For many folks, myself included, the problems relating to undocumented immigrants are secondary issues at best.

With the problems that face us individually and as a nation, there are just so many places to focus. If we are not directly affected by the issue of immigration, then it is likely that it only comes up when various politicians and officials draw it to our attention (often to gain political points with their constituencies).

Plus, I know ‘What an American Is.’

Don’t I?

Today I saw reference to a story that was just published on-line at the NYTimes and will appear (I think) in their Sunday Magazine June 26th. It caught my eye because I know the name of the person who wrote the story and know that he has interviewed my wife in connection with her work to promote transparency in our government.

I have never met this individual, tho I do know he is a respected journalist and was part of the Washington Post’s Pulitzer Prize winning team that covered the killings at Virginia Tech a number of years ago.

So I took the time to watch the 4:33 minute video that you can see for yourself by clicking on the arrow in the picture at the top of this article.

As is often the case, it is personal stories that grab me. And so following the video, I looked on line at the NYTimes and read the article “My Life as an Undocumented Immigrant” that is to appear on Sunday. You may be able to read it yourself by CLICKING HERE.

You can also find the article in this Sunday’s NYTimes Magazine section.

And if none of those links work, I have reproduced the article for MillersTime readers HERE.

My wonderful maternal grandmother use to say “Good on You” when ever one of grandchildren did something of which she approved.

Good on You Jose Antonio Vargas.

* * * *

Update 6/23/11: For those of you who follow such things, the Washington Post apparently was scheduled to publish Vargas’ article but pulled it at the last minute. The NYTimes jumped on the chance to publish it. See details, according to the WaPo: Click Here.

JIM GILLIAM: “THE INTERNET IS MY RELIGION”

Fri, 10 Jun 2011 07:51:37 -0400

In a week when the news is filled with stories about Rep. Anthony Weiner and his use/misuse of the Internet to pursue his personal peccadilloes, I heard a 12 minute presentation, a personal story, that shows a very different use of the Internet.

I was attending the second day of Personal Democracy Forum’s NY conference on “Agents of Change” when a guy named Jim Gilliam stood up on stage and pulled 800 ‘agents of change’ away from their computers and made many of us cry.

Only rarely do I recommend and reproduce articles or videos.

This one, I believe, is worth your time.

(Click on the arrow above and add a comment if you feel moved to do so.)

PS -- You can read more about and by Jim by Clicking Here)

PPS -- Jim has also just launched www.theinternetismyreligion.com which he hopes to turn into a ‘movement.’

THE REAL BATTLE(S) IN 2012 MAY NOT BE THE RACE FOR THE PRESIDENCY

Mon, 23 May 2011 09:29:32 -0400

In 2010 the Republicans gained control of the House of Representatives and were able to change the dynamics of political Washington.

Now they have a good opportunity to gain control of the Senate.

As you no doubt know from your high school civics, every two years one third of the Senate seats are contested. Next year, 23 of those are Democratic held seats and 10 are Republican.

Currently the Dems hold a 53-47 margin in the Senate.

All the Republicans need to do is turn a total of four seats into their column to take over control of the Senate.

A close look at the seats up grabs reveals that the Republicans have a reasonable chance to do just that. North Dakota’s Dem Kent Conrad is not seeking re-election, making that conservative state a strong pick up possibility for the Republicans.

Dems John Tester in Montana and Ben Nelson in Nebraska have been behind in the polls for months now. In Missouri, Dem Claire McCaskill may well have difficulty holding on to her seat. And in Virginia, Jim Webb’s decision not to run again puts that seat up for grabs.

If the Repubs win just four of those five seats and hold their own in the remaining races, the Senate turns Republican, and the balance of power in Congress changes completely.

But there are other Dem seats that are also in jeopardy, including Ben Nelson’s in Florida, Debbie Stabenow’s in Michigan, Jeff Bingaman’s open seat in New Mexico, Sherrod Brown’s in Ohio, Bob Casey’s in Pennsylvania, Joe Manchin’s in West Virginia, and Herb Kohl’s open seat in Wisconsin.

The most vulnerable Republican seats are probably Olympia Snowe’s in Maine, Scott Brown’s in Massachusetts, Jon Kyl’s in Arizona, and Richard Lugar’s in Indiana (especially if he loses to his conservative challenger).

And if you add in the factor of unlimited money going into many of these races as a result of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, the chances of the Republicans coming out on top in the Senate are pretty good.

So while the press is mostly focusing on the presidential race, keep your eyes on the state races. That may be where the most important battles occur in the next 18 months.

GLENN GREENWALD: HOW POLITICAL POWER IS SHAPED IN OUR COUNTRY

Thu, 7 Apr 2011 10:03:13 -0400

When I first created the MillersTime website, I chose to have it include the major areas of interest in my life. Thus the Family and Friends blog, the Escapes and Pleasures blog, the Go Sox blog, and The Outer Loop blog. (I recently added the Apps for Everyone blog at the suggestion of my friend and my tech mentor Larry Makinson to include some elementary commentary on the exciting directions in the world of technology.)

The Outer Loop blog, however is a bit different from the others. It has been evolving over the past couple of years. Living inside the Washington DC beltway gives one a close but often distorted view of what is happening politically, economically, socially, etc., in our country. I knew I did not want to compete with the many far more insightful writers and commentators of the political scene. Likewise, I did not want to compete with the ever-increasing news sources that have literally overwhelmed us all with information about what is happening in our country.

But I have been an observer of the local scene since I first arrived in Washington in the mid 60s. And I was aware that many of my friends and acquaintances around the country, and internationally also, do not have the time, nor the ability, to follow what is happening here as closely as I am able to do so. Yet many of these folks are actively engaged in their communities and deeply concerned about what happens in our country and in the world at large.

So I added The Outer Loop (a reference to the counter clock lanes of the beltway that circle Washington) as a place where I could, on occasion, comment upon what I observe and understand about Washington, DC and our political system and hopefully initiate some dialogue among the MillersTime readers. Increasingly, I have used this blog to link to or reprint articles that for me are particularly useful in trying to understand what is occurring in our country.

All of the above is a bit of a long-winded introduction to the present (lengthy) link that I offer for readers’ consideration.

I have become increasingly dismayed at the direction of the country, at what is occurring in our political system, at President Obama’s inability to fulfill the promises of his campaign (tho I continue to believe that his intentions are genuine), at what sees to me to be a dysfunctional political system, and above all, at our country’s inability to successfully grapple with the problems facing us.

I have never been one to believe in conspiracies, and despite my liberal views on most issues, I have always thought I was a good listener and was someone who avoided knee jerk reactions to events.

Increasingly, I have felt that there is something at work in our system that drives what happens in our country, that goes beyond individual leaders and parties, and that is not generally understood.

Thus, those of you who have followed The Outer Loop blog at all have seen in the past year a number of postings that for me have been particularly educational. Bill Moyers put his finger/pen/voice on some of these issues in his speech “Plutocracy and Democracy Don’t Mix” (click here). Jeffry Sachs added light for me with his “Our Budget Dilemma Made Simple” (click here). And Joseph Stiglitz’s recent Vanity Fair piece, “Self Interest Properly Understood” (click here) added to my ‘education.’

Now Glenn Greenwald, in a lengthy speech he gave last month, adds to my understanding of why we are where we are. He writes about why secrecy, transparency, and particularly WikiLeaks are key to that understanding. But more central for me, his speech clarifies what is truly occurring in our country.

So if you’ve gotten this far and have some free time remaining (I suspect the written transcript of Greenwald’s speech will take you at least 15-20 minutes to read and to begin to digest), click on the link below and see if what Greenwald has to say resonates with you.

As always, please feel free to add your voice in the Add a Comment section, no matter whether you agree or disagree with part or all of Greenwald’s views.

Click Here to read a transcript of Glenn Greenwald’s speech.

SELF INTEREST PROPERLY UNDERSTOOD

Tue, 5 Apr 2011 09:29:36 -0400

Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%

by Joseph Stiglitz, Vanity Fair, May 2011

It’s no use pretending that what has obviously happened has not in fact happened.

The upper 1 percent of Americans are now taking in nearly a quarter of the nation’s income every year. In terms of wealth rather than income, the top 1 percent control 40 percent. Their lot in life has improved considerably.

Twenty-five years ago, the corresponding figures were 12 percent and 33 percent. One response might be to celebrate the ingenuity and drive that brought good fortune to these people, and to contend that a rising tide lifts all boats. That response would be misguided.

While the top 1 percent have seen their incomes rise 18 percent over the past decade, those in the middle have actually seen their incomes fall. For men with only high-school degrees, the decline has been precipitous—12 percent in the last quarter-century alone. All the growth in recent decades—and more—has gone to those at the top. In terms of income equality, America lags behind any country in the old, ossified Europe that President George W. Bush used to deride. Among our closest counterparts are Russia with its oligarchs and Iran. While many of the old centers of inequality in Latin America, such as Brazil, have been striving in recent years, rather successfully, to improve the plight of the poor and reduce gaps in income, America has allowed inequality to grow.

Economists long ago tried to justify the vast inequalities that seemed so troubling in the mid-19th century—inequalities that are but a pale shadow of what we are seeing in America today. The justification they came up with was called “marginal-productivity theory.” In a nutshell, this theory associated higher incomes with higher productivity and a greater contribution to society. It is a theory that has always been cherished by the rich. Evidence for its validity, however, remains thin.

The corporate executives who helped bring on the recession of the past three years—whose contribution to our society, and to their own companies, has been massively negative—went on to receive large bonuses. In some cases, companies were so embarrassed about calling such rewards “performance bonuses” that they felt compelled to change the name to “retention bonuses” (even if the only thing being retained was bad performance).

Those who have contributed great positive innovations to our society, from the pioneers of genetic understanding to the pioneers of the Information Age, have received a pittance compared with those responsible for the financial innovations that brought our global economy to the brink of ruin.

Some people look at income inequality and shrug their shoulders. So what if this person gains and that person loses? What matters, they argue, is not how the pie is divided but the size of the pie. That argument is fundamentally wrong. An economy in which most citizens are doing worse year after year—an economy like America’s—is not likely to do well over the long haul.

There are several reasons for this:

First, growing inequality is the flip side of something else: shrinking opportunity. Whenever we diminish equality of opportunity, it means that we are not using some of our most valuable assets—our people—in the most productive way possible.

Second, many of the distortions that lead to inequality—such as those associated with monopoly power and preferential tax treatment for special interests—undermine the efficiency of the economy. This new inequality goes on to create new distortions, undermining efficiency even further. To give just one example, far too many of our most talented young people, seeing the astronomical rewards, have gone into finance rather than into fields that would lead to a more productive and healthy economy.

Third, and perhaps most important, a modern economy requires “collective action”—it needs government to invest in infrastructure, education, and technology. The United States and the world have benefited greatly from government-sponsored research that led to the Internet, to advances in public health, and so on. But America has long suffered from an under-investment in infrastructure (look at the condition of our highways and bridges, our railroads and airports), in basic research, and in education at all levels. Further cutbacks in these areas lie ahead.

None of this should come as a surprise—it is simply what happens when a society’s wealth distribution becomes lopsided. The more divided a society becomes in terms of wealth, the more reluctant the wealthy become to spend money on common needs.

The rich don’t need to rely on government for parks or education or medical care or personal security—they can buy all these things for themselves. In the process, they become more distant from ordinary people, losing whatever empathy they may once have had. They also worry about strong government—one that could use its powers to adjust the balance, take some of their wealth, and invest it for the common good.

The top 1 percent may complain about the kind of government we have in America, but in truth they like it just fine: too gridlocked to re-distribute, too divided to do anything but lower taxes.

Economists are not sure how to fully explain the growing inequality in America. The ordinary dynamics of supply and demand have certainly played a role: laborsaving technologies have reduced the demand for many “good” middle-class, blue-collar jobs. Globalization has created a worldwide marketplace, pitting expensive unskilled workers in America against cheap unskilled workers overseas. Social changes have also played a role—for instance, the decline of unions, which once represented a third of American workers and now represent about 12 percent.

But one big part of the reason we have so much inequality is that the top 1 percent want it that way. The most obvious example involves tax policy. Lowering tax rates on capital gains, which is how the rich receive a large portion of their income, has given the wealthiest Americans close to a free ride. Monopolies and near monopolies have always been a source of economic power—from John D. Rockefeller at the beginning of the last century to Bill Gates at the end. Lax enforcement of anti-trust laws, especially during Republican administrations, has been a godsend to the top 1 percent.

Much of today’s inequality is due to manipulation of the financial system, enabled by changes in the rules that have been bought and paid for by the financial industry itself—one of its best investments ever. The government lent money to financial institutions at close to 0 percent interest and provided generous bailouts on favorable terms when all else failed. Regulators turned a blind eye to a lack of transparency and to conflicts of interest.

When you look at the sheer volume of wealth controlled by the top 1 percent in this country, it’s tempting to see our growing inequality as a quintessentially American achievement—we started way behind the pack, but now we’re doing inequality on a world-class level. And it looks as if we’ll be building on this achievement for years to come, because what made it possible is self-reinforcing.

Wealth begets power, which begets more wealth. During the savings-and-loan scandal of the 1980s—a scandal whose dimensions, by today’s standards, seem almost quaint—the banker Charles Keating was asked by a congressional committee whether the $1.5 million he had spread among a few key elected officials could actually buy influence. “I certainly hope so,” he replied. The Supreme Court, in its recent Citizens United case, has enshrined the right of corporations to buy government, by removing limitations on campaign spending.

The personal and the political are today in perfect alignment. Virtually all U.S. senators, and most of the representatives in the House, are members of the top 1 percent when they arrive, are kept in office by money from the top 1 percent, and know that if they serve the top 1 percent well they will be rewarded by the top 1 percent when they leave office.

By and large, the key executive-branch policymakers on trade and economic policy also come from the top 1 percent. When pharmaceutical companies receive a trillion-dollar gift—through legislation prohibiting the government, the largest buyer of drugs, from bargaining over price—it should not come as cause for wonder. It should not make jaws drop that a tax bill cannot emerge from Congress unless big tax cuts are put in place for the wealthy. Given the power of the top 1 percent, this is the way you would expect the system to work.
America’s inequality distorts our society in every conceivable way.

There is, for one thing, a well-documented lifestyle effect—people outside the top 1 percent increasingly live beyond their means. Trickle-down economics may be a chimera, but trickle-down behaviorism is very real. Inequality massively distorts our foreign policy. The top 1 percent rarely serve in the military—the reality is that the “all-volunteer” army does not pay enough to attract their sons and daughters, and patriotism goes only so far. Plus, the wealthiest class feels no pinch from higher taxes when the nation goes to war: borrowed money will pay for all that. Foreign policy, by definition, is about the balancing of national interests and national resources.

With the top 1 percent in charge, and paying no price, the notion of balance and restraint goes out the window. There is no limit to the adventures we can undertake; corporations and contractors stand only to gain. The rules of economic globalization are likewise designed to benefit the rich: they encourage competition among countries for business, which drives down taxes on corporations, weakens health and environmental protections, and undermines what used to be viewed as the “core” labor rights, which include the right to collective bargaining.

Imagine what the world might look like if the rules were designed instead to encourage competition among countries for workers. Governments would compete in providing economic security, low taxes on ordinary wage earners, good education, and a clean environment—things workers care about. But the top 1 percent don’t need to care.

Or, more accurately, they think they don’t. Of all the costs imposed on our society by the top 1 percent, perhaps the greatest is this: the erosion of our sense of identity, in which fair play, equality of opportunity, and a sense of community are so important. America has long prided itself on being a fair society, where everyone has an equal chance of getting ahead, but the statistics suggest otherwise: the chances of a poor citizen, or even a middle-class citizen, making it to the top in America are smaller than in many countries of Europe. The cards are stacked against them.

It is this sense of an unjust system without opportunity that has given rise to the conflagrations in the Middle East: rising food prices and growing and persistent youth unemployment simply served as kindling. With youth unemployment in America at around 20 percent (and in some locations, and among some socio-demographic groups, at twice that); with one out of six Americans desiring a full-time job not able to get one; with one out of seven Americans on food stamps (and about the same number suffering from “food insecurity”)—given all this, there is ample evidence that something has blocked the vaunted “trickling down” from the top 1 percent to everyone else. All of this is having the predictable effect of creating alienation—voter turnout among those in their 20s in the last election stood at 21 percent, comparable to the unemployment rate.

In recent weeks we have watched people taking to the streets by the millions to protest political, economic, and social conditions in the oppressive societies they inhabit. Governments have been toppled in Egypt and Tunisia. Protests have erupted in Libya, Yemen, and Bahrain. The ruling families elsewhere in the region look on nervously from their air-conditioned penthouses—will they be next? They are right to worry.

These are societies where a minuscule fraction of the population—less than 1 percent—controls the lion’s share of the wealth; where wealth is a main determinant of power; where entrenched corruption of one sort or another is a way of life; and where the wealthiest often stand actively in the way of policies that would improve life for people in general.

As we gaze out at the popular fervor in the streets, one question to ask ourselves is this: When will it come to America?

In important ways, our own country has become like one of these distant, troubled places.

Alexis de Tocqueville once described what he saw as a chief part of the peculiar genius of American society—something he called “self-interest properly understood.” The last two words were the key. Everyone possesses self-interest in a narrow sense: I want what’s good for me right now! Self-interest “properly understood” is different. It means appreciating that paying attention to everyone else’s self-interest—in other words, the common welfare—is in fact a precondition for one’s own ultimate well-being.

Tocqueville was not suggesting that there was anything noble or idealistic about this outlook—in fact, he was suggesting the opposite. It was a mark of American pragmatism. Those canny Americans understood a basic fact: looking out for the other guy isn’t just good for the soul—it’s good for business.

The top 1 percent have the best houses, the best educations, the best doctors, and the best lifestyles, but there is one thing that money doesn’t seem to have bought: an understanding that their fate is bound up with how the other 99 percent live. Throughout history, this is something that the top 1 percent eventually do learn. Too late.

OUR BUDGET DILEMMA MADE SIMPLE

Tue, 1 Feb 2011 09:18:16 -0500

Jeffrey Sachs has long been one of the voices I listen to as he has a way of explaining issues simply and clearly.

In the article linked to below, he explains why the rhetoric of both President Obama and the Republicans cannot be trusted in relationship to our budget problems.

Sachs’ article is short and clear, and less than 900 words.

Check it out for yourself: Click Here.

MAKING SENSE WHEN THINGS DON’T SEEM TO MAKE SENSE

Thu, 13 Jan 2011 08:03:03 -0500

I’ve read, watched, and tried to understand the sad events that occurred in Tucson on Saturday, and since Saturday.

The two best pieces for me have been John Stewart’s 9:33 minute opening of his Daily Show on Monday night and President Obama’s 34:18 minute speech in Tucson last night.

If you haven’t had a chance to see or hear either (in their entirety), I provide links to each below.

(For the Obama speech, click on the > in the middle of the picture or the one in the lower left corner. For the Stewart piece, click on the link below his picture, and Stewart will appear after a 30 second ad)

For me, they are worth the time it takes to watch and listen.

Update: To read the full text of the speech as President Obama delivered it, Click Here.

ESSAY: INSIDE TEMPESTUOUS IRELAND, AUTUMN 2010

Thu, 18 Nov 2010 09:21:47 -0500

(For those of you who follow international events, you may have seen in the last several weeks the various articles on the financial crisis in Ireland (Ireland on the Brink, Irish Luck Runs Out as Bailout Looms, Ireland, Greece Tip Euro Debt Crisis, Euro Zone Seeks Way Out of Irish Debt Crisis, etc.).

Dave Stang, the author of the essay below, is a long time friend who splits his time between Washington, DC and County Kerry, Ireland. Although Dave and I rarely agree on political issues, I always seem to learn from him both when he is talking about US politics or, as he is doing increasingly, when he is schooling me on Ireland, its beauty, its people, its history and/ or its politics.

Here is his first hand account of what he sees happening in Ireland today.)

Inside Tempestuous Ireland Autumn 2010
DP Stang, October 2010

It's been just about two months since leaving our Nation's Capital for a belated visit to Ireland, in particular to the site of my lovely home in County Kerry on the shores of Kenmare Bay overlooking the majestic McGillicuddy's Reeks, the tallest range of mountains in Ireland. Even with nearly unending deluges of rain and gale force winds knocking down hundreds of trees this place is still beautiful.

But being inside Ireland in the autumn of 2010 contains much of what has become familiar to me over the 25 years I have visited my vacation home here. I've already alluded to the spectacular scenic beauty of the country. Secondly I would say that equally familiar is what might be categorized as the strangely humorous, often bizarre behaviors of the Irish people, including those in government and those not in government, but resentful of decisions being made by those in government.

Regarding this (dare I say?) uniquely Irish way of doing things, allow me to begin with the front page of the Irish Times of Tuesday, October 5, 2010. The left-hand column of that paper is headed "News Digest". The first item under the category ‘Home News’ read:

"Speed limit: the 30 km/h (approximately 20 mph) speed limit introduced in Dublin city centre last January is to be removed from certain streets after it emerged last month that motorists were ignoring the limit: see page 3"

Apparently some high official in charge of regulating Dublin traffic after receiving thousand of complaints and perhaps a few suggestions from local politicians decided that it was more cost-effective to take the 30 km/hour signs down than to hire additional police personnel to more rigorously enforce the rather onerous and unnecessarily restrictive speed limit. Clearly the budget crunch played a factor here, but, even if it had not, this traffic speed modifying event and its handling by all concerned is arguably representative of the Irish way of doing things.

No doubt about it, the Irish disdain authority of nearly any form and variety. But abuse of authority -- particularly by governmental decision-makers -- gets them fighting mad and defiant.

Another headline on page 1 of the October 5th Irish Times read:

JUNIOR DOCTOR 'unable to work on call due to poor English'

The story reported that " the head of the [Lady of Lourdes] hospital's anaesthetics department, Dr. Michael Staunton, in a letter to the clinical director of Louth Meath Hospitals [stated] that 9 out of the 14 [junior doctor] posts in anaesthesia which the Lourdes Hospital had managed to fill, four 'require extremely close supervision and support'. One of these is the doctor with extremely poor English and two of the others have 'minimal experience with epidural anaesthesia.' Epidurals would be required regularly at the maternity hospital. [Dr. Staunton] said part of the reason for the shortage was excessive workload, cuts in the pay of junior doctors, changes in visa regulations, a reduction in the number of recognized training posts and an increase in the pass mark for the International English Language Testing exam."

An Irish friend to whom I called attention to this article indicated that her sister who recently gave birth to a daughter was subjected to four spinal punctures by a foreign doctor in Ireland before her epidural was effectively administered, yet leaving her paralyzed from the waist down for four days following the birth of her daughter. This is not an isolated or atypical example. The Irish Health Care System was clearly designed by the author of Murphy's Law.

A month later a story broke that the same hospital failed to ‘read’ and process 58,000 X-rays in the past three years. When asked why this happened ahead of the x-ray department at the hospital in essence retorted that it’s difficult to hire good help considering what we are paying. We get what we pay for and that's not much. These national healthcare horror stories are commonplace throughout Ireland.

Might these Irish medical tales have precedential value for the implementation of our new American Healthcare Law?

On the subject of Irish newspapers allow me to mention that the Irish Times and its major competitor in the Irish Examiner both charge €1.80 for their daily edition. This amounts to about $2.50 for a weekday morning edition. The Irish really love their newspapers notwithstanding the fact that the Irish economy is in the worst condition since the winning the war of independence against Great Britain in about 1920 and the fact that there is no home delivery service for newspapers in Ireland, thus requiring the readers to visit a newsstand in order to obtain a copy. The widespread Irish habit of carefully combing the daily newspaper involves all classes of the society. Most stories covered in Irish newspapers -- not unlike most newspapers worldwide -- contain bad news. The Irish have a near world monopoly on bad news.

But miraculously and with great courage the Irish newspaper buying public continues reading the newspapers and the multitude of Irish reporters continue writing stories, mostly about bad news, but sometimes about funny things going on. The same day of the stories of center city Dublin’s 30 kph traffic restriction signs coming down and the ‘no speakie English’ foreign doctors another story appeared which was headlined:

Fruit Bat Felatio Revealed.

This tongue-in-cheek exposition mentioned that a famous biology professor in one of the Dublin Universities had recently published the results of his exacting and meticulous scientific research in which he somehow managed to discover and verify that the female Fruit Bats who practice felatio for their mates have a markedly superior capacity for sustained copulation than those who don't engage in felatio. Great science, wouldn't you say?

These humorous little snippets provide occasional relief in Ireland from a deluge of unmitigated bad news. It is to this latter category that we now turn our attention. After witnessing the explosive growth of the Irish economy -- known worldwide as the now defunct Celtic Tiger – observing firsthand Ireland in such desperate economic straits is quite unfamiliar to me.

Presently in the Republic of Ireland 443,000 people are out of full-time work. That is well over 10% of the population, but when the already retired, too young to work and unemployable members of the population are subtracted from the total population the percent of the eligible workforce unemployed with full-time work is approaching 15%.

What is the significance of the growing number of unemployed? To date in the current year already 65,000 people have abandoned Ireland to seek work abroad. The understated official government budget projection is that another 45,000 people will emigrate next year. That's more than one out of every 400 full-time residents of Ireland will have fled the country, in essence, in order to avoid starvation or bankruptcy. Many of those who left hold mortgages on houses that they no longer have the resources to pay for and yet they left the country knowing that in a matter of weeks or months the banks who underwrote the mortgages will be repossessing their homes and putting them on the market which already contains nearly half a million houses, few of which have any real prospect of being purchased within the foreseeable future. Sadly, nearly all of the young graduates of Ireland's technical training schools are unable to find work. Those whose training was in the building trades don't even try. As Jon Kenny, one of Ireland's leading comedians put it, "As to the Celtic Tiger the shit is after hitting the fan."

One might ask what was the genesis of this Irish debacle? During the early 1990s the Irish Builders lobby persuaded the then Prime Minister, in Ireland referred to as the Taoiseach (pronounced Tea Shock) Bertie Ahearn, leader of the Fianna Fail Party, to introduce legislation to create tax incentives for several different types of new building construction. These included, among others, holiday homes, student housing and various kinds of office complexes. For a 10-year period rental income from such new construction could be offset against capital costs. The legislation roared through the Irish Parliament. Every Irish builder and his brother were cashing in on the deal and every Irish person with even the slightest speculative inclination decided that this was a new game worth playing seriously.

Traditionally Irish Banks maintained a policy of balancing their loan portfolios by investing in a diversity of types of loans to avoid putting all their eggs in one basket. But in light of the building boom created by the legislation and the unprecedented profits to be earned therefrom some of the banks decided against maintaining the traditional policy of hedging their bets in favor of all-out speculation in loaning money to building boom participants. The Anglo-Irish Bank decided to allocate 80% of its loan portfolio to help finance the building boom created by the Irish legislation.

The Nationwide Building Society, which had been organized to provide loans for individual persons seeking to purchase new homes, saw a great opportunity for maximizing profits in the building boom. They decided to allocate an unprecedented part of their loan portfolio to directly finance the builders themselves. The assumption was that under the tax incentives created by the legislation purchasers would be lining up to buy themselves a holiday home, student housing and other such construction activities covered by the law.

The Allied Irish Bank and the Bank of Ireland -- the two largest and most conservative of the Irish Banks – envied what they observed the Anglo-Irish Bank and Nationwide Building Society doing in the way of throwing loan money at the building boom and reaping gigantic profits as a result thereof. These two banks independently decided that it was time for them as well to throw caution to the winds. Allied Irish Bank, between the two, began taking the more reckless risks in the building boom. The Bank of Ireland was not far behind.

The building frenzy had escalated at such a pace that the native Irish builders and construction companies had hired any Irish person interested in work and still there were more buildings to be built than people needed to build them. So the builders and construction companies began hiring Polish workers and others from former Central European countries who had recently become members of the European community. These Polish and other immigrants found work not only in the building trades, but in other forms of employment used to support those engaged in the building boom.

Anyone driving around the small town and countryside parts of Ireland as well as in and around the larger cities during the first seven or eight years of the new millennium could see holiday homes and other new building activities springing up where ever they looked. The building activities became so extensive that the new construction virtually changed the look of the landscape surrounding every town and village in Ireland.

The Taoiseach Bertie Ahearn, with his ear to the railroad track began to learn that the building boom was about ready to go bust and that its breaking point would be closely related to the situation at the Anglo Irish Bank (and possibly at other banks) was beginning to show signs of the dam about ready to break. And when it would break the Chief of State would be standing up to his neck in very hot water. Apparently quite aware of the well-known political adage, ‘Quit while you're ahead’, Mr. Ahearn decided to step down after a long career in politics and turn over the government to his faithful Finance Minister, one Bryan Cowen, who had been reputedly begging the Taoiseach to give him the nod.

With Brian Cowan settled in the helm as Taoiseach a few days after the September 2008 economic catastrophe experienced in the United States as a result of American financial institutions having made irresponsibly risky loans to persons seeking to purchase a new home -- irrespective of their individual complete lack of credit worthiness -- the building boom created by the Irish tax incentive legislation also rapidly collapsed.

Anglo-Irish Bank, whose stock shares three years ago were worth about €20 per share are now worth zero because the bank has been taken over by a new government entity named the National Asset Management Authority (NAMA). It is holding all the Anglo-Irish Bank bad loan portfolios without having a comprehensive grasp regarding how properly to dispose of them.

Allied Irish Bank is now 90% owned by the Irish government. It's shares of stock three years ago were worth about €20 per share. Its present stock value is worth 27 cents per share.

Three years ago Bank of Ireland stock shares were individually worth €18; their present value is 43cents per share.

Anyone driving around Ireland in the year 2010 has to strain their eyes to find any kind of construction activity taking place. Many of the smaller Irish builders have fled the country and gone to Australia or Canada in search of employment. What one sees wherever one goes driving around Ireland are hundreds of thousands of unoccupied holiday homes with chain-link fences surrounding them, commonly referred to as ‘ghost estates’ and tens of thousands of abandoned partially constructed new buildings.

The cost to the Irish government and to its taxpayers of bailing out the banks and handling their thousands upon thousands of bad loans will be about €50 billion. Legislation to bail out the banks was introduced on September 30th. The silver lining in this storm cloud is that it will be a ‘once off’ proposition. The bad news is the tax payers who invested in the banks and those who the banks invited to take out a fat credit mortgage will be leading the pack of angry citizens who feel they’ve been double shafted by the banks. The first shafting was their loss of capital assets; the second was paying their taxes to the government to bail out the banks.

€50 billion is what it costs normally to run the Irish government each year. But it's going to cost a lot more for two reasons. The first is that bailing out the banks is going to cost €50 billion. The second and most painful reason is that for several years now the annual cost of running the Irish government has been about €50 billion, but since 2008 tax revenues have equaled only about €30 billion. The remaining €20 billion have been financed by government debt. Because of the high ratio of government debt to GDP the cost of borrowing to finance the $20 billion deficit has increased significantly not only because billions more need be borrowed by the Irish Government but also because the amount being borrowed is so high relative to Irish GDP that the interest rate on the borrowed money is at 2 to 3 times the amount charged to more solvent governments. Needless to say, the current Irish government is being forced to take drastic action to solve the deficit problem. The European Commission has told the Government of Ireland that they are required within four years to reduce the level of government borrowing to 3% of GDP. This means that Irish taxpayers are going to have to pay the bill and Irish beneficiaries of government services are going to face many of such services cut off or substantially reduced.

Irish National Health Services which owns and operates most of the nation's hospitals and nursing homes employs 50,000 doctors and nurses. On average Irish National Health Services employs one administrator for every doctor or nurse. The waste caused by such administrative inefficiencies is enormous.

The Irish educational system is similarly dysfunctional. Irish teachers are the most highly paid teachers in not only all of Europe, but also worldwide. But by comparison -- teacher salaries aside -- the educational expenditure of the Irish Government per student is quite low.

Nearly every Irish family is, and will continue to be, in one way or another directly economically affected by the budgetary policies about to be adopted by the Irish Government. In early December the Government is due to announce its new budget.
The new budget will include new taxes and income taxes are to be raised by two percent at the highest bracket, the 41% rate. The lower 20% rate will be increased by 1%. Many lower income bracket wage earners, earning less than €18,300, now exempt from paying income tax, will be brought into the tax paying net. The new budget will simultaneously exclude many government services that it will be forced to discontinue. The aged, disabled and infirm in Ireland are likely to suffer the most from anticipated health program cuts.

Higher taxes are likely to take many forms including water charges now included, but virtually invisible, in County Council budgets, but not charged to residential home owners. Thus in addition to paying utility bills involving electricity, gas, and telephone services Irish home owner citizens will soon be faced by unprecedented water bills. Also previously privately owned and occupied residences in Ireland have not been subject to annual property taxes. It appears as if real property taxes on one's home in Ireland may possibly also be levied.

Recently I met with the daughter-in-law of an elderly couple who for years had owned a small grocery store. The daughter-in-law and her husband had taken over management of the store three years ago, added a much-needed new roof, remodeled the interior of the shop and added a fast food section. The daughter-in-law told me that for the last year and a half she has been working without pay and barely able to balance income with costs. She and hundreds of thousands of other Irish people are trying to survive economically in the current recession are asking themselves how are they going to be able to pay higher taxes required by the new soon-to-be announced budget when they can barely pay their bills while simultaneously receiving no net income as business owners.

Brian Cowen and his Fianna Fail Party have become the chief laughing stock and whipping boy of the four million angry and frightened citizens of the Republic of Ireland. Nearly everyday a new scandal involving the government is reported in the Irish press. The responses to these incidents by Brian Cowan and his Ministers are usually weak, evasive and often lacking in credibility. To make matters worse, Brian Cowan in September appeared at a public function conspicuously inebriated. Such behavior is known in Irish sliding as ‘going on the piss.’ Since then whatever public sympathy he might have once had seems to have evaporated.

The October 2nd Irish Times featured Barbara Scully, a mother, housewife and writer, commenting on the political and economic situation in Ireland. Her piece was entitled,

"I am a citizen of this country and I am angry". These are some of her complaints:

"I am angry that the government which presided over the Celtic Tiger… and allowed the property market to run amok over a number of years is still in office."

"I am angry that we are two years into the banking crisis and, despite all the rhetoric, things just continue to get worse."

"I am angry because I feel we have been misled by our Government on Anglo Irish Bank"

"I am angry because there are still fat-cat bankers, the very ones who contributed hugely to this mess, who are still fat cats. There has been no accountability."

"I am angry because our Taoiseach , at such a critical time, saw fit to go on the piss a few weeks ago. I am angry that he then thought it acceptable to address the nation on the economy after very little sleep, with seemingly little preparation and clearly hung over."

"I am angry that there seems to be no credible opposition to this lame Government." …

"I am angry that we are being told there will be major cuts in the next Budget. I can tell you that this family, like many others, has nothing left to give. The past two years have eroded at any savings we have for our children's education. We have cut all that can be cut in our own budget, and every week it is a struggle to pay the bills."…

"But most of all I am angry because I know I am not alone. I am one of thousands of women all over Ireland in the same situation."

Having been at work doing research for this essay for nearly two months I've had the advantage of listening to the news, reading the daily press and discussing the Irish economy with a wide-ranging opinion sample based largely on one-on-one conversations. Between now and December how is the Irish government going to find enough additional new ways to slash public spending in order to reduce it by €6 billion?

Let's consider a hypothetical situation and then speculate on how the current Irish government might solve the problem. As is well known when a country is in deep recession the crime rate shoots up (burglary, robbery, embezzlement, fraud, petty theft and other forms of stealing) and along with it convictions and new convicts being sent off to prison.

Also, as is well known, during deep recessions individuals have less money not only for discretionary expenditures, but less money to pay their debts including debts in the form of long over due fines, having been levied as a result of traffic tickets, more serious criminal fines and civil fines. Under Irish law persons who fail to pay their debts can be and are tried, convicted and sent to prison.

These fact situations give rise to a challenging hypothetical question: if government revenues can be enhanced by enforcing the ‘failure to pay debts’ law, why not seriously step up enforcement of that law? On the other hand, with criminal convictions on the rise and the prison inmate population growing by leaps and bounds, how can the government afford to house more prisoners if all governmental budgets are being drastically slashed?

Have you yet thought of a solution to these two interrelated problems? Now transitioning from the hypothetical to the real let us once again consult the front page of the Irish Times. We find in the November 10, 2010 issue of that newspaper an answer in the form of the following quotation from the left-hand column headed as NewsDigest:

"Prison figures: Prisoners jailed for non-payment of fines are having their fines put to zero on arrival at prison and are being released immediately, so are not appearing in official prison figures: page 5"

Turning to page 5 we learn that this is part of a new system under which at least 200 inmates have been released upon their reporting to prison to discover that government records presently indicate that they owe no fines at all. This new system is based upon a
"temporary release mechanism" which "is a long-standing arrangement aimed at freeing inmates for short periods to prepare them for reintegration into society when their sentences expire." The Irish Times elaborates:

"In mid-June there were 4,274 inmates being held in the Republic's jails with a further 938 on temporary release because there was nowhere to keep them. Since then some 250 new prison spaces have been provided. The prison population has grown by 167 since June to 4,441 inmates as of [November 9th]. All of the extra prisoners would have been accommodated by the new prison spaces, leaving another 83 new spaces to accommodate some of the 938 on temporary release. This means that numbers now on temporary release should have fallen to 855 inmates. However, the numbers on temporary release [on November 9th] were 651. This means that 204 temporary release inmates have disappeared from the system."

Alan Shatter, the opposition party’s spokesman on Justice Department issues in the Dail [Irish Parliament] had this to say about the ‘temporary release mechanism’: "This outrageous and indefensible misrepresentation of what's happening in our prison system underlines how incapable the Government is of telling the truth on even simple matters."

One might ask, ‘What is the truth?’ It is not difficult to imagine an investigator discovering a prison authority honcho sending a memo up through the chain of command to the Minister of Justice summarizing the situation. It might read, ‘On average the unpaid individual fines amount to €150 and the average sentence would be 60 days.

At €1000 per week per prisoner it would cost the government over €8,000 to feed and clothe the convicts who failed to pay their fine. If we look the other way and just tell the convict the record shows that he owes nothing, we could save €8000 by telling him to take a hike -- less of course our loss of €150 that he owes us.’

Then a week later after further consideration the prison authority honcho might send a follow-up ‘money- saving’ memo to the Minister of Justice recommending that the Minister send a memorandum to all sitting judges trying the fine paying scofflaw cases with the suggestion that following conviction and prior to sentencing the judge should obtain a credit rating for each such a criminal defendant. If the guilty person has a good credit rating and money in his banking account, then simply take the requisite funds out of his account. If on the other hand, should the investigation related to any person convicted of not paying his fines indicate a low credit rating and an overdrawn bank account, the judge should retroactively dismiss the conviction on some fictitious technicality.’ If the prison authority honcho was Irish through and through and therefore likely possessed a genius for imagination and diabolical creativity one could easily foresee such a memorandum making its way through the governmental chain of command and being approved by the Minister of Justice.

If such were the case and the Justice Minister were queried on the floor of the Dial about the ‘leaked’ memo, he could give the same response he uttered to Alan Shatter the first time the ‘temporary release mechanism’ issue was raised: "The question could not be answered ‘in the time allocated.’ "

Faced with a constant onslaught of scathing criticism from both media and the citizenry the Irish Government is constantly seeking to dream up new gimmicks to win back the hearts and minds of the electorate. Thus, it has been taking various actions to demonstrate that its mission is to show sympathy and compassion for the unemployed and others lacking the wherewithal to pay their grocery bills and tax bills. During the first week of November the Irish Minister for agriculture, Brendan Smith, announced his "Free cheese for the needy" project. He had arranged through with the European community’s agricultural surplus operation to obtain at no cost to the Irish government 53 tons of cheddar cheese in 20 pound blocks, the total value of which is €750,000 to distribute to the Irish needy through 331 separate Irish charities. That would feed 5,300 families each with a 20 pound block of cheese. For a family of five with each member eating 1/5 of a pound per day, all that wonderful free cheddar cheese would last nearly 3 weeks. After a three-week three-meal a day diet of force fed cheddar cheese the entire family for the rest of their lives would probably regurgitate at the thought of even one more single bite of the sickening stuff.

The opposition parties, seizing as precedent Marie Antoinette’s infamous defiant phrase, ‘Let them eat cake!’, began mocking derision of the Agricultural minister’s program. This predictably attracted the attention of the press, producing on November 6 the following headline in the Irish Times: " ‘Let them eat cheese’ approach fails to butter up electorate."

The Irish Labour Party leader, Eamon Gilmore, has been arguing for extensions of time before any cost-cutting new budget takes effect. He argued that presently implementing a €6 billion cut would hamper growth and job creation.

Economists have predicted that the Irish government will be basically bankrupt by July of 2011 unless budget cuts are promptly made. What happens if Ireland goes bankrupt so to speak as did the Greek government earlier this year? The European Union and the International Monetary Fund would each have a role to play. Both of these entities are doing everything they can to hold the Irish government’s feet to the fire to make the very necessary €6 billion budget cuts without further delays. In resistance to such suggestions Olli Rehn, the European Commissioner for Economic and Monetary Affairs, flew to Dublin early in the week of November 8th to stiffen the spine's of the leaders of the Irish Government. This prompted a public statement by the Taoiseach Brian Cowen that the planned budget cuts needed to be made on schedule.

As public criticism of the Irish Government intensifies its leaders are beginning to anticipate a worse case scenario when it announces next month the details of the new budget. The Irish are aware of the mob scene, arson, property damage and chaos the citizens of France and Greece, among other European countries, have created this year in resistance to proposed government budget cuts coupled with higher taxes.

Public rioting, arson, looting and mass destruction on the part of the outraged Irish citizenry is not unforeseeable. One can anticipate the angry Irish taking to the streets, burning cars, igniting government buildings and banks with Molotov cocktails, and other forms of violence. Who will be the adversely affected by the Irish government cutting €6 billion out of its incoming fiscal year budget? Middle class families as well as the infirm, aged, widows and orphans among other less fortunate people will be feeling the biggest brunt of these budget cuts. The taxpayers in Ireland, like the taxpayers in the United States, are repulsed by the idea of the government taking their tax dollars to bail out the banks. They are repulsed by the forthcoming €6 billion cut in government services. They are repulsed by the new 2% income tax hike plus an assortment of additional new taxes about ready to be imposed upon them. Recent news stories reported that the government is so frightened of a likely very negative and violently destructive public reaction to the new budget to be disclosed in December that they have arranged for the nation's armed forces to begin joint training exercises with the national police force, called the Guards, to acquire and don riot gear, wield batons and fire hoses in order to protect government buildings and avoid mob action arson, extensive property destruction and bloodshed.

Is such violence likely to happen? Irish Examiner reporter Caroline O’Doherty concluded that "undoubtedly, [public] anger has grown… but unlike in other countries, people are not erecting barricades, throwing paint-balls at Parliament or even waving peaceful placards demanding, ‘Down with this sort of thing’ to any great extent. So are we too apathetic, too scared, too reserved or too resigned to our fate to act? Or are we just lacking the structure and skills for effective mobilization? Is it the psyche or the system that is keeping us off the streets?" O’Doherty quotes Dr. Niamh Hourigan, a sociology professor at University College Cork, who answers the question by saying both apathy and lack of skills suggest that there will be no riots. Additionally, the professor noted, the Catholic Church is opposed to radicalism and it still has enormous influence over the Irish public.

But time will tell. One thing is certain. The Irish military and the Guards are continuing to acquire the resources and undertake the training necessary to quell a foreseeably hostile mob scene reaction to the new budget being revealed next month.

* * * *

(Dave has written at length about Ireland. If you want to know more about Ireland (today and in the past) try to get a copy of his book Emerald Spirit: A Journey into the Irish Heart and Soul (Cork: Merceir Press, 2003). And even if you think you know Ireland, you will learn much about the country, its people, and its myths and realities.

To quote from a review of Emerald Spirit:

“This book gives a unique insight into how the Irish are seen from outside. It covers a wide range of topics from the famous Irish wit and why the Irish tend to open every conversation with a discourse on the weather, through to the Irish sense of the supernatural, fairies, ghosts and demons. In describing his various Irish experiences, the author deals with the deeply felt Irish sense of place and the acute awareness of nature in their everyday lives. He also examines the changing face of religion in Ireland and the spiritual side of the Irish passion for music. The book draws the reader to a more subtle understanding of the Irish character. It reveals aspects that are familiar to, but often overlooked by, the native Irish and which are revelatory to most newcomers.”)

“PLUTOCRACY AND DEMOCRACY DON’T MIX”

Wed, 3 Nov 2010 10:18:34 -0400

Well it’s the morning after the elections, and those who voted have spoken.

Other than to say the obvious -- the Democrats were punished for (take your choice) not fixing the economy, for not having a clear message, for not having enough money, for Obama’s leadership or lack thereof, for not having answers to the frustration, fear, and anger many Americans feel, etc.,-- I’ll let the pundits have their say.

Perhaps later I’ll add my two cents to the mix.

In the meantime, I recently came across a speech Bill Moyers gave that I believe connects the dots about what is happening in our country.

It is a long speech.

It will take you time to read it.

But in this age when sound bites seem to speak the loudest, I think what Moyers has to say deserves hearing.

And as always, I would be interested in whatever reactions you have once you have taken the time to read and digest the speech.

You can read the speech by Clicking Here.

THE RALLY

Sun, 31 Oct 2010 11:36:18 -0400

I have been living in Washington, DC since I returned from the Peace Corps in 1967 and have attend more gatherings, rallies, and marches than I can remember (both prior to Peace Corps and since).

My take on this one yesterday:

1) The numbers matter. And the fact that this rally out numbered the Beck rally by more than 2-1 is significant.

1) The Park Police have stopped estimating crowd size because of the controversies about the accuracy of their estimates. Organizers of the various march always seem to inflate the numbers, opponents tend to minimize the numbers, and the press seems generally erratic and often unreliable in terms of estimates and coverage of such events.

1) The folks around Ellen and me yesterday seemed pretty diverse. But other friends who attended said they saw a wide age range but not much diversity otherwise.

1) The signs people had were wonderful, rarely negative or angry, often clever and humorous. There are many Internet sites that have compendiums of the signs. Here’s one, but there are many others.

1) The rally was not political in the sense of supporting one party or another or calling for specific action. Stewart certainly cannot match the power of the black ministers (MLK, etc.) who can deliver mesmerizing speeches. But Stewart did end the rally with words and a message to which the audience seemed to respond: lower the temperature on angry rhetoric, there’s more to our country than what the media is portraying, and we’re a country and people that can and do work together, even if our leaders are not doing so now.

1) The actual show put on by Stewart and Colbert seemed to me to be a cross between their usual TV show and an extended special two hour long show. Much of it seemed to fall flat.

Bottom line for me was encouraging. Lots of folks wanted to simply show up and make the point that the incivility and hostility that the media (all the media, not just cable) portrays is something that doesn’t represent them.

That a quarter of a million people showed up to make that point ought to give the media and some of our representatives pause. I don’t suspect that much will change immediately as a result of the rally.

But it was a lovely moment of sanity in a time when one wonders if our country has gone off the deep end.

Saturday, there was sanity on the Mall.

* * * *

POINT AND CLICK POLITICS

Sat, 30 Oct 2010 07:29:01 -0400

Occasionally articles get written that truly inform.

Such is the case with Micah Sifry’s Point and Click Politics in today’s tech section of the Wall Street Journal.

(Disclosure: I have known (and admired) Micah for at least 20 years, he is an advisor to my wife at The Sunlight Foundation, and I believe he has an perceptive understanding of and an ability to convey what is happening in the world of the Internet as it affects democracy, governance, politics, the media, and the social media.)

In this insightful article, he explains how the Internet is transforming our politics in both good and worrisome ways. And he explains how it just may have the possibility of improving how we govern ourselves.

But rather than try to summarize all of what Micah says, let me simply urge you to Click Here and read it for yourself.

It informs, educates, and explains where we are and where we are heading in a reasoned and clear voice.

If you are interested in understanding how the Internet is and may in the future impact democracy in America, check it out.

CATEGORY 5 STORM APPROACHING?

Fri, 29 Oct 2010 09:07:00 -0400

It’s not always easy to keep a level head in unlevel times.

I watch, listen, read, talk to people, and try to understand what is taking place in our country. It is not easy to figure out exactly what’s going on these days in the USA.

And if you don’t know what is truly going on, then you certainly can’t talk about effective solutions to problems.

(In a small way, I’ve tried to add to the conversation about public schools at MillersTime.net, using the film Waiting for ‘Superman’ as a starting point, adding in an opposing view with Diane Ravitiz piece from the NY Review of Books, and asking for comments from readers. Click Here.)

It is certainly easy to get off track with the way the media focuses folks’ attention.

Tom Friedman, not someone with whom I always agree, had what I thought was quite a good column addressing this very point the other day (Please consider reading his entire column by Clicking Here).

The gains that are about to be made by Republicans - - who not only helped get us into our current mess and who do not seem to have any solutions but more of what they offered previously – are only likely to make the next two years even more a time of gridlock and divided government.

The Democrats on whose watch the worst of our economic decline has occurred have not even been able to get the country to agree that their modest reforms, in health care, in regulation, in preventing a severe recession from becoming a severe depression, etc. have staved off what might have been an even larger disaster.

Understandably, the folks in power, as limited as it is and with the successful do nothing Republican minority using the power of the filibuster (they were able to prevent more than 500 House passed bills from being voted on in the Senate and then blame the Democrats for not doing anything) are about to pay the price for an economic situation that penalizes all but the most wealthy.

President Obama’s passion for collaboration and for thoughtful talk and action have been effectively overwhelmed by the anger (some quite justified) of many, anger which has been turned into resentment and rage against largely Democrats but also others in power.

The portion of Friedman’s article that was most striking for me was his comment about how much more time has been given to issues such as NPR’s Juan Williams’ firing (you could substitute many other issues here) than to something such as the 2005 National Academies study (commissioned by a bipartisan group of senators) that looked at what was going wrong in our country in the area of competitiveness and employment and what we needed to do to repair it.

Called Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future, there was been a follow-up report in September of this year by the same group, with the conclusion that we are now headed to a Category 5 storm. It is worth taking a look at what these thoughtful folks wrote both in 2005 and recently. You can do so Here.

But these thoughts, this thinking, these recommendations are not sound bites. They do not get the media’s attention. They do not get people’s blood boiling. They are not so easily packaged.

I for one believe that the world is passing us by. I believe Obama understands much of this. He may not be the best person to lead us back and forward (yes back to a powerful position in the world and forward to a leadership position in what the world demands in the 21st century). But he is thoughtful in a time when it is not popular to be thoughtful.

Yes. I believe our current political and governing system is largely broken, lead by a party system that is bought and owned by the monied interests in this country.

Yes, I believe there is racism, xenophobia, ignorance, and fear in this country, and it is alternately being stoked and fueled by folks such as Beck, Limbaugh, O’Reilly as well as the viral nature of some of the new technologies to spread hate and fear.

Yes. I believe …..

But I also believe that Americans are pretty decent folks who are mostly worried about their jobs, their families, their declining incomes, and are uncertain about who or what is the cause of these very real fears.

In such an environment, it is not easy or popular to ask folks to look at something such as what was done by the National Academies. But we ignore them at our country’s peril.

Assuming (and it is not a small assumption) that we somehow get the economic situation stabilized, will that be too late to honestly face the issues raised in Rising Above the Gathering Storm Revisited or do anything about them.?

If you have the time, take a look at Friedman’s article and even further what the 2005 and 2010 reports said (you can read summaries by going Here and Here - you’ll see links to ‘Executive Summaries’ on the lower left hand side of each site).

They seem to make a lot of sense to me.

FENTY OR GRAY: WHO SHOULD BE MAYOR ?

Fri, 3 Sep 2010 09:06:59 -0400

UPDATE: Sept. 15 - Challenger and DC Council Chairman Vincent Gray beat incumbent Mayor Fenty by 7 to 8 per cent in a very light turnout for a change in who will be DC’s mayor for the next four years.

Two good stories about the race in this mornings Washington Post:

*How Fenty Lost: http://bit.ly/bfdTJE

*Voters Pick Gray: http://bit.ly/dqcSUN

* * * *

Sept.3: DC voters will decide in a primary election Sept. 14 who will be the next mayor of their city.

Actually, the voting has already begun as early voting in DC started Aug. 30th thanks to a new law allowing voting for two weeks.

And there’s a possibility there could be a dispute about the security of the ballots, after the 14th, but that’s a different story (Click Here).

Basically, however, Adrian Fenty or Vincent Gray, whichever candidate wins the DC primary Wednesday, Sept. 14, will be the next mayor because DC continues to be a heavily Democratic city.

As you can see from Washington Post poll above (or Click Here), Gray leads Fenty by 17 points among likely voters, with 34% of the likely voters undecided. In the Post poll, Gray leads Fenty 49%-36% among all Democratic voters. (The Post has endorsed Fenty)

(An earlier poll by The Clarus Research Group had Gray leading by 39%-36% with all voters and with 20% undecided.)

DC Council Chairman Gray’s lead over current DC Mayor Fenty comes despite results in the same Post poll that indicate most Democrats believe Fenty has brought change to DC and give him credit for that change.

So what gives?

For those of you who don’t follow, or only marginally follow, DC politics, these results may come as a surprise. Why would a mayor who is widely credited with bringing positive change to the city be threatened with losing his job?

Especially, if you add in the significant financial advantage Fenty has over Gray (in June Fenty had $3.2 million in cash to Gray’s $371,000, according to campaign finance reports).

For those who follow what goes on within the city more closely, there is not quite as much surprise. Fenty is seen as aloof, not inclusive, and more concerned about upper income residents than the issues of concern to the majority (54%) African American residents of the city. Some also question Fenty’s honesty. And in regard to Fenty’s hiring and support of School Chancellor Michelle Rhee, there is an almost equal split between residents who support her and ones who disapprove of the job she is doing.

Gray seems to be benefitting from the significant drop in Fenty’s approval rating among African Americans (54% now see him unfavorably as opposed to 17% four years ago). Gray seems to score points on issues of openness, honesty, and empathy.

I am curious which candidate MillersTime readers believe should be the next DC mayor.

Particularly, I am interested in the views of those who live in the District.

In either case, please consider posting below your choice for the next mayor along with your reasons for making that choice.

You can post your comments ‘Anonymously‘ or with your name attached, but whichever way you choose to do so, please continue the MillersTime readers ‘tradition’ of being respectful.

(If you wish to email me your comments, you can do so to Samesty84@aol.com. Please indicate if I may post the email or not).

YES. THEY SHOULD BUILD IT AS PLANNED

Thu, 19 Aug 2010 09:28:03 -0400

I support the building of the Islamic cultural center and mosque as proposed.

It is not sufficient to just support a ‘right’ to do something.

If that right is abrogated because of anger, fear, hatred, prejudice, xenophobia, or because of an impending election, then it’s not really a right.

* * *

I have written and rewritten this post numerous times over the last few days, and have discarded all of the earlier attempts as I think ultimately the issue comes down to the three sentences above.

Although reluctant to get into this issue as I think it’s one of those topics that can create bad feelings between folks who otherwise may be quite reasonable, I was brought up to believe that it is wrong to remain silent when one believes an injustice is taking place.

Many, many in the Jewish Diaspora have taken up opposition to this building and see it as a threat, a symbol, a disgrace, evidence of an Islamic intrusion, incursion, takeover.

I think they are wrong.

And I think their opposition, along with others who also are against the building, is short sighted.

Today it may be about Islam.

Tomorrow it can be about Judaism.

Or substitute any minority or individual or group that you may not like, you do not understand, or you find objectionable.

Our country is not being taken over because a community center with a mosque within it may be built at this specific place.

Nor are we being hijacked in how we remember 9/11.

Just as there is an Islamic prayer room within the Pentagon and one already near the site of the terrible destruction of 3,000 people in lower Manhattan, the building of a religious community center and prayer rooms (‘mosque’ actually means something quite different from what is proposed here) does not threaten our democracy.

It actually strengthens it.

To abrogate the right to build on the proposed sight would be a victory for the Islamic terrorists who destroyed so much just a few blocks away.

We are, and should continue to be, not just a nation of laws but also one of openness, of fairness and of justice and not a nation that submits to the fear mongering of ignorance, of prejudice, of anger, of hatred.

Debate in a democracy is much of what a democracy is about. But when it leads to or becomes a denial of rights, then we are heading into dangerous territory.

Richard Miller

A REVOLUTION AND A WAR

Tue, 10 Aug 2010 10:10:40 -0400

The Revolution:

Electronic books pushing printed books to the side (and out?).

While this is not new ‘news’ (check out a previous posting HERE that humorously describes what is happening), there have been a number of developments recently that indicate the ‘Revolution’ is in process.

Probably the most frequently cited fact(oid) is Amazon’s recent announcement that its e-book sales now outpace hardcover sales on Amazon.com almost two to one. They said they sold 143 Kindle books for each 100 hardcover book last quarter, or about 22 million Kindle books so far this year. See Jay Yarrow’s article on this: Here)

But more is probably being made of these facts than meets the eye. As Yarrow points out, less than 25% of printed books come from hardcover books, and 22 million Kindle books is only 6% of the total print book market.

But it’s coming folks. Last month, Amazon said it sold 180 e-books for every 100 hardcover books.

And just yesterday, one publisher, Dorchester Publishing, announced it will no longer mass print books and will move to digital and print-on-demand only. (Dorchester says it’s the”oldest independent mass market publisher in America.” Click Here).

These two occurrences do not mean that printed books are done. But they are indicators that the e-book revolution is progressing. Whether it will take five years, six, years, or ten years (three predictions I have read) for e-books to overtake all printed books, only time will tell.

I know that folks, myself included, love the feel of a book, etc., and there are folks who will never, ever give that up. But with the development of e-readers such as the Kindle, the iPad, the Nook, the Sony Readers, etc. it’s a whole new ball game, to mix a metaphor.

(Also, keep your eye on what is happening in the education world. That is a huge battleground between print and digital books too.)

The War:

The real battle is not e-books vs printed books but is Amazon vs Apple, or more specifically the Kindle vs. the iPad.

There are now more than three million iPads in readers hands (all sold in only 80 days). Amazon will not release how many Kindles it has sold, but it has announced that since it cut its price to $189 from $259 in June) its sales have “accelerated each month.”

And the beneficiaries here are those who read e-books, largely because every time Apple or Amazon announces a new e-book feature, the other soon matches it.

There are folks who are passionate about one being better than the other.

In my opinion, both devices are good (I own them both). At the moment each has something the other doesn’t, but that won’t last long.

And as much as I love books, bookstores, and the printed word, I have to admit that in the last three months I have not bought a printed book but have downloaded (at costs from nothing to as much as $12.99) 20 books and read most of them.

As friend Randy Candea commented elsewhere on this website, “Advances in technology will continue to alter how we read, listen, and view subjects. However, we will continue to communicate our thoughts, music, and views of life in ways still unimagined.”

In the meantime, know that ‘The Revolution’ is for real, and “The War” is in progress.

(As always, I’m interested in your views and experiences on this topic - and others on this website - and hope you will share them below with other MillersTime readers)