"Know Your Rights" - As Relevant A Song Today As Ever

This is a public service announcement! With a bloooooggg...

Way back in 1982, rock band The Clash released a song called "Know Your Rights." It is the first song on their best-selling Combat Rock album. Many of you have probably heard it at one time or another, although it's not as popular a tune from the album as, say, "Rock the Casbah" or "Should I Stay Or Should I Go."

Artwork for the song on a t-shirt. (C) Marc Osborn

None the less, it's an extraordinary song that absolutely scorches out an alternative view of the western world. You just don't hear songs this cutting, this brave and this - as it turns out - accurate. Not today or even back then. I guess that's why The Clash is often called "the only band that matters."

In any case, it's not a tune you hear unless you seek it out. No time for such serious business when the world can be distracted by fluffy, electronic confections of pitch-corrected nothingness.

But even more impressive is that - and this occurred to me while listing to the song on my iPod while running a treadmill as the news filled the nearby TV screen - that despite its age, "Know Your Rights" is still dead on relevant today as it ever was. It's a song that can still be turned up and blasted loudly and people will relate...or should.

You can see and hear a live performance of the song by The Clash HERE.

So that you get my point, however, lets revisit the lyrics as written by the late great Joe Strummer to see what I mean. Here is the first verse...

Know your rights! All three of them.

Number one, you have the right not to be killed

Murder is a crime, unless it was done by a policeman or an aristocrat.

Hmm. Does that sound familiar in 2014? Ferguson, Missouri anyone? Or, how about the born-rich George W. Bush and the Haliburton-rich Dick Cheney leading the USA into a falsely-premised war in Iraq...killing thousands of Americans and Iraqis who otherwise would not have died?

Or how about verse two...

And number two, you have the right to food money

Providing of course you don't mind a little investigation, humiliation 

And if you cross your fingers, rehabilitation

Sounds like today's right wing and its ongoing, calculated ridicule, despise and marginalization of the poor and any program meant to help them help them out of poverty. As their propaganda goes, the poor are 100% percent to blame for their situation and why should anyone - particularly the rich or the government - pay one thin dime to help them? They are "takers" after all.

And finally, verse three...

Number three, you have the right to free speech

As long as you're not dumb enough to actually try it

The "Occupy" movement seems to be a good example of this. Sure, the initial protests happened, but the biggest one in NYC was shut down by the cops on a city ordinance technicality. I remember one protester sign said something like, "If authorities enforced Wall Street regulation like it does park ordinances, there would be no economic crisis." Touche. Also, this third verse evokes the more recent Ferguson, MO situation again where cops armed with military weapons swept up the street of protesters, arrested journalists and imposed a curfew on all citizens.

So there you go. Find this song. Give it a listen. Think about the words. Think about how this type of perspective on the world is so sorely missing in the "shout your opponent down" mentality of today's cable TV and non-political entertainment machine.

That is all.

Obama, Bush and bin Laden

Now that the news of bin Laden's death is all over the place and people have had a chance to embrace and digest it in their own way, here are a few related thoughts on who secured this outcome and who did not - as well as a question about how long it'll be until we see the "bin Laden not really dead" theories materialize and from whom...

The Bush/Obama Comparison

• Attack. BUSH: The worst attack on American soil by foreigners - an attack masterminded and led by Osama bin Laden - occurred on the watch of President George W. Bush. OBAMA: Directed, sanctioned and gave the go ahead for the operation that found and killed bin Laden. And, no successful terrorist attacks carried out on U.S. soil in his presidency so far.

• Mission Accomplished. BUSH: Proudly flew that now infamous banner bearing that phrase on an aircraft carrier in the early days of the Iraq war - a war by the way that had nothing to do with bin Laden or the 9-11 attacks. I think we can all agree that the banner was a tad premature. That's being kind. OBAMA: No banners, no gloating or landing on an aircraft carrier in a flight suit like Bush. Nope, just a short announcement to the nation on a Sunday evening that justice had been served and confirming the killing of bin Laden. "Mission Accomplished" ineed.

• Quotes. BUSH: On Bin Laden in 2002: "I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority." And: ""I am truly not that concerned about him." OBAMA: On Bin Laden in 2011: "Today, at my direction, the United States launched a targeted operation against that compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. A small team of Americans carried out the operation with extraordinary courage and capability. No Americans were harmed. They took care to avoid civilian casualties. After a firefight, they killed Osama bin Laden and took custody of his body."

• Timing. BUSH: In office for eight years. No capture or killing of bin Laden. OBAMA: In office for just over two years and Bin Laden is dead. Those are the facts. My opinion is that the American people need to keep that in mind when judging Obama as a leader in the 2012 elections.

I think these facts and comparisons tell the tale quite well actually. Bush was a man who took his job lightly and coasted...to the degree that he ignored concrete evidence that an attack such as materialized on 9-11 was being planned. We know how that turned out. He then made a series of errors that not only did not kill bin Laden, but actually made our situation worse. Meanwhile, Obama is a man who apparently is on the ball and dead serious about fighting terrorism...to the degree that within two years of serving in office, bin Laden is dead.

Rumors and Conspiracy Theories
U.S. media is reporting that the body of bin Laden was burried at sea. So, as you read this post, the body of bin Laden resides in the cold, dark depths of the ocean. A fitting place for him for sure. But, no body to see means those who believe in him or his cause - or are against the U.S. or Obama - will be able to suggest that he is not really dead.

I think we'll see skeptism in two ways:

1. The Middle East. Indeed, the Middle East and Arab world thrive on ruomor and conspiracty theories. From listening to NPR today, I've heard this is already starting over there with people doubting the story of bin Ladens death.
2. Right wing conservatives in the U.S. There are those here who will not want to give credit to Obama for this action and will raise questions about whether bin Laden is really dead and/or that the whole thing was faked to make Obama look better going into the 2012 election cycle. Remember, there's a certain percentage (and a percentage who gets a lot of media attentions) who believe Obama was not born in the USA.

Obviously, for some people who don't want to believe it, no amout of disclosure will be enough to prove bin Laden is dead. In any caes, I will be quite interested to see if or how the U.S. proves to the world that bin Laden is indeed dead.

Great Presidents Behaving Badly...And Bad Presidents Behaving Good

On this President's Day I thought I'd turn things around a little bit and cite some good things that some of our worst presidents did and some of the worst things some of our best presidents did.

Using my list of Top Five Best and Wost U.S. Presidents from earlier this weekend, below are some fun facts you may not have known...

Great Presidents Behaving Badly

George Washington. He was a slave owner his entire adult life, including his time as President. He even tried to get an exemption from a new law in Pennsylvania abolishing slavery in the state by saying that he only lived in the state because Philadelphia was the capital of the nation (which it was in the 1790s). Washington did eventually emancipate all his slaves, but only after his death as part of his will.

Thomas Jefferson. As president, he pushed for and signed a law banning trade between the United States and other nations called The Embargo Act. This led to a major economic downturn. Jefferson also signed a law outlawing black Americans from carrying the U.S. mail. He was no fan of women participating in government, saying, "The appointment of a woman to office is an innovation for which the public is not prepared, nor am I." Famously, Jefferson is also accused of carrying on an affair with one of his slaves while President.

Abraham Lincoln. During the Civil War, Lincoln suspended the right habeus corpus -enabling the government to hold anyone prisoner for unlimited time for any or no reason. Most agree this was a dubious decision at best, but even some of those critics understand the context that the Civil War played in Lincoln's thinking.

Teddy Roosevelt. He signed into law a policy that established the Untied States' "right" to intervene in other countries affairs - especially smaller nations near the United States - to keep them stable. That little maneuver was, in my opinion, less about the concern for the well being of people in places like Panama, Cuba or Guatemala and more about ensuring a stable and "business-friendly" countries for U.S. businesses seeking to make money there. All too often, this has meant U.S. support for dictators who accommodate business while enriching themselves on loans from our government and kickbacks from companies while ignoring their impoverished citizenry - ensuring unrest and violence in the region during the 20th century.

Franklin Roosevelt. While president, it is widely believed that FDR carried on an extra-marital affair with his secretary. Caving in to war rage and racism felt of much of the country following the attack on Pearl Harbor by the Japanese, he signed Executive Order 9066 - imprisoning all first generation Japanese immigrants and their American citizen children. Also, the Pearl Harbor attack happened on his watch. Some say he knew the attack was likely, but did not command the military to stop it because he knew the only way to get into the war...and therefore address the more sinister threat to the world that the Hitler-led Nazi Germany represented...was by an attack. Finally, fearing his hard won economic reforms of his first would not pass muster with the Supreme Court in his second term Roosevelt championed a bill that would enable the president to appoint additional Supreme Court Justices. Following a series of about faces, resignations and even one death among the Supreme Court justices the motivation for the bill abated and it ultimately was voted down. But, it all shows that FDR was willing to do some very controversial things to get his New Deal passed and permanent.

Bad Presidents Behaving Good

James Buchanan. I've looked into this guy, and I have to say...there really isn't anything good I could find that he enacted, championed or did during his one term in office. He was inactive, sympathetic to the South and slave owners rights, uninterested in expanding civil rights or education to the masses and, well, I just can't find anything good on him. So there you go. James Buchanan - first class duchebag.

Ulysses S. Grant. He ordered the military to suppress activities of the Ku Klux Klan in the typically violent post-Civil War south. He won passage of the 15th Ammendment to the United States Constitution that prohibits governments in the United States (Federal, state, local, etc.) from denying anyone (men) the right to vote based on race, color or previously having been a slave. He established Yellowstone as the first U.S. National Park.

Herbert Hoover. He enabled law enforcement to prosecute gangsters such as Al Capone on tax evasion charges. He initiated major Federal dam building projects to generate energy for the growing country. The largest one is now called The Hoover Dam. He set aside 3 million acres of land for the U.S. National Parks system. He created an anti-trust unit of the Justice Department. He canceled private oil company leases on public lands.

Richard Nixon. Nixon presided over the largest period of desegregation of U.S. schools in the country's history. He supported the Equal Rights Ammendment to the Constitution. He signed into law the Equal Employment Opportunity Act outlawing workplace discrimination. He proposed healthcare reform to extend universal, affordable health coverage to all Americans. Like previous and subsequent Presidents, he was unsuccessful in getting his measures passed in Congress and signed into law. He opened dialog with communist China, taking the first initial steps that paved the way for a now more open and free-market China.

George W. Bush. So complete were his blunders domestically, economically, environmentally and overseas that it is difficult for me to find good things to say about Bush's tenure as president. We're talkin' James Buchanan territory here. I will try and be kind to say that he did effectively rally Americans' spirits in the post-9/11 attack timeframe.

Presidents' Day: Top 5 Best/Worst

To kick off this Presidents' Day weekend, I've created my own "Best" and "Worst" U.S. Presidents list. I think there's a lot to learn by who was successful in that office and who was not, why and what the implications may be for now and into the future.

Sure, there are Presidents who are certainly candidates for either the good or bad category not on my list, and not every one I've listed is 100% good or 100% bad. But, I've tried to select presidents who in my opinion (and I believe objectively) had a monumental and lasting impact on our nation in either a good or bad way. To put another way, had we not had these specific leaders at the precicely right (or wrong) time, the history of our nation would be either terribly worse or terribly better respectively.

On Presidents Day itself, I'll "reverse course" and do a post about some bad things the good presidents did and some good things the bad presidents did.

But for now, here's my list. See if you agree.

Top 5 Greatest U.S. Presidents
Listed in chronological order:

George Washington (Independent, 1789-1797). Washington makes the list not just because he was the first US President, but for the tremendous job he did holding the Union together in the nation's very first and shaky years. At a time when some were calling for - believe it or not - an American monarchy, when there was a percentage of the population still loyal to England, when many states would rather have just gone their own way rather than join a Union, Washington was the person to keep the piecces together and point to a common way forward. Perhaps nobody other than the revered top general from the victorious Continental Army could have done this. No doubt among our very best.

Thomas Jefferson (Democratic Republican Party, 1801-1809). Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration of Independance, a major leader of the American Revolution, governor of Virginia, founder of the University of Virginia and major proponent of a relatively limited federal government, the separation of church and state and, well, many other things that have become the cornderstone of American freedoms. For those works alone, he would be remembered as a great American. But, none of those things are really associated with him when he was president. Serving as top man from 1801 to 1809, Jefferson led the nation through many of its early years and accomplishing a lot. For example, his administration executed the Louisanna Purchase that doubled the size of the country, sponsored the Lewis & Clark expedition, established the U.S. military accademy, signed the law making it illegal to import slaves into the United States (but certainly not ending slave trade by any stretch of the imagination) among other actions. I personally also like how Jefferson was very suspicious of the aristocracy (even though he was pretty much one of them), banks and the need to shake things up every now and again if they became untennable or stale. His tenure as President following Washington and Adams served the nation well as a republican (small "r") counterbalance to the Federalist agenda of the previous two administrations. A giant if we ever had one.

Abraham Lincoln (Republican Party, 1861-1865). Perhaps no other president faced as daughting and critical circumstances during his time as president than Lincoln. Following the disintigration of the Union by the secession and aggression of southern states, Lincoln perservered to rally the nation and pursecute a military campain to re-establish the full Union. Also known as The American Civil War, this conflict was a monumental time in our nation's history, and Lincoln our leader in it. And, in that fight, Lincoln found an even higher calling to rally the nation...the abolition of slavery through the issuance of The Emancipation Proclamation. For these two accomplishments alone - saving the Union and abolishing slavery - Lincoln stands as one of our greats and, in my opinion, perhaps our greatest president.

Teddy Roosevelt (Republican Party, 1901 - 1909). While perhaps not as universally revered today as he was, say, in the first half of the 20th Century, there is a reason "TR" is on Mount Rushmore. Actually, there are several resons he makes my top five list. First, he came into office following the assassination of President McKinnley, assuming the top post from his position as Vice President. Not an easy task. TR also ran an administration that started to bring the United States into a more modern era. For example, he championed laws to regulate and curb dangerous business monopolies (often called "trusts" back then), enacted some of the first consumer protections from dishonest business practices, stood for a strong but not internationally aggressive military policy ("speak softly but carry a big stick"), and as a strong conservationist he initated the U.S. National Park System. These were big moves for an early time...dragging the nation in many ways forward towards a transformed nation.

Frankin Delano Roosevelt (Democratic Party, 1933-1945). You want to talk about accomplishiments? How about leading the nation out of the depths of The Great Depression and leading us through the largest war in our - if not the entire world's - history. Well, FDR did both. Lets not minimize this stuff. Seriously, at the time when FDR came into office, the nation was in REAL trouble with the financial and econimic system collapsed and our very way of life under serious threat.

An unfettered, unregulated laissez-faire approach to the economy and government had led the country to near ruin. There was no such thing as social security, no health insurance for the poor, no meaningful regulation of financial markets, very few labor laws - zero safety net for Americans unless you happened to be rich - an isolationist policy aboard and other elements that led to the crash of 1929 and the ensuing massive unemployment and associated problems that plagued the nation.

The alteratives were to do nothing in hopes that "the market" would magically correct things or to inject the resources of the Federal goverment to try and aid the current situation short term and to avoid the same thing from happening in the long term. Guess which choice FDR made?

Realizing that "do nothing" invited catastrophy for our society and the very real chance of a turn to the extreme right or extreme left in attempts to fix the situation, Roosevelt instead introduced and pushed through Congress a comprehensive legisative program for relief, recovery and reform called the New Deal . It helped create jobs, address holes in our system and re-build our economy. In short, FDR made the fundamental leap that the Federal goverment does indeed have a role to play in ensuring the well being of society. Relying on business and charity is not enough. We are, after all, all in this together at some level. While these concepts ended up being the prevailing mindset for goverment in ensuing decades, they also were (and still are) an outlook of America that conservatives have been trying to undo ever since...and I may add they had their greatest succes in doing so in the 1990s and 2000s. Guess where that got us? Again.

As for leading our country in World War II against both Hitler and the Japanese? Well, FDR was exactly the right guy to do it. Masterfully working with allies, he was at the center of devising the strategy that ultimately felled both foes. Not to sell Winson Churchill short (he is another GIANT of the 20th Century), or to minimize the ruthless pursuit of the war against Germany by Stalin and the Soviet Union, but no Roosevelt...no victory - or certainly no victory in the relatively timely and advantageous way to unfolded under his leadership. Sure, some say he "sold out" eastern Europe by ceding it to the Soviet Union at the end of the war, but do you really think we could have or would have benefitted from engaging in a "hot" war with Stalin's Red Army immediately following WW II? No. Finally, in both his domestic and wartime leadership, FDR also gave Americans a boost of confidence in these times of troubles - a brave face in light of worldwide dangers, a bright outlook and "can do" attitude in the face of dire economic circumstances. "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself."

Honorable mention: John F. Kennedy (Democratic Party, 1960-1963). Perhaps not a "great" president given his tragically limited time in office, he did preside during the critical Cuban Missle Crisis. His leadership helped pull the world back from the brink of nuclear war with the USSR. For this alone, not to mention other achievments such as initiating the U.S. space program, JFK is honorable mention for great president.

__________________________________________________________________

Worst 5 U.S. Presidents

James Buchanan (Democratic Party, 1857-1861). As president immediately before the Civil War, Buchanan rates low in my opinon for...well...not doing anything. Personally believing in slave owners' rights, he staked out positions like it was illegal for the South to leave the Union, but it was also illegal for the Union to go to war over it, and slavery was bad but it was not legal for the Federal goverment to do anything about it. His statement on the issue of whether slavery should be allowed in new states and territories was, "happily, a matter of but little practical importance." His term functioned as a pressure cooker regarding North/South relations that blew up just after he left office with the breakout of the Civil War. Had he been more creative, committal and forward looking, perhaps history could have turned out differently.

Ulysses S. Grant (Republican, 1869-1877). U.S. Grant was a Civil War hero - the Union general that finally and decisively defeated the breakaway Confederates. It is no surprise that he was easily elected presdient when he ran not long after the conclusion of the war. What is surprising is how bad a president he ended up being. For someone blessed with the ability to lead and command, he presided over an adminstration rife with graft, corruption and horrible decision making - leading to economic downturns (Panic of 1873), a series of high profile scandals and an overall not good era for the United States. Amazingly, he was elected for a second term. This is possibly, even likely, due to his war hero status and who he was running against.

Herbert Hoover (Republican, 1929-1933). Hoover was the president when the sock market crashed in 1929 and the Great Depression quickly hit afterwards. But simply presiding in office when these events took place is not why I regard him poorly among our presidents. No, it's his - and to be fair, his predicesors Coolige and Harding in the 1920s - championing of Federal degregulation of business and finance markets along with massive tax cuts for the wealthy and business that paved the way for crash and depression to happen in the first place. (By the way, does this sound familiar to you?) And, unlike his successor, Franklin Roosevelt, Hoover felt that the goverment should have a very limited - if any - role in solving the nation's economic woes. His idea of a recovery plan? Volunteerism. Seriously, the man believed that the way to pull the country out of massive and wide-spread economic depression was to rely on companies and individuals to voluteer to help each other out of the goodness of their hearts...and that's about it. He felt that goverment intrusion would errode "self-reliance" and "individuality."The result of this reaction to the Depression? Twenty four percent unemployment, massive homelessness, poverty for huge chunks of American citizens...and the springing up of shanty towns for the poor that were accurately called "Hoovervilles." Hoover was not a bad person and actually proved himself to be quite a good ex-President. But as President, I rate him as one of our worst.

Richard Nixon (Republican, 1969-1974). Ah, tricky Dick. Yes, he is the only president to resign while in office. Of course, he did this due to his likely impeachment on grounds he orchestrated an elaborate scheme to cover up the Watergate political break-ins made by members of his re-election campaign. But, his lying and coverup of Watergate is not the only reason Nixon is among our worst presidents in my opinion. Let me give you three more: 1) the covert and illegal war in Cambodia launched by Nixon that ended up deepening our problems in Southeast Asia rather than helping them (not to mention getting so many people killed), 2) his aggressive appeal to "the silent majority" of Americans and for "law and order" were code (and practice) for extending policies that hurt minorities and women and curbed civil rights and social justice for all, and 3) his use of politican and law enforcement agencies to spy on, intimidate and martinalize those who he consider "enemies." Nixon's parnoia and poor decision making on a number of key areas certainly set our nation backwards on a number of fronts.

George W. Bush (Republican, 2000-2008). Some may say that it's too early to judge W, that only history can do that. Well, I'm going to go ahead and spectulate that "history" will judge Bush as one of our worst presidents. The monumental, profound and long-lasting screw ups that this man sanctioned and presided over will weigh down our country for decades. Bush has a long history of absolutely running anything he touches into the ground, only to have others come in and clean up after him. His time as president proved to be a tragic extension of that track record. There are so many things to cover, but here are a few that make my point:

• 9/11 happened on his watch. Remember, the worst attack on the United States in our nation's history happened in his term, on his watch and under his command of our military and intelligence services. Ignoring clear warnings from intellience services that Bin Laden was likely to attack the U.S. using airliners as weapons, Bush did virtually nothing and, well, you know the rest of the sad story.


• His call for and Republican passage of tax cuts for the wealthy and deregulation of financial and other markets led directly to our current economic problems. The lessons of the 1920s and Herbert Hoover were not learned. This moved us from a nation with a surpluss to a defecit, from a country with nearly "full" employment to nearly 10% unemployment, going from a respected economic power to a faltering one.


• He used 9/11 as an excuse for a number of radical changes and actions - both foreign and domestic. The most significant of which was to invade Iraq...a nation that had nothing to do with 9/11. That war has lasted more than six years, cost untold number of lives and a bloody fortune that could have been spent domestically. A close second was initiating laws and policies such as The Patriot Act and others that circumvent the Constitutional protections of privacy, search and seizure, right to a fair trial and more.


• His administration appointed buddies and cronies to high positions and the American public paid the price. This is best exhibited in the whole Hurricane Katrina fiasco in which Bush buddy and horse breeding association guy "Brownie" was in charge of...well, scewing up big time the response to the storm and it's aftermath. This ended up costing some people their lives, and others their livelihoods.
  
• Environmental incompetence. What a missed opportunity! At the very moment our country could use a transition to a "green" economy and all the historic economic and health benefits this could have brought to the U.S., Bush and company rewarded their oil industry buddies instead of forward and long term for all Americans. And what is the result? A tragic, and perhaps nationally fatal, missed opportunity to transition our economy, preserve the global environment and keep our edge on the rest of the world.

Dishonorable mention: Andrew Johnson (Democratic Party...and others...1865-1869). Succeeding the assassinated Lincoln, Johnson presided over the reconstruction period following the Civil War. He did this badly, becoming the first predident Congress attempted to kick out of office via impeachment.

______________________________________________________________

Presidents' Day Weekend kicker. The President I bet you never heard of is...Chester Arthur. Check him out HERE.

Admiring the Conservative Approach

In my last couple posts on political topics, I've definitely called out what I feel are some shortcomings of the conservative position to healthcare reform - if not politics generally.

However, I want to give conservatives and Republicans their due. While currently in the political minority, there is much to be admired about their approach to getting things done. Whether its planned out in advance, organic in nature or some of both - it doesn't matter. They kick ass. By comparison, your average liberal or Democrat is lazy, unmotivated and full of long-winded messages that are lost on listeners the moment they start.

So, with no irony or malice here are four things I like about the conservative and Republican approach:

Passion

Oh yes, conservatives are passionate. When one of them is debating an issue, there is no f-ing doubt they believe what they're saying and think the opposition is plain wrong. This conviction is seen not just in elected officials, but indeed everyday people such as those attending the recent town halls on healthcare reform. Passion translates as credibility - even if the facts don't back up what's being said.

By comparison, liberals and Democrats try the "explain" things and "reason" things out with "facts" or "data." If there's one thing I've learned in my years doing PR work it is this: emotion trumps facts EVERY TIME. Actually, emotion takes fact out behind the woodshed and completely kicks its ass. Always. So, guess who wins most arguments?

Organized

I'm not sure how it gets done, but Republicans and conservatives seem so much more organized than their liberal and Democratic adversaries. They're at all the right places at all the right times with all the right talk points and all the right props and numbers of people to make an impact. Boom, there you go. Organization brings a political message and perspective to bear right when and where it's needed - in person, online, on the phones, over e-mail. This is a major advantage over liberals who seem to think, again, that facts, reason and logic mean certainly that people must agree with them so they don't do much. How lame is that?

Action-oriented

This might be part of being organized, but conservatives and Republicans seem more willing to get off their ass and do something - march, protest, write, call, attend precinct meetings. Whatever. They're willing to do it in more numbers than liberals or Democrats. Actions speak louder than words. Enough said.

On-Message

This one I am sure is not organic. Rather, I'm pretty sure that there is a way that the "talk points" on different issues are rolled out systematically to conservative operatives and talking heads - and then by extension the general public. None the less, it's admirable.

Quick, what's the Republican take on healthcare reform? It's socialized medicine where the government will be in control of your care - including deciding when you live or die. You know it because you've heard it a million times. OK quick, what's the Democrats message on reform? Uhh, well, uhh, care costs too much and not enough people have access so we need to...zzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

I think you get the point.

And what is the big upshot of being passionate, organized, on-message and action oriented? You get to win most debates and have more influence on how things get done. My opinion is that healthcare reform will be significantly watered down if not derailed completely by this approach. You know that I think this will mean bad things for the country, especially for the very people protesting against reform, but in any case my bet is that we'll see the very admirable approach of conservatives pay off for them.

And for those out there who might say, "yeah, if Republicans are so great at this how come they lost the '08 election?" I would say this...they lost because they had a very flawed incumbent (Bush), weak candidates (McCain, Palin), and a bad economy courtesy of their running of the government. All the organization and passion could not overcome that when put up against a more compelling and - at least for the election time frame - on-message candidate. Frankly, I'd rather my party be passionate, organized, action-oriented and on-message and take my lumps every once and a while than have to rely on a "super candidate" (Bill Clinton, Obama) and a bad economy just to squeak out an election win every now and again.

W Writes a Book

I read today that George W. Bush is writing a book about key decision points in his life and presidency.

Story here.

There are a lot of cynical, snide and snarky things one could say about the rich irony of this given how bad W's presidency was and how clearly he has shown that his intellect and critical thinking skills are poor.

But I won't.

No, I think Bush's project is all about trying to soften the heavy blow history will deal him in assessing his presidency and his character. See here for a short list of why I think he'll be judged the worst U.S. president in the nation's history.

Unlike Bill Clinton who literally needed money to pay off debts after his tenure as president ended, Bush has been spectacularly wealthy since the moment he was born. So, no, this isn't about money.

Rather, I think it's Bush's attempt to use hindsight and spin to try and justify the litany of decisions he's made.

We'll see what the book ends up doing, but I dare say that for all of Bush's self-satisfying explanations there are a lot of people whose lives have been ended, ruined or seriously set back around the world specifically because of the "decision points" Bush faced and the choices he made at those times. Those people won't be buying that book - literally and figuratively.

"W-Villes" Have Arrived

I heard a story on the radio today about the sharp increase in "tent cities" in urban areas across the United States. 

While these type of homeless settlements, if you will, certainly existed before our recent economic downturn...the issue today is that there are beginning to be more of them as more and more people lose their homes and possessions. As the cold hard reality of the bad economy takes hold in larger numbers than we've seen in a long, long time, shelters are full up. So what do you do? 

Back in the Great Depression of the 1930s, similar settlements sprung up too. They were dubbed "Hoover-villes" after the Republican president Herbert Hoover whose administration ushered in the depression. 

Maybe we ought to call the influx of tent cities today, "W-villes." Or mabye "Decider-villes."

Goodbye to the Worst U.S. President Ever

So here we are...the last full day of George W. Bush as president of the U.S. of A. 

Who knows what the next few years hold. Hope resides primarily in the vision and abilities of one Barack Obama. 

But, before the revision, the spin and the B.S. starts in full about Bush - because for sure it will come - I wanted on the last day of the Bush presidency to touch on a few things to consider in judging the job "W" did in running this country. Any ONE of the following would be grounds for considering Bush the worst president in U.S. history in my book, and there are PLENTY more examples one could add. But, below are five to ponder. I've listed these catastrophic examples of Bush's poor leadership in particular because I think they have had a direct effect on people in this nation, and certainly others:

1) U.S. attacked. The worst single attack on the American homeland by foreign powers in our nation's history occurred on Bush's watch. Think about this. The worst attack ever. Sure, Republicans say Bush "protected" America for seven years straight, but they always fail to remember that the 9-11 attacks  and all the deaths they caused happened on his watch despite clear warnings the president and his team received in advance. Literally historically poor leadership. By the way, the revisionism is already started. The other day in downtown Seattle, I saw a big billboard that said, "President Bush. Thank you for keeping us safe." 

2) Economic disaster. As an inevitable result of the "trickle down," rig the system for the rich, tax cuts for the wealthy, and the spectacular de-regulation of financial, energy and industrial sectors...not to mention an anti-union, outsource-friendly and "free trade" policy...this president and his party aided and abetted THE single worst economic crisis in this country's history other than The Great Depression  - so far as we know yet. High unemployment rates, skyrocketing costs for education, massive home foreclosures, increasing homelessness, more people without healthcare, record deficits (aren't Republicans supposed to be fiscally conservative?), a historically weak dollar and no hope for improvement. Thanks a-hole.

3) Needless war. Yes, most Americans would agree - and I do too - that we needed to go into Afghanistan to go after Bin Laden and the people who orchestrated the 9-11 attacks. But, that had zero to do with Iraq. Bush and Cheney "worked' the American public, the intelligence agencies and the U.N. to get a war started against Saddam predicated on a combination of "daddy issues" for Bush, trumped up evidence and "money making opportunities" for Cheney and the crowd he runs with. The result? Thousands of U.S. dead and wounded, not to mention a much higher toll for Iraqi's. Lets also not forget the war has squandered our Federal budget on Iraq rather than using it to either going after Al Qaida or spending it on domestic priorities. Our reputation around the world has taken a huge hit. There has been  massive grift by U.S. defense contractors. And perhaps the topper...we still haven't killed Bin Laden and shut down his organization, but Bush's decisions have alienated an entire region of the world against us. Want more terrorists? Bush helped create a whole generation of them. 

4) Monumental cronyism. This administration appointed buddies and cronies to high positions and the American public paid the price. This is best exhibited in the whole Hurricane Katrina fiasco in which Bush buddy and horse breeding association guy "Brownie" was in charge of...well, fucking up big time the response to the storm and it's aftermath. This ended up costing some people their lives, and others their livelihoods. And, I suspect there are unknowable millions that have gone to waste, fraud and abuse through Bush's appointments as well. 

5) Environmental incompetence. What a missed opportunity! At the very moment our country could use a transition to a "green" economy and all the historic economic and health benefits this could have brought to the U.S., Bush and company looked backward and short term instead of forward and long term. And what is the result? A tragic, and perhaps nationally fatal, missed opportunity to transition our economy, preserve the global environment and keep our edge on the rest of the world. 

Yes, there are lots of other things beyond these five examples that one could cite as evidence of the total and complete failure of the Bush presidency. Indeed. But I think these handful really tell the story. 

To summarize, at a critical moment in our history when we needed exactly the right leader at the right time, we got (and really, also chose and accepted) the exactly wrong guy and the wrong time in Bush. And for this, our nation is paying a heavy, heavy price that it will take decades to reverse. And for that, George W. Bush will go down as the worst president we've ever had.

I believe history will judge Bush harshly too. We can only hope wiser, more competent and leaders with the interests of all Americans prevail over the next 10-15 years.

Tomorrow, it's, "Welcome President Obama!"

But for at least one more day, it's "F-you George Bush!"

Something to remember as Obama takes office

A quick check in to say...

Lets all remember that as he takes office and navigates year one of his administration, Barack Obama inherited the massive financial markets and economic disaster we're in. He did not create it. No, the conservative agenda of deregulation, trickle down economics, an unnecessary and expensive war, and pandering to big business ushered in under Republican control of Congress and coupled with incompetent leadership from Bush and his cronies created this mess.

Why is this important to remember? Because you can bet anything you want that come Jan. 21, 2009 Republicans will wash their hands of all that they have created and instantly blame Obama and the Democrats for the economic and foreign crisis our country is in. None of this will be true of course, but they'll do it. And the media will cover it. (Congressional elections are now less than 24 months away you know.) Therefore, it's important to remember the sequence of events.

Now, if we're sitting here in January 2010 and nothing has changed or things have gotten worse, then I think we start looking at whether or not Obama's and Congressional fixes are starting to work or not. If they aren't, I'll be disapointed in them...but not until then.

Whose to blame for the current crisis?

With all the drama this week with the financial crisis and what to do about it, one prominent strain of conversation on TV and in DC is who to blame.

Everybody has their favorite culprit. Bush. De-regulation and those who championed it for years. Fat cats on Wall Street. Bankers. Lobbyists.

I think all those types are partially to blame. But, who gave them position and license to create this mess?

Yes, the American people. And that's primarily who is to blame.

We, the American people, have continually been conned by the false gods that conservatives put out there to entice us to vote for them. Family values. Rugged individualism. Ownership society. Compassionate conservatism. Get government off our backs. Read my lips. Who are you gonna trust? San Francisco. East coast elite. Supply side economics. Tax and spend liberals. Culture of life. There you go again. Government is the problem.

Sound familiar?

These are among the many short-hand "tag lines" conservatives from Reagan to W have used to dupe voters into giving them power. Problem is that once in power these so-called conservatives have not done anything to follow through on their promises except to deregulate many sectors of the economy to enrich their donors and cronies.

Well, that game just came to it's natural and predictable conclusion. Crisis. And we're all going to pay for it.

Congratulations America. You got what you deserve.

The good news is that you, American voter, can change things by voting smart in November. Think about what your issues are, what your problems are and what local and national candidates can really solve...and who has the credibility to do it.

Is it really that conservative talking to you about family values and fiscal restraint? That person who has presided over massive debt while doing nothing on  your values issue? Or, maybe it's the other candidate running in whatever race your looking at. 

Think. Reverse where this country is heading.

May the Best Perception Win

Another thought about what has shaped up over the past two weeks of political conventions is that it's now pretty clear what the dueling "positioning" efforts will be by McCain and Obama.

• McCain Campaign - Make it a battle of personalities and perceived character. Say that Obama puts other interests above country first, intimate that his is not patriotic and talk about how he is inexperienced compared to McCain. Go on the attack full time. Do not talk so much about your own policy ideas. Keep Palin away from the media.

• Obama Campaign - Make it a battle of ideas, judgement and the need for change in America. Offer new and specific ideas while tying McCain to George W. Bush and paint him as a guy who will simply continue the failed policies of the last eight years. Use the huge war chest to fight back each time challenged.
  

So, come November a majority of people will either think Obama is just not the right guy for the job or they'll decide they've had enough of conservative rule and vote for change. 

It seems obvious to me what the right choice is, but I said that four years ago and I was wrong. Also, being in the PR business, I can attest to the fact that emotional appeals and negative attacks almost always work when squared off against facts, logic and reason. 

So, I'm wary. 

No Country for Old Men (Or Old Ideas)

The Republican convention has just wrapped up. John McCain delivered his speech pretty well and the conservative party have had their say.


While there are many, many issues that could be debated about what has been said by the GOP this week (many instances of utter and shameless hypocrisy come to mind), the thing that the convention and especially John McCain's speech drove home to me quite clearly is...


The last thing our country needs right now in a leader is a rich old man espousing old, disproven ideas that have directly led the huge problems our nation now faces.


Whether it's the economy, the Iraq war, relations with China and Russia, healthcare, jobs, energy policy, environmental policy...all of these things are spectacularly worse than they were eight years ago specifically because of the leadership, action (or inaction in many cases) and the so called "judgement" of Bush, the Republicans and definitely John McCain.


All I could think about each time that McCain made a point in his speech about what he was going to do to solve our problems was that he is the head of the party that created these very ills and he was offering nothing new - same old Republican punch lines. And lets face it, the Republicans have really been running things for much longer than the last eight years. They controlled Congress from 1995-2006 and the Presidency for 20 of the last 28 years.

We need new ideas, new people and change. Twenty six year DC insider John McCain literally goes around the country promising more of the same.


I can't vote for that and won't.

Further, because the Republicans have so totally failed with their policies I genuinely think those deciding to vote for McCain are in fact putting some very narrow interest - anti-abortion, lower corporate taxes, oil interests, some vaugue notion of family values - ahead of the overall good of the nation. The opposite of the "Country First" mantra of the Republicans. How else can you explain signing up for the exact some thing that got us into this mess. Or, McCain voters are making their judgements on some very, very subjective criteria like...he was a POW or he seems like a nice guy. Using that type of criteria got us George W. Bush.


Lets not repeat that again.

Your "stimulus package" check and big oil

Bush and Cheney are oil men. Oil men have financed their campaigns during their entire careers. This has paid off big time for oil companies again and again.

While gasoline prices have skyrocketed during the Bush presidency, oil companies have enjoyed spectacular and record breaking profits …and remember, some of these oil companies have been around for 100 years or more. These same oil companies get huge tax relief despite the windfall profits.

Also, our nation is at war in the Middle East over oil (yeah sure, go ahead and try to convince me Iraq is all about "fighting terrorists over there so we don’t have to fight them over here”).

Former oil company executives hold positions of power in the government and government leaders often go on to positions of power at oil companies. Oil companies held sway over their buddies George and Dick in terms of the environment too...resulting in the U.S. bailing out of the Kyoto treaty.

So, is it any surprise that recently the oil-man-in-chief…aka, “The Decider”…recommended that Americans can spend their “economic stimulus” checks (ours hasn’t arrived yet) on gasoline? You know, to offset the bite we’re all feeling because of high prices.

Putting aside for a moment how asinine, pandering and ineffective the stimulus check idea is, this really pisses me off.

Our money pays taxes that support the government. The government is run by oil men and women and beholden to the oil industry. At the very moment when maximum profit for big oil coinsides with big time pain at the pump for everyday people, these oil men suggest you put that money right back in the hands of…you guessed it, the oil companies?

Is our government a wholly owned subsidiary of big oil? Has our government – 100% led by Republicans in six of the last seven years – simply created a massive funnel to shift tax dollars to oil companies? And, has all of this radically diverted time, money and effort to the things our country should really be focusing on?

Yes is my answer.

What are we going to do about it? What are you going to do about it?