Politizine.com

Random musings about politics, music, the media and modern times. Since 2002.

Wednesday, May 21, 2008

Rice and Richardson for Vice President? Perhaps Not Such a Good Idea

By Rich Rubino

She is an African-American, holds a PhD in Political Science, is the former Provost at Stanford University, served as Senior Director of Soviet and East European Affairs, served as National Security Advisor, and is currently U.S. Secretary of State.

He is half Latino, served 14 years in the U.S. House of Representatives, held the post of Ambassador to the U.N. and was U.S. Energy Secretary. He is currently Governor of New Mexico and is very popular in that important swing state, having garnered 69% of the electorate in his re-election bid.

Republican Condoleezza Rice and Democrat Bill Richardson appear to be superlative candidates for Vice President. Rice’s resume will likely be scintillating to presumptive Republican nominee John McCain. Richardson’s resume and perceived electoral potency will undoubtedly bring serious consideration from the Democratic presidential nominee.

However, as the old axiom goes, “If it looks too good to be true, it probably is.” While on paper, Rice and Richardson appear to be outstanding vice presidential candidates; both would create serious problems for their respective tickets.

Rice’s problem comes primarily from her tenure as National Security Advisor. If Rice were to get the nod, Democrats would assail her for her failure to take the Al-Qaeda threat seriously prior to 9/11. Ad makers would be elated with thoughts of using clips from Rice’s 2004 testimony before the 9/11 Commission when commission-member Richard Ben-Venise asked Rice: “You acknowledge that Richard Clark [Counter-Terrorism Coordinator] told you that Al-Qaeda cells were in the United States. Did you tell the President anytime prior to August 6 [2001] of the existence of Al-Qaeda cells in the United States?” Rice answered: “I don’t remember the Al-Qaeda cells as being something that we were told we needed to do something about.” The ad might then show Ben-Veniste asking Rice: “Isn’t it a fact Dr. Rice that the August 6 PDB [Presidential Daily Briefing] warned against possible attacks on this country, and I ask you weather you recall the title of that PDB.” Rice responded: “I believe the title was Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States.”

The ad would then display the title of Rice’s 2003 article published in the New York Times: “Why We Know Iraq Is lying.” Her article makes the case that Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction. The ad would conclude with a still photo of Rice with a voice-over saying: “Condolezza Rice --- Wrong on Al-Qaeda --- Wrong on Iraq. Can we trust her to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency?”

Richardson’s tribulation stems from his time as U.S. Energy Secretary. In 2000, while Richardson was spending much time campaigning for presidential candidate Al Gore, two computer hard-drives with designs of the nation’s nuclear labs went missing from the Los Alamos Nuclear facility following a fire. They were later found behind a copy machine. During a hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Richardson suffered a bi-partisan excoriation for a perceived malfeasance and inattention to his job. Members of his own party, including West Virginia Senator Robert Byrd, lambasted Richardson for refusing to appear before the Senate Intelligence Committee on the grounds that he had no answers. Byrd said to Richardson: “You have shown a supreme, a supreme contempt of the committees of this Congress . . . you have squandered your treasure, and I am sorry.” The following warning might follow this sound-bite: “If members of his own party can’t trust Richardson with national security matters, can we?”

It is extremely important that a vice presidential running-mate not antagonize the base of the presidential candidate’s party. John McCain is presently trying to establish rapprochement with the conservative base. Many conservatives are incensed with McCain’s deviations from right-wing orthodoxy on a litany of issues such as illegal immigration, Campaign Finance Reform, and climate change. Rice’s vice presidential candidacy may make a rapprochement impossible. Rice leaves the conservative reservation on what for many conservatives is a litmus test issue: abortion. She calls herself: “mildly pro-choice.” To many conservatives, opposition to abortion rights is non-negotiable, and the thought of a potential president who does not share their views could force them to sit out the election.

Richardson ran to the left during his now aborted presidential campaign. When the Democratic base looks at his history, they will find two major departures from the Left Wing. The first was Richardson’s strong advocacy for the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which many liberals blame for job hemorrhaging. In fact, Barack Obama, Richardson’s potential running-mate, slammed the treaty for shipping “jobs overseas and forcing parents to compete with their teenagers to work for minimum wage at Wal-Mart.” Richardson, a Congressman at the time, orchestrated the successful effort to Shepard NAFTA through the House when he was Chief Deputy Whip. Richardson’s prior support of NAFTA will have the duel distraction of alienating the Democratic base and de-energizing swing-voters in the critical NAFTA-sensitive industrial mid-west.

Richardson’s second major departure from Left-Wing orthodoxy was his advocacy for maintaining U.N. sanctions on Iraq. Many liberals maintained that the sanctions dramatically debilitated Iraq’s economy. UNICEF, for example, contends that the sanctions led to the deaths of over a million Iraqis, including over half a million children due to malnutrition, lack of medical supplies, and diseases caused by a lack of clean water and chlorine. Dennis Halliday, the United Nations Humanitarian Coordinator in Baghdad, resigned in protest, saying: “I don't want to administer a program that satisfies the definition of genocide.” Former Democratic Minority Whip David Bonier called the policy: “infanticide masquerading as policy.”

In 2005, when challenged by Voice Of America’s Amy Goodman, “Do you think the price was worth it, 500,000 children dead?” without challenging the premise of the question, Richardson deadpanned: “Well, I believe our policy was correct, yes.”

If Richardson garners the vice-presidential nomination, that clip will be played ad nauseam in the media. Hearing a potential vice-president callously defending the death of 500.000 children can only lead to consternation among his Democratic base and will cause Richardson to spend critical time defending himself.

Both Rice and Richardson have attractive resumes, but if chosen, McCain and the Democratic nominee had better have a plan for dealing with the firestorm of criticism their choices will surely elicit. Proponents of Rice and Richardson should be careful what they wish for.

Rich Rubino, a resident of Marblehead, Massachusetts, is a political advisor specializing in independent political campaigns. He is a graduate of Assumption College and holds a Masters Degree in Journalism from Emerson College. He was a policy advisor to the Christy Mihos 2006 Massachusetts Gubernatorial Campaign.

Is Obama eyeing Kansas?

Some weird traffic on the Web has me wondering whether or not Barack Obama is planning on choosing Kan. Gov. Kathleen Sebelius as a running mate.
I don't want to go into why I am speculating about this. But let's just say that some folks in D.C. are casting a very wide search net, gathering data from around the Web about John McCain's shellacking at the hands of Mike Huckabee in the Kansas primary back in February.
This is pure speculation on my part. I'm just putting 2 and 2 together to see if the answer is 4 or not. I could be totally wrong on this.
But if Obama does pick Sebelius, it would be a safe bet. She is on everyone's short list right now. She would also deflect major criticisms of an Obama general election campaign: He would be joined on the ticket by a midwestern, more conservative Democratic woman. How could the Hillary supporters complain at that point?
As well, if Obama can hold the Kerry states, win back Iowa and New Mexico to the Democrat side, and win Kansas' 6 electoral college votes, he would beat McCain, 270-268. Obama wouldn't need Ohio or Florida.
Ideally, I would prefer to see Obama pick U.S. Rep. Marcy Kaptur, D-Ohio, a champion of worker's rights and an anti-NAFTA activist that Naderites and Perotistas could get excited about. That might just be enough to pull the election off, assuming McCain makes a really stupid VP pick or stumbles badly this fall.

Obama inches over majority delegate threshold but ...

Hillary won't quit. She's also $31 million in the hole now, money that Obama will be expected to help her raise if he wins the nomination. So, let me get this straight: Hillary can continue to burn through money like this, hurting Obama's general election chances, but he will be expected to help her raise more money to pay off her bills? And we wonder why Democrats can't be trusted to run things? That's not party unity, that's insanity. That's rewarding backstabbing. It's ridiculous.

Kentucky:
Clinton: 459,145 65 percent
Obama: 209,771 30 percent
Uncommitted: 18,029 3 percent

McCain: 142,855 72 percent
Huckabee: 16,239 8 percent
Paul: 13,439 7 percent
Uncommitted: 10,630 5 percent
Romney: 9,151 5 percent
Giuliani: 3,126 2 percent
Keyes: 2,138 1 percent

Oregon:
Obama: 330,533 58 percent
Clinton: 235,937 42 percent

McCain: 262,433 85 percent
Paul: 45,978 15 percent

Anyone know what John Cox received since some of his campaign folks are still saying that there is going to be a floor fight on the GOP convention floor and he will slip in as the nominee?

Tuesday, May 20, 2008

'To know and not to do is not to know'

By Ralph Nader

Mountain View, California – An invitation to visit Google’s headquarters and meet some of the people who made this ten year old giant that is giving Microsoft the nervies has to start with wonder.

The “campus” keeps spreading with the growth of Google into more and more fields, even though advertising revenue still comprises over 90 percent of its total revenues. The company wants to “change the world,” make all information digital and accessible through Google. Its company motto—is “Do No Evil,” which comes under increasing scrutiny, especially in the firm’s business with the national security state in Washington, D.C. and with the censors of Red China.

Google’s two founders out of Stanford graduate school—Sergey Brin and Larry Page—place the highest premium on hiring smart, motivated people who provide their own edge and work their own hours.

We were given “the tour” before entering a large space to be asked and answer questions before an audience of wunderkinds. E-mail traffic was monitored worldwide with a variety of electronic globes with various lights marking which countries were experiencing high or low traffic. Africa was the least lit. One of our photographers started to take a picture but was politely waved away with a few proprietary words. A new breed of trade secrets.

I noticed all the places where food—free and nutritious—was available. The guide said that food is no further than 150 feet from any workplace. “How can they keep their weight down with all these tempting repasts?” I asked. “Wait,” he said, leading us toward a large room where an almost eerie silence surrounded dozens of exercising Googlelites going through their solitary motions at 3:45 in the afternoon.

“How many hours do they work?” one of my colleagues asked. “We don’t really know. As long as they want to,” came the response.

In the amphitheatre, the director of communications and I started a Q and A, followed by more questions from the audience. It was followed by a YouTube interview. You can see both of them on: (Q&A) http://youtube.com/watch?v=KR-V6bl41zU and (Interview) http://youtube.com/watch?v=zzUrUNhIj4c&feature=related.

Google is a gigantic information means, bedecked with ever complex software, to what end? Information ideally leads to knowledge, then to judgment, then to wisdom and then to some action. As the ancient Chinese proverb succinctly put it—“To know and not to do is not to know.”

But what happens when a company is riding an ever rising crest of digitized information avalanches without being able to catch its breath and ask, “information for what?” I commented that we have had more information available in the last twenty five years, though our country and world seem to be getting worse overall; measured by indicators of the human condition. With information being the “currency of democracy,” conditions should be improving across the board.

“Knowledge for what?” I asked. Well, for starters, Google is trying to figure out how to put on its own Presidential debates, starting with one in New Orleans in the autumn. Certainly it can deliver an internet audience of considerable size. But will the major candidates balk if there are other candidates meeting criteria such as a majority of Americans wanting them to participate?

The present Commission on Presidential Debates is a private nonprofit corporation created and controlled by the Republican and Democratic Parties (see http://opendebates.org/). They do not want other seats on the stage and the television networks follow along with this exclusionary format.

Google, with its own Foundation looking for creative applications that produce results for the well-being of people, should hold regular public hearings on the ground around the country for ideas. They may be surprised by what people propose.

In any event, the examples of knowing but not doing are everywhere. More people succumbed to tuberculosis in the world last year than ten years ago. Medical scientists learned how to treat TB nearly fifty years ago. Knowledge alone is not enough.

For years the technology to present the up-to-date voting record of each member of Congress has been available. Yet only about a dozen legislators do so, led by Reps. Frank Wolf (R-VA) and Chris Shays (R-CT). Recalcitrant power blocks what people most want directly from their lawmakers’ website. Here Google can make the difference with Capitol Hill, if it wants to connect information technology to informed voters.

When the internet began, some of us thought that it would make it easy and cheap for people to band together for bargaining and lobbying as consumers. At last, the big banks, insurance companies, credit card companies, automobile firms and so forth would have organized countervailing consumer power with millions of members and ample full time staffs. It has not happened.

Clearly technology and information by themselves do not produce beneficial change. That depends on how decentralized political, economic and social power is exercised in a corporate society where the few decide for the many.

I left Google hoping for a more extensive follow-up conversation, grounded in Marcus Cicero’s assertion, over 2000 years ago, that “Freedom is participation in power.” That is what connects knowledge to beneficial action, if people have that freedom.

I hope my discussions with the Google staff produced some food for thought that percolates up the organization to Google’s leaders.

Wow ... Howie Carr surprises me ...

Howie Carr just opened the show by saying that they would not allow tasteless comments on the program today.
"Let's keep it on a decent level today," he said. "It's a sad day for his family. We don't wish this on anybody."
All I can say is Wow.

Ted K has a brain tumor ...

It's malignant and it's all over the news. My first thoughts were, Boy, that sucks. Second thoughts? He should call it a day and retire from the Senate. It would be a free-for-all campaign not unlike 2004 when everyone and his uncle was thinking about running for the supposed open John Kerry seat. Third thoughts? What will Howie Carr do today at 3 p.m.

Standing head?

["Bush intends to attack Iran before the end of his term"]

Monday, May 19, 2008

Massive crowds

This picture says it all: ["Obama's swept away by sea of supporters 2 days before Oregon vote"]. And this is just sad: ["As Time Runs Short, Clinton Claims Lead In Popular Vote"]. I find it funny that Hillary is dragging this out when in 1992, the Clintons did everything they could to make Jerry Brown quit the race. They are pathetic.

Wednesday, May 14, 2008

Piling on Hillary ...

The Edwards endorsement of Obama is clearly a move to pile on.
I just took a quick look at the C-Span footage of Edwards and Obama from Michigan and while Edwards was extremely gracious towards Clinton in his speech, this move is a clear message: It's time to get behind the person who is going to be the nominee.
"When this nomination battle is over ... and it will be over soon ... we must come together as Democrats ..." etc.
Drudge is wondering if Obama and Edwards are "The Ticket?" but I doubt that is going to happen. I think if Edwards had stayed in and had more than 26 delegates on hand, maybe. The New York Times is reporting tonight that Edwards might reconsider his earlier comments that he would consider the VP slot or a cabinet position: ["John Edwards endorses Barack Obama"].
I like John Edwards a lot. I voted for him in the primary. His message is clear and he is correct. But he was not the best VP candidate in 2004 [granted, that was mostly John Kerry's campaign's fault, handcuffing him] I don't know if he would be the best one for Obama. I don't know who would be but I don't think Edwards is the best choice.
However, check out this line in the Times story:
But privately, he told aides that he would consider the role of vice president, and favored the position of attorney general, which would appeal to his experience of decades spent in courtrooms as a trial lawyer in North Carolina; and his desire to follow in the footsteps of Robert F. Kennedy, one of his heroes.
Now, that's the way to do it. Edwards as the AG would almost be as good as Ralph Nader being the AG. That's the way to go. Let's hope Obama is smart enough to make this move.

Edwards to endorse Obama

WMUR-TV and CNN are reporting that John Edwards will endorse Barack Obama, according to a source within the Obama organization. Interestingly, not a single former candidate has endorsed Clinton. Dodd, Edwards, and Richardson have endorsed Obama; Biden and Kucinich have been quiet; Gravel bolted for the Libertarian Party.

Update: Well, maybe this has changed. CNN has just taken off the banner headline announcing its breaking news about Edwards. So, maybe something has happened ... Did Bubba start screaming at him and Elizabeth?

Update 2: Whoops, never mind. Here's the story, literally updated a minute ago: ["Edwards to endorse Obama"].

Obama gets hammered in WV ...

But does it matter?
Clinton, 238,941, 67 percent, 20 delegates
Obama, 91,613, 26 percent, 8 delegates

Tuesday, May 13, 2008

'Liberty needs a voice and America needs a choice ...'

Those are the words of former GOP Rep. Bob Barr of Georgia as he announced he would be a Libertarian candidate for the presidency. Here is his YouTube announcement:



Russ Verney of Ross Perot fame is an advisor, according to press reports.
On half the issues facing the nation, Barr is dead-on correct. On others, he is bats.
If the two major party candidates are smart, they will agree to face off against Barr, Ralph Nader, and Cynthia McKinney, in televised debates and not be scared of the independents like the candidates of the past. 2008 could get very interesting.

Saturday, May 10, 2008

Members of PrioritiesNH and New Hampshire Citizens Alliance "stirred it up" Thursday, as they celebrated their "mixer" over ice cream treats with Ben & Jerry's co-founder Ben Cohen.

PrioritiesNH, the campaign for sensible budget priorities known for its colorful pie charts and eye-catching vehicles, has become a project of New Hampshire Citizens Alliance. The PrioritiesNH campaign calls for cutting off funds for Pentagon waste and obsolete weapons and using the savings to fund priority programs like education, healthcare and energy independence.

As an affiliate of US Action, New Hampshire Citizens Alliance promotes the Invest in America's Future campaign, which calls for safely, responsibly ending the U.S. occupation of Iraq and making public investments in the same priorities: education, quality, affordable healthcare for all, and energy independence.

As a special guest of the "Stirring Committee" of the two groups, Cohen launched the "mixer" by stacking Oreo cookies to demonstrate the lopsided priorities of the federal budget. "We're still spending about $60 billion a year on weapons that are designed to fight the Soviet Union," said Cohen. "That money could be used to renovate and rebuild all the schools in the U.S., or provide healthcare to all the kids who don't have it, or help us gain energy independence."

NHCA Board of Directors Chair Margaret Duffy said, "There's great momentum here to build on. Bringing our organizations together strengthens our work to shift national priorities in directions that better meet the needs of us all."

Bob Marley's "Stir it Up" played in the background as the crowd at the Common Man Restaurant in Concord enjoyed Ben & Jerry's ice cream treats and wrote their ideas for the next phase of the campaigns on giant sheets of paper on the walls.

Tuesday, May 06, 2008

For Hillary, the end is near ...

North Carolina

President - Dem Primary
721 of 2817 Precincts Reporting - 26%

NamePartyVotesVote %
Obama, BarackDem384,39960%

Clinton, HillaryDem246,41138%

No PreferenceDem7,7841%

Gravel, MikeDem4,2611%
President - GOP Primary
714 of 2817 Precincts Reporting - 25%

NamePartyVotesVote %
McCain, JohnGOP135,17275%

Huckabee, MikeGOP21,27112%

Paul, RonGOP13,2747%

No PreferenceGOP6,9834%

Keyes, AlanGOP4,3382%
Indiana

President - Dem Primary
3537 of 5230 Precincts Reporting - 68%

NamePartyVotesVote %

Clinton, HillaryDem440,94953%

Obama, BarackDem391,76647%
President - GOP Primary
3540 of 5230 Precincts Reporting - 68%

NamePartyVotesVote %
McCain, JohnGOP233,60677%

Huckabee, MikeGOP31,36510%

Paul, RonGOP23,1248%

Romney, MittGOP14,6785%

Monday, May 05, 2008

It's kinda official: Hillary's chances are very slim

The NYT has this very cool delegate calculator showing what percentages of the remaining primaries and super delegates both Hillary and Obama need to win the Democratic nomination: ["Delegate Calculator"].
They show results based on each candidate's best result, as well as an average of the results.
For example, if Hillary gets election returns close to her best state - Arkansas, 77 percent - she will still need to win every state by that amount AND need 32 percent of the remaining super delegates to get the nom. If Obama can win the rest of the primaries by 53 percent, he will only need 22 percent of the leftover super delegates to win.
If this data is correct - and I have no reason to believe that it isn't - Hillary can't win. It's completely unrealistic to believe that she can. This means that she has no reason to stay in the race at this point unless she is a) gunning for the VP slot with Obama, which isn't going to happen, b) is hoping for a brokered convention where she can deny Obama the nom, or c) going to help McCain - willing or unwillingly - sink Obama so she can run against Huckabee or Romney in 2012.
As I have said for more than two years, it is going to be brokered convention. It's going to be mess. And I'm going to friggin' enjoy every minute of it!

Sunday, May 04, 2008

More evidence that Terminator is here ...

Creepy spider bug weapons are on the way: ["Robobug goes to war: Troops to use electronic insects to spot the enemy 'by the end of the year'"] and ["War of the future; Robot versus robot"].

Follow up: A blogger runs for reelection ...

Editor's Note: After the 2006 election, I found out that one of the new representatives to the New Hampshire Legislature was a blogger. Margaret Porter ousted Republican insider Tony Soltani for the seat. I decided to send her a follow up email to see what she thought of her first term.

First, have you decided whether you will be running for reelection?

I've already committed to running for re-election, and earlier in the year informed both my town committee and the Majority Office.

What do you think you have accomplished as a state representative in the last 18 months?

Where do I start? Such a busy, productive time!

It has been a pleasure and a privilege to vote in support of legislation that I feel benefits New Hampshire's citizens and their quality of life. Defining an adequate education, raising the minimum wage, re-establishing job training funding, providing financial support to higher education, ensuring civil unions for same-sex couples, expanding health care and preventative health care programs, eliminating straight-ticket voting, supporting small business and agri-business, approving North Country employment initiatives, protecting the state's natural resources, and providing a funding source for the L-CHIP program.

In the aftermath of the recently completed Fish & Game Department Performance Audit, I was appointed to the legislative subcommittee that will review some of its recommendations and craft appropriate legislation.

Within my district, I've closely tracked the environmental studies and findings related to the flooding of the Suncook River, which has had considerable local impact. I participated in the naming of the Epsom Traffic Circle for Officers Michael Briggs and Jeremy Charron. Recently, at the instigation of Congressman Hodes, I became involved in economic stimulus efforts in Pittsfield and attended the recent summit he convened in the town.

I'm responsive to the individual constituents who contact me--about pending legislation, or for assistance or information or resources. I help them to the best of my ability.

Two of the biggest issues, tax policy and education funding, still seem unresolved. Do you have any thoughts on why they are unresolved? In addition, what do you think will occur during the next session to remedy these issues?

Tax policy cannot be substantially altered by the Legislature as long as there is a Governor unwilling to approve any substantial change in the status quo. With regards to education, the Legislature has followed the timeline set by the court: last year, in bi-partisan fashion, we defined the components of an adequate education by the deadline imposed. In the next few weeks we should complete the adequacy costing analysis. The funding source can't be determined until the costs are known. I'm afraid I can't predict how these issues will be resolved in the next session...it depends on numerous factors. For example: how the costing formula turns out, whether the Governor takes The Pledge again, if his Constitutional Amendment makes it onto the ballot in November, the decline in the economy, our state revenue shortfall, which party holds the majority.

Lastly, has it hurt or helped you to have come in as a writer/blogger/concerned citizen instead of a retiree and attorney?

I like to think that my background and all my life experiences provide a useful perspective. Certainly it helps that I'm accustomed to reading and analyzing printed materials--we deal with a lot of paper! My public speaking experience came in handy on occasion when I addressed the House. Though there are plenty of retirees in the House, their professions and expertise are broad and varied. I've encountered relatively few attorneys. In the area of Representatives Hall where I sit, there are young or middle-aged professionals. And college students!

Democrat Rep. Margaret Porter serves Merrimack County District 8 which represents Allenstown, Epsom, and Pittsfield. Her Web site is margaretporter.com.

Saturday, May 03, 2008

Surge technology?

Wow, check this out:

Question: Can anyone - anyone - hot rod my Honda Civic to do this? I spend $240 to $300 per month in gas to get to work. I will pay anyone a year's worth of gas - up to $3,600 - to upgrade my Honda to run on nothing but magnets. My email is above.

Speaking of gas, I have to agree with Barack Obama on the gas tax holiday thing. It's a completely silly argument and both Hillary Clinton and John McCain are pandering. Sure, I could use the $3 to $4 per week I pay in gas taxes back in my pocket. But gas taxes, for the most part, go toward road repairs and bridge construction. And after years and years of decay, our infrastructure is crumbling. So, the last thing anyone should do is roll back the gas tax. What should be done is that the government should implement price controls and they should do it now.

Friday, May 02, 2008

Trippi's regret is ours too ...

From Political Wire via Campaigns & Elections Magazine:
"I didn't tell him what I should have told him: That I had this feeling that if he stayed in the race he would win 300 or so delegates by Super Tuesday and have maybe a one-in-five chance of forcing a brokered convention. That there was a path ahead that would be extremely painful, but could very well put him and his causes at the top of the Democratic agenda. And that in politics anything can happen -- even the possibility that in an open convention with multiple ballots an embattled and exhausted party would turn to him as their nominee. I should have closed my eyes to the pain I saw around me on the campaign bus, including my own. I should have told him emphatically that he should stay in. My regret that I did not do so -- that I let John Edwards down -- grows with every day that the fight between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama continues."
Ya know Joe, your regret is ours too. Now we are stuck with two mediocre candidates - one who is a borderline empty-suiter and the other who is obsessed with power. Next time, like in the past, don't hold back it and keep it on full throttle. I predicted almost two years ago that there might be a brokered convention. I still think there might be. But if Edwards had a few hundred delegates, he could have been a bigger player.

Wednesday, April 30, 2008

Herald kicks That Guy Tai's blog off its site ...

The radio Web sites are abuzz with news about former 'FNX rocker, 'RKO talker That Guy Tai [Tom Irwin] getting booted from the Boston Herald Web site after he was critical of Howie Carr, the Herald's - and 'RKO's - marquee player: ["Tai unplugged"].
The blog, Tai-rade, which I have written about before here on Politizine, went missing after Tai reportedly stated that Carr had been phoning his show and column in. Tai supposedly offered to do the show - and the column - for free! How could Purcell pass that up? Well, since Tai-Rade disappeared quite quickly, we can all presume what happened.

Update: A quick Google yielded no results of where the new Tai-Rade Web site has landed [Note to Tai: Get it up fast so we can link it buddy!]. However, I did find some bits from a site called labs.daylife.com:

From April 24, "Leaders Vs. Followers: Howie Carr Vs. Reality":
The problem with Howie Carr listeners is that, regardless of their political stripes, they are followers. Democracy needs people who can think beyond party lines and stale prejudice. So here’s the wake up call to the lemming brigade: google “mass media” ...
From April 22, "They Said It, Not Me. Entercom Owns WRKO, Hello?:
April 22 (Bloomberg) — Entercom Communications Corp. is luring Barclays Global Investors and JPMorgan Chase & Co., its fourth- and fifth-largest investors, to buy shares even as the U.S. radio chain’s stock drops on speculation of a dividend cut. Six ...
From April 20: "Howie Carr Replaced':
Howie – I’m Calling You Out. Now hear this: I’ll take over Howie’s slot at the Herald, and his radio show – and I’ll do them both for free. Don’t ask questions about the practical complications of such a plan, just start lobbying for it, damn it. You ...
Maybe Tai should be hired by WRKO to replace Tom Finneran in the morning. It would be good radio and drive Howie bats too.

Sunday, April 27, 2008

Fueling Food Shortages

Guest Perspective/Ralph Nader

Where is Harry Chapin when you need him? The popular folk singer (Cat’s in the Cradle), who lost his life in an auto crash 27 years ago, was an indefatigable force of nature against hunger—in this country and around the world.

To hear Harry speak out against the scourge of hunger in a world of plenty was to hear informed passion that was relentless whether on Capitol Hill, at poverty conferences or at his concerts.

Now the specter of world hunger is looming, with sharply rising basic food prices and unnecessary food shortages sparking food riots in places like Haiti and Egypt. Officials with the U.N.’s World Food Program (WFP) are alarmed. The WFP has put out an emergency appeal for more funds, saying another 100 million humans have been thrown into the desperate hunger pits.

Harry would have been all over the politicians in Congress and the White House who, with their bellies full, could not muster the empathy to do something.

Directly under Bush and the Congress is the authority to reduce the biggest single factor boosting food prices—reversing the tax-subsidized policy of growing ever more corn to turn into fuel at the expense of huge acreages that used to produce wheat, soy, rice and other edibles.

Corn ethanol is a multifaceted monstrosity—radiating damage in all directions of the compass. Reducing acreage for edible crops has sparked a surge in the price of bread and other foodstuffs. Congress and Bush continue to mandate larger amounts of subsidized corn ethanol.

Republican Representative Robert W. Goodlatte says: “The mandate basically says [corn] ethanol comes ahead of food on your table, comes ahead of feed for livestock, comes ahead of grains available for export.”

Corn growing farmers are happy with a bushel coming in at $5 to $6—a record.

A subsidy-laden, once-every-five-years farm bill is winding its way through Congress. The bill keeps the “good-to-fuel” mandates that are expanding corn acreage and contributing to a rise of global food prices.

Of course, more meat diets in China, futures market speculation, higher prices for oil and some bad weather and poor food reserve planning have also contributed to shortages and higher prices.

But subsidized corn ethanol gets the first prize for policy madness. It not only damages the environment, soaks up the water from mid-west aquifers, scuttles set asides for soil conservation, but its net energy equation qualifies for collective insanity on Capitol Hill. To produce a gallon of ethanol from corn requires almost as much energy (mostly coal burning) as it produces.

Designed to alleviate oil imports, hold down gasoline prices and diminish greenhouse gases, corn ethanol has flopped on all three scores.

Princeton scholar Lester Brown, an early sounder of the alarm of global food shortages and higher prices, writes in Science Magazine “that the net impact of the food-to-fuel push will be an increase in global carbon emissions—and thus a catalyst for climate change.”

Can Congress change course and drop its farm subsidy of corn ethanol this year? Observers say, despite the growing calamities and the real risk of severe malnutrition, even starvation in Africa, Congress will do nothing.

Farm subsidies, once installed, are carved in stone—unless there is enough outcry from food consumers, taxpayers and environmentalists. They are paying from the pocketbook, from their taxes and health. That should be enough motivation, unless they need to see the distended stomachs of African and Asian children on the forthcoming television news.

Unless we wake up, we will continue to be a country stuck in traffic—in more ways than one.

Don’t rely on the election year political debates to pay attention to destructive corn ethanol programs. For years I have been speaking out against this boondoggle, while championing the small farmer in America, but no one in positions of Congressional leadership has been listening.

They must be waiting for the situation to get worse before they absorb a fraction of Harry Chapin’s empathy and care.

Friday, April 25, 2008

On the air tomorrow ...

Sorry for the short notice: I will be sitting in with Samantha Clemens on 91.5 FM WMFO radio tomorrow morning from 9 to 11 a.m. Since the station is located on the Somerville/Medford line, you can only hear it if you live in the area. But you can also check it out online, at wmfo.org.

Rebuilding Congress

Guest Perspective by Lee Hamilton

With their promise of new energy on Capitol Hill, congressional elections are always a time for hope. This year's contests will be especially significant, for Congress is listing and the nation desperately needs it to right itself. No single is! sue is the problem; it's Congress itself. The people we elect in November to fill the House and Senate chambers next January will need to set about not just doing the people's business, but fixing the institution so that they can do the people's business.

At some level, Americans understand this. The overwhelmingly negative polling numbers that Congress has been putting up recently may be fed in part by issues such as Iraq and the economy, but more generally they reflect widespread disappointment and scanty confidence in the institutions of government. People are discouraged by the lack of progress they see on the big issues we face as a nation. They're tired of excessive partisanship. And they're especially dismayed by political leaders who seem, for whatever reason, unable or unwilling to lead.

Congress is under great stress, then - in its internal dealings, its relations with the executive branch, and its legitimacy in the eyes of the American public. It ne! eds renovating.

Its first charge ought to be to reassert itself as a robust and vigorous institution, comparable in strength and initiative to the President. Our system relies on creative tension between a strong Congress and a strong President for the simple reason that different opinions and approaches, forthrightly stated and creatively resolved, produce the best policy. This is why Congress' willingness to yield war-making authority to the President has not served this country well; issues of life, death and entanglements abroad need thoroughgoing debate, not deference to the President in the name of patriotism.

Similarly, Congress' penchant over the past several years for letting the President largely set the budget has allowed it to sidestep responsibility for laying out and vetting the basic blueprint of government.

Congress has of late made some progress on overseeing the executive branch and holding it more accountable for its actions. This is promising, for oversight is the best means of determining whether fede! ral programs are working as intended or whether there's misconduct on the part of bureaucrats and political appointees.

But Congress needs to get even tougher. Effective oversight is not just a matter of looking at a few programs; it needs to be part and parcel of Congress' activities, especially in the routine reauthorization process that Congress has by and large abandoned. The continuing resolutions and massive "omnibus" spending bills that Congress relies on these days don't offer the chance to probe the nooks and crannies of federal agencies; they allow the executive branch to escape scrutiny, and weaken not just Congress, but the President and the nation.

This is one reason why a return to what Capitol Hill veterans call "the regular order" is crucial - taking up one appropriations bill at a time, holding hearings that investigate issues carefully, letting the diverse voices represented in Congress be heard, allowing full and fair debate on the most cont! roversial issues, and voting on all of the major issues. The tradition al, deliberative process may seem plodding, but it is how Congress assures openness and its own legitimacy in the eyes of ordinary Americans - who worry, often rightly, that shortcuts or closed doors hide decisions that wouldn't bear public scrutiny.

To be sure, even an open process can be hijacked by rank partisanship or by members determined to gum it up for their own purposes. There's no easy answer to this. In part, the solution lies with voters, who need to make clear at the ballot box that they value civility and a willingness to work on behalf of common sense and the common good.

In part, it lies with thoroughgoing ethics reform: Congress has made a start over the last year, but too many members still fail to understand how their low institutional standing stems from public mistrust. Congress must insist that all of its members reflect credit on the institution, as the basic code of conduct requires.

In the end, though, perhaps the most important ! answer lies with a recognition that at this point in our history, with the nation politically divided in the face of fundamental threats to its well-being and its standing in the world, it is the job of the Congress to try to forge consensus and national unity behind solutions to problems.

It showed it could do so with its recent economic stimulus package, although compared with the very tough decisions still facing our national leadership, cutting taxes was relatively easy.

Perhaps, in the end, it won't be able to muster a consensus on Iraq or reshaping financial regulation or combating climate change. Even so, the American people expect it to try, and when they go to the polls this November, that hope will go with them.

Lee Hamilton is Director of the Center on Congress at Indiana University. He was a member of the U.S. House of Representatives for 34 years.

Thursday, April 24, 2008

Concord Monitor faces economic challenges

Editor's Note: This is a corrected and edited version of an earlier post. Monitor Publisher Geordie Wilson was kind enough to respond to the first edition of this post with some clarifications which I have integrated into the original post. His full comment is posted on the OurConcord.com version of this post. This is the first in a series analyzing the news industry in Concord.
The Sunday edition of the Concord Monitor revealed some startling admissions on its editorial pages about the teetering state of the newspaper industry and what the company would be doing in the future to stay in business.
The revelations were a bit startling to many, especially those who have had a long-term relationship with the newspaper [For me, it's been more than three decades: I started reading the newspaper as a boy, became a peddler of the afternoon edition in the late 1970s while in middle-school, and have been a regular reader for years].
While they may seem awkward, these letters to readers are an important part of continuing the relationship between the reader of the news and the producer of the news. Despite the economic climate, many people are still connected to their community newspapers and Concord is no exception.
In the column, linked here: ["Tough times, tough choices for the 'Monitor'"] Executive Editor Felice Belman noted that changes were coming in order to weather current economic conditions. While not going too deeply into specifics about how bad things were, Belman said the newspaper would preserve what was important: reporting local news:
In planning for budget cuts we have been mindful of protecting what's most important: the local news report, brought to you by a serious staff of New Hampshire reporters, editors and photographers.
The Monitor will cut costs by lowering print and ink usage. It will publish tighter newspapers by dropping filler house ads and moving to a two book edition instead of four books. On Monday and Tuesday, the paper published the tighter layout with 20 pages. The previous two Monday editions were 24 pages. On Wednesday, the Monitor was a four book again, with 24 pages. Belman wrote that the changes would limit space previously available for national and international news noting that readers could get that information via other outlets [And she's correct on this point].
These types of changes are not surprising and have been the norm for a while in an industry battling to stay alive. Some have lopped off column inches from the size of their newspapers and cut other costs to preserve what is important without alienating current readers. Some have gone through redesigns in order to hide the changes from readers.
The fact that it took the Monitor so long to come to these cost-cutting conclusions is a bit remarkable considering the state of the industry. Everyone in media circles knows how bad business is and has been. As advertising revenues have been diverted to other mediums, newspaper companies have sustained layoffs [or buyouts for those fortunate enough to be union employees or highly-paid columnists] year after year in order to please shareholders. The Monitor has delayed decisions made by other companies because it is owned and operated locally and is not hounded by Wall Street worrying about 20 percent returns each year.
But there is only so much one business can sustain before making changes. Since the Monitor has been owned by the same family, it has not had to worry about market forces until now. Many of us though have suspected things might be bleak for our local daily as recently as 18 months ago.
Back in December 2006, as part of the Greater Concord Chamber of Commerce's Leadership Class, I spent the day at the Monitor's facility for our Media Day class. We did some roleplaying which was fun for the non-media types and there was also an interesting debate about news media issues in which the Monitor's circulation director Mark Travis took a cheap shot at local radio for not having a person on the panel [What he did not realize until later was that I was a member of the class and managing WKXL at the time and therefore, not invited to sit on the panel, something not lost on my classmates].
The class also received a tour of the offices and printing facility. It was great to see the new facility [It isn't all that new but to me it was since I remember the days when the Monitor's office and printing press were on Green Street, in the heart of downtown].
Since WKXL was actively seeking support from the same advertising base as the Monitor, I had some inside knowledge about the state of affairs at the Monitor. Specifically, the Radio Advertising Bureau [RAB] had provided our company with the newspaper's declining paid circulation numbers - numbers which turned out to be incomplete - and other ways of showing how the Audit Bureau of Circulation [ABC], one of the circulation bureaus used by newspapers, fudges the numbers for newspapers to make the numbers seem not so bleak.
According to Wilson, the Monitor has a circulation of just under 20,000 weekdays, and a little more than 22,000 on Sunday, based on calculations done in June 2007 by the Certified Audit of Circulations. This circulation includes Newspaper In Education sponsorships, as well as other programs, although Wilson noted in a recent email that more than 90 percent of the editions are paid copies.
The ABC figures submitted to the radio station were apparently for Concord proper only and not the entire service area. Those figures showed the Monitor with an average daily readership of 18,000 Monday through Saturday and 19,000 on Sunday, according to the latest figures available from 2005 [The Monitor claims 22,000 readers and the latest figures are not currently available without paying for them]. These figures were based on about 7,800 newspapers sold each day in Concord, Monday through Saturday, and 8,000 on Sunday. The ABC calculates circ numbers based on more than one person reading each edition of the newspaper which is sold: 2.3 people reading the weekday edition and 2.4 people reading the Sunday edition.
This mechanism of calculating readership by ABC is a great leap of assumption but is also the industry standard. Despite this standard, it seems like a completely flawed formula and probably reflects inaccurate readership numbers. How inaccurate? Well, consider other mediums for a minute.
Radio tracks listeners by recording and tabulating the decisions of the listener. But imagine what a boon it would be if a station could take its six share and multiply it by 2.3 and tell advertisers, "Well, there are three commuters in every car so ..."
Television tracks household viewership [They may multiply households by 2.3 viewers to get overall viewership but I don't know for sure. I'm sure they do this to come up with the 10 million viewer number but not the actual ratings].
The Internet tracks things by actual clicks of computers entering a site. They could exaggerate and say, "There were three co-workers leaning over my shoulder while I was on Drudge ..." but that isn't how it is done.
Weekly newspapers - at least the ones that I have worked for - talk about actual print editions sold and subscriptions sent out. They don't multiply by 2.3.
So, why shouldn't daily newspapers be held to the same standard? These comments are not posted to beat up on dailies, the Monitor, or anyone else. It is just done to show a flaw in the mechanism of counting circ and one has to wonder how they get away with it.
When I thought that the Monitor only had about 8,000 sold editions in a market population of about 120,000, I was floored and didn't believe. It turns out, these figures were wrong and not as bad as previously posted, which, frankly, is a relief.
But how could any newspaper in a small market stay alive with such a small amount of newspapers sold?
Before the Media Day class, participants of the class sat in on an editorial board meeting of the newspapers editors to watch how they decided what went into the newspaper. About seven editors sat at a table and talked about the stories of the day, including local stories, photos, sports, and other items. It was an interesting discussion to watch because there wasn't much discussion. A list was printed up of all the potential stories and a photo editor showed off the day's shots. There was a bit of banter but it was not extensive.
After the editors were done, they answered questions about the process or anything else we wanted to know about. The six people who attended the meeting and did not work in media had some interesting questions about story content, staffing, and other things.
One woman asked, "How many news reporter do you have?"
Then-Executive Editor Mike Pride stated, "13."
"How many people work on the paper itself?" another asked.
Pride said there were 46 editorial employees and 120 employees altogether.
I asked about the new publication called The Insider and why it was only distributed to the Concord subscribers and not in say, Webster, where people might find the information and content interesting.
Pride said people from outside of Concord could pick up it at newsboxes downtown.
But what if they don't get downtown?, I asked.
Then folks wouldn't get it, he said.
I then asked, Was there any thought to spending the staffing dollars beefing up the Local/Regional section instead of producing an entirely new product?
To this question, Pride bristled and stated "No" quite sharply and I didn't ask anymore questions.
This entire conversation shocked me on many different levels.
To start, I couldn't believe the newspaper had so many employees. But the numbers were later confirmed by Wilson when he gave the classmates a tour of the facility a week after the editor's meeting.
During the tour, Wilson showed off the Monitor's printing presses and some of the other publications which the company printed for other businesses. Those newspapers included The Hippo, some Spanish language newspapers, and the Sun Transcript chain on the North Shore of Massachusetts, showing that the printing presses were an integral part of the company's overall business strategy.
Issues of staffing and news production were front and center in my mind and had been for months. There had been staffing issues at WKXL, specifically, the station was losing full-time employees but not replacing key personnel in order to save money. Over a period of two years, staffing went from 15 full-timers and two part-timers at its peak, to six full-timers and a few part-timers. The six remaining full-time employees were expected to produce more content and a heavier workload than the previous 15. The six people were also expected to perform as good - if not better - than better-staffed news operations like the Monitor, NHPR or WMUR-TV Channel 9.
The production [and quality] of the local news produced by the Monitor was often used by the station's owner to criticize the two full-timers and one part-timer working on news.
'How come the Monitor got this story and we didn't?' was a regular mantra I heard.
'Eh, because they have more reporters doing less work?' [This is not a dig at the Monitor reporters. But some days when comparing the two news organizations, their 13 reporters would produce fewer actual stories than the station's 2.5 reporters, while the radio reporters also produced calendar listings, long-form programs, and numerous 5-minute audio segments on top of the actual stories].
While I didn't know this for sure, I suspected as much. After attending the class and confirming the 6 to 1 and 10 to 1 staffing level differences between the Monitor and WKXL, I mentioned to the owner that he should either hire more staff or limit the amount of criticism leveled at the station's news operation. No new staffing was hired and I returned to my previous newspaper job a few months later.
What was cool about the admission by Wilson was that he would make the admission. But also that a family business so cared about the quality of its news and its commitment to the community that it was willing to use another facet of the business to sustain that quality [WKXL should get the same consideration on a smaller scale].
In making these changes, the Monitor is clearly salvaging what its staff believes is important while at the same time attempting to survive the current economic storm. They seem minor and worthy of support by both the news consumer and the news producer. And, frankly, it is an important endeavor to make sure newspapers which focus on local content and information stay alive and vibrant.

Upcoming: The importance of local news and why it is worth fighting for. Plus, some suggestions on how the Monitor [and other news outlets] can change with the times while also staying relevant to the community.

Death defying!

One of my sisters sent me this video. Very cool: