Category Archives: Culture

The Age Of The Corporation.

Posted on by

Following the Great Depression and World War II, most people in the US were independent.  Many owned a small family farm or a small business such as a Five and Dime, a soda fountain, clothing store or whatever.  If they managed to set aside any savings, the money likely went into a Certificate of Deposit or US Savings Bond with guaranteed interest.

Things pretty much continued that way until the 1970s and 1980s.  Then, large indoor shopping malls and big box stores began replacing small retailers.  Farms became larger and larger until only a few families and wealthy corporations could afford the land and equipment.  Much of the US population moved to large cities to work for large corporations. Whatever savings we managed to accumulate went into large, corporate-controlled mutual funds, corporate 401Ks or IRAs.

In the 1990s and early 2000s, yet another trend toward corporate control began as on-line shopping sites began to replace brick and mortor stores cutting salaries and moving many jobs off-shore.

The result of all of this is an almost total corporate dominance of our lives.

We not only rely on large corporations for our jobs.  We have grown to rely on them for food, healthcare, pharmaceuticals, communications, entertainment and our investments (if we’re lucky enough to still have some).  And now large corporations are beginning to seize control of many other aspects of our lives such as education, transportation, even the military.  And, in the most disturbing intrusion of all, thanks to the Supreme Court ruling for Citizens United, corporations are now exerting even more control over our election campaigns.

Our once proud democracy is slowly fading into history.  Welcome to the age of plutocracy.

How Performance-Based Compensation Is Killing America.

Posted on by

Sometime in the late 70s, I met with a client to discuss his marketing plans for the year.  When I asked about the company’s long-term plans, the client said that his Fortune 500 Company no longer does long-term planning.  When the client noticed my obvious surprise, he told me that things were changing too quickly.  He went on to explain that the company’s CEO is now compensated with a base salary and performance-based stock options.  The higher the stock price, the more the CEO would be paid.

Now more than 30 years later, the effects of performance-based compensation are obvious.

CEOs now base their companies’ success on the share price of securities.  Not on brand value, number of offices and employees, company holdings and investments, or sales.  As a result, many CEOs are now willing to mortgage the future of their companies in order to maximize share price.  Of course, one way to accomplish their short-sighted goal is to increase productivity, aka employee layoffs.  Another popular method is to cut or eliminate employee benefits.  Yet another method is to export jobs to countries that have a plentiful supply of low-cost workers, no labor unions and few regulations.

There is no loyalty to long-time employees, vendors, communities, the nation or the environment.  The only thing that matters is the stock value and how that translates into executive compensation.  The average tenure of a CEO with any one company is slightly more than 8 years.  As a result, they often don’t care about what happens to that company 10, 20 or 30 years from now as long as they have time to cash in their stock.  If the company is aquired or merged, that only means the stock price is likely to go up.

If we want to take back our country from these greedy few, we have to change the way performance is measured.  The price of a share of stock is not enough.  We must also measure the value of corporations to our nation – the number of jobs provided, impact on our environment, contributions to communities, value of natural resources consumed, and taxes paid.

Until that happens, you will continue to see CEOs lead our nation in a race to the bottom.

Where Fair And Balanced Still Mean Something.

Posted on by

Although little more than an imaginary line separates us, Canada’s politics are light years away from those in the US.  Unlike our politicians, Canadians don’t have to consult a dictionary for the meaning of compromise.  And except for the vile rhetoric blasted across the border by US radio stations, the Canadian airwaves are void of hate-filled rants.

The reason?

Canada’s Radio Act requires that “a licenser may not broadcast….any false or misleading news.”  Broadcast news reporters and pundits tell the truth?  How positively pre-1987!  That was the year the FCC, pushed by President Ronald Reagan, repealed the Fairness Doctrine.  Ever since, conservative crackpots have been free to lie, mislead and spew any hateful ideas they want – the more the better.  In the US, we understand those are the things that build ratings.

But those darn, polite Canadians have yet to realize that ratings are more important than civility and fairness.  So they cling to the quaint belief that broadcasters and politicians should tell the truth.  Is it any wonder that Canadian conservatives are deprived of the likes of Fox News Channel?  And now that Canadian regulators have rejected Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s efforts to repeal the Radio Act, Canada’s conservatives will have to settle for the truth a while longer.

In The Words Of A Founding Father…

Posted on by

For those who demand that the US pass a so-called “Defense of Marriage Act” banning gay and lesbian marriage; For those who demand that the government intervene in the relationship between a woman and her doctor for fear that she might take a contraceptive or consider an abortion; For those who demand that the US be declared a Christian nation; For those who demand that our schools teach Chrisitian values to students; For those who believe that a failure to follow the commandments of the Bible will result in the collapse of our nation, consider this:

In Notes on the State of Virginia, Thomas Jefferson outlined his views which led to the separation of church and state: “The rights of conscience we never submitted, we could not submit.  We are answerable for them to our God. The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others.  But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods, or no god.  It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. … Reason and free enquiry are the only effectual agents against error.”

Running To The Left.

Posted on by

Teapublican candidates are notorious for running to the right during primaries in order to placate the base.  Then they run to the center during the general election.  What about Democrats?  When’s the last time you saw a Democratic candidate run to the left during the primary contest?

It’s a trick question.

The answer is most likely never.  In my voting lifetime, I cannot recall a single instance of a Democratic candidate changing positions following the primaries to become more centrist.  They all seem to be centrists, that is if you consider the center to be what once was the right.

More and more Democratic candidates are refugees from the new Teapublican Party.  More and more of them talk about the need to cut social programs while maintaining or increasing defense spending.  More are in favor of corporate tax cuts.  And more are in favor of liberal gun laws.

The result of this dynamic is that, with each election cycle, Teapublicans are successful in moving the discussion further to the right.  And Democrats just keep going along with it.  In fact, it would be difficult to distinguish a “liberal” of today from a conservative of the 1970s or 1980s.  The “liberal” President Clinton signed a Republican bill repealing the Glass-Steagall Act regulating the financial industry.  The “liberal” Clinton signed a bill making it easier for corporations to export jobs.  The “socialist” President Obama signed a law permitting guns in our national parks.  And, instead of pushing for universal healthcare, the “socialist” Obama settled for health care reform based on a concept from the ultra-conservative Heritage Foundation.

What the Democratic Party really needs is a less belligerent, liberal version of the Tea Party that will force candidates to run to the left in order to win their primaries.  Maybe then we can turn our political discussion back to the real center.

The Party of Hate.

Posted on by

Teapublicans love to say incendiary things about their political opponents.  In just the past few weeks, Teapublican candidates and representatives have called President Obama a socialist, communist and fascist.  A Teapublican Senator called President Obama the most divisive figure in politics.  A Teapublican stated that gays should be rounded up, surrounded by an electric fence and killed.  And the Teapublican Secretary of State in Arizona has stated that he won’t allow the president on the state ballot unless the State of Hawaii will send documentation of his birth.

And that’s not to mention the usual drone of really hateful rhetoric on conservative talk radio.

Yet whenever Teapublicans are accused of fomenting hate, they ridicule the accusers.  They claim Democrats are manufacturing a straw dog for political purposes.  They claim that their remarks do not stir up violence.

Unfortunately, the facts don’t support them.

Just consider this:  According to the Southern Poverty Law Center (the organization that tracks domestic hate groups), the number of radical “anti-government” militia groups has increased from 150 to 1,274 during the years of the Obama presidency. The SPLC also reports that there have been more homegrown domestic terrorism attacks by right-wing groups than by international terrorists during his presidency.

Of course, Teapublicans say that has nothing to do with their constant drumbeat of hatred aimed at the nation’s first president of African-American ancestory.  Nooooo!  It’s only because of Obama’s policies, they say.

The last time hate groups were so prominent was during the Clinton administration when the SLPC identified 858 such groups.  So when a Democrat is in the White House, hate groups increase.  When a Republican is in the White House, the number of hate groups is diminished.  And when a black Democrat is in the White House, the number of hate groups explodes!

If you think that’s simply a coincidence, you haven’t been listening.

A Message To Moderate Republicans:

Posted on by

To those long-time Republicans who fondly remember the Party of Lincoln, the party that held the Union together against the forces of slavery, the party that supported the “live and let live” principles of Goldwater, the party that stood with Reagan against the Soviet Union:  I have some very bad news for you.

That Republican Party no longer exists.

It was hijacked by neo-cons who started a “pre-emptive” war and resorted to torture in defiance of the Geneva Conventions.  These “new conservatives” bought votes with their unfunded Medicare drug plan.  They abandoned fiscal responsiblity by running up huge deficits and massive debt.  And they drove our economy off a cliff.

But they aren’t the only hijackers of your once proud party.  Your party has also been taken over by a group of intolerant zealots who intend to force their own unforgiving brand of Christianity on everyone; people who want to create a nanny state that dictates behavior, particularly that of women, gays and the poor.

Then, in 2010, your party embraced the “Tea Party” and yet another extreme agenda.  These people hate – I mean HATE – our government and anyone who supports it.  They hate public education, “entitlements” and government regulation – even to preserve the environment.  They refuse to compromise.  If anyone even mentions the word, they’re labeled RINOs (Republican in name only) and pushed aside.  They hate immigrants and people of color – any color but white.  And, if they don’t get their way, they threaten to exercise their “Second Amendment rights.”

Despite your best intentions, you won’t be able to fix the Republican Party from within.  There are simply too many of them and too few of you.  There is no Ronald Reagan waiting in the wings to save your party.  Instead, you have “leaders” such as Newt Gingrich, Michele Bachmann, Rick Santorum and Paul Ryan – the rising star who follows the self-centered principles of Ayn Rand, instead of those of Lincoln, Goldwater and Reagan.

Sooner or later, you’ll realize that the only real options left for moderate Republicans are to become Independents with no hope of choosing candidates, to form a new party, or to join the Democratic Party which has become the party of fiscal responsibility.

As someone raised Republican turned Independent turned Democrat, I can assure you that you will be very welcome in our party.

As Long As We’re Telling The Truth…

Posted on by

A recent editorial in The Washington Post was headlined, “Let’s just say it: The Republicans are the problem.”  The writers go on to say, “We have been studying Washington politics and Congress for more than 40 years, and never have we seen them this dysfunctional. In our past writings, we have criticized both parties when we believed it was warranted. Today, however, we have no choice but to acknowledge that the core of the problem lies with the Republican Party.”

This is not coming from the so-called “liberal media.”  It’s from one of the most respected and unbiased newspapers in the land; the newspaper that covers both sides of politics from our nation’s capitol. When The Washington Post makes such a statement, everyone needs to pay attention.

This amazing admonishment of the right, follows the revelation of a meeting that took place the night of President Obama’s inauguration.  With the nation having just experienced the collapse of the housing industry, the freefall of the entire global economy, the loss of 4.4 million jobs, the loss of billions or trillions in tax revenues, a bankrupt financial system, huge deficits adding to our national debt and two wars (one unnecessary), all caused by the decisions of an 8-year Republican administration, these “patriots” seemed concerned with only one thing:  How could they cause the Obama administration to fail?

Unaware of the plot against him, President Obama began his administration by trying to accomplish the goals of his campaign – to repair the fractures in our nation by working with Republicans. He asked several Republicans to join his cabinet in order to heal the nation.  Most declined.  Instead of accepting the president’s hand, Republicans claimed he was not an American citizen and, therefore, not a legitimate president. When the administration and Congress passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and offered loans to the failing auto industry, Republicans cried “Socialist” and organized the “Tea Party” from their most right wing supporters. They appeared at Presidential speeches with guns. They carried signs calling him a Fascist, a modern-day Hitler and threatening to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights.

Republican Senators filibustered almost every initiative to create jobs in the hopes that the struggling economy would benefit them politically.  They filibustered and obstructed legislation that would prevent a repeat of our economic collapse.  They refused to allow votes on a record number of presidential appointments, including federal judges and heads of government agencies.  A Republican Congressman even broke long-standing decorum by shouting “You lie” during a State of the Union address.

The stalemate caused by the Teapublican obstruction worked.  Teapublicans took control of the House in 2010.  Still, President Obama reached out to find compromise with the right.  In response, the Republican House Speaker said he didn’t believe in compromise; that he didn’t even know what the word meant.  Since then, Teapublicans have only become more obstructionist, more unyielding and more uncivil.

Now we’re approaching yet another election.  No thanks to Teapublicans, more than a million auto industry jobs have been saved, we’re digging out of the economic abyss, we’ve ended one war and placed an end date on the other, we’ve eliminated the leadership of al Qaeda, and we’ve greatly improved our reputation throughout the world.

By almost every measure, President Obama deserves to be re-elected.  Teapublicans, on the other hand, have earned a place in the very darkest corners of our history.

What’s Your Definition Of Freedom?

Posted on by

If you listen to conservative talk radio, you’d think conservatives are the only ones who care about freedom.  They call themselves “patriots” and wrap themselves in the flag in a show of false superiority.  But, truth is, moderates and liberals want freedom, too.  The difference is in the way we define it.

For example, conservatives seem to believe freedom means being able to do whatever they want without restriction.  They seem to equate freedom with money…the more money the more freedom.  And some seem to believe the color of their skin gives them more freedom than others.

Some believe corporations should be free to exploit natural resources without regard to the quality of our air and water.  They believe corporations should be free to sell foods that slowly poison their customers.  They believe corporations should be free to sell any product no matter how flawed or dangerous.  And they believe corporations should be free to use their money and influence to control our government.

Moderates and liberals, on the other hand, believe corporations should be regulated to protect our families and our environment.

Many “conservatives” believe that they should be free to impose their religious and moral beliefs on others.  To tell others who to marry and who to love, and what they can do with their bodies.  Some believe they should be able to control who votes.

Some believe they should have the freedom to speed, to tailgate and to run red lights.  Some believe they have the right to ridicule and intimidate others.  Some believe they should be free to cheat, lie and steal.  Some believe freedom is tied to the barrel of a gun.

Others, like me, consider such people to be bullies and cowards.

That’s the difficult thing about freedom.  Everyone has a different definition.  With more than 300 million sharing this land, freedom requires compromise and we should never allow any ideology to co-opt it.  In fact, the only thing standing between your freedom and mine is government; the system of representation and laws our Founding Fathers had the wisdom to create.  We can’t permit conservatives to claim ownership of it.

Latest Vatican Reprimand Says It All.

Posted on by

On Wednesday, the Vatican stepped into the fray between the Leadership Conference of Women Religious and the American bishops.  Not surprisingly, it came down hard on the side of the bishops.  Saying the group, which claims to represent 80 percent of the 57,000 nuns in the US, had failed to make the “Biblical view of family life and human sexuality” the centerpoint of its teachings, the Holy See and company accused the group of promoting “certain radical feminist themes incompatible with the Catholic faith.”

In other words, in the opinion of the Vatican, the nuns were spending too much time worrying about poverty and social justice, and not enough time spewing anti-feminst, anti-gay propaganda.  (Imagine that…women not attacking the rights of other women!)

This latest reprimand comes from an out-of-touch group of unmarried old men who apparently believe the only proper role for women is to be subserviant to their husbands and almost continuously pregnant.  It’s a group of arrogant men who believe there is no acceptable role in society for gays, except maybe as priests. 

This is the same unbroken chain of clueless old farts who called for the slaughter of the “heretics” who left the Church, such as my Huguenot ancestors.  It’s a group whose predecessors virtually invented torture in order to make their victims admit to “crimes against the Church.”  A group of men who, to this day, refuses to acknowledge that the Inquisition was a mistake.  The very same group of men who allowed their subordinates to molest children for hundreds of years and then turned a blind eye to the victims who had the courage to step forward.

At this point, I should say that I have enjoyed the friendship of many devoted Catholic priests, nuns and parishioners over the years. For the most part, I find them to be joyful, caring and compassionate people. I don’t blame the majority of Catholics for the anti-feminist, anti-gay, out-of-touch political action group that the heirarchy of Church has become.  I blame the Vatican.  And I blame those who use their positions and pulpits to push their political views like the nitwit Bishop Daniel Jenky who recently used his homily to compare President Barack Obama to Hitler!

Is it any wonder that the Catholic Church has been losing members faster than any other religion?