Category Archives: Culture

More Evidence That Mainstream Media Are Not Liberal (Or Fair).

Posted on by

ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox’s Sunday morning “news” guests between June, 2011 and February, 2012 have been 70% Republican, 86% men and 92% white according to the monitoring agency, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting.  This is particularly revealing since Sunday morning programs are some of the most-watched programs for government and business leaders. 

These statistics are a reflection of those who are deemed to be most influential in our government.  And since they are given more access to promote their agenda on national television, they are allowed to gain even more influence.

So tell me again, Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, et all.  Exactly where is this liberal “lamestream” media you constantly whine about?

There’s A Reason It’s Called Gun Fire.

Posted on by

Much of the western United States is tinder dry as the result of a prolonged drought.  Wildfires are breaking out throughout Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico and Utah at an alarming rate; many caused by people taking target practice in remote areas covered in tinder dry grass.  The resulting fires have cost millions, yet the shooters are not going to let that get in the way of their second amendment rights.

It seems the states can ban campfires, even camping, but they don‘t dare ask a gun owner to hold his fire until the drought eases.  They can’t even ask them to confine their shooting to gun ranges thanks to the National Rifle Association.   You see, the NRA vehemently refuses to accept any restrictions on guns, no matter how many people are needlessly killed.  No matter how much damage their “rights” cause to others.

As long as politicians continue to fear the NRA, we can forget about common sense gun laws. Although NRA members have an abundance of guns, ammo and political influence, they’re entirely lacking in common sense.

The Freedom To Fail On Your Own.

Posted on by

There’s a long-standing attitude of individualism in the US that causes people to inherently dislike any form of collectivism, such as collective bargaining through labor unions.  As I wrote in a previous post, we come from a long line of independent-minded people; people who were pushed out of Europe by dictators of all ilks, from royalty to the Roman Catholic Church.

Unfortunately, corporations and their lackeys on the right have been able to exploit this inborn streak of independence to extract money from us.  They have used a combination of lobbyists, campaign contributions, exportation of jobs, and right wing media megaphones to undermine labor unions and pit workers against one another in order to maximize profits while minimizing wages and benefits.

As a result of the propaganda, far too many Americans equate labor unions with socialism or communism.  Many poor and middle class workers vote for candidates that will continue the pattern of withdrawing employee benefits, eliminating pensions, depressing wages and foreclosing on homes.  Now they are turning their attention to the “entitlements” – Social Security and Medicare.

Yet many of us will continue to support corporations out of the fear of losing our jobs, misplaced loyalty, or the determination to “make it on our own.”  What these people don’t understand is that any individual’s disagreement with a large, heavily capitalized corporation is not a fair fight.  A retail clerk cannot fairly negotiate with a big box retailer.  An assembly line worker cannot win against a large manufacturer.  A maid cannot fight a large hotel chain.

The only chance they have to improve their position and their wages is to band together.  Individuals, no matter how hard they work, are far more likely to fail on their own than to make it on their own.

Liberal Media, Huh?

Posted on by

If you’re a media observer, as I am, you may have noticed a change in the political coverage over the past several weeks.  The majority of stories are now about Mitt Romney’s rallies and statements.  The few stories about President Obama have been largely negative – showing his decline in the polls or supposed “gaffes” by his campaign.

Another more subtle trend is to refer to President Obama as Mr. Obama.

It seems that the narrative has become “Mr. Obama is a nice man, but he has failed to live up to his campaign promises.”  Never mind that he has faced the most obstructionist Congress in history.  Never mind that the right wing media has blathered endlessly about his “socialist” policies.  Never mind that the Teapublicans have rallied the nation’s racists into a hateful fever over the birther “controversy.”

The “liberal” media seems to have accepted the right wing propaganda that, since the economy has not rebounded quickly, we may as well let Mitt Romney have an opportunity to lead.  They don’t even discuss the fact that Romney’s policies are nearly identical to those of the presidential predecessor who drove our economy off a cliff.

The “lamestream” media seem too partisan, too lazy or too brainwashed to do their jobs.  Wouldn’t it be refreshing to see a network news reporter ask a question that’s as insightful and penetrating as Jon Stewart or Stephen Colbert?

It’s a sad fact that our comedians are now better reporters than most of our journalists.

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.