Category: Ethics in Government

By Posted on Posted in Democracy, Diversity, Ethics in Government, Politics, propaganda, Protests and Crackdowns, Transparency vs. Secrecy Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , ,

…But I’m going to write it anyway.

As a young teenager protesting the Vietnam war, I had a huge poster in my room with a picture of a Vietnam-era peace demonstration and the quote,

It is a sin to be silent when it is your duty to protest.

—Abraham Lincoln

It is my duty to protest.

I am only one generation removed from the Holocaust, and I wonder how many millions of lives might have been saved if ordinary Germans and Italians had protested and organized in large numbers against the gradual encroachments on their liberty that provided the legal framework for Nazi and Fascist repression.

Earlier this week, while the rest of us were merrily celebrating the arrival of 2012, President Obama signed a truly wretched piece of legislation: The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

In the words of one commentator whose post is entitled “R.I.P. Bill of Rights 1789 – 2011,” this law

grants the U.S. military the “legal” right to conduct secret kidnappings of U.S. citizens, followed by indefinite detention, interrogation, torture and even murder. This is all conducted completely outside the protection of law, with no jury, no trial, no legal representation and not even any requirement that the government produce evidence against the accused. It is a system of outright government tyranny against the American people, and it effectively nullifies the Bill of Rights.

Signed into law by the same President Obama who, as a candidate, was the champion of liberty and “change” who would close the illegal prison at Guantanamo, rein in the torturers of Abu Ghraib, and quickly end the US presence in Iraq. The same Obama who had said he would veto this dreadful bill. (Yes, the soldiers have come home. But it took three years and we still have thousands of “advisors” there, along with a highly fortified embassy in Baghdad  that could easily be the nerve center for US command and control.) Guantanamo is still open, the climate of anti-Muslim racism persists, and the torturers at the highest levels (e.g., Cheney and Rumsfeld) have never been held to account.)

So I am protesting. Even though it puts my own liberty potentially at risk.

In his signing statement, Obama said he would…

interpret and implement the provisions described below in a manner that …upholds the values on which this country was founded.

Two problems with that. Number 1, he has not shown himself trustworthy in upholding those values in the past.

And second, there is no guarantee that the presidency won’t be delivered to a much more repressive figure with no such scruples. The contenders on the Republican side include several sworn enemies of freedom for those of us who don’t happen to be straight, conservative, and some repressive flavor of Christian: Bachmann, Gingrich, Perry, and Santorum (in alphabetical order).

This is merely the latest in a gradual erosion of our civil liberties committed during both Democratic and Republican governments; two other examples (among many) are the shift over the last two decades of ballot counting to insecure, easily manipulated, and highly suspect electronic counting devices that in some cases don’t even HAVE a paper trail (and that led directly to the disastrous worst-in-history administration of George W. Bush) and the citizens United Supreme Court decision that nakedly grants corporations the power to buy elections.

Yes I protest.

I have never forgiven myself for not doing enough to stop the coup that let Bush seize power in 2000—in part because I didn’t see Gore as any great champion of my values, in part because I could not foresee just how bad that eight years was going to be—but mostly because I was feeling too shut down and disempowered to help organize a movement like we saw in Mexico, Iran, Egypt, and elsewhere.

I still don’t feel like I can personally organize a movement. But I can at least protest, and send some money to a civil liberties group.  I hope you will too.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in censorship, Democracy, Diversity, Ethics in Government, language, Media Ethics, National Conference on Media Reform, Politics, propaganda, Protests and Crackdowns, Publishing, Social and Economic Justice, Web 2.0/Social Media Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

An Oregon judge ruled that blogging is not protected as journalism under the state’s journalism shield law. If allowed to stand, this sets a truly terrible precedent.

Here’s what the law says:

No person connected with, employed by or engaged in any medium of communication to the public shall be required by … a judicial officer … to disclose, by subpoena or otherwise … [t]he source of any published or unpublished information obtained by the person in the course of gathering, receiving or processing information for any medium of communication to the public[.]

Notice—there is nothing here about working for a recognized mainstream media outlet. By my reading, a guy in a clown suit standing on a milk crate in the park and haranguing a crowd of random passers-by would not have to disclose sources.

Yet here’s what U.S. District Judge Marco A. Hernandez wrote:

. . . although defendant is a self-proclaimed “investigative blogger” and defines herself as “media,” the record fails to show that she is affiliated with any newspaper, magazine, periodical, book, pamphlet, news service, wire service, news or feature syndicate, broadcast station or network, or cable television system. Thus, she is not entitled to the protections of the law

Hello! Since when does being a journalist require working for mainstream media? This country has a history of independent writers serving a journalistic role going back to those 18th-century “bloggers” Tom Paine and Ben Franklin—those guys didn’t write for the London Times, but started their own publications. Are you going to tell me that Daily Kos, Huffington Post, RedState, Drudge Report, Washington Spectator, and even the legendary I.F. Stone’s Weekly of the 1950s and 1960s have no place in the world of journalism? That the thousands of indy-media-istas who attend the National Conference for Media Reform are spitting in the wind?

And meanwhile, investigative blogger Crystal Cox is facing a $2.5 million judgment because she would not disclose her sources. Out-bloody-rageous!

Shame on you, Judge Hernandez!

Abraham Lincoln said, “It is a sin to be silent when it is your duty to protest.” I am protesting. And I hope voices with more clout than mine, such as FreePress.net, the National Writers Union, Authors Guild, American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), People for the American Way, National Coalition Against Censorship, and opinion journalists working for mainstream media (like Rachel Maddow) jump in and protest as well—with amicus briefs filed for the appeal.

 

Kris Miller Law is a respected and trusted  criminal defense attorney ready to help you with your legal needs.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Ethics in Government Tagged with

I’ve often been told that I’m a delusional optimist for saying that honest, ethical behavior is rewarded in the marketplace. I don’t talk very much about the negative personal consequences of being crooked.

But that side deserves attention too, every once in a while. Like today, when deposed Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich got sentenced to 14 years in prison for trying to sell off the Senate seat once held by President Obama.

14 years is a long time. Blagojevich will have lots of time to reflect on why crime doesn’t pay, and those charged with upholding the public trust should do so.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Business Ethics, Corporate Social Responsibility, Ethics in Government, Ethics: General, Peace and War, Politics, Social and Economic Justice Tagged with , ,

60 Minutes reports that not a single bankster has been prosecuted on criminal charges over violations of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (a/k/a Sarbox)—the corpoate ethics law much-ballyhooed by reformers and much-belittled by corporations (on whom it imposed a significant paperwork burden).

As the TV program documents, there’s plenty of evidence of criminal wrongdoing, and there are people who would be perfectly willing to testify. Why the failure of will?

Could it perhaps be related to that other failure: failure to prosecute the leaders of George W. Bush’s administration who lied their way into two wars, passed billions of dollars in sweetheart deals, stole two presidential elections (and likely a few key races in Congress), and approved a regulatory climate that let the banks and polluters run amok?

Just wondering out loud. What do you think?

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Business Ethics, Corporate Social Responsibility, Ethics in Government, Politics, Social and Economic Justice, Transparency vs. Secrecy

Must-read article by Eliot Spitzer on how banks defrauded the government into giving a whopping $7.7 trillion in secret loans, with no conditions, under false pretenses. That is half the entire GDP!

And that’s OUR money, folks! Bush’s “regulators” let these deals happen with no scrutiny of the banks, and nobody was scrutinizing the regulators.

“If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.” (author unknown)

“Justice, justice shalt thou pursue.” (The Talmud)

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Ethics in Government, Ethics-International, Peace and War, Politics Tagged with , , , ,

Never, ever think that war solves problems. It multiplies them.

Before the illegal and immoral US invasion, Iraq was a garden-variety dictatorship, similar to at least 30 other countries around the world, where dissent was suppressed but society was basically functional.

Now, it’s a wreck. And of course, US mainstream media only talk about the impact on Americans: the US soldiers (and their mercenaries) who died or were wounded or who suffered post-traumatic stress, and their families who are impacted by the hurt to these brave men and women. The impact of the war on the people of Iraq is rarely talked about.

An article by John tirman in the November 15 Washington Spectator (not yet posted on the newsletter’s website) lays out some of the litany of chaos and devastation. A few “highlights”:

  • Somewhere between 400,000 and a million deaths, many of them civilian
  • 3.5 million to 5 million displaced refugees
  • Massive, widespread infrastructure and support failures including health care, education, clean water, sanitation, and electricity
  • Thousands of desperate Iraqi women and girls turning to prostitution
  • 750,000 impoverished widows
  • A legacy of corruption that diverted millions of dollars from the US economy into the hands of a few well-placed privileged Iraqis, while the services being paid for either went undelivered or were so shoddy as to be useless
  • And of course, widespread hatred and fanaticism directed against the West in general, and the US in particular, and a huge rise around the world in the worst kinds of extreme Islamic fundamentalism—it’s a lot easier to recruit a teenage suicide bomber or terrorist when that person is furious that you killed a close friend or relative

The first five bullets come directly from the article, “How Will We Remember Operation Iraqi Freedom?” The last two points are my own analysis. The stats that follow come from another article in the same issue, “Left Behind,” by editor Lou Dubose.

While the war was entirely a creation of George W. Bush and his advisors (particularly Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney), it hasn’t really gotten better under Obama. His withdrawal process has been slow and incomplete, and he’s leaving behind a “diplomatic” apparatus big enough to run a small country: 17,000 people including 650 American diplomats, in the largest embassy in the world (not counting several satellites around Iraq), with a $6 billion budget and another $13 billion in private contracts.

And why has Obama steadfastly refused to even consider war crimes trials?

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Advertising, Democracy, Ethics in Government, Marketing Techniques and Philosophies, Politics, propaganda Tagged with , , ,

Political advisors spew so much crap about the need to tear down your opponent. Here’s a refreshing case study that proves the opposite is possible.

Congratulations to the newly-elected mayor of Northampton, Massachusetts, David Narkewicz. While his opponent went negative to the point of craziness (even going so far as to attack him for riding a bicycle, with an ad that talked about training wheels as a metaphor for inexperience), Narkewicz stayed positive, focusing on community-building, achieving widely held goals, and his own civic history. He was also deeply issue-focused and very articulate during the numerous debates (more than I can remember for any previous local election, in my 30 years in the area).

As a marketing consultant who has occasionally advised politicians, I have long held the opinion that such a positive campaign could be quite popular. I used this positive focus writing the press releases for the successful first mayoral campaign of a different mayor, who won in 1989 and went on to serve four two-year terms.

And while I predicted that his opponent’s strategy (using the considerable talents of a very good local ad agency), would fail, even I was pleasantly shocked at the margin of victory. Narkewicz took 70 percent of the vote, sweeping every ward, even the traditionally conservative western parts of the city. And he had coattails for progressives in every other contested race, as well as a ballot initiative to keep a land-preservation bill that the right had attacked.

Bravo.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Ethics in Government, General Commentary, Politics, poverty Tagged with , ,

There’s an awful lot of talk about how Obama has had plenty of time to fix the economy, and it’s his mess now.

While I am not a great fan of Obama, who has done too little, too slowly, on a myriad of issues, I think it’s time to put things in perspective:

Who led the banks run untrammeled and did nothing to stop the plunge into chaos until it was too late? George W. Bush (admittedly, with some help from the repeal of Glass-Stiegel under Clinton).

Who has now killed THREE jobs bills in a row with no meaningful alternative? Republicans in the Congress.

Who chopped so many taxes off the top end of the spectrum that the government can’t seem to fund anything? George W. Bush.

Who refuses to let their ultrawealthy friends pay even a tiny fraction more in taxes to cover the cost of job-creating major infrastructure upgrades? Republicans in the Congress—even though under Eisenhower and Nixon, people in the higher brackets paid considerably higher portions of their income in taxes than they do now.

Who took a huge surplus and turned it into a massive deficit, with the help of two illegal and immoral wars? George W. Bush.

I sure hope the public is paying attention come next November. The entire mission of the Republican Party agenda these days seems to be to sabotage the economy, stall any initiatives of Obama’s (even if they were originally proposed by Republicans) and bring government to a standstill.

It’s ugly, unethical, and I hope, unpopular next election. Throw the bums out!

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Abundance and Prosperity, Business Ethics, Energy & Sustainability, Ethics in Government, Ethics-International, Green Business Tagged with , , , , , , ,

According to the New York Times, it seems the Chinese want to have their cake and eat it too when it comes to electric cars. With only a minuscule budget for R&D, the Chinese want to coerce their way into access to expensively developed technologies for electric cars by making that access a precondition for foreign manufacturers who want to sell electric vehicles in China, if they want the same subsidies that Chinese-made electric cars enjoy. (This happens to be a violation of the World Trade Organization’s rules, and China is a WTO member)

Here’s how I think that would play out:

  • At least some foreign automakers, wanting access to the vast and rapidly growing Chinese market, make the devil’s bargain and share their technology secrets
  • China begins a crash program in its state-owned car companies to bring cars to market using this technology
  • After one to three years, the foreign automakers find themselves closed out—and sitting on a big useless pile of expensive infrastructure—as the Chinese rush cheap and shoddily built EVs to market using American, European, or Japanese technology

General Motors is actively resisting and protesting; Nissan doesn’t even want to go into the market under these conditions; yet Ford apparently plans to cave.

This is one time I find myself agreeing with General Motors. This is a bad idea!

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Energy & Sustainability, Ethics in Government, Frugality/Frugal Fun, Green Business Tagged with , , ,

With all the partisan conflict gridlocking Washington, it’s refreshing to read about a 16-year-old partnership between deep environmentalists and deep conservatives.

The “Green Scissors” project, with participation from the likes of Friends of the Earth on the environmental side and the Heartland Institute among the conservative groups, targets $380 billion in wasteful government spending that happens to also foster environmentally negative impact.

Among the programs suggested for the chopping block:

  • Ethanol Excise Tax Credit
  • $49.6 billion in subsidies for the troubled, environmentally disastrous nuclear power industry
  • $109.6 billion in highway subsidies
  • A $5 billion natural gas subsidy

Download your own copy of this year’s (and previous years’) reports at https://www.foe.org/green-scissors.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail