Category: Politics

By Posted on Posted in Politics

Barack Obama’s and Hillary Clinton’s speeches yesterday demonstrate exactly what went right with this campaign.

The longer the seemingly endless quest for the nomination went on, the happier I was with my decision in March to endorse Obama. While I don’t expect that an Obama candidacy will really change much, he just has so much class, I find it impossible not to like him.

Remember eight years ago, when GWB ran as “a uniter, not a divider”–and then proceeded to run the most divisive and partisan presidency in my memory, and perhaps in the history of the country? I don’t think that would happen in an Obama presidency. At every crucial moment in the campaign, every time another candidate (like Hillary or McCain, and certainly like GWB) might have lashed out, he delivered a beautiful, genuinely unifying speech. He was graceful in apparent defeat, and remains graceful in apparent victory.

As Alternet put it, “as is his style, Obama appealed to Democrat’s better angels to unify behind a campaign for real change.”

Listen to Obama’s language last night, starting with his remarks about Hillary:

Our party and our country are better off because of her, and I am a better candidate for having had the honor to compete with Hillary Rodham Clinton.

There are those who say that this primary has somehow left us weaker and more divided. Well I say that because of this primary, there are millions of Americans who have cast their ballot for the very first time. There are Independents and Republicans who understand that this election isn’t just about the party in charge of Washington, it’s about the need to change Washington. There are young people, and African-Americans, and Latinos, and women of all ages who have voted in numbers that have broken records and inspired a nation.

All of you chose to support a candidate you believe in deeply. But at the end of the day, we aren’t the reason you came out and waited in lines that stretched block after block to make your voice heard. You didn’t do that because of me or Senator Clinton or anyone else. You did it because you know in your hearts that at this moment — a moment that will define a generation — we cannot afford to keep doing what we’ve been doing. We owe our children a better future. We owe our country a better future. And for all those who dream of that future tonight, I say – let us begin the work together. Let us unite in common effort to chart a new course for America.

Clinton, on the other hand, gave out two conflicting messages. To the larger public, she’s still not letting go:

In the coming days, I’ll be consulting with supporters and party leaders to determine how to move forward with the best interests of our party and our country guiding the way.

That same Alternet article raised a disturbing specter of Clinton the pit bull, clenching her teeth around Obama’s metaphorical pant leg and refusing to let go:

Clinton left open the possibility that she would contest Obama’s delegate totals within the party’s governing bodies. Just this past weekend, a top campaign lawyer accused the party’s Rules and Bylaws Committee of “hijacking” delegates after that body accepted a compromise on seating the Florida and Michigan delegations. It remains to be seen whether Clinton will appeal that decision to the party’s Credentials Committee.

“Now the question is, where do we go from here, and given how far we’ve come and where we need to go as a party, it’s a question I don’t take lightly,” she said.

Yet, to her private e-mail list of supporters, she sent a much more conciliatory message:

I want to congratulate Senator Obama and his supporters on the extraordinary race that they have run. Senator Obama has inspired so many Americans to care about politics and empowered so many more to get involved, and our party and our democracy are stronger and more vibrant as a result.

Whatever path I travel next, I promise I will keep faith with you and everyone I have met across this good and great country. There is no possible way to thank you enough for everything you have done throughout this primary season, and you will always be in my heart.

Sincerely,
Hillary Rodham Clinton

Let’s hope this is the real Hillary, and not the pit bull. It is long past time to get on with the business of showing McCain for the shallow, hypocritical Bush Lite he has become.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Politics

Who will be Obama’s Veep? The ideal candidate would be nationally known, white, female, from the South or West, progressive without alienating, and lacking the very heavy negative baggage of Hillary Clinton. Someone who’s been against the war from the beginning and is good on environment and economy–and who runs clean, unifying campaigns. I can’t actually think of anyone like that. Bill Richardson comes close, and is Latino to boot. So does Edwards, although he hasn’t fared so well in the past. But both of them have Y chromosomes. Where is the late Ann Richards when you need her? She’d have been perfect: sassy, clever, a friend to everyone, and the Governor of Texas before George W.

There’s the brilliant but relatively unknown Native American activist Winona LaDuke–but she’s also from the northern Midwest, also not white as most Americans define it, and about Obama’s age. Plus she doesn’t have enough of a following and the Dems would crucify Obama for choosing Nader’s former running mate.

Some names being tossed around make me decidedly uncomfortable, like Virginia Senator Jim Webb–and Hillary, whose sleazy, dirty, innuendo-filled, divisive campaign has appalled me.

Where are the great stateswomen of our time? In the 70s, there were plenty of them.

And if you were Obama, who would you choose, and why?

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Politics

In Huffington Post, Robert Creamer claims the long, grueling primary will make a very strong Obama for November: battle-tested, Swift-boater attacks already launched and deflected, campaign organization in every state and their organizers understanding what it takes, and so forth.

He concludes,

In the end, the long primary season has set the stage for what could be a transformational election that sweeps Obama into the presidency, and substantially bolsters Democratic majorities in the House and Senate.

Well, I hope he’s right. But meanwhile, the once-honorable McCain is getting a free ride. Took him bloody long enough to ditch Hagee, I must say. What a shame to see him betray everything he once stood for. I hope Obama busts him by 10 points or better, and carries big coattails for Congress.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Peace and War, Politics

It’s about time! The House voted against war funding (because the Republicans, for their own reasons, sat out the vote)–and the Senate voted to block more media consolidation.

Now, we’ve got to put enough pressure that these very positive actions are mirrored in the respective other chambers.

My question: what happens if the Senate votes to continue funding the war while the House aintains its opposition? What happens in conference committee?

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Business Ethics, Energy & Sustainability, General Commentary, Other, People Helping People, Politics

Fascinating and far-ranging interview with European philosopher Slavoj Zizek on Democracy Now this morning.

He covered war, energy, US presidential politics, and much more. But the statement that really got to me was:

A true act creates the conditions of its own possibility. That is to say, it appears impossible, you do it, and the whole field changes: it’s possible.

He went on to cite President Nixon’s opening US relations with Maoist China, and postulated that if Obama becomes president, he will seize a similar window with Cuba.

But this concept has reach far beyond international relations. In sports, the 4-minute mile was an unassailable barrier for decades; once Roger Bannister broke it, many people followed quickly. In science, it was unthinkable in 1955 that a human being would walk on the moon before 1970. In energy and the environment, the work of Amory Lovins and others show new ways of reinventing society as a more earth-friendly place (see my article here). And in business ethics, I like to hope that my Business Ethics Pledge campaign will make a similar difference in the consciousness that ethical business is actually more profitable.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in People Helping People, Politics, Shel's Personal Life, Web 2.0/Social Media

Last night was the twice-a-year Town Meeting in my town of Hadley, Massachusetts. We still have an old-style New England Town Meeting, where any registered voter can speak (about issues already on the agenda, anyway) and vote. And these votes really do shape the town; every zoning change, for instance, has to get a 2/3 supermajority at Town Meeting.

During the Save the Mountain campaign several years ago, for instance, one of my neighbors submitted a citizen petition to restrict the altitude of a building lot. She gathered the requisite number of signatures,w e organized turnout at the meeting, and her new bylaw was overwhelmingly adopted, along with some others we’d put in.

But some financial outlays are a two-step process. First, Town Meeting approves them, and then, a paper-ballot election is held at a later date, to appropriate the funding.

Last night, a longtime citizen environmental activist raised the point that we
d passed some of these improvements several times, but they kept getting voted down in the later election because most people didn’t know when that election would take place. She asked if the election date could be announced at Town Meeting, but the Selectmen (kind of like a Town council) hadn’t set the date yet.

So I stepped to the microphone and offered to create an e-mail notification list. Then I went home and set up an announce-only newsletter on yahoogroups with this mission statement:

An announce-only media channel to notify residents of Hadley, Massachusetts of upcoming votes and meetings of town boards, committees, and commissions. This non-partisan list will not take positions on any issues. It is solely to notify the public of upcoming votes and meetings. It will distribute information as received; the listowners make no promises or claims regarding the completeness or accuracy of information received. We just want to help get the word out.

By phrasing it as a “media channel,” and by not stating opinions on the matters before us, I will be able to receive and forward the press releases from the town administrator, and hopefully over time several hundred people will be able to learn the dates of the elections in time to vote.

Seems like this is a pretty good model for lots of communities. It costs nothing to set up, and I’m anticipating a whole year of administering the list will add under an hour to my workload. We’ll see how it works.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Ethics in Government, Politics

If McCain is an example of “straight talk,” I shudder to think of what the crooked guys look like.

Here’s another lie and amplification of what it means. According to Cliff Schecter on AlterNet, McCain’s official calendar had him missing a key vote on the neocon agenda because he was in California–BUT he managed to show up for 15 other votes of lesser importance that day.

Schecter writes,

According to the Washington Post database tracking Senate “vote missers,” McCain had missed a whopping 261 of 468 votes, or almost 56 percent, by March 2008. McCain is understandably busy running for president — and all the candidates running for that highest of offices in 2008 have shown a poor record in showing up for votes. But number of votes missed is one thing; which votes you miss is another. McCain the maverick has missed votes in a way that betrays a calculated strategy: namely, to avoid going on the record when doing so would be politically risky.

Not exactly a “profile in courage”–or integrity.

Meanwhile, in the we-knew-that-already department, for the first time, the mainstream media has clearly delivered the link between torture policies and the highest levels of government. Here’s the AP story directly linking Dick Cheney and Condoleeza Rice to the torture policies, expressed in a way that made even John Ashcroft (who was present, as was Colin Powell) uncomfortable.

And just what does it take to get our spineless Congressional leadership to get off the dime and start impeachment procedings?

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Media Ethics, Politics

A lot of people have been dumping on Obama’s former pastor, Jeremiah Wright, for his remarks about 9-11, his endorsement of Louis Farrakhan, and various other things.

Obama has consistently publicly and thoroughly distanced himself from Wright’s positions–a clear repudiation even of a close personal friend. Obama also immediately got rid of the key staffer who called Hillary Clinton a “monster.”

Meanwhile, it looks like a lot of those shaking their fists in the air about this have some reluctance to criticize others who surround themselves with extremists and questionable characters–or, in some cases, are guilty of this behavior themselves.

You want examples?

  • First of all, Fox (big surprise) took Wright’s remarks wildly out of context, according to Alternet. Wright was quoting someone else, Edward Peck–the white former Ambassador to Iraq (under Jimmy Carter) who might be expected to actually know about such things. And Fox’s camp-followers and parrots in the mainstream media (I don’t consider Fox to be mainstream in spite of its large viewership–it’s politics are extremist, its columnists act as attack dogs who use hate and intimidation, and its journalistic style seeks not the truth but the discrediting of those who disagree) didn’t question this, and repeated the accusation.
  • Clinton herself seemed remarkably unwilling to part company with Geraldine Ferraro, despite Ferraro’s crude racist remarks about Obama.
  • The ever-loathsome Sean Hannity, says Huffington Post, has ties to a neo-Nazi, Hal Turner.
  • And last but certainly not least, John McCain actively went after his endorsement by pastor John Hagee, an open homophobe and right-wing demagogue who is at least as extremist as Wright, and to my mind quite a bit farther out–and why isn’t the mainstream media, or Fox, jumping on McCain for this?
    • Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

    By Posted on Posted in Business Ethics, Ethics in Government, Politics

    David Patterson, New York’s new governor will never need to stand, ashen-faced, and admit that he cheated on his wife–as his predecessor, Elliot Spitzer did.

    Why? Because, knowing that skeleton was in his closet, Patterson pre-empted it with an act of transparency. He openly admitted, at a time, place, and manner of his own choosing–actually on the very day he was sworn in as governor–hat he and his wife had both had affairs during a difficult time in their relationship. He maintained control of the discourse, and the admission can never be used as a weapon to destroy him, as it would very much do if he’d been suddenly, unexpectedly, “outed.” As Spitzer found out very quickly.

    For all we know, the Pattersons may have even had an agreement that theirs was an open relationship–in which case, the word “cheating” wouldn’t even apply. It’s not cheating if you have permission from the cheatee.

    Transparency is a good strategy whenever there’s an ethics issue. It means you can’t be blackmailed. It means you minimize the hurt to other people. And you stay in control of the situation.

    Almost four years ago, I wrote about a utility company that handled a gas explosion with rare good sense. Like Johnson & Johnson’s handling of the Tylenol poisoning scare years earlier, this company was both transparent and extremely customer-centric, and thus enhanced rather than destroyed its reputation.

    Gay and lesbian activists have understood this for almost 40 years, since the 1969 Stonewall riots. The closest thing to a rational reason for keeping gays out of sensitive jobs (say, those that expose the employee to highly sensitive information) is the fear of blackmail. But when the gay employee is already out of the closet, that weapon fizzles away.

    I’d say that transparency, combined with Nelson Mandela-style reconciliation, creates powerful momentum in favor of the person making the confession, whether in business or politics. Plus, as the Catholics with their confession ritual have understood for centuries, there’s tremendous personal release in not bottling up secrets.

    Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

    By Posted on Posted in Ethics in Government, Politics

    Wooo-eee! Columnist Greg Palast has a powerful commentary on the difference between the trashing of Elliot Spitzer, crusader for consumers in the mortgage mess, and do-nothing Republican Senator David Vitter.

    Spitzer, says Palast, was pretty much the only one standing in the way of a Federal reserve $200 billion bailout of banks who lost money in subprimes. Does this help the overmortgaged householder in any way? Nope.

    And Spitzer was ready to take on the Bush administration over this, and in fact that’s what he was doing in Washington on that fateful night.

    Fascinating reading. Here’s a little taste:

    Then, on Wednesday of this week, the unthinkable happened. Carlyle Capital went bankrupt. Who? That’s Carlyle as in Carlyle Group. James Baker, Senior Counsel. Notable partners, former and past: George Bush, the Bin Laden family and more dictators, potentates, pirates and presidents than you can count.

    The Fed had to act. Bernanke opened the vault and dumped $200 billion on the poor little suffering bankers. They got the public treasure – and got to keep the Grinning’s house. There was no ‘quid’ of a foreclosure moratorium for the ‘pro quo’ of public bail-out. Not one family was saved – but not one banker was left behind.

    Every mortgage sharking operation shot up in value. Mozilo’s Countrywide stock rose 17% in one day. The Citi sheiks saw their company’s stock rise $10 billion in an afternoon.

    And that very same day the bail-out was decided – what a coinkydink! – the man called, ‘The Sheriff of Wall Street’ was cuffed. Spitzer was silenced.

    Funny–one thing I haven’t heard discussed at all, is that Spitzer built his reputation as a consumer advocate, yet he was willing to pay far more than the going rate. Forgetting for a moment about morality, about idiocy, about hypocrisy (this guy was a prosecutor before he became governor, and he even went after some of the high-end “escort” operations), about throwing your entire career away for a few minutes of pleasure–you really do have to wonder how someone who works so hard at stopping consumer ripoffs would pay, on multiple occasions, $5K to spend an evening with a call girl. I’ve owned cars that cost me less than that!

    Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail