Break It Down!: April 2011

Wednesday, April 27, 2011

Regal Fixation: An American Obsession

It's time to Break It Down!

This is a really short post. In the past, I have often lightened up the discussion around holidays. While I didn’t do that last week for Easter, I have decided to ease up a bit and take a step or two back this week. There is a holiday in

England

to commemorate the Royal Wedding; might as well give my little corner of the blogosphere a break too.

As the “Wedding of the Century” approaches, it has been frequently noted during the last several days that the pending Royal Nuptials have received more coverage in the United States than in England. Of course the concept of coverage, in and of itself, connotes the involvement of the media in influencing the formation of opinions. But there must be more to it than that. What accounts for the insatiable desire for the seemingly never-ending pomp and prose about Americans’ newest favorite couple?

Although we in America revel in having declared independence from England and from King George III, and in the fact we fought (and won) a War ofIndependence to punctuate that historic separation, there is still, I submit, a deep-seated association with what many Americans consider their roots. And those roots, quiet as it is kept, sprung directly from the Monarchy that that so stifled the early patriots, their forbearers, and descendents that many of them risked “it all” to fight to the death to secede from tyranny and taxation.

Now it goes without saying, the Monarchy it not what it used to be. Still, there is more than a hint of irony in all this overly pretentious fanfare. On one hand, America long ago asserted its independence from the erstwhile all consuming tentacles of what was then an overreaching system of government. Alternately, today, in an admittedly different environment, one in which we consider Great

Britain

our closest ally, we eat sleep and dream Royal Wedding. What a reversal in our posture. As boxing impresario Don King says, “Only in America!”

I suppose Royal Watching is harmless enough as a sport. After all, it is a pursuit centered on activities based on another continent, played out, in large measure by people whose lives we cannot eve imagine living. In other words, it is not that different than passionately following your favorite NBA player, or tuning in to see if your favorite team’s quarterback can lead the squad to the Super Bowl. Bottom line; for most of us, all of the above fits fairly in the same category…fantasy.

Of course, there are at least a couple of points worth mentioning. First, it is highly unlikely a Lakers-Celtics Final will ever be more popular in London than in Los Angeles. The degree to which Americans have invested in following this European Made for TV Special is unique. Second, while the fascination is both off the chain, and for the most part, viewed positively, imagine if you will a wedding in

America

, any wedding, at a cost of $32 million. Then consider that tax payers pick up the tab. I can see all that flowery media spin now, still spinning, of course, but with a decidedly negative slant.

Two days from now, the phenomenon that is the Royal Wedding will have come and gone. The media will move on to “The next big thing,” and we will return to the mundane matters of budgets, battles, and birthers. Reflecting for a moment on that reality, perhaps Royal Wedding mania is not such a bad diversion after all. “Regal Fixation: An American Obsession,” run with it…at least for the rest of the week.

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com. A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://dailycaller.com/2011/04/25/royal-wedding-receives-more-coverage-in-u-s-than-in-u-k/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_III_of_the_United_Kingdom

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/parody

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/satire

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/irony

http://www.williamkate.com/

http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2011/04/26/down-for-the-count-americas-fascination-with-royalty/

http://www.officialroyalwedding2011.org/

http://www.nydailynews.com/lifestyle/royalwedding/2011/04/26/2011-04-26_prince_william_and_kate_middleton_royal_wedding_granny_guen_murray_among_first_i.html

http://www.people.com/people/package/article/0,,20395222_20467910,00.html

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/royal-wedding-watch/2011/03/royal_wedding_web_site.html

http://articles.cnn.com/2011-03-02/world/uk.royal.wedding_1_kate-middleton-wedding-dress-website?_s=PM:WORLD

http://erhj.blogspot.com/2011/03/americas-obsession-with-royal-wedding.html

http://newyork.citypudding.com/entertainment/entertainment-gossip/why-americans-are-so-obsessed-with-william-kates-royal-wedding

http://www.watchtheroyalwedding.com/20265/us-televisions-obsession-with-the-royal-wedding/

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2011/royal.wedding/

http://www.sheknows.com/entertainment/articles/829395/royal-wedding-will-cost-around-32-million

Wednesday, April 20, 2011

"Birther Madness: Brewer, No; Jindal, Yes, If!"

It's time to Break It Down!

In what on some level can only be seen as an unexpected development, Arizona Republican Governor Jan Brewer vetoed Arizona’s so-called Birther Bill; legislation that passed easily in both houses of the Arizona Legislature. If enacted into law, the bill would have required Presidential candidates to prove their citizenship before being cleared to appear on the State’s ballot.

Arizona would have been the first State to invoke such requirements. Most observers viewed this bill as another effort to question President Obama’s birthplace. Proponents ardently denied such a connection; an amusing side step not even taken seriously by most Republicans. In fact, the effort seemed to be among the most transparent attempts to throw a stone and hide ones hand. In a word, sad; really!

The State has fielded a number of controversial issues in recent years, many having to do will Illegal Aliens. The Governor has found herself at the center of some of the more notable debates. Several months ago, she alleged that headless bodies had been found in the border region of the State. When called upon to verify this assertion, Mrs. Brewer was unable to do so. Several pols close to the situation had worried out loud that the law, if approved, would simply serve to give Arizona yet another black eye.

Still, there was ample anticipation that the Governor would sign the legislation, if it reached her desk. That she did not reflects a dialing back of sorts. Reigning speculation revolves around whether the decision was strategic, designed to eliminate unintended consequences, such as subjecting Republican candidates to a new level of scrutiny related to their place of birth, or perhaps, having a Democrat in the Arizona Secretary of State’s position making a deciding call on whether a Republican could be on the ballot…or rather a call made based on heightened sensitivity to trending intensity of rhetoric and vitriol in political campaigns.

On January 8^th of this year, Representative Gabby Giffords, who is serving her 3^rd term in the U.S. Congress, from Arizona’s 8^th District, was shot and critically wounded while talking to constituents at a Safeway supermarket near Tucson. Since that incident there have been repeated calls for a more civil public debate, led by President Obama. Governor Brewer noted in comments following the veto that the measure did not contribute anything worthwhile to Arizona, and stated further that, there were many other issues of higher importance and deserving attention that a bill that would require. She also added:

"I do not support designating one person as the gatekeeper to the ballot for a candidate, which could lead to politically motivated decisions.”

“In addition, I never imagined being presented with a bill that could require candidates for President of the greatest and most powerful nation on earth to submit their ‘early baptismal circumcision certificates’ among other records to the Arizona Secretary of State. This is a bridge too far.”

“House Bill 2177 “creates significant new problems while failing to do anything constructive for Arizona”

Mrs. Brewer, who served as the State’s Secretary of State, before ascending to the Governorship when President Obama selected Janet Napolitano as Secretary of Homeland Security, seemed intent on steering the State of Arizona around, rather than right into the middle of this potential quagmire. Perhaps she is benefitting from her On-the-Job Training.

Technically, as in most situations such as this, the Arizona House and Senate could override the Governor’s veto. However, when asked about that possibility, Speaker of the House, Kirk Adams noted that legislative researchers found that it had been 50 years since an Arizona Governor’s veto had been overridden. The bill’s sponsor, Representative Carl Seel, Republican, Phoenix, conceded pursuing an override would involve defying the (Republican) Governor, as much as standing up for and supporting the bill. With that backdrop, it appears Governor Brewer’s veto will stick.

As if to prove there is never a shortage of bad ideas, just as Governor Brewer struck a blow for sensible pursuit of germane issues, Governor Bobby Jindal, Louisiana, opted for the “Road more traveled.” Two Republicans introduced a Birther Bill last week in the Louisiana Legislature. According to Kyle Plotkin, Governor Jindal’s Press Secretary, the Governor will sign the bill if it reaches his desk.

As with the sponsors of the Arizona bill, Representative Alan Seabaugh, co-sponsor of the Louisiana legislation, denies he is a Birther. Instead, he contends the bill would clear up an area of the law where there appears to be a gap. For his part, Governor Jindal, through his spokesman, says he believes the President is a citizen.

These backdoor tactics underscore the kind of Machiavellian, win at all cost design, that submits that if you can’t beat President Obama at the ballot box, which they were unable to do in 2008, see if you can prevent him from getting that far by “un-qualifying” him. It is too funny to be sad, and too bizarre to be funny; I guess I may as well call it what it is; desperate. I think about these efforts at disinformation and subterfuge, and all I can see is a vision of multiple Wizards; each standing behind a curtain, frantically (and pointlessly) operating a set of controls, hoping to erase reality, change facts, and ultimately re-write history.

It’s too late…this is not Oz! No matter what the results of the 2012 election turn out to be, 2008 is in the books; it already happened people!

So the saga continues. “Birther madness; Brewer No; Jindal, Yes, If” given a chance. As Frost so eloquently and poetically framed it, “Two roads diverged in a yellow wood.” As is always the case when faced with forks in the road, some will choose the well-worn path, while others will take “The Road Not Taken.” For whatever it’s worth, in this instance, Governor Brewer has chosen the latter; Governor Jindal the former, if given the chance. So much for the New (Old) South; can you say oxymoronic?

I’m done; holla back!

http://www.aolnews.com/2011/04/18/arizona-gov-jan-brewer-vetoes-presidential-birther-bill/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Brewer

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2011/04/19/20110419xgr-birthveto0419.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/18/jan-brewer-birther-bill_n_850803.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gabrielle_Giffords

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_Napolitano

http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/04/19/arizona.president.bill.veto/

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0411/53419.html

http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/dpp/news/politics/state_politics/brewer-vetoes-birther-bill-guns-on-campus-4-18-2011

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/04/arizona_gov_jan_brehttp://www.myfoxphoenix.com/dpp/news/politics/state_politics/brewer-vetoes-birther-bill-guns-on-campus-4-18-2011wer_vetoes.html

http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2011/04/gov_jindal_will_sign_birther_b.html

http://nation.foxnews.com/gov-bobby-jindal/2011/04/19/gov-bobby-jindal-says-hell-sign-birther-bill-if-it-reaches-his-desk

http://www.wwltv.com/news/Jindal-will-sign-birther-bill-if-it-reaches-his-desk-120198749.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Frost

http://www.bartleby.com/119/1.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_citizenship_conspiracy_theories

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machiavellianism

Wednesday, April 13, 2011

The Donald Trumps The Field

It's time to Break It Down!

Tonight, President Obama will deliver a speech in which he will, depending upon whom you ask, detail his own budget proposal, or provide a sketchy outline rift with generalities, mixed messages, and of course a scary concept to “I am every man" Republicans; profundities. Which will it be? Well, because future-telling is beyond my pay grade, I will wait until a later date to pursue that debate…or not.

In the interim, there is a matter I want to spend a few minutes with this week. A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released yesterday indicates Donald Trump tied Mike Huckabee for the lead when Republicans were asked who they support for the GOP Presidential Nomination. It is important to say, “It’s early.” Another obvious caveat is Donald Trump injects an enormous name recognition factor into the conversation. Having noted those points, here are the poll results in there entirety:

Huckabee 19%

Trump 19%

Palin 12%

Gingrich 11%

Romney 11%

Paul 7%

Bachmann 5%

Daniels 3%

Pawlenty 2%

Santorum 2%

Barbour * (Less than 1%)

Someone else (vol.) 3%

None/ No one (vol.) 4%

No opinion 1%

Both The Donald and Huckabee garnered 19% of the votes, while Sarah Palin captured 12%, Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney, collected 11% each. That adds up to 72%, or slightly less than three-quarters of the 824 people polled. No other candidate mentioned cracked double-figure polling. In fact, the sum of the totals for Someone else, None/No one, and No opinion exceeded every other named candidate’s share of the votes.

Though mentioned above, it should be repeated, it is very early. Candidates are still in the process of forming Exploratory Committees, and few if any have formally announced their intentions (to run), though Tim Pawlenty came close to doing so yesterday on CNN, in a conversation with Piers Morgan.

Those facts notwithstanding, it is interesting that the two highest polling candidates have embraced the Birther Movement (though Mr. Huckabee has been known to denounce that point of view) ideology, which holds that President Obama was not “Born in the USA.” Moreover, the candidate polling 3^rd, Sarah Palin, has endorsed Mr. Trump’s position of calling into question whether President Obama was born in Hawaii.

Did I say it is early? The temptation is to say the results of this recent CNN Poll provide incontrovertible evidence that regardless of the calendar, we are fully immersed in the Silly Season. It is enticing to believe we will wake up in a month or two or three and the zaniness will have subsided; replaced by adults responding to survey questions instead of their kindergarteners, and a sense of sobriety will rule, once again. Hold on to that thought!

It is an absolute truth that polls and surveys taken today may be inconsequential, in relation to actual 2012 results. Consider that at this time in 2007, the Polls, most Republicans, virtually all Democrats who were not running, and conventional wisdom, to be sure, held that Hillary Clinton would be the Democratic Party’s nominee for President. So, “it is early, really!”

I have addressed the Birther debate in an earlier blog, and so, will not revisit it again, per se, in this post. However, it is worth noting that CNN reported yesterday that Mr. Trump said he has hired a team of investigators to go to Hawaii and research Mr. Obama. Mr. Trump is a billionaire, of course. So it stands to reason he can afford to hire the best private investigators/researchers on the planet. The thinking on this matter must go something like this:

Clinton investigators – Rank amateurs

McCain researchers – Totally incompetent

State of Hawaii (and it’s Republican Governor) – Nitwits all

CIA, FBI, Secret Service – Government workers

Other Democratic candidates – Losers

Other Republican candidates – Duped

New York Times, Washington Post, other media – Co-opted

Yes, this is clearly a job for The Donald, or at least his minions. If this view point is the outlook necessary to score with Republican voters, we are in for quite a 2012 Campaign Season. But let’s face it, this scurrilous tack, while a low blow, is nothing new. In the 2008 Campaign, Senator Obama’s opponents embraced a variety of substitutes for issues, including:

Community Organizer

Socialist

Muslim

Elitist

Terrorist consort

Jeremiah Wright protégé

Kenyan

There were others of course, but the list above is more than adequate to make the point. Although most of his opponents claim Mr. Obama is weak on the issues, it is incredibly fascinating why so many of them prefer to trade these proxies for issues, rather than choosing to debate the issues themselves. It is almost as though they have conceded they cannot win a head-to-head battle focused on the issues they all claim really matter to Americans. Hmmm!

Be all that as it may; it is almost surreal to confront the current reality: “The Donald Trumps the Field!” That, sadly, pretty much says it all. To wit, I’m done; holla back!

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/04/12/rel6c.pdf

http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/264503/words-i-never-thought-i-would-write-trump-leads-gop-2012-poll

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/chatter/2011/04/donald-trump-ties-mike-huckabee-in-cnn-poll-of-republicans.html?cid=6a00d8341c630a53ef014e60c6ba72970c

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/04/12/cnn-poll-trump-tied-for-first-in-gop-horserace/

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/155495-poll-has-trump-tied-for-first-in-race-for-gop-nomination

http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/trump-ties-huck-lead-cnn-poll-gop-vo

http://www.seattlepi.com/default/article/Trump-and-Huck-hold-private-pow-wow-1333380.php

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/264499/poll-trump-huck-tie-first-place-gop-primary-katrina-trinko

http://onespot.wsj.com/politics/2011/04/12/643c2/poll-trump-huck-tie-for-first-place-in

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/04/cnn-poll-donald-trump-ties-huckabee-for-lead-in-gop-primary.php

http://www.newser.com/story/116234/donald-trump-ties-mike-huckabee-for-first-in-gop-primary-poll-from-cnn.html

http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheat-sheet/item/trump-leads-gop-poll/wingnuts/#

http://nation.foxnews.com/mitt-romney/2011/04/12/romney-trump-obama-doesn-t-need-birth-certificate

Wednesday, April 6, 2011

Shut It Down: Act II

It's time to Break It Down!

As I was growing up in agrarian North Carolina, adults, who thought they had a corner on the smarts and common sense markets (and who probably did), repeatedly assured me and others of my tender age that one of the principal defining qualities separating men (and women) from animals was the capacity to learn from our mistakes. This meant more than the ability to avoid taking an action that previously led to getting hit with a newspaper, or acting in a way that had resulted in earning a treat. No, this was about developing and using ones considerable mental prowess to think, critically analyze, and solve complex problems.

For most of my life, I have accepted that conventional wisdom as writ. But I concede there are a number of poignant examples that give me pause. To use a prominent baseball metaphor, another case is waiting on deck. For the last couple of months I have been a casual observer to what appears destined to become the next American governmental docudrama. If the Godfathers of Government don’t start exhibiting some of that agile, problem-solving skill, post-haste, the Federal Government will Shut Down Friday.

Now, I realize that there are a number of anti-government activists who are convinced that’s a good thing. Suffice it to say, I disagree. But that, in and of itself, is not the point of this post. Rather, I’d like to remind gentle readers of the most recent precedent for this approach to resolving the compelling questions about the federal budget, and consider briefly the lessons drawn from that 1995 misadventure.

The main actors, in what I shall refer to as Shut Down I, were President Bill Clinton, and Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich. The Cliff Notes version of this misapplied act of machismo was Mr. Gingrich, even now considered a stout intellectual dynamo in GOP circles, acting at the behest of the Republican majority in Congress, attempted to extract more budget cuts than President Clinton would accept. Mr. Gingrich, certain that the President would blink, miscalculated, and persuaded Congress to refuse to raise the debt ceiling.

The end result of this ill-conceived game of Chicken was played out between November 14, 1995 and January 6, 1996. The Federal Government was shut down twice, for a total of 4 weeks; so-called non-essential government workers were furloughed, and the corresponding non-essential services those workers provided were suspended. The economic consequences of a government shutdown, then, as now, include a loss of investor confidence, which in turn means it costs more for the government to borrow money.

Not surprisingly, active finger-pointing ensued. The President blamed the Speaker; the Speaker blamed the President…and the people were left to “eat cake,” figuratively, of course. Ultimately Republican resolve melted. This occurred in part because of factions tied to Presidential politics, and in part due to an untimely gaffe by one of the key players.

Both Speaker Gingrich and Senator Bob Dole harbored ambitions of running for President. As a result, Senator Dole favored “ending the hostilities” sooner rather than later. Gingrich, on the other hand, having devised the idea, and served as the face of the movement, was content to not only to shut it down, but to nail it up, indefinitely.

The Senator's position would prevail. A couple of days after the shutdown ended, Mr. Gingrich was quoted citing a Clinton snub as the basis for his doggedness on the issue. His complaint was widely reported, and almost instantly, he and more important, Republicans lost any semblance of moral high ground on the issue. The sequence of events would later be considered significant in a classic double-whammy sort of way. If deflated Republican energy and momentum in advance of the 1996 Presidential Election; alternately, President Clinton’s ratings soared, and he went on to secure reelection.

Fast-forward to the here and now of the 21^st Century. Another Republican Speaker and another Democrat President; at odds over budget matters. Democrats have moved significantly from their original position; Republicans are vowing to remain steadfast, citing their mandate as the cause to which they must be true. In fact after reach a tentative agreement on budget cuts, they subsequently increased their demands. There is much to differentiate the current and past Speakers, starting with Speaker Boehner’s Trademark ultra-tan, and Speaker Gingrich’s ascribed intellect. Mr. Gingrich flew hard-charging into the 1995 Shut Down. Mr. Boehner spoke against the idea, consistently, until recently. Few would confuse the savvy populism of President Clinton with the reserved professorial demeanor of President Obama. Once again, active finger-pointing is the order of the day. As a result, not surprisingly, here we are, poised to for a Shut Down redux.

When reflecting back to 1995, one may have a temptation to cast one side as the protagonists, and the other as either the sympathetic victim(s), or more ominously, the bad guys. I do none of the above. Looking in the rear view mirror that shut down looks the same now as it did then; like a lame idea, the repercussions of which threatened to punish the masses in general, and the poor in particular. Looking ahead, nothing about Friday’s potential Shut Down scenario has changed. In an already tenuous economy:

Hundreds of thousands of employees will be sent home
The masses will be denied the benefits and services those employees provide

Markets will react badly due to increased uncertainty

Borrowing money will cost the government more

Consumers will find borrowing more difficult

Without public sector demand, the private sector & entrepreneurs will compress

Unemployment up; benefits down

And so it goes! If there is no agreement by Friday, it’s hard to say who will win, but the losers are already evident. It was a bad idea in 1995; if political operatives decide take a walk down Memory Lane and in effect, “Shut It Down: Act II,” it will further erode my confidence in the elders who taught me to believe our species was special, adaptive, and inclined not only to learn from our mistakes, but to put that new insight into practice when faced again with similar obstacles. It is not too late, but, reports suggest both sides have taken steps to put all concerned on alert that a shutdown is imminent. Definitely not a good sign, as omens go.

As in 1995, it is impossible to miss the implications for the coming Presidential campaign. On one hand, the scorched earth, “cede this President no victories” strategy resides at the center of this madness. Meanwhile, this malicious tack is countered by an equally injurious effort, intended to show the people how detached the Republican leadership is from the day-to-day struggles of the working class who rely on the jobs and services that will be lost…during the most challenging period of economic distress the nation has seen since the Great Depression. All the while, as the professional politicians hone and refine their moves, like manipulating pieces on a Chess Board, the people wait…and prepare to suffer. It is hard for me to imagine that supporters of the Left, Right, or Center view this as a desirable outcome. Instead, I believe, paraphrasing the patriot, Patrick Henry, "Now is the time for all good men to use their considerable mental prowess to think, critically analyze, and solve complex budget problems. What do you believe?

I’m done; holla back!