IDEAS MATTER!

What is she up to?

2009-07-06T07:32:00.010-04:00

Governor Sarah Palin has decided to shed the responsibilities of public office, but not the goals and objectives of most who seek such offices. Gov. Palin seems to have come to a conclusion that, I must admit, seems pretty reasonable; that influence in public life can be greater without "official" responsibilities. Plus, unelected influence accumulation pays a hell of a lot better.

Though she will not be in a position to win the Republican nomination for president in 2012, she may well be able to influence the race and might even mount an independent run for the White House. Will she succeed? Not if success means becoming president, but why should it mean that? The presidency, after all, is just another elected office with responsibilities to large numbers and a wide variety of interests.

Sarah Palin appears to be on a path to celebrity-conservative stardom. Her story might be part of an increasingly clear realization about politics: Influence and office are not necessarily as interdependent as most suppose.

For a video of my analysis of Gov.Palin's resignation, click HERE.

One of my favorite public intellectuals, Stanley Fish, published his thoughts about Governor Palin's resignation on NYTimes.com yesterday afternoon. I am pleased to report that his analysis mirrors my own, though admittedly, Fish's take is both more substantial and more artfully presented.

More USC by Yankee's Manager

2009-06-23T11:13:00.006-04:00

Yankee manager Joe Girardi, in yesterday's game against the Florida Marlins, noticed that the Marlins had made a substitution mistake by sending one wrong player into the field for the eighth inning. So what did he do? Did he call timeout and inform the Marlins of their error prior to the first pitch of the inning? Nope. He intentionally waited until after the first pitch and then called timeout to protest the mistake to the umpire and to announce that the Yankees would play the remainder of the game (which they were losing 6-3) under protest.

I'm well aware that Major League Baseball is a business and is hyper-competitive, and that many admire the Yankee skipper's clever exploitation of the Marlins' mistake. However, I cannot believe that such a move, while within the rules, is an example of good sportsmanship. For me, it may have been fair (according to the rules) but it was also ungentlemanly, maybe even unmanly.

The Marlins won the game, 6 to 5.

Unintended Social Commentary

2009-06-22T19:12:00.007-04:00

I just saw a TV commercial for MassMutual Financial Services. In it a women approaches a street corner on a rainy day, notices the puddle in the road and backs up several steps. Just then, a passing bus soaks the poor fools who did not step back and thereby exhibit what the commercial portrays as "being smart" and "planning ahead."

Obviously,the intention was merely to portray a MassMutual financial services customer as someone smart enough to plan ahead. However,what struck me, especially when the women who didn't get soaked walks through the wet bystanders across the street with a smug look of self satisfaction, is that this exemplar of intelligence and savvy chose NOT to recommend to her fellow pedestrians that they also step back.

Am I nitpicking? Probably, but I have little doubt that the folks who wrote the commercial never even considered having the women warn her fellows. For one thing, the swamped bystanders provide a TV friendly stark visual of the difference between smart and dumb, which is key to their message. On the other hand, I also suspect that the subtle "every man for himself" message wouldn't raise an eyebrow among the ad men even if it were pointed out to them.

Rhetorical Attacks: Do they work?

2009-06-18T11:03:00.005-04:00

The unhinged rhetoric of present day Republicans and conservative public figures generally may represent a fairly simple misunderstanding on their part. The last couple of elections have seen the convincing rebuke of Republicans and conservative ideas and rhetoric. I suspect the present conservative rhetorical offensive against the Obama Administration and Democratic congressional leaders is based on the assumption that the electoral decline of Republicans was the result of overheated liberal and Democratic rhetoric during the Bush Administration, rather than the perception of voters that Republican policies have failed.

What if the overheated attacks against Bush and Republicans merely coincided with the public’s rejection of Republican policies based on perceived failure? What if the political decline of Republicans would have happened (maybe more gradually) even if liberals had not employed crazy, over the top, rhetorical attacks? If this is the case, then the present administration will not be damaged by extremist rhetoric, at least until there is credible evidence that its policies are not succeeding. Staying with this assumption, the present conservative approach may only be succeeding in damaging the credibility of conservatives, who are not savaging a president with 30% approval ratings, but rather are savaging a president with approval ratings consistently in the 60s whose programs are not (at least not yet) perceived as failures.

Click HERE for thye rest of the story.

Democratic Theory and Local Government

2009-06-15T12:02:00.007-04:00

Are the people of Longmeadow united by their membership in a community where citizens have broadly shared values, institutional obligations, and economic interests? Or, is Longmeadow a town where residents share resources, have overlapping cultural values, but see their relationship with town government as economic; the way consumers see producers in the marketplace, or employers see employees on the job?

My sense is that the latter better describes the perspective of most Longmeadow residents. Unfortunately, this model of citizenship is starkly at odds with both the actual form of government in Longmeadow (the New England town meeting) and its attendant theory of democratic citizenship; a theory to which virtually all of Longmeadow's 11,932 registered voters probably aspire and (ostensibly at least) subscribe.

Click HERE for the rest of the story.

Bring back segregation!

2009-06-03T10:30:00.006-04:00

When life was simpler it seems like we were better able to segregate the reasonable from the unreasonable, the passionate from the paranoid, the intense from the insane. Today, there is no longer a big bright line recognized by all separating the ridiculous from reality.

Presently, two ongoing stories in the national press bring this sad state of affairs into stark relief: the nomination battle over Sonia Sotomayor, and the Dick Cheney national speaking tour. In both cases, folks with national audiences and plenty of resources are saying things that ought to get them laughed off the stage for stupidity and naked dishonestly.

The strange part is that none of the absurd lies, distortions, and twisted interpretations are actually fooling anyone, even those who are repeating them out of political self interest. That's right, I'm saying that most of the ditto heads and O'Reilly Factor fans who dutifully parrot the lines of the day DO NOT ACTUALLY BELIEVE that their claims are "true," in the strictest sense. Rather, they believe their claims are "right" or "righteous" means to achieve larger, more important, ideological ends.

Extremists of all stripes perform this kind of mental gymnastics in order to maintain prejudices that form the core of their worldview in the minds of impressionable followers. For such folks, sober self reflection would be self destruction. This type of behavior used to be confined to marginal kooks like Lyndon LaRouche or cult leaders. Now, argument by oft repeated (and often untrue) assertion is the method of choice even for "mainstream" political activists, to say nothing of so-called "political pundits."

The good news for you is that if you are reading this it is very unlikely that you are persuaded by anti-intellectual arguments. As far as Sotomayor's nomination and Dick Cheney's revisionist tour, her confirmation and the sober judgement of history on the Bush-Cheney record would (and I think will)help confirm the popular political wisdom that in the long run the people are by and large reasonable and tend to get it right.

Obama's National Security Policy Approach

2009-05-22T09:48:00.015-04:00

President Obama's speech on national security this week drew more criticism from the left than it did from the right, despite the fact that he eviscerated the previous administration on its handling of national security affairs. After decisively declaring an end to the Bush era of national security ineptitude and moral depravity, the president did not then throw red meat to his liberal base.

President Obama could have promised to reverse every constitutionally suspect Bush policy or tactic with civil libertarian bravado. He could have said that freedom must always trump fear and that security purchased at the price of justice is no security at all. Make no mistake, the president was eloquent and his rhetoric was soaring, but his substantive policy approach appears to be something much different.

Click HERE for the rest of the story.

The Theory and Practice of American Politics

2009-05-20T11:56:00.017-04:00

People constantly ask me about the differences between left and right in American politics; what divides us as Americans? In some ways its an easy question to answer. The difficulty is, in fact, that there are so many useful (if incomplete) ways to explain it. The tricky thing is that every American can identify with elements of both wings of the American Eagle. Left and right revolve around the same fundamental philosophical/moral tenant, born of the Enlightenment, that each person possesses -or is endowed by their Creator with- individual freedom and self determination, natural rights thought justly limited only when they encroach on those of another.

Click HERE for the rest of the story.

Et tu, George?

2009-05-15T10:38:00.026-04:00

For decades, the lunatic fringe of American conservatism has tried to sell the idea that liberals want everyone to be dependent on the government so they can maintain power by handing out the goodies. The lunatic left analogue to this absurd theory is that conservatives want to starve widows and orphans and force every American to worship Jesus Christ.

Presently, The Republican Party is in terrible shape. The right wing nuts seem to be running the show. Limbaugh, Coulter, Sowell, and other irrational ideologues are running wild. [Click HERE for a particularly egregious example of conservative stupidity and moral relativism.] Sadly, credible conservative intellectuals, like George Will, seem to be getting pulled into the madness. In a recent Will column, he matter-of-factly asserted that the Obama Administration has a "dependency agenda" intent on "maximizing the number of people and institutions dependent on the federal government."

We need George Will and other credible conservatives to keep their heads while their fellows lose theirs all about them. Analysis that calmly asserts ridiculous claims such as this will not help save America's conservative party. Indeed, this is exactly the type of claim that has sent the Republican Party into an apparent death spiral. Undoubtedly, it is difficult for ideological conservatives like Will to accept that the present condition of our economy and international standing is due in large part to the folly of their dogma, but we cannot forget that part of the reason America lurched too far to the right in the first place was the ineptitude of the minority Democratic Party over the last decade or so.

Without credibility, conservatism will remain in the wilderness for many years, something that would be quite dangerous for the nation. Credible opposition to the majority party in the American system is vital to stability and progress.

George, please, put down the cool-aid, take a vacation and come back ready to espouse credible conservative ideas.

100 Days in Narrowcast America

2009-04-29T13:59:00.014-04:00

The liberal media watchdog website, Media Matters for America has produced a video montage of the Fox News Channel's coverage of the Obama Administration in its first 100 days. For people who don't watch Fox News much, the video is surreal. Comparing this depiction of Fox News coverage with national public opinion data reveals a truly amazing contrast. Americans as a whole have very positive feelings about the president and his policy agenda. When this fact is combined with the fact that Fox News is usually #1 in the cable news ratings, one gets a good sense of how the news broadcasting business does niche marketing. It's called narrowcasting and since no president is ever going to sustain 98% favorable ratings among voters, outfits like Fox News will always be able to succeed. MSNBC, which was nearly out of business a couple years back, has rebounded by catering to another niche in the TV news market, Fox News haters.

Is this situation the beginning of the end of journalism? I doubt it. As far as I can tell, regular and/or exclusive consumption of partisan news operations is only harmful to those doing it. I don't think there is any real danger of "second hand" self delusion that needs to be dealt with by society at large. Watch the video. Consider the source and assume it's editors took "artistic license." Still, I'm confident that at least 62% of Americans (Obama's current approval rating) will either laugh at, or cry for, the folks in the Fox News target demographic.

Republican Identity Crisis Worsens.

2009-04-28T14:08:00.005-04:00

Arlen Specter's surprise defection from the GOP should give the Republican Party just the kind of wake up call it needs. When Al Frankin gets to Washington, the Democrats will have the magic number of 60 votes in the US Senate.

What does it all mean for the Democratic agenda, the survival of the Republican Party nationally, and the public policy making process in the short and long run?

Click HERE for the rest of the story.

"Ferris Beuller's Day Off"

2009-04-23T12:57:00.023-04:00

In thinking about the public relations battle between President Obama and his critics, I find myself thinking of that lovable scamp Ferris Beuller gracefully riding a wave of self confidence and popularity, while his Nemesis, Principal Ed Rooney, haplessly pursues him only to to be thwarted at every turn by his own jealousy, incompetence, and obliviousness.

Is it really that hard to see this cult classic as an apt description of President Obama and his increasingly hysterical and decreasingly credible critics? If you want to know how the president is doing politically at the 100 day mark, maybe you should go rent a movie.

Policy v. Politics

2009-04-22T19:12:00.012-04:00

Although I often cringe at the commonplace notion that politics and policy are mutually exclusive, there is a good reason for this common misconception. In Massachusetts politics today we have a Democratic governor and a legislature overwhelmingly dominated by Democrats at a time when the Republican Party and its fiscal policy agenda is in shambles and crippled nationally. The Massachusetts Republican Party couldn't get Mother Theresa elected Miss Congeniality. And yet, the Beacon Hill line on the state's fiscal policy is NO NEW TAXES! Why are our Democratic legislators acting like the anti-tax crackpots in last week's Fox News Tea Party protests?

Click HERE for the Rest of the Story.

Republican Party in Trouble

2009-04-01T10:22:00.002-04:00

It's April Fools day but there's nothing funny about the ongoing self destruction of America's conservative political party. The Republican Party has had a really bad decade or so. The gap between the Republican Party's principles and its performance in office makes the Grand Canyon look like a pothole. What is needed is some serious soul and mind searching by the party whose job it is to caution against over reaching. The real life failures of conservative public policies were the result of the abandonment of intellectual conservatism.

Click HERE for the rest of the story.

Why we need Rush Limbaugh!

2009-03-27T14:16:00.004-04:00

Click HERE for a video blog post on this counter intuitive claim.

Free Speech on Campus

2009-03-19T07:17:00.002-04:00

Last fall at CCSU a student was asked to come to the police station for questioning about firearms possession after he had given an oral presentation in a communication class in which he argued that students and faculty should be allowed to carry concealed weapons on campus. The CCSU police were alerted by the professor of the communication course, who apparently was concerned that this student might present a danger to the campus community.

Click HERE for the rest of the story.

It's the ideas, stupid!

2009-03-06T10:12:00.007-05:00

Readers of this blog can be forgiven for rolling their eyes as I write yet another post bemoaning the fixation of just about everyone with the who, rather than the what, of politics. In Washington, DC today everybody is killing themselves to avoid blame for the current economic crisis and when real issues do get some airtime, such as the contending economic theories regarding the appropriate role of the government in regulating the economy, debate quickly turns to the advocates and away from the arguments.

Click HERE to read the rest of the story.

Epistemological Scepticism AND Experimentation

2009-02-26T09:15:00.007-05:00

Readers of this blog know that David Brooks is one of my favorite columnists. His latest column was a gem, though I do have quibbles.

Brooks worries that the Obama Administration is moving too fast, that it is falling into a trap to which liberals are more susceptible. He characterizes Obama's bold plans as government designed "top-down transformational change" and argues that if it "mostly" works, "the epistemological scepticism natural to conservatives will have been discredited." If it "mostly" fails, "then liberalism will suffer a grievous blow and conservatives will be called on to restore order and sanity." Never mind the obvious reality that it was conservative reliance on old ideas that got us into this mess, that's not actually my quibble here.

The problem is that Brooks' language (despite his conspicuous use of "mostly")oversimplifies things and rings of cynicism instead of the much more laudable scepticism about which he writes. He makes it seem as though we can only have one or the other, epistemological scepticism OR experimentation, and that the Obama plan represents the latter. Sceptical(or critical)experimentation, not to be confused with splitting the baby in two, is what all sides are really after.

It's a small quibble about a thoughtful essay that spells out for readers the yin and yang of liberal and conservative thinking, both of which serve valuable functions in our intellectual and political life.

Truth in jest: gets me every time.

2009-02-25T12:35:00.003-05:00

Are you a REAL AMERICAN? Take the quiz.

WMass Reader-Specific Post

2009-02-19T09:17:00.006-05:00

Click HERE to read my reaction to the Springfield Republican's latest editorial.

Obama's Approach

2009-02-18T14:35:00.008-05:00

The following Obama quotation is from an interview with several syndicated columnists recently. In it he clearly and concisely describes his vision of post partisanship. -I made every effort to reach out to Republicans early to get their input and to get they buy-in. I think that there were some senators and House members who have a sincere philosophical difference with the idea of any government role in boosting demand in the economy. They don’t believe in Keynes and they’re still fighting FDR. And no matter what we did, said, whatever the process was, they just don’t agree that this is the best prescription. And I think we can disagree without being disagreeable on that front.

What the president makes clear here is that bi or post partisanship is not about splitting the ideological difference. It is about pursuing the agenda that got him elected without ignoring or attacking Republicans. It's about giving them an opportunity to contribute to his agenda, not an opportunity to enact a Republican agenda. Obama is offering Republicans a chance to help him recognize "unintended consequences" of liberal policy prescriptions in order to avoid them. He is essentially asking them to play the role of loyal opposition, rather than that of obstructionist.

The difficulty is that his vision of post-partisanship is daily distorted by folks on both sides; conservative and extreme liberal ideologues have an interest (a genuine and legitimate ideological interest by the way) in resting control of public opinion from Obama.

By speaking much more often and much more substantively to the press about the substance of policy, Obama is effectively blunting his critics' efforts. It is very hard to distort a president's objectives and perspective when that perspective is regularly explained and discussed with the public by the president himself, rather than "administration officials."

Post-Identity Politics

2009-02-06T14:46:00.004-05:00

President Obama's efforts to bring about a "post-identity" politics is rightfully praised by one and all, right? That depends on what is meant by the term "identity" politics. It appears that most consider it a synonym for "partisan" politics, which is why Obama has used the term "post-partisan" politics as well. Should we be willing to cast off partisanship? Should we, as is constantly advocated by partisans on all sides, "put partisanship aside to do what's right for the American people?"

Click HERE for the rest of the story.

Obama's Call to Service

2009-01-20T13:49:00.010-05:00

I have spent my life listening to speeches by civic leaders called in youth to their life's work by the words of Kennedy and King. President Obama's call, no less poignant, will be no less potent. Today, I am as thankful for a national leader capable of inspiring a nation as I am envious of those who experienced this great call to service with the pure hearts and open minds of the very young. What a gift.

Bush's Ex-Presidency

2009-01-12T13:05:00.012-05:00

George W. Bush gave his final press conference this morning. He was probably more relaxed and in control than ever before at such an event. While his presidency was undoubtedly less than he had hoped for, there is no reason why his ex-presidency need be.

Ckick HERE for the rest of the story.

Apologies

2009-01-09T14:38:00.011-05:00

I am sorry that I have not blogged in so long. The thing is: I haven't had any ideas worth sharing. One of the good things about blogging is that I don't have to write on a schedule and produce something just to have it out there. We all know how annoying it is when columnists write "filler" columns.

I have work due to an editor this month, so will likely return to blogging at the end of the month. In the meantime, I did tape a couple of TV interviews you might be interested in. To watch, to to my Web TV page. Actually, I may blog next week on thoughts about the Obama transition and immediate future because I agreed to speak on a panel about it at my next Town Democratic Committee meeting.

Happy New Year!