Right now, as I blog away, I'm sure that there is a camera whirring away (well, they don't whir anymore, but you get the picture) making an ad that hangs Barack Obama's preacher around his neck. We'll see Rev. Wright hourly throughout the fall making Willie Horton look like a choir boy. I'm also sure that similar ads will be running hanging the "Keating 5" around John McCain's neck. In the scheme of things, the weight of Rev. Wright will weigh heavier on Obama. Despite his statements to the contrary, Obama runs a major risk of being "swiftboated". In the eyes of many Americans, Rev. Wright is a racist, and Obama's guilt by association will be a major influence on how the majority of the electorate will vote.
Is this unfair? No, and I didn't think that the Genesis of "swiftboating" four years ago was unfair either. Enough facts were out there to make a case that a candidate for commander in chief was unfit for duty. The public has a right to know. The former gatekeepers of information, such as the TV network news broadcasters, weren't going to break the story. Therefore, I'm glad that other individuals stepped up to the plate and presented the information to the public.
Does this mean that I like the increasingly shrill tone of our political campaigns? No, but I'm not going to hold my breath and wait for a campaign where candidates debate how far they intend to stray from, or return to, the vision of our Republic outlined on the Federalist Papers. What we have now is imperfect, but certainly better than returning control of information to the mainstream media gatekeepers.
At the local level, things are different and the old information gatekeepers still hold sway. Because of the expense, no one is going to advertise in the Salisbury media market to win a Ridgely election. What is now starting to happen, however, is that free blogs and podcasts are providing local candidates the opportunity to make their case. The "everyman" running for office now has the means to an end run around expensive media markets and other information gatekeepers.
Some of this might be termed "negative" campaigning. However, candidates for local office are just as likely to be flawed and the public has the right to know the whole story about those seeking our votes. Because there is no media access, local politicians can often rest "on their laurels" earned from years in the community performing some service well with a local institution. Unfortunately, good service in one area of endeavor doesn't guarantee competence in the civic/political arena. For instance, if a local candidate or office holder states that "if we take out a loan, we won't be in debt anymore", they need to be held accountable. Candidates also need to have a means to get their message out and counter the all to common whispering campaigns that plague local politics. In all of this, blogs mean access and information for voters.
Technology in the service of democracy is never a bad thing.
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Monday, May 5, 2008
Sour Grapes Vs. The Whole Truth!
It was heated at the Commissioner's meeting tonight and events pertaining to the recent election are still being discussed. At issue was the recent Town Manager "press release".
Some simple facts will set the story straight about the proposed '09 Budget "press release" from the Ridgely Town Manager the weekend before the election.
It all started when an email was sent out to all three Commissioners, 9:08 AM, April 24th, from the Town Manager, stating that "the attached has been forwarded to the media". Commissioner Gearhart emailed back that this was wrong and premature since the Commissioners hadn't even seen a draft of the budget, and asked him to retract the "press release". As the Town Manager was unavailable, Gearhart notified the press to clarify that the Commissioners hadn't yet seen this so called draft budget. Then, at 12:02 came another email from the Town Manager saying that "Chuck and Linda OKd". HOWEVER, you can't call such an email "vote" OFFICIAL, since such an action would VIOLATE the Maryland Open Meetings Act. The press did not print the Town Manager's "press release", writing that "to cover it would be imprudent".
The bottom line: WHY THE RUSH? If this "press release" was truly what it pretended to be, why would it matter if it was released the 24th or TODAY? Speaking of today, why wasn't the budget proposal in evidence at tonight's town meeting? The town meeting IS the time and place to consider this issue. The absence of any proposal tonight speaks volumes about the politics of the "press release".
Some simple facts will set the story straight about the proposed '09 Budget "press release" from the Ridgely Town Manager the weekend before the election.
It all started when an email was sent out to all three Commissioners, 9:08 AM, April 24th, from the Town Manager, stating that "the attached has been forwarded to the media". Commissioner Gearhart emailed back that this was wrong and premature since the Commissioners hadn't even seen a draft of the budget, and asked him to retract the "press release". As the Town Manager was unavailable, Gearhart notified the press to clarify that the Commissioners hadn't yet seen this so called draft budget. Then, at 12:02 came another email from the Town Manager saying that "Chuck and Linda OKd". HOWEVER, you can't call such an email "vote" OFFICIAL, since such an action would VIOLATE the Maryland Open Meetings Act. The press did not print the Town Manager's "press release", writing that "to cover it would be imprudent".
The bottom line: WHY THE RUSH? If this "press release" was truly what it pretended to be, why would it matter if it was released the 24th or TODAY? Speaking of today, why wasn't the budget proposal in evidence at tonight's town meeting? The town meeting IS the time and place to consider this issue. The absence of any proposal tonight speaks volumes about the politics of the "press release".
Thursday, May 1, 2008
Progressive Politics
I'll use this May Day to reclaim the the term Progressive. All too often, it is a word that is used by the left and has collectivist connotations for many of us.
The Progressive movement at its height at the beginning of the 20th century included many Republicans and conservatives. Teddy Roosevelt, for example, was a leader of the Progressive movement. The focus on promoting the people's interests over large monopolistic corporations led to much legislation that we take for granted today.
Today, at the international, national and local levels, we find an array of forces and trends which are compromising the voice and interests of the average middle class American. For example, our jobs are being out sourced because of "free trade", while both legal and illegal immigrants come and take the remaining jobs. My own brother-in-law, a computer programmer, must watch as his American co-workers are forced to train "H-1B" visa immigrants to do their jobs. He is the last one left in his department, and has every reason to believe he'll be next.
We always need to look at who benefits from such phenomenon, and in all the above, it's the multi-national corporations and their insatiable need for cheap labor. The situation today is similar to the one a hundred years ago when corporate driven changes were threatening the social good.
Only a few lonely voices such as Ralph Nader on the left, or Pat Buchanan on the right, have consistently criticized the growing dispossession of Middle America. (Their common ground is intriguing, and despite their differences on social issues, could contain the seeds of a wide ranging progressive renewal.)However, few will now take on sacred corporate cows such as "free trade". And, when a mainstream figure like Lou Dobbs begins to raise his voice, look at how he's tarred and feathered as an extremist, isolationist, or even a racist. It's a hard road ahead for those fighting to regain control over our fate.
At the local level, I am gratified to see a functioning coalition composed of both conservatives and liberals, which I call progressive. It puts the people's interests ahead of the interests of corporations, developers and their administration allies.
Of course, many people voted in the recent election for a candidate that they simply liked or found personable and competent. However, many of us were aware of the stakes involved here. Many of us voted not only because we like Kathy Smith, but to keep an open, citizen oriented government, to serve the interests of the residents of Ridgely.
The Progressive movement at its height at the beginning of the 20th century included many Republicans and conservatives. Teddy Roosevelt, for example, was a leader of the Progressive movement. The focus on promoting the people's interests over large monopolistic corporations led to much legislation that we take for granted today.
Today, at the international, national and local levels, we find an array of forces and trends which are compromising the voice and interests of the average middle class American. For example, our jobs are being out sourced because of "free trade", while both legal and illegal immigrants come and take the remaining jobs. My own brother-in-law, a computer programmer, must watch as his American co-workers are forced to train "H-1B" visa immigrants to do their jobs. He is the last one left in his department, and has every reason to believe he'll be next.
We always need to look at who benefits from such phenomenon, and in all the above, it's the multi-national corporations and their insatiable need for cheap labor. The situation today is similar to the one a hundred years ago when corporate driven changes were threatening the social good.
Only a few lonely voices such as Ralph Nader on the left, or Pat Buchanan on the right, have consistently criticized the growing dispossession of Middle America. (Their common ground is intriguing, and despite their differences on social issues, could contain the seeds of a wide ranging progressive renewal.)However, few will now take on sacred corporate cows such as "free trade". And, when a mainstream figure like Lou Dobbs begins to raise his voice, look at how he's tarred and feathered as an extremist, isolationist, or even a racist. It's a hard road ahead for those fighting to regain control over our fate.
At the local level, I am gratified to see a functioning coalition composed of both conservatives and liberals, which I call progressive. It puts the people's interests ahead of the interests of corporations, developers and their administration allies.
Of course, many people voted in the recent election for a candidate that they simply liked or found personable and competent. However, many of us were aware of the stakes involved here. Many of us voted not only because we like Kathy Smith, but to keep an open, citizen oriented government, to serve the interests of the residents of Ridgely.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
