In the days that followed the Obama election there was much talk of how Barack Obama was studying Abraham Lincoln to the degree that Doris Kearns Goodwin’s book Team of Rivals was revised. Yet the president and the times that face President Obama truly reflect both President Lincoln and also President Roosevelt. Both presidents were elected in critical times in this countries history. Yet today, as I assess the current state of the Obama Presidency, there is a growing and disconcerting trend. There remains a deep and profound mistrust, and fear of an Obama presidency, and to be clearer about a black man in the white house. In the latter days of the presidential race, conservative commentator Pat Buchanan often reminded viewers that until the September 17th meltdown, the race was a virtual dead heat. Senator McCain’s “fundamental” remarks and Barack Obama’s calm demeanor allowed many voters to basically “hold their nose” and give Obama then nod, believing that they could trust him to manage the economy. It is clear that many voted with their fingers crossed. Yes President Obama is very popular as a president, but it is clear now that the strategy of the Republican Party is to tap in to the visceral and latent fear that many in Americans have. It is almost as if they played back the Palin rallies of last fall, and made a strategic decision that to fear as an organizing principle is the hand that needs to be played.
This is Barack Obama’s three am moment. How to govern, and introduce change in the face of fear. The Republican Party has been very effective in parlaying fear both real and imagined into policy. Often that policy when the cloak of fear has been removed is exposed for fraudulent, anti democratic, and possibly illegal. The democrats to their discredit have never learned the art of the down and dirty welfare. It was many democrats who a year ago feared that the Obama candidacy would crumble under attack in the manner that the Gore and Kerry efforts did, but Denver in a speech labeled “manly” ironically by Pat Buchanan, Barack Obama assuaged such fears. Barack Obama if given truth serum would acknowledge that he underestimated the voracity of the pent up anger that was glossed over in the after math of his election. He hoped that his audacity for hope would be a precursor for the audacity of change. I believe that Barack Obama saw an America weary of divisiveness and fear and would support his agenda. Perhaps he was wrong. Those who support the status quo have never had such illusions of a kinder gentler America, those who support the status quo, bided their time, licked their wounds and now are revitalized.
The pattern is familiar and scary, and it there is nothing to suggest that it will get any better, at the Palin rallies last fall there were cries of “off with his head”, during the health care debate President Obama is seen has been compared to Adolph Hitler, called a socialist, and now the overseer of a “death panel” that will be the final arbiter of life and death for the elderly. Yet in my opinion this is just a test. If we think the passion is turned up on health care, just wait until 2010 when immigration is on the table. For those who have irrational fears, then “noxious” mix of a black president developing policy for Mexicans may be too much to bear. This it the America of 2010. Changer is coming, and the fear is rising. How President Obama governs in this atmosphere will be very interesting. My thoughts are that competence, and commitment, to change is the only course. With very few exceptions Barack Hussein Obama has been steady at the wheel, understanding the nuances, of governance, pushing the right buttons, and doing what is needed rather than what is popular.
October 2009
Saturday, July 31, 2010
Saturday, July 24, 2010
Hitting the "Reset" Button the McKee Development Plan
Real Estate Development is a complex animal with many moving and often divergent parts. Despite the inherent complexities, that set each project apart, there are several ingredients that ring true of any development project regardless of their size and scope For example; the developer has to cobble together a financing package that inspires confidence with his bankers. In addition, there is a political dimension that has to be accounted for. As land use, property acquisition, availability of public funds and tax credits all require the support of the political class. In addition to the financial and bureaucratic reality, there has to be community “buy in” which in the best case scenario, starts long before the first loan application is made, or shovel has been planted. And finally as those who envisioned the Ball Park Village to accompany the new Busch Stadium discovered, the state of economy in general and the commercial and retail market in particular always has the potential to wreak havoc with the most grandiose of visions.
And if the economic hurdles weren’t high enough, there are also social and cultural considerations that cannot be ignored. Especially in St Louis where racial polarization and distrust seem to be engrained in our civic DNA, therefore any developer with plans for North St. Louis, but fails to include this communities’ social profile in his planning, is subject to a rude awakening. What that means is that accounting for a long standing feeling that North St Louis has consistently gotten the short end of the stick is for a developer, “job one”. Secondly a developer that does his homework would be aware that many in the African American community hold a general distrust toward “outsiders” who they believe come to their community with a singular drive for profit with little regard for the needs of the community. Because many of these “outliers” gained entrance into the community by first establishing their bonafides with African American leaders, this distrust may also extend those same leaders who paved their way. In either case those concerns will continue to be a factor in how receptive the African American community is toward any major development plan. North city feels it has been burned too often by failed development plans and therefore their desire to impose their will on the development project of West County developer Paul McKee is rooted a history of failed promises. And because Mr. McKee’s failed to gain community support on the front end, his development vision has become the cause célèbre for community activists and residents.
As this billion dollar battle over the future of five hundred acres of prime city real estate grinds forward, there was little doubt that one of the battlegrounds would be the courts. As such, the North side development plan ended up in the court room of circuit judge Robert Dierker. Judge Dierker’s recent ruling which essentially served as a judicial “thumbs down” for the development project has put a huge dent in McKee’s plan. Struck down by judicial gavel was the controversial tax incremental financing or TIF part of the plan that was approved by the Board of Alderman in October. Judge Dierker’s decision was based on his opinion that the statutes that govern TIF applications should not have been applied to the Northside Development Plan. While not as complex as those exotic Wall Street financial instruments like derivatives, and default swaps, TIFs were started in California in the fifties to creatively attract financing to a development. Since the seventies TIFs have increased in usage to compensate for the reduction in federal development funds. The premise of a TIF is the tax revenue of undeveloped parcels will increase once those parcels have been fully developed, and the a portion of those increases can then be used to pay for public improvements that the municipality may see as desirable, but without the TIF would not have the money to pay for without increasing taxes. In making his ruling, Judge McKee smacked down the Board of Alderman for overreach, and therefore sent Paul McKee scurrying back to the drawing board. Whether Mr. McKee can truly deliver on hi vision without the TIFs remain to be seen.
Meanwhile opponents of the development project cheer the ruling but they have also cited the potential for massive housing disruption via eminent domain as a reason to oppose the bill, McKee’s promises of equitable treatment notwithstanding. Others, who opposed the plan, have raised the specter of gentrification, which has been a long standing code word that has provoked fear in depressed communities. Yet as these battle lines were drawn, blurred, and redrawn, the fact remains the status quo i.e. an underdeveloped community with boarded up buildings and vacant lots is not a tenable solution. Which means a “win win” solution will require both sides to revisit their lines in the sand and find some meeting of the minds that will allow something positive to happen.
As I have watched this issue unfold I am reminded of the health care battle that took place last summer. President Obama saw the insurance industry and their supporters as proponents of the status quo, as his health care plan would impact industry profit margins. As a result, opponents of health care adopted a strategy of fear using terms like socialism, and “death panels” to arouse unenlightened passions. President Obama often conceded there were some troublesome aspects of the legislation and often encouraged legitimate debate – on the merits. What President Obama got in return was an almost intractable status quo intent on effectively throwing the baby out with the bath water. Over the past eighteen months, I have seen some interesting parallels in the health care debate and the McKee Development plan. In both cases, those in opposition talked on how they wanted change, and were only opposed to it on merits, yet in both cases they used fear, and scare tactics to rouse support. In both cases the opposition often was framed around the word no, with very little offered as a viable alternative. And ultimately, just as it was in health care, what is needed is for the emotional volume to be turned down, so that real proactive, and solution based discussions can take place.
Is Paul McKee the perfect developer? He would probably be the first to tell you no, and acknowledge that he has made mistakes in the roll out of the plan which have served to undermined his efforts. But then again, recent history of development in North St Louis will reveal a long line of dubious development deals that lacked the type of communal “due diligence” that is taking place now. Which begs the question why some who in the past were avid supporters of development projects that had even more red flags then this one, now are strident in their opposition of this plan? That said, Judge Dierker's decision ultimately provides an opportunity for both sides to hit the proverbial “reset” button. The glare of the spotlight on the plan has revealed some flaws in the project that need to be attended to, yet for those to oppose the plan and refuse to work with Mr. McKee, exposes them in the minds of some as obstructionist with their own axes to grind. In addition to hitting the “reset” button, Judge Dierker’s ruling provides an opportunity for all stakeholders to sit back down at the table and grind out their differences.
As with all multi million dollar ventures, this one has attracted both those who should be at the table as well as those who shouldn’t be there. Unfortunately for the process, what this project has not attracted is an honest broker, one with no “skin in the game” who can galvanize community support, while making sure the communities’ concerns are assuaged. That middle man should have enough gravitas with both sides to remind them that this development project needs to happen. For a city with a damaged psyche, we should be striving to lug a cumbersome, but needed project over the finish line. We need trusted leaders to provide context and perspective and remind this community on where we have been, and were we are going as a community, and how great communities find a way to get hard things done.
Over one hundred years ago, St. Louis hosted both a World’s Fair and the 1904 Olympic Games. One hundred years ago, the “Gateway to the West”, was one of the crown jewel cities of an emerging nation. The twenty century however has not been kind to St Louis as witnessed by the decades of decline which included significant population loss, the exodus of major corporate headquarters, and an overall diminishing of civic pride. Yet, despite all those “negatives” there appears to be a new pulse of revival as evidenced by a more livelier downtown nightlife, emerging neighborhoods like South Grand, the expansion of the Loop, the hosting of the NCAA Men’s Final Four in 2004, and the Baseball All Star Game in 2009. The fact that St. Louis is a major contender for the 2012 Democratic National Convention speaks volumes to the hard work done by many to reverse the trends. This revival would not be possible without a combination of vision, cooperation, and a willingness to work through tough issues.
Yet North St. Louis stands out as a source of derision, and division, due in large measure to a history with dysfunction, poor planning, and a poor political leadership. In addition, this project exacerbates what seems to be an irreconcilable chasm between many in North St. Louis and current Mayor Francis Slay. Mr. McKee’s development project is not a panacea for all that ills this community, and while massive in scope, it does not include other depressed areas like the Ville, Greater Ville or Walnut Park. Ultimately one would hope that Mr. McKee’s project can serve as a template for impactful development and unleash a critical mass of revival that could spread further North to other afflicted areas. Time always is of the essence, although Mr. McKee says Judge Dierker’s ruling notwithstanding, he plans to forge ahead. Hopefully he stays true to his word, as in the Obama Health care plan, we should be mindful that if we miss this opportunity, the legacy may be another generation of neglect in North St. Louis as the rest of the city moves on.
And if the economic hurdles weren’t high enough, there are also social and cultural considerations that cannot be ignored. Especially in St Louis where racial polarization and distrust seem to be engrained in our civic DNA, therefore any developer with plans for North St. Louis, but fails to include this communities’ social profile in his planning, is subject to a rude awakening. What that means is that accounting for a long standing feeling that North St Louis has consistently gotten the short end of the stick is for a developer, “job one”. Secondly a developer that does his homework would be aware that many in the African American community hold a general distrust toward “outsiders” who they believe come to their community with a singular drive for profit with little regard for the needs of the community. Because many of these “outliers” gained entrance into the community by first establishing their bonafides with African American leaders, this distrust may also extend those same leaders who paved their way. In either case those concerns will continue to be a factor in how receptive the African American community is toward any major development plan. North city feels it has been burned too often by failed development plans and therefore their desire to impose their will on the development project of West County developer Paul McKee is rooted a history of failed promises. And because Mr. McKee’s failed to gain community support on the front end, his development vision has become the cause célèbre for community activists and residents.
As this billion dollar battle over the future of five hundred acres of prime city real estate grinds forward, there was little doubt that one of the battlegrounds would be the courts. As such, the North side development plan ended up in the court room of circuit judge Robert Dierker. Judge Dierker’s recent ruling which essentially served as a judicial “thumbs down” for the development project has put a huge dent in McKee’s plan. Struck down by judicial gavel was the controversial tax incremental financing or TIF part of the plan that was approved by the Board of Alderman in October. Judge Dierker’s decision was based on his opinion that the statutes that govern TIF applications should not have been applied to the Northside Development Plan. While not as complex as those exotic Wall Street financial instruments like derivatives, and default swaps, TIFs were started in California in the fifties to creatively attract financing to a development. Since the seventies TIFs have increased in usage to compensate for the reduction in federal development funds. The premise of a TIF is the tax revenue of undeveloped parcels will increase once those parcels have been fully developed, and the a portion of those increases can then be used to pay for public improvements that the municipality may see as desirable, but without the TIF would not have the money to pay for without increasing taxes. In making his ruling, Judge McKee smacked down the Board of Alderman for overreach, and therefore sent Paul McKee scurrying back to the drawing board. Whether Mr. McKee can truly deliver on hi vision without the TIFs remain to be seen.
Meanwhile opponents of the development project cheer the ruling but they have also cited the potential for massive housing disruption via eminent domain as a reason to oppose the bill, McKee’s promises of equitable treatment notwithstanding. Others, who opposed the plan, have raised the specter of gentrification, which has been a long standing code word that has provoked fear in depressed communities. Yet as these battle lines were drawn, blurred, and redrawn, the fact remains the status quo i.e. an underdeveloped community with boarded up buildings and vacant lots is not a tenable solution. Which means a “win win” solution will require both sides to revisit their lines in the sand and find some meeting of the minds that will allow something positive to happen.
As I have watched this issue unfold I am reminded of the health care battle that took place last summer. President Obama saw the insurance industry and their supporters as proponents of the status quo, as his health care plan would impact industry profit margins. As a result, opponents of health care adopted a strategy of fear using terms like socialism, and “death panels” to arouse unenlightened passions. President Obama often conceded there were some troublesome aspects of the legislation and often encouraged legitimate debate – on the merits. What President Obama got in return was an almost intractable status quo intent on effectively throwing the baby out with the bath water. Over the past eighteen months, I have seen some interesting parallels in the health care debate and the McKee Development plan. In both cases, those in opposition talked on how they wanted change, and were only opposed to it on merits, yet in both cases they used fear, and scare tactics to rouse support. In both cases the opposition often was framed around the word no, with very little offered as a viable alternative. And ultimately, just as it was in health care, what is needed is for the emotional volume to be turned down, so that real proactive, and solution based discussions can take place.
Is Paul McKee the perfect developer? He would probably be the first to tell you no, and acknowledge that he has made mistakes in the roll out of the plan which have served to undermined his efforts. But then again, recent history of development in North St Louis will reveal a long line of dubious development deals that lacked the type of communal “due diligence” that is taking place now. Which begs the question why some who in the past were avid supporters of development projects that had even more red flags then this one, now are strident in their opposition of this plan? That said, Judge Dierker's decision ultimately provides an opportunity for both sides to hit the proverbial “reset” button. The glare of the spotlight on the plan has revealed some flaws in the project that need to be attended to, yet for those to oppose the plan and refuse to work with Mr. McKee, exposes them in the minds of some as obstructionist with their own axes to grind. In addition to hitting the “reset” button, Judge Dierker’s ruling provides an opportunity for all stakeholders to sit back down at the table and grind out their differences.
As with all multi million dollar ventures, this one has attracted both those who should be at the table as well as those who shouldn’t be there. Unfortunately for the process, what this project has not attracted is an honest broker, one with no “skin in the game” who can galvanize community support, while making sure the communities’ concerns are assuaged. That middle man should have enough gravitas with both sides to remind them that this development project needs to happen. For a city with a damaged psyche, we should be striving to lug a cumbersome, but needed project over the finish line. We need trusted leaders to provide context and perspective and remind this community on where we have been, and were we are going as a community, and how great communities find a way to get hard things done.
Over one hundred years ago, St. Louis hosted both a World’s Fair and the 1904 Olympic Games. One hundred years ago, the “Gateway to the West”, was one of the crown jewel cities of an emerging nation. The twenty century however has not been kind to St Louis as witnessed by the decades of decline which included significant population loss, the exodus of major corporate headquarters, and an overall diminishing of civic pride. Yet, despite all those “negatives” there appears to be a new pulse of revival as evidenced by a more livelier downtown nightlife, emerging neighborhoods like South Grand, the expansion of the Loop, the hosting of the NCAA Men’s Final Four in 2004, and the Baseball All Star Game in 2009. The fact that St. Louis is a major contender for the 2012 Democratic National Convention speaks volumes to the hard work done by many to reverse the trends. This revival would not be possible without a combination of vision, cooperation, and a willingness to work through tough issues.
Yet North St. Louis stands out as a source of derision, and division, due in large measure to a history with dysfunction, poor planning, and a poor political leadership. In addition, this project exacerbates what seems to be an irreconcilable chasm between many in North St. Louis and current Mayor Francis Slay. Mr. McKee’s development project is not a panacea for all that ills this community, and while massive in scope, it does not include other depressed areas like the Ville, Greater Ville or Walnut Park. Ultimately one would hope that Mr. McKee’s project can serve as a template for impactful development and unleash a critical mass of revival that could spread further North to other afflicted areas. Time always is of the essence, although Mr. McKee says Judge Dierker’s ruling notwithstanding, he plans to forge ahead. Hopefully he stays true to his word, as in the Obama Health care plan, we should be mindful that if we miss this opportunity, the legacy may be another generation of neglect in North St. Louis as the rest of the city moves on.
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Who cries for Latonya Perkins?
From 2000
Who cries for Latonya Perkins?
For the last month so-called “leaders” of the black community have gotten major headlines wringing their hands over the President election, the State Senate replacement for Lacy Clay, or internal workings of the local NAACP. In the past under this same black leadership there have been other headline grabbing protests, internal bickering between newspaper publishers, but strangely there is silence in the recent shooting of Latonya Perkins who was found shot to death December 3rd in North St. Louis.
Ms Perkins was the wife of Harold Richardson who is being held in custody for the shooting this past summer of police officer Robert Stanze in August. Many people in North St. Louis felt that there was more to that shooting that meets the eye.
First Mr. Richardson was stopped in connection with the shooting of a Berkley policeman. Although the officers involved in his August 8th arrest were veteran cops, the manner in which the arrest was handled was curious; especially in light of the crime they suspected him of committed.
Secondly even as Mr. Richardson was being arrested for officer Stanze’s shooting, the police continued looking for someone even though they never acknowledged there was another person at the scene. Now his wife gets gunned down barely a block away in what is called an execution style murder that the police say is ‘not related’. Yet the chronology of events leads many to doubt the official story. While the St. Louis police department may not have the negative reputation as say the Las Angeles Police, recent St. Louis Police history is replete with many questionable shootings and incidents. There has been a lot of talk and a lot of smoke, and where there is smoke there is usually fire. Yet there appears to be a conspiracy of silence by the media, the political leadership, and those who fashion themselves as black leaders.
So, who cries, who marches for Latonya Perkins? Was she just as the police and the media suggest, another black homicide victim? Or was it more? Her husband has alleged through his mother that he has been beaten in jail. Who marches for him? What are we missing here? What is being covered up? Perhaps if the black leaders rolled put as much energy in this incident as they do grabbing headlines about elections that in essence had already been decided, the internal bunglings of the NAACP, and the fumbling of the State Senate seat, maybe the real truth can be uncovered. Until then, all we have is more of what the late poet Tupac Shakur, called “Teardrops and closed caskets.”
Who cries for Latonya Perkins?
For the last month so-called “leaders” of the black community have gotten major headlines wringing their hands over the President election, the State Senate replacement for Lacy Clay, or internal workings of the local NAACP. In the past under this same black leadership there have been other headline grabbing protests, internal bickering between newspaper publishers, but strangely there is silence in the recent shooting of Latonya Perkins who was found shot to death December 3rd in North St. Louis.
Ms Perkins was the wife of Harold Richardson who is being held in custody for the shooting this past summer of police officer Robert Stanze in August. Many people in North St. Louis felt that there was more to that shooting that meets the eye.
First Mr. Richardson was stopped in connection with the shooting of a Berkley policeman. Although the officers involved in his August 8th arrest were veteran cops, the manner in which the arrest was handled was curious; especially in light of the crime they suspected him of committed.
Secondly even as Mr. Richardson was being arrested for officer Stanze’s shooting, the police continued looking for someone even though they never acknowledged there was another person at the scene. Now his wife gets gunned down barely a block away in what is called an execution style murder that the police say is ‘not related’. Yet the chronology of events leads many to doubt the official story. While the St. Louis police department may not have the negative reputation as say the Las Angeles Police, recent St. Louis Police history is replete with many questionable shootings and incidents. There has been a lot of talk and a lot of smoke, and where there is smoke there is usually fire. Yet there appears to be a conspiracy of silence by the media, the political leadership, and those who fashion themselves as black leaders.
So, who cries, who marches for Latonya Perkins? Was she just as the police and the media suggest, another black homicide victim? Or was it more? Her husband has alleged through his mother that he has been beaten in jail. Who marches for him? What are we missing here? What is being covered up? Perhaps if the black leaders rolled put as much energy in this incident as they do grabbing headlines about elections that in essence had already been decided, the internal bunglings of the NAACP, and the fumbling of the State Senate seat, maybe the real truth can be uncovered. Until then, all we have is more of what the late poet Tupac Shakur, called “Teardrops and closed caskets.”
Sunday, July 4, 2010
The Fading Spirit of 1776
In the spring of 1954 Texas Instrument Chief Gordon Teal unveiled the transistors at an industry convention. Yet what happened that spring day would have an impact that would not be understood for another forty years as the introduction of the transistor launched computers into the modern age. Looking back and considering the implications of this new technology, that fact that it was scorned and scoffed at now seems short sighted and silly. But when Texas Instrument introduced the world to the transistor, it completed a journey started by Alexander Graham Bell, which would ultimately lead to the domination of three screens. In 2008, media giants Verizon and AT&T launched their ‘three screen’ strategy designed to lure consumers to their brand by offering a one stop shop for all of your information needs via telephone, television and internet. At the same time another national phenomena was taking place.
The newspaper industry now understood what its industry brethren in the railroads felt over a century before with the advent of air travel. Newspaper readership is down losing a battle with more advanced news information platforms. As a result in the same manner pharmaceutical companies compete for the cure for cancer, or AIDS, communication companies compete for the newer and faster ways to disseminate information. Information is often what separates winners and losers. Before armies go to war they utilize their intelligence resources to gauge enemy strengths and weaknesses. Hence both the capacity to gather and disseminate information is critical - businesses use it so they can effectively market their product, for politicians information gathering helps them to plan their political campaign in the same way that military strategists prepare to prosecute a war.
Lost in this barrage of new technology, and multi platform media outlets, is a dramatic shift of power is underway. A shift so dramatic that in my view it undermines the intent of the original intent of our founding fathers which was to have a government of the people and for the people. What makes this shift dangerous is that most Americans and unaware of the lurking dangers. Therefore for many of us, the power of Washington, Congress, the President, the Supreme Court, is intact and the handiwork of James Madison lives on. Yeah right. Only a well conceived story of fiction would lead one to believe that the President of The United States really runs this country. We all remember the glorious campaign of 2008, the choked up Keith Olberman announcing that Barack Obama would be the 44th President of the United States, and the great speech in Grant Park. Yet, how does the saying go, that was then, and this is now. In the final analysis, Barack Obama’s hold to power is only as strong as the media’s desire to keep him there. But as long as Americans focus on the distilled power conferred by the Constitution to our government leaders and ignore the real power of the media to wage a mind control program that would make Joseph Goebbels blush, our blindness will continue to “energize’ the new world order.
All that to say what? The Obama Administration is a well conceived trick on the American public. Not trickery because of ill intent by President Obama, but the Obama election obscures the the reality of a democracy in decline, and a growing inability of Washington to produce real change. I am not sure if Barack Obama is a dude that understands that at the end of the day, the best he can do is to deliver “change lite’ and hope that what he does sets in motion a critical mass that can open the floodgates for future progressive Presidents.Change agendas that sound so compelling on the campaign trail reach Washington and enter a twilight zone, where the media decides for its non critical thinking viewers and listeners whether this change is socialistic, un-American, good, bad, ugly or indecent. President Obama must feel like a worn out puppet as he continually recalibrate due to the musings of the media. When he first ran for President he was not black enough, then as time moved forward he was too black, and too radical, he was praised by the media for been cool, and nuanced, now blasted for not being angry enough. And before the public can get their arms around which President Obama they should like, they media changes again.
This game is worth billions of dollars to the major networks, their outlets, talking heads, and bloggers. Whether it comes from the right via FOX or from the left via MSNBC, they both need hyperactivity, vitriol, and insecurities to keep fear moving at warp speed. Politicians have always pandered to the media, but now the pandering is so pervasive, that voters can’t keep up with the number of faces a politician may put on from day to day. Furthermore, voter’s perceptions are now crafted not by common sense, or the reality on the ground, but by the pontifications of their favorite talking head. Look no further than the influence of the media on the issue of government spending. During the Bush years, when the Bush Administration fleeced the government coffers blind, with tax cuts to the rich, and wars of choice, the right wing media was silent on the issue of federal debt and therefore the American public many steeped in personal debt, saw our fiscal imbalance as a non story. Now the conservative news media label Barack Obama as a freewheeling spender whose expansive stimulus package was borderline socialism, and therefore now the American public finds our debt as disconcerting and want to rein in spending. President Obama ought to ask them where do they want the ax to fall.
Networks understand their power in crafting perceptions. I recall in the days leading up to President Obama’s Afghanistan review decision, NBC News sent Brian Williams to Kabul ostensibly to garner American sympathy for the plight of the Afghanistan people, and to give the upcoming military buildup decision a soft landing. In addition in the aftermath of the Gulf Crisis, President Obama eschews his “cool hand Luke Persona” to tell The Today Show's Matt Lauer that somebody needs to kick BP’s ass. President Obama went hard only after the media hounded him for not being angry.
On the eve of America’s 234th birthday, the levers of power have shifted far beyond the wildest imaginings of the founding fathers. Now to be sure, the men who met in Philadelphia in 1776 understood in their own time and in their own way the importance of messaging, and image. As evidenced by no other than John Hancock whose imprimatur, was large enough to be viewed across the Atlantic by the British King. Yet the vast influence in today’s media, is unprecedented and in my mind dangerous. Multi platform, media corporations are now under the banner of General Electric – NBC, Viacom – CBS and Disney owns ABC and ESPN. And let’s not forget that Fox News owned by the world’s second largest media conglomerate News Ltd is not American owned. In a world where we zig zag from work to home, to school, to soccer practice, rehab centers, and back again, our dependency on the media has become an unseemly American addiction. News shows like the Today Show have now morphed into a hybrid of a news/gossip show, while other outlets like Fox and MSNBC have become media darlings of the conservative and progressives respectively. But just because Keith Olberman says something, in direct contrast to Glen Beck does that make it so? How much of what is said and done in Washington can truly be trusted or credited as original thought? How much is done merely for “effect”, how much is done for spin?
Over two hundred years ago they wrote, “When in the course of human events it may become necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them”. This is now an unrecognizable America, seemingly incapable of big things, where reality is suspended in favor of noise. The bands that now connect us come in the form of a “3G” network where bandwidth is king. Urban rumors, mindless chatter, gossip, fears, hatred, is now dispensed faster than you can say 1776. At a time of two wars, economic instability, a gathering ecological storm, our political leaders prefer grandstanding than grand vision. When a politician speaks, now the first question that is asked is “what audience” is he or she speaking to, lending a certain amount of two facedness by our leaders.
As Rome burned, Nero fiddled, as America continues to crumble under her own overextended weight, our leaders “mean mug” for the camera. In 1960 John F. Kennedy faced Richard Nixon in the first televised debate, according to historian the late Teddy White, those who saw the debate which pitted the younger and charismatic Kennedy against and older Richard Nixon sporting a five a clock shadow, many who saw the debate on television said Kennedy got the better of it. Those who listened to it on the radio gave the nod to Richard Nixon. All which gave birth to political style over political substance.
Our current leadership now comes with talking points, which often become the sanitized version of what is said in the media, or they make a 180 degree reversal after reading the media driven tea leaves. What we need, and what the spirit of 1776 was based on was leaders having original thought, having a vision, and doing the big things need to run a country. Today those leaders have more strings than Pinocchio, as what they say, do, or produce is done at the behest of their media masters. Today the spirit of 1776 has been replaced by a dark, foreboding media mega power whose power to control minds, takes us closer to Nazi Germany than Philadelphia and the spirit of 1776.
Lost in this barrage of new technology, and multi platform media outlets, is a dramatic shift of power is underway. A shift so dramatic that in my view it undermines the intent of the original intent of our founding fathers which was to have a government of the people and for the people. What makes this shift dangerous is that most Americans and unaware of the lurking dangers. Therefore for many of us, the power of Washington, Congress, the President, the Supreme Court, is intact and the handiwork of James Madison lives on. Yeah right. Only a well conceived story of fiction would lead one to believe that the President of The United States really runs this country. We all remember the glorious campaign of 2008, the choked up Keith Olberman announcing that Barack Obama would be the 44th President of the United States, and the great speech in Grant Park. Yet, how does the saying go, that was then, and this is now. In the final analysis, Barack Obama’s hold to power is only as strong as the media’s desire to keep him there. But as long as Americans focus on the distilled power conferred by the Constitution to our government leaders and ignore the real power of the media to wage a mind control program that would make Joseph Goebbels blush, our blindness will continue to “energize’ the new world order.
All that to say what? The Obama Administration is a well conceived trick on the American public. Not trickery because of ill intent by President Obama, but the Obama election obscures the the reality of a democracy in decline, and a growing inability of Washington to produce real change. I am not sure if Barack Obama is a dude that understands that at the end of the day, the best he can do is to deliver “change lite’ and hope that what he does sets in motion a critical mass that can open the floodgates for future progressive Presidents.Change agendas that sound so compelling on the campaign trail reach Washington and enter a twilight zone, where the media decides for its non critical thinking viewers and listeners whether this change is socialistic, un-American, good, bad, ugly or indecent. President Obama must feel like a worn out puppet as he continually recalibrate due to the musings of the media. When he first ran for President he was not black enough, then as time moved forward he was too black, and too radical, he was praised by the media for been cool, and nuanced, now blasted for not being angry enough. And before the public can get their arms around which President Obama they should like, they media changes again.
This game is worth billions of dollars to the major networks, their outlets, talking heads, and bloggers. Whether it comes from the right via FOX or from the left via MSNBC, they both need hyperactivity, vitriol, and insecurities to keep fear moving at warp speed. Politicians have always pandered to the media, but now the pandering is so pervasive, that voters can’t keep up with the number of faces a politician may put on from day to day. Furthermore, voter’s perceptions are now crafted not by common sense, or the reality on the ground, but by the pontifications of their favorite talking head. Look no further than the influence of the media on the issue of government spending. During the Bush years, when the Bush Administration fleeced the government coffers blind, with tax cuts to the rich, and wars of choice, the right wing media was silent on the issue of federal debt and therefore the American public many steeped in personal debt, saw our fiscal imbalance as a non story. Now the conservative news media label Barack Obama as a freewheeling spender whose expansive stimulus package was borderline socialism, and therefore now the American public finds our debt as disconcerting and want to rein in spending. President Obama ought to ask them where do they want the ax to fall.
Networks understand their power in crafting perceptions. I recall in the days leading up to President Obama’s Afghanistan review decision, NBC News sent Brian Williams to Kabul ostensibly to garner American sympathy for the plight of the Afghanistan people, and to give the upcoming military buildup decision a soft landing. In addition in the aftermath of the Gulf Crisis, President Obama eschews his “cool hand Luke Persona” to tell The Today Show's Matt Lauer that somebody needs to kick BP’s ass. President Obama went hard only after the media hounded him for not being angry.
On the eve of America’s 234th birthday, the levers of power have shifted far beyond the wildest imaginings of the founding fathers. Now to be sure, the men who met in Philadelphia in 1776 understood in their own time and in their own way the importance of messaging, and image. As evidenced by no other than John Hancock whose imprimatur, was large enough to be viewed across the Atlantic by the British King. Yet the vast influence in today’s media, is unprecedented and in my mind dangerous. Multi platform, media corporations are now under the banner of General Electric – NBC, Viacom – CBS and Disney owns ABC and ESPN. And let’s not forget that Fox News owned by the world’s second largest media conglomerate News Ltd is not American owned. In a world where we zig zag from work to home, to school, to soccer practice, rehab centers, and back again, our dependency on the media has become an unseemly American addiction. News shows like the Today Show have now morphed into a hybrid of a news/gossip show, while other outlets like Fox and MSNBC have become media darlings of the conservative and progressives respectively. But just because Keith Olberman says something, in direct contrast to Glen Beck does that make it so? How much of what is said and done in Washington can truly be trusted or credited as original thought? How much is done merely for “effect”, how much is done for spin?
Over two hundred years ago they wrote, “When in the course of human events it may become necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them”. This is now an unrecognizable America, seemingly incapable of big things, where reality is suspended in favor of noise. The bands that now connect us come in the form of a “3G” network where bandwidth is king. Urban rumors, mindless chatter, gossip, fears, hatred, is now dispensed faster than you can say 1776. At a time of two wars, economic instability, a gathering ecological storm, our political leaders prefer grandstanding than grand vision. When a politician speaks, now the first question that is asked is “what audience” is he or she speaking to, lending a certain amount of two facedness by our leaders.As Rome burned, Nero fiddled, as America continues to crumble under her own overextended weight, our leaders “mean mug” for the camera. In 1960 John F. Kennedy faced Richard Nixon in the first televised debate, according to historian the late Teddy White, those who saw the debate which pitted the younger and charismatic Kennedy against and older Richard Nixon sporting a five a clock shadow, many who saw the debate on television said Kennedy got the better of it. Those who listened to it on the radio gave the nod to Richard Nixon. All which gave birth to political style over political substance.
Our current leadership now comes with talking points, which often become the sanitized version of what is said in the media, or they make a 180 degree reversal after reading the media driven tea leaves. What we need, and what the spirit of 1776 was based on was leaders having original thought, having a vision, and doing the big things need to run a country. Today those leaders have more strings than Pinocchio, as what they say, do, or produce is done at the behest of their media masters. Today the spirit of 1776 has been replaced by a dark, foreboding media mega power whose power to control minds, takes us closer to Nazi Germany than Philadelphia and the spirit of 1776.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
