Left Coast View

Martial arts actor Chuck Norris knows that celebrity will get you an audience.  What you do with it is another story.

Norris has found a platform beyond his films to speak to those who share his paranoid, conspiratorial views of politics and government.  He now writes a column for the World Net Daily, which is an online, right-wing, publication whose trade-in-stock are heavily opinionated pieces posing as news items, along with an assortment of right-wing and libertarian columnists.

Norris’s latest conspiracy “discovery” involves President Obama and Interpol, the international organization that assists law enforcement worldwide by sharing information about criminal activity and investigations.  President Obama recently signed an Executive Order that grants certain immunities under U.S. law to Interpol’s activities, including an exemption from the federal Freedom of Information Act’s disclosure requirements.  Norris just “knows” that Obama did so to create a safe haven for Obama to stash any incriminating information that he may choose to hide with them.  He also waxes delusional about supposed connections between this Executive Order and the upcoming trials of 9/11 terrorists.

Michael Isakoff has written a fine article

The great thing about the Internet and blogs are that they democratize the conversation in the larger community.  Anyone can say their piece.  Anyone can respond.

Norris’s films portrayed his characters as lone, avenging figures who battled the forces of evil.  In his current role of Tea Party tough-guy, Norris continues to see evil around every corner – well, maybe only around Democratic corners.  No doubt, his audience of die-hard believers in conspiracy theories will agree.  But, it doesn’t take long for more objective readers to realize that the conspiracies that appear in Norris’s long-winded writings are really just the product of his own paranoid mind.

I’m back!  My short hiatus from writing this blog – so that I could take care of some business interests – turned into a break that lasted much too long.

I’ve missed writing this blog.  And there is so much great stuff write about.

So, whoever is reading, please stay tuned.  I’m committing to writing at least twice a week this year. 

I want to hear your thoughts, too.  What do you have to say?  Add your comments below each post and maybe we can get a good dialog going.

What a speech!  It’s refreshing to hear (finally!) a president speak the truth – after eight long years of lies and deception from his predecessor. 

President Obama had a big challenge facing him in last night’s speech to Congress and the nation.  He needed to continue to give the nation the sobering facts that the economy is in deep trouble and that there is no quick fix or easy answer.  But, he also needed to rally the nation by appealing to its best qualities and to inspire everyone to pull together to get through this difficult time. 

On both tasks he succeeded. Yet, his speech did so much more. 

Obama presented this monumental challenge as not just a problem to be solved, but an historic opportunity to re-make several aspects of our nation – to ready it for a 21^st century world.  He spoke of transforming our energy system toward reliance on renewable energy sources.  He talked about building high-speed rail systems to link our population centers.  And he emphasized the absolute necessity of reforming health care systems and fully supporting education for everyone – so that we can compete in this increasingly global economy.

A few years back, when I would watch West Wing and listen to the speeches that (fictitious) President Jeb Bartlett would give, I’d wonder why we couldn’t have a president who could inspire and who could speak with the clarity of tone and with the vision needed to set us on a course to be a more just and broadly prosperous nation.  Now we do.

It’s two days later and the wonderful reality that we have elected Barack Obama as our next president is still hard to believe.  For the first time in ages, it feels like we will have an honorable man in the White House who will be able to put America back on the path toward justice and equality.

We have so much work to do, to re-build this nation.

And now we have a man with the vision, determination, and ability to lead that effort.

The neocons and the religious right and all those who sought to profit personally from their arrogant and self-aggrandizing policies have had their opportunity to run this country.  And they damn near destroyed it.

Now it’s our turn to restore America.  Get your sleeves rolled up.

We have one day to go until what will be, I believe, an historic election. This election is significant in as least three respects.

First, the nation is poised to elect its first African American president. This is a potentially transformative event in American history. For a country whose history is so intertwined with the legacy of race and race relations, we have crossed a threshold that would have been unimaginable a generation ago. And with it, we have given ourselves the opportunity to look at ourselves in a new light and to become the country that truly fulfills the promise of our ideals.

Second, the hard work of progressives over the past several years is about to pay off. The election of Senator Obama as president and the election of a number of progressive Democrats to Congress will give this country a chance to move toward greater equality of opportunity and fairness.

Third, the registration of huge numbers of new, younger voters heralds what may be a renewed participation in electoral politics and, perhaps, a restored faith in our democracy. Our newly elected leaders must honor that participation by becoming more responsive to those who have put them in office.

Tomorrow there will be reason to smile. Tomorrow night there will be reason to celebrate. And on Wednesday the hard work of governing will begin.

The financial crisis on Wall Street and the impending bailout look to many like a tragedy slowly unfolding.  The Bush Administration’s rush to pass legislation bailing out the financial markets has the Democrats scrambling to figure out how much of the proposal they can accept and what concessions will make it palatable to the American taxpayer.

But, what if the Democrats viewed it differently – as an opportunity?

And I mean an opportunity not just to plug the hole in the dike.  But, an opportunity to reform the financial markets by returning to sound, appropriate regulation.  What a concept!

Allowing Phil Gramm and his backers to tear down the wall between commercial banks and investment banks was a major factor that permitted the mortgage securities crisis to occur.  Re-building that wall is crucial to reforming the financial markets, so that overly risky investments are discouraged.  Requiring greater transparency of the risks inherent in certain financial instruments is also needed.

This is where the Democrats could play an invaluable role.  Even though there is significant time pressure to find an appropriate solution to this crisis (and, yes, that will inevitably include some sort of purchase by the government of non-performing and lower-performing assets), what the Democrats are overlooking is the fact that they hold all the cards.

This crisis has given the Democrats more leverage than they have had in a decade to put forward and pass meaningful reforms.  The Republicans cannot pass a $700 billion bailout plan without the Democrats.  And even many Republicans are balking at Bush’s vague plan.  Moreover, the Bush Administration is desperate not to have a financial crash of Depression-era proportions be its final legacy.  What a great opportunity for the Democrats to dictate the terms on which any bailout will happen!  Who knows when they will have this kind of leverage again?

The big question, though, is whether the Democrats will recognize this situation for the opportunity that it is.  And, whether they will muster the courage to use this windfall of leverage that has dropped into their laps to pass much-needed reforms and return to sensible regulation of the financial markets.

The Wall Street meltdown has reached crisis proportions and the federal government has been forced to come to the rescue of our financial markets.  So, what has John McCain’s reaction been? 

Well, up through Monday, McCain was still wearing his rose-colored glasses and repeating his “the fundamentals of the US economy are sound” mantra.  That didn’t go over so well, while the stock market indices were plunging and news commentators were ridiculing his out-of-touch statements. 

So, it was time for a change (meaning 180-degree flip-flop). 

And McCain the de-regulation champion began to pretend that, not only was he in favor of strict regulation of the financial market, he had always been in favor of it. 

The only problem is that McCain had long been one of the cheerleaders for de-regulation of the financial markets.  Moreover, his chief economic advisor, former-Senator Phil Gramm, was the architect of the 1999 legislation (the Gramm-Leach Bliley Act )that eliminated the regulatory wall between investment banks and commercial banks and which was one of the main factors leading to this mortgage and banking crisis – legislation that McCain voted for. 

So much for “straight-talking.”

Alaska Governor Sarah Palin introduced herself to the nation last night at the Republican National Convention with a speech that was short (and in some instances dishonest) on the facts, but very long on snide and sarcastic comments.

Her personal introduction of herself combined a less-than-modest image of a small town PTA member with a one-sided recitation of her record as local mayor and then governor of Alaska. Palin told the Republican delegates that she was against earmark spending by Congress; but, neglected to tell them that she actively sought and happily accepted millions in earmark spending while serving as mayor of Wasilla, Alaska.

She also portrayed herself as an opponent of the infamous “bridge to nowhere,” when the truth is that she was a vocal supporter of it before finally opposing it (only after the tide of public opinion had turned against it), but still accepted the federal funding for the bridge and (as governor) spent it on other projects.

She followed that brief bio with a condescending and misleading comparison of the Obama-Biden team with the Republican ticket.

While trying to paint Obama as an elitist, Palin succeeded only insulting those who work as community organizers. Comparing her former job as mayor to community organizers (a not-so-subtle reference to Senator Obama’s early career path), Palin implied that community organizers (unlike mayors) have no responsibilities. Denigrating people who fight for the rights of hard-working, lower-income Americans played well to the largely older, white crowd of Republican delegates, whose party usually promotes economic policies that favor the wealthy over lower- and middle-income Americans.

Palin went on to state that Alaska had plenty of oil and gas and that a McCain-Palin administration would promote more drilling for both. She criticized the Democrats for not wanting to do any drilling (or even produce more energy of any sort), even though the real situation is that multinational oil companies are already sitting on enormous tracks of U.S. land and offshore areas that have been approved for drilling, but which the oil companies are not making use of (largely because they can produce oil more cheaply in other foreign locations). It remains to be seen whether Palin’s apparent fondness for at knocking down straw men like that can overcome her lack of substance on the issues.

Palin also tried to portray Obama as someone who would raise taxes on working people, when, in fact, Obama’s economic plan aims to raise taxes only on the wealthy, while giving greater tax relief to working-class people. Governor Palin’s snide and petty demeanor may have warmed up the partisan crowd at the convention hall; but, it struck me as a sign of immaturity and smugness that is often characteristic of the self-righteous wing of the Republican Party.

Palin’s speech provided little insight into her far-right political positions (for example, favoring the banning of all abortions, even in cases of rape and incest) and presented no policy suggestions other than increased drilling for oil and gas.

And finally, for a vice presidential candidate from the party that has given us record budget deficits, ineptly managed wars, and the shakiest economy since the Great Depression, it was not surprising that Gov. Palin neglected to make a single mention of the dire circumstances that the next administration will inherit in January. But, it is disappointing that she (and her party) seem unwilling to even acknowledge the faltering economic situation in America and the millions of Americans who are struggling to survive. Could it be a lack of concern for that segment of Americans? Or just that that reality just doesn’t fit into the Republicans’ perpetually rosy and out-of-touch image of America? Or just an attempt to run away from the taint of the Bush record over the past eight years?

But, more than that, Palin’s speech created a sharp contrast with Senator Obama’s acceptance speech last week. Hers was an attempt to play off cultural divisions and policy distortions and to simultaneously animate the partisan divide while ignoring the miserable Bush legacy that is owned by the Republicans. It was not a speech that sought to unify Americans in a common effort in difficult times. The next two months will determine which vision of America the voters will accept.

The theme of this week’s Democratic National Convention is unity. Tonight’s speech by Senator Hillary Clinton will be perhaps the most important test of whether she and the party faithful can put that theme into practice.
Sen. Clinton and her supporters will need to set aside their disappointment and misplaced sense of entitlement to the nomination, for the sake of helping to win the presidency for the Democratic nominee, Senator Barack Obama.

Sen. Clinton was the early favorite to capture the Democratic presidential nomination. But, a strong grassroots organizing campaign, supported by the progressives who used the Internet effectively for fundraising and empowering individual voters, propelled Obama past Clinton during the primaries.

In recent months, various Clinton supporters, many of whom with connections to the Democratic Leadership Conference, as well as former President Clinton, have made statements that were less than fully supportive of Obama or, in some instances, seemed to reflect a hope that Sen. Clinton might still wrest the nomination for herself. Unfortunately, Sen. Clinton has not done enough to extinguish those hopes.

Sen. Clinton may still see a future for herself as a presidential nominee in the years ahead. However, the way in which she conducts herself now will determine, in part, whether that remains an option.

The convention is the time for all Democrats to pull together to support the presumptive nominee and do their best – and I mean their best – to win this presidential election. For that to happen, Sen. Clinton will have to check her ego at the door.

During the past few weeks, Sen. McCain has made a series of misstatements about the roles of various groups in the Middle East and the relationships among them.  The most glaring was his repeated (and erroneous) insistence that Iran is training al-Quaida.  Sen. McCain’s apparent confusion about who the key political and religious groups are in Iraq should be troubling to us.

 These errors, if they were isolated, could be written off to verbal slips, or the weariness of the campaign trail.  But, when they happen repeatedly, they shouldn’t be so easily overlooked or forgiven.

 As the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, Sen. McCain has a group of high-level policy advisors to keep him informed and to provide accurate information to him – to make sure that he is prepared.  The fact that Sen. McCain makes these same mistakes again and again can’t be a product of poor preparation by his team.  Nor does it seem to be a product of declining mental abilities, despite attempts by some to excuse these incidents as “senior moments.”  McCain seems sufficiently engaged on some issues.

 Any other serious candidate would have been chagrined by these mistakes the first time and would have taken the time to learn the facts and not repeat the mistake.  Instead, McCain kept repeating the erroneous information.

The only reasonable conclusion to be drawn is that McCain is lazy – plain and simple.  He just can’t be bothered to learn who the key groups are in the Iraqi conflict, which is arguably the most important issue of this presidential campaign.

Can we really afford to entrust our security and our relationship with other nations to a man who is too lazy to do his homework?