Tag Archives: Politics

Pomp and Hudson Valley Apple Pie

Monday, January 21, 2013, 1:30 PM ET

Ah, the Inauguration. Yet another excuse for our government to do nothing, while spending a great deal of money doing it.

Hands down, the highlight was Kelly Clarkson who was great. If you didn’t hear her rendition of “Of thee I sing,” you can find it on-line. When Senator Chuck Schumer came back to the podium after Ms. Clarkson was done, the first thing he said was, “Wow.” He was right.

Kelly Clarkson at Inauguration

The leaders of our country are at lunch now. See the menu below? (Click on it to make it larger.) Thank goodness that single mother working two jobs to raise her kids, eating her homemade peanut butter and jelly sandwich on the bus, doesn’t have time to watch. Maybe the millions who are still un- and under-employed will catch a glimpse on the screens in store windows on their way to their next interview.

-wf

Inaugural Luncheon Menu

Gun Control. The illusion of leadership.

I wasn’t going to write anything about guns. It’s not that I don’t think we need vastly more restrictive gun control legislation, it’s just that I’m still depressed about November’s election. Nothing new. I just can’t get over the fact that, with very few exceptions, we re-elected the same Congress and President that failed to resolve any of the major economic, financial or social crises we’ve been facing. The President is now focusing on his legacy, like any of us really care, and waiting for the economy to recover on its own so he can take credit for it. Bummer.

Newtown

Okay, about guns. In the wake of Newtown, the President threw his best agent at the problem, Joe Biden. Mr. Biden talked to all sorts of people over a very short period of time. He did that to give us the impression that our input counts. It’s a trick. If Vice President Biden and the President were serious about gun control, they would have been working on the problem non-stop for the past four years. Now, the best they’ve been able to come up with are some recommendations about background checks, assault weapons and limiting high-capacity clips to 10 “rounds.” They call them rounds, because it sounds like we’re ordering more beer at our favorite roadhouse, but we know that what they’re really talking about is bullets. Rounds don’t kill people, bullets do.
Keep reading…

“Mitt, you ignorant slut!” The question no one asked at Tuesday night’s debate.

Thursday, October 18, 2012

In the 1970s, CBS’ “60 Minutes” had a recurring segment during which two consummate journalists would briefly argue some issue. It was serious television that apparently caused the writers at “Saturday Night Live!” to wonder what these overly-civilized professionals really thought of each other. The result was SNL’s own late night “Point/Counterpoint,” starring Jane Curtain and Dan Aykroyd.

Here’s one of those SNL segments. Take a look. You’ll enjoy it. (Sorry, but you may have to sit through a brief commercial.)

http://www.hulu.com/watch/2306

By comparison to Tuesday night’s second debate between President Obama and Mitt Romney, the SNL skit seems tame, save perhaps only the colorful language, and certainly less troublesome.

I only wish I had been in the audience and that CNN’s Candy Crowley had called on me for a question.

“Mr. President,” I began, rising to my feet. “Governor Romney. Do either of you seriously believe that this contentious, in-your-face, confrontational, substance-poor ‘discussion,’ if I can call it that, of the most critical issues of our time demonstrates that either of you have the temperament, are mature enough to be our President and Leader of the Free World?”

I’ll leave it to you to speculate how the candidates might have answered. Me? I’m emailing Jane Curtain and Dan Aykroyd to check their party affiliations and availability in 2016. At least they’re funny.

-Next Contestant
(www.NextContestant.us is the political blog from the author of the WordFeeder.)

President Obama: “I have a plan to pay off the entire national debt. Unfortunately, …”

Wednesday, September 12, 2012

“..unfortunately, it requires electing Mitt Romney President.” Thank you, Mr. President. What irony. Here’s how the plan works.

Yesterday, it was announced that our government has made another $2.7 billion by exercising our option to buy additional AIG stock, and then selling it. The stock market is up. Our total profit to date on the AIG bailout is now $15.1 billion. This is great. ..Or is it?
Keep reading…

Dating Romney

Thursday, September 6, 2012

Hi. A couple of days ago, a wrote a piece that gave my advice to a friend who is a liberal when it comes to social issues, but who believes we need a fiscal conservative in The White House. Her dilemma has to do with compromising her social concerns in return for getting us out of our current economic and financial mess. I did my best to assure her that it wasn’t a matter of one or the other, but of setting priorities.

And then it occurred me, after having watched some of the Republican and now Democrat Conventions, that I didn’t go far enough. Consider this brief article to be a postscript to the one I wrote on Tuesday.
Keep reading…

Don’t you think it’s time our government went to unit pricing?

Tuesday, August 28, 2012

This is from my political blog, www.NextContestant.us.

I’m not kidding. You know how the grocery stores show you how much an item costs, but then gives you the price per ounce? It’s called “unit pricing.”

Round numbers, there are approximately 312 million Americans. Our national debt is just under $16 trillion. The simple math is that, on a per capita basis, we’ve each borrowed $51,282 to fund our national debt. How many people in your family? Just the three of you? Okay, 3 times $51,282 is $153,846. That’s your family’s share of the national debt.
Continue…

A little self-deprecating humor.

Friday, June 29, 2012

No article. Just the cartoon.

Think I’m kidding? See the WordFeeder’s political blog, www.NextContestant.us.

Breaking the Pattern. (Isn’t it about time?)

Monday, June 25, 2012

It’s gotten to the point that a dysfunctional Congress (the President included) has become our most important problem – more important even than the economy because, unless and until Congress becomes functional, it’s not going to deal effectively with any of the critical economic, fiscal and social issues we’re facing.

We’re all about patterns. Some of them are dictated by work. Others are just the way we do things, the sequences of events and habits that express and define who we are. To no small extent, we are and become what we do.

The problem with patterns is that they’re hard to break, even when it’s blatantly clear that the patterns aren’t helping us and may even be detrimental. It’s just too easy to keep doing things the same ways we always have.

Complaining about Washington, about the “Washington” that is our federal government, is a tradition that reality, as of late, is turning into a bad joke. Our Congress does next to nothing and what it does do, it does poorly. Way too much politics, not enough careful study and collaborative making of creative, effective legislation. Money, specifically the costs of getting elected, has made matters worse, has subverted the whole idea of elected representation, of “one person, one vote.”
Continue…

Negative Advertising: Changing voters’ minds.

Wednesday, May 30, 2012

Yesterday, I wrote an article entitled, “Negative Advertising: An essential means of voter education.” This piece looks at the flip side of negative advertising. From the campaign’s point of view, it’s as essential to winning as money. In fact, funding negative advertising may just be the primary reason the candidate needs money.

Yesterday’s piece was more academic. This one, on the other hand, reads more like a come-from-behind thriller, without all the shooting and car chases of course, or the street-savvy call girl with a heart who risks everything for the hero she knows will never love her. (Can you tell I prefer to write fiction?) Like the ads say for the “Monster Trucks” show, “Twenty dollars will buy you a whole seat, but you’ll only need the edge!”
Continue…

Negative Advertising: An essential means of voter education.

Tuesday, May 29, 2012

Hi. This is the first of two articles that I’m writing about “negative advertising,” a concept that I believe has been given a bad rap by the media and, most importantly, by the form of it that many well-funded candidates and their political action committees have chosen. This first piece is about its definition and essential role. (As usual, I’m going to write like I know what I’m talking about, leaving it to your comments to help me get it right.)

“Negative advertising” is when one candidate or organization supporting a candidate runs ads that point out shortcomings of the other candidate. The media treats negative advertising like it’s a bad thing. It’s not.
Continue…