Five Tips for Politicians Who Never Seem to Learn

It seems we need another reminder on what never to say (or act) when running for political office. I say this because apparently the candidates never seem to learn.

First, try not to use the “Nazi” card . . . as in “Those other guys are acting like a Nazis by not voting on this measure I really like.” Just rubs people the wrong way unless you're trying to find a real bad guy for a book or movie.

Second, avoid the “God called on me to run” card. If God called on you, I’m doubting it was to throw your hat into a ring filled with political fools, which now includes you. I’m not sure, but God probably won’t set the bar that low.

Third, if you’re accused of some wrongdoing in your past, don’t act surprised if it comes up now. That’s not a media conspiracy, that the media’s job. Address the issue assertively and clearly and honestly when the story breaks. Don’t keep altering and clarifying it over the next couple of weeks. Then lay off personally attacking whatever or whomever it is accusing you of whatever and tell your lawyer not to threaten anyone (re: Herman Cain’s attorney Lin Wood). Failure to accept this will result in a story growing legs and developing over weeks, kill your campaign (no matter how much you bitch at the press), and in the end won’t stop whatever truth there is from coming out. People will forgive and forget, but not if you fumble, mumble and lie at the outset.

Fourth, don’t wear a coat and tie when campaigning in a country diner. If you dress differently than those around you, you’re the “don’t get it” politician. Fit in you dope. Nobody wears a coat and tie to a diner unless they’re on their way to an office job. Lose the fancy duds, break out an old golf shirt (not a new Izod) and have at those eggs and country-fried steak with homemade biscuits. In the long run you’ll feel much better about yourself and those photos of you fitting in with the locals will live forever.

Fifth, try not to be stupid. We voters aren’t, in the long run, stupid. We may act that way in the beginning, but we’ll eventually figure you out. Try to come up with some useful ideas instead of just pissing on the other guy. And if you’re running attack ads instead of giving us a good idea of where you stand on issues important to us (start with the economy, jobs, Medicare, the deficit people like you created, healthcare and child welfare . . . feel free to add yours). Why should I vote for you, not just why shouldn’t I vote for the other schmuck? I figure you’re not going to keep your pledges when you’re elected, but at least give me something to chew on before I get into the voting booth.

(Note: Don’t worry, I have tons of other tips for these guys. After all, with a year to go, do you really think they have a clue about how to act or not to act?)

Experts? Nah . . . Just Filter the News and Find Your Way Through the Maze of Confusion, Pundits and Boneheaders

I had an editor at a newspaper who told us never the use the word “expert” in a headline “because one man’s expert is another man’s assh***.” That was then and this is now . . . we live in a world filled with "experts."

I was lucky in that first full-time job at a local paper. My first editor told me to forget writing for the sports desk and instead work as a general assignment reporter for a bit, and if I decided to head to sports later, then that was fine, but writing about sports, he said, didn’t make me a news guy, which he felt was the base for any journalistic endeavors later. He was right, as a reporter and feature writer I was able to

The newspaper industry is dying a slow torturous death as we turn to online news sources. The editorial and op-ed pages was where the opinions were printed. Now, people don’t get the difference between news shows and “pundit” shows. Bill O’Reilly is not a news person. Neither is Rachael Maddow. You may like ‘em, but they’re not giving you the news, they are giving you commentary.

The world has changed, we think something, Tweet it and it’s around the world to all our followers in a flash. We share our thoughts and lives on Facebook and all that is out there, where that is, forever. Now even your neighbor is an “expert” on whatever because he saw it on the web. Yikes.

Put on your “news” filters, folks, because if you’re getting your “news” from one place, then you’re probably mis-informed. We used to read at least eight or 10 papers a day. Of course we didn’t have to pay for them and they were all delivered to the news desk, but the point is that we actually read. Not glimpsed or skimmed . . . actually read. That seems to be too much work for people now. We surrounded by more news and media outlets than ever . . . but we still take those one-time internet posts and pass them around from place to place until they seem real and truthful. A while later they circulate again . . . they seem even more real and truthful then.

Let’s remember to take step back filter what you read and then take a few minutes to fact-check. Because along with all those news and media outlets are dozens of easy to access sites that debunk rumors and untruths, or help you give you the cold facts on information you’re digesting.

We vote for a President in a year. It’s worth the small effort to check those claims, charges and statements from those who would be President. You may not get much ink on your fingers in this digital age, but there’s no excuse for not getting the news you want if you want it.

My Pet Peeves . . . I Have a Few (Don't Try to Steal Them . . . They're Mine)

Much as I’d like to say I have no pet peeves, the truth is I actually have a few. Hard to believe, but our pet peeves are our way of pausing and going, “hmmm . . . that’s weird . . . why do they do that?” You know, those little things that kind of make us twitch a bit. Now, since I’m pretty much a hermit up here in New Hampshire I’ve whittled down my pet peeve list a bit.

But a few remain. Most of them, I’ll admit, are a bit silly . . .

What’s with the tomato and lettuce on the bottom of those restaurant burgers? That stuff’s supposed to be on top.

Why can’t a label be honest? “Natural,” for instance means virtually nothing on a food label. I also want to know whether or not my veggies have been genetically engineered or my fish raised in some fish farm somewhere. So tell me.

Why can I get an airplane delivered by Amazon for nothing, but it costs more than the product itself to ship from some places? (Finally Harry and David is offering better or free shipping on some orders . . . and LL Bean’s is nailing it with its new free shipping policy and ad campaign.)

Hair plugs. Really? One of my subconscious work rules was to never work for a guy with hair plugs. If he’s that insecure about his hairline, what the heck else is he going to be insecure about and how does that play with his being a boss? And while we’re at it, why are there still so many guys doing the comb-over thing? If’s you’re covering more than a couple of inches of bare landscape, then cut it and forget it.

Stop trying to make your restaurant’s food fancier than it is. Resist your urge to cover a great piece of fish with an over-wrought sauce. Keep it simple and showcase the food.

Don’t ask me to trust you while you’re sharpening a knife when I’m not around. The workplace has changed . . . look out for yourself and protect yourself. They’ll dump you if they can because they have their own agendas, and you may not know what they are. Be careful about hitching a ride on your boss’ skirt because you never know when they’ll come after him or her and you’ll get caught in the crossfire. Call me a cynic . . . but it happens again and again . . . we all have the work scars to prove it.

I’ll save a few for later . . . I don’t want to seem too pet peevy, after all . . .

Rick Santorum: A Dangerous, Small-Thinking Village Idiot

Rick Santorum, the former senator from Pennsylvania and current GOP presidential wannabe, has now risen to the top of the “major idiot in the village” heap.

We’re fighting two wars, the economy is completely in the tank, unemployment is over 9 percent, wounded soldiers aren’t getting the care they need and this bozo is standing on his “I’ll die on that hill” in his fight against gay marriage and any federal dollars being spent on any type of contraception.

Oh man, get a clue. The whole argument that gay marriage will shake "the very foundation of our country, the family, what the family structure is going to look like" (his words) is bogus. The family structure isn’t what it used to be now. Sunday dinners at grandma’s are a thing of the past, the black and white picture of the 50s has long since turned into a wider, broader Technicolor world.

Santorum seems to believe it’s this “family structure” that has held the country together and any changes to that dated 50’s black and white screen is what has led to our economy woes and the apparent decline of our nation and probably the world in general. Oy. We evolve . . . sometimes for the better and sometimes not so much. Of course one could argue that things never really were all that great then, but they certainly seem more simple than today as we look back. It’s kind of like he’s living in the colorless world of Pleasantville.

Santorum’s rage against gays is obviously comparable to the rage years ago some people had against blacks and their civil struggle for equal rights. And Santorum’s anti anything “in the sexual realm,” including Planned Parenthood and contraception apparently means that if we don’t talk about it and deal with the issues then they simply don’t exist.  

I guess the larger issue (and Santorum is a small issue guy) is the thought that state-sponsored discrimination is bad. Why shouldn’t committed partners (gay or not), be allowed to visit loved ones in the hospital, buy real estate, apply for health insurance together, and on and on? He’s one of those guys who tries to bully everyone and then complains someone’s bullying him, as he did when Saturday Night Live did a bit poking fun at his anti-gay views.

I’ll admit I just don’t get it. I don’t get the energy spent on these issues and the time spent actively and openly discriminating against people, largely because they are different than what some feel is “normal.” People are different . . . live with it and move on. I do find it interesting, though, that people who preach less government want to change the Constitution to add a gay-marriage ban or alter laws regarding immigrants and their offspring. Government doesn’t belong in the bedroom, or many other places into which it creeps. Our forefathers are rolling in their graves at the small mindedness.

Rick Santorum is dangerous. He may have risen to the top idiot status among this crop of GOP hopefuls, but that not saying all that much. If this is the best we can hope for, then God help us all.

At a time when we need and are looking for leaders, the horizon seems woefully empty.

GOP Pandering to the Far Right Will Only Hurt at Election Time

Republicans are making a big mistake in their right-wing pandering. A mistake that could enable Barack Obama get his feet back under him, get off the ropes, and start to frame the issues that may help him win re-election next fall.

He’s already starting to frame his campaign, and as the Republicans start to flounder as they bang on each other and try to show the Tea Party who has the most tea party “pick me” points, Democrats can start taking the opportunity to show they are the ones who care about the middle class, the environment, the elderly, women and the young.

By continuing to move to the right, Republicans are making themselves even easier to target as the party of “no.” And while some “no” is important, the current Republican stand on taxes, Social Security, Medicare, disaster financing, the environment, women’s health and a host of other issues is starting to turn off even many Republicans.

The problem for the Republicans now is that they apparently need to pander to the far right to nail the primaries. That pushes them too far to the right for the general population, most of whom sit in the moderate/conservative seating section. Obama probably won’t be able to rally the groups of new, young and enthusiastic voters that pushed him into office in the first place, so that, and the critically ill economy outweigh his recent foreign policy points (thanks Hillary) and we’ll see if that’s what sends him home after one term.

The simple truth is that while voters want to cut government spending, they also want the most fragile in our country to be protected and they want the unemployment rate down big time. On top of that, I’m guessing most Americans want their water safe to drink, their food safe to eat and their land to be protected from environmental risk like oil spills and chemical leaks..

Those issues are long-term ones, but important elements to the fabric of our country. Let me put it this way: Remember the disaster in the Gulf? Are you willing to risk another disaster like that by lifting environmental regulations? Me neither. In the long run (and that’s a run about which most politicians have no clue) the regulations (reasonable and sensible) are cheaper and certainly more logical than such having to deal with disasters themselves, given the overall costs, both financial and personal.

But government has embraced the short-sighted vision. They look at the cost of adding food inspectors instead of looking at the cost of food recalls, poisoned people and damaged businesses.

Is hydraulic fracturing (pumping fluid from into deep underground rock fracturing to push out natural gas and oil) safe? Personally, I don’t know, but there is growing evidence it is not. Ground water pollution (and companies aren’t disclosing their fluid formulas) is just one issue. I’d ban it until we had more science on the risks. Of course science is something some politicians rail against. That’s a shame.

Science doesn’t take place over night and by ignoring it now, often simply because our political ambitions differ from scientific findings, is stupid and short sighted. Let’s push the science through faster so we can move on some of these issues faster. Let’s not red-tape stuff to death.

Clean it up, increase efficiency, decrease bureaucracy and begin to make good policy that’s good for the country instead of minor clips and bits that may sound good today, but do nothing in the long run other than to show how limited Washington’s view really is.

A Field of Bigots: Will They Continue to Hijack the GOP?

Unfortunately, it’s easy to be a bigot. We’re all biased in one way or another. Sometimes we fight those feelings and sometimes we don’t. Sometimes our prejudice is silly (would you hire a guy with a huge hair comb-over to be your director of marketing?) . . . and sometimes not so much . . .

The current flock of Republicans is going to find many of them have a bigotry issue that may play to the far right, but won’t play, even in this era of “throw all the bums out,” in the general election . They have a gay issue , , , a woman issue . .  and a poor people issue . . . (and I haven’t even started on things like environmental and regulatory issues , , , don’t worry, I will.) It appears to be a field full of bigots. And they to have hijacked the GOP.

Congressman Rick Santorum has showed his colors time and time again. He doesn’t like gay people . . . doesn’t want them to get married and, I’m guessing, won’t be having any of “them” over for a cookout any time soon. That’s too bad, because maybe if he spent some time talking with gays he’d start to see them as actual people. He continues to rail against the end of “don’t ask, don’t tell,” saying, "They're in close quarters, they live with people, they obviously shower with people," Santorum said, saying the presence of gay soldiers could have an adverse "effect on retention and recruitment."

It's talk without knowledge. Talk designed to get people hyped up over some base issue.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry, the current GOP frontrunner, has time and time again said he is opposed to any gays, or any unmarried people living together, holding jobs as teachers.

Rick Perry, Mitt Romney, Michelle Bachman and Rick Santorum have signed a pledge saying they will back a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. Oh come on. Why is it that those people so intent on waving the constitution every chance they get are so intent to change it to fit their political views? Leave the damn Constitution alone.

And too often the heavy Christian talk of Perry or Michelle Bachman leaves one wondering if they’d throw non “born agains” out of the country. After all, the president lords over all the people, not just those who happen to believe exactly what he or she believes. Creating a message of “I’m superior to you” because I believe this or that is a slippery slope from which it’ll be hard to recover. And while primaries tend to bring out the most fervent believers in both parties, the risk is that the person who remains standing may be unelectable to the larger and more moderate voter pool.

And herein lies a problem for the Republicans. In snuggling up to the far-right, they’re writing off independent voters and the apparently silent and endangered moderate Republicans . . . and even (gasp) moderate and conservative Democrats.

Too bad . . . it may cost them by the time we wade through all the political bull that will be thrown at us over the next year. And it may cost them at a time when Obama is falling out of favor with his base. If he can effectively hammer the Republicans on the perception that their radical conservatism, anti-woman, anti-environment etc. positions are actually anti-middle class positions that have nothing to do with lowering unemployment, fixing the tax code, cutting corporate subsidies, rebuilding infrastructure, improving the mortgage/foreclosure mess and reigning in earmarks, he can start to turn his political ship around.

Thus far he hasn’t done it. People love a good talker who pokes and jabs with his or her opponent (Reagan was a master and Clinton managed to weather all the Republican arrows with his verbal prowess and nimble political footwork). Come election time, the only issue will be whether or not Obama has damaged himself enough to allow the far right to slip into power. I shiver . . .

Keep a keen ear, don’t just suck up the 30-second sound bites, read, read, read, and remember that nothing is spontaneous . . . it’s all part of a politician’s grand plan to get your vote and spend your money.

There Shouldn't Be Drug Shortages in a Good Health Care System

We may hear people bitch and moan about health care, and also bitch and moan about any changes to our current system, especially what we commonly call “socialized medicine.” One of our complaints is that in some countries there may be a wait for certain procedures or tests or for access to equipment like MRIs or CAT scans.

But here, where health care costs continue to rise without so much as a pause, we now have drug shortages and price gauging of drugs that raise some of those costs 50 times above the usual cost to patients. How is that better than those places we complain have socialized medicine? We continue to argue that our system is the best in the world (although survey after survey debunks that myth). Hundreds of hospitals have reported shortages, patients have died because drugs were unavailable and some analysts believe the drug shortages will cost more than $400 million a year in increased costs in buying drugs from third-party companies.

Without federal oversight, and no federal price gauging regulations, what’s to keep this from happening again and again? Here’s a place where regulation and oversight is money well spent. Pass legislation that prevents (with heavy fines and penalties) price gauging, that mandates continued production of drugs and broad notification if production is interrupted so other companies can pick up the slack. And what about legislation that helps these companies produced drugs here instead of overseas?

Setting up manufacture and production facilities is expensive, and some of those drugs, while life-saving, don’t sell normally at huge profit margins, so let’s make sure we can continue to produce them here without fear of shortages, and price gauging by third parties. That would add some stability to a health care issue that shouldn’t be an issue in a good health care system.