On March 25, 2008 Chelsea Clinton was campaigning for her mother, Senator Hillary Clinton. The younger Ms. Clinton was making one in a series of campaign stops at college campuses at Butler College in Indianapolis, Indiana. A student journalist asked Ms. Clinton if Senator Clinton's credibility was harmed by former President Bill Clinton's involvement with a White House intern.

The younger Ms. Clinton responded to the question with remarkable poise and grace, "Wow, you're the first person actually that's ever asked me that question in the, I don't know maybe, 70 college campuses I've now been to, and I do not think that is any of your business."

I am no fan or supporter of Hillary Clinton or former President Clinton. I believe that there are way too many unanswered questions about Whitewater, futures trading, and long misplaced files suddenly appearing on a table in the White House. Beyond that I am much more impressed that while Senator Clinton was practicing law and doing her "First Lady" gigs, Senator Obama was working with and for, and living among the poor and marginalized in Chicago.

Senator Clinton apparently "misspoke" about whether or not she was "under fire" in Eastern Europe, which seems odd to me, since I am quite sure that if you were for the one and only time in your life under fire in a combat zone I believe it would sufficiently impress itself upon your mind that it would be highly unlikely that you might "misspeak"about it years later, and only when campaigning for President of the United States. If, in fact, Senator Clinton did misspeak about being under fire, I would have serious concerns about her cognitive lapses.

Lastly, Senator Clinton's abrupt relocation to New York, a large state with a large Democratic voting block, seems to me to be a completely transparent attempt to position herself for a presidential campaign. Senator Clinton assumed that the Democratic party would enthusiastically embrace her and bestow the mantle of candidate upon her by default. Senator Clinton did not anticipate that Senator Obama wold be such a popular candidate.

But beyond all of that I am very troubled by how negative Senator Clinton has been in attacking Senator Obama, and we are still in the primary campaign.

So when the younger Clinton speaks with such grace and poise, is direct, makes no clever attempt to avoid or dismiss the question, and answers honestly with a tact far in excess of the question, I am very pleased. In fact, I want to know when Chelsea will run for something.

The student journalist who asked the question later defended the question by lamely claiming he was interested in Chelsea's response, principally to illustrate how Senator Clinton successfully negotiated a difficult time in her life. I think I can hear his nose growing now.

Regrettably, and amazingly, that has not been the end of it. Again on March 31, 2008 Chelsea Clinton was at North Carolina State University and was asked a similar question. The younger Ms. Clinton's response was equally tactful, poised, graceful, and direct.

It does make me question how truthful the American public is being when they consistently say that they don't like negative campaigning, since these inappropriate questions keep coming up and all the research indicates that despite our faint protests, negative campaigning works.

I AM APPALLED

On the evening of Tuesday April 1, 2008 I received an email from one of my Senators, Patty Murray. The subject line was "Rallying Against The Tanker Decision". In the email Senator Murray wrote that she protested the Air Force's "misguided decision to award a $40 billion tanker refueling contract to the European company Airbus."

I am simply appalled and I share my response to Senator Murray here.

Senator Murray,

I AM APPALLED!!!!

• As this nation spends literally billions of dollars daily to wage a war
  falsely claiming to be a retaliation against terrorists who were raised and
  trained in Saudi Arabia and based on overstatements, exaggerations, outright
  lies, and pretext to satisfy President Bush’s attempt to build his legacy on the
  backs of dedicated young men and women and the bodies of Iraqis
• As no bid contracts are awarded to large corporations with ties to the administration and those same contractors are found to be wasting and/or embezzling the funds that American citizens have paid in taxes and borrowed against their children’s and grandchildren’s and great-grandchildren’s futures
• As young men and women are deployed multiple times to fight an insurgent and now civil war with no realistic prospect of any hope for a resolution within sight - particularly given our experience of Viet Nam and the more recent and ongoing real world example of the utter and folly of a “war against terrorism” in the Middle East
  As daily more of those same young men and women come home not in uniform but in body bags
• As the Democratic majority has been unwilling and/or unable to take an affirmative stand against the illegal, immoral, and ultimately unforgivable actions of the current administration while we watch our international legitimacy and currency erode with every new picture or story of American atrocities and excesses …
  
  And I could but will not go on.
  
  I find your “Rallying against the tanker decision” to be an obscene waste of your precious time as my representative in Congress. From everything that I have read the contract was awarded to the lowest bid who provided the best value for the money proposed, which of course, will be borrowed against the futures of my children and grandchildren and …
  
  I find it inexcusable that you

• Have been unable to find as much passion to oppose the war in Iraq
• To demand that the President acknowledge that there never were any weapons of mass destruction, terrorists from Iraq, or any terrorist training bases in Iraq, at least until the United States pressured some nations to join us in an unprovoked attack against a sovereign nation
• To publicly admit that the only planes allowed to fly immediately following the bombings in New York and Washington DC were Saudi planes allowing material witnesses sought for interview by the FBI
• Have not demanded that the President keep his word and fire any and all persons involved in the wanton release of a CIA operative’s name in retaliation for the truth spoken by her husband which was contrary to the Administration position and thus jeopardized her life and career as well as the life of her family
• Have not demanded that the President and all members of his staff fully and unequivocally comply with the provisions of the Geneva Convention and oppose all forms of inhumane or degrading treatment of prisoners and in particular denounce and reject any act of torture
• That you have not demanded that the present administration immediately cease dealing with any contracted provider who was awarded a contract without competitive bidding and demand a full accounting of all excesses, waste, and embezzlement of millions of dollars and demand that any person including Chief Operating Officers, executives, or members of the present administration who have been found to have participated in such acts receive the same type of punishment that a young black man would receive for shoplifting.

Airbus won the contract in competitive bidding. Apparently it has been acceptable to this nation for decades that we supply arms to the world, including supplying arms to brutal dictators when it served a "national interest" and including supplying arms that American soldiers ultimately faced in Iraq when it was no longer in our national interests to support Saddam Hussein. And now we are supplying logistics and arms to Pakistan in what promises to be a repeat of a historical pattern of arming brutal, oppressive regimes in what is a truly misguided hope that we will benefit from the support of that regime and achieve some good end. It seems only just that when a provider, regardless of where their coprpoate headquarters are located, submits the lowest bid in a competitive bid and meets and/or exceeds the standards established for satisfying the bid, that the contract be awarded to that provider. If we truly believe in the capitalistic democracy and the free operation of the markets then we should believe in and demonstrate that in what we do. If we act against our own rhetoric, as we have so often done in the past, we can hardly expect that people will be willing to have confidence in our rhetoric.

Voters in Farmer's Branch Texas were to decide Saturday whether to repeal or approve an ordinance prohibiting landlords from renting apartments to most illegal immigrants in their Dallas suburb.

It is interesting, and tragically ironic, that on the 500th anniversary of the establishment of the English settlement of Jamestown, this vote should be taking place. Settlers at Jamestown did not have a passport, visa, or guest worker permit. They did not, in fact, even ask permission of the original inhabitants before occupying their lands and taking food they had stored ... which seems to me to clearly violate one of the commandments of the religion to which they professed to be so passionately devoted that despite enormous costs, risks, and dangers, they came to this continent seeking a refuge where they could freely practice their faith ... which commands that they not steal ... which is what they did almost as soon as they landed.

The situation for Texans is even more hypocritical. Citizens of the newly formed United States were invited to immigrate to the Mexican territory of Texas by the Mexican government. The Mexican government was liberal in the invitation; however, the Mexican government also abolished slavery. Some of the new immigrants refused to comply with this law and imported slaves.

It seems that the more things change, the more they stay the same.

Who Is Really At Fault Here?

CBS Radio fired Don Imus on April 12, 2007, but only after mounting public pressure to do so. On April 4, 2007 Mr. Imus referred on air to the Rutgers women's basketball team using well worn phrases that are both racist and mysoginistic, but which warrant no repeating.

Mr. Imus is now suing CBS Radio for wrongful termination. Apparently, Mr. Imus' contract specifies that he will be "controversial" and "irreverent."

Mr. Imus bears the ultimate responsibility for what he chooses to do and to say. It is likewise appropriate that, at the minimum, he should experience the natural and logical consequences of his choices.

Beyond that; however, sorting out who is responsible can be a little more difficult.

CBS Radio has some responsibility. They pay Mr. Imus. Apparently they encouraged him, with an obscenely large bag of money, to be "controversial" and "irreverent." Any employer has responsibilty for what their employee does. All employers have an obligation to train, supervise, counsel and discipline as necessary, retrain and rehabilitate as necessary, and to terminate an employee based on performance. For celebrities, too often employers ignore, deny, or evade this duty.

Sponsors have some responsibility. They are the ones that fill the bag that CBS Radio gives to their employees. Sponsors do not do this because they value the rich tapestry of "controversial" and "irreverent" talk radio that furthers the public debate and strenthens our democracy. They give CBS Radio that money because it helps them sell their widgets, which in turn helps them pay their corporate officers and more importantly return dividents to investors. Corporations have demonstrated again and again that they recognize no particular obligation to moral or ethical behavior that supercedes their primary mission, to make money.

But as citizens and consumers we have an individual and collective duty to be honest with each other and with ourselves, which we rarely do. It is so much easier and entertaining to compalain about what this company is doing to us or what this politician has done, yadda, yadda, yadda. In fact, the money that Mr. Imus receives to be "controversial" and "irreverent" comes from CBS Radio, who gets the money from the sponsors, who gets the money from selling widgets, most of whcih we do not need, to us.

I do not know about you. I can only speak for myself. I have an indivdual responsibility to exercise the use of my very limited resources in a responsible way. For me that means that it is vitally important from whom I purchase items or patronize services. My greatest impact on the corporate world is the exercise of the leverage of my dollar. I aspire to make choices about how I spend those dollars in ways that are consistent with my own intellectual, emotiona, and spiritual beliefs and values and that cultivates and helps to construct the type of community and world in whcih I want to live.

I choose not to patronize businesses that are destructive to the environment, to people, or to the social fabric.

I make a deliberate, conscious, thoughtful effort to choose to purchase my clothing from manufacturers who pay a living wage and treat their employees and the Earth in a responsible, humane, respectful way. For clothing manufacturers in particular, this type of behavior is the exception and requires more effort and on many occasions, more $$$ than the ostrich approach to consumer spending. If I don't see it, it didn't happen, doesn't matter, isn't my problem.

A friend of mine, who is very image conscious, excitedly told me about her trip to New York. She purchased a designer handbag from a street vendor. A very high percentage of property crimes are related to the illegal drug trade and by extension to violent crimes, destruction of our environment, individual lives, families, communities, a huge investment in rehabilitation and treatment, and a much larger investment in incarceration and courts. My friend would deny having anything to do with the drug trade, especially supporting it. However, when she gave that street vendor her money for a product that she knew or should have known was stolen, she , in fact, did support the drug trade. That money eventually found its way up someone's nose or into their bloodstream.

So, who is responsible for what Mr. Imus says and does? CBS Radio would not expect and encourage and tolerate Mr. Imus' controversial irreverence if it was not popular and profitable. Corporations would not give CBS Radio their money knowing it was to be given to Mr. Imus if they did not believe that doing so would help them sell more widgets, buy another boat, and take that Carribean cruise.

Every dollar I give to a corporation or business or non-profit agency or individual who I know or should know will use that money irresponsibly is my business and my choice. It is appropriate that I experience the natural and logical consequences of my choices and behavior. That is why we have the politicians we deserve. We have the entertainers we deserve. We have the music lyrics we deserve. We have the television shows we deserve. yadda, yadda, yadda.

He is Just Wrong, At Least So Far

He was wrong about any connection between the terrorists of 9-11 and Iraq.

He was wrong about American troops being welcomed as heroic liberators.

He was wrong about Weapons of Mass Destruction.

He was wrong about "Mission Accomplished."

He was wrong about the leak about Valerie Plame coming from his office.

He was wrong about the Kyoto Treaty and global warming.

He was wrong about Alberto Gonzalez.

What sort of personality disorder, denial, or mental illness would compel us to believe that he is, or in the foreseeable future, will be right?

Can't We Just All Get Along

It was today, April 29, in 1992 that rioting erupted in Los Angeles following the acquital of any wrongdoing of the four Los Angeles police officers who savagely beat an unarmed African-American motorist.

On the evening of March 3, 1991, Rodney King was driving his automobile when a California Highway Patrol officer signaled him to pull over. Mr. King, who subsequently admitted that he had been drinking, fled and a high-speed chase ensued. Los Angeles Police eventually pulled Mr. King over. After King got out of his car, four officers—Stacey C. Koon, Laurence M. Powell, Timothy E. Wind, and Theodore J. Briseno— kicked King and hit him with their batons more than fifty times while he struggled on the ground.

Likely, nothing more would have been known about this and Rodney King's name would be unfamiliar to everyone, except that an amateur photographer, George Holliday, videotaped eighty-one seconds of the beating. The videotape was shown repeatedly on national television demonstrating the daily reality of police brutality for people of color and almost unknown to the white, priviedged, and/or affluent.

Koon, Powell, Wind, and Briseno were charged with assault with a deadly weapon, excessive use of force, and filing a false police report. The trial was moved to Simi Valley and the jury was seated - ten whites, one Filipion-American, and one Hispanic. On April 29, 1992 the jury found the four police officers not guilty on ten of the eleven counts and could not come to an agreement on the other count.

Understandable outrage and protest turned to violence in South-Central Los Angeles, erupting first at the intersection of Florence Boulevard and Normandie Avenue.

Freeways and surface streets were blocked and random motorists were beaten. A news helicopter filmed truck driver Reginald Denny being dragged from the cab of his truck and savagely beaten almost to death. Business were looted and burned.

Los Angeles police were slow to respond, and then Governor Pete Wilson deployed the national guard at the request of Mayor Tom Bradley. A citywide curfew was declared.

On May 1, President George Bush ordered military troops and riot-trained federal officers to Los Angeles and by the end of the next day the city was under control.

The three days of disorder killed 55 people, injured almost 2,000, led to 7,000 arrests, and caused nearly $1 billion in property damage, including the burnings of nearly 4,000 buildings.

It was during this period of rioting that Rodney King, being interviewed on television news, posed his now famous question when he tearfully asked, "Can't we just all get along?"

I was living in San Diego at the time managing a shelter for homeless teenagers. I remember that night so vividly because all throughout Southern California sympathetic riots were also erupting. I remember how vigilant and expectant we were that violent protests were likely to begin. I had known for many years how oppressive and abusive San Diego Police were towards people of color and the homeless. Remarkably, it was a quiet night. This was due in large part to the calm, reassuring voices of community leaders, notably African-Americans, Asians, and Hispanics, calling for restraint and a begin to healing.

That experience left a profound effect on me of the tremendous power of the right words at the right time. Power to provoke violence and the power to provoke healing.

I think that it is good for us to remember this. I think that it is especially good for us to remember this because we have a President, Vice-President, Attorney General of the United States, presidential advisors and cabinet members, many other elected officials, and numerous celebrities who clearly do not understand this. What we say and what we do has a powerful capacity to create or to destroy and to define our world and our place in it.

In the last several years the United States has cultivated significantly more destruction than construction. Our place in the world, in many eyes, has been defined in terms that embarasses and shames me. President Bush and Vice-President Cheney, and the administration for which they are responsible, has deliberately and intentionally pursued a path of ego centric nationalism that has caused much destruction. They have not seized opportunities to genuinely pursue a path that is contructive.

And oh, by the way ...


In August 1992 a federal grand jury indicted the four officers for violating King's civil rights. Koon was charged with depriving King of due process of law by failing to restrain the other officers. The other three officers were charged with violating King's right against unreasonable search and seizure because they had used unreasonable force during the arrest.

At the federal trial, which was held in Los Angeles, the jury was more racially diverse than the one at Simi Valley. On April 17, 1993, the jury convicted officers Koon and Powell of violating King's civil rights but acquitted Wind and Briseno. Koon and Powell were sentenced to two and a half years in prison.

King filed a civil lawsuit against the police officers and the city of Los Angeles. After settlement talks broke down, the case went to trial in early 1994. On April 19, 1994, the jury awarded King $3.8 million in compensatory damages. However, the jury refused to award King punitive damages. In July 1994 the city of Los Angeles struck a deal whereby King agreed to drop any plans to appeal the jury's verdict on punitive damages. In return, the city of Los Angeles agreed to expedite payment of King's compensatory damages.

ITS THE SAME EXCEPT FOR THE LANDSCAPING

I have had a slowly evolving malaise over the last few months and I wasn't quite able to identify the cause. I have a lot of stress at work and health problems but it seemed that it was really something else. It just occurred to me this morning.

I am a card carrying member of the News Junkies Anonymous and now I am dreading the news. I am cutting back on how much media I watch or read. And when I do go to the news, I start looking at golf news or the offbeat stuff or the arts calendar. I am avoiding headlines and front page news. I see it, I just don't really see it, or read it.

I remember this.

The landscaping is different, but this is the late 60s and early 70s all over again. When it was never a question of if there had been any horrible news from the war, just how bad was it. Never a question of if any soldiers had died needlessly for some dubious yet unattainable, and largely unidentifiable, goal, just how many. How many young men (almost all men in Viet Nam) had sacrificed their lives for that huge lie that they were serving and protecting their country.

OK, so it's more than just the different foliage. Now young women have also bought the big lie and are dying to protect their country.

I wake every morning knowing in my bones that some of the best and brightest young people in this country have been killed or maimed or otherwise traumatized and that we are so much poorer for their loss. It is never a question of whether or not this has happened, only how much, how bad is it. How much grief and loss is there for my breakfast today?

We sit here going through the motions of work and family lifle, listening to music and voting for our favorites or watching selfish egocentric people conspire against each other on some tropical island, while half a world a way, the future and talent, spirit, energy, and creativity of this country is slowly bleeding away in the sand. How many brilliant future teachers or doctors died in Iraq today? How many gifted artists or musicians are irreprably traumatized today? How many future world shaking inventions have we lost today? What great books will never be written or films never made now?

And when those who are "only traumatized" come home, how many future homeless vets have we created? How many flashbacks and nightmares yet to terrorize are being planted today? How many children became orphans today? How many children might as well be orphans because their parents are emotionally and spiritually incapable of being present?

We have the capacity to create greate things ~ literature and music and inventions and medicines and people. We are choosing the path of destruction ~ blowing things up, knocking things down, and the people, always the people.

That seems like enough to explain my malaise.

But then I think, I always try to think, I aspire, to bring some light into this darkness. I have little influence or capacity to change what happens in Iraq. I can influence what happens here and now, which is the only place and time I actually have anyway. I can ... I do choose to cultivate positive energy, to light a candle, tell a story, read a good book, help a neighbor, make a friend, play some golf, be artistic and creative, make a delicous meal. Its not a cure for my malaise and it won't change our government or Iraq and it won't make me forget or ignore, but a candle lit in the darkness, no matter how dark, is better than a curse.