« January 2006 | Main | March 2006 »

February 22, 2006

Corruption leading change conference call

I recently sat in on a conference call (February 16th) with Stanley Greenberg (Democracy Corps pollster and strategist) and Robert Borosage (Campaign for Our Future) on “How Corruption will play in 2006 and why it matters”.

Background materials:

The questions I posed by email were, and each were addressed:

Technorati Tags: ,

Continue reading "Corruption leading change conference call" »

Corporation reform

Today, we are experiencing a period of enormously painful transition from the industrial cold-war era to the globalized information economy with rising economies in India and China.  This is exacerbated by Republican policies that have cut manufacturing jobs at an accelerating pace over the last few years, rising healthcare, retirement and economic insecurities and finally by global warming.

There is a growing sense that we need to redefine the role of corporations away from strict greed is good for the shareholder to a more balanced sense of the greater good.  In the past, this was through regulations, such as monopoly busting, worker rights, etc. These will continue, but there is new thinking afoot as well in the area of “corporation reform”.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Continue reading "Corporation reform" »

2006 election cycle; site update

Hi folks — it's been a while.  As election 2006 gets rolling and its results later setting up the 2008 election, I thought I'd offer an update.

But first, some bookkeeping …

Technorati Tags: , ,

Continue reading "2006 election cycle; site update" »

Book: the Next Deal

John C. Bogle: The Battle for the Soul of CapitalismAndrei Cherny: the Next Deal: The Future of Public Life in the Information Age

A thoughtful and action-oriented book with good historical perspective, Cherny draws an analogy between today's circumstances and those that launched previous great eras of change in society and the way we use government to address those changes.  His premise is, roughly, that the information age and globalization is producing the “choice generation” that recreates (in a less agrarian way) the kind of individual, rather than industrial, focus of life and politics that dominated during the founding of America.  We can each have impact on politics again (blogs, internet, ...) and we need to rethink government in a way that corresponds.  This kind of great shift is like that from agrarian to industrial leading to great upheavals, the creation of robber baron industries but then the creation of labor unions and the New Deal.

Conservative solutions to eras of great change don't work because they resist the change; a new progressive era is required to successfully transition through as a great, world power.

Thoughtful and thought-proving, this is a great read by one of the creative progressive thinkers.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Book: Get This Party Started

John C. Bogle: The Battle for the Soul of CapitalismEdited by Matthew R. Kerbel: Get This Party Started

A recently released compendium of some of the best writers and articles on “how progressives can fight back and win”, updated so they fit and flow together.  The book covers most areas of interest -- values, polling, language, policy directions, leadership, characteristics of both the left and right, internet, campaign financing, organization.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

February 19, 2006

Book: Promises to Keep

Thom Hartmann: What Would Jefferson Do? A Return to DemocracyRichard N. Goodwin: Promises to Keep

Goodwin starts from the premise that (emphases mine),

“Democracy and capitalism are the twin pillars of American society.  Together they support the structure that guards and advances the traditional purpose of American life: national growth in the service of democratic values; increasing opportunity for every individual to sustain and enhance his life; economic justice for every citizen; and the protective strengthening of those ties that have traditionally bound us to our fellow citizens and to the heritage and destiny of the nation.”

While capitalism is “the engine” for “the creation and distribution of wealth”, it is “democracy alone [that] can ensure freedom of the marketplace, justice in the distribution of wealth, equality of opportunity ... protecting the people against abuses of private economic power, ... and for ensuring that capitalism serves the interest of the entire American community.”

For this reason he calls our system Democratic Capitalism, not free market capitalism.

While written in 1992, he makes a compelling argument that applies to our current situation (how  dreadful each post-Republican economy is!) that has let the capital system use the power of its money to corrupt the democratic system to the detriment of larger society and we need to exert more forcefully the “restraining powers of representative democracy” if we are to be able to face the changing world.

Technorati Tags: , ,

Re: Corporate execs step up war on shareholders (SirotaBlog)

[Posted on Sirotablog re: Corporate execs step up war on shareholders 2/18/2006]

John C. Bogle's (founder of Vanguard mutual funds) has an interesting take on this from a Republican capitalist that feels management is robbing the store in his book The Battle for the Soul of Capitalism.

He argues that “ownership capitalism” has been replaced with “management capitalism” and the executive suites are robbing owners by diverting unreasonably large amounts of owner returns to managements' own compensation. This is bad because the people taking the risk (owners investment $) aren't getting appropriate returns and eventually the system will implode from manager greed.

Technorati Tags: , , ,

February 17, 2006

Signing “Demand the Truth”

I wrote this signing statement when signing the ACLU petition to “Demand the Truth”:

In the name of fighting terrorists, President Bush has become the domestic threat to our liberties.  As Benjamin Franklin put it, “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

We have to put unreasoning fear aside.  We have to have the courage our founders had to accept that we can’t be totally free of all threats if we also want to have our freedoms.  We have to have the courage to fight to get our freedoms back.

The administration has engaged in numerous constitutional, law and treaty violations in its zeal to assert itself as an unchallengable force able to act unilaterally on the world, over the Congress and in spite of the “inalienable” rights of Americans.

The threat to our freedoms is not only from terrorism, it is from sacrificing our freedoms to fight terrorism.

We face threats, not only foreign, but also domestic.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

February 15, 2006

Re: Ben Westlund and the Arrogance of Non-partisan Purity (BlueOregon)

[Posted on BlueOregon re: Ben Westlund and the Arrogance of Non-partisan Purity on 2/14/2006]

My couple of interactions with Ben indicate a fine man, with a devotion to finding the right things for Oregon, such as supporting  the Hope for Oregon Families initiative and the Oregon Apollo initiative.  He fervently supports some good ideas that most of Blue Oregon probably supports too.  I'm sure we differ on a number of stands as well, but he comes about his positions honorably.  I suppose his stands may not fit a particular party, especially not the Republican Party these days.

Ben makes me proud to be an Oregonian, whether I vote for him or not.

Technorati Tags: , , ,

Continue reading "Re: Ben Westlund and the Arrogance of Non-partisan Purity (BlueOregon)" »

February 13, 2006

Re: Luntz Switching Sides?

[Reply to MyDD re: Luntz Switching Sides?]

Luntz appears to have an excellent methodology for testing people's reactions to words, phrases, linked phrases, ad spots, etc.  The tool is not inappropriate at all.

But the use of the tool, by Luntz himself and certainly at the behest of his Republican clients, to identify and use those phrasings that “work” even if they are not true, is clearly an ethical failure, giving rise to Orwellian double-speak.

But one need not use the tool that way ... assuming that Luntz can test and deliver the phrasings that work and are true to the policies.

To see the results of his testing of a great (GREAT!) ad, done by some friends of mine that won the 2004 DNC nominating convention ad contest, see America's Party and watch the version with the “dial test”.

September 2011

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30  

Campaigns I Support

About Progressive Viewpoints