CHECKS AND BALANCES

The Republican two-year campaign to win the 2010 elections was effective; yet, it has been made to seem more ominous and a sign of the times than it was.  Remember, it is a relatively normal cycle that has been repeated in some fashion throughout our country’s history – a contribution to the over-arching system of checks and balances as effective and important as the interplay among the branches of government the administration, the congress and the courts.  It was neither a great country-changing victory nor a life-threatening disaster.  It was an adjustment and should be treated as such. Learn, integrate the impact, and move on.  For me, I hoped this would signal  a return to sanity as we eliminate the extremes so that some measure of collaboration could be introduced into the way we govern ourselves…and perhaps as time healed the campaign wounds, together we could have an honest discourse of what we need to do to move forward.

This week, an Obama-appointed bipartisan deficit commission released a preliminary report on what needs to be done to get the country on track – to recover from the expense of the 21^st century wars and the emergency actions to stop the 2007-2008 slide into a repeat of the Great Depression.  It laid out options – some favored the right; some favored the left – but the report in general clearly laid out the over-arching problems this country is facing and some options that need to be considered in order to move forward.  The conversations on TV and on-line over the last two days seem to show a general consensus – this will be hard; there are some things I as a Democrat, a Republican, a Tea Party member, or simply a independent-thinking American individual would not wish to happen, but in general, most of the feedback thus far indicates those that have read the initial overviews feel it is a realistic assessment of the problems we are facing and a realistic assessment of what kinds of things need to be addressed to get back on track.  And most feel it is a starting point for discussion and reassessment of needs and values that will form the basis of the actions that may take ten years to cement.  And although I naively wish for a quicker relief, it did take decades of dangerous thinking to get us to this place of pain, so I should be happy it might only take ten years to recover.

So, for me, there was a sense of relief to hear that perhaps sanity will prevail.  Just like the American public that made hard decisions and sacrifices to individually whittle down their own personal debt in the past 2 years to the tune of $ One Trillion, so must the government.  Some changes I will be happy about; some things I will be less so – but none will be life-threatening – nor will they place this country in a place where we are worse off than the rest of the world inhabitants – we will still live a good life.

And yet I fear in today’s world of internet and cable TV connectivity, the negativity and our new tolerance for half truths and outright lies in this election may have a broader and deeper consequence. 

And this morning in the Strib, I saw proof of that fear.  A letter to the editor demonstrated for me that not all the public saw the Deficit Commission preliminary report as a ray of hope.  One reader called it a doomsday scenario, a dog-and pony show led by Bowles and Simpson to scare Americans into an austerity program aimed at further injuring the middle class.  For him, since it did not support his own ideas, it had to be a Republican plot.

It was troubling to read that proof that the polarization and negativity continues and needs to be fixed – another task for our system of checks and balances – and one, that although it starts in state capitals and Washington, must also be supported by the media self-correcting its own actions.  Put the country and its citizens first over ratings. Give the country a fair chance to let the checks and balances work!

MEET THE PRESS

I’ve been an avid viewer and supporter over the years of Sunday morning’s MEET THE PRESS. Its 9:00AM schedule dictates when I get up (so I have the Sunday paper read and digested before the show) and which church I attend – my favorite downtown, or a neighborhood church that allows me to leave for services AFTER the show is over.

Today they unveiled a new set which is modern, updated and gorgeous. But I’m afraid it won’t help. I have tried hard since the passing of Tim Russert to switch my loyalty to the current commentator but I can’t put away a nagging thought in the back of mind.

Has the mission of the show changed as well as the look, the feel, and the commentator?

I admit, every week I struggle with separating out the personality of Dick Gregory which I read as impolite, cocky, condescending, and intent on divisiveness rather than guaranteeing a honest, informed discussion of issues in our nation. Discussions always have more than one point of view, and more than one “right” answer. And certainly, despite highly political and controversial guests, in the past, moderators chose to present an overview as non-partisan as possible under the circumstances. I have always looked to MEET THE PRESS, along with the PBS NEWS HOUR for unbiased facts and thoughts which I could weigh to draw my own conclusions on an issue.

I’m certain that my own prejudices are impacting how I received the message of the show; but, as an example, I cite the discussion this morning about the tragedy of the BP oil rig and the fast-moving oil leak that threatens so much of our southern shores, their environment and their economy. No matter how hard I tried, I felt like the main goal of Gregory was to get someone to point a finger of blame – at BP or at the US Government – for a slow response- in order to create a sensational breaking headline. I read the information drill-down as a hunt for whose fault is this terrible tragedy. I felt like I was witnessing yet another media-manufactured divisive issue to support ratings against the entertainment-focused cable news channels. I was encouraged that all parties interrogated ignored the bait.

There is a difference, folks, between good issues discussions and ratings. It’s becoming harder and harder for me to stay tuned to the issues and what the guests are revealing of their positions in response to tough questions, when I continue to be distracted by impolite interruptions, the frequently raised voice of the moderator, and a performance broadcasting “smug, swaggering and self-satisfied “. The new set will not help me with that.

MEDIA INFLUENCE

Hour after hour for a couple days now, we have heard on major networks and cable TV about this devastating snowstorm that has crippled the East Coast. I’ve watched or listened in sympathy, as those who aren’t acclimated to this phenomenon, have struggled with road, airport, businesses and mall closings and for some, with the experience of being stranded along the roadside. But little did I realize how much the media reporting was influencing me!

A few minutes ago, I looked at my lengthy list of pre-holiday and year-end tasks to be done today and thought to myself…”maybe I’ll just curl up with the paper and a little music and wait ‘til the snow stops blowing and the roads are plowed.”

That was great demonstration of the power of the press because it is not snowing here in the Midwest! And yet, the commentators, without trying to, through constant repetition and hype about a storm out East, convinced my brain that the storm was happening to us! How scary is that?!!! Of course, it could be a symptom of my own mental state, but I prefer to think of it in broader terms.

The Fourth Estate was, at one time, our source for the verifiable truth via network news programs. Kronkite, Huntly-Brinkley, Brokow and others didn’t share opinions – they gave us the facts as best they knew them, and we trusted them. Is it any wonder then, that as we added cable to our viewing experience, we took with us an attitude of trust and so have difficulty comprehending that what we hear often is opinion and not necessarily researched truth?

We add that pre-disposition to believe to a second pre-disposition to HEAR that which supports our own opinions and MUTE what might make us give pause and think, and we may have at our fingertips the reason we as a country are so polarized. We still trust that those we turn to for input are the replacements to the trustworthy news anchors of the past. We can’t accept that at least in the entertainment world of cable TV, what we hear is driven by strong views and competition for ratings. The sound-bytes validate our own attitudes and before we are even aware of it, we absorb the opinions as the TRUTH. And most of us are not even aware that all the truths being told are not in sync with each other. Amazing.