PR Straight Talk

One of my clients, Anthony Abeson, the great acting coach, wrote a commentary which I placed for him in the Outlook section of the Washington Post on June 8th.  It’s such a splendid piece, I thought I would post it here for your edification.  In case you may wish to see other of Anthony’s articles and interviews with major film sites, you can find it at:  www.AnthonyAbeson.com.   Incidentally, Anthony was coach to such actors as Jennifer Aniston, Esai Morales and Ian Somerhalder, among others.  This particular piece was picked up by other newspapers, such as The Atlanta Journal Constitution, The Miami Herald and The Christian Science Monitor.

By the way, Anthony originally headlined his piece, “Anne Frank Wasn’t Hot.”  The Washington Post changed it to “Face It.  It’s Not About Talent.”  I think I like Anthony’s original best.

washingtonpost.com  

By Anthony Abeson

Sunday, June 8, 2008; Page B02

FACE IT.  IT’S NOT ABOUT TALENT. 

“Artists are the antennae of the race,” Ezra Pound once said. He was referring to the way that turbulence in the arts — the rise of dissonance in music or distortion in painting — has often preceded and presaged major upheavals in society. But today, that dynamic has been reversed. Instead of artists reflecting what’s about to befall the people, it’s the people who reflect what has already befallen the artists.

As an acting coach, I’m writing specifically about actors, who today are being cast more and more on their looks and less and less on their talent. The continual display of perfect bodies on television and movie screens has contributed not only to an epidemic of eating disorders, but also to spiritual disorders that increasingly lead young people to evaluate all humanity as either “hot” or “not.”

A while ago, I had a conversation with a 12-year-old girl about “The Diary of Anne Frank,” which she was reading for school. I asked how she liked it, and she replied, “She was a liar.” “How can you say that?” I asked. “Because she said that a lot of boys liked her. No way.” “Why not?” I probed further. Because, the girl replied disdainfully, “she wasn’t hot.”

I’m convinced that this extreme fixation on appearance represents one of many canaries fluttering their last breaths in our cultural coal mine, warning us of the toxic atmosphere we’re inhaling from television, film and computer screens and all manner of publications: a world of “hotties,” wearing hot clothes, riding in hot cars, drinking stuff that makes you look cool (even though you’re hot), wearing make-up and jewelry that famous, hot people wear, reading cool magazines that tell you who and what is hot (and what to buy so that you too can be hot), while watching music videos of other hot, cool, glamorous people.

These irresistible images, in high-def and Dolby, are going directly into people’s bloodstream and consciousness, clogging our arteries with prurience, arousing rather than inspiring, hardening our hearts and dehumanizing us. This constant bludgeoning of our sensibilities damages our souls and leads us astray, toward the material and ephemeral and away from the eternal.

Surely we can lay much of the responsibility for this on the criteria and values of the entertainment industry. Where once casting seemed to strive for a combination of looks and talent, the equation now appears to have shifted radically toward the former, particularly with regard to film and television aimed at the youth market. Not long ago, I coached a young woman on a screen test for a television project. Afterward, the casting director told me that she had been “hands down the best actress of the bunch” but they had decided to go “another way.” “Why?” I asked. “Because the girl we went with is a Victoria’s Secret model,” he said, as if that were the most obvious explanation imaginable.

Or consider this breakdown, or character description, for a film audition: “Just beneath her ivory snow exterior is a babe-a-licious ready to unleash her inner hottie.”

Nor is this limited to young women. Turns out that what a network really wanted to see wasn’t the two monologues that a young actor named James and I had prepared, but rather what he looked like with his shirt off, holding an automatic weapon.

This degraded perception of the actor has steadily permeated the acting culture, from the casting director who told a talented young man, upon his arrival in Los Angeles, to “whiten your teeth and bulk up in the gym,” to the actors who, getting the message loud and clear, are tempted to exercise their bodies more than their talent.

This takes a terrible toll on young actors, who are led to perceive their looks as the route to success. “Wow,” said an actor to one of my students at a screen test for a soap. “You do real acting. When I go back to L.A., I’ll be doing the ‘pretty-face-six-pack-abs’ acting.” This sort of self-image condems them to being treated as throwaway rather than renewable. Consider the ever-faster cycle of gobble-’em-up-and-spit-’em-out with which the industry feeds its insatiable hunger. Who can remember all the once-hot stars of “Beverly Hills, 90210″ or “Baywatch”? And the cycle is self-perpetuating. The more entertainment options, the greater the need for “hotties” who — internalizing the industry’s confusion of beauty with talent — try to market their looks right into employment, often without any training at all.

But the dragon eats its tail: Undeveloped talent used is talent used up. Even if an individual achieves some initial “success,” whatever personality trait or look seemed to have worked the first time will be milked unceasingly until it gives out and the industry goes looking for a replacement. The discard is then abandoned to the mercies of the marketplace, ill-equipped to repackage itself, because the actor has been fused into a self-portrait that’s no longer marketable.

In a recent interview, I was asked this question: “Director Elia Kazan hired Vivien Leigh for ‘A Streetcar Named Desire’ because of her beauty. So what’s wrong with beauty still informing casting decisions today?” I pointed out that while Leigh was indeed beautiful, she was cast just as much, if not more so, for the luminous quality she radiated, the fragility in her eyes and her ability to animate her character with those qualities — which is talent. And the public responded to that. No one perceived her as merely “hot.” Her exterior expressed her interior. As T.S. Eliot said, we are “joined spirit and body,/And therefore must serve as spirit and body/Two worlds, visible and invisible/Meet . . .” in us.

But nowadays, the industry’s call to serve involves more of the flesh and less of the spirit. And this is not lost on the young, as that seventh grader can attest. Beauty, in a grotesque distortion of the old saying, has indeed become “its own reward” — while warping the values, hearts, minds and spirits of our youth.

aabeson@ptd.net

Tim Russert died today.  He was 58.  When I heard the news, it was felt as a huge loss.  My eyes filled with tears.  Tim was a presence, a force on television and in the news.  He was indelibly etched in our consciousness - certainly in my consciousness - as someone who could be trusted to ask the kinds questions that would get us closer to the truth…a journalist whose research and thoroughness could be counted on to reveal the wider and deeper aspects of any given issue. 

Tim was also was fair and balanced, and a superb listener.  He was the most brilliant and savvy interviewer on tv or elsewhere.  It wasn’t just that watching Meet the Press every Sunday morning was part of my morning staple - it was my morning ritual. 

I never knew him personally, but I counted on him to make sense of the news by digging underneath it with his perceptive and probing questions, as only Tim as anchor of Meet The Press since 1991, could do.  No one could outshine Tim as an interviewer and interrogator. 

What impressed me as much as his great skill as a journalist was his humanity, and his deep abiding affection for his son Luke and his Dad, Big Russ.  He wrote a book about that relationship with his Dad called “Big Russ and Me.”  Big Russ, a World War II veteran from Buffalo, Tim’s hometown, a former sanitation man, and a man who Tim depicted as the salt of the earth and as someone whose simplicity and wisdom helped Tim in his upbringing and even during his years as a famous journalist. 

Tim just put his Dad, Big Russ, in a nursing home - and now the thought of Big Russ learning about his son’s passing is almost too unbearable to contemplate.

Tim Russert was an honest man.  He had a big heart, as many charities on whose behalf he diligently supported, will attest.  He was larger than life.  He was a patriot.  A devout Catholic and spiritually humble.  He loved politics and saw that discipline as the essence of Americana.   He was a huge fan of Buffalo, his hometown, and his favorite team, the Buffalo Bills.  He was a family man and loved his family deeply.  He was a great journalist - and perhaps the greatest broadcast interviewer of our times.

Fifty-eight is too young to go - but what a life Tim lived…to the fullest.  The impact he has left on journalism, and on the American Spirit, will be treasured and endure for a long time to come. 

I am the son of German Jewish refugees who escaped Hitler.  My father lost most of his family in the Holocaust.  My parents came to America to survive.   As I grew up, I became aware of the magnitude of the horror of what had transpired in Nazi Germany.  That the human mind could descend into tyranny, evil, domination and control - and unspeakable atrocities.  That leaders could sway and control the masses  based on the fixation of an ideology that offered hope amidst economic depression and national despair by scapegoating and annihilating the lives of minorities.

Out of this experience it became my fervent desire to become an advocate for a better, kinder, more tolerant, more hopeful world for all.  As a boy, I remember looking out the window and imagining people of all ethnicities, creeds and religions encircling the globe, holding hands together in peace and love.  I saw the possibilities inherent for humanity if every human being was encouraged to realize his or her potential to the fullest.  I saw people of different races, religions, genders, orientations speaking to each other, dialoguing with each other, understanding each other, tolerating and even loving each other.  I saw them celebrating their differences, united in their common quest for life, freedom, fulfillment, prosperity and happiness.  I saw an end to poverty and a new era of abundance for every man, woman and child on our planet - material abundance, and creative, spiritual abundance. 

This Dream is not unique to me.   Millions of people around the world yearn for the realization of that Dream.  I believe that a point has arrived in human history where a critical mass of people have emerged, wanting unity, reconciliation and a better world for all.   It has taken millions of years for humanity to arrive here, for consciousness to have reached a point in numbers where something spiritually and culturally unique and exceptional may be on the verge of actualizing in reality.

The yearning has been there for a long time.  It was there at the outset of the war for American Independence, and seeded in the Declaration.  It was there towards the end of the Civil War, and seeded in Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address.  It was there after World War I and seeded by Woodrow Wilson in The League of Nations, and later seeded in the creation of the United Nations, and in the Declaration of Human Rights architected by Eleanor Roosevelt.

I also believe that that is the yearning of the millions who have responded to the message of Barack Obama’s inspirational rhetoric.

What the huge response to Senator Obama’s messages reflect is a great hunger for a nobler, finer kind of society and politics - one that brings us together, that reinvokes the better possibilities among and between people, that allows for the actualization of human potential in every person, that ushers in a newer more humane world - one of peace, of an end to wars and conflicts, of reconciliation between peoples, of economic prosperity here at home and in the world, of an end to poverty - of lasting hope and promise.

Senator Obama has tapped into this great need and hunger.  He has become, in his rhetoric, an eloquent and skilled spokesperson for our nobler aspirations.

Perhaps my own vision emerged from the tragic circumstance of my family – from parents who suffered through the Nazi era and came to America in search of relief from persecution, of freedom and the right to be.   I learned from their experience that words such as “freedom” - “human dignity” - “equality” - are sometimes fought for, and hard won.  I learned from them and through the trials of my own journey that there are people who would deny us our freedom and our right “to be”.

There have always been ideologues of the dark side, people who need to control and dominate others, who wish to suppress the light and the natural God-given right of  human beings to flourish and self-actualize in freedom.

And so we have a paradox.  One the one hand, humanity wishes to move forward towards the realization of the Dream.  On the other hand, we must be aware – and our elected leaders must be aware – of the dark forces wishing to suppress the Light.  I believe we are in this era now – and that the forces of Islamic extremism must not be underestimated in their desire for tyranny, domination and control.   They would have the rights of women entirely suppressed.  They would have those of other religions – should they not convert to their extreme ideological “religious” positionality – wiped out. 

We need to learn from the lessons of the past, when we discovered that this kind of radical tyrannical ideological determination has no heart, and cannot be accommodated.

I believe we CAN hold onto the Dream – and move forward with the Dream – but should not be naïve in our thinking that we can negotiate with terrorists.  We must hold onto the Light – but also realistically confront the forces of darkness with steadfastness and resolve.  It is a different time than the Cold War.  When John F. Kennedy said “Let us never negotiate out of fear, but let us never fear to negotiate,” he was dealing with people who were not attached to extremist religious ideological positionality.

My concern about Barack Obama is that while he articulates the Dream that people yearn to see actualized, he may be more naïve in his readiness to dialogue and negotiate with the forces of darkness.  It would be a terrible mistake for him, as President of the United States, to hold one-on-one negotiations with a man who stupidly says the Holocaust did not exist, and who, along with his Mullahs, is determined to destroy the State of Israel.   To give stature and weight to this man and his positions, without preconditions, could be very dangerous.  One must question the naivete of such a proposition, or whether there are darker elements lurking in Obama himself.

Robert Kennedy spoke of the Dream – and I believe he genuinely touched upon it in his awareness and his rhetoric.   The difference, I believe, between Robert Kennedy and Barack Obama, is that RFK would have soberly and without naivete seen today’s threats for what they are – as impediments to the flowering of the Dream.   As to Obama, one has the right to ask, does naivete and lack of experience cast a shadow on his intentions?  Does something darker lurk behind his motives…and his rhetoric?

As we aspire to the Dream, a vital lesson is that we not ignore the Shadow - for Light and Shadow dwell in humans - and we must be discerning as we yearn for the former while allowing ourselves to clearly see the latter.

Below is a letter I wrote to Daphna Ziman of StandWithUs, after I read her testimony about the anti-Semitic statements of the head of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, who afterwards denied he made the statements.  This is the link that gives her testimony and the Reverend’s denials:  http://standwithus.com/app/iNews/view.asp?ID=350 

Dear Daphna:

It was not only horrifying to read your account of the vitriolic vituperatives hurled against the Jewish people by Rev. Eric Lee, president & CEO of The Southern Christian Leadership Conference, but even more disturbing to read his letter of denial, affirming his solidarity and respect for Jews and unbelievably refuting that he made the remarks you and others so clearly heard. 

May I suggest that you get corroborative statements from others who were present with you, especially Assemblyman Mike Davis and Senator Mark Ridely Thomas?

Rev. Lee should be fired as head of The Southern Christian Leadership Conference.  He does not deserve to stand in Martin Luther King’s shoes.  Dr. King was time and again an eloquent supporter of Israel and the noble struggle of the Jewish people for social justice – not only for themselves, but often for the struggle of African Americans.  It is a fact, as you undoubtedly know, that Jews stood with Blacks at the forefront of the Civil Rights crusade.  Some Jews like Andrew Goodman and Michael Schwerner were murdered alongside African American James Earl Chaney on June 21, 1964.  As young members of The Congress of Racial Equality who courageously came to the South to stand up for the rights of African Americans, these three martyrs stand forever emblazoned in history as champions in the struggle for freedom and the rights of all Americans.

Dr. King was no hypocrite, hiding his true feelings for different audiences.  He spoke with the same eloquence, passion and convictions in front of Black audiences as he did in front of white audiences.  He was a friend of the Jewish people and for Israel – and he would express this support at any time, to any audience.

What kind of affrontery to intelligent people of goodwill of all races and religions has Rev. Lee committed!  How can he think he can blatantly get away with his egregious hypocrisy, denials and lies?

This is the problem we as an electorate face with Senator Obama and his relationship with Rev. Wright and Louis Farrakhan.  Obama speaks to the American people denouncing these men’s bigoted words, but he has not severed his relationships with them.  He spends 20 years as a congregant of Rev. Wright’s Church, and says he never personally heard a bigoted sermon?  This is the same lying and hypocrisy displayed by Rev. Lee.  It reveals a hidden agenda – an antiseptic agenda of inspirational rhetoric dished out for a largely white public; but a hateful and venomous truer attitude that gushes up for constituents.

We don’t know the true Barack Obama, because he constantly “feeds” the media and the general public with what he knows they want him to say, while he de facto surrounds himself with advisors and mentors who belie these statements.  General Merrill “Tony” McPeak, Senator Obama’s military advisor and co-chair of his Presidential campaign is a case in point. McPeak is a longtime anti-Israel critic who has slammed Israel harshly during his career.  And yet Obama utters strong unqualified support for Israel in his public pronouncements.

Just as in the case of Rev. Lee, Barack Obama has two voices:  one for public consumption designed to gain power and the Presidency; and the other what seems to be truer darker feelings evidenced by his close and important relationships.

If I can support you in revealing the hypocrisy and lies of Rev. Lee, please let me know.

Sincerely,

Mike Schwager

C-Span interviewed Roger Mudd this past week, former CBS News weekend anchor and Washington bureau chief for CBS.  During the interview, the subject of Eric Sevareid came up.  Mr. Sevareid was the highly respected commentator on The CBS Evening News with Walter Cronkite.  His commentary came at the end of the broadcast, and ran for just a few minutes. 

Sevareid was a sage.  In running a snippet of the last interview with him on C-Span, Eric said the following about his mission as a commentator on the nightly newscast, which then was the preeminent network newscast, reaching 25 million viewers on an average night.  I’m paraphrasing.  Sevareid said:  I saw my role not as a judge, but as a teacher.  My mission was not to advocate, but to enlighten.

There is no one like Eric Sevareid in television news - or for that matter, in radio news - today.

Sevareid was like a beacon of light amidst the turmoil and seeming chaos of the daily news.  He was able to shed light on an event, a crisis, a national or world leader - not so much as a critic, or a loudmouthed tattler and gossip-monger - but to put a situation or person in context, revealing the underpinnings of an event, unravelling the complexities of a situation in historical perspective, looking at motives, evaluating a happening or utterance from the standard of high-minded universal, humane and respected values.

Those few minutes with Sevareid was something millions of Americans tuned in to absorb.  He was an illuminator and an integrator.  He helped make sense out of seeming nonsense.  He crystallized complexity into profound simplicity.  There was no one like him.

We need a man or woman like that today, especially in the world of ratings-driven network or cable news.  But there is no such person.  Instead, we have news mixed with commentary.  We have Lou Dobbs, an intelligent and able news person turned advocate, mixing it all up simultaneously, in a soup of both news and vigorous, passionate and often angry commentary.  Objectivity has been thrown out the window.  And we have the plethora of talk show commentators, with their highly subjective and biased views hurtled onto the American consciousness, as if their utterances were gospel.  They are not -but the effect is to turn minds without providing context, objectivity, sanity.

We need to have more objective reporting, and respect for commentary not so much as advocacy, but as enlightened teaching.   Will another Eric Sevareid ever grace our experience?  The way things are going, it doesn’t look good, at least as far as the money-driven news rat race is concerned.

Undercover video released by the Humane Society, and just shown on national tv, of sick cows in a meat processing plant, just prior to slaughter, made national headlines – but not out of compassion for these poor suffering animals.  The focus of concern by the news media was about the meat of sick animals entering the food supply.

When I saw the footage this morning, of animals too sick to stand, stumbling helplessly on the slaughterhouse floor, and lifted mercilessly and callously on a fork about to be taken for slaughter, I realized that my long interest in becoming a vegetarian had been realized. Where is our compassion?  I speak not only for the sickly cows, but the healthy ones too.  These are feeling, thinking beings.  The cow is a benign animal.  But the fate of tens of millions each year, who suffer by never seeing the light of day, in closed warehouses and cramped conditions, only to be cruelly slaughtered in the end – is a mark of a society and a culture without feeling, without compassion, without understanding or caring of the suffering of these docile creatures.

Mahatma Gandhi always felt that animals should be protected from torture and cruelty.  “The greatness of a nation can be judged by the way it treats its animals,” he said.

“Anyone who has accustomed himself to regard the life of any living creature as worthless is in danger of arriving also at the idea of worthless human lives,” wrote humanitarian and Nobel Peace Prize winner Dr. Albert Schweitzer.

Where is the national campaign and the voices of outrage that decry the suffering and cruelty of such animals – that decry their suffering in the manner in which they are housed and treated, and in the fact that they are slaughtered in inhumane and merciless ways?  Ultimately, where is the campaign that calls for an end to the slaughter of cows, period?  Where is the campaign that is rooted in a true embrace of reverence for life – all life?  Where is the campaign that decries the suffering and slaughter of pigs in a similar manner?  The campaign that decries the inhumane caging of chickens who live out their lives in cages without room to move in? 

The list goes on and on.  Has anyone ever considered that the pain and suffering we inflict on all these creatures, when ingested into our own systems, transforms into our own pain and suffering?  Think about it. 

This irreverence of the lives of animals extends to the treatment of dogs and cats in so many of this country’s County shelters –  killing institutions dedicated to the “euthanasia” of beautiful, healthy and adoptable dogs, cats, puppies and kittens, instead of a dedication to increasing community awareness, traffic and adoptions as our highest priority? 

What kind of a society is this that ends the lives of creatures who come into the world to give us the unconditional love we so sorely need?   What kind of a commentary is it about us that we so devalue these precious lives?  Is it any wonder that so much cruelty abounds in man’s treatment of his fellows?

If you are reading this and are moved in any way, reach out to animal advocacy groups dedicated to reversing all of this cruelty and suffering.  If you can’t find a group, start one yourself.  Get help from local public relations professionals who resonate with these sensitivities.  You can start by seeking them out on Craigslist.org – or by contacting the local PRSA (Public Relations Society of America) chapter in your city (www.prsa.org).

If the challenge seems uphill and insurmountable, remember the answer to the question posed in the Talmud:  “Where is the center of the world?” To which the response came, “Where each human being stands – there is the center of the world.” 

Television again showed its power and impact after the winners of the Iowa Caucus were announced, and the leading candidates made their election-results speeches.   All major cable and broadcast networks covered the speeches of Senator Obama and Senator Huckabee, the Democratic and Republic winners, respectively, and in that instant, they became nationally known as never before.

As a regular follower of C-Span, I am following the more extensive and in-depth pronouncements and remarks of all the candidates, so I had been aware of Senator Obama’s gifts of oration and inspiration.  C-Span, however, reaches a more limited, politically focused audience - and does not impact upon the national electorate in the way of the combined power of all the commercial news networks.

In one instant, Obama and Huckabee were on the national stage as never before - and became national celebrities as never before.

It made me realize, once again, the power of television - and the power it has not only to raise awareness, but the potential power to act as a force for raising consciousness.

See my earlier post, “Why We Need to Transform Television,” to get my fuller view in this area:  http://www.prstraighttalk.com/why-we-need-to-transform-television/

In my previous posting, written days before the Iowa Caucus, I wrote about “That Vision Thing” - and acknowledged Senator Obama for his gift to inspire and unite.  It appears a plurality of the electorate in Iowa felt something too - and put him over the top.

In an earlier posting, I acknowledged Senator Huckabee for my perception that he was a man of character.  It appears that Iowans felt the decency of the man too.  It’s also understood that some Conservatives, and Evangelical Christians in particular, have been looking for a candidate they can embrace in this campaign.

Clearly, both Obama and Huckabee speak to a deep desire for change in the country - in Obama’s case a change that represents a truly new paradigm envisioning a less divisive, confrontative approach with respect to both domestic and international issues; and in Huckabee’s case, it appears his call is for a return to truer Conservative values combined with “heart” for the needs of the common man, that also speaks to a disaffection with Bush-Republican policies as we’ve known them.  

John Edwards speaks to this populist agenda, though in a more progressive vein.  Hillary Clinton will probably now emphasize herself more as a change agent, and if she’s smart, also speak more to the needs of people and less about what “I” will do.  She’s immensely talented and intelligent - as is her husband - and she still has plenty of determination in her.  It will be interesting to see if she can gain the momentum again.

I was a bit saddened to see that Senator Biden had to pull out.  He’s a man of enormous intelligence, wisdom and experience - and hopefully he will be called upon to serve the country by a smart next president, whoever he or she is.

But for now, the momentum is with Senator Obama - and Senator Huckabee - the former a man of true vision, and the latter a man of perceived character and someone able to connect with the people.  Their politics and political philosophies are very different though, and there is plenty of work for the American voter in the days, weeks and months ahead.

Happy New Year everyone!  May 2008 bring you closer to the realization of your Dreams!

As our planet continues its journey around the Sun, and as humanity continues to evolve, we must pray that the evolution of consciousness (Spirit, Heart, Wisdom and Awareness) keeps up with the evolution of technology.  As I’ve written, the danger for the latter to outpace the former raises profound concerns, especially with the dangers of our weaponry and the harshness of certain ideologies in different places.

Every now and then, champions surface to the fore who uphold humanity’s highest and noblest values:  Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Robert F. Kennedy, Mother Theresa, Pope John Paul II, the Dalai Lama…and, a shining star whose Light was just recently dimmed on the physical plane - Mrs. Benazir Butto.   She was a true champion of democracy, and her courage in the face of danger was of the stuff true martyrs to higher purpose are made.  It deeply saddened me to learn of her assassination, and hopefully her death will find redemption in the struggle she fought for - to bring the voice of expression and power to the people.

The only strong voice I heard among politicians in this country regarding Mrs. Butto’s murder, was that of Senator Joseph Biden.  He called for the resignation of President Pervez Musharraf, and the appointment of an interim coalition government that would pave the way for meaningful and honest elections in Pakistan.   That was a strong statement, and it reflects the views of a strong democrat (small “d”) whose experience in international affairs combined with a deep appreciation for democratic values shines through.

Every candidate has particular assets.  With Joe Biden it is deep experience in international affairs.  With Senator Hillary Clinton it is broad legislative experience and considerable experience with domestic and international issues based on her White House years as First Lady.  With Rudy Guiliani it is finely honed and effective management skills as the once-Mayor of New York, and a steadfast focus on the issue of Islamic terrorism.  With Senator Barack Obama it is “the vision thing.”

Listening to Obama on the stump, I’m frequently in awe of his amazing ability to inspire, to see the larger picture, to articulate a vision that contextualizes where as a democracy we come from, what we’ve inherited in vision and values from our Founding Fathers, how our struggle to achieve the ideals of the Declaration has evolved and must be ever-perfecting, and how our commitment as a nation to these values - the values of civil and human rights, freedom of expression,  and unity in community, demands continuing commitment.

Obama, it seems to me, has captured some of the hopefulness of the late Senator Robert Kennedy, whose articulation of the vision of the American story as evolving and perfecting based on its founding principles, was truly inspirational.  Senator Kennedy reminded us of who we were and who we can become - and his greatness, it seems to me, was forged out of tragedy (the deaths of his brother and Reverend King).

Obama carries that inspiration in his message, in his own unique and profoundly articulate way.  I think only a few presidents have used the bully pupit of the Presidency as an inspirational pupit in such a way, to capture in energy the Spirit and potential of the Republic - Abraham Lincoln, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, and Ronald Reagan.  Whether one agrees with their politics or not, these men came in at points in time where the American public needed a certain “reminder” of who we are, where we come from and where we’re going.   And they each articulated their messages in unique ways, and sometimes via a new paradigm of seeing.  Senator Obama has that gift - and through the prism of a paradigm that is fresh, he seems to view political reality in a way that offers new approaches to old problems.  This way includes a willingness to deal with our “enemies” with fresh eyes and an openness for dialogue.

I watched C-Span the other night, where Bill Clinton delivered a speech to Iowans in support of his wife Hillary as presidential material.   The former president spoke extemporaneously for about an hour, without notes. 

I was in awe of the man’s brilliance, his deep understanding and familiarity with the issues, his uncanny ability to present his knowledge in an almost folksy way - a way that reached people.   I thought, this man is a genius - in his breadth of knowledge of domestic and international issues, and in his ability to communicate.  He assured the audience that Hillary, in terms of her experience, her knowledge and her wisdom, was the best-equipped of the presidential candidates.

I came away listening to Mr. Clinton in true admiration for his knowledge and his communications skills.   If he was accurately describing Hillary in terms of ability and competence, he was certainly describing someone who could measure up in spades to the awesome task of the presidency.

The one thing that I did not feel in listening to Bill, however, was that “vision thing”.  I was deeply impressed with his ability, and his articulation of his wife’s ability, but I was not inspired to the extent that I have been by listening to Senator Obama.  I think Oprah is right - Obama has something special.

This is not to say that the Illinois Senator has a claim on victory as of this moment.  For the issue of his experience, or lack thereof, is one deserving debate and dialogue.

If only Mrs. Clinton can summon up a vision of equal force - or if only we the American public could benefit from a candidate who comprises both the adroitness of a Bill and Hillary Clinton, the experience of a Senator Joe Biden, the vision of a Senator Barack Obama - and perhaps a dash of the commanding focus and strength of Rudy Guiliani with respect to dealing with our adversaries.

If I were advising the Clintons, I would advise them to inspire more from a place of vision.  If I were advising Senator Obama, I’d counsel more of the same with respect to vision and inspiration, but balancing that with greater immersion in concrete issues.  Joe Biden, it seems to me, can benefit more with an articulation of the ”vision thing.”  And Rudy?  He ought to balance the bellicose stance with reminding us as Americans of who we are, and where we’re going. 

A people who know who they are and where they’re headed is the nation’s greatest source of strength.

This is a peak time for charitable giving. I once represented a fine organization called Geneva Global, which represents wealthy donors by investigating and conducting due diligence of charitable projects in Third World countries, seeking out those with a successful track record of performance.  Geneva then recommends an assortment of these proven projects to donors, who after choosing their favorites, subsequently have the philanthropic advisory group facilitate their donations directly to these grassroots charities, by-passing umbrella organizations or governments, and avoiding possible corruption and bureaucratic ineptitude.

The man who made Geneva Global what it is today, and who was CEO when I represented it, Eric Thurman, a brilliant and dedicated humanitarian, and who is soon launching an important Philadelphia-based non-profit called The Christian Community Network, co-authored a book with Phil Smith entitled, “A Billion Bootstraps:  Microcredit, Barefoot Banking and the Business Solution for Ending Poverty” (McGraw-Hill).  This is an important book providing an overview and thorough “soup to nuts” introduction to donors about “microcredit” - one of the most effective forms of charitable giving, especially in Third World countries.

Co-author Phil Smith, a former Oklahoma and Texas oilman, and very astute businessman, conducted in-depth research about the most effective forms of philanthropy - and came to the conclusion that microcredit was the most proven and bang-for-the-buck effective, above the many others he considered.

With microcredit, a donor provides a small business loan of anywhere between $25 to $2,000 to a poor working man or woman (usually woman) in a developing country, someone who has suffered impoverishment by either being unemployed or underemployed.  By empowering such a person to start-up her own little business(perhaps a fruit and vendor stand in the marketplace, or little tailor shop, or canteen), the donor creates an entrepreneur who now becomes embarked on the path of self-sufficiency, dignity and economic freedom for herself and her family.  The additional benefit of microcredit is that the loans, which are paid back at fair market value rates, are recycled, thus enabling a new fledgling entrepreneur to get started in a similar fashion.

“A Billion Bootstraps” is a book I have already recommended in this blog, and recommend again to those of you considering an effective and powerful way to make your donations effective.  Bootstraps also has a chapter which recommends various humanitarian organizations that specialize in microcredit - or microfinance, as it is also known.

If your donations are smaller, but you wish for them nonetheless to have moxie, you might also consider providing microcredit support via a website called “www.kiva.org” - a wonderful way to target your giving to specific projects that have undergone due diligence.

All of this said, there are thousands of other charitable organizations doing magnificent work in the world, both domestically within the USA, and internationally.  How do you know which of them are the most effective in terms of fulfilling their respective missions, and best-run?

An impressive website called “www.CharityNavigator.org” evalutes charities and assigns a rating to each, designating up to four stars for the best.  I encourage you to explore this site.  You can either enter a charity you are considering into their search engine, to discover if indeed they’re doing a good job.  Or, you can hunt for an effective high-star-rated charity within a category that resonates with your interest.

For example, if supporting the work of homeless shelters appeals to you, you can discover four star organizations such as the Bay Area Rescue Mission in Richmond, Georgia; or Bridge Communities in Glen Ellyn, Illinois; or the Chicago Coalition for the Homeless in Chicago…and many others.  My recommendation is to always look for those that have earned a four-star ranking.

You may be interested in helping the work of food banks.  Organizations such as the Atlanta Community Food Bank in Atlanta, Georgia; or the Alameda County Community Food Bank in Oakland, California; or Channel One Food Bank in Rochester, Minnesota - and many other food banks with four star ratings, could be worth your consideration.  Perhaps you can start with the one right in your very own community.

If you wish to support non-profits that help and enhance the lives of the intellectually disabled, I can think of no better an organization than Best Buddies International (www.bestbuddies.org) in Miami - and of course it has earned four stars by Charity Navigators.  That organization is headed by Anthony Kennedy Shriver, son of Sargent Shriver, the first Director of the Peace Corps, and Eunice Kennedy, founder of The Special Olympics.  This would be a great way to support and embrace the life of an intellectually disabled individual - but always a human with great heart and the need to give and to grow.

Then, there are fine youth development and crisis non-profits like the Arthur Ashe Youth Tennis & Education organization in Philadelphia.  There is also KidsPeace:  The National Center for Kids Overcoming Crisis, in Orefield, Pennsylvania.

In terms of international development, both poverty alleviation, medical support and agricultural development, look for great four-star organizations like Americares; American Jewish World Service; ACCION International; HOPE International; FINCA International; World Vision; CURE International; Compassion International; Grassroots International; and Oxfam America.

Finally, if your heart is in the humane treatment of animals, Albert Schweitzer said:  “Until he extends his circle of compassion to all living things, man will not himself find peace.”  And Gandhi said:  “The greatness of a nation can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”  If your passion is to instill more respect and reverence for animals, especially the abandoned dogs and cats in our animal shelters, you may decide to support such four-star rated no-kill shelters like Animal Haven in Flushing, New York; or the Animal Rescue League of Boston.  But there are many dozens more around the country that are no-kill, and need your help.  Or, you may decide to start-up a committee of your own within your own community, and work to influence a no-kill policy at your own local shelter.  You may wish, too, to support the work of the Humane Society of the United States in Washington, D.C., which advocates no-kill as a policy for healthy and adoptable dogs and cats. 

However you decide to give, do give - and give smartly…from the heart.