PR Straight Talk

New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristoff wrote an important piece, published on April 8th, entitled, “Humanity Even For NonHumans”.  Cudos to him for bringing the suffering - and rights - of farm animals - to the spotlight.  In his blog on the same topic, I addressed a kindred issue - the suffering of shelter animals.  Here’s that comment, posted by The Times:

Dear Mr. Kristoff:

Thank you so much for this important contribution to raising consciousness about the plight of farm animals.

The late great Dr. Albert Schweitzer said: “Until he extends his circle of compassion to all living things, man will not himself find peace.”

Another related very important issue is the inhumane treatment of dogs and cats at so many animal shelters across the country. Here in Broward County, Florida, at the Animal Care & Regulation Division’s two animal shelters run by the Broward County Commissioners, 10,000 dogs, puppies, cats and kittens are euthanized each year. The vast majority of them are healthy and adoptable. The core of the problem is an unspoken but very real attitude of irreverence for the lives of these precious, feeling creatures. “ACARD” or “Animal Control” as it is known, is in actuality a disposal unit for the elimination - killing - of these animals.

Until they are killed, and due to this disposal attitude, their treatment is abominable - many are crunched in too small cages, making it impossible for them to move about; too many are not given the exercise they vitally need; they cannot be touched, thus lack the tactile experience all living creatures need for emotional and physical well-being; food is awful. Virtually all of the animals develop kennel cough, which can lead to pneumonia. A sweet Yorkie I recently adopted was near death with pneumonia.

Furthermore, no real effort is made to bring traffic to these denizens of death, allowing for adoptions to increase. Few know its location (the main facility is near the Ft. Lauderdale Airport). Despite my past urgings for large and colorful signings leading to the place, please have been ignored. Offers to provide free publicity (I am a media relations specialist), which would include public service spots on radio and television, articles in newspapers, stories on radio and tv - these offers have been ignored.

I am the son of Holocaust survivors; and I tell you that facilities like Animal Care and Regulation in Broward County is much like an Auschwitz. There is no regard for the lives or feelings of these dogs and cats - and they are truly unconditionally loving and feeling beings who only seek to be treated in a humane and kind manner. “Kindness” is not a word within the vocabulary of the uncaring bureaucrats and politicians responsible for this dreadful institution.

To make matters worse, they feign concern - but to see the actions that take place - and the gross inhumanity that exists there - this concern is clearly nothing more than a subterfuge.

In 2006, when I first became aware of conditions at ACARD, I wrote an article for The Best Friends Network. It describes the cruelty at this institution, and I am sad to report that the essence of the story has remain unchanged. That article can be found at:

http://network.bestfriends.org/news/postdetail.aspx?np=7511

A website I created, http://www.CompassionateAnimalFriendsofBroward.org also describes the critical situation, and provides an opportunity to electronically sign a Petition to the Broward Commissioners, demanding change.

Kindness must extend to all living beings who share this planet with us. We are all part of the Great Circle of Life. We are all connected. We all live, breathe and feel. We must advocate for them, for they cannot advocate for themselves. But their purity, and the unconditional love they give to us, stands as a call for us to act, to act now and to act with compassion.

VALUES IN PR

This is a page you may not ordinarily see on a public relations site.  Many p.r. people are “invisible” when it comes to publicly taking a stand about their own values and what they believe in – or don’t believe in.  They hold a position of seeming neutrality in this area.

For some, this may be to maximize the field of potential clients they can attract, and consequently, to maximize the potential for doing business. The potential negative consequence of this decision is that it has created the perception of some p.r. professionals as “flacks” and “ambulence chasers.”  

For others, withholding a statement of values and beliefs is necessary in order to spotlight their clients’ values. They rightly hold that the mission of public relations professionals is to create compelling communications programs on behalf of their clients’ positions – not their own.  They believe that the most effective p.r. representation, therefore, is to represent virtually any kind of client, while remaining personally detached from that client’s point-of-view (even while exhuberantly presenting that view to editors and producers).   Some of the professionals in this latter grouping may even believe that by adhering to this position, they support the constitutional right of freedom of speech (on behalf of their clients).

While I believe there is merit to this latter position, if it is sincerely held, I come down in a slightly different place.  I believe that, for me, the times we live in make it necessary to enunciate a basic personal and professional declaration of “What I believe and what I value.”   For while I see myself as an advocate for my client’s core values and fundamental self-interests, as a citizen of my country and the world – like yourself - I also see myself as an advocate of core values that guide the decisions I make about who I  represent.

The first experience I can remember as a public relations professional that layed track for this position was just prior to the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant accident in Pennsylania.  I was a young rookie, working for a major public relations agency (my first p.r. job).  I was asked to be part of a strategic brainstorming meeting with a new client, a major corporation involved in energy and electronics.  The client informed us that its nuclear power plants were one hundred percent safe from any mishaps, and asked us to craft a communications program that boldly enunciated that position.

When I raised my hand and asked the question, “Can you back up that position with sound scientific proof and evidence?” - I noticed that some of the more senior staffers in that meeting seemed to cringe, annoyed I had asked this question. I also suggested that a “crisis media plan” be developed in advance in case the client was confronted with some sudden catastrophe which required damage control.  I explained to the client that it was necessary to take a “devil’s advocate” stance, in order to build a stronger campaign which anticipated the tough questions that would inevitably be posed by adversaries of nuclear power plants, or in case of human error “in spite of  the client’s insistence that nothing could go wrong.”

The client “laughed me down,” saying that the proof was so “self-evident,” it wasn’t necessary to further research the issue or to prepare for a problem.

Two months later, the Three Mile Island Nuclear Power Plant accident occurred. That plant was owned by this particular client.  When the media tried to approach the client for a statement, it took days before the client was ready to make an intelligent statement to the press, let alone answer tough questions.

It was at this moment that I realized four very important things:

(1)    It is the public relations professional’s responsibility to help the client anticipate problems in advance – and counsel the client on how to deal with      problems when they occur.

(2)    Clients can make mistakes, and should admit mistakes when they occur.

(3)  A good public relations professional must have the courage to follow his or her gut instincts and intuition, as long as they are honest and sincere – even in the face of raising questions the client may find unappealing.

(4)    Public relations agencies and professionals should think twice before representing clients they consciously know have services, products or ideas that may undermine the quality-of-life or higher public good, irrespective of the fees that client may be willing to pay the agency or professional.

In subsequent years, I developed a list of such “value statements” that ultimately turned into a kind of credo.  Here’s the rest:

*    Be open to representing clients which have services and products that minimally pose no hazards to public safety.  Just as a potential client will investigate whether  you as a public relations professional are right for them, you have every right to investigate whether they are right for you.

*    The world is in a critical stage in its development.  It needs advocates who embrace the values of both the American Declaration of Independence, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights…advocates who are  willing to take a stand for the enrichment of life – and public relations advocates who represent   clients that enhance the quality of life with a view of life’s sacredness…clients that enrich the environment, human health and well-being, human rights (and animal rights)…clients that promote the advancement of human economic, creative and social potential, especially children’s potential…clients that advance human understanding, tolerance and respect      for the richness of, and differences  in, cultures, religions, genders, races, ethnicities and ideas…clients who if they       advance technology, also advance the progress of the human heart.

*    Take a stand for the Earth and the “wholeness” and intelligence of Nature.  Take a stand for the advancement of world culture while equally respecting the  uniqueness and sacredness of every individual human being, and the healthy, enriching uniqueness of  regional and national cultures.

*    Be suspicious of any group, organization or individual who believe they, he or she have “all the answers” or who wish to impose or project these  “answers” onto others.  Veer instead towards those who present creative solutions to specific problems; and judge these solutions on the basis as to whether they expand human human happiness and fulfillment

*    Consider groups, organizations or individuals who have creative or innovative ideas, services or products that enrich human life; or that have winning ideas, services or products that can help empower the poor or heal the sick.

*    Represent businesses that conduct themselves ethically, that deliver products or services that help, and don’t harm; that are businesses that invest in their people and contribute to the health and well-being of the communities in which they do business, both domestically and internationally; and that are sensitive to  the promotion of the human and civil rights of women and minorities, especially among their own employees and the customers they serve.

Five months have passed since the last entry here.  In that time, Obama won the election and is about to be inaugurated as President in two days.  McCain gave what I think was the greatest concession speech of all time - full of heart, graciousness, honor and authentic patriotism.  Here it is:

MCCAIN: Thank you. Thank you, my friends. Thank you for coming here on this beautiful Arizona evening.

My friends, we have — we have come to the end of a long journey. The American people have spoken, and they have spoken clearly.

A little while ago, I had the honor of calling Sen. Barack Obama to congratulate him. 

To congratulate him on being elected the next president of the country that we both love.

In a contest as long and difficult as this campaign has been, his success alone commands my respect for his ability and perseverance. But that he managed to do so by inspiring the hopes of so many millions of Americans who had once wrongly believed that they had little at stake or little influence in the election of an American president is something I deeply admire and commend him for achieving.

This is an historic election, and I recognize the special significance it has for African-Americans and for the special pride that must be theirs tonight.

I’ve always believed that America offers opportunities to all who have the industry and will to seize it. Sen. Obama believes that, too.

But we both recognize that, though we have come a long way from the old injustices that once stained our nation’s reputation and denied some Americans the full blessings of American citizenship, the memory of them still had the power to wound.

A century ago, President Theodore Roosevelt’s invitation of Booker T. Washington to dine at the White House was taken as an outrage in many quarters.

America today is a world away from the cruel and frightful bigotry of that time. There is no better evidence of this than the election of an African-American to the presidency of the United States.

Let there be no reason now … Let there be no reason now for any American to fail to cherish their citizenship in this, the greatest nation on Earth.

Sen. Obama has achieved a great thing for himself and for his country. I applaud him for it, and offer him my sincere sympathy that his beloved grandmother did not live to see this day. Though our faith assures us she is at rest in the presence of her creator and so very proud of the good man she helped raise.

Sen. Obama and I have had and argued our differences, and he has prevailed. No doubt many of those differences remain.

These are difficult times for our country. And I pledge to him tonight to do all in my power to help him lead us through the many challenges we face.

I urge all Americans … I urge all Americans who supported me to join me in not just congratulating him, but offering our next president our goodwill and earnest effort to find ways to come together to find the necessary compromises to bridge our differences and help restore our prosperity, defend our security in a dangerous world, and leave our children and grandchildren a stronger, better country than we inherited.

Whatever our differences, we are fellow Americans. And please believe me when I say no association has ever meant more to me than that.

It is natural. It’s natural, tonight, to feel some disappointment. But tomorrow, we must move beyond it and work together to get our country moving again.

We fought — we fought as hard as we could. And though we feel short, the failure is mine, not yours.

1  |  2  |   Next Page >>

AUDIENCE: No!

MCCAIN: I am so…

AUDIENCE: (CHANTING)

MCCAIN: I am so deeply grateful to all of you for the great honor of your support and for all you have done for me. I wish the outcome had been different, my friends.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: We do, too (OFF-MIKE)

MCCAIN: The road was a difficult one from the outset, but your support and friendship never wavered. I cannot adequately express how deeply indebted I am to you.

I’m especially grateful to my wife, Cindy, my children, my dear mother … my dear mother and all my family, and to the many old and dear friends who have stood by my side through the many ups and downs of this long campaign.

I have always been a fortunate man, and never more so for the love and encouragement you have given me.

You know, campaigns are often harder on a candidate’s family than on the candidate, and that’s been true in this campaign.

All I can offer in compensation is my love and gratitude and the promise of more peaceful years ahead.

I am also — I am also, of course, very thankful to Gov. Sarah Palin, one of the best campaigners I’ve ever seen … one of the best campaigners I have ever seen, and an impressive new voice in our party for reform and the principles that have always been our greatest strength … her husband, Todd, and their five beautiful children … for their tireless dedication to our cause, and the courage and grace they showed in the rough and tumble of a presidential campaign.

We can all look forward with great interest to her future service to Alaska, the Republican Party and our country.

To all my campaign comrades, from Rick Davis and Steve Schmidt and Mark Salter, to every last volunteer who fought so hard and valiantly, month after month, in what at times seemed to be the most challenged campaign in modern times, thank you so much. A lost election will never mean more to me than the privilege of your faith and friendship.

I don’t know — I don’t know what more we could have done to try to win this election. I’ll leave that to others to determine. Every candidate makes mistakes, and I’m sure I made my share of them. But I won’t spend a moment of the future regretting what might have been.

This campaign was and will remain the great honor of my life, and my heart is filled with nothing but gratitude for the experience and to the American people for giving me a fair hearing before deciding that Sen. Obama and my old friend Sen. Joe Biden should have the honor of leading us for the next four years.

(BOOING)

Please. Please.

I would not — I would not be an American worthy of the name should I regret a fate that has allowed me the extraordinary privilege of serving this country for a half a century.

Today, I was a candidate for the highest office in the country I love so much. And tonight, I remain her servant. That is blessing enough for anyone, and I thank the people of Arizona for it.

AUDIENCE: USA. USA. USA. USA.

MCCAIN: Tonight — tonight, more than any night, I hold in my heart nothing but love for this country and for all its citizens, whether they supported me or Sen. Obama — whether they supported me or Sen. Obama.

I wish Godspeed to the man who was my former opponent and will be my president. And I call on all Americans, as I have often in this campaign, to not despair of our present difficulties, but to believe, always, in the promise and greatness of America, because nothing is inevitable here.

Americans never quit. We never surrender.

We never hide from history. We make history.

Thank you, and God bless you, and God bless America. Thank you all very much.

——————————————————————————————————————–

It never made me prouder to be an American than to listen to those words by Senator McCain - a good man, and a true patriot.

Many wish the President-elect well, yours truly included.  As readers of this blog know, I supported Senator McCain - but now it’s time for all people of good will to pray for the success of our new President.   Indeed, the election of the first African American president is a major breakthrough for this country, an achievement that comes on the historical heels of much struggle and represents a victory for America and the unifying vision embedded in the Declaration, in the heart and mind of Abraham Lincoln, in the long years of the fight for Civil Rights, and in the realization of Martin Luther King’s “I Have A Dream” speech.

Since this blog was last posted, a great economic crisis revealed itself - to everyone’s enormous surprise.  It is far from resolved; and let us pray it will heal sooner than later.  This is perhaps Obama’s greatest challenge, and all Americans wish him well as he proceeds with an unprecedented-in-size Stimulus Package. 

The international situation is full of crisis - what to do about Iran, the Israel-Gaza confrontation, the situation in Pakistan, the Terrorist challenge, how to withdraw from Iraq with honor - and more.  I applaud the appointment of Hilary Clinton as Secretary of State.  As readers know, I supported her candidacy for President prior to her loss in the primaries.   Whatever Obama’s motivation - and I think there were political motivations and others on his mind - I like to think that her appointment was above all a reflection of his estimation of her strength, and her competence.   She will help his Administration, and the country - though of course the “bottom line” will rest with Obama.

He was clear.  He was concise.  He was unambiguous.  He was certain about the response to evil (Islamic fascism) in the world - “defeat it.”  He was relaxed.  He could be light and funny.  He was a superb storyteller.  He spoke unpretentiously about the courage required as a prisoner-of-war in Vietnam and the painful but necessary moral choice to refuse release while those like his friend, detained two years longer than he, remained imprisoned.

This was John McCain at his best:  passionate, defender of the Constitution, patriot, hero, a man whose story revealed a dedication to higher causes beyond self-interest, a man clearly committed to the safety and advancement of the United States and the principles it rests on.

Most of all, this was a man who wreaked honesty and integrity.  His response and stand on virtually every question and issue raised by Rick Warren of the Saddleback Church was unambiguous - and seemed to rest on deep conviction and solid values.

This came through particularly in his response to the question about abortion - he’s pro-Life; and his understanding of the complexity of the issue and his ability to nuance it based on compassion for those suffering with life-wrenching illnesses such as Lou Gehrig’s disease and Alzheimers, revealed itself in his advocacy of stem cell research (while pointing to skin cells as an imminent alternative solution).

The brilliance of the “performance” cannot be understated.  For in a one hour interview, the character and intelligence of John McCain came through…compellingly, convincingly.   It was clear that this is a man who as President would, to the best of his ability, both defend our democratic - small “d” rights (as a prisoner-of-war, he pointed out, he experienced their absence), while balancing that with the staunch defense of America from terrorism and the radical Islamic threat.  My belief that McCain would do his best to protect civil rights through this delicate maneuvering is that he so forcefully criticized the use of torture as a means to extract confessions from possible terrorists.  He was a victim of torture in Vietnam.

He was equally compelling - whether one agreed with him or not - on his stand on energy solutions - offshore drilling and the development of the fullest range of energy alternatives.  He was also brief but persuasive in his exhortation to relieve all Americans of higher taxes.

What was exceptionally significant about the forum - a one hour conversation with each candidate - Obama and McCain - with the same questions put to each individual on the same stage and in exactly the same structured setting - is that the electorate had an  opportunity to compare each  man and each man’s character and mindset - with unprecedented clarity. 

Obama was typically eloquent and cerebral - but my own impression of the man was that he was more tenuous, and less compelling as a leader.  I sometimes had to ask myself, what did he really say?  There was more ambiguity in his responses.

While I do not agree with Senator McCain on all the issues, I was left feeling that I would trust America and her safety more to this man, than his opponent - and in spite of his opponent’s often idealistic rhetoric.

What was especially gratifying was to give each candidate one hour, in a conversational format.  That really allowed the viewer to experience the fuller depth and range of each person in terms of character, style, depth of conviction and values, centeredness and qualities of leadership.

Prior to this event, McCain had been a disappointment - but clearly this forum was ideal for him - and a gift to the American public - enabling them to see what in my opinion was the better candidate.  He may not read a teleprompter well - but he can articulate his views and articulate them well in a more impromptu, less contrived setting.  The man reveals himself.

McCain won from the standpoint of more effective communications style, depth of values, character and certainty as a potential leader.

For the first time, I thought, “McCain can win!”

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.

In political campaigns, message equals at least half of perception.  The other half has to do with style - a candidate’s personality, character, likeability, body language and the fluency of rhetoric, and identifiability.

When an economy is in decline, when jobs are down, and mortgages are on the line, message has much to do with economic solutions.  When gas prices are escalating out of proportion to the average person’s ability to manage his or her bills, the message is about lowering gas prices.  When the cost of health care and pharmaceuticals becomes unmanageable, health care is an important message.

When a country is in a long, seemingly endless and protracted war, message has to do with ending war - especially if losses outweigh gains.  

Last but not least, does the candidate inspire?  Offer hope?  A change of some kind?

Thus in the current primary battle, depending upon how voters perceive the messages of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama as they relate to the above issues, they will veer towards one or the other candidate based on their belief in that candidate’s sincerity, and their judgement that he or she can deliver on the message. 

The same holds true for John McCain.

But the degree of gravitation towards one candidate or the other will also be based on the other major variable - that of style.   Is the candidate likeable?  Is there a resonance with the way the candidate moves and gestures?  Does the delivery of language resonate?  Is there something about the character that moves the voter? 

Where in the assortment of all the above variables does the voter identify?

With respect to Hillary Clinton, clearly many women identify with her as the first major woman candidate.  Voters are also impressed with her tenacity, her strength and persistence, and her experience.  Those who support a universal health care system support Hillary’s plan.   “Message” and “gender” and “character” play important roles.

With Barack Obama, African Americans identify with the first serious candidate of color running for office.  Many Americans resonate with the Obama message of hope and bringing people together; and of a new kind of “cleaner” politics that presents itself as void of typical political games, and a willingness to talk to our enemies without preconditions. Many find Obama’s disdain for the war attractive.  Many are attracted to a high level of rhetoric that speaks to our nobler natures.   “Message” and “race” and “rhetoric” are high on the perception ladder.

During the Republican primary, those voters were clearly looking for Conservative messages, and were high on staying the course in Iraq, and a strong posture against terrorism.  Message was most important.  John McCain prevailed.

Perception of message and style clearly will sway voters in one direction or the other; and the convincability of message and the resonance with style will produce a President in the national election. 

What it seems to me hasn’t been tested enough is the vetting of one particular candidate.  How well do we really know Senator Obama?  How good a job has the media done in helping the electorate by investigating him with a real thoroughness deserving of the highest office in the land?  The Rev. Wright affair and Obama’s extremely tardy denunciation of the man after 20 years of close relationship with him; and the presence of advisors with stances contrary to Obama’s public posturing (e.g., anti-Israel advisor General McTweak versus Obama’s public declaration of staunch support for Israel) create doubts about the Illinois Senator’s credibility.  So do his pronouncement that he will meet with harsh adveraries without preconditions.  Hints of Chamberlain and Hitler?  He will say anything, it seems, in his typically articulate and mellifluent manner, to get elected.

If there has been insufficient vetting, then does that candidate deserve the electorate’s blind trust, message and style aside?  To put it another way, how can a candidate be accountable to the electorate in terms of the viability of message, if there is a lack of experience and lack of certainty as to that person’s background (in measuring up to the words of the message)?

The answer it seems to me is “No” and…”He can’t.”  And given this litmus test, Senators Clinton and McCain are known “commodities” with proven records of long standing, but Senator Obama, who clearly has not been vetted enough, and with little experience on the national level, does not deserve voter trust or confidence, irrespective of message and style.  The stakes are simply too high.

This is one case when message and style seem shallow in importance compared to the certainty that comes from in-depth vetting.

That’s one p.r. man’s opinion - p.r. aside!

Some years ago, as I was meditating, I could hear birds singing just outside my window.  As the meditation went deeper, the bird sounds somehow grew stronger and richer, and as I simultaneously meditated and listened to the aviary song, I could feel my consciousness spiraling upward until I felt myself immersed and at-onement with a “sea of unity and love.”  As I came out of the meditation, I could feel the “sweetness” of life, and I remember thinking that the sounds of birds were a vehicle for Spirit.

Today, as I was having lunch at an outdoor Cafe, some birds - a sparrow, a robin, a parrot and a dove, came close to my table.  I threw them little bits of bread and I could see they were quite hungry and gobbled up the morsels.  I thought of my meditative experience of several years ago, and just as I had that remembrance, the dove hopped onto my table, looked at me, and then jumped onto my right hand.  I took a little piece of bread with my left hand, dropped it into the palm of my right hand as she remained perched on it, and she received the offer and began eating out of my hand.  As she ate, I continued to feed her.  When she had enough, she flew away.

I could not help but think, “a gift from Spirit.”  And a sign of life’s preciousness, and our connection to all of Life through Spirit.

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