Thoughts on disasters, the 24-hour news cycle, and unrealistic expectations…

In light of the tragic BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, there is once again an expectation amongst many Americans that a disaster of this magnitude can be fixed on demand within the framework of media talking points. The media is increasingly guilty of dramatizing events which will garner ratings, many times at the expense of the true story on the ground. Some anchors continually look for out of context sound bites and headlines that invoke our worst fears and divisive partisan opinion. To feed a hungry 24 hour news cycle, the press today has no choice but to dig for every angle, whether factual or prophetic, in order to satisfy the needy “hear what we want to, not what we need to” segment of our population.

Take for example the reporting by the major news networks over the past weeks of the oil spill: despite the common knowledge that BP was not truthful as it relates to the nature of the leak, the media is acting as if they knew the extent of the disaster when it first occurred. Next, these news anchors, talk show hosts, and partisan politicians who are swayed heavily by media reports and not researched facts, begin to spread blame along various chains of command and agencies that, while they obviously care deeply about fixing the disaster at hand, were unable to properly respond because of BP’s initial, lobbyist and public relations ridden attempts to cover up the true enormity of the pipe breach.

Unlike Hurricane Katrina, where the scope of the disaster was evident upon the breach of the levees, this disaster occurred nearly a mile below the shore, with technology to monitor the leak provided by the very people responsible. Until the oil became clearly visible from Satellite imagery, and estimates as to the scope of the leak where attained, it was virtually impossible for the US Government to put a plan into action that was based on the tangible, truthful, calculation of the extent of the spill. In addition, President Obama has expressed a sense of urgency and engagement that was absent in President Bush’s response to the flooding as a result of the failure of the Army Corps of Engineers to properly construct the levee system above the city of New Orleans.

With light speed internet sites like Twitter, Facebook, Blogs, and major news sites facilitating rumors and opinion at the expense of realistic, fact based schools of thought; it has become increasingly difficult to translate the pace of responsible decision making to the 24 hour news cycle. A thought out decision must include good information that facilitates a proper response. Until BP accepted the ramifications of its transgressions, there was no good way to know what kind of disaster to expect. The fact that it was not until today that the estimate of the size of the spill was revealed, it should not surprise people that there were mistakes and oversights in the Federal Government’s handling of the situation. The prevalent media talking point, that this disaster could have been handled well with such a broken system at the MMS and lack of candor from BP, is clearly a product of the unrealistic expectations.

Thoughts on the state of air travel in 2010…

As I sit here in my seventh hour on standby at the world’s busiest airport, Atlanta-Hartsfield International, there could not be a better time to discuss the good, the bad, and the ugly aspects of modern air travel. Though many new amenities have been added to both the airplanes and airports, we have seen many of the older, comforting conveniences of the travel experience become compromised by our fight against terrorism and a struggling economy. That being said, the option to travel by air is also one that my generation, and especially the younger folks, take for granted for its overall expediency and savings on gas, room, and rest stop hotels. The travel experience that has arisen as a result of our modern day compromises can work well as long as there is no bad weather or lack of work ethic exhibited by airline and airport employees. Therein lies the problem.

In my experiences, I have encountered virtually every airport scenario; from trips that went off without a hitch, to instances of pure human error and complications with simple itineraries. But let’s take a look at today’s situation, one that is out of the control of the airline I am traveling, but still a scenario that occurs more and more due to a significant reduction in the number of flights airlines are taking in today’s economy. Due to bad weather in Atlanta, a ground stop was put on planes headed to AHI, therefore my flight sat idle for an hour on the tarmac in my departure city of San Antonio, Texas. With an hour between flights, my day was doomed even before takeoff, and when I arrived in Atlanta the plane to my destination, San Juan, Puerto Rico, was already pushing away from the gate. Upon seeking help from the airline, I was placed on standby for a flight eight hours later with no guarantee of reaching the destination I paid good money to reach.

This situation occurs every day across the world, as the reduction in flights has led to more and more standby instead of guaranteed seats. Despite having booked months in advance, a one hour ground stop was capable of ruining mine and the at least 60 or more other people who missed their connections and were not given a real ticket to continue their paired journey. In addition, should I not be given a ticket for the flight to the island, I will be forced to stay overnight and leave in the morning, costing not only a day of my trip, but also causing me to secure reservations on a weekend in Atlanta. I have nothing but love for the city, but for many travelers the lack of backup flights to ensure the arrival of paid customers is cause for much disdain for the airlines and for the respectability of air travel in general.

Add to this the fact that we have no choice but to go through the maze of security checks and long lines at customs because of the awful actions of others, and the traveler who goes through my experience has reason to complain about the nature of the current system. To their credit, the employees of the airline I am traveling on have done everything in their power to rectify the situation, but the bottom lines is that air travel is not the experience that it could and can be. In no other industry can you have a consumer not receive the service they paid a pretty penny for and get by with an “I’m sorry” and a rebooking to an inconvenient time or rerouted through an obscure destination as I was today. To be frank, there doesn’t seem to be a good solution to the problem at the present time. The fact that we depend so heavily on oil to power up our planes has put a stranglehold on tight budgets that could better go towards improving the experience, not cutting down on it at the expense of the consumer.

On the plane is no different. Airlines have moved towards an a la carte system for amenities, leaving much to be desired when compared to the steep cost of flying today. Instead of compensating for a lack of ready planes and pilots to ensure the soundness of itineraries, the airlines, for the most part, have decided that they can easily nickel and dime passengers at 35,000 feet. These growing practices, and the vastly unpopular checked baggage fees, have left the air travel consumer in the precarious position of having no choice but to deal with a shareholder first system of travel.

Though there is no doubt in my mind that the airlines will recover under a greener fueling system and an improving economic outlook, in the meantime the airline consumer is getting an increasingly raw deal. Sure, there have been times where my trips have been run to perfection, but the trend has been towards frustration and delay. More than half the time I have flown in the past two years, I have either faced a long weather related delay, or some other form of inconvenience for which the airlines have no good solution. It’s always something different, and it usually stems from human error in scheduling and delivering upon that itinerary. In our capitalist society, we expect those at the top to represent the best and brightest of their industry. In this department, airline travel has suffered greatly in a post 9/11 world. It should be interesting to see where the quality of air travel goes from here, but there is no doubt that it must improve to an acceptable level of dependability and bang for buck..

Thoughts on the plausibility of a Rand Paul/Sarah Palin Tea Party Presidential Ticket in 2012…

Though we are nearly two and a half years from the 2012 Presidential Election, it’s never too early to speculate upon which prospective candidates will represent the respective political parties on the national stage in two years. Despite their best efforts to reign in and unite with the Tea Party, the establishment of the Republican Party may have to deal with a difficult scenario in 2012. One that is eerily similar to 1992, where Ross Perot ate up the moderate conservative vote which helped the election to swing Bill Clinton’s way. The rightward shift of the conservative political spectrum has helped to legitimize the Tea Party, and with the primary victory of Rand Paul in Kentucky this past Tuesday, the Republican Party now has in its midst the first true Tea Party backed Senatorial candidate for office.

Now, the Republican Party leadership must choose either to embrace Paul and his followers, who beat their establishment candidate handedly, or they must stay Luke warm towards the more controversial elements of the Tea Party, and the radical rhetoric that could drive away moderate voters this fall and going forward. The quagmire for Republicans is that over the next two years there are likely to be more and more social conservative candidates emerging under the Tea Party label. The Tea Party will likely continue to eat away at the Republican Party’s socially conservative base. Therefore, as national trends continue to show increased interest in alternatives to the status quo, the Tea Party could be set to run third party candidates at the national level.

Should this game changing, third party presidential run occur, the two politicians who have been the most vocal advocates of the Tea Party message, and by far the most popular figures associated with the larger anti-big government movement, are the before mentioned Republican Rand Paul of Kentucky, and the keynote speaker of the first national Tea Party Convention, former Alaska Governor and Republican Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin. This potential star pairing would most likely garner the support of a significant portion of the socially conservative electorate, dealing a critical blow to the chances of the Republican Party ticket.

The electoral impact on the other side of the aisle would be negligible, as few moderate to die hard liberals would be inclined to support the social policies of a Tea Party ticket that is to the right of the Republicans in almost every way. Therefore, if a scenario such as Obama/Biden v Paul/Palin v Romney/Brown were to arise, it’s conceivable that the Republican ticket could lose as much as 20% of its voting base in the process. Much like in 1992, this division amongst conservatives would deliver an easy general election victory to Barack Obama and the Democrats, and thus leave the Republican Party no choice but to crawl home and start over again. Only this time, the challenge for Republicans is coming from the right, and not the center of the political spectrum.

Thoughts on the updated status of KTI’s most vulnerable Senate incumbents of 2010…

Recent primary results have stamped home the message that KTI’s most vulnerable Senate incumbents are in imminent trouble politically. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, our #1 Senator to watch, lost badly to Representative Joe Sestak by a margin of 8 percentage points. Senator Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas barely held a plurality in her 2 point victory and now faces a hotly contested runoff with Lieutenant Governor Bill Halter. And finally, just over a week ago, now former Senator Bob Bennett of Utah failed to make the top two at the Utah GOP Nomination Convention, falling to Tim Bridgewater Mike Lee, and stamping a fail sign on 3 out of the top 5 most vulnerable incumbents in 2010. Nonetheless, May has been a challenge for all politicians facing challenges from their left and right respectively.

The other two incumbents on our list, Richard Burr of North Carolina and Michael Bennet of Colorado, must focus intently on the looming November election. Despite Burr’s big primary win, and Bennet’s likely nomination in August, as freshman Senator’s they will face the growing challenge of a strong anti-incumbent sentiment amongst the American electorate. The bottom line is that change message of 2008 lives on in varying forms, and those who have positioned themselves to deliver that message in the face of establishment candidates are primed to win big come November. Both the Tea Party on the right, and MoveOn.org on the left, have already impacted the primary season, and the pressure has quickly shifted towards the few remaining moderates in Congress, a disappearing breed, to remain attractive to voters in an election season clearly defined by historic pressure from the fringes of both ends of the left-right political spectrum.

America’s social political dynamic has skewed so far to the right over the past thirty years that the liberal left is now positioned in the old center, and the socially conservative right is nearly radical in nature when compared to the conservatives of the 1980’s and prior. Therefore, this election cycle, where many moderate incumbents are vulnerable to defeat by their more liberal or conservative counterparts, should prove to be one that sees all five of KTI’s listed incumbents lose their respective seats in the Senate. These formerly popular individuals have seen the political tide shift to the fringes at their expense. Though the trends always seem to be corrected over time, the fact is that 2010 will go down as yet another change election. Americans are clearly done with the stalemate that has come to define the US Senate, and as victims of poor timing and a hostile political climate, those who are considered insiders, such as Specter and Bennet, are likely to find themselves sitting on the sidelines come 2011.

Sources:
http://www.politico.com/2010/maps/

Thoughts on individuals who fake their military service and the Military Valor Roll of Honor Act…

Today, prospective Senator, and current Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal became the latest example of shameful military misrepresentation. As the New York Times first reported, on more than one occasion, Blumenthal has claimed to have served in Vietnam while enlisted in the Marine Corps. While speaking to the families of veterans, he falsely referred to occasions and interactions while at war that he claimed helped to shape his identity. The problem is that he was actually in the Marine Corps Reserves, and never actually set foot in Vietnam. He used his false story for political gain, and in turn disrespected the veterans and families of the brave Marines who fought during the Vietnam War, and other wars throughout our nation’s history. The incredible sacrifice undertaken by the Marine Corps makes the story of another fake soldier one that brings great embarrassment on the guilty party and those associated with the lie. Despite his truthful enlistment in the Marine Corps Reserves, in taking his story to a level where he gained monetarily and politically from his misrepresentation, Blumenthal has added yet another vital piece of evidence to the case in favor of a federal law against public military misrepresentation. In fact, Blumenthal took five different deferments to avoid serving in the very war he states in his false stories of service. Therefore, especially in cases where congressionally administered awards are falsified, there needs to be a federal law on the books that makes illegal such a disregard for the honorable service and sacrifice of others.

H.R. 666, or the Military Valor Roll of Honor Act, which was introduced to the House Committee on Armed Services Representative by John Salazar back in January of 2009, seeks to set up a federal database of military award winners to act as a way of red flagging rogue individuals who seek to use fake military service for personal gain. By expanding the current system from a branch by branch approach to a national database approach, the argument can be made that it will be much easier to nail down individuals who are faking their service, regardless of the claim, and without regard for their location. Suspicious reporters and individuals could then look up the public database of real award winners on the internet, thus creating a deterrent for those who might consider lying about their military service. Families can then rest assured that their brave sons and daughters who have sacrificed it all for their country will not be taken advantage of by individuals such as Blumenthal and others. This long overdue bill can thank it’s origins to Doug Sterner, a decorated Vietnam veteran, and the man who has led the fight against the falsification of military service records and decorations. He has advocated for the families of veterans by helping them locate lost records and helping to bring down those who have stolen the valor of others. In 2005 he became notorious for his work on the Stolen Valor Act, which made a federal misdemeanor the unauthorized wearing, manufacture, sale or claim (either written or oral) of any military decorations and medals.

Now may be the perfect time for Congress to push this important legislation through, and in addition make the provisions of the Stolen Valor Act more specific in order to counter recent court challenges to its constitutionality on the grounds that the law is too broad. With elections coming up, and our soldiers returning home in the next few years, it is up to lawmakers to take the steps necessary to eliminating the practice of stolen valor and the prospering from false tales of glory. Politicians such as Blumenthal should be held to even a higher standard than ordinary citizens who use false stories for social gain. Given their public status, and their request for public and corporate funding for their campaigns, this kind of lying by politicians could easily qualify as a con artist. It is important to realize that these kinds of people, who are willing to pretend to be heroes despite the memories and families of the heroes themselves, must be held accountable by being banned from running for public office if found guilty of such an offense.

The Stolen Valor act, in addition to its current provisions, should address the sad yet preventable prospect of prospective and tenured politicians using false military service and heroism for their own selfish gain. As a member of the Marine Corps Reserve, the Attorney General of Connecticut, and a registered Democrat seeking a Senate seat this fall, Blumenthal should have known better than to think his lies about Vietnam would go unnoticed. His misrepresentations act as disturbing evidence that action must be taken to prevent this kind of trend from increasing in the coming years. Only by taking action preemptively to curb the faking of military service can we handle what should become an imminent problem upon return of hundreds of thousands of active duty and discharged troops to the US mainland. Though it seems unlikely, today’s story is sure to inspire those who feel passionately about protecting the memories, and honor of those who have served to take action and encourage Congress to proceed with the passing of the Military Valor Roll of Honor Act.

Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stolen_Valor_Act_of_2005
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h666/text
http://www.reportstolenvalor.org/