Citizen Brand

The tipping point

Jack Cafferty of CNN called this one in September.

Colin Powell endorsing Obama?

From Howard Fineman  at Newsweek :

Will Powell Endorse Obama?

Is Gen. Colin Powell getting ready to endorse Sen. Barack Obama on "Meet the Press" this Sunday? Two sources close to Powell, speaking on the condition of anonymity, predict that he will. On the record, a third, Ken Duberstein, a Washington lobbyist and former White House chief of staff, didn't flatly deny it. "You can say what you want," he told me, "but I didn't tell you that and neither did Powell."

OK, true enough.

If Powell does endorse Obama, racial pride will have something to do with it, which is understandable. Powell has been a trailblazer himself, and he admires Obama's unflappability and skill in rising so quickly through the ranks of American politics.

While Powell is personally close to McCain, and has been for many years, he seems to have taken a special interest in making himself available, behind the scenes and from time to time, to discuss foreign policy and defense issues with the novice Illinois senator. I believe Powell feels a responsibility to help Obama out, almost as if a member of the family were taking on a tough new job.

However, if Powell does endorse, it will have less to do with American sociology than world affairs. Powell simply has no use anymore--if he ever had any--for the neo-con cowboys he thinks misled the country (and him) into a mistaken and costly war in Iraq.

Powell has been careful in public not to criticize his colleagues in the Bush administration nor bluntly call the war a mistake. He came close to saying that at the Aspen Institute's Ideas Conference last summer, but remained droll and elliptical.

An endorsement of Obama would be an indirect but powerful way of expressing his resentments and regrets: refusing to support a fellow Republican who has very Bush-like ideas about how to make America more secure in a world of terror.

"It's not so much about race as it is about foreign policy," a friend of Powell's told me. "He thinks Obama has a lot to learn, but that he has the capacity."

To bailout or not to bailout

A quick post tonight.  As a lifelong communicator, I have a simple question to ask.  Was the "bailout bill" the best name to call this piece of legislation that failed to pass the House today?  I mean, seriously, how easy is it for anyone to vote for something called a "bailout bill?"

Congress proved all of its detractors right today.  That was the most mishandled, bungled strategy in the history of mishandled, bungled strategies.  And everyone is to blame.  Leaders on both sides failed to make sure they had the votes to secure passage of the poorly named legislation.  Or perhaps, neither side leveled with each other of what their true agendas were heading into the vote.

The need for change in Washington just solidified today.

It is time to get serious

The final act of the longest presidential campaign in the history of the United States has begun.

Our attention spans are being challenged.

Lipstick, hockey moms, pit bulls and pigs.  Is this really what we want to determine who our next President will be?

Are we left to listen to 30 second ads that go beyond distortion?

I celebrate my 53rd birthday on September 12.

All I want for my birthday is for my fellow Americans to wake up and tell the candidates, their confidantes, the pundits and the media to give us two months of serious discourse on what we need to do solve the real challenges we face.

It is time to get serious. 

Lazy media

It's funny how the media can't tell us enough about how political conventions these days are four day "infomercials" for the parties.  And yet, their coverage of them actually ends up validating them as infomercials.  The 24 hour cable networks keep repeating the same spin and punditry all day long and the three old school networks treat them as a four hour mini-series with a one hour episode each night.  Jon Stewart probably has it right.  Thanks to the Bulldog Reporter for this take on convention coverage via the host of "The Daily Show.

As Convention Coverage Locks In, Jon Stewart Hammers Mainstream Media for Lazy Campaign-Spin 'Regurgitation'

As Comedy Central's "Daily Show" descends on Denver for four days of coverage, Jon Stewart took after the "established" media for getting too cozy with candidates and regurgitating campaign spin when it comes to political coverage. In a breakfast with reporters, Stewart directed most of his ire at the 24-hour cable news networks, which he called "gerbil wheels," and said the media at-large had "abdicated" to what he called the "slow-witted beast." He said the never-ending television news cycle creates a "false sense of urgency" and forces reporters to "follow the veins that have been mined," instead of pursuing serious and in-depth reporting, CNN reports. Even as Stewart shredded reporters for, in his estimation, getting too cozy with and used by political candidates, he readily admitted that candidates flock to his show to attract his much sought after younger audience. "It's just one part of their sales pitch," he said, reports CNN political producer Sasha Johnson. Stewart said he found neither Sens. McCain or Obama particularly funny and it was "absolutely irrelevant" which one takes the White House because "the jokes will be there." He dismissed criticism that comedians are having a hard time joking about Obama because of his race and said "the age joke with McCain is somewhat meaningless because it's already trite." The choice of Joe Biden as Obama's runningmate, Stewart said, was refreshing because of the Delaware senator's large personality and endless possibility for jokes. "Biden is really nice. His style is so effusive and unguarded," Stewart said. "He's emotion plus." Stewart said politicians in recent campaigns are "animatronic" because all of the "humanity has been managed out of campaigns." He referenced the back-and-forth during the Pennsylvania Democratic primary over Obama's lack of bowling skills. "It's stunning where this election is going to be decided on," he said. "Or what we allow it to be decided on."

Back to School

I didn't intend to take the summer off from Citizen Brand.  It just happened.  But I'm going to take that one small step back into the 'sphere and see how it feels.It was a great summer.  A lot of successful work and some great play made it a full season.  The weather in the heartland has been rare.  More rain than usual and less heat.  If we had more summers like this we would attract tourists.

I will write more about two incredible trips to the Rockies this summer and provide some art to go with it.  But I can't resist a trip down the political lane tonight as Citizen Brand returns to the fray.  The political conventions are upon us and as of this writing, we still don't know who Masters Obama and McCain will select as their running mates.  Speculation runs rampant and conventional wisdom is all over the board.  Let's dissect what we know to date.

McCain floated Tom Ridge, a social moderate, and it landed with a thud among the right wing of the GOP.  The right would embrace Romney, but why is it that he left the race as fast as he did when he had all the dough in the world?  McCain has entertained young governors and the rumor of Secretary of State Condeleeza Rice rears up a couple of times a week.  

  Which brings us to Obama.  Conventional wisdom currently centers on Joe Biden.  He would be a solid choice.  Biden shores up the gray hair some think Obama needs on the ticket.  But does he communicate change?  Evan Bayh and Tim Kaine round out the white guys Obama has on his short list.  But what about a woman?  A black man and a woman would be about as different - well let's face it - that would be completely different than the previous 44 administrations that have served as the executive branch since we became a nation.

Our own Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius has remained on the Obama Veep list, likely as a placeholder for a woman.  And that brings us to Hillary Clinton.  The first woman to run a serious and near successful campaign for President of the United States.  After all the noise of the past year and the incredible campaign that Obama and Clinton waged to try to win the Democratic nomination, there may be only one answer to the question of who Obama should select as his running mate.  I can make the case that Hillary gives the Democrats the best chance to reclaim the White House in November.

It was both Obama and Clinton that drove up voter registration and raised record amounts of money.  Obama certainly led the way in both, but looking back, it's fair to say that the combination of the first serious African American and the first serious woman to run for President energized the electorate together and brought hundreds of thousands of new voters into the fold.

Yes, I have opined more than once that it was time to end the two decades of Bush, Clinton, Bush.  But the practical politician in me says Obama/Clinton could prove to be the ticket that has Obama raising his right hand and taking the oath in January, 2009.

Game on.  The final chapter of this epic and important election is about to unfold.

Of Bobby and Barack

It took 40 years.  America has fought four wars, one of which is still raging.  The world is a remarkably different place in June of 2008 versus June of 1968, but there is one very strong connection.  Barack Obama is the true heir to the presidency that should have been.

My personal political hero is Bobby Kennedy.  It has taken me four decades to find a candidate that I believe will make the kinds of changes we need.  Bobby Kennedy would have been a much different president than even his brother was.  Barack Obama will be a much different president than any we have had in the four decades since that turbulent year of 1968.  A year that shaped a generation's thinking and actions, including yours truly.

And yet Obama will mean much more than even RFK could have hoped to mean.  His is a truly historic campaign as was that of his worthy competitor, Hillary Clinton.  But the Clinton campaign did not comport itself consistently as one that deserved the historic tag.  It was at times difficult to watch and listen to the Clinton campaign.  In 1992, the Clintons represented change.  It was a change that was never fully realized as scandal and impeachment politics sidetracked the promised progress.

And now there are two.  McCain and Obama.  An aging war hero versus the young gun.  Two United States Senators.  Two men once again when many expected the first woman to grace the presidential stage.  The questions begin.  Can Obama convince Hillary's female and white male base to stay in the Democratic fold? Will the hundreds of thousands of young Americans who have been energized by Obama stay tuned and vote in November?  Will John McCain figure out a way to distance himself from his promise to stay in Iraq for 100 years?  Will Obama pick Hillary for VP?  Would she take it or tell him to take a hike?

But those are the questions of practical politics.  Obama has raised our sights to look beyond the mundane day to day politics.  He is challenging us to step up, get engaged and embrace real change.  He is a reminder to this child of the 60's of a time when politicians could be respected and be believed.

It took 40 years.

The Red Phone

As we head to the next showdown in the best political race in a generation, Rich Harwood has a nice take on the ad campaigns of Obama and Clinton evoking the fear tactics of the Walter Mondale's Red Phone or Reagan's Bear in the Woods ads of years gone by.  I will reprint it below or you can link to it here .  Rich is a smart guy who makes you think beyond the answers of the moment and focus on what can be in the moments of tomorrow.

It’s jolting and ominous. Indeed, the dueling Clinton-Obama “red phone” ads are a throw-back to previous eras, a time of the cold war, a bear in the woods, daisies and detonation. The red phone is an icon of fear, often used when other arguments fail. But that’s just it: the red phone is about the past. I want to look to the future, one rooted in our present-day reality.

This campaign has given us Senator Obama, who has captured many people’s imagination; Senator Clinton, who has demonstrated just how tough she is; and Senator McCain, an American hero. But my concern here is not about media buys, “get out the vote” operations, or how to excite people and motivate them to vote. I have no problem with tough-minded ads.

My concern is that I want candidates who call us to look to the future by genuinely reflecting and understanding the present. We’re squarely barreling into the 21st Century, whether we like it or not and things have changed dramatically from the 1990s, or even from 2004. For instance:

•    In just the past few years the auto industry has undergone a total makeover, well beyond changes in the 1980s and 90s. With tens of thousands of workers recently laid off or bought out, the auto industry of the future is not the one of our childhood.

•    The Internet has altered how we get information and news and with whom we connect, changing what and who we know, and how communities function. 

•    While younger Americans are re-entering politics, the huge baby boomer generation is retiring and seeking meaningful things to do; yet no one is clearly proposing how to tap into this energy, other than to say, “Vote for me!”

•    National security issues have fundamentally changed in the last eight years, with terrorism, the further emergence of China, an increasingly testy Russia, just to mention top-of-the-head issues.

With fundamental shifts taking place in this country and around the world, old discussions about the same old issues won’t work. Nor will simply updating various policy proposals, arguing endlessly about who voted for NAFTA and what they think today, or talking about speeches vs. solutions. 

I remember sitting in a restaurant in New Hampshire in 1995 with a group of citizens I was interviewing for a project with the Pew Center for Civic Journalism. The project was built around listening to Americans talk about their concerns and hopes. People talked movingly and with deep frustration about how their factory jobs had gone overseas.  They were clear that something was changing in America, but weren’t exactly sure what, and they were holding on for dear life to the past.  Of course, that’s not uncommon, we all do that.

But there’s little doubt today that the world has gone through a major transformation and that we are not returning to the 1980s, or even the 1990s. What’s more, no president alone can shape the future, or craft a new, complete and cogent narrative for the nation. Such changes emerge only over time. And yet, a candidate for the presidency and future president can help us “turn” toward the future, so that we can begin to see it and address it. You see, the fundamental choice before us is not simply a matter of debating one policy or another, but a choice about our orientation concerning the next leg of our common journey.

When I was 23 years old, several presidents ago, I was a young aide to senior staff for the Mondale for President Campaign. That campaign also produced a red phone television ad, one used against Senator Gary Hart (D-CO). Just a few short years later, in 1987, I made the decision to start what has become The Harwood Institute for Public Innovation, in part because I felt that politics had become more about striking fear into people’s hearts, than tapping into their aspirations and solving problems.

In many respects, politics is on the upswing this year. The positive changes have been a long-time in the making, a manifestation, I believe, of Americans’ long-held aspirations for a better politics and public life. Which leads me back to the red phone: this year’s race, I believe, is the first in recent times to be squarely about the new century, about an era already upon us, one which represents a fundamentally different trajectory for our nation. If, as I believe, our trajectory is fundamentally different from era’s past, then I want a campaign which talks about that different path and how we can take it.

You can't make this stuff up

We will be talking about the 2008 presidential election for decades to come.  And it won't be because of voters in Chicago accused of voting more than once (Kennedy v. Nixon in 1960) or hanging chads and Supreme Court votes (Bush v. Gore in 2000).  No, this time we will be thinking back on an election that has had candidates that voters actually were supporting and issues that were actually being discussed.  And here it is the day after Super Duper Tsunami Tuesday and we still don't know exactly who will be on the ballot in November.  Isn't it great?

A Hollywood screenwriter looking for work right now instead of a picket line could not write some of the story lines that are unfolding right before our very eyes.  Rush Limbaugh, the conservatives' favorite comedic radio host is doing everything he can to submarine the apparent Republican front running John McCain.  Mike Huckabee, who has no money compared to everyone else, manages to win a few states on Tuesday catapulting himself into top challenger status in the GOP race.  Meanwhile, Mitt Romney would have to spend $1.33 billion dollars to win enough delegates to take the nomination away from either McCain or Huckabee.  That is based on what he has spent thus far to win the paltry number of delegates he has scraped off the floor since the snows of Iowa.

Then there is the Democratic race.  This time last year, Hillary Clinton was all but anointed as the nominee.  Turn the page to February, 2008 and she finds herself running neck and neck with Barack Obama.  The first legitimate chance for either a woman or an African-American to be elected President of the United States and they wake up each morning realizing they are battling each other for the right to live at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.  And today, she revealed she had to loan her own campaign $5 million to keep it going.  Obama is out-raising her in donations by a big margin.

And the talk is already beginning of a deadlocked convention and smoke filled back rooms deciding the Democratic nominee.  Wait a minute, there won't be any smoke filled rooms inside any building in Denver for the convention.  Those meetings will have to occur outside.

This is what I mean.  You cannot make this stuff up.  We are witness to a remarkable story in 2008.  Don't blink.  You might miss something.

Yes We Can

The result of a little inspiration and access to a recording studio.....

Click here.

As the song in the 60"s said...."There's something happening here....."