June 13, 2008
I miss Tim Russert. He was one of our few voices of sanity in the corporate media.
May, 2008
Hillary
It's tragic.
Even though I didn't support her for the nomination, I certainly would have had no problem voting for her. Well, not much of a problem. But now....
Her statements about assassination suggest the conversations going on within the campaign. A campaign, incidentally, run mostly by men.
But what I see as the tragedy is that she seems unable to admit having made a mistake.
Everyone makes mistakes. Even presidents. Even candidates. But apparently not Hillary.
Her 'apology' was a magnificent example of corporate doublespeak which completely avoided the issue compounding rather than resolving any problem caused by her statement to the Sioux Falls Argus-Leader editorial board. And, perhaps more to the point, she did not in any way address the explosion she caused with what was essentially a justification for continuing primary campaign which no one except George McGovern has asked her to quit. It suggests that she has no comprehension of what she did. A scary thought.
Another person who has never made a mistake is the current president.
Unfortunate company.
OtiBlog - May, 2008
Pacifica
KPFTx has retained complete and utter neutrality from the beginning. Even when we disagree with someone, it has absolutely nothing to do with our function to stream and record the meetings of Pacifica. We're absolutely devoted to the concept of debate and honest contention in the service of the Pacifica Foundation, and, faithfully, without spin or modificaton we share the reality of the ongoing Pacifica governance.
I'll accept any challenge to the above from anywhere any time. And it will not change. It is the basis of KPFTx and our expression of the reality of the Pacifica mission.
But as a member of the Pacifica Foundation, one of those types of people who were parties to at least two of the lawsuits which resulted in our present structure, I feel I have a right and duty to speak up as many far braver and more cognizant of the issues than I have before me.
What I'm seeing appalls me. Our network, our only reason for being pulled together in this mutual enterprise. is in real trouble on a number of fronts. We're talking survival here.
That's really the only issue.
The only issue.
Our board doesn't seem to be able to deal with reality, or even Roberts' Rules. If our board can't handle a simple committee meeting under the rules, how can they handle a foundation?
As far as I can tell, the focus seems to be on agendas having nothing to do with the survival and growth of Pacifica, and, far more importantly, it's value to the thousands of listeners who pay for its existence (operative word there: 'pay'), and to society which benefits immeasurably from its contribution to the national consciousness. The Pacifica Foundation is an irreplaceable national treasure.
I personally am outraged at the behavior of some of our board and committee members. I stress again that this is my personal response. But the lack of interest in the survival of Pacifica and the obsession with political issues having nothing to do with the survival of Pacifica demonstrated by some of them raises real questions for me.
At some point, this board as a unit will have to grapple with issues on a basis other than personal likes or dislikes, personal fears and personal whims, for, in my humble opinion, the survival of Pacifica and all it stands for is at stake.
I'm aware that patience is a virtue, but Aquinas(!) pointed out the patience beyond a certain point is a sin. He's pretty conservative.
My questions: when will the Pacifica Board realize as a body what its function is? And, possibly more importantly, will the individuals on it find the personal strength and magnanimity to act for the good of the whole and, finally, carry out its function?
(By 'the whole' I mean THE WHOLE - not a faction, not a point of view, not a personal interest, not a good idea, not a political issue, not a demonstration of political correctness, not an evocation of the fighter who refuses to give up 'no matter what the odds', but THE WHOLE.)
What we have lacked in our pursuit of perfection is training in consensus. How I can give up on MY issue for the benefit of us all? As a strong believer in consensus as opposed to tyranny of the majority, I am even more incensed by the behavior of those who hold us hostage to their views, no matter how righteous those views are and hang on to them, forcing them on everyone, sucking time demanding that they be taken as the view of all or Pacifica somehow will be party to an irretrievable and catastrophic shattering of justice.
The cost of this behavior is the survival of Pacifica.
Sevice in the governance of Pacifica is not a power game. The very concept is totally contrary to the ideas put forth in the Mission. Anyone who approaches it that way is, again in my humble opinion, not fit to serve. Not because they're bad or that their ideas are unacceptable, but because they have lost sight, if indeed they ever had sight, of why we are here: why we engage in this difficult and time-consuming process of advancing the cause of the Foundation and all it means to those who find it an irreplaceable resource for their lives and their sanity.
Please, board, do your ******* job. Individually and collectively. Put aside your personal issues, no matter how deeply held and arguably relevant, and act for the Foundation.
The Foundation.
Let me put this clearly in stark and simple terms.
Act for the Foundation.
Please keep Pacifica alive.
This is the only Pacifica we have.
--Otis Maclay
Speaking for himself and not KPFTx.
I'm sure someone will complain that I have access to the site and therefore I can put this up here.
You're right. It comes from having for years put my personal time and resources in the service of Pacifica. Show me you've done the same and I'll post your stuff too.
The other question to complainers is:
Do you think I'm talking about you?
Actually, I'd probably post it anyway.
Tax
My election rule is that whatever is not discussed is a real issue.
I notice no one ever talks about taxing stock trades.
Of course, they could be worried that people would quit trading. Or go the the Nikkei or London or Shanghai. Of course, that would be tragic. Like when the NY Stock Exchange threatened to move to New Jersey.
Yah, sure.
I wonder how much income Wall Street could generate.
Hmmm.
Oh, sorry. I meant...
Shhhhhh.
OtiBlog - April, 2008
Apples and Oranges
The idea that Hillary's having won big states somehow predicts her performance in the fall has no basis in fact - or even moderately intelligent reasoning. That Obama would lose a state where he couldn't win the Democratic primary completely misses the point. This is a Democratic Primary- not a General Election. Except for the most crystallized voter, they will vote for the Democrat in the Fall. And the new registrations suggest a large majority for the Democrat.
Comparing performance in the primary to performance in the General Election makes no sense. Comparing the turnout makes more.
|