Author: Cheri DelBrocco

WHO KILLED HOWARD DEAN?

The television pundits are proud of their culinary work. They boiled, broiled, fried, and basted until they completed the job. Put a fork in him. Howard Dean is done.

The Democratic Party owed Governor Dean much more than their participation in the mass media mischaracterization of his message, manner and tone. Dean did not possess the charisma and persuasiveness of Bill Clinton, but he did have the matter of fact, common sense, common man intelligence of Harry Truman – just the style, manner and personality to expose the bogus and disastrous policies of George W. Bush.

Howard Dean stood up for the most basic of Democratic ideals at a time when his fellow contestants felt compelled to cater to the neo-evildoers in Washington. Just as Truman pursued a moral, dignified and intelligent way for our country, Dean recognized the destructiveness of fewer jobs, the shortsightedness of environmental degradation, the incongruity of war to achieve peace, the lack of vision and practicality in simultaneously proposing a mission to Mars with $500 billion deficits and the hypocrisy of the unfunded No Child Left Behind Act.

Dean successfully channeled the anger of millions who felt apathetic and disenfranchised. He awoke voters and gave voice to the legions who intuitively questioned the policies of the present administration. He introduced serious dialogue to an administration whose every effort has been to deceive, distract and manipulate the masses. By talking about the misguided war in Iraq, the shameful lack of jobs, the destructive obese deficits, and the massive increase of our $7 trillion national debt, he caused America to question whether George W. Bush is the right man for the job.

Before Howard Dean, Democrats were sounding like “Me too, I agree with Bush” Joe Liebermans. But when he came out swinging with his “I represent the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party”, record crowds showed up, money poured in from the common man and everyone involved began to run scared – the Republicans, the Democrats and the national media.

Governor Dean got a raw deal from his fellow Democrats; but they can be excused. They were running for office. Exploitation of trivia was in their best interest at the polls. But the media, especially the television punditry, have no excuse. Rather than giving fair treatment and attention to the message, they attacked the dignity and personality of the man. They were determined to frame Dean as one without substance despite his many personal, professional and political accomplishments..

That is why we heard about Dean’s “woodchuck” smile rather than his balanced budgets and successful healthcare policies in Vermont. That is why we got “the Judy dilemma” rather than the story of his successful 20+ years of marriage. That is why we got the “Dean scream” rather than his impressive practice as a family physician.

In 1999, after speaking to a youth group interested in politics, President Clinton opined, “I couldn’t tell them the truth, that the media runs the government.” Perhaps he should’ve warned us that the war room mantra for 2004 has been changed to “It’s the Media, stupid.”

A MARRIAGE MADE IN HELL

The haggling between the Grizzlies and the University of Memphis Tigers sounds suspiciously like a mismatched couple negotiating a prenuptial agreement, knowing good and well that this thing isn’t going to work.

The terms of their move to the FedExForum isn’t a sports story, it’s a marriage story Ñ a subject many of us know a lot about without benefit of the sports page.

Therefore, the person whose insight I offer is not Stan Meadows or Michael Heisley or Mike Rose or R.C. Johnson. It’s novelist Anne Tyler, Pulitzer Prize winner and one of America’s greatest writers. For all I know, she’s never seen a pro basketball game, but, boy, does she understand dysfunctional relationships.

Near the end of her new bestseller, The Amateur Marriage, the husband looks back on his 60-year relationship with his ex-wife and attempts to explain it all to their bitter and estranged daughter:

“We did the best we could. We did our darnedest. We were just … unskilled; we never quite got the hang of things. It wasn’t for lack of trying.”

Sorry, sports fans, but a marriage of Grizzlies and Tigers looks to have all the staying power of a matchup between Larry King and Britney Spears.

The Grizzlies, like other pro teams, routinely pay multimillion-dollar contracts to benchwarmers and even ex-players like Bryant Reeves and Michael Dickerson who aren’t even in the league any more. But they’re reportedly balking at paying an annual six-figure subsidy to the U of M that is, relatively speaking, small change. Is that any way to treat the hometown partner you propose to love and cherish for the next 20 years?

Rule Number 1: Beware of the flashy stranger who sweeps you off your feet and tells you to forget your old love from the neighborhood.

The Tigers and their die-hard fans are hung up on the memory of the way they were. Wasn’t it great when sharp-shooting Larry Finch took them to the NCAA finals in 1973 and when local guys Keith, Baskerville, Doom, Vincent, and the Little General stuck around four years and went to the Final Four in 1985? Trouble is, young fans weren’t even born then, and four-year star players are rare today. Now, in desperation, the U of M has hitched a million-dollar coach to a vagabond team in a bargain-basement league.

Rule Number 2: There is nothing like the golden memory of an old flame to screw up a not-so-golden marriage.

College hoops in Memphis once filled 11,000 seats at the Mid-South Coliseum, so the Tigers got talked into buying into The Pyramid with 20,000 seats. In 1989, the fear Ñ can you believe it? Ñ was that they might only draw 12,000 or so.

Attendance these days is far below the 1989 projection. Seats sold at Tiger games has averaged 6,780, excluding Wednesday night’s game against Louisville.

Today, the Grizzlies and the Tigers understand that unless the Tiger talent and schedule improve dramatically, things could get much worse than that. Conference rival Houston, which knocked off the Tigers in the 1983 and 1984 NCAA tournament, averaged 3,808 fans last year and 2,848 this year.

Rule Number 3: A bigger mansion can’t save a bad marriage.

At the FedExForum, the Grizzlies will call the shots, tell the Tigers when they can play, control the revenue streams, and, of course, upstage their product.

Rule Number 4: Father knows best is a lousy recipe for a long-term relationship.

The Grizzlies would like you to believe that the NBA family is strong and healthy, if not exactly wholesome. The team is playing hard, winning more than losing, and general manager Jerry West and head coach Hubie Brown are getting great reviews. But there’s definitely something dysfunctional about the NBA, even by the standards of pro sports. Seventeen head coaches Ñ the people who know the players and owners best Ñ have quit or been fired since last season. And the NBA’s star attraction, Kobe Bryant, is going on trial for rape.

Rule Number 5: Beware of the in-laws.

The FedExForum has bills. The Grizzlies have bills. Fans are going to have to help pay them. Hauling the wife and kids to the game will be a tad more expensive than an evening at, say, AutoZone Park. Like $100 more expensive. Let’s hope the economy and stock market are strong for the next 20 years.

Rule Number 6: Couples fight about money.

The entertainment alternatives aren’t standing still. Reality television, the Tennessee lottery, movies, and casinos are endlessly inventive, easy to get to, and relatively cheap.

Rule Number 7: Affairs happen.

Do you see now why these love birds are already fighting about the pre-nup? They’re doing the best they can. They’re doing their darnedest. If it doesn’t work, it won’t be for lack of trying. n

NO WAY OUT FOR HERENTON AND CITY COUNCIL?

Not necessarily. We talked to people who give advice for a living.

Is there no way out of the mess Mayor Herenton and the Memphis City Council have gotten themselves into? Not so fast. Things could be worse. It’s not life and death. It’s not a business meltdown. It’s not a criminal investigation, at least not yet.

The Flyer asked political spin doctors, corporate consultants, mediators, lawyers, former politicians, and other professional advice-givers to make a few suggestions about where to go from here. Here’s what they said.

Wyeth Chandler, former Memphis mayor, judge, city commissioner, and now a professional mediator with Resolute Systems:

“The first thing that needs to be done is the mayor needs to sit down individually with every member of the council. He should say he regrets anything he said that demeans their activities as members of a legislative body, and that he considers their rank equal to the executive branch and he intends to deal with them. Then he needs two things from them: First, [they should] let him know what their priorities are. And, second, he needs to have from them the names of some people they feel would render good service as members of boards and commissions.

“Hopefully, that at least establishes with each of them a new relationship.

“At the same time, council members need to tell him they made some statements that impugn his integrity, and they regret it. On this bond deal, they are not doing an investigation as a personal vendetta but as part of their job. The city comes before any of them personally. That’s a way to start over. And that’s what they need to do.”

LaSimba Gray, minister of New Sardis Baptist Church and leader of a group of Memphis ministers trying to resolve the controversy:

“The glowing image of Memphis will be tarnished if this war of words continues. We have pulled together a group of ministers with training and skills in negotiation. We sat with the mayor last Friday and met today with three council members on an individual basis for three-and-a-half hours. We have invited all of them to meet with us.

“I would do an assessment of what has happened and then call all the parties together for ownership in what has happened. What role did they play Ñ good, bad, or indifferent. Second, look at alternatives to behavior or actions that may have caused this situation. Then look at possibilities of resolution and have those thrashed out in discussions. You reach a proposed set of solutions and have those implemented immediately. Over 90 days you revisit them to see if they are working. That has to be done in the environment of a covenant of resolution.”

Mike Cody, attorney, mediator, and former city councilman, candidate for mayor, and Tennessee attorney general:

“This has an adverse effect on the community regardless of who’s at fault. I would go back and analyze how the dispute arose and what are the factors that brought us here. See how many of those situations could be dealt with by sort of easing over the frustration that resulted from certain statements.

“Then I would go to a major confidant of both parties. With the council you’d probably have to find somebody well respected by three or four of the most vocal ones. Do the same with the mayor. Put those people in a room without the major players, and I would try to explain to them that the public feels Ñ regardless of whose fault it was Ñ that it’s time to move past this situation. How do you think that is best done?

“After the general meeting, put them in separate rooms and ask each side what are the things that disturb you most and what could the other side do to move you to an understanding. Then go to the other side and ask them what would you think if this could happen. Then in private Ñ and I don’t know how the Sunshine Law would work here Ñ a mediator would get the major players and make suggestions as to what could be done.”

John Bakke, veteran political consultant:

“You’ve got to find your common goals is number one. And make a recommitment to goals you committed to when you took your oath of office. I think it’s big-picture time. Time to understand the effect this is having on the community. Because I have heard it said outside of Memphis and Shelby County that real estate agents are getting calls about people moving and businesses relocating.

“This happens any time there is any controversy in Memphis. But population trends are something to pay attention to. We’ve had far more serious crises in this city than this one, but this is something people don’t want to see in their leadership.”

Mother Wit, morning radio personality on WRBO FM-103.5

“I would clean the slate. Start all over again. There is such a thing as saying I’m sorry and such a thing as forgiveness. I firmly believe in apologizing and coming out with a clean slate. It’s the city that is important, not petty issues or egos or words that have hurt the city. We have to stay focused on what is important. Our children are watching this. They see too much insanity as it is. Memphis is a stable place if we let it be.”

John Malmo, business marketing consultant and author of the book When on the Mountain There Is No Tiger, Monkey Is King:

“When you have a problem like this in business it’s a lot easier to work out than it is in politics. Because even though egos get involved, there are usually overriding issues, and in business you have an ultimate authority, either the boss or customer. That makes it easier for two opposing parties to bury the hatchet. In politics, the media makes it so messy because you add the element of public posturing by the individuals involved.

“They are going to have to get together, probably the mayor and a small group of three to five council members at most. First of all, what are the consequences and potential consequences of this situation? How long can the city go without division directors? I’m not sure, knowing the parties involved, that they are going to be able to solve this problem.”

Benjamin Hooks, minister, former president of the national NAACP, and former Criminal Court judge:

“It’s time for them to sit down together. I don’t think it’s out of hand at this point. I believe firmly that the council has its powers and the mayor has his prerogatives. They have to work together. I have not been able to meet with this group of ministers trying to act as mediators, but sometimes an outside group respected by both sides can do more. It might be well if a group met with the mayor and then the council before meetings were held together. I think it is newsworthy now because it has not happened here before. But I have lived in cities where this is a common thing. It was not as surprising to me as it was to some people in Memphis.”

Ralph Berry, president of Thompson Baker and Berry public relations firm and former vice president of corporate communications for Holiday Inns, Promus, and Harrah’s:

“The first thing they have to do is step back and put all the comments and insults and criticism aside. I would start by saying that it seems like an awful lot of things have been done in the heat of the moment. Everybody needs to get a little self-discipline when it comes to saying the first thing that comes to mind. They need to start talking as people, not as politicians.

“A lot of business folks step back and make a personal list: Here is what I would like in an ideal world; here is what I am willing to accept. If everyone is willing to accept what is not the perfect choice but still moves the agenda forward, then everyone will benefit. From a PR standpoint, they ought to keep in the back of their heads what the things they’re saying sound like to someone outside the city. Because ultimately what this is about is making Memphis an attractive place to live and work.”

Spence Byrum, vice president of sales and customer service for Crew Training International, which trains people ranging from combat pilots to surgeons to make good decisions under stress:

“The job you do handling a crisis is determined by how you prepare. The focus should be on what’s right rather than who’s right. If you are caught up in who’s right, it keeps you from listening.

“What strikes me in this particular situation is that as soon as one party starts talking, the person on the receiving end starts thinking how they are going to respond. We call this rehearsing your rebuttal.

“If I was going to start from scratch, I would focus on what’s right. That takes the personal-ownership factor out of it. It’s difficult to let go of a concept if it’s yours. As I read about these volleys back and forth, it appears the listening is what’s missing.”

Joe Hall, partner in the Ingram Group, a government relations firm whose clients include the Public Building Authority:

“First, look to the closest allies of both the mayor and council and feel out how much they’re dug in and determine the interest in either or both sides of settling this. If there is resistance to that, you have to look to the part of the community with the most at stake, which is the private and civic sectors.

“They have had a terrific working relationship with both Mayor Herenton and the council for a while. And then take a look at what the next four years would be like with a fractured relationship. It jeopardizes progress and opportunities. For example, if the Grizzlies deal was just beginning, it would be absolutely jeopardized. Who knows what opportunities could be lost if this fracture remains for a long time?”

Suzanne Landers, divorce attorney:

“It’s not unlike a divorce. If things are so hot that stability is not possible, they may need a cooler head to help facilitate. What they’re doing now is what I call triangle building. The council goes to the press, then the mayor goes to the press and responds. Triangle building is treacherous business.”

BLUE, GRAY, GREEN

NASHUA, N.H. — For three years, the ubiquitous Red and Blue map of 2000 (red for Republican states; blue for Democratic ones) has been the political landscape; however, a more interesting, and complex color code is emerging in this election. Blue and gray may become very important factors in deciding who gets the Democratic Party’s nomination, with camouflage green dominating the background.

The elements of that new color chart emerged from the past week’s campaigning in New Hampshire, as some obvious contrasts have evolved.

Ex-Vermont governor Howard Dean began a campaign built on a passionate opposition to the wrongheaded, go-it-alone, invasion of Iraq. In New Hampshire, the message has changed to themes conveying solid values of frugality, balanced budgets, and concern for the loss of community . Fiscal conservatism and social progressivism are the cornerstones of this unique candidacy. Dean appears to be the embodiment of old fashioned Yankee pragmatism and idealism. In a state where people prefer to live free or die, it plays well. Color him Yankee blue.

Massachusetts Senator John Kerry is formal and less approachable; however, when he affectionately hugged fellow Vietnam veteran, and former Georgia Congressman, Max Cleland, at one campaign appearance, he evinced surprising compassion. Throughout this last week, war hero Kerry directly challenged George W. Bush on national security issues and the Iraq war by using the mantra “Bring It On” in mocking parody of Bush’s deadly bravado towards both issues. Like Dean, Kerry tells stories and lays out plans without much reference to geography or personal religious beliefs. Put this veteran in camouflage green.

In states north of the Mason-Dixon line, stories of regional geography, family history and religious faith are considered somewhat inappropriate for those campaigning for elected office. Certainly, in the South, things are glaringly different. Southerners have a primal desire for personal narratives from politicians. Perhaps the history of story-telling and religious testimony makes it requisite for candidates to share upbringings, heritage, transgressions, and conversions. Only time will tell whether Governor Dean and Senator Kerry can resonate with Southern voters without benefit of such touchstones.

It won’t be so with General Wesley Clark. On the stump this past week, Arkansan Clark puncutuated his themes of patriotism, faith, family values, and leadership not only with nostalgic stories of childhood, but with a Cook’s tour of his religious history and church affiliations. While he gave due attention to issues of Iraq, jobs, inclusiveness, healthcare, and the environment, the very real substance of his rousing speeches was overshadowed by matters of style and personality. Soldierly green is a striking background for Clark’s distinguished shade of gray.

Although Senator John Edwards lacks military experience, he exudes understanding and concern for the plight of the common man — the underdog. Waxing nostalgic, this son of a small-town mill worker raised bashed George W. Bush for dividing the country into two different Americas — while highlighting every speech with a reminder that his warm honeyed North Carolina drawl can garner votes in the South. Color him in down-home colors, y’all.

Senator Joe Lieberman, a Connecticut Yankee raised by Russian immigrant parents, talked openly on the campaign trail about his values and Orthodox-Jewish religious beliefs. He defended the Iraq war and mixed talk of deficit reduction and small-business tax incentives with references to his reputation as the “soul” of the Democratic Party. Although too conservative for many party stalwarts, the genial Liberman could prove to have a chameleon-like appeal.

The last time Democrats in New Hampshire went to the polls, Al Gore, Son of the South and Vietnam veteran, narrowly defeated Bill Bradley, a Northerner who did not serve in the military. Even back then, the color palette was somewhat mixed; but this year Democrats are more busily scrambling the right shades of blue, gray, and camouflage green to find a color code that can paint George W. Bush out of the White House.

LARCENY: A CONSISTENTLY BIPARTISAN INITIATIVE

What if you woke up tomorrow morning and read – or more likely heard Dan Blather say on the Evening News — that the Federal Government is out of money? That’s right, plumb out! as my Uncle Elbert would have said. Kaput! Se habla no dinero!

What a terrifying thought, huh? Our Markets would go first followed by a Great Depression style run on the no-longer-insured banks. Other World economies would quickly follow because they own too many shaky dollars and have too large a presence in this, the largest of all consumer bazaars on the planet. Bereft of the world’s only policeman, capricious and arbitrary though he might be, dime store despots everywhere could run amok. With the United States in ruins, the Arabs and Israelis would have to actually duke it out in an internecine Sons-of-Sem shootout, and the French would have to go back to despising the English and the Dutch. Without money in the US coffers, our world is well and truly over is it not?

But wait. I forgot — and this is something that is frequently forgotten by politicians and their constituents alike – the Federal Government really doesn’t have any money of its own. It never has. When a bill comes due, as it does every day of course, Uncle Sam just picks your pocket to pay it. Yes, you! Don’t look over your shoulder. If the bill is higher, he just digs a little deeper. No big deal. Nor is it a recent phenomenon. Almost fifty years ago, Everett Dirksen said it best: “A billion here and a billion there starts to add up to some real money.” It was a very revealing Freudian slip. He wasn’t kidding. And, as I am sure one of our current legislators would be quick to add, that was back when a billion dollars was worth something.

Also, regardless of what Republicans would have you believe, this is not a partisan issue. They are just as anxious and willing to strip you naked as the Democrats and even less likely to give you any back unless there’s an oil lease in it somewhere. But even that differentiation is splitting hairs. My checkbook can find no substantive difference between them. Whether that buck was stolen from me by one party or the other, the fact is that I’ll get a couple pennies benefit from a road that I can drive on and some interstate commerce that they’ve over-regulated, and of course, the unbridled joy of watching the bombs that I bought obliterate various backward cultures around the world. The other 98 cents goes toward buying them another term in office. Depending on their affiliation, they will be writing their checks to labor unions or oil companies or farmers or steel manufacturers. Some of them will pay poor girls to grow babies and others will pay rich guys not to grow wheat. Either way I’m picking up the tab for something I’m not very sympathetic about and I don’t see that choosing one party’s spendthrift over another is going to do me any personal good.

So I’ve decided how to decide on my next vote. I’m going to vote for the first candidate, Republican, Democrat, or Independent, who looks embarrassed about it. That’s all — just embarrassed. Nothing abject or grand – just a sheepish smile or a blushing refusal to meet my gaze as they’re elbow deep in my pocket. I’m practicing it myself. That’s the same red-faced look I’m going to give back to them in a dozen years or so when they’ve bankrupted Social Security and my monthly medical coverage is two thousand dollars and they reach into my hip pocket for more. Sorry. Plumb out!

DR. DEAN MAKES A CALL

NASHUA, NEW HAMPSHIRE –The doctor was in the house. A hoarse Howard Dean showed up in twelve degree weather at a noon hour packed house at Martha’s Exchange on Main St. in Nashua. As he suffered with his own case of bronchitis, he was passionately determined to keep making house calls. Although the wind outside was bitter and cold, the sentiment inside was toasty as patients waited for diagnosis and prescribed treatments on how to cure what ails them.

Like most Americans, voters of New Hampshire are afflicted. They are pained by the loss of jobs. They are weary from an inability to pay for healthcare insurance and prescription drugs. They are sickened by the escalating numbers of soldiers dying daily in Iraq. The most perilous affliction for voters, however is a condition called CMM. It’s very contagious and as a matter of fact, it has become an epidemic.

Dean began dispensing his dosages of ideas. The first, concerned the correction of “fiscal folly” practiced by” the Bush administration and the restoration of 2.9 million lost jobs. Addressing corporate love affair with job outsourcing, the governor called for tax penalties for those companies choosing to take jobs offshore. He recommended massive investments in infrastructure so that roads, bridges, and energy supply sources can be rehabilitated.

Next, he measured out his prescription for the country’s healthcare system and plans to overhaul it so that children in America, like those in other countries around the world, can have access to doctors when they are sick. He blasted the new drug benefits bill and explained that the pharmaceutical companies who will gain from this plan also wrote the bill and are giving money to the Republican Party for the Bush re-election campaign.

By now, Howard Dean’s opposition to the war in Iraq is well known. Voters in New Hampshire are familiar with his passionate feelings against the unilateral invasion. Therefore, he spoke briefly about Iraq and reiterated that we were lied to by the Bush administration about the reasons for going to war.

The time had come for questions. Unlike a typical office visit, where patients get four minutes of the doctor’s time, this physician spent lots of time explaining his cure.

Eventually, a lady asked the question that allowed Dr. Dean to elaborate on the worst infection sickening the body politic. She wanted to know what Governor Dean thought of the incessant television replay of his post Iowa Caucus rally and the systematic attempt by the corporate media to select the party’s nominee. He answered by explaining that he is not a shill for corporations, has not taken money from them, and is only beholden to the thousands of supporters who have given him small donations.

By all appearances, Americans have become grossly debilitated by CMM. We have become infected with a feverish inability to distinguish fact from reality because we are in the grips of manufactured fiction. The repeated footage of what the media dubbed “The Dean Scream” is a perfect case in point.

When Americans watched Howard Dean exuberantly rally his supporters last week, they were witnessing the pandemic known as Corporate Media Manipulation and its effects on politicians and the democratic process. Since the day of that event, pundits and commentators, like Svengalis, have manipulated viewers into believing the governor engaged in a maniacal rampage. But media networks, not Howard Dean, are on a rampage. They have given the event a title and engaged in pseudo post mortem analysis. In addition, they chant repeatedly of the public’s “outrage” by the rally. Although he has drawn standing room only adoring crowds in New Hampshire, televisions glow with manipulative distortions by commentators and media pundits. Ruminations by so called “professionals” such as Robert Novak, replete with yet another replay of accompanying footage, instruct voters that “Dean is dead”. Polls are flashed like terror alerts to further infect the collective American psyche.

Whether the voters in the Granite State suffer too badly from CMM remains to be seen. One gentleman at the Dean event told me he stopped watching television a long time ago because he could no longer stand the fabrications and unrestrained bias. Hopefully, others here are as healthy and robust of mind.

The Doctor With a New Patient

MASTER OF DECEIT

“They misunderestimated me.” Well, Dubya, I guess we did. Most Americans wanted to hear how you are going to reduce unemployment. We wanted to hear your plans for fixing exploding healthcare costs for families. We wanted to hear your plans to balance that cherry bomb of a budget and how you are going to get our soldiers out of Iraq, now that over 500 have died. You’re not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but at least you could try to be an honest dolt.

In the State of the Union address that many hope will be your last, all you could cough up was more fearmongering and rosy predictions with theatrically transparent proposals. Obviously, your stage managers had explained this was a kick-off for re-election, instead of an address to explain the present state of the country and what can be done to make it stronger. You disparaged the average, middle-classer’s ability to see your intent on driving more nails into our coffin. Perhaps you misunderestimate us.

Your answer to the job loss dilemma is to blithely proclaim that “America enjoys a growing economy” and “We must respond by helping more Americans gain the skills to find good jobs in our new economy.” Those comments are deceitful, because if the economy is growing and being enjoyed by so many Americans, bankruptcy rates would not be the highest in historic record. If helping Americans gain skills in finding good jobs is your goal, you would not continue to cut funding for programs that would provide such job training. What you didn’t say was that your corporate donors still moving jobs overseas at bullet rate. For example, last week, IBM supposedly added 15,000 jobs to their payroll. Guess how many were in the U.S.? 4,500. Additionally, they moved several thousand offshore, ending up with an actual net loss for American workers. So where is the growth?

When your daddy ran for election and stated that healthcare costs were not a problem, he was out of touch yet honest in his callousness. To the contrary, you dishonestly pose as compassionate with average working folks. Your administration’s answer to the problem of spiraling healthcare costs is to establish so-called health savings accounts, which would allow workers to place a woefully inadequate amount of money into medical tax-free savings accounts in the hope that their family members never get ill and they can get their money back tax-free. Gloom, despair and agony on the family that has to go the hospital once a decade with this plan. What two income family, who is living hand to mouth, can put aside money to save for anything, let alone something as expensive as healthcare? How can the middle-class, who struggles to pay mortgages and credit card bills, suddenly find ways to put money into accounts to be used for future doctor visits and medication? Sounds like the “save to own” healthcare reduction plan means “you’re on your own” when it comes to the staggering costs of medical care.

The budget deficit is approaching $500 billion, yet such a taboo subject was considered off limits by your speech writers. As usual, however, a public effusion of your personal religious beliefs and the suggestion that they become public policy was no problem. The subject that marriage should be between one man and one woman was raised in a cynical attempt to distract voters from the real problems of war, job losses, and deficits. You failed to mention the proposed $1.5 million program that will give government money to churches so they can attempt to teach interpersonal skills to those who are unhappy in their one man, one woman marriage by forcing taxpayers, who are barely hanging on, to sacrifice hard earned tax dollars for another phony faith-based program. This crock of the union play will require everyone to pay for religious counseling and indoctrination.

Last year, in your address, you claimed the United States needed to invade Iraq because Saddam Hussein had assembled the world’s most dangerous weapons and intended to use them very soon. You said Iraq had sought to buy significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Now, the world knows those claims were a pack of lies. In fact, Saddam was in a spider hole and no weapons had been amassed. You and your buddies decided to hang some wallpaper by telling Americans that its soldiers had really been sent to Iraq to capture Saddam and install democratic government. This charade must stop. It is time for our military, who is trained to defend this country in the event of an attack, to stop the invasions and occupations of other countries for the political whims of a misguided and deceitful leadership. We have no defense if our soldiers are constantly consumed with the task of nation building. We are not safer if we are told to live like Chicken Littles consulting color codes to determine our collective level of anxiety.

One of the questions posed to voters before this year’s State of the Union address was “Have things changed since the State of the Union address of 2003? Unfortunately, war, the soaking of middle income families, abandonment of the working poor, alienation of the world community and the continued destruction and relocation of American jobs seems to be the never ending Bush legacy.

With this presidency, the dark reality is the more things change, the more they stay the same.