A Happy and Blessed New Year in 2009

On the eve of a new year, I leave my best wishes for 2009:

• To President-elect Barack Obama--Best Wishes as you embark on a perilous journey. The miracle of the Presidency is that most who have held the office grew into it and rose to meet the challenges of the day. Here's wishing and hoping you join that illustrious crowd.


• To the New York Yankees--Best Wishes on your quest to buy the National League Central Division


• To the battered global financial markets--here's wishing that you bottom out quickly and start the process of rebuilding economies around the world


• To leaders of the new Congress, that they may be touched, as Mr. Lincoln said, by better angels of their nature to put the interests of the nation ahead of regional, parochial and partisan goals


• To those around the world living under the yoke of tyranny and oppression, that 2009 may mark the time when they began to breath the air of free men


• And to all bloggers and readers--a happy and healthy New Year.

Happy New Year!

The Broadsheets' Broad Decline

Continuing their long climb down the ladder of success, newspapers have been replaced by--you guessed it--the Internet--as the second most popular source for news. Television for the moment remains the leading news source for most people.

This according to a new survey by the Pew Research Center for People & the Press.

The findings, as reported by Media Post News, are interesting:

• 40% of the survey's respondents say they stay current on world and national events via the Internet, as opposed to 35% who keep up with events through a daily newspaper
• The 40% mark is up a startling 16% increase in one year, from 24% in 2007
• For newspapers the long-term trend is a death spiral: The Internet's share has tripled from 13% since 2001, while newspapers have dropped almost 25% in the same period.
• While television continues to take home the gold medal as a news source, its share of news hawks continues to plummet as well--70% in 2008, but down from 82% in 2002
• The percentage of 20-something respondents who claimed that TV was their primary source of news dropped in one year from 68 to 59%

A couple of dynamics drive these trends. First, the use of the Internet as a news source continues to grow because it allows us to disintermediate the information process.

On TV and in newspapers we're pretty much stuck with whatever the anchorhead tells is we need to know today, or whatever the assignment editor feels is important for us to know. On the Internet, we as news gatherers decide what's important to us. We've removed the mediator from the process.

Second, readers and viewers who are clearly centrist or right of center appear to be tuning out and rejecting the left-leaning news mandarins who are no longer satisfied with reporting the news, but who want to conform the news to their own world view.

The fact that the most coveted demographic in media is migrating to the Internet means that advertisers dollars will continue to follow them. That means less money for newspapers and TV, fewer metropolitan dailies, fewer and leaner news operations, and an even less desirable news product.

As an old newsie, and someone who remembers the sound of 12-year old paper boys flinging the afternoon paper on the front steps, that's a bit sad. But in the end it is the continued democratization of information, and that's a good thing overall.

Just thought you might like to know.

The Real Torture is Carl Levin Himself

You would think Democrat Senator Carl Levin of Michigan would have his plate full arranging a helping handout for the auto industry in his state. But you would be wrong. Sen. Levin has released his “report” on the Bush Administration’s alleged torture policy. As with all ideologues, Sen. Levin fails to let the facts get in the way of a good piece of fiction.

The narrative is as tedious as it is fallacious: Pres. Bush and senior officials blessed the abuse, first by denying Al Queda operatives the rights of uniformed combatants guaranteed by the Geneva Conventions, and later by rewriting the definition of torture.

If you’re one of those poor souls with the back of his car plastered with anti-Bush bumper stickers, you’d probably drink a cup of this Kool-Aid. But here are the facts:

The CIA and field commanders in the theaters requested some guidance from the Administration on what was allowable, not the other way around as Hans Christian Levin would have you believe.

The so-called smoking gun “torture memos” on which Sen. Levin hangs his case were legal documents by the Justice Dept. that explained the legal boundaries of interrogation. They were not policy memos on how to torture prisoners, as Sen. Levin and the leftover ‘60s crowd would have you believe.

The most aggressive interrogation method used in the war on terror has been “waterboarding,” of which we hear so much, but in reality was used on only 3 prisoners

As a direct result of this action, U.S. forces were able to finally nail Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind behind 9-11

For a long time, maybe 3 or 4 years, whatever the U.S. knew about Al Qaeda came only from the KSM interrogations, admits no less a source than Vice President Dick Cheney

The current Administration has already been investigated by nonpartisan panels 12 times! Every single investigation cleared senior officials of any charges that the Bush Administration sanctioned abuse. Every single one!

What's also interesting is that Sen. Levin did not release his "report" in his capacity as the Chairman of the Senate Armed Forced Committee, issuing his news release on private stationary rather than Senate letterhead. Perhaps the Senator's support on the Committee for taking up valuable time on a witch hunt when Members' consituents on Nov. 4 told them it was time to move on was less than unanimous.

Mr. Levin’s endgame may be to stage a Stalinist show trial of senior Administration officials, the Wall Street Journal opines in a Dec. 19, 2008 editorial. President-elect Obama, who campaigned as a “post-partisan” candidate would do well to run, not walk, away from this stinker.

But the real tragedy in all this may be Carl Levin himself, who has become a parody of a reformer. If he’s successful, we’ll see the CIA return to its Carter-Clinton era function as an international-relations think tank, rather than an agency possessed of real bullets to fight hard for actionable intelligence that can protect America.

Just thought you might like to know.

Undoing the Democracy of Wealth

It will be interesting to hear the final retailer numbers for the about-to-conclude holiday shopping season. Especially interesting will be the numbers for high-end retailers trying to hawk overpriced merch in a down economy.

The Center for Media Research says that luxe marketers are changing their sales tactics. This according to a recent Wharton Marketing Conference in Philadelphia.

According to the Center's report:

• 2009 will be the worst year on record for marketing luxury goods


• Out are marketing campaigns aimed at making 16-year-olds want that to-die-for luxury handbag


• Out are marketing campaigns aimed at nouveau riche Russians flush with petrodollars


• Out is pandering to the conspicuous wealth of the Persian Gulf

What's in? Pampering the richest and most loyal of customers. The Center quotes a representative of one luxury goods manufacturer: 50 percent of their sales come from just 5 percent of their customers.

So after an unprecedented period of economic expansion and wealth creation, we're entering a period where wealth will be where it's always been--concentrated in the hands of a few. There was something democratizing to see members of what used to be the middle class driving tricked-out SUVs, checking time on their Rolexes, or stopping for a quick shine on their Guccis.

In a future where government will control more and more of the capital, and private industry in various sectors--finance, healthcare, manufacturing--will become more and more dependent on government for that capital, we may not see these days again.

Just thought you might like to know.

Merry Christmas

In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world. (This was the first census that took place while Quirinius was governor of Syria.) And everyone went to his own town to register.


So Joseph also went up from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to Bethlehem the town of David, because he belonged to the house and lineage of David. He went there to register with Mary, his bethrothed, who was with child. While they were there, the time came for her to have her child, and she gave birth to her firstborn son. She wrapped him in swaddling clothes and placed him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn.


Now there were shepherds living out in the fields nearby, keeping watch over their flocks at night. An angel of the Lord appeared to them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were struck with great fear. But the angel said to them, "Do not be afraid. I bring you good news of great joy that will be for all the people. Today in the town of David a Savior has been born for you who is Christ the Lord. This will be a sign to you: You will find a baby wrapped in swaddling clothes and lying in a manger."


Suddenly a great company of the heavenly host appeared with the angel, praising God and saying, "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace to those on whom his favor rests."

Luke 2: 1-14

Merry Christmas!

Responsibility

The media are alive today with stories of how developers now want a piece of the TARP bailout funding. Presumably these are the same developers who built tidy fortunes over the last five years due to the cheap money the Federal Reserve kept pumping out and the same creative lending that is now in some small part responsible for the economic mess in which we find ourselves.

Banks. Investment banks. State governments. Automobile manufacturers. Now developers. Where does it end?

There used to be an entrepreneurial spirit in this country. A spirit of risk taking that separated us from other peoples. People accepted the consequences of their behavior. Failure was not fatal. Thomas Edison failed many times in his attempted inventions before he hit it big with the incandescent light bulb and other creations. One of the most brilliant men I know failed more than once with companies before he founded one that had lasting success.

Now we line up for the government to feed us, put a roof over our heads, pay our medical bills, educate us and put us through college and take care of us in our old age. We've given up responsibility for ourselves to government.

Edmund Gibbon once said of ancient Athens, "In the end more than they wanted freedom, they wanted security. When the Athenians finally wanted not to give to society but for society to give to them, when the freedom they wished for was freedom from responsibility, then Athens ceased to be free."

As a nation our goal was once the preservation of our freedoms as brilliantly articulated by FDR:

• Freedom of speech


• Freedom of religion


• Freedom from want


• Freedom from fear

We seem to have lost our direction, wanting instead, as the Athenians did, freedom from responsibility. And we turn to a massive, largely ineffective federal bureaucracy to be responsible for our care and keeping--cradle to grave.

But there will a price for this. As Gerald Ford said, "A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have." Including your self-respect, your money, and yes, your freedom.

Just thought you might like to know.

Unintended Consequences

A new survey from Synovate Motoresearch says that only a third of those surveyed would consider buying a domestic automotive product. That's down from the not-so Big Three's current market share of 47%. Yikes.

The poll was taken earlier this month after Detroit bigwigs Nardelli, Mullaly and Waggoner parachuted into Washington with their tale of woe.

Synovate says they're seeing consumer opposition to the auto industry bailout not going down but going up. This is the opposite of what you'd expect after two months of incessant media coverage and scare tactics telling us that letting Ford, GM or Chrysler fail would result in a second Great Depression.

It seems to me to be the law of unintended consequences: When the three car CEOs flew to Capitol Hill on private jets (they couldn't even jet pool) the die was cast.

Even Rick Waggoner slumming it the second time around in his hybrid Escalade couldn't change the image in the mind of the American public of pampered CEOs for whom life will go on very nicely whether they get your money or not.

Their problem is that the louder they cry poor mouth the less anyone wants to do business with them. Why should I put tax money down on a bad bet? And why should I buy a Ford, Chevrolet or Chrysler if the company may be out of business in 9 months? The law of unintended consequences.

For the record I own and drive two domestic products: a full-size pickup truck and a spiffy little convertible. They're ove ten years old. Never had lick of trouble with either one of them. Great vehicles. Love 'em. I suspect most owners feel the same way about their domestics.

But apparently what the Big Three have done in their assault on the taxpayers is to convince their most loyal customers that putting their money on Detroit is a sucker's bet.

Just thought you might like to know.