"Press Release Wars" Are Downright Silly

(Danville, California)

 

    OK, folks! I am going to start sharing with you some of the downright silliness of this campaign (heck, just about all campaigns). Since I am on the press e-mail list for the Obamas, the McCains, and yes even still, the Clintons, I thought I might share some of the more ridiculous offerings.

 

    Today it was former President Bill Clinton, trying to entice us to play a "lottery" of sorts, so we could dine with Hillary (and help retire her multi-million dollar campaign debt). The press release is entitled "The Person I Most Want to Spend Time With." Seriously, that's the title (or the punch line; make your own joke!) Anyway, here's what his email said:

 

"Dear Mark,

During the campaign, Hillary and I didn't have the chance to eat together much because we were usually on the trail in different states. Now that the campaign's over, I'm glad we can share more meals again.  

Of all the people I've had the privilege to break bread with, the person I most enjoy is still Hillary.

Now you have a chance to have dinner with her. And if you contribute today to help Hillary retire that pesky campaign debt, you and a guest might be sitting down to dinner with her soon. I think you should go for it and enter today. 

Join Hillary for dinner. Make a contribution today.  

Trust me on this one. If you're the lucky winner, it will be a night you'll really enjoy and one to remember.

All my best,

Bill Clinton"

 

In fairness, some of the McCain and Obama offerings are equally as touching. Those chapters are coming soon to a blog near you! www.MarkCurtisMedia.blogspot.com.

 

---

Get fantasy football with free live scoring. Sign up for FanHouse Fantasy Football today.

Let them Debate: The Barr/Nader Factor

(Lafayette, California)

 

    I had the great honor of speaking to the Lafayette Rotary Club this week about Campaign 2008.  Every year I speak to more than 25 Rotary Clubs around the Bay Area. These are folks committed to community service and are true leaders. How Rotary has served around the world for over 100 years, especially its effort to eradicate Polio, is remarkable. Roto-plast and other great programs have treated thousands with birth defects, too. It's a wonderful group of kind, generous people.

 

    Of course, the Rotarians had lots of questions about this year's Presidential campaign; and since I had been on the campaign trail from January through June, there was a lot to discuss.

 

    One Rotarian asked me about the viability of third-party candidates and whether I think there should be third-party candidates in the debates. GREAT question, and one I love to talk about.

 

    An Associated Press poll in June had it:

 

    Obama   47%

    McCain   43%

    Nader       6%

 

    A Zogby Poll in early July had it:

 

    Obama 44%

    McCain   38%

    Barr        6%

 

    I have always believed that a Democracy is simply a "marketplace of ideas." If you put an idea (or candidate) forward, and get the majority to support it, you may prevail. It's not a guarantee, but it has worked well in this country for more than 230 years.

 

    I am a supporter of a viable third option. In 1992, Ross Perot garnered 19 percent of the popular vote. In 1998, pro-wrestler-turned-Mayor Jesse Ventura won the Governor's race in Minnesota. While I did not support either, I do support people having a choice. In 1980, I liked John Anderson; and he got my vote.

 

    My point is....choice! We have nothing to lose by looking at all options. With that in mind, I believe that if any candidates are polling above 5 percent, let them participate in the fall debates. In 1980, there was great turmoil over whether to include John Anderson. The same goes for 1992 and Ross Perot. How about Pat Buchanan in 1996 and Ralph Nader in 2000?

 

    Oh, I know the arguments: Conservatives believe Ross Perot cost George H.W. Bush reelection in 1992; and liberals blame Ralph Nader for Al Gore's defeat in 2000. They argue that the third-party candidates should not have run because they pulled from Democratic and Republican Party constituencies.

 

    That's crazy! A candidate's choice should be on whether they attract votes, not whether they draw votes away from another person. This year, Republican Ron Paul was polling 10% in the New Hampshire primary, yet Fox News Channel blocked him from the debate. Why? Are we that afraid of new and different ideas? Don't we trust ourselves to reject ideas that might not work?

This year is interesting, as Libertarian Bob Barr may pull votes from John McCain. Independent Ralph Nader and the Green Party's Cynthia McKinney may pull votes from liberals. Maybe they will just cancel each other out.

Who knows? We'll never know if the corporate media and major parties "systematically" lock them out by not given them serious coverage, or by not giving them a place on the stage. Let's make it a policy: If any third party candidate is polling better than 5% on Labor Day, let them join McCain and Obama in the fall debates.

What's the harm? After all, this IS a Democracy!

I am busy getting ready for the Democratic Convention in Denver and the Republican Convention in St.Paul. Check in often at www.MarkCurtisMedia.blogspot.com.

Immigration Policy a National Embarassment

(San Francisco, California)

 

    A shocking tragedy in the wonderful "City by the Bay" may finally put the illegal immigration issue on the national radar screen. And it's about time! Most of the Presidential candidates largely ignored it this year; and - now that we are down to McCain and Obama - they are still ignoring it. The press needs to start insisting on answers, and not just accepting the "policy position handouts" that all campaigns are guilty of. Running the country by "press release" on immigration or any other issue simply won't work.

 

    Just ask Danielle Bologna, of San Francisco. Today she is a widow with two dead sons, thanks to Washington's utter indifference to illegal immigration and to San Francisco's blatant flouting of immigration law. San Francisco turned a blind eye towards a criminal alien, and now three family members are dead. That's an outrage.

 

    Here's what happened: On June 22, a man named Tony Bologna was shot to death near his San Francisco home. His son Michael, age 20, and another son Matthew, 16, were shot to death as well. The violence appears to have been precipitated by some type of road-rage incident.

 

    The murder suspect now in custody is 21-year-old Edwin Ramos of El Salvador, who was convicted of two violent felonies as a juvenile, but was never deported as an illegal immigrant. Why? Because, for some reason that defies explanation, San Francisco has a policy of not deporting violent illegals who are juveniles. San Francisco is a self-proclaimed "sanctuary city," meaning it does not obey or enforce most federal immigration laws. Cooperation between federal agents and city police is nil (much to the dismay of many honest SFPD cops, who take their pledge to enforce the law seriously, but aren't allowed to do so).

 

    By the way, lest you get the impression that Mr. Ramos was a petty juvenile delinquent, here's what he was convicted of doing. The first conviction was when Ramos and some known gang members beat a man mercilessly on a city bus - a beating which, thank God, was captured on the bus's security video camera. Ramos's second crime is even more unspeakable. He attacked a pregnant woman on the street and tried to steal her purse. For this he gets sanctuary?

 

    So by this time, after two violent felony adjudications, you'd think someone would have called the "feds," but no such luck. According to the County of San Francisco's Juvenile Probation Department, "Probation officers shall not discriminate in any fashion against minors based on their immigration status."

 

    By the way, for all those who love to constantly beat up on the news media, I hope some will tip their hats to the "San Francisco Chronicle" and reporter Jaxon Van Derbeken for unearthing this shocking story. It's Journalism 101 at its finest, all too seldom seen anymore in the world of "infotainment" that media executives claim is "news." But I digress.

 

    In any case, I hate to use a cliche, but this story is just the tip of the iceberg. No one is really talking about illegal immigration policy on a serious level, especially in the Presidential campaign. Much of that lack probably stems from the illegal immigration bill that died in Congress last year. The bill was widely criticized by liberals as too tough on border enforcement, and it was widely attacked by conservatives who thought it provided "citizenship through amnesty" for too many illegals. So, both ends of the political spectrum are to blame for stopping a possible solution. It wasn't a perfect bill by any stretch, but doing nothing is hardly good public policy on any issue.

 

    Of course, with any policy crisis we always get the quick fix. San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom has now rescinded the policy (which, fair to say, he did not create); and city leaders have told the "Chronicle" that ten juvenile offenders have been referred to immigration agents for possible deportation.

 

    For Danielle Bologna that will likely provide little comfort as she buries her husband and sons. Mayor Newsom has officially "closed the barn door, after the horses escaped."  American politics always seems to run "a day late, and a dollar short" these days. The response to Hurricane Katrina from the state, local and federal level was a case study in that inadequacy three years ago. Today, San Francisco takes this year's prize for inept government.

 

    Hopefully, there will be a lot of debate over illegal immigration this year as the campaign heats up. There will be talk of border fences, guest worker programs and "paths" to citizenship. That's all well and good, but any bill that Obama or McCain signs into law should have one clear provision: ALL illegals, adult or juvenile, with felony convictions must face mandatory deportation. Cities, such as San Francisco, which ignore the law should have federal funds withheld. That might get their attention.

 

    As Danielle Bologna tearfully pointed out to Greta Van Susteren during a TV interview tonight, fixing the law won't bring her family back. And, as for illegal immigrants in the U.S, "They have more rights than we do," Bologna said. 

 

    It is hoped that illegal immigration will be up for serious discussion at both the Democratic and Republican National Conventions next month. I will be in Denver and St. Paul to report. Check in at www.MarkCurtisMedia.blogspot.com.

    

---

Get fantasy football with free live scoring. Sign up for FanHouse Fantasy Football today.

Obama Foreign Trip "About Time" for Many Reasons

(Danville, California)

 

    You might think it is the "second coming." The Internet and TV networks and newspapers (and MANY blogs) are filled with talk of Barack Obama's trip to Iraq and Afghanistan. The coverage is a bit "over the top," and he has not even arrived yet. I'll try to dissect some of the conflicting opinions about this trip in a moment, but first some initial thoughts.

 

    I think the most important point here is that nothing bad can come from Obama's trip. Seeing things firsthand can be eye-opening, with a lot more information than can be gleaned from a stale Congressional hearing in an air-conditioned room with preplanned testimony. This guy might possibly become Commander-in-Chief, so he had best get familiar with the troops now. As we saw in the movie "Charlie Wilson's War," the Congressman was profoundly changed by what he saw in person. (OK, I know it was a Hollywood depiction and was embellished, but the point is well taken).

 

    There are various facets to the debate over Obama's trip. One political blogger argues that John McCain dared Obama to go and that now Obama is "one up" on McCain for calling his bluff. Sorry, but this might be the silliest argument on the table. First of all, it presumes that Obama is going only because of the taunts from McCain. Folks, Obama is going because he has to go! Can you imagine his trying to be a serious candidate in November without going to Iraq?

 

    So, this trip is a matter of necessity, not choice; and, all politics aside, it's a matter of grave national security.

 

    Yes, there is a political equation. I am not naive. Obama simply can't win in the fall without this trip. His military and foreign policy credentials pale so in comparison to McCain's, that Obama's inexperience raises serious doubts about his viability as President. (That said, I still argue that this election will be decided by the state of the U.S. economy, not by foreign policy, just as happened in 1980, in the midst of international strife).

 

    Still, given the timing, Republicans will try to have a heyday over Obama's visit. He should have gone there months ago, they will argue. The trip may change Obama's troop pullout plan, they may further argue. On the other hand, with Prime Minister Al-Malaki now searching for some sort of timetable for our withdrawal, the Obama visit may play into his hands, given Obama's pledge for specific troop drawdowns by specific dates.

 

    So, maybe it's a fact-finding trip; maybe it's a policy trip; and, yes, maybe it's a campaign trip. It may be all of the above but, given the time and proximity to next month's conventions, I'll defer to another colleague from Wisconsin, who may be the best analyst in the business on either end of the political spectrum. "It's very hard to argue that this is not political," said Jeff Greenfield, political analyst for CBS News, on Friday.

 

    I can't wait to get to Denver for the Democratic National Convention on August 25, followed by the Republican National Convention in St. Paul on August 31. Check in at www.MarkCurtisMedia.blogspot.com.

---

Get fantasy football with free live scoring. Sign up for FanHouse Fantasy Football today.

Polls Are a Mixed Bag Right Now

(Danville, California)

 

    Most polls continue to put Democrat Barack Obama in the lead in the Presidential race. However, the gap is closing. Polls that showed him leading John McCain by 12 to 15 points just a few weeks ago now show that lead all but gone. Why is that? Well, for starters, many of those polls were taken right after the dramatic and historic primary season ended. The euphoria over Obama's razor-thin win over Hillary Clinton and the fact that McCain had won his nomination three months earlier, meant that McCain was knocked out of the headlines for a good stretch.

 

    Now that people have just two choices (Okay, I know Nader, Barr, McKinney, et. al., are hovering out there.), the polls may tighten further.

 

Here are some of the latest numbers:

 

POLL:                                      Obama:                  McCain:

 

Newsweek                                44                            41

Quinnipiac                                50                            41

ABC/Washington Post               49                            46

Real Clear Politics                    47                            43

 

    The key here is the undecided vote. As many as 15 percent of voters have yet to make up their minds, so the election could swing either way. Also, most polls have a margin of error of +/- 4 percentage points. That could make these polls essentially dead even.

 

    Bad News for McCain: An AOL poll shows that six percent of American homes have no "land line" phone. They rely on cell phones only. Most of those numbers are unlisted, making this mostly young, 18-to-30-year-old group unavailable for phone polling. As we saw in the primaries, this voting demographic heavily favors Obama.

 

    Bad News for Obama: A variety of polls still indicate that 20 to 25 percent of Hillary Clinton supporters are planning to vote for McCain, or they will just simply stay home. Many are still angry, believing Obama took "skips in line" ahead of Hillary Clinton when it was "her turn" to be the nominee. These people are still mad six weeks later. They could be decisive.

 

    Battleground states: There are eleven in all. It's a toss-up in eight right now: Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, New Hampshire, Florida, Virginia, Nevada and New Mexico. Obama has wider margins in Wisconsin and Colorado. McCain has a leg up in Missouri.

 

    The bottom line: This race is wide open! I have heard too many McCain backers ready to "throw in the towel." And I have heard too many Obama supporters talk of a certain victory. Neither group is right!

 

    I am gearing up for the Democratic Convention in Denver and the Republican Convention in St. Paul. Until then, keep checking in at www.MarkCurtisMedia.blogspot.com.

    

---

Get the scoop on last night's hottest shows and the live music scene in your area - Check out TourTracker.com!

Tony Snow 1955-2008

(Danville, California)

 

    First it was Tim Russert; now it's Tony Snow. One was unexpected; the other we kind of knew was coming. Still, both deaths are a shock to the journalism community. Russert was 58; Snow, 53. Both died much too young, well before their prime. Death is hard to take at any time; but, in a Presidential election year, when we all expected to see a lot of Tim and Tony, missing them is even harder.

 

    I had the good fortune to know both men, not as good friends, but as professional colleagues. One was a tried-and-true Democrat; the other, a hard-core Republican. I respected them both deeply for their passion, their intellect and their integrity.

 

     I have great memories of interviewing Tony a number of times when he was host of "Fox News Sunday." We would have him on KTVU the Friday before, for a preview.

 

    Ironically, the last time I spoke with both Snow and Russert was in January. Tim was at the Iowa Caucuses in Des Moines. Three weeks later, I had dinner with Tony in Concord, CA, when I   introduced him as the featured speaker before a crowd of 500 at the annual Contra Costa USA Dinner. He was fantastic! We had a lot in common. We were both professional journalists. We had both worked in politics. We had both played in rock bands in our 20s. We had even worked as stand-up comedians; and we had both lost our moms to cancer when we were teenagers. Despite all the ups and downs of life, we counted our blessings.

 

    We talked a lot that night, and Tony was especially encouraging, because I had just lost my job two weeks before and was professionally devastated. He was so encouraging and supportive. He had lost media jobs, too. He was thrilled that I decided to strike out on my own and cover the Presidential race as a freelancer, because he knew it would be an uphill fight in the world of entrenched media empires.

 

    Days later came this note to me in the mail. It may be hard to read, so I'll transcribe it: "Dear Mark: It was a real treat to meet you in person at last, and to get time to talk about everything from stand-up to politics to the wild and ruthless business of broadcasting. As one who has been through the 'getting fired' business, let me share one consoling thought: Something better, and probably something unexpected, will come your way. That just seems to be how these things work. Your talent, drive and ability will shine through. I know how tough it is now, but hang in there: It will get better. Thanks for doing such a great job last night. I hope our paths will cross again soon. Best, Tony."

 

    Here was a guy who was losing his life to cancer, but he was consoling me for losing my job on TV. That dose of humility and reality will carry me a long way. I will treasure the handwritten note forever.

   

    But my greatest memory is of March 22, 2007, when Tony held the White House briefing the day after Elizabeth and John Edwards had announced the return of her cancer in the midst of his Presidential run. Here is what Tony said to a national TV audience from the briefing room:

 

    "A couple of things up top. As you probably know, Senator John Edwards and his wife, Elizabeth, have announced that she has a recurrence of cancer, and that they will still continue a full and vigorous campaign. First, our thoughts and prayers are with Elizabeth Edwards. Also, as somebody who has been through this, Elizabeth Edwards is setting a powerful example for a lot of people, and a good and positive one. She has been on top of diagnosis and followup. When you have cancer it's very important to keep checking. She's being aggressive. She's living an active life. And a positive attitude, prayers, and people you love are always a very good addition to any kind of medicine you have. So for Elizabeth Edwards, good going; our prayers are with you."

 

    Snow also said, "When you see an Elizabeth Edwards saying, 'I'm going to embrace life and I'm going to move forward,' that is a wonderful thing." 

    From the other camp, came a response. John Edwards told "People" magazine that he and Elizabeth were praying for Snow, adding: "Tony has been an incredible example for people living with cancer and cancer survivors."

 

    That was simply an exchange of kindness, class and leadership from both side of the aisle. Cancer is an equal opportunity killer. It could care less whether you are Republican, Democrat, Green, etc. When it strikes public figures, they have two choices: Wall themselves up in privacy and self-pity, or become public advocates for education, early detection, research and beyond. The nation is fortunate that the Snows and Edwardses chose the latter.

 

    Tony was optimistic about his prognosis. In our last conversation, he talked about living long enough to see his kids grow up and provide him with grandchildren. Feeling equally optimistic, I invited him back to Contra Costa County to tell us all about those grandchildren, and we would dissect the political world at the same time. I can't believe that conversation was just six months ago, and now he's gone. He was so strong, and so ready to keep fighting.

 

    Like Tim Russert, Tony Snow was a devout family man who loved his wife and children. Today our prayers are with Tony's wife Jill, their two daughters and their son. God Bless them! With Sunday upon us, I can't help thinking that Russert and Snow are in Heaven, hosting a spiritual Sunday joint edition of "Meet the Press" and "Fox News Sunday" from the great beyond. What a show it would be!

---

Get the scoop on last night's hottest shows and the live music scene in your area - Check out TourTracker.com!

"Foot in Mouth Disease" Infects Campaign Trail

(Danville, California)

 

    Good Lord! Where do I begin? The campaign missteps are coming so fast that I feel I need dance lessons. (Or maybe the candidates do!)  

 

    
Today it was former U.S. Senator Phil Gramm (R-TX), a surrogate for Sen. John McCain,  who - during an interview with "The Washington Times" - called the United States "a nation of whiners" in a "mental recession."

People paying $ 4.50 a gallon for gas are probably not really thrilled about being called "whiners." And the "mental recession" remark smacks of Jimmy Carter's infamous "malaise speech," which was likely the lowest emotional moment in U.S. Presidential history. People don't like being told they are "losers," whether it's by a Republican or a Democrat. Such remarks helped lead to Carter's landslide defeat to Ronald Reagan in 1980. We want to be uplifted, not castigated.

 

    Not to be outdone, Phil Gramm has plenty of competition from the Rev. Jesse Jackson. At the end of a Fox News interview this week, Jackson said (assuming the microphones had been cut): "See, Barack been, um, talking down to black people on this faith based .... I wanna cut his nuts (testicles) off ... Barack ... he's talking down to black people." The fact that Sen. Obama has been chastising black males who father children, then abandon their families, is laudable. That he's calling on churches to help is an acknowledgment that he knows they fill a big need in the social services gap. Entertainer Bill Cosby (who holds a Doctorate in Education) has been attacked for similar remarks. Why do people attack the messenger when they don't like the message?

 

    Much to my dismay, some U.S. media outlets are "self-censoring" Jackson's remarks. This "namby-pamby" journalistic nonsense needs to end now! Report what he said, and let people make their own interpretation and judgement. (NOTE TO THE MEDIA: Go back and read the First Amendment in case you are confused!) There was no such restraint when then-candidates George W. Bush and Dick Cheney referred to "New York Times" reporter Adam Clymer as an "ass" during the 2000 campaign, while they stood to close to an open microphone. Just report what the candidates say, crude as it may be at times. (NOTE TO CANDIDATES: Always assume all mikes are hot!)

 

    Now, let me take a moment to defend Sen. Gramm and Rev. Jackson. They are entitled to their opinions, and - quite honestly - it's nice to hear a little candor in a prepackaged corporate sound bite world. I think both men probably truly believe their statements. Heck! That's actually refreshing from both sides. At least we know where they stand!

 

    The real problem here is that both men are surrogates for the candidates. What REALLY matters in this election is what the candidates themselves say and how they respond to questions and issues. Gramm and Jackson are not on the ballot.

 

    This year Barack Obama was nominated for the "Foot in Mouth" award when he stereotyped rural voters as gun-and-Bible-toting hicks. John McCain won his "Foot in Mouth" nomination by saying that he needed to be educated about the economy because his real strengths lie in military and foreign affairs. Both men were pummeled for their remarks, and that's the way it should be because THEY are the ones who could actually sit in the Oval Office.

 

    So, while we can all be amused by Jesse Jackson and Phil Gramm, (and Geraldine Ferraro, Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Rev. Pat Robertson, et. al.), it's important to keep in mind, they are not on the ballot.

 

    Let's focus on the candidates themselves and hope the "Foot in Mouth Award" does not become a category at the Oscars! It might be hard to pick a winner.

 

    In six weeks, I hit the road again for the Democratic and Republican conventions. Keep dropping by, www.MarkCurtisMedia.blogspot.com.

 

---

Get the scoop on last night's hottest shows and the live music scene in your area - Check out TourTracker.com!

Comcast Newsmaker

San Francisco Politics as Self-Parody

(Danville, California)

 

    They seem hell-bent on outdoing themselves time and time again, and this idea is no exception. Some San Francisco political leaders are hoping to name the city's sewage treatment plant after President George W. Bush. The idea is that, in their opinion, the Bush presidency has been so bad that giving the sewage plant his name is a befitting recognition

 

    "In President Bush's case, we think that we will be cleaning up a substantial mess for the next ten or twenty years," said Brian McConnell, of the Presidential Memorial Commission of San Francisco, in an interview with the Associated Press. "The sewage treatment facility's job is to clean up a mess, so we think it's a fitting tribute," McConnell added.

 

    This Commission is serious, and members are trying to have a ballot initiative ready for the November election. This is the same San Francisco that was about 400 million dollars "in the hole" a few years back and is still short staffed in its police department to the tune of about 800 officers. The city's crime rate (including murders) has jumped in recent years. Gangs are a real problem.

 

    This is also the same San Francisco that tried to ban the Junior ROTC program from the public schools because many in the city were opposed to the war. Being against the war and the President who led it are certainly legitimate areas of political discourse, but why punish a bunch of needy teenage kids (many of whom use the ROTC program to launch themselves into the military, college or both)? Even Mayor Newsom and Sen. Diane Feinstein had the good sense to oppose banning the Junior ROTC. It's another classic lesson in "If you don't like the message, don't kill the messenger!"

 

    Naming the sewage treatment plant after President Bush poses the question: "Don't we have more important things to do?" The problem is that such a move just adds to the national perception that San Francisco is a place filled with kooks. That's a shame because it remains one of America's most wonderful cities, not to mention a major tourist destination point. Besides, not all the ideas from here are bad. San Francisco is modeling a health care plan for all its residents that could spread throughout the nation, as talks of health care reform continue in the presidential race. But good ideas get overshadowed here by the bad.

 

    As you might guess, Republicans think naming the sewage treatment plant after Mr. Bush is a bad idea and plan to fight the ballot measure. "This is why San Francisco is considered wacky," said former state GOP spokesman Patrick Dorinson in an interview with the Associated Press. Dorinson also called the ballot initiative "a horrible idea" that is "childish."

 

    Political activists in San Francisco may be doing this as a practical joke, because an idea like this is sure to make national headlines (and it has); but, instead of making President Bush look foolish, it has the opposite effect - leaving the "City by the Bay" with egg on its face once again.

 

    I will be writing about politics all summer as I gear up to attend both political conventions in Denver and St. Paul.  Check in often at www.MarkCurtisMedia.blogspot.com.    

---

Get the scoop on last night's hottest shows and the live music scene in your area - Check out TourTracker.com!

Campaign Maps Paint Fascinating Puzzle

(Danville, California)

 

    The wonders of the internet never cease. For political junkies like me, there is always something new to catch my eye. This year it is the plethora of Electoral College prediction maps. Just Google "electoral map predictions," and you'll find plenty! Some are very interactive and have state-by-state polling, so you can tell where the race is close and where it isn't.

 

    The maps vary a great deal. One shows Barack Obama way up, with 320 electoral votes - 50 more than he needs to become President. The most fascinating one, though, is from www.politicalmaps.org, which shows Obama and John McCain tied at 269 electoral votes apiece.

 

    Based on my look at a variety of these electoral maps and at state polling, I think we are in for a very close race on election night; and I am still looking at a one-state margin to decide the entire race. The sad part of this is that the drama may end early on election night, because some of the "bellwether" states are on the East Coast and could affect turnout in the West. For example, if Virginia (a normally Republican state), goes Democratic, it could be a bad night for McCain. On the other hand, if Pennsylvania (a traditionally Democratic state), goes for McCain, Obama may be in trouble. If both states "buck the system," we're in for a long, wild night!

 

    As I always tell folks, each of these maps, like the polls, represents a single "snapshot" in time. What a particular map predicts in July may not be what it will show in November. Swings in the economy, ups and downs in gas prices, the candidates' selection of running mates, and terrorist activity (or the lack thereof) can all affect the polls and maps. Nothing is cast in stone. For example, politicalmaps.org had the GOP up by 20 electoral votes last November, before we even had nominees!

 

    I was at the Danville Veterans Memorial Building on July 4th, announcing the town parade as it passed by. Two of my retired military friends were having quite a debate- one predicting an Obama landslide and the other predicting a close McCain win. The point is that this race is wide open. We vote in November, not in July!

 

    I will be at both political conventions this year. The Democrats are in Denver beginning August 25, and the Republicans are in St. Paul as of September 1. Check in often at www.MarkCurtisMedia.blogspot.com. We will update those maps, all summer long!

---

Gas prices getting you down? Search AOL Autos for fuel-efficient used cars.

Jesse Helms Dies on July 4th

(Danville, California)

 

    Former U.S. Senator Jesse Helms, a stalwart of conservative American politics, has died today at the age of 86. He joins a list of famed American politicians whose deaths ironically occurred on the nation's birthday, the 4th of July. The list includes former Presidents Thomas Jefferson and John Adams.

 

   
Helms was a fascinating man. People either loved him dearly, or hated him deeply. There was no in between. Helms was a newspaper editor and TV commentator before his first successful run for the U.S. Senate in 1972. He would serve thirty controversial years before retiring in 2002.

 

    Helms was a complex man who could be bitterly partisan or unwaveringly kind. In one of his notorious displays of discourtesy, he purposely sang "Dixie" in a Senate elevator to Senator Carol Mosely-Braun, a black, female Democrat from Illinois, in hopes of making her cry - this after a bitter debate over the Confederate flag. On the other side of the coin, Helms could be a man of great compassion. He and his wife adopted an orphaned nine-year-old with cerebral palsy, after the boy simply wrote the newspaper saying he wanted parents. Now that's heart!

 

    Helms also eased his tough stance on AIDS funding over the years. At first a tough opponent of AIDS spending, he was criticized for being anti-gay. To be fair, Helms made the argument that by the 1990s more was being spent per capita on AIDS patients, than on the far greater number of patients still dying of cancer. In later years, Helms helped back funding for treating AIDS in Africa, where it is simply epidemic and a threat to regional and world stability, not to mention just plain heartbreaking for the number of children left without parents.

 

    I got to interview Senator Helms on a number of occasions when I was a Washington, DC correspondent for WSOC-TV in Charlotte, North Carolina. He could be feisty, belligerent, or as gentle and kind as could be. You were never quite sure what to expect.

 

    One of my most memorable conversations with him occurred as he was getting ready for Richard Nixon's funeral. "We could have had the Nixon Presidential Library at Duke University if it wasn't for Walter Dellinger," Helms said at the time. He was referring to the liberal law professor and former Solicitor General, who helped block the Nixon Library from going to Duke, where the former President had graduated from law school. No matter what people thought about Nixon, Helms argued, landing any presidential library could have been a real plum for tourism and research in North Carolina. Today the Nixon Library is in Yorba Linda, California.

 

    Love him, or hate him - and there are many people on both sides - Jesse Helms will be remembered as an icon of American politics. We are a country of vastly diverse political ideas, from liberal on the left to conservative on the right. Each has had its time and place in our history. We have survived in the balance of the two longer than any other democracy on earth. That is something we can all celebrate this 4th of July!

 

    I'll be writing daily about political happenings. Tune in often at www.MarkCurtisMedia.blogspot.com.

 

 

 

 

---

Gas prices getting you down? Search AOL Autos for fuel-efficient used cars.

Politicians Are Not "Rock Stars!"

(Danville, California)

 

    Every campaign has its just plain ludicrous moment. In 1992, some nut asked Bill Clinton if he preferred "boxers or briefs." Not only was the question inane, but the press coverage was equally as bad. In 1995, some poor reporter in Baltimore tried to ask newly-elected House Speaker Newt Gingrich the same question. Gingrich, whether you like him or not, properly excoriated the fool reporter by dressing him down in front of the entire press corps (and national TV audience) for asking such a ridiculous question. For those of us who still value quality journalism, it was a choice moment! (Such moments, sad to say, are far too infrequent these days).

 

    So let's fast forward to the 2008 campaign. This year's bad cliche is to refer to candidates as "larger than life": "Barack Obama is a rock star!" "Hillary Clinton is a rock star!" (OK, the picture here was "photo-shopped!")  I even heard former Gov. Mike Huckabee referred to as a "rock star!" Now Huckabee does play a mean bass guitar, sometimes in a band, but he is NOT a rock star. Nor is Obama or Clinton.

 

    The only people who are actually "rock stars" are the rock stars themselves. It's a self-describing title. You either are, or you aren't. There's no room for "wanna be's" here. The Hall of Fame football coach and announcer John Madden has always railed against team owners and executives who pull football jerseys over their suits and then accept the team trophy in the locker room after the Super Bowl. Not only, he says, do they look foolish for wearing a football jersey over a coat and tie (and they do), but none of them ever played a down in the game! The point is that owners own, and players play. And, politicians make laws; and rock stars make music. Mixing the roles and metaphors in society is confusing (and in many cases is deceiving).

 

    I have had the good fortune to have worked in both the music industry and the political world. The great lesson in life (as well as in entertainment, in sports and in politics) is, "Don't try to be what you are not!"

 

    Truth be told, most politicians are "dull as dirt." I've been around a lot of them. Not all are dull, mind you. Former Sen. Bob Dole and current Rep. Barney Frank are among the funniest people I ever met. They have more jokes and one-liners than most stand-up comics. But they are the exceptions, not the rule.

 

    Politicians are not "rock stars," and I doubt whether anyone really wants them to be. The music business has been marred by excesses in sex, drugs and alcohol since time began. It's a tough, grueling, often heartbreaking business that has taken its toll (even death) on countless who enter. Excess is an occupational temptation and an occupational hazard. Yes, and sometimes, the same pitfalls occur in the political world.

It's a hard life, constantly living on stage and in a glass house, surrounded by a curious public and press.

 

    But the analogy ends there. The real problem with calling politicians "rock stars" is that those doing so feel compelled to embellish the candidates - to make them something larger than life - which they are not. Former Congresswoman Pat Schroeder, whom I got to know over my years as a Congressional Aide and as a reporter, used to refer to this phenomenon as "putting lipstick on a pig!"  In the advertising business the old adage is "Sell the sizzle, not the steak!"

 

    The problem with all of this from a media standpoint is that I see reporters (even on the networks), standing at a rally and reporting "live" that "Barack Obama is a rock star!" What this says, loud and clear, is that the reporter has nothing of real significance to say. Nothing about Obama's biography; nothing about the candidate's stance on issues; and no knowledge about the candidate's voting record.

 

    Comedian Jay Leno once joked that "Politics is show business for ugly people!" Cute line, but maybe he's on to something. If Barack Obama becomes president, I want him to be more like Harry Truman than Ozzy Osbourne. If John McCain becomes president, I want him to be more Calvin Coolidge than Sid Vicious.

 

    So let's stop the media obsession with the "rock star" analogy. All it does is diminish the candidates, diminish the reporters using it, and - most of all - it diminishes what should be a great public debate.

 

    I will keeping writing the "rocking blog" (OHMIGOD...did I just say that?) Tune in daily at www.MarkCurtisMedia.blogspot.com.

 

---

Gas prices getting you down? Search AOL Autos for fuel-efficient used cars.