Te Advocates – 10-29-08- with Drew Zambelli, Doug Garr, and AF Cook talk about the upcoming election

“The Advocates”

 With

Richard J. Garfunkel

 WVOX – AM Radio 1460- 12 Noon Wednesday

October 29, 2008

All archived Shows at:

http://advocates-wvox.com

 

Wednesday, October 29, 2008, at 12:00 Noon, I am hosting my show “The Advocates” on WVOX- 1460 AM, or you can listen to the program’s live streaming at www.wvox.com. One can call the show at 914-636-0110 to reach us on the radio.  Our guests today are Drew Zambelli, Doug Garr and AF Cook from Virginia.  Our subject today is the upcoming presidential election, the outlook for the Congress in 2009 and their predictions on who will win and what will Congress look like. Also our guests will give their views on the battleground states and what to watch for on election night!

 


Andrew J. Zambelli, Ph.D. is a market research consultant with over 30 years experience He has extensive public policy and political experience having served as Director of Communications and Chief of Staff (Secretary to the Governor) for Governor Mario M. Cuomo of New York.  He has done polling, communication strategy and campaign management for scores of legislative issues and political candidates on the national, state and local level.  He has been a delegate or alternate to three Democratic Presidential conventions.
 

Dr. Zambelli received his Ph.D. in psychology at the State University of New York at Stony Brook and postdoctoral-training at Columbia University and is a life-long resident of Westchester County, NY. Doug Garr, a graduate of Syracuse University’s Newhouse School of Public Communications has written for magazines, newspapers, and CEOs of companies like, JP Morgan, Hewlett-Packard, and Network Appliances. He has written books on Lou Gerstner of IBM, investing, and Silicon Valley. He wrote economic speeches for former Governor Mario Cuomo, and he is currently working on two new books. He has a life-long interest in politics.  Doug grew up in Westchester County and now lives in NYC. Mr. Garr was a guest of The Advocates on July 23, 2008 talking about political campaigns since FDR.

 

A.F. Cook is an author, sometime blogger, and average American citizen whose recent book, “Democrats in the Red Zone: an Independent voter’s take on the game of political perception” was published in November 2007. Cook wants Democrats to be savvier about how they play the political perception game. She believes Republicans retain an edge in their understanding of American cultural biases, and that Democrats must sharpen their rhetoric and cultivate more mainstream perceptions of their constituencies to gain an upper hand.

 

In a direct challenge to the organizational culture of the Democratic Party in particular and liberal culture in general, Cook asserts that such a strategic shift will only occur when barriers to inclusion based on class and educational credentials are broken down within those two cultures. Cook believes that America’s voting majority — especially football fans — detests one trait even more than dishonesty: pretentiousness. In her view, the impact of Sarah Palin’s nomination as the Republican Party’s vice presidential candidate clearly illustrates this reality. Ms. Cook lives in Virginia, which she calls a “red state going purple,” and she was a guest on The Advocates on both January 2nd and September 3rd of this year talking about politics.

 

Meanwhile, the mission of the “Advocates” is to bring to the public differing views on current “public policy “issues. “Public policy,” therefore, is what we as a nation legally and traditionally follow. Over the years, the “public policy” of the United States has changed or has been modified greatly. As an example, “free public education” is the public policy of the United States. Also, over time great struggles have ensued over the control of the direction of “public policy” For example: free trade vs. protectionism, slavery vs. emancipation, state’s rights vs. Federalism, and an all-volunteer armed forces or the “draft.”

 

One can find my essays on FDR and other subjects at https://www.richardjgarfunkel.com. One can also listen to all of the archived shows at: http://advocates-wvox.com. Next week we will analyze the results!

 

Richard J. Garfunkel

 

 

 

 

 

The Advocates with Michael A. Cohen 10-22-08

“The Advocates”

 With

Richard J. Garfunkel

 WVOX – AM Radio 1460- 12 Noon Wednesday

October 22, 2008

All archived Shows at:

http://advocates-wvox.com

 

Wednesday, October 22, 2008, at 12:00 Noon, I am hosting my show “The Advocates” on WVOX- 1460 AM, or you can listen to the program’s live streaming at www.wvox.com. One can call the show at 914-636-0110 to reach us on the radio.  Our guest today is Michael A. Cohen, author of Live From the Campaign Trail: The Greatest Political Speeches of the 20th Century and How They Shaped America.

Michael A. Cohen is a Senior Fellow at the New America Foundation where he co-helms the Privatization of Foreign Policy Initiative. Previously, Mr. Cohen has taught speechwriting and political rhetoric at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs. He also served in the U.S. Department of State as chief speechwriter for U.S. Representative to the United Nations Bill Richardson and Undersecretary of State Stuart Eizenstat. He has worked at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and Foreign Policy magazine, and as chief speechwriter for Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT).

He holds a bachelor’s degree in international relations from American University and a master’s degree from Columbia University. Mr. Cohen blogs regularly at democracy arsenal, and serves on the board of the National Security Network, which focuses on increasing grassroots involvement in foreign policy decision-making.

Mr. Cohen will address some of the following questions:

·        Why did he write this book?

·        What “campaign” speech had the greatest impact on America in the 20th Century?

·        Which president does he rank as our greatest speaker?

·        Which president had the greatest team of speechwriters?

 

 

Meanwhile, the mission of the “Advocates” is to bring to the public differing views on current “public policy “issues. “Public policy,” therefore, is what we as a nation legally and traditionally follow. Over the years, the “public policy” of the United States has changed or has been modified greatly. As an example, “free public education” is the public policy of the United States. Also, over time great struggles have ensued over the control of the direction of “public policy” For example: free trade vs. protectionism, slavery vs. emancipation, state’s rights vs. Federalism, and an all-volunteer armed forces or the “draft.”

 

One can find my essays on FDR and other subjects at https://www.richardjgarfunkel.com. One can also listen to all of the archived shows at: http://advocates-wvox.com. On our last show before the election, I will be hosting Doug Garr, Drew Zambelli, and AF Cook from Virginia and they will be espousing their views will on the November 4th election!

 

Richard J. Garfunkel

Letter to the Editor – The Journal News 10-21-08

Letter to the Editor:

 Journal News- October
21, 2008

I was sickened to read a letter by Mr. Ralph Caccomo, in the
October 21st edition of the Journal News. Mr. Caccomo’s cynical and pejorative
views reflect what is basically wrong with our country which George Bush has
helped ruin and John McCain’s brand of “divide and conquer” politics has looked
to conquer. Mr. Caccomo already believes that Mr. Obama (and he uses his middle
name for emphasis) will plunder the country into the worst economic crisis since
Jimmy Carter. Most of us already believe that we are in the worst economic
crisis since Herbert Hoover’s time. Most of us also believe that the brigands
on Wall Street, and their deregulating friends like John McCain, have plundered
the country. Mr. Caccomo believes that our “messiah,” as he terms, Mr. Obama,
will open the door for more “femi-nazi” secular progressives, now being
lambasted by his hero Sarah Palin. Mr. Caccomo wishes this economic disaster on
America
so that the Sarah Palins of the future will pick up the pieces and triumph. In
the words of the late Joseph Welch when he was addressing Senator Joseph
McCarthy,  “Until this moment, Senator, I
think I never really gauged your cruelty or recklessness…have you no sense of
decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?” Have we reached
a point in the country where political discourse has descended to the lowest of
all possible depths or are there more McCain-Palin robo calls in the offing?

Richard J. Garfunkel

Tarrytown,
NY

 
Republicans will emerge
triumphant

Win or lose, the Republican Party will emerge stronger from
the upcoming election. There is no doubt that a Barack Hussein Obama presidency
will plunder this country into the worst economic crisis that we have seen
since the disastrous Jimmy Carter era in the 1970s.

You liberals want change – well get ready because you just
might get what you wished for – higher payroll taxes, higher income taxes, higher capital gains
taxes and the list goes on. Then let's see how you feel about your messiah.

Perhaps the biggest winner that will come from this election
is the magnificent Gov. Sarah Palin. She has single-handedly turned the secular
progressive femi-Nazis on their heads. Take notice of the rage and acrimony
coming from the women's movement crowd. What happened to their mantra of
acceptance and tolerance? What a bunch of phonies. The bottom line is they
tremble at the thought of their precious right to kill human embryos being
under attack. Don't worry all you insufferable secular progressive women out
there, slaughter of the unborn will continue – for now.

Ralph G. Caccomo

Rye Brook

 

 

The Advocates-with Dr. Alison Stallings 10-15-08

The Advocates”

 With

Richard J.
Garfunkel

 WVOX – AM Radio 1460- 12 Noon Wednesday

October 15, 2008

All archived Shows at:

http://advocates-wvox.com

Wednesday, October
15, 2008, at 12:00 Noon, I am hosting my show “The Advocates” on WVOX- 1460 AM,
or you can listen to the program’s live streaming at www.wvox.com. One can call the show at
914-636-0110 to reach us on the radio.  Our
guest today is Dr. Alison Stallings, who is a medical dermatologist
based in Tarrytown, NY with Advanced Dermatology of Westchester.
Dr. Stallings who is originally from Mahopac,
New York, received her Bachelors
degree in Molecular Biology in 1998 and graduated from Colgate University Magna
Cum Laude.  She went on to complete her
Medical Degree from Tulane University School of Medicine where she was elected
to the AOA medical honor society.  She
completed her residency training in Dermatology at Tulane University School of
Medicine.  This
week’s subject on The Advocates is”

 “The
Sun and the Myths About Skin Cancer, Is the Public Really Informed?” Some of
the common myths that will be addressed are the following:

 ·       
Only the
elderly can get skin cancer!

·       
It takes
years for the effects of the sun to show up!

·       
Dark
skinned men and women aren’t in danger from the sun!

·       
You
can’t get burned on an overcast day!

Meanwhile, the
mission of the “Advocates” is to bring to the public differing views on current
“public policy “issues. “Public policy,” therefore, is what we as a nation
legally and traditionally follow. Over the years, the “public policy” of the United States
has changed or has been modified greatly. As an example, “free public
education” is the public policy of the United States. Also, over time great
struggles have ensued over the control of the direction of “public policy” For
example: free trade vs. protectionism, slavery vs. emancipation, state’s rights
vs. Federalism, and an all-volunteer armed forces or the “draft.”

One can find my
essays on FDR and other subjects at https://www.richardjgarfunkel.com.
One can also listen to all of the archived shows at: http://advocates-wvox.com. The next two
weeks will be devoted to politics and the coming election. On the 22nd of
October, The Advocates will host Mr. Michael A. Cohen, a senior research fellow
at the New American Foundation and the author of “Live From the Campaign Trail:
The Greatest Presidential Campaign Speeches of the 20th century and
How They Shaped America.” On our last show before the election I will be
hosting Doug Garr, Drew Zambelli and AF Cook from Virginia and they will be
telling our audience what they think will be happening on November 4th!

 

Let the Real Maverick Stand Up! 10-12-08

Let the Real Maverick Stand Up!
Richard J. Garfunkel
October 12, 2008 

The Make-Believe
Maverick
: A closer look at the life and career of John McCain reveals a
disturbing record of recklessness and dishonesty!

I am not a frequent or even casual reader of Rolling Stone Magazine. In fact, the
only time I read it was when I was sitting and waiting for my car to be
serviced in White Plains, and then it was a very
interesting story about the last days of Jim Morrison in Paris. But the other day Linda brought me the
downloaded version. This revealing eighteen page story, which of course can
contain some editorially slanted perspectives can be accessed through the below
site:

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/23316912/makebelieve_maverick/print
(If you can’t open just Google the story!)

But one thing can be clearly seen and understood, John
McCain is not the person he says he is regarding his naval aviator career, his
unfortunate time as a prisoner of war or as a straight-talking maverick. There
are many inconsistencies in his story and with the persona he has crafted
through the prism that he wishes to be seen, and therefore supported by the
American public.

In fact, when one reads this biting review of John McCain’s
life and career, the terms affirmative action, old school tie network, erratic
and reckless behavior, fit quite well. Recently there has pushback from the
sycophantic supporters of McCain over the term “erratic.” They claim that this
is a “code word” for his age. Of course, from my perspective his age is an
issue, but it has nothing to do with his “erratic” behavior. After reading this
article one would not be in any way confused by that term. It means what it
says.

McCain’s personality traits were very well established and
apparent from early on. Whether it was his difficult days as an unruly, spoiled
Navy brat, or the fact that he was negatively influenced by his hard drinking
father’s ambition, or his small stature, McCain entered into the Naval Academy
as a “legacy” or an “affirmative action” choice. His reputation as a brawler
and a punk at the prestigious Episcopal High School in Washington did not obscure or enhance his
miserable academic record. By his own admission he was “a lazy and incurious
student.”  Of course his name allowed him
into the Naval Academy and by midway in his final year
he faced expulsion due to demerits. He was always on probation, and the only
reason he was able to graduate was through the direct intervention of his
mother. His self described “four-year course of insubordination” ended with him
being ranked fifth from the bottom of a class of 899.

In comparison the claim that Barack Obama was also the
beneficiary of “affirmative action” seems to belie the fact that he made the Harvard Law School’s
prestigious law review, was its president, and graduated with honors. He also
taught at the University
of Chicago, and the
esteemed Harvard professor, Lawrence Tribe called him “one of my best
students.”

Of course, McCain’s level of competency and education,
reflected on his record as a pilot, his crashes and his brash final flight that
led him to captivity seemed to fit in with his strange view of what he was
doing. Ironically, while on the flight deck of the Forrestal, awaiting his sixth bombing mission over North Vietnam,
an errant missile from another plane struck his A-4 bomber’s fuel tank. One of
the 1000 lb bombs his plane was carrying dropped from his plane and “cooked off,”
(exploded) causing a huge crater, a massive fire, and a “devastating inferno
that would kill 134 of the carrier’s 5,000 man crew, injure 161, and threaten
to sink the ship.” But it wasn’t McCain that displayed valor in confronting the
spreading inferno! He took no part in the effort to fight the flames or save
his ship. After escaping the blast, that task was left to other A-4 pilots
while McCain ran off and watched the efforts of others to save the ship on
closed-circuit television in the “ready room.”

One can learn much more about Senator McCain character
through his relationship with his first wife, Carol, who he treated with utter
contempt in the wake of her injuries she received from a traffic accident.  Of course, while still legally married he was
living for nine months with Ms. Cindy Lou Hensley, a Budweiser beer heiress and
a former USC cheerleader. In his memoirs he stresses that he married three
months after his divorce, but interestingly he was issued a marriage license
while he was still officially married to his first wife Carol.

It was the Hensley money that would support his first run
for political office. He found out that a GOP congressional seat was opening in
a suburb of Phoenix, and within a few moments of the incumbent’s official retirement
statement, the Hensley money purchased a home in that district, one of the many
McCain was to own. One later learns of how his future mentor, the former
disgraced US Senator John Tower from Texas, made sure that he was well taken
care of through his own private donor list. Through those associations he would
meet and become closely associated with “Charles Keating, the banker and
anti-pornography crusader, who would be eventually convicted on 73 counts of
fraud and racketeering” regarding the ill-fated Savings & Loan scandals of
the Reagan era. In the year before his Senate run to succeed Barry Goldwater,
he supported legislation that would have delayed new regulations on the savings
and loans. A grateful Charles Keating gave his campaign $54,000 for his
services. Today that would be equivalent to over $150,000.

 

There is much, much more regarding McCain’s support for
Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas. He called for the abolishing of the
Departments of Energy and Education. In 1995 he supported a measure that would
have imposed “a moratorium on any increase of government oversight.” 

He opposed the new GI Bill, voted to repeal the minimum wage
and opposed the CHIP program for government supported health care for almost 4
million children. One can read on about his efforts to deregulate banks with
his colleague the former US
Senator Phil Gramm.

His hotheaded reputation is well documented, and despite his
denials, three reporters watched him explode at his wife Cindy when she messed
his hair, and “needled him playfully that he was getting a little thin up
there.” According to these witnesses, he retorted, “At least I don’t plaster on
the makeup like a trollop, you c—t.” There are many more of his schoolboy
outbursts like the one directed at Senator Grassley, “No I’m calling you a
f—king jerk!” That one almost resulted in fisticuffs. He did refer to Senator
Pete Domenici, when discussing a new budget, “only an a—hole would put together
a budget like this.” There are many more of these outbursts and a number of his
colleagues have gone on record to say, “…that they consider him temperamentally
unsuited to be commander in chief.”  I
would say that those testimonials reflected a sense of being erratic.

As to consistency, McCain is consistently inconsistent. In
fact, he may be one of the biggest “flip floppers” to ever enter into a
national race. There are too many examples to list here, but by reading to the
end of the full eighteen pages one will learn enough about his straddles,
reversals, and hypocrisies to understand the “real” John McCain. Maybe his
greatest “flip-flop” was his promise that he would “raise the level of
political dialogue in America”
and he pledged to “treat my opponents with respect…”

Obviously we have been witnessing his hand-picked “pit-bull”
with lipstick articulate his real perspectives on this campaign and Barack
Obama. He may term himself a “maverick,” but I am sure that the Maverick family
of Texas
would vigorously disagree!

McCain's
just talking '
gobbledygook'
By Fontaine Maverick / The Rag Blog / August
31, 2008

I just got a call from my brother, Maury Maverick, who said that if he hears
that John McCain is a Maverick ONE MORE TIME, he is going to shoot the TV.
Well, my brother doesn't even own a gun, but I know exactly how he feels. Every
time we hear that use of our name, it is like fingernails on a blackboard times
ten.

We kicked around the idea of doing a web page but good old Monkey Cage has beat
us to the punch:

The Real Original Maverick

John McCain is running this new ad (see video below) touting himself as the
“original maverick.”

This led Jason Zengerle and Christopher Orr over
at TNR’s The Plank to debate whether Tom Cruise or James Garner is the real
original maverick.

In fact, the original maverick was Maury Maverick, the grandson of Samuel
Maverick, from whom the name maverick
first entered the American lexicon. Maury was a radical politician from San Antonio who served
two terms in Congress (1935-1939). There, he led a bloc of progressive
Democrats who sought to push Roosevelt and the
New Deal to the left. The press quickly labeled this group “The Mavericks.”
While hugely popular with the the many poor Hispanics in his district, Maverick
was far too liberal for the conservative Texas
Democratic establishment. In 1938 he lost the Democratic party primary after
being slandered as a communist. Maverick then went on to serve as mayor of San Antonio before once
again losing in the primary after being red-baited.

 

The Advocates with Loren Gilberg and Florisa Zinghinin 10-8-08

“The Advocates”

 With

Richard J.
Garfunkel

 WVOX – AM Radio 1460- 12 Noon Wednesday

October 8, 2008

All archived Shows at:

http://advocates-wvox.com

 Wednesday, October 8,
2008, at 12:00 Noon, I am hosting my show “The Advocates” on WVOX- 1460 AM, or
you can listen to the program’s live streaming at www.wvox.com.
One can call the show at 914-636-0110 to reach us on the radio.  Our guests today are Ms. Loren Gilberg, who is
a registered nurse with more than twenty years of experience in geriatric
care, and the founder of ELDER CARE CONSULTING, INC., to help her senior
clients receive outstanding care and maintain their quality of life.  In addition to her medical expertise, Loren
has a Bachelor’s Degree in Social Work and a Master’s Degree in Business
Administration.  This background affords
her the necessary skills to help clients of ELDER CARE CONSULTING, INC.
navigate the complex world of managed care, medical benefits, social service
organizations and legal issues.  Ms.
Gilberg has been interviewed on Cablevision’s News 12 Westchester and Blumberg
Cable News and has had articles published in numerous journals, including The
Journal News, Senior News, Inside Westchester County, Advance for Nurses, and
Town Report.  Over and above her media
exposure, Loren Gilberg has served
as keynote speaker before the National Association of Elder Care Attorneys and
before groups assembled at assisted living communities and participants of recreational
senior centers.

Elder Care
Consulting, which was founded in 2000, is a professional Geriatric Care
Management (GCM) resource company offering seniors and their families a
comprehensive range of GCM services with a distinct personal touch.  Their mission is to help older adults to
maintain quality of life, independence and dignity.  Their primary goal is to allow their clients
to remain in the comfort and security of their homes.

Our other guest is
Ms. Florisa Zinghini has worked in the long-term care industry for over 20
years.  She is a NYS-licensed Social
Worker and is currently the Director of Marketing and Admissions at the Somers
Manor Nursing Home.  Her background
includes experience in non-profit organizations, skilled nursing facilities,
and independent and assisted living communities. 

The questions we
will address today are:

 ·       
This
region has a large aging population, what can be done about their care and
needs?

·       
What
role does the family play in helping to cope with this problem

·       
What role
does the government play in assisting the elderly needs?

·       
What are
some of the proto-typical problems facing both the elderly and the disabled?

·       
What is
the role of a Geriatric Care Manager?

Meanwhile, the
mission of the “Advocates” is to bring to the public differing views on current
“public policy “issues. “Public policy,” therefore, is what we as a nation
legally and traditionally follow. Over the years, the “public policy” of the United States
has changed or has been modified greatly. As an example, “free public
education” is the public policy of the United States. Also, over time
great struggles have ensued over the control of the direction of “public
policy” For example: free trade vs. protectionism, slavery vs. emancipation,
state’s rights vs. Federalism, and an all-volunteer armed forces or the
“draft.”

One can find my
essays on FDR and other subjects at https://www.richardjgarfunkel.com.
One can also listen to all of the archived shows at: http://advocates-wvox.com. Next week we
will welcome Dr. Alison Stallings who will talk about skin care, the impact of
the sun, and the public policy problem regarding the growth of skin cancer.

 


Wall Street Compensation, Our Near Meltdown 9-27-8

Wall Street Compensation, Our Near Meltdown
and
Who Speaks for America?

9-27-08

Every one is running around in a
dither wondering what is happening to our financial house, or is it house of
cards? Of course, the simple answer is greed, and how does Wall Street satiate
that greed? One of the easiest ways to make an incredible amount of money and
keep it is to become the Chairman of the Board of a Fortune 500 company. But
that alone doesn’t guarantee platinum parachutes at the end of one’s corporate
tenure. You don’t even have to be successful. Just look at the records of recent
beneficiaries of corporate send-offs, Ms. Carly Fiorina, who after almost
destroying Hewlett –Packard was sent off to be an economic advisor to John
McCain with a bank-roll in the scores of millions. She of course, for a short
moment, was being considered for vice-president on his ticket. Unfortunately
after not being chosen, the scorned woman decided to tell the truth, and in an
interview she stated that Sarah Palin could not be a CEO of a major Fortune 500
firm. When she realized her faux pas, she quickly amended her remarks to
include John McCain. Of course since “there is many a truth said in jest,” her
honesty really did hurt, and she has been declared persona non grata by the
Steve Schmitt/John McCain campaign machine.

But to be more current, yesterday
Washington Mutual, a bank holding company, whose stock had traded as high as
$45 per share collapsed. The stock had dropped in mid-September to as low as
$2.00 and the price finally settled at 16 cents this week. The Chairman Kerry
Killinger stepped down in June, but remained as the Chief Operating Officer.
This month he was forced to resign because of pressure from the investors and
Alan H. Fishman, a former CEO of the Sovereign Bank was named to head Washington
Mutual on September 8, 2008. The depositors were not happy with what
was going on and a massive run on their banks ensued as customers withdrew
almost $17 billion in less than two weeks. Secret negations were started after
the Office of Thrift Supervision seized the bank and placed into the hands of
the FDIC. The negotiations over this past weekend proceeded and JP Morgan Chase
became the new owner. The new CEO Alan Fishman, who was flying to Seattle when the transfer
was consummated, was now out of job. He had held that position for 17 days, and
for his time and effort he received a $7.5 million up front payment and a cash
good-bye present for $11.6 million. As George Gershwin once said long ago,
“Nice work if you can get it!”

So where does that money come from? Well for sure a good
chunk of it comes from the boards of trustees at many of these firms who want
to first ingratiate themselves with the company’s new “top dog” and later on,
if he/she fails wish to rid themselves of these characters as painlessly as
possible. Usually as a requirement to these “golden parachutes,” a written
non-disclosure, and non-compete statement is a must. Quite often though, many
of these “top-bananas” eventually select their own “cronies” as members of the
board. These “grateful” trustees feel obliged to therefore shower excess
compensation as a heartfelt expression of “thanks.” On the other hand, stock
options being executed at the right market timing bring countless millions to
the “golden parachute” beneficiary. Of course what better way to execute
valuable options than to inflate the stock with non-existent assets of
worthless paper on the books?  Please
note that when an initial public offering (IPO) hits the market, the inside
folk, the CEOs, and other officers, have already been allocated millions of
shares, while quite often, their employees were left out.

I recall vividly when John Hancock went “public” and the CEO
David D’Alessandro was allocated millions of shares. Were the Hancock employees
offered any stock? No! Were the Hancock employees offered any of the IPOs? No!
Of course, D’Alessandro did an excellent job for Hancock, but he increased his
own salary, making himself one of the highest-paid executives in financial
services. His compensation of more than $21 million in 2003 placed him 79th on Forbes's
list of best-paid CEOs and increased debate at John Hancock over discrepancies
between CEO compensation and shareholder returns. What else is new?

There are many, many stories out there on Wall Street and
four years ago I wrote some of this piece about executive compensation. Often
it has nothing to do with whether the company makes money, but most assuredly
it is connected to whether the stock goes up. Ironically the public and the
shareholders find out after the fact that the stock was run up on false
assertions, pumped up figures, and cooked books. Also over the years,
executives have tried to liquidate their massive holdings in an effort to cash
in before the public is completely aware impending revelations. Most
shareholders would be startled to see the company’s executives selling their
own stock. In truth, the average stock investor has his/her holdings mostly in
mutual funds, and has no idea when one of the companies, which make up that
fund, has experienced an executive’s excessive sale of stock. Just look at what
we are witnessing today with companies like Bear-Stearns that reached a high
water market price of $172 per share. We all should wonder how many executives
were bailing out as the stock began to slide in the year before its final
collapse. Unfortunately in a great many of these situations, many of the
employee 401K pension funds were overloaded with company stock, not unlike
Enron and other recent collapses. These company pension accounts disappeared
along with the demise of the parent corporation.

In the summer of 1969, I was a junior analyst with Bache
& Co., which offices were located at 40 Wall Street. Right after I was
employed, I was assigned to work with Ms. Mary DeSapio, whose sector, among
others was transportation, which included railroads and railroad cars. My
responsibility was to write evaluations of companies like St. Louis Car (closed
in 1973) and its parent company General Steel Industries. This was the dullest,
slowest and one of the worst sectors to cover on Wall Street. Ms. DeSapio had a
young intern who tracked her stocks. I had heard through the office “grape
vine” that she had made her reputation by discovering the emerging stock, the
Indonesian company Natomas Oil. In those days Natomas was selling at more than
100+ times its earnings and when I had arrived the stock was in the mid 150’s.
In talking to her young intern I found out that Ms. DeSapio still had a huge
position. Coincidently, I read a story in US
News and World Report
that the top Natomas executives were liquidating huge
amounts of stock. Being a good scout, I went to Ms DeSapio, a single wren-like
woman in her forties, and mentioned the story I had read. She seemed startled
that I brought up that stock. Maybe she was not happy that I had learned of her
connection to that speculative company. When her initial surprise calmed down,
she informed me that executive-selling didn’t indicate anything, and curtly cut
off our conversation. Despite her dismissing of my information, knowledge is
still king, and in that pre-Internet era, I believed that I had found something
interesting that may have had potential value. Ms. DeSapio in her arrogant and
condescending manner attempted to demean the value of that news and seemed
offended that I would bring up her pet project. Within a few weeks the Natomas
stock “tanked” dramatically, and if she didn’t sell her position, she was
really burned. It wasn’t long after that meeting that she was fired. Eventually,
in 1970, Wall Street experienced a huge recessionary problem of unusable leases
to cope with the pre-computer backlog of “paper” that was generated in 1968 and
1969. Thousands were fired, including yours truly. Bache was eventually
acquired by Prudential Insurance in 1981 and the 101-year old Bache name
disappeared until it was brought back and re-branded in 2007.

In the Wall Street Journal's Executive Pay Listing of
April 12, 2004, all the Fortune 500’s top executives had their sources of
income published. How ironic and fitting that this report should come
out on the anniversary of FDR's death, who understood quite intimately how
poorly financial institutions monitor themselves, the need for transparency, and
how greed drives our plutocratic “economic royalists.”  

Salary and Bonus- some selections: Freeport-McMoRan-CEO-
$5,540,000 in 2003 with $10M in stock options and $50M more in potential
options, Merrill-Lynch-CEO- $28M in 2003 with $37M more in unrealized stock
options, Time-Warner-CEO, $9.5M and $11.6M in stock options with
another $18.9M in unrealized options.  Also the front page of the NY Times' Business Day section, bonuses
top $41.4 million at troubled Interpublic for its executives. With Federal
taxes at 35% for anyone over $300,000 per year they should cry? This
compensation is way out of control. Where did they get all of their stock? They
didn't buy it!

Some critics of pay ratios, say formulas that exclude
options are useless. “Usually it's a charade,” says Mr. Alan Johnson
of Johnson & Associates, managing director of pay consultants in NY.
He says, “…employees see through it. They know the CEOs are making
millions on stock, so limiting them on salary means nothing. It is a PR
gimmick.” (The Wall Street Journal). It
is a known fact that in and around 1970, CEO's of Fortune 500 companies made in
real dollars a ratio of 43 to 1 over the average salary of their employees. In
real dollars, wages, taking in account inflation over the past 34 years or
so, have gone up slightly. In other words, the $17,000 of 1970 is not
worth much more than the $35-40,000 of today. Of course times
have changed, and our economy has shifted greatly over the last 30 or so years.
Our manufacturing has shifted to overseas, and we are much more of a service
economy today. No question “freer” trade has brought more
total prosperity to America.
But where is that prosperity concentrated and what will be the affects. In that
light, executive compensation is now 1000 to one! In “real” and tangible 1970
dollars, the average Fortune 500 CEO was making $731,000. By the year 2000 that
same corporate CEO’s compensation went to between $35 and $40 million. While
his worker’s income doubled in 30 years, their real income barely kept pace
with inflation. But the corporate executive had his income go up 52 times.
Inflationary worries were obviously not a factor. Besides all that good news,
the top income tax bracket was reduced by Ronald Reagan and his buddies at
Treasury.

So we have seen what has happened. The GOP/Right has
encouraged the lowering of taxes, the conglomeration of industry, the exporting
of jobs overseas, the deregulation of industry, and the accumulation of greater
money in fewer hands. Now, as in 1929, less people own more of America! In the
midst of this incredible increase in executive compensation, Ronald Reagan’s
administration lowered the highest tax brackets by more than 60% from 71% to
28% in 1986, while raising the bottom tax rate from 11 to 15%. In reality the
Reagan Administration created two tax brackets. The poorest earners paid up to
15% and multi-millionaires paid a little more than double? Did this increase
revenue to the Treasury? No! No wonder we experienced record deficits. Did it
increase wealth to the wealthiest? Yes! Recent articles have debunked the
“urban myth” promulgated by the flat-taxer’s and other anti-tax groups that tax
cuts increase revenues. In fact, tax cuts without expense reductions create
greater deficits. With that in mind, the Reagan years offered some of the
biggest deficits, (tripling the National Debt), continued high unemployment,
averaging over 7% in his tenure, and great private sector increases in wealth.

On the March 17, 2006, broadcast
of the PBS' The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, New York Times
columnist David Brooks falsely claimed that “in the Reagan years,
unemployment went from 13 percent to 5 percent.”

In fact, according to data
from the U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics, in 1981, Ronald
Reagan's first year in office, the U.S. average unemployment rate
stood at 7.6 percent. During Reagan's presidency, it reached a high of 9.7
percent, and had declined to a level of 5.5 percent when Reagan left office.
The rate from when Reagan entered office through his last year declined by 2.1
points, far less than the eight-point drop for which Brooks credited Reagan.
(Besides that obvious reality in November of 1981, ten months into the Reagan
Administration, unemployment had risen to 8.5% and continued to rise to almost
10% through February of 1983.)

From the March 17 broadcast of The News Hour
with Jim Lehrer
:

BROOKS: I disagree a little. I think most people
who call themselves independent are really partisan. They're just lying.

And — and I think partisanship — one of the
things political science shows is that partisan shapes the reality you choose
to see.

People choose the reality that — that flatters
their partisanship. For example, in the Reagan years, unemployment went from 13
percent to 5 percent. If you asked Democrats, at the end of that, did
unemployment go up or down under Reagan, 60 percent said it went up.
Republicans said down.

You choose the reality you want to see. And, then,
the Clinton
years, when you had the reverse, this time, it was the Republicans' turn to be
more pessimistic and wrong. People choose the reality that flatters themselves.

 c/o Media Matter for America http://mediamatters.org/items/200603210007

Along with Reagan’s tax cuts for the rich, we experienced
the Stock Market crash of 1987, the Savings & Loan debacle and bailout for
almost one trillion dollars, and the deregulation of broadcasting, which has
led to the consolidation of ownership regarding thousands of previously
independent stations.


What we have seen in this country has been an explosion in
private wealth and a crying need for public revenues. This drought in public
revenues has resulted in an aging infrastructure, which includes; poor and
deteriorating bridges and roads, an antiquated electric grid system, weak,
porous and inadequate levee systems, un-dredged harbors and rivers, a
deteriorating reservoir system and over-crowded dangerous airports. In the
Clinton Years, taxes on the wealthiest bracket went up to 39.6%, three extra
brackets were created, there were tax cuts for the middle class, surpluses
ensued, and over 20 million jobs were created. A benefit of that expansion of
the work force, especially in the center cities, resulted in a dramatic
lowering of crime in the period from 1993 through 2000. (Another urban myth was
that Rudy Giuliani’s police tactics alone lowered crime in NYC. What is
conveniently forgotten was that crime dropped dramatically in urban centers
throughout America
without Giuliani’s help!)

Of course, one immediate result is that the
“entitlements;” Social Security and Medicare are under attack.
Certainly they are threatened by the demographics facing us. We have a large
“baby-boom” population (64-74 millions) that is aging. This
population emerged from parents that had 2.6 children per family. It
is now being replaced by a generation that is composed of 2.1
children per family. Generally speaking this smaller population is not as
wealthy and earns less in the service sector than its parents, the
baby-boomers, earned in the manufacturing sector! Is the answer less taxes
for this wealthiest of classes? It was said that to tax these people at
previous levels would only bring in 4% more! Well 4%, if that is correct, will bring
in $40 billion at least. Also, why is $75 billion being used from the
Social Security Trust Fund to be used to help balance the budget and defray
more deficits? These same antagonists of Social Security say it is “broke” and
therefore people like John McCain and his leader, President Bush, have called
for its partial or complete privatization. This would be another trillion
dollar gift to our Wall Street “friends.” Conveniently they have forgotten that
the Social Security system runs surpluses and that since Nixon’s time over $2
trillion has been borrowed from this Fund to pay for trinkets like Star Wars space
missile defense systems, the 600 ship navy,  and an all-volunteer army. I am sure that
figure of $40 billion is probably incredibly low. I have also
noticed that a recent report has stated that the IRS has been lax regarding the
issue of corporate taxation. In fact, US Corporations are not paying their fair
share, and many have been running to offshore tax shelters for years,
while they drape themselves in patriotism! The case of Stanley Tool recently
comes to mind! So with corporate taxes at all-time lows (post WWII) and the
capital gains tax at 15%, and the highest marginal rate at 35%, one can readily
see why we have a $500+ billion deficit that is growing. Should we continue
down this path until we are broke?

By the way the myth
regarding unemployment: Courtesy the United States Bureau of Statistics

Since 1928
there have been 13 presidents, 7 Republicans (Hoover, Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush
Sr, and Bush Jr) and 6 Democrats (FDR, Truman, JFK, Johnson, Carter and
Clinton).

Six of the
seven Republican Presidents had unemployment
increase while in office.  Ronald Reagan is the only
Republican President since 1928 to leave office with a lower unemployment rate.

All six
Democratic Presidents had unemployment
decrease or stay the same while in office.  The worst
Democratic performance was Jimmy Carter, who had the same unemployment rate
when he left office as when he entered.

Viewing the
President's 4 year term gives an even more pronounced effect.

Of the
Repubilican President's 9 terms, unemployment has
increased in 7 of the 9 terms.

Of the
Democratic President's 10 terms, the unemployment rate
never increased.

Here is the
same list, sorted by decrease in the unemployment rate.


Civilian
Unemployment Rate, U.S. Department of Labor: Bureau of Labor Statistics

   
 period         start end  chng   President
     Party
Jan 1993 Jan 1997    7.3   5.3  
-2.0   Clinton I
     Democrat

Jan 1985 Jan 1989    7.3   5.4  -1.9   Reagan II
     Republican
Jan 1961 Jan 1965    6.6   4.9  
-1.7   JFK/Johnson
   Democrat

Jan 1965 Jan 1969    4.9   3.4  
-1.5   Johnson  
     Democrat

Jan 1949 Jan 1953    4.3   2.9  
-1.4   Truman  
      Democrat

Jan 1997 Jan 2001    5.3   4.2  
-1.1   Clinton II
    Democrat

Jan 1981 Jan 1985    7.5   7.3  -0.2   Reagan I  
    Republican
Jan 1977 Jan 1981    7.5   7.5  
0.0   Carter  
      Democrat

Jan 2005 Aug 2008    5.2   6.1  +0.9   Bush, GW II
   Republican
Jan 2001 Jan 2005    4.2   5.2  +1.0   Bush, GW I
    Republican
Jan 1953 Jan 1957    2.9   4.2  +1.3   Eisenhower I
  Republican
Jan 1969 Jan 1973    3.4   4.9  +1.5   Nixon  
       Republican
Jan 1989 Jan 1993    5.4   7.3  +1.9   Bush, GHW
     Republican
Jan 1957 Jan 1961    4.2   6.6  +2.4   Eisenhower II
 Republican
Jan 1973 Jan 1977    4.9   7.5  +2.6   Nixon/Ford
    Republican

One cannot begrudge Ronald
Reagan
's personal admirers their moment of eulogy. And particularly not in
view of the man's wise embrace of Mikhail Gorbachev late in his term, his
gallant departure into Alzheimer's 10 years ago, and Nancy Reagan's noble
advocacy since then of government support for stem-cell research. There were
moments beyond politics when those of us who opposed Reagan the most could, and
did, tip our hats to him.

But let's talk economics. It is not too early to
contradict those who would elevate Reagan above Franklin Roosevelt, John F.
Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, or even Bill Clinton, on this score. Yes, Reagan
did change the course of history. But his economic legacy was mainly
destructive, and especially so for the world's poor and our own working class.

Among postwar administrations, who had the best record on
economic growth? The answer is Kennedy-Johnson (49 percent over eight years),
followed by Clinton
(34 percent), followed by Reagan (32 percent). Among postwar two-term
presidencies, Reagan beats out only Eisenhower (21 percent) and Nixon-Ford (24
percent). Call him the best of the Republicans, if you want.

The unemployment rate stood at 6.6 percent when Kennedy
took office and at 3.4 percent when Johnson left it. The average over their
eight years was 4.8 percent. When Clinton
came in, unemployment was at 7.4 percent; it averaged 5.2 percent during his
two terms and fell to 3.9 percent by the end. And for Reagan? Unemployment
stood at 7.5 percent at his inauguration, and it averaged that same 7.5 percent
during his entire eight years. The jobless rate was 5.4 percent when Reagan
left office.

Inflation did come down — from just over 10 percent in
the oil crisis year of 1980 to just over 3 percent in 1983. But at whose
expense? Here the correct contrast is with FDR, who controlled inflation while
doubling output over four years in World War II. In the process, Roosevelt leveled the pay distribution and created the
modern American middle class.

Reagan's disinflation came from unemployment over 10
percent, from his attack on unions, and from high interest rates, which drove
up the dollar and cheapened imports. Those measures bankrupted much of the
manufacturing belt. They damaged the middle class. And they created a vast
trade imbalance and a rising external debt whose consequences haunt us still.
Precisely what Roosevelt built, in other
words, Reagan did much to destroy.

Mythmaking especially surrounds Reagan's economic ideas,
where memory blurs reality into romance. In truth Reagan's economic team was a
shotgun marriage between ideologues, monetarists and supply-siders who couldn't
stand one another. There was even a good-humored (though conservative)
Keynesian mixed in — Murray Weidenbaum, the first chairman of Reagan's Council
of Economic Advisors.

I remember Murray sidling over to me at a meeting of a
deplorable group called the Gold Commission — an official assembly of nut
cases, to be blunt about it — in the Cash Room of Donald Regan's Treasury
Department, on the day in 1982 when the CEA's first “Economic Report of
the President” for Reagan's presidency was published.

American
Economist- The son of renowned economist John Kenneth Galbraith and of Catherine
(Kitty) Atwater Galbraith, he earned his BA
from Harvard in 1974 and Ph.D from Yale
in 1981, both in economics. From 1974 to 1975, Galbraith studied at King's College, Cambridge.

In conclusion, whether one is a Democrat, Republican or an
independent, or liberal or conservative, the one reality which should be most
apparent to all is that we are way too much in debt. Our personal, corporate
and government borrowing is out of control. Our personal savings rate is
non-existent. Our economic society has been driven by debt, and the “greater
fool” theory which postulates that there is always a greater fool out there who
will pay a premium for what we own. We are running huge budgetary deficits, we
are fighting wars that we are not paying for, and we owe over $11 trillion to
ourselves and foreign countries. We are buying cheap imported goods from
Wal-Mart, who once prided itself on only “selling American!”  They have becomes the world’s greatest
retailer and they are a conduit for our dollars to go straight to China. We are
purchasing $700 billion on foreign oil, and much of it is going to regimes that
do not like us and some of that money is going to finance militants and terrorists
that are threatening our very existence. What we need is honest and strong
leadership. And we need that leadership now! Our society will not long exist
with an attitude of business as usual, and that we are the best because we are
Americans. As Lincoln stated in his famous
speech in Springfield, Illinois in June of 1858, “A House Divided
Against Itself Cannot Stand!” He was talking about slavery, and today we have
to be talking about economic slavery. It is the issue of the great economic and
social divide that has arisen in our country and has the potential of ripping
us apart.

I often quote FDR who said the following, “The test of our
progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it
is whether we provide enough for those who have too little.”  FDR, the Second Inaugural Speech, January 20,
1937

 

“The immortal Dante tells us that divine justice weighs the
sins of the cold blooded and the sins of the warmhearted in different scales.
Better the occasional faults of a government that lives in the spirit of
charity than the constant omissions of a government frozen in the idea of its
own indifference.” FDR, from remarks he made in 1936.

 

In the spirit of those remarks we have to pull together for
the commonweal and address the fissures that are renting our nation state
apart. This means sacrifice and cooperation. Let us hope it begins in January.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Advocates with Mik Moore 9-24-08

The Advocates

With

Mr. Mik Moore

Jewsvote.org

 Wednesday, September 24, 2008, at 12:00 Noon, I am hosting
my show “The Advocates” on WVOX- 1460 AM, or you can listen to the program’s
live streaming at www.wvox.com. One can call
the show at 914-636-0110 to reach us on the radio.  Our guest today is Mr. Mik Moore and our subject
today is:  “Are the Democrats Taking the
Jewish Vote to Lightly?”

Mr. Mik Moore is the Co-Executive Director and Co-Founder,
Jewsvote.org and has fourteen years of experience working in the often
overlapping worlds of communications, politics, and the Jewish community. He is
currently on leave from Jewish Funds for Justice, where he serves as Chief
Communications Officer. Before joining JFSJ in 2005, Mik did electoral and
policy work for a variety of elected officials and non-profit organizations in New York City. Mr. Moore
serves on the board of The Jewish Week
and is board chair of the Jewish Student
Press Service. He studied at Hebrew
University of Jerusalem, spent a year in Israel
with the Zionist youth movement Young Judaea, and holds a B.A. from Vassar College
and a J.D. from Georgetown Law.

Mr. Moore will address some of these questions:

 ·       
Are there states which the Jewish vote will be
pivotal?

·       
Do Jewish voters question Obama’s support for Israel?

·       
Is the McCain campaign connected to the spread of
internet rumors about Obama?

·       
Why do most Jews vote Democratic?

Meanwhile, the mission of the “Advocates” is to bring to the
public differing views on current “public policy “issues. “Public policy,”
therefore, is what we as a nation legally and traditionally follow. Over the
years, the “public policy” of the United States has changed or has
been modified greatly. As an example, “free public education” is the public
policy of the United States.
Also, over time great struggles have ensued over the control of the direction
of “public policy” For example: free trade vs. protectionism, slavery vs.
emancipation, state’s rights vs. Federalism, and an all-volunteer armed forces
or the “draft.”

One can find my essays on FDR and other subjects at https://www.richardjgarfunkel.com.
One can also listen to all of the archived shows at: http://advocates-wvox.com, including last
week’s show with Mr. John Berenyi discussing the continuing crisis of
confidence in the financial markets.

 

Obama Turns the Corner in the Polls 9-25-08

Obama Turns the Corner in the Polls

September 25, 2008

Richard J. Garfunkel

Looks like fortunes have been changing for the
Democratic ticket since my last 50 state survey. I'll work on a new one this
rainy weekend. As I thought, Sarah Palin's novelty has worn
thin and the “blush is off her rose.” A plurality of the
public does not feel she is qualified, what else is new? McCain's
flip-flops and grandstanding is eroding his numbers and in the words of James
Carville, “It’s the economy stupid!” Maybe his ads which have
pretzeled the truth are starting to backfire with the press, the moderates and
the non-gullible.

The latest October surprise is one promulgated by the Three
Blind Mice: Bush, Paulson and Bernanke. Wasn't it only in the spring when
Paulson and George (Herbert Hoover) Bush told us don't worry, “prosperity
is just around the corner.”  And wasn't a few days ago that ancient
John McCain thought that the economy was fundamentally on solid ground. Well
according to the Three Blind Mice, the ground is trembling. All one had to do
was listen to another impossible performance by our fearless leader in his
monotonic, no animation style to find out how disengaged he is regarding
his day job. As the NY Times said in its lead editorial “He
could have offered a great deal more than an eerily dispassionate primer on
credit markets in which he took no responsibility at all for the financial
debacle.” When has this guy ever taken any responsibility I ask of
Lewis “Scooter” Libby?

What else could one expect from this heir to the political
legacies of Franklin Pierce, James Buchanan, US Grant, Warren Harding, Calvin
Coolidge, and Herbert Hoover? He even makes Jimmy Carter, look sincere, honest,
intelligent and engaged. The Times went on to say, “In the end,
Mr. Bush's appearance was just another reminder of something that has been
worrying us throughout this crisis the absence of any real national
leadership…”

Of course everything this Medusa of ill-tidings touches
or says turns around to stone. His ideas range from A to B, and they can be
summed up in two words, “cut taxes.” By the way for your friends that
are “supply-siders,” a recent published study proved that tax cuts do
not generate more revenues, Surprise, surprise!

So here we are facing a bailout of $700 billion which
is equivalent to 25% of last year's US Budget and makes the costs of
the ongoing morass in Afghanistan
and Iraq
look like peanuts. But the greatest irony of this whole mess is that the
fractured Republican Party is running against itself on this issue. McCain
decided to fly to the rescue while supposedly suspending his campaign.
Another lie! His campaign proceeds, his commercials air, and the
machinery of his apparatus is still on the move, But before his
mad dash to Washington he made sure that he had a stop-over in NYC to
schmooze with Katie Couric. He stated that he would rather be a
patriot first and a candidate second, even if it costs him the election. I
agree! This seems to be another act in his farcical campaign
melodrama that brought us the hurricane suspended convention, Sarah Palin,
the golden girl from the Yukon,
and now the abandonment of the debate at Old Miss.  But Obama and the
public was not sucked into this black hole of fabrication. Barack Obama intends
to be at the debate, and I assume big John McCain, who would
rather be in the Hanoi Hilton, will show up also. He would also like
to have Sarah Palin have her first full press conference on the Alaskan tundra
with the caribou and her dogsled. I assume they would
want to have her VEEP debate the opening night of the World
Series. Look for more fun and games before this one is wrapped up!

Letter to the NY Times City Room Blog 9-25-08

September 25, 2008

Letter to the NY Times
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/25 regarding Roosevelt
Island and the now approved Memorial to FDR

Congratulations to Mr. William vanden Heuval and his
magnificent efforts and work regarding the memory of one of New York's greatest sons. Obviously, to all
who have a sense of history, Franklin Delano Roosevelt will remain fondly in
the hearts of all freedom-loving Americans. His remarkable leadership in
confronting the Great Depression, and reversing the panic and our slide to
oblivion should never be forgotten or deprecated, by the “fiction writers
inside and outside of Congress.” The reforms instituted in the First
Hundred Days of the New Deal should be a lesson to us today regarding the miscreants
of greed who have brought our financial well-being and stability to a dangerous
precipice. The apostles of de-regulation are now begging for relief as they
hold the whole financial system hostage to their falsehoods and empty words.
Wasn't it in only April and May when our modern day Andrew Mellon and Herbert
Hoover, declared “prosperity is just around the corner.” Hopefully
come this November the American people will rise up in their “righteous
indignation” and throw those rascals to the dustbin of history.

FDR conquered polio, saved our economic institutions,
founded the Warm Springs Foundation that found the cure for that dreaded
disease, and rallied the country in the wake of its “Day of Infamy.”
FDR the “Soldier of Freedom,” aptly named by historian James McGregor
Burns, made us “The Arsenal of Freedom,” authored the Atlantic
Charter, created Lend-Lease, and cemented the alliance of Allied nations that
brought the fascist totalitarians to their knees. He also brought us the GI
Bill, Bretton Woods monetary reform and the United Nations. Churchill said of
him that he, “was the greatest man he known.” No better site could be
then on Roosevelt Island that flanks both the FDR Drive and is in
the shadow of the UN. I look forward to visiting this memorial, and again
“hats off” to Bill vanden Heauval and his great work.

Richard J. Garfunkel

Tarrytown,
NY