Stimulating New Jobs: Where's the Leadership?

New York Times columnist Frank Rich got it exactly right when he stated:

"As the nation’s anger rose last week, the president took responsibility for what’s happening on his watch — more than he needed to, given the disaster he inherited. But in the credit mess, action must match words. To fall short would be to deliver us into the catastrophic hands of a Republican opposition whose only known economic program is to reject job-creating stimulus spending and root for Obama and, by extension, the country to fail. With all due deference to Ponzi schemers from Madoff to A.I.G., this would be the biggest outrage of them all."

Anger did rise, and it's still boiling up. There should be more job-creating stimulus spending now and more focus on the "real" people in the American economy: workers, mid-level and low-level managers, small-business owners and entrepreneurs starting new companies.

Yes, the appalling problems in the upper levels of the American economy must be fixed. At the same time, it is vital to deal with the difficulties, challenges and economic emergencies now facing people below the rank of "Master of the Universe." Specifically, emergency focus now should be given to Main Street and rural America, as well.

Where are the Congressional and White House leaders who can cut through the bailout noise and be stronger--and louder--advocates for the millions of Americans struggling in the heartland? These layoff victims need jobs now and can't find any, and thousands of small businesses who could hire them are unable to get crucial loans.

"Congress and the White House Team Up to Tackle Middle America's Deepening Crisis" -- that should (but won't) be tomorrow's big headline.


-- Si Dunn

It's the BushCheneyRoveLimbaugh Economy, Stupid

It's funny--yet not really funny at all--how the current economic crisis suddenly exploded into public view just a few short weeks before the end of the Bush-Cheney-Rove-Limbaugh Administration. And lawmakers were given something like one week to come up with massive amounts of bailout cash, or else the American and world economies would all swirl down the tube like a flushed toilet.

Conspiracy theorists might postulate that Republican insiders were frantically trying to keep the meltdown hidden until BushCheneyRoveLimbaugh made it out of office, so the economy then would implode just after President Barack Obama was inaugurated. And Democrats would get all of the blame for the collapse just as they tried to put forth their agenda of change and help for the downtrodden middle class and poor.

Anyway, it all blew up on the GOP's watch, and the elephant boys now are feeling the wrath from people all over America and the world while they frantically try to deflect the criticism toward President Obama--and make it "his" economy.


“Never underestimate the capacity of angry populism in times of economic stress,” Robert Reich, a professor of public policy at the University of California, Berkeley, and labor secretary under President Bill Clinton, recently told the New York Times. “A big challenge for President Obama will be to maintain a rational and tactical public discussion in the midst of this severe downturn. The desire for culprits at times like this is strong.”

The blame needs to stay squarely on the true culprits: the "free market" Republicans who pushed financial regulation almost completely out of the economy and let crooks, pirates and others driven by greed take over and rip us off while steering corporations, funds and worker benefits straight into the ground.

Former Vice President Dick Cheney recently has said "Don't blame us for this mess." He was just trying--very unsuccessfully--to steer the spotlight away from the economic sins of the past eight years, during which he helped advise and preside.

It's still not Barack Obama's economy--not yet. We're still trying to cope with the financial horrors of the BushCheneyRoveLimbaugh economy. And we will continue trying to cope with them for many months to come, until the Obama Administration's frantic flurry of emergency measures finally starts turning things around.

So, yes, do blame the free-market, anti-regulation Republicans for this current mess. Keep the spotlights squarely focused on BushCheneyRoveLimbaugh--and make them keep paying the electric bills for the illumination, as well.

For a long while, it seemed that the messes in Iraq and Afghanistan would be their main--and dubious--legacy. But those are small potatoes now, compared with the huge pile of burnt hash browns the GOP and their free-market cronies have made out of the American and global economies.

Once a recovery starts to take hold, remember who refused to help and cooperate in our nation's time of peril: the House Republicans and their incessant "No!" votes against the Obama Administration's proposals; and most (but not all) of the Senate Republicans, who keep clinging to the failed policies that nearly sent us into the Great Depression of 2009.

Oh, and especially the real head of the Republican Party: Rush "I Hope Obama Fails" Limbaugh.

--Si Dunn

The New Business Model for Newspaper Survival?

All over the U.S., newspapers are in deep trouble. Some have closed their doors; others are teetering toward collapse.

Their incomes from advertising and paid subscriptions are shrinking as more and more of us turn to online sources for news, sports, information, classified advertisements and updates on restaurants, movies, products and services.

Now there is urgent talk that newspapers may have to become mostly digital and try to sell their content online, to subscribers and to single-copy buyers (the digital equivalent of those who occasionally purchase newspapers from coin racks and news stands).

Selling digitized newspaper content already has failed several times. The New York Times and others previously have tried and abandoned it. Internet users are used to getting almost everything for free, except on music sites such as iTunes.

Some pundits already have floated this idea: Why not sell digitized newspaper content the same way music is sold on iTunes?

There's one big problem, however. Newspapers going digital with the iTunes model in mind will have to spend a lot of money on trying to make their reporters, feature writers and columnists into national and international media stars, so people will want to buy what they write.

Every journalist will have to become his or her own "brand"--You sell, you can keep working here.

The emphasis on "gotcha" journalism and scandal mongering then will just increase, as journalism "brands" battle each other for sales and marketplace dominance.

Nobody will want to cover local news--Boy Scout promotions, wedding announcements, obituaries, two-car accidents at Main and Elm--because almost nobody (except a few family members) will pay any money to read such reports, print them out and put them in scrapbooks.

Meanwhile, there will be hundreds, thousands of journalist "brands" rushing to cover President Obama, Kate Winslet and the Jonas Brothers.

Why, after all, write a story that will bring in two dollars when you can write one that might, potentially, bring in thousands for the newspaper and hundreds for your pocket?

If you sell, you can stay. If you don't sell, we'll replace you with a better "brand."

Doesn't sound like a very promising future for American journalism.

-- Si Dunn

-30-