Commentary Update for April 29, 2003: Doyle v. Rendell, Sham Hearings, Earth Day Musings, Comic Relief, Gephardt Plan, Santorum, Banfield on War Coverage, Deep Throat Uncovered

This week's Commentary guests are Steve Heins, Director of Marketing and Communications for Orion Lighting and Sean Fitzgerald, Publisher and Executive Editor of Lake Winnebago B2B. We discuss Wisconsin's energy policy and needs, the state of the Fox Valley economy, and a variety of other issues.

As of May 1st, Commentary and all Titan-TV shows are moving to cable channel 66. This is a "second tier" cable channel, meaning that it's not included in the Time-Warner basic cable package. What that means is that fewer citizens will have the opportunity to view Commentary. You might say we're putting in first rate effort for a second tier channel. This is especially ironic given that the show has developed a popular following in Madison.

Last year Jim Mather and I had a discussion with UW Oshkosh Director of University Relations Robin Asbury about the possibility of taping Commentary in a new studio and perhaps having the shows played on Oshkosh Cable Access Television (which will continue to be on the basic cable package and thus would allow for the widest possible viewership). Hopefully we will renew those discussions in the coming weeks.

If you do want to help Commentary survive as a vital source of news and opinion in the Valley but are not sure what to do, email me (Palmeri@uwosh.edu) or call me at 920-424-4422 and I can give you some suggestions.

In other News:

*Doyle v. Rendell--New vs. Old Democrat?: Ed Rendell was elected governor of Pennsylvania in November of 2002. Like Wisconsin's Jim The New Democrat Doyle, he inherited a massive budget deficit and has to deal with a legislature dominated by Republicans (Pennsylvania's Republicans control the Assembly by a 109-94 margin and the Senate 29-21). Unlike Doyle, Rendell has had the courage to take a look at the Pennsylvania tax code and is essentially asking that the wealthiest Pennsylvanians pay more income taxes--a move that will allow for property tax relief for the middle class. Regardless of whether or not one agrees with Rendell's approach to fixing Pennsylvania's budget problems, he is at least giving Democratic candidates something to run on in the 2004 elections that will represent a clear alternative to the Republican majority. Pennsylvania Democrats will be able to run for office saying, "our governor wants the wealthiest Pennsylvanians to pay a little more so we can reduce the pain of budget cuts, preserve vital services, and actually cut taxes for a significant part of the population." I can't see what Wisconsin Democrats are going to say other than, "the Republicans are mean and nasty." The Philadelphia Inquirer supports Rendell's plan.

Sounds like Rendell, unlike New Democrat Doyle, has a chance of passing what the Madison Capital Times calls the "Moral Test of Government." Instead, under New Democrat Doyle it looks like we are going to see a dramatic expansion of gambling (which is really a regressive tax if we want to be honest about it), something even prominent Dane County Democrats Kathy Falk (Dane County Executive) and new Mayor of Madison Dave Ciesliewicz have come out against.

*Sham Hearings: On last week's Commentary show, Jay Heck made the point that the Legislature's Joint Finance Committee solicits public comment and then promptly disregards it. Evidence for that occurred recently in Rhinelander, where a group of 58 high school students were treated like utter crap by the arrogant committee. The Green Bay Press Gazette ended up editorializing against these "sham hearings."

Earth Day Musings: The Wisconsin Democracy Campaign's Mike McCabe on Earth Day said that "The greatest environmental challenge of our time is the health of our Democracy." On a related note, Becky Katers of the Clean Water Action Council wrote recently about how the University of Wisconsin credibility is being damaged by polluter donations. Ed Garvey recently said of the UW: "What's the buzzword of the day? Oh yes, we need 'a conversation' about the future of the UW. Fair enough. Let's have a conversation. But let's make it more than a business deal with corporations, special interests and big donors. Let's have it involve Wisconsin’s working families."

Comic Relief: Tommy Chong of Cheech and Chong fame participated in an on-line chat recently. Here's a piece that caused me to chuckle:

Q: Tim Hefter of Stoughton - What do you feel about the feds cracking down on glass pipes and bongs?

A: Tommy Chong - I feel pretty sad, but it seems to be the only weapons of mass destruction they've found this year.

*Gephardt Plan to Cover All?: In an attempt to distance himself from other Democratic Party candidates for president, Dick Gephardt last week came out with what he calls a "universal coverage" health care plan. If you actually read the entire Washington Post story on the plan, you'll find that it only really covers 97% of the population and even that not until the plan has been in existence for several years. Compare what Gephardt is calling for with the single payer approach of Dennis Kucinich--the latter is a true universal care system.

*"Santorum. Isn't that Latin for asshole?": That's an actual quote from a few years back by then Nebraska Senator Bob Kerrey. He was talking about Pennsylvania's junior Senator Rick Santorum, who stirred some controversy recently by espousing views on homosexuality that even managed to upset a good chunk of Republicans. Here's an excerpt from Santorum's actual remarks. Note the response of the AP Reporter:

Santorum: Every society in the history of man has upheld the institution of marriage as a bond between a man and a woman. Why? Because society is based on one thing: that society is based on the future of the society. And that's what? Children. Monogamous relationships. In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. That's not to pick on homosexuality. It's not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing. And when you destroy that you have a dramatic impact on the quality.

AP Reporter: I'm sorry, I didn't think I was going to talk about "man on dog" with a United States senator, it's sort of freaking me out.

Andrew Sullivan is a prominent, gay conservative who has been very supportive of the Republican Party. He and the "Log Cabin Republicans" have been most upset with Santorum. Sullivan has been getting lots of hate mail sent to his website after saying things like this: "Santorum, of course, doesn't believe he's prejudiced against gay people. I wonder if he knows any, or any work for him, or have ever worked for him. He claims his remarks are only pertinent to the Texas case before the Supreme Court. That's a lie, as anyone reading the transcript can attest. He further says he has nothing against homosexuals, except that if they ever want to express their homosexuality in an actual intimate and physical love, it's the equivalent of molesting a child or having sex with a dog, and they should be put in jail for it. That's what the Christian far-right means by 'compassion.' In the abstract, I suppose you could argue that if you have no problems with celibate homosexuals, then you're not a homophobe. Some saintly people might fall into that category, and I wouldn't like to say it isn't possible. But in practice, I'm really not so sure. It's hard to find the right analogy, but it's not that far from saying that you have nothing against Jews, as long as they go to Church each Sunday. (Which was, of course, the Catholic position for a very long time.) Worse actually. It's like saying that, even if Jews practiced their religion at home, in private, they could still be arrested for undermining the social order. Their very persistence in their identity - which harms and could harm no-one else - is a threat. Do you think someone who said that would remain a leading pillar of the Republican Party?"

Banfield On War Coverage: MS NBC's Ashleigh Banfield (the one with the stylish glasses) delivered the annual Landon Lecture at Kansas State University recently. She was highly critical of the cable and network treatment of Iraqi freedom, claiming it was "coverage" and not "journalism." The story has a link to an audio version of the speech, which you will need real player to listen to.

As an aside, Banfield was ruthlessly attacked by shock radio jock Michael Savage after she said that Americans should try to understand why Hezbollah are not seen as terrorists by the Lebanese. Savage subsequently said this about Banfield;" turn on MSNBC and you'll find the mind slut with a big pair of glasses that they sent to Afghanistan. She looks like she went from porno into reporting. What happens from 20 to 30, they do porno. From 30 to 40 they do weather. Then from 40 to 50, they do tv news." Perhaps in an attempt to out-Santorum Santorum, Savage has also said that gays and lesbians are "perverts" and that "the gay and lesbian mafia wants our children"; that America is a "'she-ocracy' where a minority of feminist zealots rule the culture...together, they have both feminized and homosexualized much of America to point where the nation has become passive, receptive and masochistic." How's that for uplifting discourse? Savage is the guy, believe it or not, that MSNBC has signed on to replace Phil Donahue. Donahue calls this an attempt by MSNBC to "out-Fox Fox."

Deep Throat Uncovered: University of Illinois Journalism Professor Bill Gaines and his students spent 4 years trying to uncover the identity of the infamous "Deep Throat," the source that provided the Washington Post's Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein with much of the information that led to their stories that brought down the Nixon Administration. Gaines' website presents some fairly convincing evidence that Deep Throat is Fred Fielding, Nixon's Deputy White House Counsel. I can't find the exact quote, but Carl Bernstein has said words to the effect that Gaines should have spent the four years teaching budding journalists how to protect source confidentiality rather than how to uncover such sources. I kind of agree with Bernstein in the sense that revealing the identity of Deep Throat will make it that much more difficult for potential White House whistleblowers to come forward.

All the best,

-Tony