New Year's Message
November has been exceptionally cruel. I have been trying desperately to reconcile the events. Some people say that luck evens out in the end. But that is absurd. In the course of life, random events occur - these things that we call luck. And like the distribution of all groups of random events, they lay out in a bell curve. Most of us have luck that falls in the middle, neither too fortunate nor too tragic. But others are on one extreme of the curve or another. And it is that distribution, with some people having unbelievable luck and others tragic fortune, that is so maddeningly difficult to understand. Which leads us to the first of the November events, the re-election of George W. Bush. George Bush - when fate flips its coin, it has come up heads for Bush ninety nine times out of one hundred. Yet this beneficiary of infinite good fortune does not display the tiniest hint of awareness, nor any curiosity as to "why him?" His methods of coping with unfair privilege have started with alcoholism and ended with religion. He has embraced a perverse form of evangelical Protestantism that equates good fortune on earth with favor in God's eye. It is preordained that he have good fortune, because he is one of God's elect. And in late November, the Rector of my church and his wife buried their son. Two of the most decent, thoroughly well-meaning people I have ever known nursed their twenty-five year old son as he withered and died of cancer.

I have agonized to find an explanation. I have lain in bed, vacillating between two simplistic theories. First, that this is God's way of testing us, a simple exercise in making us stronger. The stronger we are, the better able we will be to fight evil. The other is that there is no explanation at all; that the ultimate absurdity is to seek meaning in the face of an uncaring universe. Unfortunately, the latter leads to despair, the former to fanaticism. Neither of these serves our purposes. Despair makes us an enablier of evil, both in the world and in ourselves. It leads us to a life of shallow hedonism and cruelty. On the other hand, if all of life's misfortune makes us better able to fight evil, then we are never really strong enough. We need to seek more and more stringent tests so that we can make ourselves even stronger. And then we become inured to the pain of others, because it is good that they be strong too. Fanaticism leads us, ultimately and inevitably, to actually practice evil.

So I end up with a working hypothesis that allows the questions to remain unanswered. I believe that either God does not act directly in this world or that God's plan is so complex and subtle that it is well beyond my understanding. But this leaves me full in the midst of a quandary; How then, do I lead my life?

The only thing I can do is to cultivate certain virtues within myself (the only area over which I have even slight dominion). These virtues will help me to cope with the cruelties of November, and maybe even influence the world for good.

The first virtue I will call acceptance, patience and determination. It starts with an understanding that the task of ridding the world of evil and injustice is too enormous to be accomplished in my lifetime. The virtue that I have to cultivate is to retain my distain for evil, accept the inevitable fact of its existence and not become overwhelmed or embittered. I have to understand that I will -- and will have to -- continue to fight injustice to the moment that I draw my last breath. I have to cultivate this understanding in myself, despite human nature to the contrary. Human nature does not easily accept a dynamic balance. It seeks ultimate victory or the glory of obliteration. It has to be held, by ropes of will, on the tightrope between the two. I have to take satisfaction in the fight, glory in each victorious battle, and truly accept that the war will continue.

The second virtue is the capacity to experience joy. Without it my own life is wasted. I believe that the capacity to experience joy does not come naturally to most adults in our culture. Some people are simply hardened. Some refuse to allow themselves joy while others are oppressed. Some denigrate joy as a cheap feeling, and others believe they never have enough. I will not experience joy unless I cultivate the ability. And that means that I have to find joy in my own circumstance. I have to find it in my daily life, in the natural world that surrounds me, the people that love me and the exercise of my human capacities. I can certainly experience joy vicariously, from the satisfaction of helping other people -- the thrill of marching forth. But I have to do more than that. For I cannot help others without feeling it myself. Joy is not something that can be taught; it can only be cultivated.

So these are my two New Year's resolutions. In the New Year - and thereafter - I will practice patience, acceptance and determination. I will celebrate joy. And without really understanding, I will use these virtues to shelter me from the storms of November.

Religion and Poverty
The Left Coaster has an excellent piece on the refusal of the religious right to address poverty and social injustice issues. See http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/003490.html#more

The religious right will not see it this way. There has always been a strain of American Protestantism that views "worldly success" as a sign of God's favor. They view success in this world as God's sign that you are one of the select. The corollary, of course, is that you should not help your fellow humans, at least in any material sense, since that would be working against the judgment of God. The only help you should give to others is to help them to accept Jesus as their personal savior. This goes back as far as the Puritans. Now, if you are cynical, you might see this as a theological justification for selfishness -- but if you are rich and worried about suffering even the remotest pangs of social awareness, it is a pretty attractive religion.

Bill Moyers -- The End Time
Every once in a while I read a piece on another blog that simply has to be seen. Please read this piece on The Left Coaster, reprinting a speech by Bill Moyers.

http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/003450.html#more

Merck and Crony Capitalism: They have no shame
At some point, even Redstaters will wake up and realize that this is obscene.

The theoretical underpinnings of the BushCo economy is that the market works and it will mete out punishment for companies who do not perform. This is in contrast to government, where bureaucrats are not responsible to anyone and can simply collect their paychecks while doing nothing.

Then something like Merck comes along and exposes the truth. Left to itself, a capitalistic economy will turn into an oligarchic, crony capitalistic club, where insiders take care of each other, no matter what they do. And right now, this is George Bush's America.

In September Merck had to recall its arthritis drug VIOXX and pull it off of the market. It seems that the drug greatly increases the dangers of a heart attack, and the FDA estimates that it may have contributed to 28,000 heart attacks in the United States over the past several years (see the FDA website, www.fda.gov or the study, at http://www.fda.gov/cder/drug/infopage/vioxx/vioxxgraham.pdf ) Of course, this event comes on the heels of Dr. David Graham's Congressional testimony that his employer, the FDA, has virtually no ability to protect the public from unsafe drugs.

But from a purely economic standpoint, the shareholders of Merck suffered nearly as badly as the drug's users. Merck suffered a stock price drop of approximately $23/share, or nearly fifty percent of its value. In the wake of this event, the company and its shareholders lost approximately $50 billion (yes, with a "b" as in "big bucks").

This $50 billion dollar loss came out of the 401K plans of everyday people. It reduces the opportunity for the "ownership society" that George W. Bush wants us to enjoy. It took $50 billion out of the stock market, where George Bush wants us all to invest our Social Security pensions.

But to Merck management, this was simply another opportunity for the pigs to feed at the trough. As a result of this fiasco, Merck is now considered to be "undervalued" and a possible takeover target for other drug companies. So the company, acting through its board of directors, adopted a multi-hundred-million dollar golden parachute plan for upper management. As stated in the company's SEC filing, this plan grants special severance benefits to approximately 230 members of current management. If Merck is ever taken over by another company, and if, as a result, any of these top executives loses his or her job, or is demoted, then they receive a special cash payment. The exact payment will vary by position, but the top part of upper management will receive a payment equal to three times their base salary, plus three times their targeted annual bonus. (The targeted annual bonus is the bonus that the executive would receive if he or she achieved every one of their goals and objectives for the year. Merck's Compensation Committee states that it awards bonuses to promote "the Company's communicated goal of being a top-tier growth company." Suffice it to say, the loss of $50 billion in market value was probably not on anyone's goals list.) In addition, they will continue to be covered by company health and dental benefits for three years, all of their stock options will vest immediately, and they will receive "enhanced retirement benefits."

For the top five executives at Merck, this will mean a payout of $22.8 million dollars, just for their salary and bonus payments. CEO Ray Gilmartin will himself receive a payout of approximately $10 million. Surely, it is a good thing that these poor people will not have to pay for their own health insurance for the subsequent three years. The exact figures are not available for the cost of this program for all 230 covered executives, but conservative calculations peg it at over $100 million dollars.

In its SEC filings disclosing this plan, Merck's board states that it has adopted this plan "in recognition of the importance to the company and its shareholders of avoiding the distraction and loss of key management personnel that may occur in connection with rumored or actual fundamental corporate changes." Ray Gilmartin was paid $3 million in salary and bonus in 2003. One might expect him to do his job, without being distracted, even without this special plan. (Not surprisingly, Ray Gilmartin contributed the maximum $2000 to the reelection campaign of George W. Bush in 2004, and has donated over $83 thousand dollars to Bush since 1999.)

To sum up the tally, in George Bush's ownership society, 28,000 people had heart attacks. Investors lost $50 billion dollars. The top management at Merck received a security blanket, to protect them against distraction, of over $100 million. And a major Bush contributor received a promise of over $10 million, plus three years of continued health insurance. As Warren Buffet said, class warfare has already happened. The rich won.

Anchors in Tumultous Times
In a recent Rolling Stone roundtable, David Gergen said something very interesting:

GERGEN: To the degree that the Republican Party is discovering that you can reach out to lower-income working people, whose lives are in huge flux. As Peter was pointing out, those voters are looking for something beyond an economic boost. They don't have much faith in government producing for them anymore, and they're looking for security. And they find it in a wartime president, and in their cultural beliefs. They're looking for anchors. The Republicans have learned how to reach out to those people and offer them some anchors -- while Democrats find it harder to talk to them in those terms than they did in the past.

The New Deal coalition was built on people believing that government could provide an economic anchor in times of severe, and then not so severe, economic times. Eventually, its compelling power was eroded by the right associating it with failed socialism.

Our job over the next four years, as we again face severe economic times (whether it is a depression, stagflation or a continued middle-class squeeze) is to convince voters that government can again play a role as anchor in tough economic times. It will play that role in a different way, after all, we have learned something over the past fifty years, but it will play it effectively.

This is not a case that a presidential candidate can make during a campaign. The frame of "big government liberal" has already been built. It is a case that we, the writers, talkers, organizers and other grass roots believers, have to make.

Brian Schweitzer
Barrack Obama is wonderful, but he will not single-handedly rescue the Democratic party. To win in the West, we need to resurrect our populist theme and connect with farmers and small businesspeople. They should be a natural constituency.

Don't believe it? Read this article about Montana's new -- Democratic -- governor.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2004/0412.sirota.html

We need more of what he is selling.

Progressive Framework
Some thought about simple phrases to characterize the progressive agenda

How about

FOR FOREIGN POLICY

FIGHTING ON ALL FRONTS -- Using our cultural, economic, diplomatic and, finally, military might to end terrorism and promote peace and freedom

ON ECONOMICS

FAIRNESS -- A fair tax code that doesn't give special tax benefits to the well connected

OPPORTUNITY -- Opportunity for everyone to live the American dream -- to get rich or to live a comfortable middle class life -- not just back scratching crony capitalism

SECURITY -- Collective help -- like affordable health care -- to help people with things they truly can't control

ON CIVIL LIFE

STEWARDSHIP -- preserving our planet, our economy and our way of life for ourselves and future generations

PRIVACY -- The right to control your own body and way of life, free from intrusion by other people

The Kooks and the Crooks
Two of the most important parts of the Bush constituency are the Crony Capitalists -- the big money, I'll scratch your back type who want to prevent true equality of opportunity and the Radical Religious Fundamentalists. The two do not have completely coincident interests; Often they conflict. It will be interesting to see how they play out and who really holds sway. For example, while the War in Iraq may bring short-term gains for business, if we do, indeed, become an international pariah, it will be bad for business. So you could expect the Crony Capitalists to keep the excesses of the Bush Imperialist agenda in check.

In the end, I think that anything that the Crony Capitalists do can be undone. It may be harder to dislodge them from power, but their damage is not irretrievable. On the other hand, many Fundamentalists want to bring about Armageddon. At the least, they want to force an all out war against the forces of evil throughout the world, which could lead to Armageddon.

Lets root for the Crooks to take precedence over the Kooks.

Amazingly, the sun came out this morning!
I don't know how long this will continue, but lets take advantage of it while we can.

A couple of quick thoughts about where we go from here:

1) We need to reclaim religion from the radical right. Religion should be about love and helping the less fortunate, not about punishing anyone who is different.

2) We need to reassert the idea that government intervention in the economy is a good thing, not a bad thing. (I hope for this to be the main point of my blog)

3) We need to convince the middle and lower class, including small business owners and farmers, that our ideas of fairness and equal opportunity are really in their favor.

4) We need to continue to organize and speak out.

A day in the life of Joe
One of my loyal readers (Yes, I have some!) sent me this from the Wesleyan parents' listserve:

Joe gets up at 6 a.m. and fills his coffeepot with water to prepare his
morning coffee. The water is clean and good because some tree-hugging
liberal fought for minimum water-quality standards. With his first
swallow of water, he takes his daily medication. His medications are
safe to take because some stupid commie liberal fought to ensure their
safety and that they work as advertised.

All but $10 of his medications are paid for by his employer's medical
plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid
medical insurance - now Joe gets it too.

He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs. Joe's bacon is safe
to eat because some girly-man liberal fought for laws to regulate the
meat packing industry.

In the morning shower, Joe reaches for his shampoo. His bottle is
properly labeled with each ingredient and its amount in the total
contents because some crybaby liberal fought for his right to know what
he was putting on his body and how much it contained.

Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes
is clean because some environmentalist wacko liberal fought for the
laws to stop industries from polluting our air.

He walks on the government-provided sidewalk to the subway station for
his government-subsidized ride to work. It saves him considerable money
in parking and transportation fees because some fancy-pants liberal
fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the
opportunity to be a contributor.

Joe begins his work day. He has a good job with excellent pay, medical
benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some lazy
liberal union members fought and died for these working standards.
Joe's employer pays these standards because Joe's employer doesn't want
his employees to call the union.

If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed, he'll get a worker
compensation or unemployment check because some stupid liberal didn't
think he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune.

It is noontime and Joe needs to make a bank deposit so he can pay some
bills. Joe's deposit is federally insured by the FSLIC because some
godless liberal wanted to protect Joe's money from unscrupulous bankers
who ruined the banking system before the Great Depression.

Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae-underwritten mortgage and his
below-market federal student loan because some elitist liberal decided
that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and
earned more money over his lifetime. Joe also forgets that in
addition to his federally subsidized student loans, he attended a state
funded university.

Joe is home from work. He plans to visit his father this evening at his
farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive. His car is
among the safest in the world because some America-hating liberal
fought for car safety standards to go along with the tax-payer funded
roads.

He arrives at his boyhood home. His was the third generation to live in
the house financed by Farmers' Home Administration because bankers
didn't want to make rural loans.

The house didn't have electricity until some big-government liberal
stuck his nose where it didn't belong and demanded rural
electrification.

He is happy to see his father, who is now retired. His father lives on
Social Security and a union pension because some wine-drinking,
cheese-eating liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe
wouldn't have to.

Joe gets back in his car for the ride home, and turns on a radio talk
show. The radio host keeps saying that liberals are bad and
conservatives are good. He doesn't mention that the beloved Republicans
have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys throughout
his day. Joe agrees: "We don't need those big-government liberals
ruining our lives! After all, I'm a self-made man who believes everyone
should take care of themselves, just like I have