allmedia.com watch: David Brooks of the New York Times Needs to Hit the Streets

I have been pondering David Brooks, the “conservative columnist” of the New York Times, and his latest lament about politics in America. Brooks is the author of a popular and incredibly innocuous book, Bobos in Paradise, and another book, The Social Animal, which just got panned by his own newspaper.

Brooks wrote a column this week about how people are not really involved or interested in politics to the extent that he thinks they should be. As a result, he wrote that both parties were taking the country toward a path that he actually compared to the former Soviet Union.

The I-didn’t-even-call-anyone-let-alone-talk-to-any- real-people-because-I-sat-at-my-desk column can be read and dismissed at http://nyti.ms/myF90T

If you have already used up your 20 clicks before paying for content on the New York Times website or don’t have a free account as we academics do, I will quote liberally from this blather:

….the two parties are about to run utterly familiar political campaigns. The Democrats are going to promise to raise taxes on the rich to preserve the welfare state, just as they have since 1980. The Republicans are going to vow to cut taxes and introduce market mechanisms to reform the welfare state, just as they have since 1980.

The country is about to be offered the same two products: one from Soviet Production Facility A (the Republicans), and the other from Soviet Production Facility B (the Democrats). It will react just as it always has….

Harper back: I don’t see extensive experience in his biography with the former Soviet Union. To compare the current American political system with the Soviets is just b*******.

In Brooks’ continuing blather about the American political system, he wrote:

Americans have lost faith in the credibility of their political system, which is the one resource the entire regime is predicated upon. This loss of faith has contributed to a complex but dark national mood. The country is anxious, pessimistic, ashamed, helpless and defensive.

Harper back: America may be anxious and somewhat pessimistic these days, but this country will NEVER be ashamed, helpless and defensive!

I have lived in Chicago, Washington and Philadelphia, where politics are taken as seriously as sports. I would suggest that Brooks come down to the 8th District of Philadelphia, where seven candidates are vying to represent an area of African Americans and wealthy whites in the City Council. The district stretches from Chestnut Hill, a wealthy enclave in Northwest Philadelphia, to one of the poorest, Nicetown-Tioga in North Philadelphia. The district includes Germantown, a predominantly African-American community and Mount Airy, one of the trendiest neighborhoods in the city.

Last night the candidates met for their first debate during the primary, where voters will make their choice on May 17. All seven candidates are Democrats in the heavily Democratic area, but they include business people, government insiders and even an electrician with an outside chance of winning. I would suggest that Brooks come see democracy alive and well, where people are not ashamed, helpless and defensive. He can read about the debate. which attracted a large crowd at http://bit.ly/m8fSpg

He can read our continuing coverage at http://bit.ly/lBJGAN

Philadelphia is where this nation began. Brooks should come on down to see politics from the street level. Brooks needs to burn a little shoe leather to find out what people really think about democracy rather than ordering up lunch from behind his desk. I remember one of my heroes, the late Mike Royko, hitting the streets of Chicago almost every day.

I know that the Times is having financial troubles and Brooks’ expense account may be low, but the Bolt Bus to Philly is only $8 if he buys early. I will treat him to BBQ at the Rib Crib in Germantown if he comes down.

allmedia.com watch: In Case You Missed it, Obama Announced His 2012 Candidacy

Barack Obama announced his reelection campaign for 2012. He did it online. He’s not the first to announce online. That happened in 2000 when Steve Forbes did it. Remember his presidential campaign? Unlikely.

The online announcement is odd, particularly when an incumbent president can use the pomp and circumstance of the White House in an election campaign. Perhaps he took the online route because of the anti-Washington sentiment that occurred in the 2010 congressional elections.

POLITICO offers this assessment of the announcement: http://bit.ly/eDcyeP

philly.com watch: Cape May vs. Criminals

The lead story for much of the day on philly.com has been how Cape May may lose its status at a National Historic Landmark City.

But the key story today is that the City Council passed a law that removes a question about criminal history from an employment application. At the same time as the Inquirer is questioning why records of school violence perps are not made available to all agencies, philly.com doesn’t lead with a significant change in employing criminals. If you do the crime, you pay the time, and there are other consequences.

The message sent by this new law is odd. Sure, criminals should be given a second chance, but it is hardly discriminatory that an employer should know that someone has done time.

Here is the far more important story at http://bit.ly/hMkgJj:

It is interesting that the Donna Reed Miller, who is retiring from her position in the 8th District and may face some legal problems of her own as a result of a housing scandal in Germantown, was the sponsor of the legislation.

The Mainstream Media Ignore Us

I decided to sign on to the discussion blog of Dick Polman of the Philadelphia Inquirer about President Obama’s State of the Union address. Polman has been cited by various publications as a great political analyst.

I posted the following:

A lot of people, including young people, voted and worked for Obama. The young folks, who are not politically active, have now checked out. He has left a legacy in only one year that is as bad as Jimmy Carter did in four years.

Polman replied: I don’t agree with the Carter analogy at all. I vividly remember double-digit unemployment and double-digit inflation and long gas lines at the pump. Young folks have now checked out? Young folks need to get some perspective – a lot of presidents have lousy first years (including youth idol JFK) – and wean themselves from the assumption that politics can be just like their smart phones. You can’t get instant satisfaction with the click of a thumb.

I replied: I happened to cover Carter for Newsweek. The only difference is the lack of gas lines.

After that, I could not post on the site. I was cut off from making any other comments on the blog. I really couldn’t believe it.

The father of a Temple undergraduate saw the exchange and wrote to Polman and me. Here was Polman’s response:

If he [Chris Harper] wants to say on Facebook that this was some kind of conspiracy, and if you want to believe that, well, it’s a free country. I was just trying to field as many folks as possible, nothing more.

Here is what I said on Facebook:

Chris Harper wants everyone to know that Dick Polman, the “esteemed” political reporter for the Philadelphia Inquirer, pulled the plug on me from his blog on the State of the Union address. I made two comments he disagreed with. I guess that’s what interactive journalism is about in the mainstream press. When Polman and others don’t know what they’re talking about, they simply cut you off. Amazing!

The exchange got picked up at http://media.nationalreview.com/

I asked Polman for an apology. Not surprisingly, I haven’t gotten one. I used to ignore readers and viewers  when I worked for Newsweek and ABC News. I used to toss the letters complaining about my stories into the trash. I want to apologize to those who wrote to me with serious issues. I was arrogant. Now I realize why I was wrong to do what I did.

I hope Polman and others in the media will realize at some point that they are arrogant individuals who really don’t want to debate with individuals who disagree with their viewpoints. Or, in my case, Polman didn’t want to hear from people who simply question their assumptions. I think that’s why people don’t have much faith in the mainstream media today.