SAIGONBOB

Obama's Problem: Lack of Press Avail:Ruth Marcus/WashPost

    I'll most likely vote for Barack Obama, but it is with incredible dismay that I read in the Washington Post today (Nov.7,2007) in commentary by journalist Ruth Marcus, that the Senator from Illinois is running away from the legitimate press.
    I guess he'll have no problem meeting with the tin-horn dictators of Syria and Iran, but talking with American reporters is a no-no.
    For some time, I've been writing about the new Democratic Candidate phenomena of shutting out the media from fund raisers and other functions.
    It has been a few months since I wrote that Obama, like Adlai Stevenson, may be too intellectual for the average voter.
    A few postings ago, I also discussed that maybe it is time for Obama and his campaign to "panic."
    If it is Barack Obama's campaign that has strategised against him talking to the press on the campaign trail, they should all be fired!

    So far, we the voters know that the Senator is against Hillary Clinton.....WOW!

    If he doesn't open himself up to tough questions from the media, he doesn't deserve to win and probably, on the practical front, won't win because he is underexposed to the average American.

    With less than 60 days until the first Primary, it is crunch time for Barack and his campaign professionals.

    My Democratic Party is well connected and wealthy, right now. This is a complete departure from years past, when the GOP had the purse strings.  We used to depend on an open media to make our case.

    Have we become too spoiled and elitist to learn how to fight on the political front?

    Thanks for reading:

    Bob Kholos

      

Where is LBJ When We Need Him?

    As a long time Democrat, I'm looking for an unpolished, mistake-ridden, and not particularly pretty, presidential candidate to vote for.
    So far, although I favor Obama and Richardson, but will vote for the nominee in any case, I can't find that down to earth, feet on the ground, candidate.
    When I worked for Senator Frank Church (d-ID) he told me that President Lyndon Baines Johnson used to hold his cabinet meetings while he was taking a dump.
    Church also said that LBJ was fond of saying, "You don't have a guys vote, unless you have his pecker in your front pocket."

    So, Johnson made a slight mistake in foreign policy and the War in Vietnam (sarcasm).

    But, at least the guy knew how to put together a good domestic policy and could cajole enough legislators to get his way--from Civil Rights to the War on Poverty.

    Of course, when Lyndon Johnson ran against  Senator Barry Goldwater, the former Senator from Texas was the "peace candidate."

    I was 21 years old during that 1964 election (there was no 18 year old vote at the time), and voted for LBJ.

    Then the guy drafted me and I wound up serving a year with the 4th Infantry Division in the Central Highlands of Vietnam.

    I suppose this should give us all pause when looking for the peace candidate now.

    You never know what a successful presidential candidate is going to do when they walk into the Oval Office for the first time.

    The candidates now, are so protected in their own public personalities, it really is hard to find that "down-to-earth" practical person who can run the country.

    For the first time in my memory, the Democratic candidates are raising more money than their GOP counterparts.

    I doubt that any of the major contenders make their own dinner or drive their own car.

    At least President Johnson would drive his guest around his ranch in Texas, while he would throw beer bottles out the window.
    Of course, I would like some form of national health insurance...at least something that works for the Doctor and the patient, but what really concerns me are the religious nut cases in Iran running around with Nukes in a couple of years.

    President Jimmy Carter couldn't stop a few students in Iran from capturing a lot of American citizens, and about 8 American Soldiers died trying to rescue them, under his watch.

    Which one of our Democratic Candidates for President of the United States, looks practical enough to handle a nuclear Iran?

    At this point, I'm not sure.  That is why I keep thinking about our late President Lyndon Johnson.

    Thanks for reading:

    Bob Kholos

      
   

Andrew Malcolm and Don Frederick Light Up LA Times

    As an old political press secretary (last to know, first to go), I've always had a great fascination with working reporters.
    They work very hard on the campaign trail, trying to get it right.  I always thought, when I was on the same press bus, that I could never do their job: Get it done fast and be accurate, at the same time.
    As a political press secretary, I always had the advantage of being able to schmooze, but didn't have to be 100% right.
    Also, I thought it was my job, when I represented Mayor Tom Bradley, for example, not to get too close to the average reporter: In this way neither one of us would have to compromise our integrity...its kind of a balance of power situation.
    But, between the lines and very much under the headline of human nature, working political reporters who cover the political beat are a great class of American citizens.
    When there is mutual trust: I'll let you look at my boss, if you let me look at yours--there is fun to be had.

    When the Los Angeles Times decided to incorporate the "new media" within its on-line edition, they eventually got around (a little late, I may add) to adding a political blog by experienced journalists Don Frederick and Andrew Malcolm, who light up the newspaper with a few paragraphs and story lines, every day.

    I recently read, with glee,(www.latimes.com, Nov. 2nd..still running on Nov.5th, 2007) how the average working reporter will be tortured by having to cover the Iowa Presidential Primary on January 3rd, 2008, by being there on New Years Day.

    This was blog heaven:Reporters and candidates being tortured by having to start the new year in the freezing cold of Jan. 1st.

   I've always been against the new early primary system, where Californians spend 60-90 million tax dollars pushing the primary date to February from the usual voting in June. (resulting in other states competing and moving their voting date earlier..creating a mess)

    Maybe, now, reporters--who have to leave their families on the eve of the new year-- will torture the politicians who pushed these early primaries on the rest of us.

    Thanks for reading:

    Bob Kholos

   

   

      

Why End the Limits on Political Campaign Contributions?-By Bob Kholos

    If you want to lessen the impact of special interest politics, the best thing we can do now is eliminate the farce of campaign cash limits to local and presidential candidates.
    Right now we have a system where a candidate on the federal level is limited to $2,300 dollars per cycle from an individual.  This leads to every special interest Attorney and business, glad-handing the leading candidates at small fund raisers throughout America, almost around the clock for years.

    The patchwork of the Watergate reforms have made a joke out of the entire process.

    The anti-war movement and the possibility of a "Mr. Smith" going to Washington is all but gone with the modern campaign reforms.

    Even though a corporation or business is not allowed to contribute to a campaign, the entire workforce and board of directors are allowed to contribute. Do you think that the elected officials know that, for example, many big-wigs from the Cell Phone industry are giving these bucks?

    So, these subterranean groups and committees are formed to subvert the system.

    The Los Angeles Times has broken stories on a statewide level of "charitable" organizations giving money to the Governor and the powerful leader of the California Assembly for personal travel and other luxuries.

    On a Federal level, Richard Nixon is laughing in his grave.

    Between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, they have raised about 100 million dollars for a campaign in which the election won't start to take place 60 days from now.  It will probably cost about one-half a billion dollars to win the Presidency by November of 2008.

    Solution:

    Let's add even more transparency and allow candidates to raise, at least 25% of their campaign money from one or more individuals.

    As long as we know where the money is coming from, and which candidate is raising from which special interest, they will spend less time raising money, and more time getting out their philosophy.

    Past history:

    After City Councilman Tom Bradley, lost his campaign for Mayor against Sam Yorty in 1969, everyone said, " A Black will never become Mayor of Los Angeles."

    But, millionaire Max Palevsky stepped in and "loaned" the campaign $600,000 dollars and as a result Tom Bradley was able to run a strong campaign against a small minded incumbent, and win the election.

    Bradley did pay Palevsky back after he became Mayor in 1973.

    During the time Sen. George McGovern was running against the war in Vietnam, Miles Rubin put in untold thousands of dollars for the California primary.  Although many didn't think he could beat Richard Nixon, at least those making a statement against a runaway war were heard, and McGovern did win the primary on the way to the Democratic nomination.

    A Dream:

    I have a little dream: A wealthy entrepreneur could take an American maid of Latino decent, who may belong to a union, and support her for elected office.

    Perhaps someone who lives in East Los Angeles, and has virtually no power against the gangs, crime and lack of educational opportunities, but can explain to us in real terms on how to solve the problems she faces on a daily basis.

    This would be a statement campaign.  She wouldn't have to try to raise money against the favorite "bought-out" candidate of the district, but have a Max Pelevsky or Steve Jobs, make an unrestricted contribution to put together a stong campaign.

    Such a scenario is impossible under the current "limits" of campaign spending.

    Thanks for reading:

    Bob Kholos

   

   

   

Oregon College Sports Fans:Oregon Ducks Vs. Arizona State:A New Era

    For a small state, Oregon has done some amazing things the last couple of years.
    Fans in the Eugene/Springfield and all over the state, are talking about, perhaps, the biggest football game ever played at home on Saturday, Nov. 3rd, 2007, between the University of Oregon and Arizona State.
    The Ducks are rated the number 5 team in the country, while the Sun Devils of Arizona are rated number 4 in the same poll.
    Could this be a new and powerful sports era for a state known for its beauty and track athletes?
    Lets face it: Nobody thinks about Oregon State Baseball, in the rest of the nation.  After all, if you are going to play College Baseball, those warm weather states, such as California and Florida, would be your first pick.  There are no major league baseball teams in Oregon, nor could you find a professional Football team in the Beaver state either.

    Yet, the Corvallis based (pop. 50,000) Oregon State Baseball team have won two world college championships in the last two years. It rains so hard during the spring in the state, that I don't see how they even get the chance to play round ball.

    Last year, the Beavs upset USC on the gridiron.  This year they gave the California Bears, in Bezerkely, the first defeat of their season.

    The U of O Basketball team surprised everyone last year by beating UCLA at Mac court, and then wound up in the elite 8, during the spring NCAA playoffs.

    The University of Oregon Ducks, under the quarterbacking of Dennis Dixon and running of Jonathan Stewart, plus a really good offensive line and a hot defense, have passed all expectations for the year and beat USC last week.  They continue to impress, even in their one defeat this year.

    Next year, Eugene...AKA "tracktown" USA will be host to the Olympic track prelims on the U of O campus.

    This may be the beginning of a new sports era for the State of Oregon.

    Its funny, because the citizens of Springfield (pop:150,000) and Eugene, just across from it on the Willamette River (pop:150,000) usually don't get along on a social or political level.

    The old hippies settled in Eugene during the 1960s, and Springfield is still a heavy blue collar town.

    For about 4 hours on Saturday, no one will argue about gun control or the Spotted Owl, instead they will be in love with each other, as they root for the hometown Ducks to defeat the undefeated Arizona State football team, just a walk across the river from the Oregon campus.

Thanks for reading:

    Bob Kholos