GAVEL TO GAVEL-THE FENCE-DONALD dumb to dumber

gavel to gavel

     The nation owes immense gratitude to Brian Lamb, the founder of C-SPAN. A crowning glory of his vision has been full screen the last couple of weeks, true reality television in C-SPAN's coverage of the Republican and Democratic National Conventions. It is television for adults and the best kind of history teaching for students.

     In 1979 Lamb's C-SPAN opened the proceedings of the US Congress to constituent oversight by winning the right to broadcast from the House and Senate. Since then C-SPAN has created a larger footprint in the nation's public affairs. Book TV, studio interview and phone in segments, coverage of committee hearings, panels, seminars, symposiums, political-cultural events, historical programs and more have graced American television screens with a seat for viewers. C-SPAN treats us with respect.

        an American ritual

      It was a family ritual in our home to watch the conventions, as was possible in those days, gavel to gavel courtesy of extended network coverage. Even before remote controls (!) we would switch from NBC's Huntley Brinkley team to CBS's coverage as Walter Cronkite began to emerge. (btw I was the remote control, switching the dial with such speed that my mother warned "don't break it.")

      By the late 1960's I was covering politics as a young reporter. I covered the nominating conventions in the '70s, 80's and 90's. By the time I was ceo of a documentary and production company or a news executive, the networks had pared coverage. 

      With all of the media available, there is the obligatory yacking head panels combined with a penchant for the broadcast anchors to blather.  Not so with C-SPAN.

      C-SPAN makes no editorial judgment or interruption. What it does is provide uninterrupted coverage of everything at the podium and an opportunity to view all of the produced video segments and musical interludes. Gavel to Gavel, for real. 

no talking, please

     By the time of a certain intellectual age, most of us can navigate the dramas without the arbitrary intrusion of anchors, reporters, producers, gee whiz graphics and the droning "experts." At the end of the day or during the rest of the news cycle we can seek out those folks, but as the "show" plays forth on the convention floor, we should be permitted to watch, do our own analysis, and render our own judgments. 

      Indeed there is a lot of good journalism and reporting, on the air, in print and on-line, but there is a freedom and quality in being permitted to watch proceedings without intrusion. We would not want interruptions at a theater or movie. I've taken to frequently doing as my long time friend and fellow media veteran Frank does during ball games, turn down the sound and watch the action. Instant replays are a nice touch, but unless I'm a particular fan of the sportscaster, I watch without sound. I'm old enough to know who's scoring and who's not and how well someone is playing. As Yogi may have said, "you can see a lot just by watching."

cheers!

       The depth and essence of a political party can be measured by how they put themselves forward, even in the non prime time segments. Gavel to Gavel has purpose and is enlightening. C-SPAN is the real star of the political season. Indiana born and educated, Purdue graduate, Brian Lamb has given the American body politic a gift of true intelligence and the best seats in the house.

      

why there is a fence

Donald

dumb and dumber

     Not that one is necessary but if you need another reason to worry about Donald Trump's suitability to be president this last stunt encouraging the Russian government to hack American computers and to get involved in our domestic politics is off the charts. It could also be treasonous. 

       I can't help but think if Hillary Clinton had said what Trump said, the Fox News? crowd would be leading a pitchfork and club brigade into Philadelphia to "lock her up" until they can "string her up" or shoot her as one Republican said last week. 

      Trump is a demagogue of the worst kind, he's a con artist and entirely out of his league when it comes to the complexities of international diplomacy. I've watched as friends who are conservative or traditional Republicans have struggled with has happened to their party. As difficult as it is to concede, several have done so. They will not vote for Trump. I've watched in disbelief as people of conscience and intelligence have migrated from their abhorrence of Trump to being reluctant supporters. Donald Trump is dangerous.

      Wouldn't it be something if a federal attorney somewhere brought espionage or sedition charges against him? It won't happen, but maybe it should.

       See you down the trail

FREEDOM OR SECURITY-TALK IS NEEDED-Dangerous or Otherwise

FEELING MANIPULATED?

or as though someones listening in?

   The big yap yap now over the NSA disclosures at least

has people talking.

     And there is a lot of that going around.(Friend and reader Beverly noted, the bovine above is not a bull. Indeed, as a careful look will inform you. But just sort of go with it)  
      A question is, How do we want it?  What are the boundaries?

      Are we willing to give up liberty to feel safe? The conversation is needed and all of us, from voters to the intelligence community, need to weigh in. 

      I'm hung up on a couple of points.  Why is so much of our top clearance, security and intelligence work being done by private contractors? When and how did we decide to job it out and for who's benefit?  We are now paying private sources more money to do work that should be the exclusive franchise of US Government employees.

      Eisenhower had it right about the "military-industrial complex."  The modern codicil is "intelligence-industrial."  So a high school drop out, army wash out, can get hired by the CIA and get clearance and then quit only to be hired by a private contractor, paid reportedly a $ quarter million a year and have his ticket punched so he can purloin some of our most secret and sensitive information. Yea, that's intelligent isn't it!  Where are the adults?

      It's not an easy riddle. Americans voluntarily give up more private and specific data to social media, banks, in online purchases and e-mail than what the NSA has gathered in bundles. Private business knows more about you than do the spooks and some in the intelligence community  can't figure why that is, or why the current flap.

      Intelligence and security people reason they've been tasked with keeping us safe from harm and in their mind they cannot have too much information. But in the old days raw and irrelevant data got purged.  Now files are kept forever. Is that right?  It's another choice we have to make.

      The panel of Judges who guide the intelligence community in their acquisition of data also need to be heard from. It would be good for the Republic to hear the mind set and thinking of those who frame these vitally important considerations.

      And a word about Snowden as a leaker.  As a one time investigative reporter I could bore you with countless details about how a whistle blower or leaker helped get information to the public. In my experience there were many instances where the public good was served.
     Examples-an elementary school being built over a "forgotten" hazardous material dump, a grand jury being used to punish political enemies, mental patients being poisoned by inept or non existent medical supervision in over or wrong medication, Ku Klux Klansmen working on a city payroll as a result of extortion, managers of public housing selling material meant to improve housing projects out of the back door and profiting huge sums, a KGB officer trying to infiltrate a public office holder's staff, security breaches where some of this nation's most deadly nerve agent is stored, toxic poison leaking into a public water resource.

      I would not have been able to get that information onto the public agenda, had it not been for state, city and federal employees getting information to me-data, records, documents that had been buried, hidden, over looked, forgotten or in some cases "destroyed." 

      In my own little footnotes to history, our work prompted investigations, prosecutions, regulations, new statutes, and informed conversations. 

      We all would be well served by a robust conversation now about privacy, safety, expectations, propriety, and who should be minding our secrets.

       There's a great thought, attributed to both Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson.  I'm comfortable with quoting them both-

       "Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either!"

   See you down the trail.