PBS Frontline - The Choice 2008

This is a post I've been chewing on, thinking about how to address, for quite some time. On 14 October, our local PBS station aired the Frontline documentary, The Choice 2008. I mentioned back in early October, when the show was first advertised, that I eagerly anticipated watching the documentary. My wife and I caught the last Frontline documentary in 2004, and it really helped us to make up our minds for whom to vote on the night before the election. Strange, perhaps, but true. Being undecided this year about whom to vote meant we wanted to see the documentary to see if the same would be true this year as well.

Unfortunately, that was not the case. We are both still undecided, and with election day just around the corner, I'm not entirely sure what will sway us at this late date. The problem certainly was not with the Frontline documentary crews, who created an excellent two-hour piece that was as informative as we expected it to be. If you haven't yet seen the documentary, I highly encourage everyone to watch it. The link above allows you to watch the video of the show, either in snippets or in its entirety. The quality of the production certainly was not the issue.

To me, the real problem comes down to simple dissatisfaction with the two candidates. Let me talk about John McCain first, since McCain was the one politician I really wanted to vote for in 2000. Eight years ago, McCain was younger, more energetic, more willing to take on the entrenched special interests on the far right, and more of a campaign finance reform maverick. The Choice captured all of that, and then showed how that version of McCain was destroyed in the 2000 South Carolina primary by Karl Rove and the Bush campaign.

Sadly, that defeat in South Carolina transformed McCain into something of a shadow of his former self, something that the Candorville daily comic strip has captured over the past few weeks. The Choice detailed the concessions McCain had to make to become palatable, and thereby electable, to the right-wing base of the Republican party. McCain still wants to be the maverick who castigates members of his own party, and who effectively reaches across the aisle to work on and pass legislation that is important to the future of this country, but the sad fact is that McCain had to bow on bended knee to the right-wing evangelicals who supported George W. Bush if he ever wanted to reach the Presidency. It's sad, sad, sad. I still like McCain as a war veteran and as a person I would trust to do the right thing for the sake of America, but he is no longer the politician he was in 2000.

Which brings me to Obama. The Choice had plenty to say about Obama's background and how he burst onto the national scene by delivering the keynote address at the 2004 DNC, which was the first time most Americans (myself included) heard his name. Living in Illinois since 2005, I've personally seen Obama's influence on local and state politics, and he certainly is an incredibly smart and effective politician. There can be no doubt about that. As much as Obama preaches the mantra of creating a unified political landscape (and his 2004 DNC speech was nothing more than his regular election stump speech, Frontline said), he is cagey, crafty, and not averse to doing whatever it takes to get himself elected. He is a fighter, and if people don't recognize that in him, it is only because his personality and charisma are so overpowering.

What I found most interesting about Obama's history, and The Choice primarily focused on his adult life post-graduation from Columbia University, is that he is primarily driven by the pursuit of power. That's the only conclusion I could draw from everything I've seen. When Obama decided to run for the office of President of the Harvard Law Review, it was not because he wanted to pursue an agenda to improve the study of law, or even to alleviate the strife between the conservatives and liberals that engulfed Harvard during his time there. Apparently, it was enough just to be the first African-American to hold the office.

When Obama decided to first run for the Illinois Senate in 1996, it was simply to gain the office of Illinois state Senator. The Choice did indicate just one reason for why Obama entered politics: he felt that he could not influence enough people working as a community organizer, the job he held before entering politics. He wants to have his hands on the levers of power. Why does Obama want to have as much influence as possible? The office of POTUS certainly would have the most influence, wouldn't it? Frontline seemed to indicate that Obama wants to help lift poor African-Americans out of poverty, and if you've ever been to the south side of Chicago, that is a laudable goal.

My next question, then, was what really is the best method of reaching people and helping them get out of poverty? Is it the New Deal version of helping people who had been tossed about by market forces beyond their control during the Great Depression? Is it the Great Society of entitlement programs and government-sponsored handouts propagated by LBJ Democrats? Or is the trickle-down economic ideal of Reagonomics the best way of helping people create value in their own communities and take ownership of their lives?

OK, so those three choices are incredibly simplified and each one carries its own baggage with political thinkers from either side of the aisle. What I really thought about was Earvin "Magic" Johnson. Yes, the brilliant basketball player who announced he was HIV-positive way back in 1991. Since his retirement from the NBA, Magic Johnson invested his own personal wealth, time and energy to create self-sustainable businesses in poverty-stricken predominately African-American communities across America. He took his social obligation to his fellow man, and instead of simply lending his name and likeness to a not-for-profit foundation, Magic understood the way of creating substantial change in these communities was to provide jobs, careers, paychecks, educational opportunities, and sustainable businesses. Investing in peoples' lives in this manner really creates the change that so much of America needs these days. He wrote a commentary along these lines for USA Today back in May, and it's well-worth the read.

Coming back to Obama, I know that he did not have the personal wealth of Magic Johnson when he decided to run for Illinois state Senator. I tend to think he's doing pretty well for himself these days, however. For as much grief as McCain has taken for marrying the daughter of a very successful beer distributor in Arizona, and for all the various real estate holdings of the McCain family, Barack and Michelle Obama also own numerous houses or condos. Not as many as the McCains, to be sure, but more than the average American family.

Ah, so who to vote for in two days? As I said before, I still trust McCain would do right for the country, no matter how unpopular a particular decision might be. If that meant touching the "third rail of politics" and creating fundamental change on Social Security and Medicare, I think McCain would find a way to work across the aisle and get it done. With Obama, I can understand why he wants to win the office of POTUS. I know lots of people who are driven to succeed, but their only goal is to be successful. Naked ambition and a desire for power is nothing new in America.

On the other hand, being the first African-American to hold the office would be pretty darn incredible. Obama has been that kind of trailblazer in the past, and he is comfortable in that role. But WHY does he really want to hold the office? Is it so he can engineer a massive redistribution of wealth, as the Republicans charge? Is it just so he can have the most influence possible, so he can drive the national discourse on the issues of race, poverty, and social entitlement programs? Is it just so he can bring U.S. troops home from Iraq?

For all the campaigning, I don't think I can answer that question about Obama. Neither McCain's campaign nor the MSM are helping to clarify these things, either. The MSM isn't really asking the questions of either candidate that would expose their underlying philosophies and explain to the American public why each wants the office of POTUS so badly. It's almost just understood that these two men want the office, and that we don't need to understand why. I'm a person who always wants to know why.

One last addendum, which is slightly off-topic: Living in the state of Illinois, I hate that we live in a very safe state for Obama. I would much rather live in a battleground state, even though that would mean being forced to see all the attack ads on TV ad nauseum. Why? My sister, mother, and brother all had the opportunity to see Obama live, in person, at various political rallies for the candidate. My sister even saw Bruce Springsteen play live on stage, before Obama took the stage. I've never seen the Boss once, and I'd love to see him play live! I'd love to meet McCain and his family, especially Meghan McCain, who has an absolutely wonderful blog that provides an unequalled behind-the-scenes look at the campaign. I would absolutely love to meet them in person! There is something to be said for being able to look a man in the eye, shake his hand, and hear him speak in person. In this election, I never got that chance.

Some Numerology For You

So, quite a few people have asked me what I think of the economy and/or the bailout package approved by Congress last week. I seriously doubt these friends have asked with the hopes of getting my opinion; rather, I think they were partly worried about the economy and partly just politely making conversation. One of the instances happened while I was in the hair salon, getting my hair cut, just for background reference.

I do think the vast majority of Americans are worried these days, and rightfully so. They aren't getting the best of information from the MSM, but they are hearing words like Great Depression, financial crisis, and disaster all being bandied about.

I finally had a chance to see one of Paul Solman's business segments on the Newshour on PBS this evening, not too long after the WSJ profiled his ways of making difficult economics issues easy to understand in layman's terms. Tonight's segment delved into credit default swaps, and in order to keep people interested, Solman used clips from classic cartoons (Bugs Bunny, Mr. Magoo, etc.) as references. The video is here, and it's well worth the time to watch it.

One of the key numbers that Solman points out several times in his segment is $62,000,000,000,000 -- that's 62 TRILLION dollars! -- the amount of money banks, hedge funds, and insurance companies like AIG had tied up in these credit default swaps, which were supposed to act like insurance against a company going bankrupt. That number ($62T) is more than four times the annual GDP of the entire US, which is a very big number all on its own. The gross amounts of money lost on these phony insurance contracts is a very big reason why we're in such dire straits today, economy-wise.

This news comes just one day after the Dow fell below the psychologically significant 10,000 barrier, as well. On the day yesterday, the Dow fell an intraday record 800 points (never done before! Black Monday in 1989 was a whopping 508 point drop!) before rebounding some to finish down just 369.88 pts, but below that 10,000 barrier at 9955.5 Today, the Dow fell another 508 pts to finish the day at 9447.

Sure, many people are probably saying, "All the news media reports is what the Dow is doing, but why should I care, I invest in the S&P 500 Index?" The S&P 500 finished today at 996, somewhat off from its peak of 1576 or so set... hmmm... just last October! That was an intraday level on 10/11/07, to be exact.

And yet, many investment advisors still adhere to strange belief systems I tend to lump together with fans of numerology. Yes, those numerologists were probably going crazy with the recent OJ Simpson guilty verdict, delivered 13 years to the day after he was found not guilty of murder, that took the jurors 13 hours of deliberations, that came 13 months after the robbery took place, the verdict was delivered on 10/3 and 10+3 = 13, etc., etc. Who knows? But many investment advisors have their own internal benchmarks for buying and selling shares of stock, and many times, they peg when to jump in or out of stocks to the performance of the Dow. You might have heard this before: When the Dow hits X, it's a great time to buy because it'll keep going up from there! Or the converse: The Dow won't stay below X for long because that means it's a good value! Or any number of arguments along those lines.

I've never felt comfortable with advisors who talk in those terms, which is probably why I continue to invest my own money. The real reason is to keep my costs as low as possible, but I tend to think I can educate myself and come to the same conclusions as the investment advisors I trust. Those are the guys (like at Vanguard) who say to invest in low-cost index funds, spread out the risk through diversification, and don't worry about market swings, just keep dollar-cost averaging into the same index funds for the long haul. Why pay someone else for what is, after all, common sense?

I might not get rich quick this way, but I know I can sleep well at night, no matter what the markets are doing. I'm obviously not in any sort of hedge fund, didn't have any assets with AIG, and really didn't care about what the investment bankers were doing with their money. Sadly, their bad debt credit default swap SNAFUs are threatening the overall stability of our economy, and we really don't want to see more large banks going under. I do feel for everyday Americans, those Main Street types who are getting no mortgage or credit card debt relief from the $700 Billion bailout package, and for the honest, hard-working bankers and mortgage lenders who practiced sound lending practices during the time when the others (like Countryside) were going nuts. No one is helping them out, either.