dis-GRACE-ful

For those who wonder what really happened to cause the majority of Americans to distrust mass media, look no further than one Nancy Grace on the HLN network. Grace epitomizes the slow and steady decline of honorable reporting. But you already knew that. This week, Grace blatantly exploited the death of Whitney Houston to draw attention to herself. This act, and so many others in Grace’s misuse of the airwaves separates her in a most unfortunate way from those who understand the real privilege of having a voice that reaches millions. In case you missed Grace’s ill-conceived take on Houston’s untimely death, watch:

If you want to know how a person of Grace’s low caliber could rise in the broadcast industry, just know it has all to do with competition. When there were three major television networks, no cable, no Internet, people like Grace could not emerge. Unprecedented industrial competition has given rise to a media landscape that causes each company to take desperate grabs for viewers. It wasn’t always that way. One would be hard pressed to imagine a David Brinkley or John Chancellor showing such direct disrespect to the family of Whitney Houston by questioning the circumstances of her death. One cannot envision Walter Cronkite speculating about the most intimate moment of Whitney Houston’s life, when she drew her last breath. All of those who approached truth telling with dignity, who knew their jobs were simply to convey information, would cringe at the image of Nancy Grace using Houston’s death for selfish reasons, for attention grabbing, or as ABC’s Barbara Walters said, for ratings.

In late 2011, the Gallup organization polled Americans about their trust of media. Not surprisingly, the results showed the majority of Americans still do not have confidence in the mass media to report the news fully, accurately, and fairly. The 44% of Americans who have a great deal or fair amount of trust and the 55% who have little or no trust remain among the most negative views Gallup has measured. As a journalist, I couldn’t be more discouraged by this development in our culture. That is because I know how much the truth matters. I know that our culture only advances in the right direction when we all come from a place of truth. So when a broadcaster comes forth from a place of half truth and manufactured drama, we all suffer for it.

Days after Grace’s fully unsubstantiated questioning of Houston’s cause of death, ABC’s Dan Abrams quite graciously offered Grace an opportunity to walk back her comments or at least acknowledge they were inappropriate, but Grace used the moment to defend her original assertion. This, even though law enforcement officials in L.A. were quick to announce after Houston’s death that no foul play was suspected. Watch:

Grace, it should be pointed out, is not a journalist. She is an attorney who got lucky and got a TV gig that caught on with a significant number of viewers. Unfortunately, in the eyes of many American viewers, talk show hosts are often mistaken for trained journalists. That being said, Grace does a disservice to all legitimate journalists by exercising her low standards of reporting on air. What she did in speculating about Houston’s death is thoughtless, especially as Houston’s family struggles to deal with their loss. I view Grace’s dramatic ratings grab on the same level as M.I.A.’s obscene gesture during the recent Super Bowl halftime. Each showed a lack of professionalism and a full disregard for the viewers.


Clearly, with “Dancing with the Stars” and the Caylee Anthony case behind her, Grace has no cause célèbre to keep herself in the forefront of media consciousness. Houston’s death happened right on time for Grace. Unfortunately for all of us, it also enabled Grace to further chip away at the tenuous relationship between the media industries and the public. And worst of all, it further erodes what little credibility news networks have left. Nice going Nancy.

LOOSE LIPS THAT COULD SINK THE GOP SHIP

Smart citizens aren’t getting too excited one way or the other that a Rick Santorum could triumph in three state primaries on the same night. After all, it’s way early to be getting excited about anybody and the current crop of GOP hopefuls are generally their own worst enemies. After thanking God, family, sky, air, water, or whatever after winning a primary, it seems the following days are full of each of them repeatedly sticking foot in mouth.

Is it just me, or has the GOP primary season run off the rails? Come on. When a candidate looks at the crowd and says there is a link between having an abortion and developing cancer, we know things have gone out of control. Rick Santorum said this after the Komen/Planned Parenthood funding debacle last week. Immediately medical experts came forward to say they knew of no relationship between cancer and abortion. Yet, Santorum clearly felt comfortable saying it.

He’s not the only one whose words are more fantasy than policy, plan or clear intention. Let’s not even go near former hopefuls Herman Cain, Michelle Bachman or Rick Perry. Let’s look at the words of the remaining contenders. Just last week, Mitt Romney (left) said, “I’m not concerned about the very poor that have a safety net, but if it has holes in it, I’ll repair them.” That same week statistics came out that show that my city, New Orleans, has the second highest rate of homelessness in the nation. So I’m wondering, what safety net was he talking about?
It gets worse: Terminally grumpy Newt Gingrich was promoted by a super pac robo-call that said, “Holocaust survivors for the first time were forced to eat non-kosher because Romney thought $5 was too much to pay for your grandparents to eat kosher.” This, of course, was not exactly accurate, but more than that, it is clear evidence of the Gingrich campaign desperately scraping the bottom of the rhetorical barrel for ammunition against the current front runner. He justified the claim by saying Romney has a “lack of concern for religious liberty.” Gingrich denied any knowledge of the robo-call, but he did not dispute what it said.

Meanwhile, Ron Paul(below, right) tells a woman with breast cancer at one of his campaign stops that insurance companies should not have to cover pre-existing conditions. “It’s sort of like me living on the Gulf Coast, not buying insurance until I see the hurricane,” he said. “Insurance is supposed to measure risk.” Paul is the same guy who said this in a recent debate: "I miss the closet. Homosexuals, not to speak of the rest of society, were far better off when social pressure forced them to hide their activities. They could also not be as promiscuous.”

Speaking of gay people, Rick Santorum seems to speak of almost nothing else. Last month he went so far as to say it would be better for a child to have a father in prison than to be raised by lesbian parents. Santorum has made his objection to marriage equality a signature issue in the campaign, while crowds at every campaign stop largely couldn’t care less about who marries who. Yet, he hammers on. Predictably, crowds have taken to challenging Santorum on his views regarding gay Americans. What he has accomplished is simply the engineering of a campaign that is known for its extremism on a subject that Americans find tedious. By the middle of 2011, the Pew Research Institute reported that Americans were almost evenly split on the issue of marriage equality. Pew found that 57 percent of Democrats and 51 percent of independents favored marriage equality, while just one in four Republicans approved.

Santorum is not exactly preaching to the choir. Yet he keeps preaching. Interestingly enough, on the same day Santorum enjoyed the afterglow of his three primary wins, a California appeals court reversed its ruling on Proposition 8, essentially lifting the ban on gay marriage. What this shows is that not only is Santorum out of step with the American public, but he’s beating a dead horse.

Here’s the problem: First, candidates are judged largely by their words and their demeanor. Everything they say on the campaign trail is duly logged for history. Santorum, for example, will almost certainly see marriage equality nationwide during his lifetime, and during his political career. A decade from now the incendiary words he puts forth today will haunt him as pundits hold him to things he said in 2012. As for Gingrich,(left) although this campaign is likely his last hurrah, a man as narcissistic as he surely values his legacy. But what kind of legacy can there really be when he campaigned by calling his opponent (Romney) “despicable,” and when he championed colonizing the moon when right here on earth people were losing their homes and livelihoods in record numbers?

One of my favorite writers, Maya Angelou, says words are actual things. They exist. I always thought of words as simply symbols, but she says they’re real. So, if she’s right, how do any of these men hope to gain the universal respect of the American people when they appear to have no filter when it comes to their own message? And how do they believe Americans will perceive their characters when they do not even deal graciously with one another? Gingrich, for his part, did not even offer the traditional congratulations to Romney, the victor in two recent primaries.

Words count. Manners count. Truth matters. Reasonable discourse attracts citizen support. The old “think before you speak” rule demonstrates intelligence. Why do the GOP candidates this year not get this? Why do they underestimate the citizenry’s collective perceptive nature? If you want to win our support, guys, talk to and with us, and not over and against one another. It’s that simple. Really.

THE POLITICHICKS ARE BACK!

The scene: Four radically conservative women get together for a political chatfest. They include a young black woman who says things like this, with a straight face: "The scripture tells us how to vote"; a non-descript librarian type who is, shall we say, not camera-ready; a blonde Heather Locklear-alike who is committed to her belief that Barack Obama is a Muslim; and, one-time, SNL not-ready-for-prime-time player Victoria Jackson, who inexplicably appears to be morphing into Shelley Winters. Today, the ladies tackle the all-important question, Can a Christian vote for a Mormon?

HALEY BARBOUR LEAVES MISSISSIPPI BURNING

Way back in 1992 Joseph Ozment entered a convenience store with another man and committed a robbery. His cohort shot the clerk, Ricky Montgomery and disabled him long enough for the two to make their escape. Still, Ozment fired two shots into Montgomery’s head. He was caught, prosecuted and found guilty. He was sentenced to life in prison. Today, Ozment is not only free, but he is missing.

One man who is not concerned about Ozment’s whereabouts is former Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour, who issued Ozment a full pardon just as he was about to exit the governor’s office on his last day. Not only did he pardon Ozment, but he pardoned 202 others, including at least 20 more convicted murderers. Watch:

That report was on January 12. The next day, Barbour held a news conference. He defended his clemency decisions by saying 189 of those pardoned were already out of jail. He said 26 were in jail, but 13 were released strictly for medical reasons. About the murderers, Barbour said they had been found guilty of crimes of passion, and according to the former governor, “experts” say those who commit crimes of passion are the most unlikely to commit another crime. He also said he is an evangelical Christian who believes in second chances. He proclaimed he is “totally at peace” with his decisions about the pardons.

One wonders why Barbour does not show more concern for the people of Mississippi who are quite uncomfortable knowing the murderers are free. I was in Mississippi the night news broke of Barbour’s eleventh hour pardons. I can safely say that everybody I came in contact with that night and the next day was dumbfounded, somewhat frightened and outraged. They were blindsided by Barbour’s callous disregard of their trust. They wanted an explanation, and they wanted Barbour to be held accountable for what they considered the careless abuse of his last moments of power. That may be why he caved to public pressure and held the press conference, at which he only managed to dig himself in deeper. About the five murderers who had worked as trustees at the Governor’s mansion, Barbour said he trusted them so completely that he even allowed his grandchildren to play with them. That simply served to make him further appear as the old, out-of-touch Southern white guy that he really is. Here is how he tried to justify his inexcusable decisions to compromise public safety in Mississippi:

Haley Barbour has a history of questionable, if not unacceptable behavior while in power. Last year, for example, Barbour said the civil rights era “was not that bad in Mississippi,” and that he “had a great childhood” in the state. Also last year, he was way too slow to veto a proposal to issue a state vanity license plate honoring a former Ku Klux Klan leader. Barbour, in fact, has a history of somewhat muted racism in his rhetoric. He also has a questionable history regarding immigration. When he worked as a lobbyist, he actually represented Mexico and reportedly made rather covert efforts to enable Mexicans to enter the U.S. and not have to fully live up to immigration laws.

What matters now is that Barbour was elected Governor of Mississippi twice, and for the most part operated in the traditions of the old South. One who spends time in Mississippi and who did not grow up there is quick to see the state has its own self-contained, early American culture. Natchez, for example, is a place that seems never to have accepted that the South lost the Civil War.[Exhibit A: At right is Mammy's Cupboard restaurant] So Barbour is a product of his environment. It so happens he amassed a certain amount of power and respect among the citizenry, so that when his term as Governor ended, he felt autonomous enough to simply let convicted first degree murderers back into the streets. What about respect for their victims, one might ask. What about their victims’ relatives, friends and associates? Are they at risk of bodily harm now?

Haley Barbour is a piece of work who has probably held Mississippi back, single handedly, from advancing into the 21st century, but his latest clemency disaster may be his worst act yet. Only time will tell if those crimes of passion he speaks of were isolated incidents or if they truly were precursors of a pattern of life-threatening criminal acts.

IS THIS THE MOST DANGEROUS MAN IN AMERICA?

This week, in one of his first appearances in New Hampshire, before a group of college students, GOP presidential hopeful Rick Santorum was confronted about his views against marriage equality. Reportedly, he asked the student what the difference would be between allowing two men to get married and allowing more than two men to marry. Essentially, he compared gay Americans getting married to polygamy. This is from a guy who has in the past compared gay people getting married to bestiality and sex between dogs.

Reports are showing up that bigger money is starting to bolster Santorum’s surprisingly emerging candidacy. Just yesterday, Foster Freiss, a megabucks-rich Wyoming financier, revealed that he dropped a half million dollars on Santorum’s Super PAC. This news comes right as it is revealed that Santorum, in a proactive sweep, is planning a major media blitz in South Carolina. While he preps for South Carolina, polls have him pulling up to third in New Hampshire. Meanwhile, he continues his unabashedly bigoted remarks about black Americans, gay Americans, pro-choice Americans, poor Americans, and even Mormons (who he says are members of a dangerous cult”). Rick Santorum is a bigot. Just reading those words right now on the page, I can’t help wondering why I haven’t read them anywhere else. Not only is he a bigot, but he tries mightily to convince you and me that he is not, even backtracking on his own words. Watch:

The ultimate danger is an exclusionary, closed-minded bigot gathering steam in the race to be the leader of the free world. What kind of a world would happen with a President Santorum? I envision a world under Santorum where America is at war with Iran. He has as much as said it. I envision a world in which girls raped by their fathers are forced to give birth; a world in which fully trained doctors in the best medical facilities in the country are legally compelled to allow a woman to die rather than abort the fetus that is killing her. Santorum would even like to legislate sexual behavior between men and women; he recently said contraceptives are “a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be.” His views on contraception are nothing new; they’ve just gotten louder. Here is what he said as far back as 2006:

Those who still remain unconvinced of Santorum’s ignorance should take note of the fact that somehow he speaks of birth control only in terms of pre-marital sex. The truth is it is a multi-faceted, life and death issue. He makes no mention of sexually transmitted diseases, HIV infection, teen pregnancy rates or any other issue associated with a lack of birth control. Again, Santorum’s narrow view of the world ignores inevitable consequences and asks the citizenry to subscribe to his own lack of understanding of vital issues.

Santorum’s rhetoric is positively Bachmannesque in its ignorance, but there is quite a distinction between him and Michele Bachmann. She was a flake who fizzled out of the public’s consciousness faster than you can say “Iowa.” He, on the other hand is rising. By some estimates his support nationwide quintupled after Iowa. He is reported to have raised $2 million in the 48 hours following the caucus there. As the money pours in, Santorum is steadily elevating his rhetorical swagger. On Thursday he actually dissed Ronald Reagan in a speech about social security. Try to remember the last time you heard a GOP candidate who was bold (or stupid) enough to denigrate Reagan. Santorum’s getting perilously cocky.

The danger here is the precedent. If Santorum can rise in America, what ails this country, and what other fringe candidate could garner support? We Americans rarely rally behind extremists who run for president. But people are scared right now. After witnessing the Arab Spring, bloodshed worldwide, the Occupy movement coast to coast – Americans are ripe for a law and order guy. And if the only type of law and order that presents itself is moral law and order in the body of a Rick Santorum, it appears a lot of scared Americans are ready to jump on his highly determined and rigidly conceived bandwagon. He is a man whose rapid ascent is the clear result of national desperation.

That’s no way to elect a president. If I could get one message across to all of those rabid Santorum supporters it would be this: What you are witnessing is the candidacy of an angry man. Inside of his rhetoric is a true rage against freedom. It is the world according to Rick Santorum, and anyone who doesn’t fall in line is simply dismissed and categorized as a sinner.


If you want to witness a teachable moment, this is the big one. Here and now we can learn a lot about what moves people when they’re in trouble. Santorum’s message is resonating among citizens who feel disenfranchised and hopeless. He is playing the God card, and transforming his holier-than-thou attitude into a public rallying cry for his limited version of morality.

Will we buy what he’s selling in the long term? I think not. But plenty of damage can be done in the meantime. As the campaign goes on, attention will likely turn to Santorum’s cozy connections with big business, his uncomfortable alliance with lobbyists, his questionable past business dealings and his hawkish views on foreign policy. But right now, since he seems hell bent on imposing his moral views on America, it’s time for us to ask ourselves if we could truly abide a President who dismisses millions of us simply because we believe in something he does not comprehend – freedom of choice.

HOLIDAY GREETINGS FROM THE BACHMANNS!

The Bachmanns Wish You Merry Christmas - watch more funny videos

EULOGY FOR OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM

By all accounts, 23-year-old David Hickman (below, left) from Greensboro, N.C. was pretty excited about coming home for Christmas. It is widely reported that he called his mother on November 13 to say so, but that would be their last conversation. On November 14, Hickman, an infantryman, was killed by a roadside bomb in Iraq. Critics of the Obama administration contend the president should never have announced in October that all U.S. troops would be withdrawn from Iraq by Christmas. According to some, Obama’s pronouncement only served to make the Iraqi insurgents step up their quest to knock off as many Americans as possible before the deadline. They may be right, and Hickman may be the unfortunate consequence of Obama’s grandstanding.

This week marked the official end of U.S. troop involvement in Iraq. It has been nine years since the U.S. involved itself in the ill-conceived “Operation Iraqi Freedom.” Many Americans believe it was not this country’s responsibility to ensure democracy in Iraq. It is now well known that the U.S. entered the war with faulty intelligence and under less than noble circumstances. It is known that President George W. Bush's aggressive stance toward Iraq after 9/11 was a knee jerk reaction that proved ill-fated and fatal for many Americans.

As usual, the numbers tell the story. According to the government’s own figures, here is the human toll: U.S. Troop Casualties - 4,486 US troops; 98% male. 91% non-officers; 82% active duty, 11% National Guard; 74% Caucasian, 9% African-American, 11% Latino. 19% killed by non-hostile causes. 54% of US casualties were under 25 years old. 72% were from the US Army.

Here is the ongoing human toll: US Troops Wounded - 32,226, 20% of which are serious brain or spinal injuries. (Total excludes psychological injuries.) US Troops with Serious Mental Health Problems - 30% of US troops develop serious mental health problems within 3 to 4 months of returning home.

We learned from the Vietnam War that the human toll exacts consequences that transcend generations. Vets who are mentally or psychologically disabled try to re-acculturate and live somewhat normal lives, but their injuries and psychological wounds affect spouses, children, co-workers and most anyone with whom they interact. We know anecdotally that marriages crumble, domestic abuse skyrockets and child abuse intensifies among many vets.

And so there was little celebration this week, and there won’t be ticker tape parades or victory services at the National Cathedral or anything to truly mark the end of this war. That is because we know that people who were 20-something when they lost their eyes or their arms or legs or sanity will spend decades trying to right themselves. And we know that many of those 4,486 US troop casualties had children that will never know their parent(s). And we know that people like George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Colin Powell who actively engaged the U.S. in this war will not be held legally accountable for their misguided decisions.

It is from the vets themselves that we learn the most about how bad decisions in Washington wreak havoc in lives from coast to coast. Watch and listen to vets recap their own experiences in a CNN report:
The war in Iraq was one of the most significant mistakes I've ever witnessed the American government make. With no weapons of mass destruction, and no evidentiary connection between Iraq and 9/11, 4,486 men and women were ordered to their deaths for absolutely no reason. That is how history will see the Iraq debacle.

It is critical that we recognize now the enormity of the error that was Iraq. I am hoping that our collective realization of the vulnerability and poor judgment of our government officials puts a kink in our blind trust of them. Every reasonable American knows now that we should never have gone to Iraq. If something similar happens in the future, we Americans are likely going to demand far more accountability from the president on down.

Like Vietnam, American history has nothing to be proud of with the Iraq war. Not a thing. And that, all by itself, should tell us Americans to become more engaged with the political process, to more carefully choose who will govern and to clearly convey to them what we expect.

DELUSIONS OF THE DONALD

Some years ago when I first walked into Trump Tower in Manhattan I remember thinking, “This guy thinks big – and shiny.” Those were the days when real estate developer Donald Trump was married to Ivana Trump, and together they had turned the Plaza Hotel into the showplace it was always meant to be. Those were glamorous times for the Trumps. The unapologetically ostentatious 1980s. It was a moment when the name Trump was synonymous with the good life, especially when compared to their arch rivals in the hotel business, the Helmsleys. Remember wicked witch hotel baroness Leona Helmsley and her increasingly infirm and senile husband, Harry? They were certainly no match for the beautiful Trumps.

Today one would be hard pressed to associate the word “beautiful” with Donald Trump. The years have not been kind to the Donald. His ego inflated involuntarily to the point where he believes he can either become the next President of the United States, or mightily influence who ever ascends. Trump is a showman. He is a circus ringmaster. He says outrageous things and he often inaccurately insinuates himself into the upper echelons of every cultural stratum. For example, in his latest book, “Time to Get Tough: Making America #1 Again,” he writes of superstar Lady Gaga, “"Maybe she became a star because I put her on the Miss Universe Pageant. It’s very possible, who knows what would have happened without it, because she caused a sensation.” Further into the book, in an equally ungrammatical fashion, he claims he warned Jeff Zucker of NBC not to move Jay Leno to a different time slot; it was a moment one might think of the Donald not as a real estate magnate, but rather as instant network programming executive. Trump can’t get enough of Trump’s magnificence.

But…you know that. The big news today is Donald Trump, presidential debate moderator. As it turns out it would be a debate between GOP frontrunner Newt Gingrich and GOP homophobe loser-in-residence Rick Santorum. Everybody else has declined the invitation to participate in the Dec. 27 debate produced by Newsmax and to air on the ION network. Let’s see if we can picture this: Newt can talk about the social merits of having first graders clean toilets in their schools while Santorum can talk about the evil gay agenda that threatens the fabric of our culture. And Trump can interrupt frequently and talk about Trump.

By the weekend, Trump was reportedly considering canceling the debate. One can only hope. Of course we know it would be cancelled because of lack of participation among the candidates. But Trump put the spin on the potential cancellation by saying it may be necessary because he is still considering running as an independent candidate, and it may be a conflict of interest for him to host a debate.

The political process is sullied by Trump’s Barnum and Bailey sideshow. We are talking about determining who may be the next leader of the free world. Whether you like them or not, most of the GOP candidates have worked their way up through the system to take the giant hopeful leap towards the presidency. Most of them probably do not have the intellect, chutzpah and finances to go the distance, but they each had a steady trajectory. They climbed. Trump, on the other hand, took an express elevator of his own making. He is tailor made for the American pop culture, famous for being famous. Who else can you think of that develops real estate and ends up with his own network reality show, his own beauty pageant, A-list Hollywood connections and now, his own presidential debate?

Still, does the emperor have even a stitch of clothing? One wonders what on earth, other than ego, convinced Trump he has a place in presidential politics. Would he have the first clue what to do as commander-in-chief of America’s armed forces? Would he know even where to begin to navigate his way through a hostile legislative branch of our government? With absolutely no legal training, no legislative experience and no Washington cache, how could he remotely expect other world leaders to assign him a modicum of credibility? It is quite a fantasy leap from TV personality to Chief Executive of the United States of America.

About that ego; this week Trump told CNN host Piers Morgan that he believes he is the one American who should be sent to negotiate trade deals with foreign nations. He told Wolf Blitzer on CNN’s “The Situation Room” that he was surprised Romney turned down the invitation to the debate because he claims Romney is clamoring for Trump’s endorsement. Rather than owning up to the fact that the candidates are not participating in his debate because it has no value, Trump told radio host Don Imus that they are not coming because "some of them don't have the courage to do it. A couple of them called me and told me, 'Donald, I'm just too nervous to do it.'"

Every election period has these short-lived sideshows. Last time it was Sarah Palin. Some years before that it was Ross Perot. Remember him? This time it’s Trump. Who’s lying in wait for 2016? Snooki, maybe? Justin Bieber? Listen, this too shall pass, or should I say, Trump, too, shall pass. We need to get laser-focused on the critical issues at hand – economy, poverty, social equality, employment, housing, global threats and regaining America’s traditional standing on the world stage. Trump is a blip on the radar screen, but one that is diverting attention from all that really matters. If he truly wants to serve his country, rather than himself, he will take a giant step back and allow the process to proceed as it should.

IT IS TIME FOR RICK PERRY TO DISAPPEAR

If Rick Perry hadn’t already sealed his unfortunate political fate, his latest campaign ad should put a cap on his candidacy. Watch:


At this point, knowing as we do that Perry is not going to represent the Republican party in next year’s election, this ad has broader implications. Look to your left on this blog and you will see the story of Jonah Mowry, the young boy who is tortured by other children who belittle him because of his sexuality. If Jonah Mowry turns on the TV and watches the ad you just watched, how will that affect his own personal development? Here he sees the Governor of Texas, a GOP presidential hopeful, essentially telling him that he is worthless, and telling him that people of “faith” would never be able to validate him as a human being, because he’s gay. That’s what Rick Perry accomplishes with this video. Ostensibly he made the video to bolster his chances of being president, but its effect on the culture around him is anything but presidential. The ad will go down in this year’s campaign history on the same level as Herman Cain’s cigarette smoking ad and last year’s Christine O’Donnell “I’m Not a Witch ad.” The difference this time is that the damage from this ad is already done.

Someone should have told Rick Perry, in the lyrics of the Broadway play, “Into the Woods”… Careful the things you say; Children will listen. It was irresponsible and borderline cruel of Rick Perry to approve of the ad and to tape it and allow it to be distributed. Trusting in the general reasonableness of the American people, as I do, I believe this ad will backfire on Perry. Within hours of the ad’s release, video parodies had hit the web in force. Rick Perry impersonators appeared in settings similar to the one in the ad, starting their messages out with statements like, “I’m not afraid to admit I’m an atheist,” or “I’m not afraid to admit I’m an asshole.” Sophomoric humor to be sure, but remember humor is often just the stylized expression of rage. I think Perry’s ad elicits feelings of rage among many of us.

The number of gay children and young people who have taken their own lives in the past few years because society messaged them that they were inadequate human beings has skyrocketed. The Jonah Mowrys of the world are numerous and often desperate. Rick Perry’s actions fuel the fires of their discontent in a way that could invite further fatalities. If I could ask Perry one question now it would be this: How can you defend your contention that you want to strengthen the country when through your own words you marginalize and attempt to weaken entire segments of the U.S. population?

Perry’s blanket dismissal of the rights of gay American service men and women is arrogance personified. Perhaps he has forgotten about people like U.S. Army Major Alan Rogers,(left) a gay service member who died while on patrol in Iraq in January, 2008. Would Perry diminish the fact that Rogers sacrificed his life for a country that made him hide his homosexuality in order to fight for it? I wonder how his dismissive attitude would go over with the family of Cpl. Andrew Wilfahrt, reportedly the first U.S. soldier to be killed in Afghanistan after President Obama’s repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. Both Rogers and Wilfahrt were blown up by IED’s. Blown up, while serving their country. And somehow, in an ill-conceived 30-second campaign spot, Rick Perry equates the human rights of these young men with an issue of holiday celebrations in grade schools. It is disgusting.

The political process has gone awry, fixating on issues that are not germane to the public interest. The public is served by a focus on dignity, in the form of respect as citizens, the right to work for a living and the privilege of owning a home in America. The public is further served by presidential candidates who understand that one’s sexuality does not define him or her. Alan Rogers and the hundreds of other gay soldiers who died in Operation Iraqi Freedom were there with the same patriotic intentions of all other service men and women. When Andrew Wilfahrt’s (right) body exploded he felt the same terror and ripping apart of his flesh that any other soldier feels at the moment of impact. All who loved them felt the same flood of grief that befalls any other dead soldier’s survivors. Rick Perry is obviously not enough of an evolved human being to comprehend this.

It is time for Rick Perry and others in this GOP race who share his limited, bigoted mindset to step down from this race and quietly disappear into the masses. We don’t need them, and we most certainly do not need anyone to lead this country who cannot understand their responsibility to respect all American citizens, regardless of their biological makeup.

THE BAD, BAD BOYS OF 2011

You have to hand it to a guy who resigns from his candidacy for President of the United States by quoting a Pokemon movie. Herman Cain appeared in front of his would-be new campaign headquarters on Saturday, to announce that he will “suspend” his campaign. Then he steps down from the stage with Motown music playing in the background. There was barbecued food and general revelry, as if it were Cain announcing his candidacy, rather than ending it amidst various allegations of sexual wrongdoing.

Cain’s timing is perfect: His hijinks become the closing bookend for a year when bad boys around the globe were hogging the headlines with their own sexual junior highisms. I mean come on: Congressman Anthony Weiner was sexting women from the gym, while considering a run for Mayor of New York City, just as his wife found out she’s pregnant. And his antics were tame compared to bad boys like Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the former head of the International Monetary Fund who stands accused of forcing a New York hotel housekeeper to have sex with him.

Bad boys are just bad boys, no matter what they do for a living or how much power they crave in their professional lives. And their egos generally somehow enable them to maintain their high profile public personas, convincing themselves that nobody will ever know about their duplicitous lifestyles. It really is stunning how not one of them seems to understand that privacy in public life is now history. It does not exist. A half century ago, JFK and his brother Bobby Kennedy could each take their turns having sex with Marilyn Monroe, and even the reporters who knew about it wouldn’t dare reveal it. But that was then.

Fast forward to 2011 and we’re still waiting for justice to be served in the case of John Edwards (below, right), the sleazebag scandal monger from the last presidential campaign. Edwards, you will recall, allegedly funneled money from his campaign to one Rielle Hunter, his secret squeeze who actually bore their daughter. While the wheels of justice turn as slowly as possible, we’ve also had to live through the very public battle over the sex tape he and Rielle made during the campaign. Sex tape. Presidential candidate. Welcome to 21st century America.

But 2011’s main scandal players were not limited to the U.S. Silvio Berlusconi, the three-time prime minister of Italy finally resigned a few weeks ago. His departure follows various periods where his name was attached to words like mafia, prostitution, tax fraud, perjury and embezzlement. But our favorite Silvio charge has to do with his alleged sex for cash scandal with an underage Moroccan dancer named Ruby Rubicouri (you simply cannot make this stuff up). Miss Ruby met the Prime Minister when she was working as a dental hygienist and he was being treated after being attacked with a marble statue by a disgruntled citizen.

All of it begs the obvious question: Are men innately pigs? Edwards was married to a woman who was fighting stage four breast cancer when he got Rielle Hunter pregnant. One of Cain’s accusers claims they were in a car headed for his corporate headquarters, when he pulled over and ran his hand up her skirt – kind of like a junior high boy might do to live out his masturbatory fantasy. I guess it depends on your definition of “pig.” Was John Edwards simply a pig disguised in matinee idol’s good looks and great suits? Was Silvio Berlusconi (below, left) an Italian pig whose reported multi-billions caused him to believe he was invincible? The Italian version of Teflon Don, you might say.

There are those who say both politics and sex are all about power. Nothing more. Nothing less. Maybe rich and powerful men simply cheat more richly and powerfully than their average Joe counterparts. But interestingly, they only get away with it until they don’t get away with it. The other day a female comic on TV said, “When was the last time we heard rumors like the ones we’re hearing about Herman Cain that did not turn out to be true?” Where there’s smoke and all that, you know. She’s right. There isn’t much you could say to me that would convince me that Herman Cain is not a pig. A more respectable pig would come forward and say, “I did it and I’m bowing out of the race.” Instead, Cain came forward and said ‘I didn’t do it, but I’m bowing out of the race for my family’s sake.’ And he said all this just as people who are close to his family have come forward to reveal the Cains are not exactly the Cleavers.

Cain, Edwards, Weiner (below, right), Berlusconi and their Hollywood counterparts such as Arnold Schwarzenegger and Ashton Kutcher are simply high profile examples of arrogance personified. Memo to all of the above: We citizens out here are not going to get real involved in your behind-closed-door dalliances unless you throw it in our face. And every time you start to feel a bit cocky about how much you are getting away with, you need to remember that you’re not getting away with it. We may as well be seated theatre style in your bedroom. Why is it that we get that but you don’t? And why is it that you can’t simply study the legacy of people like David Vitter, Bill Clinton and Eliot Spitzer to truly know that it’s only a matter of time until things come tumbling down? Way down.

Listen, combine one part predatory mass media with one part puritanical American consciousness with one part “Gotcha” and you’re nothing more than Herman Cain – powerless, jobless and without the adulation you crave so mightily. It’s a predictable recipe for public humiliation and ultimate dreaded anonymity. It is more about arrogance than ignorance. And it repeatedly leads to men who are in the prime of their careers predictably and rapidly disappearing. Just ask John Edwards who these days kicks around his South Carolina mansion worrying about whether he will go to jail. It’s a slippery slope boys.