– From “The Second Coming” by William Butler Yeats

Majority rules. It’s a fundamental precept of democracy. Yet, in real life it doesn’t always play out that way. Sometimes, the majority can be overruled.

For instance, in a spontaneous political discussion around a picnic table in the park, one pushy palooka with a bullhorn voice can shout down any five soft-spoken picnickers, taking turns to speak. Moreover, history tells us that when a savvy and energetic minority wants to run roughshod over the prerogatives of most of the population it can be done. It helps to be organized and ruthless.

We’ve recently seen town hall meetings about health care reform sabotaged in ways kindred in spirit to the picnic table example. Rudeness has seemed to be in the air this fall. Most notably, Rep. Joe Wilson shouted “You lie!” at President Barack Obama, in the midst of a presidential address before a joint session of congress.

Aren’t some of the same folks who stridently objected to President Obama speaking to their children during the school day now calling the obstreperous Rep. Wilson a hero?

Talk about setting a bad example for kids!

Just how many people really see Wilson’s calculated grandstanding as a heroic gesture is guesswork. We’ll probably see a poll on that, eventually, but polls on such provocative questions are sure to be gamed to the hilt.

However, regardless of their political affiliations, I’m confident that most everyday people disapproved of what the ill-mannered, celebrity wannabe congressman from South Carolina did to interrupt the president’s address.

Of course, Wilson got plenty of help in becoming a celebrity from the two relentlessly partisan, finger-pointing basic cable news networks — MSNBC and Fox News.

With MSNBC on the left and Fox News on the right, a consumer can take in the same story presented from clashing points of view. How close either network gets to telling the plain truth varies from day to day. With their formats, those networks need the Wilsons of the world more than they seem to need to find the truth.

All the political news programs televised in this age routinely use battling spokespersons, people who are paid to attack their opponents. Too many times those presentations degenerate into shouting contests. It’s hard to believe any of the consumers’ minds are being expanded, or changed, by being subjected to mean-voiced bickering disguised as debate.

Soft-spoken politicians/candidates who use little bombast, such as a Creigh Deeds, don’t appeal all that much much to the ratings-hungry people booking the talent for MSNBC and Fox News.

Meanwhile, with all the shouting, the quiet majority isn’t silent. But it has little say-so because normal speaking voices can’t be heard over the din. Furthermore, that means most of us are being subjected to all the noise, so that a few bullies can make thoughtful communication more difficult whenever they feel like it.

In the bigger picture, with the shouting increasing and understanding diminishing is our society’s center going to hold?

– 30 –

August is usually a slow month for news, so we are spoon-fed anniversaries to contemplate: Hiroshima’s 64th, Woodstock’s 40th, and it was 35 years ago, on Sunday, when Richard M. Nixon resigned from the presidency. Since his death 15 years ago we have been asked to reconsider Richard Nixon.

Fair enough, let’s give the man his due: The entire culture shifted gears the day President Nixon threw in the towel. The brilliant strategist, the awkward sleuth, the proud father, and the coldest of warriors had left the building.

August 9, 1974 was a day to hoist one for his enemies, many of whom must have enjoyed his twisting in the wind of Watergate’s storm. It was the saddest of days for his staunch supporters, whose numbers were legion.

Either way, Richard Nixon’s departure from DeeCee left a void that no personality has since filled.

For the first time since his earliest commie-baiting days, in the late-‘40s, Dick Nixon didn’t matter. With Nixon gone being anti-establishment promptly went out of style, too. With the war in Vietnam no longer a front burner issue, “streaking” — running around outside naked — replaced the anti-war rally as the most popular gesture of defiance on college campuses.

Soon what remained of the causes and accouterments of the ‘60s was packed into cardboard boxes to be tossed out, or stored in the basement. Watergate revelations killed off the Nixon administration’s chance of instituting national health insurance. Many people have forgotten that his regime was also easily more liberal on racial and environmental matters than any before it. Although he was a hawk, Nixon was moderate on some of the social issues.

His opening to China and efforts toward détente with the Soviets are often cited as evidence of Nixon’s ability to maneuver deftly in the realm of foreign affairs. No doubt, that was his main focus. But at the bottom line, Nixon is remembered chiefly as the President who was driven from office. And for good reason.

Nixon’s nefarious strategy for securing power divided this country like nothing since the Civil War. Due to his fear of hippies and left-wing campus movements, Nixon came between fathers and sons. To rally support for his prosecution of the Vietnam War he demagogued and exploited the bitter division between World War II era parents and their Baby Boomer offspring in such a way that many families have never recovered.

However, Nixon’s true legacy is that since his paranoia-driven scandal, the best young people have no longer felt drawn into public service. Since Watergate, for 30-some years now — taken as a whole — the citizens who’ve gravitated toward politics for a career have not had the intellect, the sense of purpose, or the strength of character of their predecessors.

Some trace the cycle of endless paybacks across the aisle to that era, as well. We can thank Tricky Dick for all that and more.

So weep not for the sad, crazy Nixon of August, 1974. He did far more harm to America than whatever good he intended. On top of that, he had twenty years to come clean and clear the air. But he didn’t do it. He didn’t even come close. In the two decades of his so-called “rehabilitation,” before his death in 1994, Nixon just kept on being Nixon.

Some commentators have suggested that he changed over that period, even mellowed. Don’t buy it. The rest of us changed a lot more than he did. While I acknowledge his guile and I tip my hat to his monumental gall, President Nixon was a man who choked on his own bile.

So, spare me the soft-focus view of the Nixon years.

Yes, dear reader, I’m here to remind you that Tricky Dick Nixon’s fall from grace should be a lesson to us all — he got what he deserved.

– 30 –

Words and art by F.T. Rea

Retiring U.S. Supreme Court Justice David Souter in May delivered a stirring call for better education of the American public about how government works.

The 19-year veteran of the court observed that surveys show large majorities of Americans cannot name the basic three branches of government: the executive, legislative and judicial branches.

Souter, in a speech at Georgetown University Law Center, warned that lack of knowledge about how government works threatens judicial independence and threatens the republic itself.

He reminded his audience that Benjamin Franklin, when asked after the Constitutional Convention of 1787 what type of government the new nation would have, replied: “A republic, if you can keep it.“

Souter sounded a note of pessimism based on the lack of civic knowledge.

“It can be lost, as he knew,“ he said of Franklin. “And the lesson we have been learning over the past couple of years is is that it is being lost. It is lost when it is not understood. If it is not understood, it will basically leech away.“

Souter said concern about attacks on judicial independence led to his understanding that “the real problem was the debasement, and in some places the disappearance, of knowledge of the structure and work of the government.“

The republic, he said, “can be lost, it is being lost, it is lost, if it is not understood.“

The concepts of separation of powers and of a fair and independent judiciary must be widely understood for the American republic to survive, the 69-year-old jurist warned.

In his home state of New Hampshire, to which he retired this month, he has just joined an independent curriculum committee to upgrade the teaching of civics from kindergarten through 12th grade.

Souter’s talk won a prolonged standing ovation from several hundred lawyers and judges from around the country, according to Tony Mauro of LegalTimes.

His words reverberate strongly across Virginia, where civics education has been allowed to wither.

So little government is taught between the 5th and 11th grades that many Virginians today cannot name three branches of government at the state or federal level, much less understand the separation of powers.

How lacking is knowledge among students in Virginia?

Ken Stroupe said the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics, where he is chief of staff, found in a survey of high school and middle school students several years ago that:

• A third of students incorrectly thought that the Democratic Party is considered more conservative than the Republican Party.
• More than 30 percent did not know the name of Vice President Dick Cheney.
• More than 70 percent did not know the procedure by which a candidate is nominated to become president.
• Only 29 percent were able to name even one of Virginia’s two U.S. senators.
• Only 23 percent correctly knew that most bills introduced in Congress are rejected in committee and never reach the full House or Senate.
• More than half could not identify which branches of government are most susceptible to being influenced by lobbying and more than half said that did not know the purpose of a political action committee.

Perhaps the lack of civics education had something to do with the unsurprising finding that only 10 percent of those responding to the survey selected civics as their favorite subject.

Virginia’s evolving demographics alone help justify increasing civics offerings in schools as well as in after-school or other community settings because people should know their system of government. A state with an increasingly mobile and growing population has more people to familiarize with the basics of how government works.

Half of Virginia’s residents were born outside the state, including a full 10 percent of the population born in another nation. No matter where they were born or where they went to school, Virginians have a better chance of improving life in the commonwealth the better they understand the civic life of their state and nation.

Our system of representative democracy depends upon reasoned debate, negotiation and compromise. Success depends on the involvement of individuals who choose to participate in a political process that can bring about changes if enough people have the faith and understanding to make it work.

Civil and bipartisan policy discussions work best when good faith, respect for others and understanding of how the process should work are shared as broadly among citizens as possible.

Virginia and the nation have enough problems to solve without the misunderstanding and paralysis that can result when people lack the faith or knowledge to make government work.

Bob Gibson is executive director of the Sorensen Institute for Political Leadership at the University of Virginia. The opinions expressed here are his own and not necessarily those of the institute. He was appointed on July 1 to the Virginia Commission on Civics Education.

The FTC is charged with protecting consumers. It administers a wide variety of laws. A quick check of its Web site — www.ftc.gov — gives you an idea of how broad the commission’s authority is. It has won judgments against bogus billing companies, payment processors, foreclosure prevention specialists and corporate merger violators. It is the FTC that requires those disclosures you often see in the fine print of ads, such as “results not typical.”

It should come as no surprise, then, that the agency would want to make it clear that endorsements and testimonials in the new media are subject to the same rules as other advertisers.

The Internet has grown exponentially over the years. Reston-based comScore Inc. estimates that the total U.S. Internet audience in May was in excess of 193 million individual visitors. That’s a whole lot of folks to try to persuade, as the ad man says, to “buy my product.” The Internet has increasingly become the source of information on products and services. Most consumers are aware, if they wind up on a commercial Web site, that someone is probably getting paid to write about the product or service featured.

But what about the bloggers? Most consumers aren’t aware that many bloggers participate in various marketing arrangements to make money. Some simply place ads on their sites.

Technorati, a leader in tracking and indexing blogs, reported in 2008 that 54 percent of blogs contained some form of advertising. Other bloggers participate in pay-per-post arrangements, earning hundreds or thousands of dollars for each post. Still others write reviews for pay, either in cash or goods.

When I co-owned an online technology site, we often received software or other small items for free in exchange for a review. Generally speaking, we had to return the pricey items after reviewing them, but times they are a-changin’. Reports of free computers, trips and other items are no longer as rare as they once were.

Some bloggers disclose these compensation arrangements; others don’t. Although the rules already apply, for the most part it has been within the discretion of the blogger whether to disclose these arrangements. Some blogger groups, such as the Media Bloggers Association, of which I am a member, encourage, but do not require, its members to embrace transparency and to disclose anything “that might influence or appear to influence” the blogger’s independence and integrity. I take the standards of the MBA seriously. The proposed guidelines would make others do the same. Failure to do so would subject the blogger — and the advertiser — to penalties.

In its announcement, the FTC proposed three new examples to be included in the guidelines reflecting material connections between endorsers and advertisers as they relate to the new media. Comments on these three were specifically requested, and the public comments didn’t disappoint. Interestingly enough, not a single one of the 17 public comments came from bloggers. (The public comments are available at www.ftc.gov/os/comments/endorsementguides2/index.shtm)

Most of the comments came from trade organizations, who count advertisers among their members. Several said that regulating the new media was premature, with a couple of them saying such regulation would have a “chilling effect” as bloggers and other viral marketers would shy away from offering opinions that might subject them to claims of misleading the public.

I say hogwash. One of the main reasons bloggers blog is because they have something to say. Regulating blogs isn’t going to change that.

While the FTC believes that the industry should self-regulate, it is obvious that, for the most part, it has not. Bloggers who already adhere to transparency standards have nothing to fear from these proposed regulations. Those who don’t — consider yourself warned.

When the never-ending election season turned to the 2009 elections for Delegates, Governor, Lieutenant Governor, and Attorney General, there was a lot of talk about winning back the other house in the Virginia Legislature, the House of Delegates. Since then, we have seen a carnival-style primary election season that sucked all the money and air out of the activist base in Virginia. After what seems like years between January and June, our question was answered and we have a ticket of great, qualified and dedicated people.

My good friend Vivian Paige published an article last night that spurred this train of thought. I had been thinking along the same lines, although in the recesses of my brain. Vivian asked some of the same questions I am, namely, “Who will ensure our majority in the House of Delegates?” We both agree that of equal importance to electing a Democratic Governor is electing the majority status in the House of Delegates.

The House of Delegates has more contested races this year than it did in 2007. Today, I believe the total is 69.

Here’s a question. With the large number of House races this year, who will be doing the usual jobs of Levar Stoney and Jared Leopold? These races need to be worked by the party, and from what I have seen in previous House election years, they couldn’t cover the races they had with a full complement of people at DPVA. In one instance at the end of the election season in 2007, a literature drop was scheduled at little or no cost to the party. Unfortunately, unless you lived in Northern Virginia, Roanoke, Danville/Martinsville or Hampton Roads, there were no events listed. This is inexcusable.

The whole of western VA, aside from a few areas like Roanoke and Danville, are routinely written off. Prince Edward County went for Obama last year. Will we see any sort of focus on Southside areas outside the ones I mentioned? Not likely.

Without the House of Delegates, there is a real good chance that redistricting would happen under the rules and carving knife of the Republican majority. We can’t let that happen to Virginia for ten years, because we couldn’t adequately staff our organizations. We can’t let it happen to Virginia’s people either, they are pushed to the economic limit now, along with the usual headaches. We especially can’t allow it to happen to the children that have no say in any of this. They deserve a good education and good health care, and a reasonable government that does the things that help people.

Will we rise to the occasion? I am hopeful, but I am not optimistic.

How did we pick up those four seats in 2007? I believe it was a combination of things. First, we had really good candidates. Second, we had extremely active caucus members. Brian Moran, as chair of the House Caucus, spent a tremendous amount of time in Hampton Roads. Creigh Deeds, although not Caucus chair, spent a tremendous amount of time here helping Senate candidates. The coordinated campaign – warts and all – did an excellent job on the ground, bringing in volunteers to help paid staff. Finally, the candidates and the caucuses raised significant amounts of money.

Reading through the various sources over the last few days one would think that the only goal this year is to win the governor’s mansion and that the only place that matters is Northern Virginia. I can only hope that I am misreading these early signs.

The announcement that DPVA Executive Director Levar Stoney was taking a leave of absence to be political director of Creigh Deeds’ campaign for governor was the first shoe to drop. Wedesday’s announcement that DPVA communications director Jared Leopold is also heading over to the Deeds campaign left me wondering who the heck will be running the DPVA through the fall.  According to vpap, there are 68 69 contested House of Delegates races this fall.  While it is arguable that each of these races is competitive, truth is that resources will be tied up fending off challengers. That makes the role of the DPVA even more critical.

The House Democratic Caucus does the bulk of its fundraising through the Commonwealth Victory Fund. As of 3/31, the PAC had a paltry $35,442 on hand.  The caucus was a little better off, with $243, 022 on hand, but nowhere near the amounts they are going to need to help fund the races. Note that the second largest contributor to the Caucus has been Minority Leader Ward Armstrong, who contributed $483,000 in 2007. (He was actually the top contributor in 2007.)  I don’t expect to see those kinds of numbers from him this year – he has a challenger. And that $100,000 from John Stryker in 2007? Forgetaboutit. It’s unlikely to happen this year.

None of this bodes well for Democrats gaining the six seats necessary to obtain the majority in the House of Delegates.  And it seems that no one is even talking about that anymore. What’s at stake here? One word: redistricting. Without some gains in the House, we are staring at virtually the same districts as we have now for another ten years! Do you really think bipartisan redistricting is going to be implemented without Democrats at least gaining some House seats?

And then there is the emphasis on Northern Virginia.

Yeah, I know that NoVA represents a significant portion of the electorate. But let’s be real: they can’t do it alone. NoVA may turn out lots of votes, but they can’t pull the load without help from the rest of the state.  Hampton Roads, historically, has come through time after time.

Within days of winning the nomination, we learned that Deeds is moving his headquarters to Northern Virginia. “Resources” was offered as the reason, not a completely invalid one but one which makes the argument that the Democratic ticket is regionally diverse less believable. Already AG candidate Steve Shannon is from NoVA, and LG candidate Jody Wagner seems to spend most of her time there, based on her tweets.

It is a constant refrain of residents outside of NoVA that they are ignored. I hear it from almost every corner of the state.  Here’s what The Virginian-Pilot editorial board said last week:

Steve Shannon of Fairfax County has not distinguished himself during his short tenure in the House of Delegates, and he remains a stranger to voters outside his district. If he wants to be the next attorney general, he should start explaining now why he’s qualified for the job.

Hampton Roads is supposed to be a part of the golden crescent, yet the editorial board knows little of Shannon. Knowing the editorial board, I know they didn’t say this without justification.

And then there are the blogs. During the primary, all three candidates had bloggers’ dinners – in NoVA. Wednesday night, Deeds had a bloggers’ dinner – in NoVA.

Let me let you guys in on a little secret: Hampton Roads bloggers enjoy the support of the main stream media. That’s right: our blogs, in addition to reaching the very small number of blog readers out there, are included in The Virginian-Pilot as pundits. Right alongside folks from the likes of The New York Times and The Washington Post. Instead of reaching a couple of thousand visitors a day, when our posts are published in the Pilot, we reach about 200,000 households.  Does The Washington Post include blog posts in the daily paper or have a whole section in the Sunday paper devoted to blog posts?

Two years ago, Hampton Roads Democrats delivered four seats. In 2009, we will defend our House seats and pick up a couple more.  But it sure would be nice if we didn’t have to do it alone.