LIBERADIO(!)

So the Governor of California has decided not to stay the execution of Stanley Tookie Williams. Let’s put aside the arguments for or against the Death Penalty as well as the “punishment” vs. “rehabilitation” debate. Let’s look at this as a practical matter. If this man is put to death, he will be unable to talk to kids about the devastating effect of gangs and gang violence. He’s only 51. If he’s executed now, several generations of kids that he might have touched with his anti-gang, anti-violence message will not be able to hear his advice. This man has so much to give to these kids. So many lessons to teach them. So many warnings for them to heed. What a waste.

On Monday, Freddie recognized that the President and Mrs. Bush are leading the war on Christmas but Brittney over at NashvilleIsTalking finds the fall-out.

“I think it’s more important to put Christ back into our war planning than into our Christmas cards,” said the council’s general secretary, the Rev. Bob Edgar, a former Democratic congressman.”

That’s genius. The quote of the season, if not the year.

“One of the generals on the pro-Christmas side is Tim Wildmon, president of the American Family Association in Tupelo, Miss….”It bothers me that the White House card leaves off any reference to Jesus, while we’ve got Ramadan celebrations in the White House,” Wildmon said. “What’s going on there?”

Well, what’s going on here, Tim, is that the White House is the people’s house, paid for and maintained by our tax dollars. And guess what? People of ALL faiths pay tax dollars.

It’s the first official meeting of the Nashville Chapter of the West Wing fan club as we welcome Radio and TV icon and author, Teddy Bart. Teddy is most well-known for hosting, along with Karlen Evins (who also makes an appearance today), Teddy Bart’s Round Table. We turn the (round) table on him this time and ask the questions – about talk radio, his personal politics, and his new book, The Hooligan. Oh, and the new season of The West Wing.

Today’s well-placed, carefully worded, non-chalant admission of guilt brings to mind this now famous Benjamin Franklin quote, “Any people that would give up liberty for a little temporary safety deserves neither liberty nor safety.” It also brings to mind this less famous Friends quote, “It’s NOT that common, it DOESN’T happen to every guy, and it IS a big deal.”

Rather than say these botched detentions are expected by-products of our policies, what Secretary Rice should have said is that we need to be extraordinarily diligent about making sure they never occur. One mistake is enough. It cannot be shrugged off.

Today’s Tennessean has a story about Senator Frist’s record on voting for legislation that would benefit HCA. The entire article is worth reading but it isn’t until far down in the story that the more interesting tidbits surface.

It appears that the Senate Ethics Commitee, in 1997 and 1999, addressed Frist’s apparent conflict of interest but concluded that his “financial interest in HCA didn’t present a conflict of interest when it came to voting on health-care issues.” Interesting that this would even be an issue if we are to take Frist at his word that his financial interests in HCA were in a blind trust. In 2003, Frist told cable news channel CNBC “As far as I know, I own no HCA stock.”

Oh but wait. We now know that “records filed with the Senate show he received a number of letters over the years informing him about shares in the company held in his blind trusts.” I guess these letters just gathered in a drawer, unopened and unread. Ahem.

And there’s more to the recently passed Medicare prescription drug act, which the Senator voted for, than helping seniors afford their much needed medications. According to the story, “The legislation gave hospitals an extra $25 billion in Medicare and Medicaid payments over 10 years.” About 35% of HCA’s revenue last year was made up of Medicare and Medicaid payments. In addition, the act extended a moratorim by 18-months “on new physician-owned specialty hospitals that would compete directly with full-service community hospitals such as those operated by HCA.”

And here’s the kicker: “HCA, like other hospital companies, oppose the physician-owned facilities on grounds they “cherry pick” patients with the best insurance, leaving traditional hospitals with an unfair share of uninsured and underinsured patients.” So much for free-enterprise.

Time Magazine releases a new poll in the wake of President Bush’s speech last week in Annapolis. The numbers appear to be headed south for the winter.

“Does President Bush have a plan that will achieve victory in Iraq?”
Yes: 41%
No: 55%

“How do you think the president is helping Iraq?”
Approve: 38%
Disapprove: 60%

“How is President Bush handling his overall job as president?”
Approve: 41%
Disapprove: 53%

I predict a cold front creeping into the West Wing right…about…NOW.

Mark over at Right Minded can’t figure out why liberals have a problem with Wal*Mart. He thinks it’s an anomaly:

“So, liberals advocate for the poor, Wal-Mart is good for the poor, liberals despise Wal-Mart.”

For the sake of his argument, let’s say that Wal*Mart benefits the poor by offerng lower prices on neccessities – food, clothing, medication, etc.. Can you think of any reason why we would be troubled by this company? Think hard. Think hard about the reasons why Wal*Mart can offer such low prices. Their low prices, my friend, come with a very high cost.

Liberals believe that corporations, with the permission to exist they get indirectly from us through our government, which grants them the licenses to exist, have a responsibility to be good citizens. We see a serious need for corporate responsiblity. What bothers us is that Wal*Mart, through it’s business practices, assumes little or no responsibility for anything but their bottomline and to anyone but their shareholders.

We maintain that corporations must take responsibility for all the pieces that make them successful – their shareholders, their customers, their communities, and above all, their employees.

Wal*Mart does not see a need to be responsible to the workers who make their products. They do not see a need to be responsible to the environment. They do not see a need to be responsible to the communities in which they build their stores. And most importantly, they do not see a need to be responsible for their employees.

As a corporate citizen, their priorities are severely lopsided. Last year, the CEO of the company made over 26 million dollars. The average Wal*Mart employee made about $13,000, was required to pay for their own healthcare, and encouraged to take advantage of government programs like WIC and foodstamps to take care of their families (“The world’s largest corporation – with over $286 billion in annual sales and 1.2 million employees here in the U.S. – cost American taxpayers over $1.5 billion in 2004.” – WalmartWatch.com)

Wal*Mart needs to balance their responsiblity to their shareholders with their responsiblity to their customers, their employees, and their country. Other corporations are able to do it and maintain good returns for their owners/shareholders and they can too – they simply choose not to.

Wal*Mart can still offer low prices that are attractive to low-income families AND be good corporate citizens. The two are not mutually exclusive. Doing so, however, may cut into their profits a bit. But really, how many billions of dollars does one family need?