My Year in Review

It seems fitting to conclude this year's My Week in Review blog with an entry titled "My Year in Review."

The blog focuses on three major topic areas: Politics, Religion and Public Relations, and I'll focus on each one in turn.

First, PR. This year has been a productive one for our company, Cut-It-Out Communications, and we've achieved several major goals. These include reaching the level of four major clients on full retainer, changing the company name (from Cut-It-Out Editing) and hiring consultants for a major overhaul of our website, to be completed in January. We've also expanded our offerings significantly, starting a new interactive program for our clients including blogs, online press releases, e-newsletters and online content syndication. We now also provide new structured web pages for client sites, primarily for press releases and forwarding of newsletter articles, so visitors can access the website directly instead of linking to a pdf file.

Religion: Well, our annual Bob Dylan Christmas card stirred the usual praise and controversy. We've also been published on lohud.com (the online site for The Journal News) with a critique of the Religious Right and the issue of immigration. This blog was launched in the second half of the year, allowing an outlet for opinions about the link between politics and true Christianity.

Politics: Cut-It-Out Communications added new clients in the County Legislature and Greenburgh town hall. Support for Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign for President took various forms, including a full-page creative word-scramble advertisement in the journal for the Annual Dinner of the Westchester County Democratic Committee.

We're looking forward to fruition in many of these fields in an exciting 2008.

A Bob Dylan Christmas

Apologies for the late post this week. Even bloggers take vacations.

For those of you who didn't receive one, my Christmas card, sent to friends, church members and my company's associates at Cut-It-Out Communications, provides the mixture of politics, religion and common sense central to this blog.

Here is the text:

When You Gonna Wake Up
by Bob Dylan

God don’t make promises that He don’t keep.
You got some big dreams, baby, but in order to dream,
You gotta still be asleep.

Chorus: When you gonna wake up,
When you gonna wake up, When you gonna wake up,
Strengthen the things that remain.

Counterfeit philosophies have polluted all of your thoughts.
Karl Marx has got you by the throat,
And Henry Kissinger’s got you tied up into knots. [Chorus]

You got innocent men in jail, your insane asylums are filled.
You got unrighteous doctors,
Dealing drugs that’ll never cure your ills. [Chorus]

You got men who can’t hold their peace,
Women who can’t control their tongue.
The rich seduce the poor, and the old are seduced by the young. [Chorus]

Adulterers in churches, and pornography in the schools.
You got gangsters in power,
And lawbreakers making rules. [Chorus]

Spiritual advisors and gurus to guide your every move.
Instant inner peace,
And every step you take’s got to be approved. [Chorus]

Do you ever wonder just what God requires?
You think He’s just an errand boy,
To satisfy your wandering desires? [Chorus]

You can’t take it with you, and you know it’s too worthless to be sold.
They tell you, “Time is money,”
As if your life was worth its weight in gold.

There’s a man on a cross, and He be crucified for you.
Believe in His power,
That’s about all you gotta do. [Chorus]

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.

Top 10 Reasons to Vote for Hillary

With all due respect to David Letterman, please see below the top 10 reasons to vote for Hillary. Unlike Mr. Letterman, however, these reasons are serious because they address a very serious topic, the future of our country.

10. Hillary knows what it's like to live in the fishbowl of the White House and has learned how to be circumspect in her words and actions. Some people misinterpret this talent as running a tightly scripted campaign.

9. Hillary gets rave reviews for her performance as a U.S. Senator. Despite initial misgivings by many New Yorkers, she humbled herself in the Senate, worked hard and listened to Senators with more seniority. The result: she was re-elected to the Senate in a landslide and universally acclaimed by New York Democrats and Republicans alike.

8. Her closest advisor is Bill Clinton, who, despite personal weaknesses, created the most properous economic climate in decades when he was President.

7. Hillary has perseverance and grit, essential components of the job description for President. She handled the Lewinsky affair with uncommon poise and determination.

6. Hillary understands the health care system in the United States better than any other candidate, and this is one of the most important issues facing our society today.

5. It would be good for our country for a woman to be elected President.

4. Hillary has deplored the excesses of the Bush administration, from suspension of habeus corpus to waterboarding, and has pledged to reverse them.

3. Hillary understands the importance of dialogue and listening, in general, and especially during crisis situations.

2. You can trust Hillary to work for her beliefs because she has done so her entire life.

AND #1

Hillary is most likely to win in November, and our country can't afford four more years of a Republican administration.

Things Get Interesting

Political junkies really got their fix this week. Of course, anyone with even a passing interest in politics knows a week can be like six months in any other profession. That's why it's so preposterous to predict who the next President will be.

Anyway, Mike Huckabee is the toast of the town, and, even though I'm a staunch Democrat, I must admit he's cast an impressive penumbra over both Parties this week. My interest, as a Pentecostal Christian myself, concerns his willingness to think independently and not pander to the Religious Right. He says, powerfully, that life does not end at birth, something the anti-abortion movement seems to forget. A true Christian should address poverty, adequate healthcare, affordable housing, etc., in addition to protecting the fetus.

Also, Mr. Huckabee refuses to pander to the hating, nativist, anti-immigrant crowd. He defends the immigrant as a human being, something the rest of his Party seems to forget.

Mike Huckabee's meteoric rise obscured a major development in the other Party, namely Barack Obama's rise to number one in the opinion polls. I don't think personally that he would make a good President, mainly because of his inexperience. With Hillary, I know what I'm getting, and she's been an activist since her days at Wellesley.

So, let's see how the frontrunner dynamic plays out next week. There may be a slight falling back as the new stars receive increased scrutiny from the press and their opponents.

Hostages for Hillary

Politics is notoriously hard to predict. Bill Clinton got a shot at the Presidency in the first place because no prominent Democrat wanted to run. George Bush was a glorious victor after Desert Storm, and his approval rating was in the 80 percent range. Who knew he would be dragged down by the economy and his failure to keep his vow, "read my lips, no new taxes."

So, when someone asks you to make a forecast about the next President of the United States, you should remember that a week can be like a year in politics.

Well, yesterday we had a wrench thrown into the Presidential campaign. Some misguided soul strapped highway flares on his body to give the appearance of a suicide bomb and waltzed into a small Clinton campaign headquarters in Rochester, NH, demanding to speak to Hillary and holding some of her staff members hostage.

As we all know, noone was hurt, but I think the incident, terrible as it was, played in Hillary's favor. Her obvious concern for her staff, her emotional yet in control response immediately afterwards, showed her full panoply of feelings. She handled the situation with poise and responsibility. How unlike the way our current President responds to a crisis.

Her speech was so good that Bill O'Reilly did not even cover it. He made some fleeting reference to the situation and then went on to another story, even having the gall to make a jibe about how much Secret Service protection Hillary gets herself.

Whether Hillary's aplomb and superb crisis management affects her poll numbers remains to be seen. However, it is a wake-up call to us all about the volatility of politics and the world we live in.

The Politics of Black Friday

Why do otherwise rational people drag themselves out of bed at 4:00 AM the day after a holiday?

Why are perceptions so important in politics?

The same reason: the bandwagon effect.

It is easier for people to follow the crowd than engage in independent thinking. Thinking, after all, means you must take some time to evaluate a situation, or a candidate, before making up your mind.

That's why most people who are members of a political party, or a particular worldview such as conservatism or the religious right, will automatically adopt all the opinions espoused by the group. Otherwise, they must think about each particular item, and that might take some time, or, God forbid, require some reading and investigation instead of watching another mind-numbing television show.

So, if all the media outlets make a big hoopla about shopping the day after Thanksgiving, and the retail stores join the hype, people will respond en masse.

Thus, everything becomes a game of expectations. Of course, politicians are constantly trying to manage expectations because sometimes, if you do better than anticipated, even if you don't win, it will be viewed as a victory.

And if enough stores run commercials on TV advertising their 4 AM opening, and the news channels cover Black Friday as if it were a major phenomenon (like lemmings jumping off a cliff), the people will show up, almost against their will.

So here's a plea to the public at large. The next time you decide on a seemingly insane course of action, or evaluate a political candidate who will lead our country for the next four-to-eight years, avoid a snap judgement and mull over your options for just a little bit longer.

Political discourse and the horse race

Political pundits on TV periodically bemoan the level of political discourse in the United States. They claim coverage of the campaign for President typically consists of who's ahead, who's behind, and by how much.

Instead of covering policy proposals by the candidates, news programs dutifully report the polling percentages instead. This is referred to, with some disdain, as the "horse race."

Why does this happen? Because the American people are more interested in the horse race than differentiating abstruse details on health insurance, energy, education and military proposals. Anyway, except for one or two extreme candidates, most of the Democrats agree with each other on the broad strokes of political philosophy and the role of government. Most of the Republicans, with the notable exceptions of Rudy Giuliani and John McCain, are the same.

As the owner of a full-service public relations firm, Cut-It-Out Communications, and with a degree in Government, I inherently understand this situation. Repetition is the key to any persuasive effort aimed at a large number of people. Whether it's a business running the same TV commercial ad nauseum, or a politician reciting the same stump speech across the nation, repetition ensures saturation into the collective public mind. Propagandists often spout that if you repeat something often enough, people will believe it even if it's false.

And so, the level of political discourse suffers. The media, unfortunately, abets this situation. Reporters are faced with the alternative of repeating the candidates platitudes over and over again as they meticulously stay "on message," or covering something more exciting, the horse race.

This situation has slowly become ingrained in political coverage, especially for mass media outlets. Today, the main hope for politically-active, informed citizenry is centered on the Internet. More on this in a future post.

Why I Support Hillary

Why do I support Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton for President?

You mean besides the fact that she has had to cope with discrimination against women in the legal profession, one of the last to be reformed?

Besides this discrimination has given her a natural empathy for minorities and the outcast?

Besides enduring national humiliation because of her husband's wanderings and her determination to stick by his side?

Besides recognizing the healthcare debacle as one of the outrages of our time?

Besides her knowledge of said arena and her painfully earned recognition of the forces arrayed against its reform?

Besides her intuitive understanding as a woman and mother about the very real impact of war, ruining one family at a time?

Besides her determination to work together with all Americans instead of splitting them apart?

Besides her amazing record in the U.S. Senate, where she has silenced critics and impressed independent New York citizens, who provided her with an overwhelming landslide in her campaign for reelection?

Besides her willingness to listen instead of pontificate?

Besides the relationships she has developed with key world leaders during her years as First Lady?

Besides her position on global warming and her refusal to become an ostrich like George Bush, who has stuck his head in the sand until it might be too late?

Besides the vicious attacks she has endured, and will continue to endure, from friend and foe alike, and the cool poise and leadership she shows in response?

Besides her refusal to be pigeon-holed as a liberal and her ability to think independently of any worldview?

Besides her very real devotion to her family, and fierce protection of Chelsea, during her years as First Lady, an evidence of family values far greater than the Republican hypocrites?

Besides the fact she will pick the best and brightest for her advisors, Cabinet and staff, unlike the cronyism of the Bush administration?

Besides her ability to renew the image of the United States abroad?

Besides she will not need as much on-the-job training, during these dangerous times, as her Democratic and Republican competitors?

I'll tell you why. Because she has a good, generous heart and a keen, insightful mind. Because she is flexible and can adapt to changing situations, growing as a person and a leader in the process. And because, after all this time in the public eye, I've come to know her well enough to trust her with the country I love.

Saving Face

The concept of saving face was fundamental to Japanese society where warriors would often commit hari-kari by falling on their sword rather than endure dishonor or humiliation.

But this week in Washington, we saw the effects of saving face in our society. Senator Chuck Schumer, in one of his more helpful moments, had recommended Michael Mukasey to George W. Bush as a possible consensus candidate for Attorney General after the disastrous tenure of Alberto Gonzales. Gonzales was accused of firing United States Attorneys for political reasons, perjuring himself on Bush's domestic eavesdropping program, and writing a secret memo authorizing the use of physical interrogations that many described as torture.

Surprisingly, Bush listened to Schumer's advice. After the nomination of Mukasey, Schumer crowed that the nomination would have bi-partisan support.

But events don't always go according to plan. Mukasey opined that the President didn't always have to follow the law in national emergencies, and, most signicantly, refused to characterize waterboarding as torture.

Of course, Schumer had argued strenously against both those positions. But he proved unable to extract himself from his own pride since the President had followed his advice. He didn't want to be the only Democrat supporting Mukasey so he hunted around, and, through his own persuasive gifts, convinced Diane Feinstein to support Mukasey as well. As a result, the nomination will probably be voted out of committee and approved by the entire Senate.

Thus, Schumer showed an inability to retreat from his strong support of Mukasey despite the results of the Senate investigation, an investigation that found Mukasey diametrically opposed to everything Schumer believed in.

Why? Because Schumer needed to save face. That's the same affliction as George W. Bush who refuses to admit error in a disastrous war.

"End Times for Evangelicals?"

The title of the cover article in yesterday's New York Times Magazine, "End Times for Evangelicals?" fits this blog to a tee as I often explore the juxtaposition of my Democratic viewpoint and Pentecostal beliefs. Here are some quotes from prominent evangelicals quoted in the article. They show, despite the title of this piece, American Evangelism is alive and well. In fact, it is expanding into a more mature movement, something the religious right is too narrow-minded to understand.

1) "In the evangelical church in general there is kind of a push back against the Republican party and a feeling of being used by the Republican political machine. There are going to be a lot of evangelicals willing to vote for a Democrat because there are 40 million people without health insurance, and a Democrat is going to do something about that." (p. 64, Paul Hill, Pastor, Wheatland Mission, former Associate Pastor at Central Christian, 7,000 members)

2) "We shouldn't allow a child to live under a bridge or in the back seat of a car. We shouldn't be satisfied that elderly people are being abused or neglected in nursing homes...You can't just say 'respect life' exclusively in the gestation period." (p. 66, Mike Huckabee, Soutern Baptist minister, Governor of Arkansas, Presidential candidate)

3) "There is this sense that the personal Gospel is what evangelicals believe, and the social gospel is what liberal Christians believe, and, you know, there is only one Gospel that has both social and personal dimensions to it." (p. 60, Gene Carlson, former Senior Pastor, Westlink Christian Church, 7,000 members)

4) "If there is racial injustice in your community, you have to speak to that. If there is educational injustice, you have to do something there. If the poor are being neglected by the government or being oppressed in some way, then you have to stand up for the poor." (pp. 44-45, Bill Hybels, Pastor, Willow Creek Community Church --12,000 member churchs in Willow Creek Association)

5) "The Indians are saying to the chiefs, 'We are interested in the poor, in racial reconciliation, in global poverty and AIDS, in the plight of women in the developing world.'" (p. 45, Bill Hybels)

6) "If more Christians worked to alleviate needs in their local communities, the church would become known more for the love it shows than for what it is against." (p. 44, Rick Warren, Senior Pastor, Saddleback Church, author of the bestseller, The Purpose Driven Life)

7) "I think that a superpower ought to be the exemplification of a commitment to peace...This is just a simple but important extrapolation from what a human being ought to do, and what a human being ought to do is what Jesus Christ did, who was a champion of peace." (p. 44, Jimmy Carter, former President)

These quotes speak for themselves.

Joe Torre's Lesson for the Democrats

A drama played out over the newspaper and media this week: the firing of Joe Torre in one of the most demeaning and Machiavellian manners ever seen in the sport of baseball.

After stringing him out in the tabloids for over a week, the Yankees made a half-hearted offer of a one-year deal with a reduction in salary and "incentive pay" if the team won the pennant and the World Series.

Despite a special trip to Florida to plead his case, the Yankees refused to budge, and Torre resigned in protest.

But the story wasn't over. Joe Torre held a news conference and conveyed how insulting it was to literally dangle a carrot before him when he already had all the motivation he needed. In addition, the players would feel additional pressure in a close race to save the manager's job, an untenable situation.

But Torre's news conference accomplished more than communicating his side of the story. It showcased him as a human being far superior to anyone in the Yankee organization. Joe's humanity, dignity, and sense of honor and trust offers a clear contrast to the manipulation employed by the Yankee management to get rid of him. If they wanted to fire him, they should have had some guts and done it right away. Instead, afraid of public opinion, they contrived a situation where he would have to say no, but they could hypocritically point to their salary offer.

As Torre said in his conference, if the New York Yankees wanted him to stay as manager, he would still be there.

Anyway, despite my continuing outrage, I think the turn of events provides a lesson for us all, particularly the Democratic Party.

Instead of trying to manipulate the voters on SCHIP and the war in Iraq, why not have some guts and lead instead of cowering before public opinion. If the Democrats want to end the war on Iraq, use Congress's power of appropriations to cut off the funding. If the President starts to scream and yell about supporting the troops, let him.

If the Democrats want to cut back on illegal wiretapping, do so, and if the President screams and yells about stopping terrorism, let him.

If the Democrats want to expand childcare, don't compromise after his veto. Keep bringing up the bill again and again. Establish an upper salary cap to mollify the opposition, and let them keep voting against it.

Congress's approval rating is about what they're not doing, unlike President Bush's, about what he is doing. Show some guts like Joe Torre and stand up for what you believe in, even if it takes some character to do so.

The Vindication of Al Gore

Every Democrat has to feel good about Al Gore's Nobel Peace Prize after the debacle of the 2000 election. Devoting one's whole life to becoming President of the United States, and then having it stolen away by the Supreme Court, would have crushed most people. Indeed, it took some time for him to recover, and perhaps his current obesity is a lingering testament to the pain he suffered.

But, a note to my fellow Christians, isn't Mr. Gore's life story a great example of the adage "with God nothing is impossible." His phoenix-like rise from the ashes is truly incredible.

Meanwhile, George W. Bush has paid the price of his own inexperience (and so, unfortunately, have we all), trapped in a war of his own making, a war planned from the beginning of his Presidency to avenge his father. And 9/11 was just an excuse for the plans already concocted by him and his fellow neocons.

I bet Bush is contemplating these twists of fate today, and I wonder if he would trade places with Gore, if given the chance.

Anyway, kudos to Al Gore for his resilience, perservance and grit; for fighting for what he believes in; and for alerting us all to the danger of global warming before it's too late.

I read somewhere today, why should Al Gore want to run for President when he's already worshipped like a demi-god?

Republicans in Lockstep and the CHIP Plot

"In lockstep" is defined in Merriam-Webster's online dictionary as "in perfect or rigid, often mindless, conformity or unison, e.g., politicians marching in lockstep with the party line.

The Republicans in Congress are often accused of operating in lockstep because they vote with almost 95 percent unity on any partisan vote. Democrats are a more unruly bunch, often splitting into factions based on individual conscience. While this is commendable, it presents unique difficulties when faced with a slim majority, such as in the U.S. Senate.

The Republicans have been accused of operating as a rubber stamp for George W. Bush, and this presents unique difficulties due to his low rating in the polls and the unpopularity of the Iraq war, especially concerning the coming national elections.

As President of a public relations and copywriting firm, Cut-It-Out Communications, Inc., I have a somewhat unique view of Republican Party strategy regarding the bill on Children's Health Insurance (CHIP). In order to uncouple the Republican Party's fortune from President Bush, the inner council of the RNC has orchestrated an elaborate dance.

The President will veto the bill and pretend to be philosophically against it, and then the Republicans in Congress, after token resistance from a very few (as well as the Republican candidates for President to demonstrate their loyalty to Bush for primary voters) will prove to be instrumental in overriding the veto.

As a result, even though incapable of speaking out formally against "The Commander-in-Chief," the Republicans will establish their independence from the President in the voters' minds.

As conspiracy theories go, this one is rather tame, but it makes sense for all involved. In addition to improving their chances to keep their jobs, the Republicans also position themselves for an independent race for the White House, reducing the drag from the Bush regime. Bush, from his perspective, isn't running for re-election anyway, and Republican victories increase his chances for prolonging the Iraq war, an effort he clings to with the obstinacy and one-track focus of a lemming throwing itself off a cliff.

Even if this strategy was not pre-determined by the Republicans, it is sure to occur to them informally during the coming weeks.

The Mantle of Leadership

What is the mantle of leadership? I'll tell you what it's not. It's not being a sheep and believing what you're told to believe. It's not subscribing blindly to a worldview on every single issue. It's not being afraid of your image with your friends or the public. It's not being afraid of accepting an element of risk.

The Democrats are losing the mantle of leadership on Iraq, drop by drop, like Chinese water torture, while the country suffers as a result. Last night, on Real Time with Bill Maher, Bill challenged Rahm Emanuel, the Democratic Caucus Chair of the House of Representatives, on Iraq. Since we can't get the 60 votes in the Senate to stop a filibuster, why not take the only route left, stop the funding for the war and force Mr. Bush to withdraw the troops.

The crowd cheered. Many Democrats have started to favor this approach, but it's politically risky. Bush could accuse the Democrats of refusing to "support the troops." But Mr. Bush, if he really supported the troops himself, would have to withdraw them. It's a little bit like a game of "chicken." But sometimes, assuming the mantle of leadership requires following this approach, e.g., the Cuban missile crisis.

Anyway, Maher, egged on by the crowd, continued to press Rahm Emanuel. Rahm started to hem and haw. He squirmed in his seat. He gave a totally unconvincing response, and people in the crowd started to taunt him.

Hopefully, Mr. Emanuel will re-consider based on the audience reaction and discuss funding as a real alternative to the Democratic Caucus. The country would respect the Democrats for taking a stand, even if they disagreed with it.

Unfortunately, even the Democratic candidates for President are starting to qualify their responses on Iraq. In a recent debate, the three main contenders, Hillary, Obama and Edwards, refused to make a commitment to withdrawing the troops before the end of their first term. That's another four years in that quagmire.

As a concluding aside, anyone who refuses to vote for Hillary because she's "pro-war" should reconsider. If healthcare is an important issue for you, I think she represents the best chance of actually accomplishing something. She has assumed the mantle of leadership in many other areas as well, one reason why, despite all predictions, she is still the front runner.

CHIP and true Christianity

As a Pentecostal Christian and a Democrat, I am frequently amazed by the hypocrisy, the lack of feeling, and the poor understanding of the central tenets of Christianity by the Religious Right.

Jesus talked about the poor in the New Testament more frequently than he talked about heaven and hell. In Matthew 25:40, Jesus says, "...Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me."

Yet George W. Bush, fervent Christian that he is, has decided to make a fiscal stand by opposing the extension of healthcare to more poor children. Billions in tax cuts to the rich, and billions in a grinding war in Iraq are okay, but, all of sudden, Mr. Bush is threatening a rare veto to stop assistance to poor children so he can save the taxpayers money.

What conclusions can we draw from this action?

First, Bush is not, and never has been, a true Christian. He trots out the terminology to fire up his base but has been willing to compromise for political expediency. For example, his choice of Harriet Miers for Supreme Court provided a rare window into his thinking, based more on rewarding loyalty and cronies than any overarching belief.

Second, if you're any kind of minority, oppressed group, if you're poor or out of the mainstream, or even just a little eccentric, you will feel much more at home in the Democratic Party than the Republican Party. To me, a lot of Republicans seem so full of hate and lack of empathy for human suffering. I'll choose a President any day who "feels my pain" over one who doesn't.

Bush adopted the false moniker of "compassionate conservative" when he first ran for President because most conservatives aren't. You don't have to say "compassionate liberal" since that phrase would be repetitious.

What's in a Name?

What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.

With apologies to Shakespeare, why did Bush pick Petraeus in the first place? Surely, their PR operation must have realized that the guy sounds like a Roman gladiator. That's why the MoveOn.org advertisement was so threatening. How dare they make a play on such a strong name and expose it to ridicule: "Betray Us."

The attack on the MoveOn.org ad demonstrates the main strategy of the Republican Party. Diversion, then divide and conquer. Instead of focusing on Iraqi policy, they try to change the topic of the conversation. Patriotism instead of their incompetence.

Here's another example. Republicans also attacked Hillary Clinton for "essentially" calling David Petraeus a liar. Diversion again. And distortion, too.

Here's Hillary's quote in context:

The first part got the publicity: "I think that the reports that you provide to us really require the willing suspension of disbelief."

The second part, following immediately after: "I give you tremendous credit for presenting as positive a view of a rather grim reality, and I believe that you and certainly the very capable people working with both of you were dealt a very hard hand, and it's a hand that is unlikely to improve, in my view."

Republicans ignored the second part for two reasons. One, it demonstrates Senator Clinton's respect for Petraeus, thus erasing their argument about her patriotism, and two, it places emphasis on the POLICY itself.

Videotape from Osama bin Laden

The main news this week, Osama bin Laden's videotape, released yesterday, brings to mind one of my pet theories about U.S. vulnerability. Bin Laden, or one of his deputies, previously stated that the next time they attack America, it will reach into everyone's homes. To me, this suggests an attempt to bring down the Internet. What else would affect just about every individual? The economic damage would be incalculable, and our country would grind to a halt.

The problem with anticipating the enemy's next move is that we are always "fighting the last war." Because Al Qaeda attacked our physical infrastructure, the World Trade Center, the last time, we are scurrying around protecting our ports, chemical facilities, nuclear plants, etc. But our enemy is cunning and resourceful. An attack on our virtual infrastructure is a real danger, and I'm not sure how much attention it is receiving from our law enforcement officials.

One scary item about the tape: Bin Laden said we should convert to Islam to avoid Al Qaeda's retribution. But the Koran commands the Muslim to make this very offer prior to engaging in jihad. Thus, this statement may portend an imminent action.

Introduction

The blog, "My Week in Review," derives its name from The New York Times Sunday section, "The Week in Review." It will cover mainly political matters based on my observations and experience during the previous week. Sometimes, it will comment on national issues, and sometimes, the entries will be more of a personal nature.

The goal of the blog is to challenge the reader to think of issues in a different light. It will avoid touting any party line, but the observations will be based on my very unique situation as a committed liberal Democrat and a fervent Pentecostal Christian.

The blog will also incorporate my business observations as President of Cut-It-Out Communications, a firm specializing in public relations, grant proposals and copywriting.

The reader should anticipate challenging, but brief, entries every Saturday.