"Is it too Late to Become an Educated Voter?"
Nov. 2, 1994
I think it's too late for voters to learn enough
about the candidates and the issues before election
day. And we are the poorer for it.
The average American knows more about the Simpson
trial than they do about individuals asking to
represent them. Yet, the people we elect impact
our pocketbooks and regulate our lives.
Most of us select a person either by party, personality,
one key issue, or an outside influence (spouse, friend, celebrity).
We know little about the legislation to be introduced,
or how candidates will be voting. And the legislation
is so complex even our representatives don't know all
the elements before passing news laws.
The media reports on negative ads, rather than presenting real differences between candidates. And the candidates become evasive when pressed to defend an unpopular vote.
The blame belongs to each of us. "We get the representation we deserve". This statement was never truer.
How do we fix it? By taking the election process as a serious exercise. Study the candidates and issues. See how
new legislation impacts you, your state and our country.
And once the election is over keep in touch with your legislators. Let them know you care, are interested and will be an active citizen.
A bigger challenge is to overhaul Congressional rules.
Allow all votes to come to the floor and not stay bottled
in committee. Provide a line item veto, change two-year Congressional terms to four years and allow legislation
to be put to a state or national vote.
Much needs to be done, but it has to start with us.
Anthony J. Bruno
Friday, December 18, 2009
"A Nugget of Gold Political speak
"A Nugget of Gold"
Feb. 17, 1996
Anyone who is familiar with the amount of rock that
must be mined in order to uncover a small nugget of
gold may understand my frustration with political campaigning.
In the political arena candidates have only their
ideas and their words. With them they must persuade
us to support their campaign and elect them.
Perhaps it is the day we live in; the electronic age,
with multi-media outlets that bring into our homes day
in and day out the candidate's words. Words selected
to convince us they are the ones who should govern.
But as I listen to the abundance of words that flow
through the speaker of my television or jump off the
page of my newspaper I see only rocks. Rocks not
unlike those that must be discarded as miners seek the single nugget that has true worth.
As I watch this campaign and listen to such useless
banter, my mind turns to important issues that need solutions. I wait for ideas conveyed with words, not
rocks. I am hopeful someone will stand above the
others based on his ability to govern, not by the
amount of rocks he wades through.
Anthony J. Bruno
Feb. 17, 1996
Anyone who is familiar with the amount of rock that
must be mined in order to uncover a small nugget of
gold may understand my frustration with political campaigning.
In the political arena candidates have only their
ideas and their words. With them they must persuade
us to support their campaign and elect them.
Perhaps it is the day we live in; the electronic age,
with multi-media outlets that bring into our homes day
in and day out the candidate's words. Words selected
to convince us they are the ones who should govern.
But as I listen to the abundance of words that flow
through the speaker of my television or jump off the
page of my newspaper I see only rocks. Rocks not
unlike those that must be discarded as miners seek the single nugget that has true worth.
As I watch this campaign and listen to such useless
banter, my mind turns to important issues that need solutions. I wait for ideas conveyed with words, not
rocks. I am hopeful someone will stand above the
others based on his ability to govern, not by the
amount of rocks he wades through.
Anthony J. Bruno
Media
"Media 'R US"
July 7, 1995
From the article it is obvious the networks have
problems, but have yet to make the changes needed
to meet the demands of there 'customers'.
I doubt they sense what is important to viewers.
There is such a sameness to network reports. None of
them offer a quality of reporting that sets them apart.
They are driven by advertising dollars, not by good journalism and still retain an arrogance from their
'glory days' and act as though the world has not
changed since there arrival in the 50s.
What is occurring to network news today happened to
the American auto industry in the 70s. The competition
has filled the void by providing better journalism,
with a creativity the networks do not offer, and a
greater respect for the viewing public.
The networks still believe in packaging, rather than
the contents within. I say this not to disparage the anchors, since each is a quality newsperson. But
somewhere the journalistic compass has shifted and
the networks are less than they can be, and the public
is poorer for it.
What will it take to fix the problem? One word, boldness.
One network must be bold, daring, and not limit itself
to the old rules. That is what is needed.
With all the money being spent to promote themselves
I find it amazing how little creativity is displayed.
Real creativity, not eye-catching graphics; creative,
honest journalism.
This problem is not necessarily the fault of the media
since too often our elected officials feed us half-truths
or misleading statements. But you, the media, are THERE, face-to-face, as the public's representative to get the story. You are the ones who can get to the truth.
So often I come away from the evening news or daily paper frustrated with the questions never asked, the statements not challenged and important information not made available to the public.
I often perceive a degree of collusion between the media
and politicians, sensing that reporters know the boundaries
they cannot go beyond, fearing they will no longer get within the political inner circle.
I don't ask you to be abrasive, cynical, or rude. But I do request you provide clear inciteful answers to the public.
The issues of today are complex and need more detailed reporting for the public to truly understand what politicians are feeding us.
As an example, balancing the budget, what does this mean?
Will our debt be erased or reduced by the time we reach
the year the budget is balanced? If not, how much will
our total debt be? And does it even matter given the
amount of 'income' our taxes provide?
Yet we allow politicians to 'explain' such topics, without
actually telling the American public what they need to understand.
A politician's (I no longer refer to them as elected officials) objective is to build himself up at the expense
of his opponent. Every speech defining a position also steps
on that of a political adversary. And the media feeds on this because its 'news'!
But sadly, while thousands of feet of video tape is used to
'report' this worthless diatribe, important issues do not get the full measure they deserve.
We allow them to fill the airwaves and newspapers with
sound bites meant more to incite and divide rather than solve problems.
Statements such as 'the rich don't pay their fair share'
are never followed with how much is fair?
Last year's health care reform effort did not have a realistic chance once the Administration decided to create
demons of the insurance and drug industry. The media never challenged why these two industries were being picked on, while both hospitals and doctors avoided similar criticism.
And with the dismal state of our public school system the media does not seek solutions aside from 'spending more money'.
But in this commentary I offer a suggestion (and challenge) that would not only benefit the public but also the media industry itself.
Very simply, become creative. Produce more in-depth news programs for the prime time audience. If Koeppel's
program gets the ratings it does at 11:30, think of how
much higher the rating would be earlier in the evening.
Prime time programming is such a waste, most networks
piggy-backing on whatever 'sells', and we send a stream
of comedies, police, medical, or whatever is in favor.
Networks rarely seek to educate viewers, a responsibility that clearly should be in the charter of the news division.
Anthony J. Bruno
July 7, 1995
From the article it is obvious the networks have
problems, but have yet to make the changes needed
to meet the demands of there 'customers'.
I doubt they sense what is important to viewers.
There is such a sameness to network reports. None of
them offer a quality of reporting that sets them apart.
They are driven by advertising dollars, not by good journalism and still retain an arrogance from their
'glory days' and act as though the world has not
changed since there arrival in the 50s.
What is occurring to network news today happened to
the American auto industry in the 70s. The competition
has filled the void by providing better journalism,
with a creativity the networks do not offer, and a
greater respect for the viewing public.
The networks still believe in packaging, rather than
the contents within. I say this not to disparage the anchors, since each is a quality newsperson. But
somewhere the journalistic compass has shifted and
the networks are less than they can be, and the public
is poorer for it.
What will it take to fix the problem? One word, boldness.
One network must be bold, daring, and not limit itself
to the old rules. That is what is needed.
With all the money being spent to promote themselves
I find it amazing how little creativity is displayed.
Real creativity, not eye-catching graphics; creative,
honest journalism.
This problem is not necessarily the fault of the media
since too often our elected officials feed us half-truths
or misleading statements. But you, the media, are THERE, face-to-face, as the public's representative to get the story. You are the ones who can get to the truth.
So often I come away from the evening news or daily paper frustrated with the questions never asked, the statements not challenged and important information not made available to the public.
I often perceive a degree of collusion between the media
and politicians, sensing that reporters know the boundaries
they cannot go beyond, fearing they will no longer get within the political inner circle.
I don't ask you to be abrasive, cynical, or rude. But I do request you provide clear inciteful answers to the public.
The issues of today are complex and need more detailed reporting for the public to truly understand what politicians are feeding us.
As an example, balancing the budget, what does this mean?
Will our debt be erased or reduced by the time we reach
the year the budget is balanced? If not, how much will
our total debt be? And does it even matter given the
amount of 'income' our taxes provide?
Yet we allow politicians to 'explain' such topics, without
actually telling the American public what they need to understand.
A politician's (I no longer refer to them as elected officials) objective is to build himself up at the expense
of his opponent. Every speech defining a position also steps
on that of a political adversary. And the media feeds on this because its 'news'!
But sadly, while thousands of feet of video tape is used to
'report' this worthless diatribe, important issues do not get the full measure they deserve.
We allow them to fill the airwaves and newspapers with
sound bites meant more to incite and divide rather than solve problems.
Statements such as 'the rich don't pay their fair share'
are never followed with how much is fair?
Last year's health care reform effort did not have a realistic chance once the Administration decided to create
demons of the insurance and drug industry. The media never challenged why these two industries were being picked on, while both hospitals and doctors avoided similar criticism.
And with the dismal state of our public school system the media does not seek solutions aside from 'spending more money'.
But in this commentary I offer a suggestion (and challenge) that would not only benefit the public but also the media industry itself.
Very simply, become creative. Produce more in-depth news programs for the prime time audience. If Koeppel's
program gets the ratings it does at 11:30, think of how
much higher the rating would be earlier in the evening.
Prime time programming is such a waste, most networks
piggy-backing on whatever 'sells', and we send a stream
of comedies, police, medical, or whatever is in favor.
Networks rarely seek to educate viewers, a responsibility that clearly should be in the charter of the news division.
Anthony J. Bruno
Are we fools?
"Fool Me Once...."
Dec. 10, 1995
Are most of you reading this a fool? Do you believe
you are? Probably not. Even those of us not
'sophisticated' or 'knowledgeable' is not a fool.
Yet every day we are fed stories on the news and
statements by politicians that presume we are.
Let's start with politicians, our elected officials.
They step forward to serve the American people and
agree to do the important work all citizens depend on.
They must make the difficult, unpopular decisions that
often catch our wrath. And to counter our displeasure politicians take us into the world of 'spin', the word
they use (but not to us directly) to temper our anger.
Spin, called LIES outside Washington, is what we are
fed each day as politicians attempt to persuade us to
their way of thinking. Mindless answers to legitimate questions. Distortion of facts, never showing the entire picture as they sell their viewpoint. It is a style we
have become accustomed to. We demand more, but our
demands are meaningless. Our EMPLOYEES set the agenda
until we fire them, as we did to so many last November.
Now for the media, who are also at fault for the quality
of the news we receive. Too often it appears they forget THEIR main responsibility, objective reporting. But they
are paid for the number of people they deliver the news
to, not for the news they deliver. And no matter what
they say or write, they will be criticized as being bias.
So where are we? The politicians say the press is not
fair. And the press say the politicians are not forthright in explaining legislation to the public.
So we sit, we listen, we become disgusted with politicians
who seem to have personal agendas rather that fulfilling
their responsibilities. And get equally annoyed with the
industry that care more about 'market share' than the
service they provide.
And as a result of our disgust and annoyance we become dis-enfranchised. Many of us stop caring, become indifferent
and often stop voting.
But we have a choice. By recognizing the problem we get closer to a solution; if we use our outrage to our advantage. LISTEN to the news and use our wonderful
ability to reason, to understand, to use our own common sense. If it sounds like 'spin', it probably is. Don't
let OUR employees not fulfill their responsibilities.
And to those who remain indifferent, maybe you are fools after all.
Anthony J. Bruno
Dec. 10, 1995
Are most of you reading this a fool? Do you believe
you are? Probably not. Even those of us not
'sophisticated' or 'knowledgeable' is not a fool.
Yet every day we are fed stories on the news and
statements by politicians that presume we are.
Let's start with politicians, our elected officials.
They step forward to serve the American people and
agree to do the important work all citizens depend on.
They must make the difficult, unpopular decisions that
often catch our wrath. And to counter our displeasure politicians take us into the world of 'spin', the word
they use (but not to us directly) to temper our anger.
Spin, called LIES outside Washington, is what we are
fed each day as politicians attempt to persuade us to
their way of thinking. Mindless answers to legitimate questions. Distortion of facts, never showing the entire picture as they sell their viewpoint. It is a style we
have become accustomed to. We demand more, but our
demands are meaningless. Our EMPLOYEES set the agenda
until we fire them, as we did to so many last November.
Now for the media, who are also at fault for the quality
of the news we receive. Too often it appears they forget THEIR main responsibility, objective reporting. But they
are paid for the number of people they deliver the news
to, not for the news they deliver. And no matter what
they say or write, they will be criticized as being bias.
So where are we? The politicians say the press is not
fair. And the press say the politicians are not forthright in explaining legislation to the public.
So we sit, we listen, we become disgusted with politicians
who seem to have personal agendas rather that fulfilling
their responsibilities. And get equally annoyed with the
industry that care more about 'market share' than the
service they provide.
And as a result of our disgust and annoyance we become dis-enfranchised. Many of us stop caring, become indifferent
and often stop voting.
But we have a choice. By recognizing the problem we get closer to a solution; if we use our outrage to our advantage. LISTEN to the news and use our wonderful
ability to reason, to understand, to use our own common sense. If it sounds like 'spin', it probably is. Don't
let OUR employees not fulfill their responsibilities.
And to those who remain indifferent, maybe you are fools after all.
Anthony J. Bruno
Partisan 2
"Partisan Paralysis"
July 26, 1997
Most Americans have leanings to either of the two
major political parties based on the direction each
want to take our country. And historically, the two-
party system has served all Americans quite well.
But there is a growing number of us who are frustrated
with both parties, observing partisan interests more
often take priority over the "business of the people".
I have had misgivings over the political process for
several years, noticing a party's agenda getting more attention than the interests of the citizens who send elected officials to state and federal legislative
bodies. And I've become increasingly frustrated, not
only in the party I support, but in the manner our
elected officials conduct the work of government.
Political parties are clearly out of control. And the
media which 'reports' the news have yet to examine and
inform the public of how legislators operate.
We can debate the merits of 'reforming' campaigns and
there funding, but this only takes our attention off
the real issue; improving the performance of the
Executive and Legislative branches. This is what
Americans want, not which party is in the majority,
or benefits from legislation.
When we demand better representation and less partisan gamesmenship the public will be better served.
Anthony J. Bruno
July 26, 1997
Most Americans have leanings to either of the two
major political parties based on the direction each
want to take our country. And historically, the two-
party system has served all Americans quite well.
But there is a growing number of us who are frustrated
with both parties, observing partisan interests more
often take priority over the "business of the people".
I have had misgivings over the political process for
several years, noticing a party's agenda getting more attention than the interests of the citizens who send elected officials to state and federal legislative
bodies. And I've become increasingly frustrated, not
only in the party I support, but in the manner our
elected officials conduct the work of government.
Political parties are clearly out of control. And the
media which 'reports' the news have yet to examine and
inform the public of how legislators operate.
We can debate the merits of 'reforming' campaigns and
there funding, but this only takes our attention off
the real issue; improving the performance of the
Executive and Legislative branches. This is what
Americans want, not which party is in the majority,
or benefits from legislation.
When we demand better representation and less partisan gamesmenship the public will be better served.
Anthony J. Bruno
Partisan
"Partisan Paralysis"
July 26, 1997
Most Americans have leanings to either of the two
major political parties based on the direction each
want to take our country. And historically, the two-
party system has served all Americans quite well.
But there is a growing number of Americans who are
frustrated with both parties, observing that partisan
interests more often take priority over the "business
of the people".
I have had misgivings over the political process for
several years, noticing a party's agenda getting more attention than the citizens who send elected officials
to state and federal legislated bodies. And I've become increasingly frustrated, not only in the party I support, but in the manner our elected officials conduct the work
of government.
Political parties are clearly out of control. And the
media which 'reports' the news have yet to examine and
inform the public of how legislators operate.
We need only look at how investigative hearings are
'conducted'. It isn't a senatorial or house hearing,
it is a partisan hearing with each party having legal
council. To Americans this must be confusing at best.
If Congress is conducting an 'investigation' why do
both parties require council? Why must partisan interest
be interwoven with government business?
We can debate the merits of 'reforming' campaigns and
contributions, but this takes our attention over the
real issue. Improving the performance of the Executive
and Legislative branches is what Americans want, not
which party is in the majority, or benefits from
legislation.
Anthony J. Bruno
July 26, 1997
Most Americans have leanings to either of the two
major political parties based on the direction each
want to take our country. And historically, the two-
party system has served all Americans quite well.
But there is a growing number of Americans who are
frustrated with both parties, observing that partisan
interests more often take priority over the "business
of the people".
I have had misgivings over the political process for
several years, noticing a party's agenda getting more attention than the citizens who send elected officials
to state and federal legislated bodies. And I've become increasingly frustrated, not only in the party I support, but in the manner our elected officials conduct the work
of government.
Political parties are clearly out of control. And the
media which 'reports' the news have yet to examine and
inform the public of how legislators operate.
We need only look at how investigative hearings are
'conducted'. It isn't a senatorial or house hearing,
it is a partisan hearing with each party having legal
council. To Americans this must be confusing at best.
If Congress is conducting an 'investigation' why do
both parties require council? Why must partisan interest
be interwoven with government business?
We can debate the merits of 'reforming' campaigns and
contributions, but this takes our attention over the
real issue. Improving the performance of the Executive
and Legislative branches is what Americans want, not
which party is in the majority, or benefits from
legislation.
Anthony J. Bruno
For the children
Here is the opening of the book I hope to write. I know I have a message to deliver and I understand young people
today are not considered an audience for the important
message they need to hear. Maybe I can deliver it.
Tony
June 15, 1997
I've wanted to write a book that would have an
impact on its readers; one that would provide
a positive influence on their lives.
But on which subject, and to which audience?
Well, the subject, or shall I say subjects will
be broad, from A to Z. And the views on them
will be solely my personal ones, based on what
I know, believe and feel.
But more importantly is the audience this book
is intended for. I want to reach readers who will
lead our country, young readers, with a world of
opportunity in front of them.
Why them? Why seek an audience who are probably
more interested in new CDs or videos than a book
by some unknown author attempting to influence
their lives?
The answer is quite simple. The people I am writing
this for will be the men and women who will lead
our nation. They will be the custodians of gov't
and industry. They will be the leaders who will
ensure are institutions are strong and individual
freedoms are protected.
Who are these people? Well, forty years ago no one
knew the names of the people leading our nation
today, either in business, the sciences or politics.
Yet today, as your young eyes read these pages,
who can say which of you will lead our nation
in ten, twenty or forty years from now.
And that is the greatness of our country, each
of you CAN be an American leader. Each of you
CAN make a difference in the lives of others.
And each of you can play an important part in
our country's future.
So this book is written SOLELY for you. My intent
is to share my opinions on life, hoping to influence
how you think about our country but more importantly
how you think about yourselves.
I'll discuss many topics, but none more important
than YOU, the individual. For nothing can be achieved
without your personal commitment to whatever goal
you seek and no one is more valuable than you are.
today are not considered an audience for the important
message they need to hear. Maybe I can deliver it.
Tony
June 15, 1997
I've wanted to write a book that would have an
impact on its readers; one that would provide
a positive influence on their lives.
But on which subject, and to which audience?
Well, the subject, or shall I say subjects will
be broad, from A to Z. And the views on them
will be solely my personal ones, based on what
I know, believe and feel.
But more importantly is the audience this book
is intended for. I want to reach readers who will
lead our country, young readers, with a world of
opportunity in front of them.
Why them? Why seek an audience who are probably
more interested in new CDs or videos than a book
by some unknown author attempting to influence
their lives?
The answer is quite simple. The people I am writing
this for will be the men and women who will lead
our nation. They will be the custodians of gov't
and industry. They will be the leaders who will
ensure are institutions are strong and individual
freedoms are protected.
Who are these people? Well, forty years ago no one
knew the names of the people leading our nation
today, either in business, the sciences or politics.
Yet today, as your young eyes read these pages,
who can say which of you will lead our nation
in ten, twenty or forty years from now.
And that is the greatness of our country, each
of you CAN be an American leader. Each of you
CAN make a difference in the lives of others.
And each of you can play an important part in
our country's future.
So this book is written SOLELY for you. My intent
is to share my opinions on life, hoping to influence
how you think about our country but more importantly
how you think about yourselves.
I'll discuss many topics, but none more important
than YOU, the individual. For nothing can be achieved
without your personal commitment to whatever goal
you seek and no one is more valuable than you are.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)