How would Watergate have played in today's 24/7 News Cycle?

There have been more than a few comparisons between the current trials and tribulations the White House is experiencing to Watergate. The IRS targeting of conservative groups, hassling reporters for doing their job and of course, Benghazi. I admit to having more than a passing interest just where POTUS was while the latter was going on and why his handlers remain "hesitant" to tell us. I'm absolutely aghast with the 1st Amendment implications of the DOJ targeting reporters. But that's just me.

Watergate started out as a stupid political burglary. It ended up with President Nixon forced out of office in disgrace. Not for the burglary, but for subverting the Constitution covering it up. Those who forget the past are always doomed to repeat it and I'm seeing a lot of repetition.

Carl and Bob back in the Day (That's a typewriter on the desk)

What's got me really thinking however,  is how differently things were covered then and now. During Watergate it was the dogged determination of Woodward and Bernstein and the Washington Post. Real journalism and real personal risk to those covering Watergate. The story took a while to catch the attention of the rest of the news media but when it did, wow. What's really key is we had to wait for news as the story unfolded. We didn't hear about it until the latest edition of the Post came out. There were no websites, Tweets or Facebook posts and 24/7 outlets like CNN or FOX.

Yes, we had to wait for what was "New." But we had time to digest it before the next information dump came as Woodward and Bernstein dug and dug and dug some more. Both being of the belief that news is indeed what's new, they would go several days before publishing new stories. At least early on.

Today, it's non-stop. You can't avoid it. On both traditional and digital media. Regurgitation of old news plus information and misinformation at the speed of light. Then there are the pundits. There are times where I simply say "ENOUGH!" I love a chocolate shake once in a while, but not every minute of the day.

Regardless of whether you agree or not between comparisons of what's happening today compared to Watergate, what's making a difference at least to me, was how we got the news a generation ago compared to today. It was solid, it was backed up and while we had to wait for it, it was worth waiting for. Today, not so much.

If you really study the history of Watergate, how it unfolded and compare it to today's rash of scandals, they are eerily familiar. But is the information overload because of today's technology turning us off to what could be something that is potentially dangerous to our civil liberties moving forward?

In other words is too much of a good thing ...a bad thing? You know, for us?

Brian Olson
Owner/Consultant
Conversation Starters Public Relations
"We start the conversation about you?"

Washington: You are Go for Sequestration

Sequestration. It's all over the news. Essentially the definition is, "If Congress cannot agree on ways to cut back the total (or does not pass a new, higher Budget Resolution), then an 'automatic' form of spending cutback takes place. This automatic spending cut is what is called sequestration."

In reality it's yet another example of what an economic mess we're in and government's total and absolute inability to do anything about it.

If both the Executive and Legislative Branches can't act like grownups it all kicks in March 1. 

A lot of folks are saying "The Sky is Falling!" Get real. If this whole thing was such a big deal the President wouldn't have gone golfing with Tiger and Congress wouldn't have gone home to shake hands and raise money for their next campaigns. This is all about politics. The folks with the "Bully Pulpit" are bullies themselves. And they're picking on us.

So let the spending cuts fall where they may. While I strongly disagree the sky will fall, if indeed it does maybe it's exactly the "Wake-up" call government needs to get serious about dealing with a $67.7 Trillion deficit.

A couple of guys who came up with a solution to this mess, and were promptly ignored by the very government who asked them to do it in the first place, are Al Simpson and Erskine Bowles.

Here's a basic outline of their original ideas:

• Replace the current tax bracket system of 10/15/25/28/33/35/39.6 with three brackets: 12%, 22%, and a maximum of 28%.
• Permanently repeal the AMT, the PEP phase-out of personal exemptions, and the PEASE limitation on overall itemized deductions.
• Eliminate all tax deductions; require taxpayers to take the standard deduction.
• Keep the earned income and child tax credits.
• Replace the mortgage interest deduction with a 12% non-refundable tax credit. Creditable mortgage balance would be capped at $500,000 (maximum credit $60,000); no credit for second residence.
• Replace the charitable contribution deduction with a 12% non-refundable tax credit, subject to a 2% of adjusted gross income floor.
• Treat state and local bond interest as taxable.
• Tax all capital gains and dividends at ordinary rates

In other words, if we're really serious about all this we'll need to do more than raise Warren Buffet's taxes.

 Never the type to give up Simpson and Bowles now recommend at the very least, trying this:

"Reform the Tax Code in a Progressive and Pro-Growth Manner. The current tax code is complicated, confusing, costly, anti-growth, anti-competitive, unfair, and riddled with well over $1 trillion of tax expenditures – which really are just spending by another name. Tax reform must reduce the size and number of tax expenditures to reduce the budget deficit and lower marginal tax rates for individuals and corporations. At the same time, tax reforms must maintain or improve the progressivity in the tax code and promote economic growth. Tax reform will make the tax code more efficient, effective, and globally competitive.:

The tax code is 70-thousand pages long, just one of the reasons Facebook is getting a $428 Million tax refund this year. How do you "Like" that?

Such foolishness, so avoidable, so very, very sad for all of us.

So maybe it's just as well Sequestration happens. As the Beatles sang, "Let it be."

Brian Olson
Owner/Consultant
Conversation Starters Public Relations
"We start the conversation about you"

Excess excess.

LeBron James announces tonight where he'll play next year. Unlike Kevin Durant who announced his new deal with Oklahoma City via Twitter, James announces his decision in a live prime-prime time one hour special on ESPN.

Great Expectations Redux.

To his credit, all the advertising revenue from tonight's "event" goes to Boys & Girls Clubs of America. As I understand it, the announcement will be made at a Boys & Girls Club in Greenwich, CT. I begin shooting a marketing video for Boys & Girls Clubs of Metro Denver today. As BGCMD says, it's a positive place for kids. Here's to all the money raised tonight making a positive difference for great kids. That's a good thing.

But is a one-hour special to say "I'm going to play for (insert city here) and for (insert amount here) dollars" a bit excessive? It's all a matter of perception. If you're a fanatic NBA fan, not a bit. If you're not, yes it is. Remember what I've posted about "Perception is Reality" here earlier.

Then this paper chase tidbit from USA TODAY. It impacts small businesses like Conversation Starters and non-profit organizations including the ones I love to support including Boys & Girls Clubs and the Jefferson County Action Center.

Effective next year, we all have to file a 1099 with the IRS anytime we buy anything from a vendor in excess of $600. Nothing like making things easier for all of us struggling to get something off the ground or helping kids and the hungry.

What's really weird about this, is the new rules are part of the new Health Care Legislation! I guess that's why the bill called for the hiring of thousands of new IRS agents.

As Gomer Pyle would say..."Soo-prise...Soo-prise!"

A bit excessive I'd say. Actually I just did.

Excess excess. It gets in the way of success in so many ways.

Brian Olson
Conversation Starters LLC
"We get the conversation started about you"