Irony, Purple Power and Some Big Business Questions

I enjoy irony, especially when names are involved. Take, for example, a recent article in The New York Times Magazine. “A Tale of Two Valleys” related the entrepreneurial conflict between old and new techies in Silicon Valley. The first source quoted by the author was Sanjit Biswas, a nouveau techie whose last name cannot help but be a metaphor for the past as prologue in this rapidly evolving business segment.

Here’s another: An invitation arrived from the White Plains Historical Society to support its Historic Preservation Fund by buying raffle tickets. Grand Prize I would be a four-volume set of Carl Sandburg’s biography of Abraham Lincoln. 

Grand Prize II would be a four-volume biography of Robert E. Lee, a Pulitzer Prize winning effort by Douglas Southall Freeman. How deliciously ironic for the author of a biography of the general fighting to keep millions of Afro-Americans enslaved to have the surname “free man”! How further ironically amusing that his middle name would be an all-for-the-South rallying cry, if ever there were one.

Purple Power: How would you like to walk around with a target on your chest or back? Probably not, considering the trigger-happy country we live in today. On the other hand, despite threats from the Taliban, nearly 60% of eligible Afghani voters are walking around with purple ink on their forefingers, proof positive they voted in Saturday’s elections. 

Which makes me wonder, why don’t we in the United States dip people’s fingers into an ink well, or create some other visual sign, to signify involvement in the one political process where all of us are equal? In our free society we fail to vote in markedly higher percentages than the threatened populace of Afghanistan. A purple finger would mark for all to see the commitment each individual has to our democracy. Conversely, lack of a purple stain would be a sign of shame, assuming one is a citizen and has not lost the right to vote.

My suggestion does have some kinks that need working out. We have a high percentage of absentee ballots cast. We also have early voting in some states. How would we identify those who take advantage of these alternatives to polling station visits? Maybe we could issue packets with just enough purple ink to paint one finger, to be applied on election day? 

If Catholics are willing to walk around in public with blackened foreheads on Ash Wednesday, if observant Jews are willing to walk around wearing yarmulkes, if Sikhs walk around wearing turbans, if Amish, Mennonites and Hasidic Jews are willing to walk around in distinctive garb, then everyone who cares about democracy should be willing to display their allegiance to the Red, White and Blue (the combination of red and blue make purple; add white and you get lavender).

Here’s another (tongue-in-cheek) idea: If we can't vote in superior numbers, perhaps we can enfranchise people in other democratic countries to help us select our president, for, after all, he or she is the leader of the free world. 

Shouldn't, say, the British or the Australians or the Polish have a vote in whom our commander-in-chief is, considering those countries always seem to support our military initiatives?

Keep Reading: Democracy demands an informed electorate. Yet, I sense a growing percentage of voters agree with a sentiment expressed during a dinner party we attended last Friday. Our host lamented he has been so depressed and distressed by the news lately that he has curtailed his reading of the front page of The Times. 

Secretly, I thought I was in the minority by also doing so, but the consensus around the table was that our host was not unique. Though we were all liberals (to the best of my knowledge), I believe the trend spans political denominations, and is not restricted to shunning The Times. We’re also turned off by network news telecasts.

I’m a big believer that an informed electorate is a prerequisite for a strong democracy. But I am distressed by the bickering from both sides of the political aisle and the tendency to reject outright any suggestions from the other side. 

Here's what I don't understand. If Republicans are the party of Big Business, why isn't Big Business pushing them to pass more projects that would help industry and put more people back to work and thus give the masses more money to spend on the products of Big Business?

Take infrastructure, for example. We need to shore up our bridges and tunnels, our highway overpasses, our rail beds and airports.

We need to modernize our power grid, our telecommunications network, our water supply system.

Surely the captains of industry see this. So why are they flushing tens of millions of dollars into the vest pockets of GOP legislators who are voting against their vested interests? What Machiavellian purpose is achieved? I'm no fan of Sheldon Adelson, but at least his wants are out in the open. When Republican presidential wannabes kowtow to him, we all know what he is demanding in return.

Sure. We know the fat cats don’t want to be forced to pay higher taxes. Nor do they want to pay higher wages. Or pay for health care for their workers. They want less regulation, fewer labor safety laws. But let's be practical. Democrats won't give them that, especially when the president is a Democrat. So why doesn't the industry elite look long term and push for investment that will benefit them in the present and near future?

Calamity Mitt

There’s an exegesis that major calamities suffered by the Jewish people occurred through the ages on the ninth day of the month of Av, known in Hebrew as Tisha B’Av. Calamities such as the destructions of both temples in Jerusalem 656 years apart, first by the Babylonians and then by the Romans. 

Tisha B’Av was commemorated over this past weekend, coinciding with Mitt Romney’s visit to Israel and Jerusalem. Need I say more? No, but I will.

Despite what Sheldon Adelson and other near-sighted people, including some of my friends, think, the worst development for Israel would be Romney’s election. As he so mis-ably demonstrated yet again on his “world tour” of England, Israel and Poland, Romney has no idea how to speak diplomatically. After publicly insulting the British, he publicly insulted the Palestinians. No amount of backtracking can remove his lack of diplomacy. Perception is reality in the eyes of the Palestinians. He has given them no reason to believe he would be an honest broker of a fair and equitable peace (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/31/us/politics/romney-angers-palestinians-with-comments-in-israel.html?_r=1).

Palestinians are industrious. Educated. They have been productive citizens and residents wherever they have been given an opportunity. The tragedy of the Mideast is that too many Arab countries used them as pawns, consigning them to live in squalor instead of absorbing them into society, as Israel did with Jewish refugees who had to flee repression in Arab countries. Romney naively attributed the economic disparity between Israelis and Palestinians to “culture.” That’s but one of the reasons.  I don’t have the time or inclination to expound on the full set of reasons. Perhaps, given all his money, Romney can hire experts who could educate him on the differences between the two peoples.

As could be expected, Romney was well received by Israeli hawks for his no-questions-would-be-asked-nor-criticism-leveled should Israel decide to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities. Just as candidate Barack Obama in 2008 expressed sympathy for those living near the Gaza Strip under constant danger from missile attacks and condoned retaliation, Romney scored points when he said, “We respect the right of a country to defend itself.” Romney also fawned on the Israelis, and further angered the Palestinians, by saying Jerusalem was Israel’s capital. 

Interestingly, Romney, and for that matter, most other politicians, have chosen to stay silent on a more imminent threat to Israel and other Western countries, namely, the huge stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction in Syria that could fall into the hands of terrorists or unstable factions should the government of President Bashar al-Assad tumble. Would Israel and the United States risk a foray into Syria to secure these stockpiles? Israel is already distributing gas masks in its northern regions, but the threat would be far wider to the Jewish state, indeed, to the world at large if groups like al-Qaeda or Hezbollah had access to these WMDs. 

Romney always seems to be trying to say what he thinks his audience wants to hear. Back in Great Britain he opined he would restore the bust of Winston Churchill to the Oval Office. Sounds great to an Anglophile. Churchill was the symbol of British grit in World War II, the staunch anti-Communist thereafter, originator of the term “the Iron Curtain.” But what do India and other non-Caucasian members of the United Kingdom think of Churchill? Reading about the fall of the British empire, Gilda has related to me stories of how racist Churchill was, how he felt Indians were inferior people, and thus could be sacrificed (read that, starved) so Anglo-Saxons would have enough food during WWII. Millions in India died after their foodstuffs were shipped to the British Isles. 

Perhaps Romney wasn’t aware of this “small” fact. I, for one, wasn’t aware of it until recently. But I’m not running for president. My comments won’t anger a nation. 

How Superstitious Am I?

Only a crazed sports fan would relate to what I am about to write.

How superstitious should I be today? Should I adhere to my time-honored practice of sitting in our den to watch the NY Giants on our 35-inch, 21-year old Mitsubishi console television, a TV that has served me well during the recent playoff drive and previous Super Bowl contests (let’s forget, for now, the debacle in 2001), or should I tempt fate and lay on my bed to watch the Giants take on the Green Bay Packers on our wall-mounted 52-inch LCD, High Definition Sharp Aquos television?

Normally, Gilda prefers I seclude myself in the den, but she’ll be at the gym later. I lean towards going with what’s gotten me, and the Giants, to their present possibility of upsetting the Packers, but I am tempted by Saturday’s viewing of the Saints-49’ers game on the big screen. No doubt about it, everything popped brighter, more vibrantly upstairs. It was indeed sharper on the Sharp.

But if the Giants lose, will I blame myself for switching? Non-sports fans (if they’ve read this far) are no doubt shaking their heads at the absurdity of my thoughts. How infantile can I be?, they are saying. They just don’t understand sports superstitions. Never have. Never will.


From Sports to Politics: You don’t need a TV screen to follow the tussles within the Republican party presidential primary. I’ve got a passing (yes, pun intended) interest in Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich.

For Gingrich, my link is to his money-bagged buddy, Sheldon Adelson. As I wrote back in May, Adelson was not one of my favorite business contacts. He is transfixed on what he sees as right, and uses his money and influence to advance his causes. Here’s what I wrote eight months ago: http://nosocksneededanymore.blogspot.com/2011/05/my-link-to-newt.html

Memory fails to confirm if I ever met Mitt Romney some 20 years ago when I interviewed several Bain Capital executives about their interest in retail companies, such as Staples. This much I do remember—the three men I did meet all dressed the same. They could have stepped out of a Brooks Brothers catalog with their blue suits, white buttoned down shirts, rep ties, and black oxford shoes. They were clean-shaven with short, dark hair, not one strand out of place.

No, I can’t say Romney was among them. I have met two presidents before they became our nation’s chief executive. Jimmy Carter crossed my path during his 1972 presidential campaign while I was covering an event attended by Rep. John Monaghan of Connecticut. Carter was testy that night, I recall.

Bill Clinton was a guest at an annual shareholders meeting of Wal-Mart about 30 years ago. Sam Walton always liked to have the governors of Arkansas make an appearance and talk about the business-friendly climate in the Razorback state and how Wal-Mart was good for the local economy. A few years later Walton solidified his ties to Clinton by appointing Hillary to Wal-Mart’s board of directors. She served from 1986 to 1992.

My Link to Newt

The presidential campaign season is heating up with its never ending quest for votes preceded by its more sordid side, its never ending dual quest for donors and dollars.

Last week’s edition of The Jewish Week asked, “Will Gingrich Bomb With Jewish Republicans?” The consensus answer was, yes. Despite his unwavering support of Israel, Newt Gingrich has too much baggage to appeal to most Jewish voters who see his domestic agenda as repugnant to their more progressive positions on issues such as abortion, gay rights, and entitlement programs.

Accordingly, Gingrich can expect little financial support from GOP Jews. Except from one deep-pocketed fellow, noted The Jewish Week. Namely, “gambling mogul Sheldon Adelson.” Forbes ranked Adelson the thirteenth wealthiest American, with $14.7 billion in net worth.

Gingrich’s week has been less than spectacular for a kickoff of a presidential run, but I’m not here to bury his candidacy. Rather, my attention is focused on Adelson.

I first met Shelly Adelson about 25 years ago. At the time he headed up The Interface Group which produced COMDEX, the computer industry’s biggest exposition, attracting some 100,000 conventioneers to Las Vegas. COMDEX was run as a closed operation. With rare exception, attendees booked their plane and hotel reservations through COMDEX. The turnkey program was a big moneymaker.

With a convention system structured around Las Vegas in place, Interface cast about for another conference theme. It discovered the National Housewares Manufacturers Association had recently scrapped its July show, opting for just one big expo a year, in January, in Chicago. Adelson et al decided to pounce on the opportunity to outmuscle the housewares association. It proposed a show in Las Vegas in August.

To jumpstart his idea, Adelson came a-courting to our offices in New York. Together with Chain Store Age General Merchandise Trends, of which I was editor and publisher, our three other merchandising publications were important media for anyone who wanted to reach housewares industry influentials, both at the retailer and vendor levels. Adelson came down from his Boston headquarters to gain our support.

He could hardly have been less accommodating. Instead of listening to our ideas, he told us how he would upend the industry, how buyers and sellers would flock to Las Vegas regardless of how hot the town could be in August. By the end of the meeting, our two camps were as divided as the North and South after Lincoln’s election.

The show was a disaster. Though scheduled to run three days, exhibitors started tearing down their booths in the middle of the second day, a violation of every standard at any trade show. They could hardly be blamed, for there was virtually no retailer traffic. No one wanted to come to Las Vegas in 110 degree heat.

I didn’t really care as Gilda had joined me for her first trip to Las Vegas. When the vendors started folding up their tents, they also started selling floor samples. We bought a 12-inch heavy metal skillet we’re still using today, a constant reminder of Adelson’s flaming out in the sun.

Of course, Adelson took it all in stride, never held another housewares show, subsequently sold COMDEX and parlayed the proceeds into casino holdings in Vegas and around the globe. He’s also become quite a philanthropist. Among his many endowments is the Adelson Institute for Strategic Studies in Israel, headed up by Natan Sharansky, the former Soviet refusenik and prisoner, Israeli politician, human rights activist and author.

About three years ago I was leafing through a magazine on Jewish philanthropists when I came across a picture of an “unidentified man” with Edelson and his wife at a gala honoring them for their support of the Adelson Institute. I couldn’t contain my cheekiness so I sent an email to the editor alerting him to his twin error—not only did he fail to recognize and identify the world famous Sharansky, but he also double-dissed him by not knowing that Sharansky was the head of the institute. Yes, I know that was bad form. But really, how could the editor of a Jewish magazine not know Natan Sharansky, one of the seminal Jewish figures of the last 30 years of the 20th Century?