Hudson River Radio dot com. It beats listening to nothing.
Oh my godness, being Frank fright, where the only way to be is Frank. Hello everyone, and welcome to being Frank. We're the only way to be is Frank. I'm your host, Franklin Bono, and I'd like to thank you for joining us on what we like to call the Intelligent Conversation podcast, where no conversation is out of bounds and all points of view are welcome. Of course, we go live to tape. I give you the date so you have some relevance
and context. It's the eleventh of February. On September seventeenth, seventeen eighty seven, at the Constitutional Convention in Independence Hall, doctor Benjamin Franklin was scheduled to address the delegates. As he was ill that day, he submitted a prepared speech
to be read instead. Within it, he wrote these words in these sentiments, sir, I agree with this Constitution with all its faults, if they are such, because I think a general government necessary for us, and there is no form of government, but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered. And believe further that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted
as to need despotic government. Obviously, this is stern and warning to future generations of Americans considering the so called liberties the current administration under Donald J. Trump is taking with our constitution. That warning may have never been more important than it is right now. Mister Trump and his minions are running roughshot over every aspect of our federal government under the guise of sweeping reform, despite the obvious
chaos and carnage it is creating. But what is truly baffling to me is that polls show that a majority of Americans still support his agenda despite significant opposition. His popularity has never been higher. As a proud member of that significant opposition I just mentioned, I intend to find ways of creating nonviolent resistance to a movement that, in the end will rob us of the very freedom we
hold so near. I have asked a great friend with similar sentiments in a Washington inside his view to help give us his unique perspective on the workings of government and the dangers of the unhinged decisions currently being made even as we speak. Jim Lyons, like me, grew up in a family who believed in public service and the value of helping others and serving the needs of their fellow citizens. After graduating from Rutgers, Jim attended Yale School
of Forestry and Environmental Studies. He went on to work for the West Fish and Wildlife Service the Society of American Foresters, which led to a staff job with the House Committee on Agriculture. He went on to serve as an assistant secretary in the Department of Agriculture for President Clinton and later in the Department of Interior for President Obama. He has also worked on international issues related to poverty and climate change for Oxfam and taught environmental policy at Yale. Jim,
welcome back. You've been here before, my friend, welcome again.
Well, thanks, Frank, it's great to join you. Very very important time for us to have this conversation.
I'm very serious about what I said. I mean, this is such a fluent situation as we speak. Changes are being made, and not necessarily for the better. Let's talk about that. And since I mentioned the Constitution in my introduction, let's start there. Okay, you have always seen a balance. You worked within a balance of government. That was the whole idea behind the formation of this government by the so called Founding Fathers, that there.
Would be a balance of power.
But you see this administration as destroying that balance.
Let's address that well. In my time and govern both inside the Congress and as well as working for three presidents, there was always a dynamic tension and differences of opinion about different policies, different programs and approaches. That was that was not unique. I would say that things began to change under the newt Gingrich when he assumed a leadership
role in the House. Mister Gingrich was more more willing to take off the gloves and and argued vehemently for his points of view, which is part of what the give and take needs to be in in any dialogue between people trying to get to an outcome that but maybe starting from different points of view. But things continued after that point in time, and as the Republicans ultimately took over the Congress, things became even more challenged. That
occurred while I was working for President Clinton. I think we saw more arguments, more vehemence, more threats than than I had seen in in my previous tenure and working with people on Capitol Hill, and obviously, you know, we
face something like that today. You know, the the current president UH certainly believes in taking the gloves off, certainly does not believe my impression in tradition or comedy, although what he's doing sometimes is comedic, I mean comedy in a different way, and and certainly is strident in in how he's approached governing the second time around, helped by the Heritage Foundation, which put together a long, detail filled almost cookbook for how to change government to meet the
needs of the ultra conservatives that are on the board of the Heritage Foundation. It's just a very different time, and I believe not beneficial for America. Certainly not beneficial for American citizens who really rely on their representatives to help government move forward in a positive way, meeting the needs of all Americans, not just you know, one side or the other. But this is a very different time.
Let me jump in there, Jim, because I think we can make a good point about the workings of government. You know, we see it. Those of us who are not in government see it from a distance. You were within. So the workings have explained how there's this huge workforce. I mean, if you look at as a company, there are millions of employees. So take us with in that. You know how it works because it's kind of a
different environment, because it's politically charged. We know that. But yet at the same time you have a job to do. How does that all work out?
Well, let me just correct one thing you said, which may be misinterpreted. I shouldn't say correct what you said, but of course you know. My first position in government was as a civil servant working for the US Fish
and Wildlife Service. It was a staff position, it was not a political position in any way, shape or form, and I was charged with helping to put together a national survey for the first time to understand Americans views and attitudes towards wildlife and the environment, and in particular how Americans used wildlife used, meaning everything from backyard bird feeding and bird watching to hunting and fishing and the like. That report was known as nineteen eighty Survey of Fishing, Hunting,
and Wildlife as Social Recreation. Was a landmark report in that it opened up the eyes of millions of Americans as well as the outdoor recreation industry to the economic opportunities associated with wildlife viewing, fishing, hunting, and the like. It was probably the most popular thing I ever produced. We had fifty individual state reports and it was transformative. What we called in the survey trips to visit wildlife
we now referred to as ecotourism. Back in nineteen eighty, believe it or not, five hundred million dollars was spent on bird seed and the bird seed industry exploded when that information came out. People were enjoying backyard wildlife. Obviously people were enjoying hunting and fishing. But this was a government service and we were trying to provide information to the public and to the different industries that were interested
in the outdoors, fishing, wildlife and the like. Information that helped them think about how they could grow their businesses, how they could better serve the public, and how they might change the way people viewed fish and wildlife not just for sport, but for enjoyment and also part of understanding the health of our environment as populations of different species changed. So that was my job and it was exciting.
I got exposed to a lot of interesting people. I was working for Jimmy Carter, ultimately and the Secretary of the Interior where fish widlife Services was headed by a gentleman named Cecil Andrews, who was governor had been governor of Idaho, and somewhat ironically, though to my enjoyment, I ended up serving on a board for a nonprofit organization in Idaho with former Governor Andrews, and it was it was delight. He was. He was a politician who knew how to work in the realm of politics to get
things done. And one of his greatest accomplishments was protecting Southeast Alaska, which at the time in nineteen eighty was kind of up for grabs, timber industry, fishing community, some people interested in out the recreation, you know, the native culture up there threatened by development. And he did his job as secretarviy Interior, working with a huge group of people who had expertise in many fields to reach a compromise and get this done. That might assume he was
a Republican, No, Susus Andrews was a Democrat. He was a Iidaho Yeah, which animal these days, for he may have been the last Democrat in Idaho, but but a very active governor and a very effective public servant in the Corn administration.
Let's talk about the mindset as a question a little further on, but as things roll and I'd like to be flexible, it's let's bring it up.
Now, Okay.
The difference in the ethos if you will, the zeitgeide Geist, the philosophy of the parties Democrats Republicans, where Democrats seem certainly, at least on the surface, to be more aware if you will, of quality of life issues like the environment, etc. And every time they try to do reasonable things like you're mentioning things that are associated with a software approach, if you will, the environment, but doesn't necessarily have to
be it can be the revenue generating. It seems like the Republicans just have a refusal to see it that way and any light presented to them.
Your thoughts, Well, my sense and I actually had a We had a former classmate in Fort Lee High School who worked for the Heritage Foundation. His name was j. Cousminski. Do you remember Jay Sure and he was an ultraliberal
in high school. Well, boy, did he turn around and became quite the conservative working for the Heritage Foundation, which we learned, of course at at a reunion anyway, The Heritage Foundation, I think, believes that the private sector and not the public sector, should kind of direct policy, dictate outcomes, and government is best is a government that's least, as
the saying goes. And so as you look at the Heritage Foundation's report prepared in anticipation of this election, you know it pretty much laid out the blueprint or the playbook for what our new president is doing in terms of dismantling pieces of government, transferring roles and response abilities to the private sector, and really trying to minimize I think the extent to which the government has a role, whether it's in protecting the environment, public health and safety, law enforcement.
And jump let me jump in and play the devil's advocate again because mentioning his popularity, and he can say, hey, I ran on this. This is not a surprise. People seem to be accepting it. Should they? Is government too big? Is there this huge abundance of waste? Is he and again I'm playing the devil's advocate. Is he addressing issues that needed to be addressed? I think he's doing with
a sledgehammer, when certainly a scalpeld might do. But we need your thoughts, because like you, I've not been there directly.
You have, well, I think I think the perceptions the public have of government reflect the lack of understanding really of what government is, what it does. Who are the people who are engaged in government. I mean they are people like me. There are people we know. There are people with expertise. I mean, you know PhD doctors who are helping to kind of find cures for cancer. A
government function. You know, they are military leaders. You know kids you know from our neighborhoods who kind of work their way up the ranks and h and found themselves
in leadership positions. I mean, you know, they The government covers you know, public safety, transportation, building roads and bridges, helping promote rural development, and infrastructure plays a critical role in agriculture because agriculture is heavily dependent on ships and markets, and and you know what, what happens on the world stage sometimes means that it's necessary to help subsidize some farmers to make sure that they can continue to farm
because his market shift, they'll come back into play. I mean, government affects people's lives in many, many different ways, oftentimes not well understood. Yet It is interesting that many people in government, many people in the public, seem to think government is something evil. And maybe maybe it's because people don't really understand the role the government plays. And as I said, and everything from health and safety to securing
our retirement incomes. Social security is a great example, and you know Medicare and the healthcare system that frankly only became law because of the vote of one man, a Republican senator from Arizona.
You know, you brought up a good point that I think we need to elaborate on a little bit. Just before we started recording, I was watching a little of CNN in the background, and there was a very interesting report a farmer from I believe Missouri, and they were they anchor at CNN was interviewing one of the senators from Missouri, who, of course a Republican, is supporting the
whole Trump agenda. And the point being that the farmer explained that when Trump stopped all payments from us AID, okay, because why are we giving food to foreigners we need it here, et cetera, et cetera. Whatever excuse he did give, he didn't realize that us AID okay, this farmer was selling enormous amounts of grain under contract which was now canceled. So, as you said, as the market fluctuates, his market is at this point gone and he doesn't know what he
will do to replace it. So here again is this thoughtlessness in a bigger picture thing where there's a rush to, oh, yeah, why are we helping people? And we should be helping ourselves because in helping other people, we are helping ourselves.
Speak to that, well, yes, we are helping ourselves in so many different ways. This has already been kind of part of the debate in the early tenure of UH, you know, of the new Trump administration cutting off foreign aid,
in fact seeking to eliminate the Agency for International Development AID. UH. People fail to realize that, you know, we provide a great deal of support and assistance to other countries, to communities in you know, sometimes in poverty, but that aid you know, helped keep them alive, helps feed their families, you know, helps them stay healthy, and and the relationship they develop with the United States, more often than not, not the stuff you see on TV, which is always
looking for conflict to highlight, the relationship they develop has a huge, huge impact on their quality of life. And their wellbeing and my experience in the time I worked for oxfand demonstrated that, you know, people really really appreciated that. If I could have been to offer one example, please
do that I think is relevant. So OXFAM there's a lot of work around the world, but one of the particular areas that we focused on for period of time was was in Ethiopia and that portion of Africa which is known for producing high quality coffees. And if you've ever if everyone a good cup of coffee, find a little Ethiopian coffee shop and it's remarkable the coffee they grow there.
Well.
Uh, OXFAM supported many coffee growers in that area, and again that was a way to ensure that they had income and they could be sustained, their families were secure, so you know, provided kind of a stable environment, which was beneficial to them obviously, but to us as well, because instability breeds contempt and that breeds, uh, you know, the threat of insurrection or the threat of you know, takeover. And this is one of the critical roles at a
I D plays. But but here's here's here's the critical role that OXVAN played. So at a certain point in time, Starbucks and the the head of Starbucks at the time wanted wanted to promote more production of these fine, high quality coffees in Ethiopia, but weren't willing to pay much more for that for that production. And ox Van, given its role in trying to address global poverty and and and in essence helped support you know, more certainty and
sustainability for these communities, stepped in. I happened to be the vice president for policy at the time, and took on, took on Starbucks and and we actually went to a Starbucks a directors meeting, shareholders meeting in Seattle, and I had a chance to speak briefly and took on, you know, the president's CEO of Starbucks made you know, and passion plea for the fact that Starbucks was undercutting these farmers who were producing some of the highest quality coffees that
Starbucks had to offer. They were undercutting themselves, and they were undercutting the stability and ultimately democracy in that area. I won't go into any more detail, but suffice it to say that a few board members on the Starbucks board, including former basketball star and Senator from New Jersey Bill Bradley, apparently I was told had a conversation with the head of Starbucks at the time and suggested that maybe they were going in the wrong direction with regard to their
relationship to these farmers. And lo and behold, Starbucks changed their business model and they started going to Ethiopia and other parts of the African continent and helping these farmers. Helped improve their production, the quality of the beans they were producing, and their ability to market those beans so that they could realize better incomes and greater stability in
their community. I mean, that's what international assistance does. And I can tell you that the US government used to provide some support for OXFAM, although I can tell you that as the transition was occurring in Congress and more Republicans were stepping into leadership roles, I testified on behalf of OXFAM requesting additional support for foreign aid, and I kind of got my head handed to me because the people stepping up into these leadership roles did not see
this connection between our security and the security of these people in Ethiopia.
Jim, this might be a rhetorical question. Why, I mean, for the for the rational, compassionate mind, the conscientious mind, say it's a win win situation. They get some, we get some. Everybody's happened in the end, what's the issue with that? Like, again, maybe it's rhetorical, but why, what's the rational Well, I.
Think the challenge for some of the senators who spoke up was they needed to be seen wanted to be seen as supporting America first. And this is money that was going to, you know, to farmers in a foreign country. Not that they were that they were US farmers producing coffee that competed with them, but you know, going to another country and there could have been money that could have gone to you know, American farmers. So they failed
to see that, you know that that critical connection. It wasn't a huge amount of money relatively speaking, but you know, it probably helped stave off you know, the kindind of upset and uh instability that we see in that part of the world now. And you know, I think played a very very important role. It's not to say that you know, Americans, American agriculture doesn't need support. It does. American agriculture benefits from the work that the US Department
Agriculture provides. I worked at us DA, you know, during the not the Obama administration, during the Clinton administration and and we worked very closely with people in American agriculture to help them secure their farms, produce soil erosion and loss of you know, you know, of the landscapes that they needed to produce the crops they were producing. We
worked with them in a whole host of ways. I didn't see a conflict between you know, providing some support for farm producers or coffee and providing funding to support and protect American farmlands and wetlands and the wildlife associated with that. Seemed to me it went hand in hand, but they don't have to be. There was some rhetorical pushback on that.
Yeah, Jim, I want to talk you and I also worked for a huge corporation for twenty years when I was at CBS, and you and the government and DEI played an important role in both of those corporations diversity, equity and inclusion, which I always saw overall as a positive thing. But the mindset seems to be changing for some reason. Again, your thoughts on that. Having been exposed to the best of it, and yet people seem to choose to look at the worst of it, why.
Well, you know, it's it's hard to address that I think we all, all Americans probably have families that have a i'll say diverse view on DEI. You know, the more recent emphasis on DEI, I would say of the last fifteen twenty years, you know, kind of led to a flare up, and you know it was exacerbated by sex change operations, and maybe the highlight was, you know, what were former men competing against women in swimming in
other pursuits. You know, I understand that upset and I think people, you know, could find ways to address that issue. But you know, it's it's it's become a lightning rod. I think because people feel friends, they feel like they're not going to get resources, or they're going to have to deal with someone you know, who was who was a man you know, six months ago and is a woman today. Perhaps I don't believe. I grew up in a liberal family, believe me, you know, policemen and firemen
and carpenters. But you know, it doesn't upset me as much as it seems to upset a lot of other people. And and that the issues athletics, for example, can be addressed. But you know, President Trump has seized on this and used it as a as a you know, as a cudgel, you know, to to amplify you know, the divisions, uh, you know, in in American society. And it's really really I think unfortunate. You can have your own view of the I but you know, I think, you know, America
should support h as many people as we can. You know, for many, many years we doubled the issue of racism. We still deal with it today, you know, but we've we found a way through that. And and I think we just need to sit down and have conversations about find our way through these other difficult issues because it's it's you know, there's an old saying in diversity is stability. I think that applies to the United States and politics as well.
Yeah, I think people have to stop looking at it as a situation of a handout and more of a hand up. If we help each other along the way, we can get somewhere. And that was always the spirit of it. Why that got perverted? I have no idea, Jim. I want to shift gears a little bit too, to go truly into one of your specialties, which is the environment. And you must be mortified by Trump's decisions regarding drilling
water rights fracking of public lands and space. I mean, they'll show a beautiful picture of a pristine Alaskan wilderness and with the idea that, oh, this is perfect for drilling, and people go for it. It's been sold as necessary. That's got to make someone like you, who so realizes the importance of open space in such a broad sense, that's got to be anathema to you.
It's even simpler than that. I mean, it is not necessary. I mean, Americans, I doubt realize that the United States is a net exporter of petroleum products of gasoline, et cetera. And so it's not like, you know, we're desperate for uh and and need access to every drop of oil and uh, you know, every cubic feet of gas that we can access. I mean, I think the oil and gas industry has used this effectively to kind of get what they wish in terms of access to lands and resources.
But in my role in the Obama administration working with the Bureau of Land Management in the Department of Interior, you know, I worked on issues affecting the protection of natural resources and oil and gas across the West. You know, there was a there's a species of birds that that is threatened across the western landscapes. And the bird just happens to like to nest in places where oil and
gas people like to drill as well. And over two and a half years, we worked very closely with the western governors, We worked with wildlife biologists, we work with the you know, conservation community, to try to find some compromise to protect the greatest age grouse, which is what the species is, that's that's threatened, and and and a compromise was struck, which hopefully will stand. It was completed
after I left office. But you know, it provided a means to conserve a species while allowing you know, oil and gas to continue to be produced. It's unfortunate that, you know, mister Trump, excuse me, President Trump, you know, uh, likes to say drill, baby, drill and promote oil and gas production as if you know that's going to benefit Americans, as if it's going to bring you know, prices for oil and gas way way down, not if we keep exporting.
It isn't. If he wants to reduce the prices for oil and gas for Americans, he should put he should put a cap on exports. He's not going to do that. That goes without saying because some of his biggest funders for his campaign from the oil and gas industry. But you know, this is a classic example of, you know, of an issue that can be resolved if reasonable people are willing to sit down, work together to address these issues instead of misrepresent them and and kind of inflate
the anger that need not be there. And and you know, this is Trump's specialty. Excuse me, this is the President's specialty. And you know we saw it in New York, you and I did growing up in that area, you know, and uh, you know, it's unfortunate that you know, now many many more Americans are going to be exposed to this. I mean, you know, we are. We're in a great position in the United States. And I think our democracy works well when people are willing to sit down and
work together. And I've had many experiences in doing so and achieving outcomes that that I hope will continue to last. That there were a function of dialogue, discussion, you know, and compromise, not retribution.
You know, Jim, you and I are both fort Lee kids, as we say, fort Lee f A W T kids, And uh so we're we're at a time we're no strangers to to the organized crime model. We knew had friends whose whose families were involved in it, so we were kind of around it. And uh, I see start similarities between what's going on at the topest echelons of our government being run as a criminal enterprise. It's absolutely amazing. I want so, you know, and it's interesting to see.
And we were talking a little bit about it before we came to record. It similarly reminds me of like Tony Soprano or Vito Corleone, these powerful and somewhat evil men, but yet are somehow respected because they're seen as powerful and strong and yet somehow honorable and doing so, they
really missed the point. There is no honor there ultimately, So some of your thoughts, they said, you know, you and I being around and especially for someone like me who is Sicilian and sometimes people and you talk about being stereotyped. The first thing that ask me is like, oh, yeah, who in New York family is the mafia? And I'll immediately say no one, because we're proud of denying that. Yet there are people there who seem value in what's happening in the so called strong arm arm tactics.
Your thoughts. Well, I, you know, I can only say that in many respects, it seems to me that the first steps taken by President Trump are more reflective of a dawn of a leader of you know, or an organized crime syndicate than uh than the leader of a democracy.
You know, basically shutting people down, you know, telling them not to report to work, You're telling them he's going to fire them all, threatening them basically, as opposed to trying to understand what value they bring to the table, how they help Americans, how they can improve the extent to which they help the Americans. Yes, maybe you know,
some people need to retire. Maybe there are you know, circumstances where you could reduce the size of an organization but continue to realize the benefits of that organization, as opposed to, you know, threatening not only Americans, but threatening other countries. You know, let's how about Greenland? Oh, why do we make Canada the fifty first state? I mean
cot there. It's hard hard to imagine that a president of the United States feels compelled to act this way, and of course he is, so I don't even know what the word is. So twisted the views and attitudes of his Republican colleagues in the Congress that they're afraid the question in any of the moves he makes, and add to that bringing in, you know, a private citizen.
Perfectly, I want you to address that, because in your mind, that's you think, one of the biggest threats facing us today and outside a citizen I e. Elon Musk looking into our private information being given access, it's virtually any information he wants.
So well, let me let me be clear. You know, the government has always brought private individuals in as consultants to help, you know, and that's true for people from the private sector, certainly true for people from academia or private citizens to work for the governor government and then and they can be exceeded exceedingly helpful. But you know, they're not handed the keys to the bank and told
go at it. You know, they're not authorized to shut down entire agencies or departments, and they're certainly not authorized to threaten people, you know, if they don't, you know, agree to retire or leave the leave the agency, the organization from whom they work. This is it's it's more than absurd. It is incredibly threatening, not just to the
people who are impacted. Who are you know, my God, have no idea whether they should take a buy out, whether they shouldn't you know, whether or not, you know, their retirement is going to be secure, you know, and
have no place to go. The fact that they that they work for the government is not a sin, you know, it's not punishable by death, though one would think so by the way the Trump people are treating these these people, these are public servants, and they're called public servants because their job is to help the public, whether it's help them manage their money, help them, you know, understand how to you know, better access health care and support, or
you know, whether it's how to improve their farm operations. I mean, you know, the fact that these people government servants are treated like dirt is disgusting. I'll just say that. And I was a government servant. I understand that. And you know, and I know many people who elected to work for government because they wanted to help people and serve people.
They've more money working elsewhere, often, oh many of them, many of them.
Instead, we bring the richest man in the world in. We give him the keys to the safe basically and access to this to the financial information of all of us, including you and me, you know, without any sideboards. I mean, what the hell is going on here? And you know, I just worry that the consequences, you know, for the
rest of us will be dire. It certainly increases my angst and uncertainty about what I should do with my retirement account, what I should do with my fine isn't funding Where the hell is that money going to go? And why is Elon Musk, the richest man in the world, allowed to make the decision for himself. He's the richest man in the world. That's great, but we're not like him. Well, and you know, we have other considerations, not just how much money we have in our piggy bank.
We're going to take a break in a second, but I want people to ponder this. I thought of something, what approximately three hundred and fifty million people in the country inclusive, approximately, if Elon Musk were to give every person, not only every family, every person in this country a million dollars, he'd still be the richest man in the world. So,
you know, fathom man. Yet yet he's going in working on government efficiency and cutting small jobs at the janitor's job and the cafeteria workers' job, et cetera, et cetera.
It's absolutely absurd.
Jim, We're going to take a quick break when we come back out a little bit more to talk to talk a lot about the Republicans. I want to talk a little bit about the Democrats. What happened in the last election, what can they do to improve? What does the future hold? So don't go anywhere. You don't go anywhere, audience, please don't go anywhere. We're having a great conversation. It's certainly intelligent with my very special guest, Jim Lyons. I'm
your host, Franklebono. This is Being Frank. We'll be back with much more right after these brief commercial messages. Please don't go anywhere.
This is Hudson Riverradio dot.
Com, Hudson Riverradio dot com. Hudson River Radio dot com. This is Hudson River Radio dot com. This is Hudson River Radio dot com.
Welcome back to Being Frank, the Intelligent Conversation podcast. Thanks for sticking with us. I'm your host, Franklebono. Our engineer is the mailman, mister Neil Richter, and our very special guest is Jim Lyons. We'll be joining us again in just a few seconds. You know, we bring our audience a fresh topic just about every week and stream from Hudson River Radio, located in beautiful and historic Stony Point,
New York. But remember you can catch Being Frank anywhere you get your favorite podcasts, And because every Being Frank is archived, you can listen to any of our programs anytime you like. Find a link to Being Frank on the Hudson River Radio Facebook page or at our website Hudsonriverradio dot com. Just click on our icon and you're there.
Okay, welcome back.
Jim Lyons. Jim is a lifelong friend. We literally grew up together. He was a member of worked for three different presidents, and he's giving us a very very interesting perspective. And I know, Jim, you wanted to make a particular point about public service. Please do so.
Well the point I want to make, Frank, And you know this is as well as I You know, many many Americans volunteer for the armed sort armed forces. Many many Americans, uh, you know, volunteer to support their communities. And you know, our our dads were policemen. My dad was a volunteer fireman. He did other volunteer work. You know, it's it's an honorable thing, and and it it just
troubles me, or maybe it puzzles me. You know why so many people who believe in public service seem supportive of someone who uh in the name of the President of the United States, denigrates public service, challenges people who serve, treats them, and maybe even in the past, has called them chumps and suckers. You know, America is great because Americans work together. America is great because Americans see other Americans in need and they find ways to help them.
Government plays a role in that, maybe sometimes too big a role, you know, but to hear the president, you know, for example, you know challenge the way in which the people who are impacted by flooding and you know in the southeastern US is it's I'll just say frightening. I mean, people are trying to help people. Same is true for
you know, the fire impacted areas in California. Now, I recognize that many of those people have wealthy homes and probably can take care of themselves, but in many instances, because of fires and other disasters, people do not, and the government plays a critically important role in helping these people.
Get back on their feet, providing them not just financial assistance, but you know, advice, support through different programs and and really, you know, does what I think all Americans seek to do, which is help lift each other up. We should not be bludgeoned by the notion now that we should We should kind of abandon that approach and just you know, let everybody fight for their own survival because we're Americans. That's that's that's how our country became the great country
that it is. We were leave in lifting all boats. Right now we've got too many people trying to drill holes in those boats.
Yeah, you know, I just wrote something on my blog, talked Frank about that and about what the American ethos is, or certainly was, and that was in taking pride and helping one another. And where we need to look in the mirror and say what happened to that and get it back as quickly as possible. Got a little bit of time left, Jim and I feel it's important we talk about the Democrats. Both you and your wife Jennifer, Paul Mary Or are players in the Democratic Party. Uh,
what happened? What's going on there? They seem to have lost their way lost their message. Uh, you know, an election everyone was predicting that close, but they would certainly win, and that didn't happen. Why what happened?
And what is that? What is their future?
Well?
I got to say, frank if I knew the answer to that, I'd be a very wealthy consultant. And I chu and me both, and nor is my wife. Just to be clear, you know, I think a number of things hurt us. Certainly, you know President Biden's decline, if you will, in the latter part of his tendre in his desire to run for re election in spite of the fact that many people thought he should not.
Was it probably additional from the beginning that was my thought.
But I think Kamala Harris, who have a great deal of respect for and by the way, her husband is is a guy from Jersey, great guy. Kamala Harris did her best, I think too, you know, pick up the pace and uh and present you know, a positive front. And frankly didn't lose by very very much, but it was enough and we see the consequences now wholesale change simply because of the small margin between winning and losing.
I don't think many Americans really thought that was possible, and you know, for whatever reason, they elected not to vote for her, but instead elected to vote for for President Trump. So you know, we have to deal with, you know, with the consequences and try to find a way.
I think too, I'll say it really make America great again, not by denigrating public servants, not by threatening you know, their future, not by challenging, you know, the commitment that people have, particularly government, to try to do their best to help all Americans. You know, we've got to recognize, you know, that we are all Americans, and I think, you know, most Americans want this country to not just survive, but to thrive and be the best country in the world.
I just I was just going to say, I just I just don't feel like the messages coming from the White House, their initial actions, and the consequences reflect that view that you know, America, America and Americans are great individuals, a great country. You know, we're not in that bad of shape. But if you were to listen to President Trump, you would think that we're on our last leg, and that's just not true.
What I'm curious about one last question, Jim, as we're starting to get lead on time is how did the GOP manage to usurp what had always been the Democrats message, which is, if you vote for us, working people, if you vote for us, We're going to make your life better. Somehow, it seems the Democrats seems to have lost that message somewhere along the way. Why, how how can they get it back?
Well, I think there are a lot of people trying to figure that out right now. Frank And if I had the answer for that, I would be a wealthy consultant. I just I feel like, I feel like what has happened is that we have let the other team use our playbook and you know, use our message, even though their intention is not, UH is not to do so I was I was going to say, not unlike what we saw on the Super Bowl. We're Philadelphia. Took it to Kansas City. But Philadelphia, even though we're from Jersey,
Philadelphia is a great place. So and UH and I and I think you know what's happening is that we need to recapture the vitality and the creativity that you know, Democrats bring to the table. You know, the problem is we are not having conversations we've we were having confrontations. People have kind of hold to their own corners and they don't seem to want to talk about, you know,
where we can meet in the middle. And I think, you know, that is incredibly destructive in our communities, for our country, and I see it, you know, in in our families, and that just can't continue. I mean, you know, the keys are, you know, conversation, and collaborate and compromise.
If we can follow those three c's and find ways to help each other, whether it's you know, little things in your community or you know, things you know at a greater level, joining an organization, working to help others who need help, you know, supporting people who aren't as well off as you and I are, and we're not nearly as well off as others. Then I think we can make a difference. But we've got to stop, you know, fighting first and then thinking to ask questions later.
Jim, I was going to ask another question, but I prefer to end it right there on a positive note, and it is a positive note. We failure is not an option. We have to get through this, and I think if we stick together, keep the lines open, the dialogue continuing, have some intelligent conversation like we had today, we can get through this final thoughts.
No, I think we have a long road ahead of us, and I would encourage people, listeners, particularly from the community you know whe're from and from you know, from the
Hudson Valley region. You know a lot of smart people, a lot of people who have a long history there, and you know, in a community that really, you know, attracts not just visitors, but about others who want to live there, because people do know how to talk to one another, they do care about each other, they care about their environment, and and I think it could be a model for ways to bring larger communities and ultimately
the country together. That kind of dialogue, that kind of environment, that mindset is what's critical to changing the path or on, because the path are on is a destructive one and we need to get back to being a democracy again.
Jim Lyons, I want to thank you so much for your intelligent conversation here on being Frank. You welcome, my friend.
Thanks Rank, I enjoy the conversation and let's hope better days are ahead.
We'll get together soon, you know. Of course, we offer special thanks to our listeners who take time to give us a voice in their lives. Remember, you offer a fresh topic just about every week. Catch us wherever and whenever you get your favorite podcasts. That includes Apple, Spotify, iHeartRadio, Speaker and all the others. Check us out on the Hudson River Radio Facebook page. Like us and leave us a comment, and we ask you to consider sharing Being
Frank with others. You know, always leave you with two little tidbits, nuggets, whatever you want to call them. One slogan and then some great original music. First, a little anecdote, and here it is. Benjamin Franklin was leaving the Constitutional Congress when he was approached by a woman the name of Elizabeth Willing Powell, and she asked, well, doctor, what have we got a republic or a monarchy? And of course Franklin answered, a republic if you can keep it. Well,
we've been challenged. Can we keep it all? Right? Here's some great music by my friend Steve bag It's called Poor You. I think you'll enjoy it very much. I like it for our engineer, the mailman, mister Neil Richter. I'm your host, Frank Lobono. We hope to see you on the next Being Frank.
I don't care you're wasted on the county line.
The art you have?
You need wine? Now are you?
Are? You got it?
Thanks? And when you are being carry.
Some mothers fores s.
Right here, I'll take off on your baby.
Its whiskey because you never know.
And I might appear looking out of that window.
I can't see it all.
I enjoy the ride.
I can't still see you stranded.
And as that train goes by, my art starts to slide for you. For you got beat as to do? You tell me? You know what's good? End to wait for? Tell me? You tell me that you don't lie? Right?
You tell me no, it's good?
End up care for.
When the brough that you have to feel you don't mind home over.
It?
Or what are you? You got bad things to tell you? You got that things got that wait, we got the wit to
Hudson River Radio dot com mm hm