Category Archives: POLITICS

July 2, 2012 · 12:32 pm

WE ARE BETTER THAN WE KNOW: HEAT WAVES AND HOT TOPICS by Louise Annarino

WE ARE BETTER THAN WE KNOW:HEAT WAVES AND HOT TOPICS,

By Louise Annarino,

July 1, 2012

 

The stress of enduring day after day of near and over 100 degrees heat with daily thunderstorms roaring through neighborhoods at 60-80 miles an hour uprooting trees, breaking off huge limbs, toppling trees and telephone poles onto cars and houses, plunging our cities and towns into darkness, isolating us from one another and formal information channels by shutting down cable television, and cell phone communication while we labor all day to clean up the mess and toss all night in the heat and humidity has been quite a test of patience and human kindness. Yet, we have endured. In fact, we have renewed our communities and our sense of belonging to one another. We have demonstrated lessons of fortitude and selflessness to our children. We are moving forward.

 

Neighbors have joined together to clear their streets and their lots of debris, pulling trees from right-of-ways, cutting them into manageable pieces, loading them on flatbeds and pick-ups, waiting in long lines to drop off their loads at city recycling lots to be turned into mulch for later on their neighbors’ yards and gardens. Citizens have worked to clear the storm debris alongside hundreds of private tree crews; while professional crews of power companies, hundreds from out of state, and city workers are able to access areas more easily and focus on doing what only they can do, what is beyond that of an average citizen’s ability, even when joined with neighbors in a common endeavor.

 

When every intersection must be treated as a four-way stop because lights are out and a normally 15 minute drive from Worthington to downtown Columbus takes merely 15 minutes more,I am surprisingly amazed. Because nearly everyone does act in communion with one another, and the few who cruise on through seem to be forgetful not self-serving, the process goes smoothly. We cooperate with one another with a mindfulness of our fellow travelers’ needs.

 

Customers are talking with one another and with the sales clerks, in darkened stores operating at half-power where the brightest light is the check-out screen on the electronic registers; and where clerks in stores with no power write up sales on a pad of paper, laughing with customers at their fumbling with this new old-way of doing things. Even the most taciturn among us join in these spontaneous conversations over where ice is still available and where gas pumps still work.

 

The mayor directed city workers to open fire hydrants during our over-heated afternoons so children can cool down, inviting them to play in the city’s fountains and water features. The memories of this struggle will be more joyful for our children and for us as a result of the mayor’s compassion and foresight. This is as it should be. This is what works. This is what moves us forward most quickly, no matter what the cause of our stress. This is what builds a strong community. We have easily shifted into a community of common interest where private citizens work alongside government workers and private company workers, and emergency personnel in government and private companies coordinate services for our common safety. While police cruise our darkened streets, National Guard soldiers go house-to-house checking to make sure our elderly are getting whatever help they need to survive the threatening heat.

 

When then-candidate Senator Barack Obama ran for president in 2007, I heard from a friend working for the Chamber of Commerce in southern ohio, and from another friend in northern Ohio that he had quietly made time to meet with local chamber leaders to discuss what Ohio needed to make our state economically strong, how business could be encouraged and strengthened, how his policies should be molded to assist small business owners in Ohio’s communities. At first, this surprised me. This was not a campaign stunt. Few people knew of these meetings. They were not being publicized, nor used as a campaign tactic for political gain. They were a sincere effort to learn more about Ohio’s business needs, and help Ohio’s employers and workers. It was, as I came to understand our president better, typical Barack: recognize we are all part of the same community, discuss our common concerns and needs, listen to the voices of others whom you know and of those whom you just met, learn from others, teach others, find common ground, plan how to improve things, offer a helping hand, work side-by-side no matter how difficult. That alone was enough to make me canvass so many hours for Barack Obama that I broke off bones in my foot from simple wear and tear.

 

How we have handled these climate-deranged days this week is a metaphor for how we must handle the challenges our nation faces as world economies shuttered and nearly stalled as a result of de-regulation and lack of institutional oversight of our business and banking enterprises, a strategy plotted, planned and financed by the U.S. Chamber of commerce, ALEC and fueled by Republican think-tanks. While Barack Obama was seeking common effort by recognizing the value of and including their ideas for a strong America, they were pledging to undermine every effort he made even those efforts which they had planned and initiated themselves under former administrations. Their goal was not to move us all forward, but to keep Barack Obama in the back of the bus.

 

If only they could have responded as our central Ohio cities and towns are responding to our latest crisis, as the good people of Ohio – Democrats,Republicans,Libertarians and Independents – are responding. Instead, our Governor John Kasich rejects transportation funds to build train routes reconnecting us to the rest of the country,tries to eliminate an avenue of communication with government workers by attacking collective bargaining, seeks to destroy and limit the economic and political power of unions representing hundreds of thousands of the government workers who keep our communities working safely and smoothly through crisis after crisis, and with his Lt. Governor Mary Taylor refuses to implement health care insurance exchanges offering Ohio businesses a structure to compete for health-care dollars. While he decries the nanny state he asks President Obama to declare Ohio in a state of emergency, to receive water, generators and other emergency supplies, cash and  other assistance from agencies he has argued should be cut or eliminated. I hope the events of these last days and weeks have thwarted the excesses of his ideological position.

But it is not just our governor, it is every governor across the nation who invites in and colludes with carpet-baggers (Tea Party) of ALEC, Koch Brothers, Chamber of Commerce to override the good judgement and wisdom of Ohio’s citizens who work hard every day to make Ohio strong, productive, and safe for themselves, their children and their neighbors. It is our state representatives and senators who attend ALEC events and introduce ALEC-drafted legislation as their own who ignore the needs and wisdom of Ohioans. Ohioans awoke to one another and the need to work together for the common good during this heat wave;hopefully, they will wake up to political reality of Ohio and throw out all carpet-baggers and those who do their bidding.

 

The insistence that taxes must be cut, and that tax cuts for individuals earning more than $250,000 dollars per year must be maintained at the expense of all our people’s employment, the education of our children and the safety of each of us and hoping for some trickle-down is a disproven approach to sustainable economic growth. Every Ohioan who endures this heat wave, works to clear up after the damaging storm, and reaches out to neighbors and strangers knows better than these elected representatives. Ohioans are better than this and behave toward one another better than this. When Barack Obama reminds us in his public addresses “We Americans are better than that”, this is what he means. We are better than that.

 

 

 

6 Comments

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , ,

June 29, 2012 · 6:15 pm

DEFENDERS OF ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC HOLDER ARE A COLORFUL GROUP, By Louise Annarino

DEFENDERS OF ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC HOLDER AREA COLORFUL GROUP,by Louise Annarino,June 29,2012

Conformity is the jailer of freedom and the enemy of growth. 

 – John F. Kennedy

 

 

I am so glad I was born a woman. It has allowed me the freedom to not conform. From first consciousness of a personal identity it was clear I was not an equal to any male; not simply different from boys, but unequal as well. This message was not simply from parents and family members immersed in Italian culture. It was the American cultural premise that boys mattered more: their plans must be first-met, their hopes first-fulfilled, their preferences first-considered. They never noticed what seemed obviously appropriate for their well-being. Why should they have done so? The culture fit them well. Their shoes fit. When shoes fit well, one does not notice. One only notices when the shoes pinch. I have worn shoes that pinch my entire life. It makes me cranky, angry and tired. This is not because of individual men who treated me so badly, although there a few who shall remain nameless. Men and women agreed to share this norm within our personal relationships and cultural institutions. It always take a prince to save the princess in our stories. Thank you Drew Barrymore for your portrayal of a different kind of princess in EVERAFTER: A CINDERELLA STORY.

 

I cannot compare a woman’s discomfort with that felt by African-Americans,Native-Americans, Latinos and other groups hobbling along with pinched shoes seeking the American dream. Even when they are  allowed to join in the race, painful feet make their chances of winning a race so much more difficult. The pain is different for each of us, but we recognize the restricted gait in others. For white men the race is also a struggle. They must work equally hard to train for the race. The course they run is the same we all run. The only difference is that our shoes pinch. We understand our struggles are common struggles. But our pain helps us become sensitized to issues of injustice, discrimination and abuse of power. This is not to ignore those white men who are equally sensitive to issues of injustice and would never discriminate or abuse power. In fact, they amaze me since it would be so easy for them to simply move ahead and leave the rest of us far behind.

 

As I watched the faces of those brave and committed Congressional Democrats who walked out on the Republican contempt motion initiated by Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CAL) I saw the faces of people who know an abuse of power when they see it, because they have experienced it so often themselves. And because they have never been able to conform to the white-male power model, they have been free to grow into people with   the strength of character, perspicacity, and empathy for others to speak truth to power.These men and women of color were joined by white representatives who understand the common struggle we all face, and know we must face challenges together.

 

Members of the Congressional Black Caucus, which initiated the protest, led the exit from the House floor, civil rights icon Rep.John Lewis (D-GA) at their head as the contempt vote against A.G. Holder began, along with minority leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CAL), minority whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD), and members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, the Asian-Pacific American Caucus,and the Progressive Caucus who were joined by more than 100 representatives of the House of Representatives.

 

pastedGraphic.pdf

 

Rep. Hoyer asserted the walkout was not about race but “to call the attention of the American people, who are angry about confrontation, angry about gridlock, angry about the fact that we are not focused on their priorities: jobs, investment infrastructure, the environment, education, innovation, building our economy.” Leader Pelosi commented that the effort was a political ruse meant to erode respect for and confidence in A.G. Holder and  impede the Justice Departments’ efforts to prevent voter suppression. This is what speaking truth to power looks like: men and women of every nationality, race, color and hue hand in hand to overcome injustice and abuse of power by awakening the rest of us.

3 Comments

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

June 26, 2012 · 8:37 pm

WATERFALL IN DROUGHT By Louise Annarino

WATERFALL IN DROUGHT

Louise Annarino

June 26, 2012

 

Cascades balance the flow

over the edge

water goes

down to the stream far on

beyond the gate

water goes

past neighbors’ barns and homes

from the fall

water goes

and I

remain

still

dry.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as ,

June 26, 2012 · 8:10 pm

IS IT REAL OR FICTION? By Louise Annarino

IS  IT REAL OR MERELY FICTION ?

Louise Annarino

June 26,2012

When presidential candidate Mitt Romney declared “Corporations are people, my friend… of course they are. Everything corporations earn ultimately goes to the people. Where do you think it goes? Whose pockets? Whose pockets? People’s pockets. Human beings my friend” 1, he was combining two fictions: political argument and legal principle. He made the statement to explain why he would not reduce the deficit or protect social security and medicare by raising taxes on corporations. His economic policy has always been based on a long-ago disproven “trickle down” theory, and is consistent with the above comment. Theoretically, if one becomes rich off corporate success one does not need social security nor medicare.

But a theoretically consistent analysis does not mean the premise of the theory is correct. One must ask, how many Americans will achieve such success? How many Americans are given “golden parachutes”2 when they are fired or severance packages designed to maintain their employed-level lifestyle when they retire?3  Not public employees! Yet, Romney sided with Wisconsin Governor Walker and Ohio Governor Kasich in decrying the excessive retirement benefits available to public workers.4 Governor Kasich and candidate Romney share another commonality; their pursuit of personal wealth resulted in reduction or loss of pension and retirement benefits for hundreds of thousands of workers: In Kasich’s case, Ohio public employees including state workers,teachers,law enforcement and fire personnel; and, in Romney’s case workers in companies his equity firm salvaged or savaged.

Courts have used the concept of legal fiction since ancient Rome. “This jargon refers to the law’s ability to decree that something that’s not necessarily true is true. It’s somewhat like a person in a discussion agreeing to accept an opinion as fact for the sake of argument in order to move the discussion along. Legal fiction helps to move proceedings along.”7 Corporate personhood is one such legal fiction.It is employed simply to determine the legality of corporate agreements (contracts) and business proceedings. However, we all understand that this is FICTION and not REALITY. Therefore, it is incumbent that such a discussion tool be used judiciously by our courts. Corporations have super-human qualities which must be constrained when using the legal fiction of personhood.

How do courts use legal fiction? Not always with judicial restraint. For example,In CITIZENS UNITED the U.S. Supreme Court recognized corporations as “persons” entitled to the 1st. Amendment political speech protections of human beings, opening a floodgate for unchecked billions of dollars of corporate donations. Last week in KNOX v SEIU “The five conservative justices, led by Justice Samuel Alito, and two concurring liberals,…held that, from now on, non-members have to specifically tell the union to take money out of their paychecks for political purposes; that is, they have to opt in.6,8 It makes sense that an individual worker cannot be forced to donate to a political effort he does not support. Unions allow workers to opt out of such political funds. Now, workers must opt in. This change restrains union efforts to effect political change on behalf of its members. Must corporations likewise now seek approval of each investor before donating to political candidates, campaigns, PACS, and SUPERPACS? Or, does corporate personhood override the 1st. Amendment rights of investors? Why are unions treated less like persons than corporations? Whether one agrees or not that the Supreme Court used this fiction judiciously in CITIZENS UNITED, courts ought to at least use it consistently. Stare Decisis, another legal term, requires such consistency. If such a shareholder challenge should come before the court it would help answer any question one has regarding the politicization of our highest court. Can you imagine a campaign finance system where investors must opt in before corporations can make political donations?

As politicians move to raise money and seal the deal with voters, one can merely hope the misleading conflation of legal fiction with political fiction will stop.Mr. Romney’s corporations are people comment sounded a false note; and, it may be why his comment was greeted with such disdain. Despite his intentions, It just sounded wrong to average citizens who could care less about legal fiction while dealing with real life. Most of us would agree with Elizabeth Warren’s political commentary, that corporations are not human beings, despite a legal fiction used solely for judicial argument.7 Mothers don’t tuck-in corporations. Fathers don’t shoot hoops with them. Voters don’t vote for corporations; they vote for a man or woman who understands their reality and will not harm them. The rest is fiction.

  1. .http://technorati.com/politics/article/video-mitt-romney-says-corporations-are/  Romney made these remarks at the Iowa State Fair in August, 2011.
  2. http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/business/2012/01/golden-parachutes-21-ceos-landed-100m-plus/ So-called golden parachutes are contractual provisions that compensate executives, if they are terminated without cause.
  3. http://money.cnn.com/2012/02/09/news/economy/romney_taxes/index.htm  Romney “is still pulling in millions from Bain Capital, a private equity firm he founded in the mid-1980s and retired from in 1999.Of course, it’s common for retiring executives to walk away with big retirement packages. But Romney pays only a 15% tax rate on his take, unlike executives at corporations, who typically pay 35%.Why? Because Romney was a partner in a private equity firm and some of the money he still receives from Bain — $13 million over the past two years — is “carried interest.”
  4. http://www.aflcio.org/Blog/Political-Action-Legislation/Romney-Finds-Soul-Mate-in-Walker-s-Assault-on-Workers-Retirement-Security “Romney’s focus on pension cuts isn’t surprising. After all, in his role as corporate raider and takeover king at Bain Capital, workers’ pensions were often the first thing to go.”
  5. http://www.examiner.com/article/huge-lehman-brother-payouts-report-recalls-ohio-gov-kasich-s-time-at-the-firm “Former Congressman John Kasich clearly was not a banker, but he found a home at Lehman nonetheless. As a one-time Ohio State Senator and then as a Congressman for 18 years, Kasich had easy access to many doors. Among them were doors to Ohio pension funds.According to published reports at the time, Kasich opened doors for Lehman Brother’s private equity department and investment officials at the Ohio Police & Fire Pension and the Ohio Public Employees Retirement System in 2002. Kasich made the case that Lehman would be a good broker for real estate and other investments.Lehman Brothers losses at Ohio pension funds.When all was said and done, after the nation went spinning into what is now called the Great Recession, the Ohio Treasurers office, which acts as custodian but does not invest pension monies, calculated that the funds had a combined $480 million loss in market value solely from Lehman investments. Other sources, using different calculations, said the direct losses were closer to $220 million.”
  6.  http://mnlabor.wordpress.com/2012/06/25/how-the-supreme-courts-knox-v-seiu-decision-could-dismantle-union-security-around-the-country-news-politics-alternet/ “The public sector union contract has to cover all the workers in the agency, not just card-carrying members– and  all the workers benefit from the resultant pay raises, health benefits, pensions and other goodies. So non-members are expected to contribute something to the direct cost of negotiations. (Workers who don’t support the union shouldn’t get to enjoy the better pay and working conditions that their union colleagues fought for, but employers haven’t historically been willing to pay people less for NOT being union members. They much prefer to bribe, cajole and threaten workers to reject the union.).Public sector unions have been major political players, too (see: Scott Walker’s targeting of Wisconsin’s public employee unions).This is partly because fundraising for politics has been relatively simple: with everyone’s full knowledge and ample notice given (called “Hudson notices”), a percentage of both members’ and non-members’ funds could go toward political work. Anyone could opt out of this political fund, and their money would be reimbursed.”
  7. http://www.examiner.com/article/elizabeth-warren-educates-mitt-romney-explaining-why-corporations-are-not-people “Mitt Romney tells us in his own words, ‘I think corporations are people.’ No, Mitt, corporations are not people. People have hearts, they have kids, they get jobs,” Ms. Warren said. “Learn the difference…And Mitt, learn this,” she continued as she strongly delivered the night’s best line, “We don’t run this country for corporations, we run it for people.”
  8. http://www.afj.org/connect-with-the-issues/the-corporate-court/knox-v-seiu.html Service Employees International Union (SEIU) represents 1.8 million people in health care and public service. Non-member public employees are required by California state law to pay SEIU a “fair share fee” to defray the costs of union representation on their behalf. To that end, each year SEIU sends its non-members a notice, as required by the Supreme Court, which informs non-members of their fair share fee and of their right to object to paying non-chargeable expenditures including money spent for political advocacy. Those fees are calculated based upon expenses during the previous year and do not take into account unforeseen expenses.In 2005, SEIU issued a valid annual notice informing non-members of the percentage of their dues which would be allocated to union representation and gave them 30 days to opt-out of paying amounts associated with non-representation functions. The notice stated that dues were subject to change based on actual costs. A month later, SEIU imposed an emergency temporary assessment fee to defend against attacks on union plans and charged non-members who objected to the increase the percentage set forth in the initial notice as the amount associated with union representation. A group of nonmember state employees in California challenged this practice in a class action suit against SEIU.Employees claim that SEIU’s failure to send out a supplemental notice when the union imposed a special assessment violated employees First and Fourteenth Amendments rights by forcing non-union employees to subsidize union political activities. SEIU counters that its notice was constitutionally and legally sufficient because the Supreme Court has recognized that the notice did not require an exact determination of the yearly expenditures, but merely a good prediction based upon the previous year’s audits. The Court previously recognized the impossibility of anticipating expenditures at the outset of the fee year and that once the union sent the original notice it need not send a second notice speculating how a fee increase might be spent. The district court found for the employees, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed, finding that a temporary fee increase did not require an additional notice.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

June 24, 2012 · 8:54 pm

DON'T PUSH HUMPTY DUMPTY OFF THE WALL by Louise Annarino

DON’T PUSH HUMPTY DUMPTY OFF THE WALL

Louise Annarino

June 25, 2012

Democratic republics in the West did not emerge in full blossom overnight; nor will they in the East. The seeds of power within people must be planted in good soil and be kept moist despite periods of drought. Those who feed the country’s growth are ever in danger of being choked by weeds. Egypt’s journey, and that of other nations seeking some form of democratic republic, is our own.

As we watch the Egyptian military generals write and rewrite laws to secure their power base in the face of shared power with a president and parliament not of their choosing, let us recall the first parliaments in England which were made up exclusively of the privileged few, heirs to the original land barons granted fiefs by their king for military service to protect and defend his crown, and more importantly, his crown jewels. The king was loath to part with his landholdings which generated his wealth. The barons agreed to supply a percentage of crops, minerals, forest, game and resources to the king in exchange for permission to act as lord over the serfs who were attached to the land, and to  supply troops whenever called upon to do so by the king. In this way, both the king and his barons grew excessively wealthy. Sound familiar?

In 1215 King John agreed to the Magna Carta, the great charter, which gave legal rights to the Barons and Earls and mandated that the king listen to them and follow their advice. Before the Magna Carta the king called a parliament at his whim with no legal obligation to follow the barons’ advice. The Magna Carta granted no rights to the serfs; but, merely became a tool of the landed gentry (who had personal armies supporting them) to control the king in order to protect their own interests. Sound familiar?

In 1265, following a war between Henry III and Simon De Montfort, De Montfort briefly established a parliament which also included  burgesses, representatives from each county,city and town until Edward I, who killed De Montfort in battle, called is first parliament in 1275 which included churchmen,two knights from each county, and two commoners from each town ( the house of burgesses). Since 1327 parliament set the pattern we know today: House of Lords, House of Commons, Monarch.

It took another hundred years to establish that Parliament’s House of Commons controlled granting money raised through taxation to the king (usually to wage war); and wrote statutes creating the law of the land, replacing the writ to the king for favor system of an earlier day.

Overthrowing the leaders of countries does not necessarily mean more power to the people. It took great Britain several hundred years and a civil war to do so. The United States, copied Great Britain’s lead, replacing the monarch with a president. The House of Lords became our Senate; the House of Commons our House of Representatives. There are those who pressured newly-elected President George Washington to accept the appellation Your Majesty. He insisted on Mister, in a new nation where all men are considered equal. And so we say, Mr. President when addressing him.

The U.S. shortened Great Britain’s time-line: 1776 – Declaration of Independence, 1789 – Constitution and first 10 Amendments ratified, 1789 – Judiciaries Act passed, 1803 – Marbury v. Madison. Hopefully, emerging democracies can shorten the time it takes to become nations of law and not men, and avoid civil war. Building a strong middle class will help.

The industrial revolution which began in the 1500’s with the guild movement solidified in 1760-1850. It is no coincidence that the movement to end serfdom occurred on the same time frame. Prior to industrialization in England, land was the primary source of wealth. “The landed aristocracy held enormous powers [through] the feudal system. However, a new source of great wealth grew from the Industrial Revolution, that which was derived from the ownership of factories and machinery. Those who invested in factories and machinery cannot be identified as belonging to any single class of people (landed aristocracy, industrialists, merchants). Their backgrounds were quite diverse, yet they had one thing in common: the daring to seize the opportunity to invest in new ventures. It was these capitalists who gave the necessary impetus to the speedy growth of the Industrial Revolution.”1

In the United States, the Industrial Revolution made the North economically stronger than the South, which barely maintained a landed gentry system on the backs of slave labor and that of poor white sharecroppers. The bloody rise of labor unions prevented this quasi feudal-serf system from taking root in the North. Despite fighting a Civil War to end slavery, and the efforts of labor unions, we still see vestiges of the old feudal system within our economic institutions, policies and practices both north and south. Since the election of our first African-American president those differences in how we choose to govern ourselves have become more overt. Ohio and Wisconsin, as well as every other state,thanks to ALEC, are fighting to protect unions, not just to protect the unions but to protect all workers from being reduced, once again, to serfdom. 2

In China, Thailand, Guam, Africa and all over the globe multi-national corporations are locking in workers for excessively-long shifts, with little or no pay. Human trafficking in workers, slave or forced labor, is on the rise world-wide in every imaginable  industry including my favorite – chocolate. 3

What is the connection here? It is that human beings seek power over their own lives. Money is power, so they seek money. The reason taxes are a big deal to both Tea Party Republicans and Liberal Progressives, The US Chamber of Commerce and the churches, Wall Street banks and non-profit organizations, Democratic and Republican parties, the upper class-middle class- and poor is because money buys power. Money bought the King. Money bought the Corporations. Money bought the politicians. We all want money because we all value power. Why? Power brings freedom: the freedom from want, the freedom of choice over need, the freedom of association, the freedom to say no just because we want to do so. If we truly believe we are all entitled to be free, then we must also believe we are all entitled to enough money to feel power over our own lives.

When we are without money for too long we feel powerless as a result. It is this feeling of being powerless which brings out our racism, sexism, homophobia etc. Those who feel powerless resent others who seem to be acquiring power. Hidden in our psyche is the racist belief that an African-American has no business being so powerful when white men now feel so powerless. That is the crux of this election. Even Roman Catholic bishops, losing esteem and power over their flocks due to their misogynist attitude toward women and their cover-up of pedophilia within their ranks are fighting for power by attacking President Obama. Even Christian church leaders accustomed to financial power and preaching its attainment as a Gospel truth, which fell apart in the recession, are attacking President Obama. They have no qualms viciously attacking him, trying to knock him off his game. Unfortunately, his game is governing this country we all love.

What can we do? We can stop attacking people who want power, who want money, who want to feel safe; who cannot feel truly free without these things. We all want these things. We all want freedom.

We can stop attacking each other lest we all end up “Humpty Dumpty”. 4  Despite British and American love of freedom, and each country’s Civil Wars to establish equality among all its citizens and clearly unified governance, neither would suggest civil war as a positive step. We can learn from these past divisive periods. History does not have to repeat itself around the globe, nor within our own borders. We can stop being so afraid that we needlessly try to knock one another off the wall. We can recognize that there is enough wealth to share so that all feel powerful and free.

We celebrate freedom in this country without understanding its roots. No banker, no corporate executive, no shareholder, no priest nor bishop, no Tea Bagger, no liberal, no politician, no judge, no citizen will feel free until they feel financially secure. This was the beauty of a strong middle class; it made everyone feel free. It was an imaginable state of being for the poorest citizen aspiring to move higher through education and hard work; and for the richest executive who fell from grace, a safe place to land. Without a middle class, no American feels free.Not the wealthiest, not the poorest, and not the middle class.

To America and to the world a message of freedom: Build and protect the common man’s wealth, the middle class. The BRITISH COMMONWEALTH is a not a fluke. American economic success since the Civil War is not a fluke. Stop seeking to be excessively wealthy; instead, seek to build wealth within the middle class, a commonwealth within and among nations. With commonwealth comes common power. With such a sense of power comes a sense of freedom and peace. The Eurozone is struggling with this concept as I write.

Look at what Britain accomplished. Look at what the U.S. accomplished. Those lessons will serve us well. this is what President Obama has been trying to remind us.  Destroying the middle class destroys our commonwealth, pushes Humpty Dumpty off the wall; and, neither all the king’s horses nor all the king’s men can put us back together again. Life is too fragile for such nonsense.

 

 

1. http://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1981/2/81.02.06.x.html

2.http://www.alecexposed.org/wiki/ALEC_Exposed 

3.http://www1.american.edu/ted/chocolate-slave.htm “Presently, about 700,000 children and women are trafficked around the world annually. The UN says that profits for this trafficking amount to approximately $7 billion a year (Anti-Slavery International).”

4.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humpty_Dumpty  “In 1648 Colchester was a walled town with a castle and several churches and was protected by the city wall. The story given was that a large cannon, which the website claimed was colloquially called Humpty Dumpty, was strategically placed on the wall. A shot from a Parliamentary cannon succeeded in damaging the wall beneath Humpty Dumpty which caused the cannon to tumble to the ground. The Royalists, or Cavaliers, ‘all the King’s men’ attempted to raise Humpty Dumpty on to another part of the wall, but because the cannon was so heavy ‘All the King’s horses and all the King’s men couldn’t put Humpty together again’. In his 2008 book Pop Goes the Weasel: The Secret Meanings of Nursery Rhymes author Albert Jack claimed that there were two other verses supporting this claim. Elsewhere he claimed to have found them in an “old dusty library, [in] an even older book”,but did not state what the book was or where it was found. It has been pointed out that the two additional verses are not in the style of the seventeenth century, or the existing rhyme, and that they do not fit with the earliest printed version of the rhyme, which do not mention horses and men.”

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

June 21, 2012 · 3:26 pm

IT'S THE NRA, NOT ATTORNEY GENERAL HOLDER WHO SHOULD BE CALLED TO ACCOUNT

IT’S THE NRA, NOT ATTORNEY GENERAL HOLDER WHO SHOULD BE CALLED TO ACCOUNT

louise Annarino

June 21, 2012

Yesterday, The House Oversight Committee chaired by Rep. Darrell Issa (R- CA) voted along party lines 23/17 to hold United States Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of congress despite a claim of executive deliberative process privilege by President Barack Obama to protect the unwarranted disclosure of additional documents sought by Issa and committee republicans. This executive privilege applies to a president’s executive branch officials such as Attorney General Holder. It is intended to protect strategies and procedures from falling into the hands of those who would harm the nation’s security. In this case, the documents in question are part of on-going criminal investigations, and contain strategies which would aid and abet those seeking to evade the long arm of justice by the Department of Justice, even as it is pursuing them. As a retired attorney and former Ohio assistant attorney general, I understand and applaud Holder for honoring his oath to uphold and defend the law despite the slur upon his character by Mr. Issa and the Republican leadership. The president is absolutely correct to exert executive privilege in this matter.

Mr. Issa is more interested in blaming the outcome of “Fast and Furious” on President Obama through attacks on Attorney General Holder, and dragging the president into the middle of the issue by forcing him to use executive privilege, than in bringing those at fault to justice. No one form the Bush era has been called to testify or answer his committee’s questions.Issa understands exactly why the president would use the privilege. Issa himself approved such a use for republican presidents in a 2008 hearing where he defended the right of Bush EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson not to answer committee questions.

One must admit it is a brilliant election year strategy, the usual attack where your opponent is strongest and lie to destroy all the praise he rightly deserves. Adhering to his promise to increase transparency, this is the president’s first use of executive privilege. A spokesperson for House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) quickly attacked: “The White House decision to invoke executive privilege implies that White House officials were either involved in the ‘Fast and Furious’ operation or the cover-up that followed. The administration has always insisted that wasn’t the case. were they lying,or are they now bending the law to hide the truth?”

It is also strange that Rep. Issa’s rationale for such dogged pursuit of Mr. Holder is the death of a border agent with a legally purchased and transported gun. Months ago, in his opening statements before the committee, Issa opined that gun control, not crime control is the Obama administration’s real objective. Is the NRA gunning for the two African Americans: Obama and Holder?

Pay attention to the tone. Republicans did everything but call Mr. Holder “boy” during his appearances before the committee. It was painful to watch such an accomplished professional racially demeaned in public view. Pay attention to the timing. Neither the NRA nor Issa, Nor Boehner, nor any Republican called for the resignation of anyone in the Bush administration which first orchestrated “ Fast and Furious”. This is not about executive privilege. This is not about ‘Fast and Furious”. This is not about the death of a border agent. This is about the NRA’s lobbying efforts to block gun control efforts. http://nraila.org/media/7733622/cc-letter-to-issa.pdf In his interview with NRA News Issa agrees with NRA’s Wayne La Pierre call that Holder should be resign. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3IF_I4lGl9A  The irony is that the Obama administration has not legislated stiffer gun control, to the dismay of law enforcement, big-city mayors, and citizens injured and killed by unregulated guns.

Below is an article worth reading with 5 more things you should know about the witch hunt against Attorney General Holder and President Obama.

From ThinkProgress:

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/06/13/498521/five-things-to-know-about-the-house-oversight-chairs-witchhunt-against-attorney-general-holder/

Five Things To Know About The Republican Witchhunt Against Attorney General Holder
By Ian Millhiser on Jun 13, 2012 at 9:00 am

In 2006, during the presidency of George W. Bush, the Justice Department launched the first of a series of misguided “gunrunning” schemes that eventually led to the death of federal Agent Brian Terry. Rather than look to ways to prevent such a tragedy from happening again, however, House Oversight Chair Darrell Issa’s (R-CA) spent his tenure as a committee chair trying unsuccessfully to embarrass Attorney General Eric Holder.

Next week, Issa plans to escalate this witchhunt by holding an committee vote on a resolution to hold the Attorney General in contempt of Congress. Here’s what you need to know about this vote:

1. Issa Has No Case: Issa’s uncovered no evidence showing Holder bears any blame for the botched operations begun under George W. Bush, even though the Justice Department turned over thousands of pages of documents concerning the operations. Instead of accepting this fact, Issa has requested many more documents containing confidential information regarding ongoing law enforcement investigations, and is now threatening to hold Holder in contempt if these documents are not turned over. Holder is entirely correct to withhold these documents, however, because Justice Department documents are not subject to congressional subpoena if they would reveal “strategies and procedures that could be used by individuals seeking to evade [DOJ’s] law enforcement efforts.”

2. Reagan’s Justice Department Agreed With Holder: President Reagan’s Justice Department warned in the 1980s that the Constitution’s separation of powers prevents the kind of documents Issa is seeking from being revealed to Congress because of the risk that the legislature could “exert pressure or attempt to influence the prosecution of criminal cases.”

3. Law Enforcement Rejects Issa’s Witchhunt: Issa’s efforts to embarrass Holder are an unnecessary distraction that hinders the Department of Justice’s ability to do its real job. As an organization representing numerous senior law enforcement officials warned Issa, his efforts are “an impediment to the vigorous enforcement of violence and crime.”

4. Even Top Republicans Think Issa Goes Too Far: After Issa leaked his plans to pursue contempt charges to the media, the House Republican leadership pressured him to back off. Indeed, even House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) has indicated that Issa is overreaching.

5. Issa Is Fixated On A Conspiracy Theory: Perhaps the most bizarre aspect of this affair is what Issa once suggested his investigation will uncover. In an interview with Sean Hannity, Issa claimed that the Obama administration “made a crisis” when they continued the Bush-era gunrunning operations because they wanted to “us[e] this crisis to somehow take away or limit people’s Second Amendment rights.” This accusation originates from a former militiaman who supports violent resistance to imagined government attempts to seize his guns. And it amounts to an accusation that a series of botched gun stings that begun during the Bush Administration were actually part of a secret Obama plot to release guns to Mexican drug lords, so that those guns could then be used to kill federal agents, which would then cause a national uprising in support of gun control.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

June 12, 2012 · 8:27 pm

DADDY

A break from global politics to family politics today. I was one of the fortunate kids with a good father. I often think of what he would say about the world today. It is really not so different from the one he first deciphered with me. He was a strong Republican;on the local Republican Central Committee. One of his best friends since childhood was Rep. John Ashbrook, a very conservative Republican. Another childhood friend he remained close to his entire life was the Chairman of the Ohio Democratic Party. This openness to diverse political thought worked just fine back in Dad’s day. Dad was a die-hard republican but he could listen to another point of view. He would make jokes about the other guy “talking like a guy with a paper hat”; but, he would later affirm the “guy might have something there”. He always told me to find a union job which would offer the greatest job security, protection, and best work environment. He was self-employed and could not imagine working for anyone else without a union. Today, his party is intent on destroying unions. Times have changed. I don’t know if dad would have changed to fit the party but I doubt it. He would have told his party it was “talking like a man with a paper hat”. I still don’t know the origins of that phrase,but I get its meaning.

It was understood and Dad imparted to me that all politicians, and all attorneys, are “crooks”; always have their hands out for a donation, or in your pocket for taxes. He told me whenever another’s behavior confused me to “follow the money” and all would be made clear. Still, politics was the core of the community and important stuff according to Dad. He suggested I attend both the Teenage Republicans and Teenage Democrats,both led by friends of his, to see how each party  operated. He encouraged me to visit Congressman Ashbrook when he held week-end office hours at the  Licking County court house and confront his support for Rhodesia even though it practiced apartheid. He knew his friend would deal with the concerns of a fledgling Democrat as equally important to the concerns of a Republican constituent.

In his later years, as he saw the benefit of Democrtically supported programs such as PELL grants, equal pay for women, voting rights, Title VII and Title IX, social security, medicare, disability benefits, unemployment compensation etc.his view of political theory mellowed. His view of politicians did not. He thought the crook Nixon deserved what he got, thought Reagan behaved wrongly and owed the nation an apology for the Iran-Contra Affair, thought Bill Clinton was a sleazy womanizer (most men in power are) but not deserving of  impeachment. By today’s standards he would be a liberal Republican and that description would absolutely enrage him. He prided himself on his conservatism, and voted for John Kennedy, even though “his old man made his money as a bootlegger”. He never asked anyone except the VA for anything. His first reaction to any liberal suggestion was opposition until we discussed it more fully and he could then see some value in the program or policy. Like most hard working small business owners, he had little spare time to research anything on his own, but was willing to learn and change when facts were brought to his attention. He was not an ideologue. He was man who believed most persons could make it on their own.

He also acknowledged some could not. Quietly, anonymously, he helped those people. Sometimes, he thought he could do it better than government. Most other times, he acknowledged government could do it better. He understood the benefits and limitations of government. He held government accountable. That is a true conservative.

We seldom agreed on political theory, and seldom disagreed in political practice. Most moderates are like that. They can see the good in both sides, and the bad in both sides. They want what works for the country. How I miss my dad, those old style Republicans, those moderate voices of reason who could laugh, live, love and work together with Democrats.

On this Fathers’ Day I hope you will recall your own father kindly, if he is no longer with you. And, if he is, let him know how much his wise counsel has meant to you. If we can’t find common ground with our own fathers, how can we hope to find common ground with anyone? There are those who will try to stop an approachment, who do not want Republicans and Democrats to find common ground with one another. Such Tea Party types like “a good fight” better than peacemaking. Ignore them. Have a happy  Fathers’ Day. I’ll be thinking of my conservative, Republican dad. I share my poem with you below:

DADDY

Louise Annarino

Fathers’ Day 2012

Those laughing eyes

and strong hands

which fashioned safety

from the strands

of life

which too often looked

like a cage

but was nothing more

than a ladder

one could climb

on his lap

where every problem

could be left

in his care

so all consuming

which too often felt

like loss of self

but was nothing more

than a cushion

against hard knocks

he absorbed

with his own body

to protect

his children with

a father’s love.

1 Comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , , , , ,

June 11, 2012 · 2:40 pm

A DAY WITH DAD: ECONOMIC LESSONS OF THE WORKING CLASS

A Day With Dad: Economic Lessons of the Working Class

Louise Annarino

June 11, 2012

 

Feet on the hassock, legs crossed at the ankle, lit pipe dangling over his left lower lip, Angelo lay back against the chair and closed his eyes, hoping the children would give him two minutes to rest.

 

“You shouldn’t sleep while smoking,” chided  5 year old Louise.

 

“I’m just resting my eyes,” her Dad responded with a sigh.

 

It was his questioning child who sat on the floor at his feet, the one who was never satisfied with a simple answer; who always followed each answer he gave with the question, “But why?”. He slowly opened his eyes and stared into his daughter’s questioning gaze. “What did you want?”, he asked.

 

“Can I have a horse?”

 

“No.”

 

“Why not?”

 

“Horses need a lot of room to run. We don’t have enough property for a horse.”

 

“Why not?”

 

“We can’t afford a farm; we can’t even buy this house. And even if we could it would not be large enough for a horse.”

 

“Why can’t we buy a farm?”

 

“We don’t have enough money.”

 

“How do we get money?”

 

“You think money grows on trees; we have to work for it.”

 

“Can we work more so we can get more money?”

 

“I already work 14-16 hour days 7 days a week. I can’t work any more than I already do.”

 

 

“Oh. Well, if you work so hard why don’t you have enough to buy a house?”

 

“Because it takes money to make money, and we started our business with very little money.’

 

“Can I work?”

 

“No, you are too young.”

 

“If I can’t get money, then how can I make more money?”

 

“You can’t.”

 

“But, why not?”

 

“Ask the rich people.”

 

“How did they get rich?”

 

“They dad’s or grandads stole it from someone else, starting with the Indians, and used it to make more money.”

 

“It’s wrong to steal, isn’t it?”

 

“Yes.”

 

“Why don’t rich people share their money so everyone can make more money? Then, no one would be poor.”

 

“Rich people never share anything. They don’t even pay their bills. I would rather cater a wedding for a poor man than a rich one. Poor people pay me right away. The rich people complain about every little thing and try to avoid paying the full bill. They delay,delay,delay. Some of them have never paid me.”

 

“But, why not?”

 

“They think they are entitled to my hard work;that they are better than us.”

 

“Why?”

 

“Because we are working stiffs.”

 

“Why?”

 

“Because we were poor.”

 

“Why?”

 

“Because.”

 

“But, why because.”

 

 

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , , , ,

June 10, 2012 · 8:42 pm

SO HE'S NOT PERFECT

SO, HE’S NOT PERFECT

Louise Annarino

June 8, 2012

I have been asked on more than a few occasions, by Democrats, Republicans, Independents and Rand supporters if there is anything I don’t like about President Obama. The question is a legitimate one since I remain so supportive of our current president, willingly and strongly oppose any attack upon his presidency or personhood, and encourage others to support him at every opportunity that one might consider my approval of the president too good to be true.

Supporting Obama, or any candidate for that matter, does not mean that one approves his every move, agrees with every position, or does not cringe upon occasion. It does not mean one is unable to assess with reason and wisdom Obama’s actions, or failure to act. It does not mean one does not appreciate certain positions of opposition candidates, nor of the opposition party. There are things I appreciate about every political party. I am seldom 100% happy with any of them.

We are all human. The Tower of Babel fell thousands of years ago and we have had trouble communicating with one another ever since. Of course we experience mistrust, tension and fear of one another. We are destined to disagree with one another. How do we overcome this? How do we not become cynical? How do we build a future in such a confusing world where people behave so contrarian? How do we remain supportive of one another? How do we move forward?

We move forward as President Obama has shown us: by simply putting one foot in front of the other and doing the best we can with what we have to work with. That is what a pragmatist does. Ideologues rant and rave, whine and tear up, demean and distort, and poke their fingers in another’s face. The pragmatist keeps on “keeping on”. While the moaners and groaners fall behind, the pragmatist moves forward. He never gives up. When he reaches a brick wall, he climbs over it, digs under it, or goes around it; but, he keeps moving. I recognize this trait in president Barack Obama because it is one of my own.

Some say President Obama and I are stubborn. Maybe so. I just know giving up on the goal is not an option; letting go of the plan, however, is often necessary and wise. We don’t always produce what we hoped for, but we keep producing. We don’t always reach the goals we sought, but we move closer. My writing is not always the best. I keep writing; and, leave to the Creator, the rest. Like President Obama, writers need thick skins. They offer themselves to the public, expecting  little but negative feedback.

Like President Obama, writers can take constructive criticism. Here is a list of criticisms of the man I fully support:

1.  Afghanistan – Leave ASAP or sooner.

2.  We need universal health care – medicare for all- single payer plan.

3.  Immigration – Dream Act immediately/prioritize unification of families over deportation/better quota system. Rein in ICE.

4.  Stop referring to Congress as the problem – Republicans in House and Republicans in Senate are obstructionists;not your own party. the vote statistics tell the tale. Use the data. Be clear and specific as to who is obstructing your efforts; Name names.

5.  Insist on Stimulus: explain that government must lead the recovery and why.

6.  Demand more proactive Justice Department – voting rights, civil rights, wall street fraud and collusion. Go after those who sank our economy with fraudulent schemes, including the “best bankers” in the country.

7.  More fireside chats for all, fewer rallies for supporters.

8.  Walk with Labor- we missed your promised leadership in Wisconsin.

9.  Rehire government workers – regular salary increases and no furloughs.

  1. You lead and let Republicans attack and show their true colors. Better to fight and lose, than to accede to wrong policies and principles.
  2. No more back-room deals with ANYBODY.

I wake up every day happy to know Barack Obama leads this country. I don’t believe anyone could do better than he has done with so little to work with and with such oppositional behavior by members of both parties; and despite Republican party obstructionism intended solely to destroy his presidency. Like other African-Americans before him, he has been measured against untenable standards to which white men are not held. He has faced daily racial assaults;some openly racist, most covert, and some subliminal even to the perpetrator. The intent of the Republican leadership is not simply to win the 2012 election, but to create such a negative and powerless image of an African-American presidency that we won’t soon elect another person of color. It is not simply about this election;it is about our racial history.

I could not be prouder of the way President and Ms. Obama face such long odds in our racially charged society, and overcome them. I am certain few, and certainly none of the current crop of, candidates could ever come close to their interpersonal and leadership skills. Politics is dirty business, and no politician can lead without getting muddy. But President Obama is open about this, admits his failures, remains transparent in his undertakings and asks us to hold him accountable. This is why I am voting for President Obama. He is not always able to make me perfectly happy;  but then, who could? Not Mr. Romney. Not Mr. Paul. He’s not perfect, and neither am I. None of us is.

1 Comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as ,

June 8, 2012 · 7:51 am

RUNNING TO CATCH UP: A Fathers' Day Tribute

RUNNING TO CATCH UP

Louise Annarino

May 29, 2012

 

My first memories of my father are the most precious, foreshadowing our life-long relationship. My five feet four inch giant, happy-go-lucky father would scoop me up with both arms, lift me high with legs dangling, then tuck me into the crook of his right arm, both of us chuckling madly at our good fortune. I was just learning to toddle and could not keep up with my parents and three year old brother whose hand Mom kept in a firm grasp. As I got a older, it was Dad who held my hand, as Mom gripped the hands of both my older and younger brothers. They seemed a world apart from me and Dad. While Mom was intent on teaching the boys to walk like little gentlemen at her side, Dad and I were off on a merry jaunt.

 

While Dad loped along with an easy gait, my short legs scissored so fast to keep the pace I would trip. Up I went into Dad’s arms. He never slowed down, nor stopped grinning at me as if we held some grand secret, even as Mom chided him to slow down and let me walk! I can still see his discomfort trying to arrange the frilly dress and crinolines layered over his arm, while Mom rolled her eyes at him. He loved to make Mom roll her eyes. He would reward her with a kiss and a laugh.

 

Dad’s cousins had warned her before they married “Angelo is ornery.” Mom liked ornery. We all liked ornery. Dad worked long hours with his brothers John, Joe, and Frank and cousin Johnny “Dayton” running an Italian-American restaurant. Every other week, it was his turn to be home between 5 and 7 pm before returning to stay later to close. That meant we could have our supper all together.  We would fight over who got to sit next to Dad. Mom joked, only because she knew we could never afford a new one,she would soon buy a table with a hole in the center for Dad to sit in so we would each be near him. 

 

Dad could draw the best cartoons and funny pictures, but he could not spell worth a darn. His notes to school would read, “please excuse Lousie from class as she had a sure throat and we had to keep her home.” “Lousie? Dad, you called me lousie! Sure throat?” I would protest. “Sister knows who you are,”answered Dad. “Don’t worry. Nobody’s perfect. It will give her a good laugh! She needs one.” She did. Most teaching sisters did need a good laugh. Most Moms, too. Dad kept them all laughing. 

 

Mom could never threaten us with “Wait ‘til your Dad gets home.” Dad usually thought our daily shenanigans great fun. He would try very hard to keep a straight face as he berated us for some activity my Mother thought out of bounds. Then he would relate some of the trouble he got himself into as a kid, “one-upping” us every time.No one held their breath over Dad’s discipline. 

 

It was Mom who chased us through the house with a wooden spoon to smack our behinds. She could not run very fast, she seldom got close enough to connect spoon to backside. Her aim was awful, too! Faking her frustration at her failure to get us, she would crack that spoon over the telephone bench so hard it broke in half. “Next time,” she would threaten, “when I buy a stronger spoon!” It took years, and many broken spoons, to realize Mom had had no intention of catching us.

 

The only time silence and tears welled up in us over Dad’s discipline style was when he took off his belt and ordered my older brother into the bathroom for a whipping, with Mom’s full support. I remember sitting at the table, looking at the faces of my younger brothers, our eyes open wide in fear, as the sound of the belt connecting was followed by Angelo,Jr.‘s tearful screams. As both Angelos rejoined a now solemn group of children at the table, my brother would be wiping the moisture from his face, his and dad’s eyes downcast, faces blushed in humiliation. We were the best-behaved kids on the block for at least the next twenty-four hours, an eternity to us. 

 

It was not until one Thanksgiving at that same table, thirty years later that we learned the dirty little secret about Dad and Angelo. Taking his tight belt off so he could eat a second helping of Mom’s lasagna (yes,we had turkey and lasagna),we started a discussion about other instances where Dad had to take off his belt. The Angelos finally confessed that Dad would hit the clothes hamper with his belt instructing Angelo to fake screams. Before leaving the bathroom, Angelo would splash water on his face to create false tears. Both kept their eyes downcast when they rejoined the table to stop the laughter they each held back, blushing with the effort. All those years we had wondered why only Angelo ever got the belt.

 

Mrs. Rowe lived on the huge lot behind us which stretched from the side street all the way to the alley. Neighborhood kids played baseball there until she called “Kreager”, the truant officer, to report our trespassing. Kreager would tell Dad, stopping in for a drink at the restaurant before he headed down to the south-end to clear us out, so Mom could get everyone out of Mrs. Rowe’s yard before Kreager showed up. This seemed to make everyone happy for the moment and no one had to worry about going to juvenile hall for playing baseball in Mrs. Rowe’s yard. I once hid in the bushes along the alley edging her property and overheard Mrs. Rowe chastise him for being so slow in responding to her calls. She desperately wanted him to catch the “juvenile delinquents” in the act. Kreager answered her that she should be glad we wanted to play in her yard. Our poor neighborhood had no playgrounds, no place for kids to be kids. She should “do her part” and let us have a place to play so we did “not become juvenile delinquents,” he told her. In such overheard conversations are great truths revealed to children.

 

Mrs. Rowe had an ancient and fertile apple tree in her yard, just over the wall between us but not within reach of our short arms. The tree produced sweet,firm yellow-green apples on limbs far above our heads. The ground apples were fine for Mom to make applesauce, but not for eating. We stood slightly out from under the tree hurling the fallen apples, knocking the good apples to the ground where we would gather them up. Mrs. Rowe was no happier with chucking apple-pickers than with ball players. She informed us “I don’t want you kids in my yard knocking apples out of the tree. You can have any apple you find on the ground, but do not stand in my yard and throw apples at the tree.” This was no bother for Mom but left us dissatisfied until we got the bright idea to use the clothes-line pole to extend our reach. 

 

We still had to find a way to reach those apples without standing in Mrs. Rowe’s yard, focusing on the stand in my yard part of her reproach. So, I stood on our wall and swung the pole out toward the tree, while my brothers waited below. Swinging the pole didn’t knock down a single apple but invariably knocked me off the wall. We gave up. The boys went off to play near the railroad tracks. 

 

I went inside surprised to find Dad asleep in his chair on a rare afternoon break, while Mom fixed dinner. I awoke Dad and asked for his help outside. He came without question, still half-asleep. I placed him on the wall and handed him the pole, instructing him to start swinging the pole at the apple tree as soon as I climbed over the wall into Mrs. Rowe’s yard. I forgot to tell him about listening for the squeaky door hinge which would tip him off that Mrs. Rowe was about to discover us. That loud hinge gave me just enough time to hide in the bushes. Thus, when Mrs. Rowe came around the corner off her porch all she found was Dad, standing on the wall, swinging the laundry pole, apples flying out of her tree. “Mr. Annarino! No wonder your children are such delinquents. Shame on you.”

 

I waited unti
l Mom called us all in for dinner, expecting a stern lecture or worse from Dad. Instead, as soon as he saw me Dad started laughing out loud asking, “Where on earth did you get to so fast? How did you know to run?” He thought it one of my best pranks, ever.  But, he admonished, it was one we could never repeat. With Dad,everything that happened in life was a cause for joy; and,learning life’s lessons was always fun.

 

Dad, Mom, Mr.Kreager, Mrs. Rowe – each of them so far ahead of us, with so much to teach us simply by being themselves. Each of them loving us and expecting us to grow into respectful and respected adults. But, it is Dad’s lessons and laughter I hold dearest. His ability to see the absurdity of rules, his ability to avoid the ordinariness of daily living by adding his own creative spark, his willingness to risk the haughty stares of others for a bit of good fun made every day a delight for us. We had no wealth, but we ate well. We never took vacations, but were always on vacation from disquiet and poverty. We worked hard within the harsh reality of the working poor, but we laughed harder than the seriously wealthy. Dad was a man on the go his entire life. He has been gone over 12 years. I am still running to catch up.

 

Happy Fathers’ Day from a daddy’s girl.

 

 

 

1 Comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as ,