Category Archives: POLITICS

March 13, 2012 · 12:41 am

WALKING WITH ANGELA: DAY 2

WALKING WITH ANGELA: DAY 2

Louise Annarino

March 12, 2012

We were walking home from the library; a visit to the library a daily event. My mother Angela would allow me to roam the library for books to read to myself, as she read to my younger brother. We bundled into our heavy sweaters and stuffed our check-out books into the pouch on the back of the stroller,tucked a blanket around my brother Michael and headed home. I had been disappointed that my 6 year old older brother Angelo was able to go to school, but I would have to wait until I was older. The library visit was one way to appease my hunger for knowledge.

The library was a magnificent and, to me, magical building of brick and granite, with Doric columns and huge multi-paned windows. The architecture became less impressive as we walked to the South-End, under the railroad trestle, to the house my Great-Grandfather had built from used materials. The wood was so old and dense that it was nearly impossible to hammer a nail in the wall. Holding onto the handle of the stroller, chatting with Mom, noting the changing demographic markers from rich to poor as we walked home, I asked Mom, “Are we poor?”

“No”, she said, “I have been poor and we are not poor. We have plenty of food to eat. You have your own bed with blankets to warm you. You have dolls to play with and books to read. There will always be someone with less than you, and others with more. Never compare yourself to anyone else.”

“Well, I don’t see why we don’t put all the money in the world into one big pile and just let everyone take their share. Then, no one would be poor,” I offered.

“Oh yes, they would,” Mom replied. “Some people would grab more than they should. Others would not be fast enough to pull out their share. Some would spend their money foolishly and end up with nothing. Others would steal from people or trick them into giving up their money. And, we would end up right back where we started.”

Well, that was an education in economics I was not happy to learn. But, Mom was right, as usual. She told me to work hard, study hard, and not waste my money on cheap clothes, nor useless items. And to “NEVER follow a fad.” She said that fads made people spend money on things that were poorly made, not meant to last, and easily discarded. In other words, a total waste.

Politics, as well as other arenas of American cultural activity, has become a fad for too many Americans. They are “dittoe-heads” who watch hate mongers for entertainment. They don’t take the time to search for lasting solutions, for policies which are “well made” and fit the needs of the country’s long-term economic growth. Unexciting but sound ideas make poor “sound bites”. They look for cheap fixes such as denying women contraceptive health care.They would end the Affordable Care Act, instead of improving it as single-payer health care, which is the most cost-effective health care delivery system. They deny LGBT community its civil rights. They tell immigrants to “self-deport”. They love the latest fad constructed by Karl Rove or the Tea Party.

The voters follow the fads of wall street and hedge fund investors, and commodities and oil traders; instead of regulating their activities, and despite the fact their un-regulated trades and investments brought this country to near-bankruptcy.

The approval rating of  President Obama rises and falls with gas prices, despite the fact he has increased US oil production to an all-time high, his policies have reduced the demand for oil, and he has expanded the development and use of alternative energy sources. Oh, and while he was doing all this, he saved the entire world from a second “great depression”. His administration is not a fad.

Thanks to Angela, I never follow fads. I look for sound economic policies with lasting impact. I am voting for President Obama.

Those who refuse any support for President Obama’s economic policies should have taken a walk with Angela.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

March 9, 2012 · 5:44 pm

WALKING WITH ANGELA: DAY 1

WALKING WITH ANGELA: DAY 1

Louise Annarino

March 9, 2012

 

We were walking home from Van’s market, just around the corner from our house. We had gone to buy a loaf of bread to make toast for breakfast, my older brother still asleep at home. The sun had not risen far this summer morning, the air still cool. I was only 4 years old, too young to run the errand on my own. Thus, I was skipping alongside my mother Angela, dodging the globs of shade cast by the sun trying to find its way through the dark leaves of the maple trees along our route. The contrast of the darkness and the light, ever moving, often capturing my dodging feet, raised a question which I posed to my mother, “Why are some people white and some people black?”.

 

Taking my hand in hers, Angela responded “God does not want us to be bored. If we all looked alike life would be very boring. He made some people tall, some short, some thin, some fat, some with red hair, some with blonde hair, blue-eyed and brown-eyed…and some white, some black. Aren’t you glad He did that?”

 

I nodded yes, “like a box of crayons, right?”

 

“What do you mean?” she asked. She wanted to be certain I understood.

 

“I have more fun coloring with a box of 64 crayons than the 8 crayon box,” I answered.

 

“Yes,” she smiled down at me, “Just like that!”.

 

And now, I understood the power and beauty of diversity; and the wisdom of a God who shared his many images within each of us.

 

Sean Hannity has been playing part of an early video of young Harvard law student who would one day become the 1st. African-American president of the United States, Barak Obama. Young student Obama was speaking as a class leader before his peers, of all colors. They had been gathering for months pleading for a more diverse faculty; a faculty lacking any African-American women, any Latino men or women. He spoke after one of 3 African-American male faculty members, took an unpaid leave in support of the students’ efforts. The students were grateful for his support.

 

Hannity’s clip simply shows young Obama’s comments commending Professor Bell as proof of President Obama’s divisive outlook and support of radicals. Hannity does not understand that diversity does not equal divisiveness; it equals inclusion. It is no more radical than liking more variety in one’s crayons.He has it exactly backwards. He does not know he should be dodging the dark side of the leaves; and, instead, dance in the light shining through the trees.

 

He should have taken a few walks with Angela.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

March 9, 2012 · 3:03 pm

FEAR AND LOATHING: A Tribute to Rush Limbaugh

FEAR AND LOATHING: A Tribute to Rush Limbaugh

Louise Annarino

March 9, 2012

 

Have you ever been sexually assaulted? Have you had a man put his hand up your skirt an drag you along by pulling on your pubic bone? Have you been walking along campus with 2 friends and been pulled away and thrown to the ground by a group of young men; your friends escaping while you were held down kicking and screaming as 3 of the 6 men tried to rape you? Have you been stopped at a red light when a man runs up and jumps into your car and reaches for you, running the light at top speed to dislodge him from your front seat? Have you been cornered, shoved and punched by a man when you were alone doing research in the library stacks? Have you been hunted down like prey until you were running through the streets walking home from the law library at 3 a.m. where you had been preparing for moot court the next day; saved by a neighborhood dog who attacked the man so you could reach your apartment door? Have you been warned by a judge that your client’s husband is asking how to find you, has a gun, and is threatening to rape or kill you? Have you been called a “f…ing bitch” by a defendant whose deposition you are taking? Do you carry the photo of a rapist in your purse and look at it daily to memorize his face because prison officials and police have warned you his letters threatening to rape and kill you upon his release from prison are deadly serious? No? well, I have. The climate of hate against women is strong; and Rush Limbaugh increases its strength every day.

 

To all those who describe his most recent verbal attacks against specific women as a matter of “free speech”, you are dead/rape wrong. I am a writer, a teacher, a lawyer. Words are my trade. Free speech is the love of my life. What Rush has done is NOT protected by the U.S. Constitution. Assault “placing another in fear of bodily harm” is not protected speech. It is a crime. Mr. Limbaugh has placed Ms. Fluke and American women under threat of bodily harm. Those of us who have experienced the results of misogyny, are well aware that sexual attacks are not based on lust, but on anger, anger directed against women. People like Rush Limbaugh use women as targets for anger because they see us as “the weaker sex”, easy victims. Rush stoked that anger for several days, and continues to do so despite an apology for 2 words. He has not apologized for stoking hatred against and causing fear in women. He has given people license to attack, threaten, rape and even kill women. For years he has done so, in a more general way, using words to describe strong women who defy his perception of what a woman should be like (weak and easy to manipulate) as “feminazis”. But, in this case he has directed his threat at a very specific woman; lying about her to make her weaker and easier to victimize. His followers have taken up his cause. Even Barbara Walters tells us to “just change the channel” because people could come after her and those on THE VIEW. Really? Rush Limbaugh’s behavior is nothing like what Ed Schultz, Bill Maher, Roland Martin, or Keith Olbermann were disciplined for. Too strong for you? Read my 1st paragraph.

 

Am I sensitive? Of course, and you should be also. you should be sensitive for the sakes of your daughters, grand-daughters, wives and girlfriends, mothers and sisters, cousins and aunts, even your grandmother. Most disturbing to me are the women who defend Rush Limbaugh. I can understand that men may not feel the fear of a Rush-triggered assault; but, women? Thank Goodness we have a president with empathy who can cross the divide between men and women, as he crosses so many divides in this country. For his daughters and his wife, he tried to ease the fear and the pain Rush Limbaugh caused Ms. Fluke. He understood that Rush assaulted her and all women when he asked Ms. Fluke, “Are you OK?”

 

I have shared my fear and disgust, hoping that when you listen or participate in a discussion of free speech and Rush Limbaugh you will feel what I and millions of women feel…utter disgust that our lives are held so cheaply! But not by President Obama; never by President Obama.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , , , , ,

March 8, 2012 · 12:11 pm

RICH OR POOR, WE EACH WANT MORE

RICH OR POOR, WE EACH WANT MORE

Louise Annarino

March 8, 2012

 

When I attended the University of Cincinnati College of Law 1st year law students were not permitted to work; they had to devote full time to their studies. The Assoc. Dean granted me “special permission” to work. It was the only way I could afford to pay tuition,rent etc. Books were not a problem. I simply bought them as soon as they appeared on the shelves, read them within the 1st ten days of classes and returned them for full refund, after outlining each chapter. One does what one must. Most students had parental or spousal help. Those whose parents were poor, who were unmarried and in debt from undergraduate school were on our own, accumulating even more debt, but rich in dreams.

 

I first worked for the university in a federally subsidized job until funds were cut off. Next I worked for the I.R.S., driving to its Kentucky warehouse, 30 minutes south of Cincinnati off I-75, for a 3p.m. to 1a.m. shift. When the shift was extended to 3 a.m. it became even more difficult to tay awake through my 8 a.m.- 1p.m. classes. One morning, as I was leaving for my Saturday 9 a.m- 3 p.m. shift, my back went into spasms after bending over to pick up a carton of yogurt for my lunch. I could not stand upright. The pain was too severe.

 

After examining me my doctor asked with whom I was so angry that I wanted to hit him. The muscles one would use to strike out at someone or something were clenched tight. I explained my landlord had warned me that he would evict me should I entertain my African-American boyfriend in the future. Since he lived in Columbus and we both worked so many hours we rarely saw one another. During his recent and first visit, I was in Kentucky working most of the time. Since my landlord lived above me (I rented the lower level of his home), he knew who my few guests were. I wanted to hit my landlord, but knew I could not. Cheap apartments within walking distance of school were nearly impossible to find, especially after the semester started. I walked upright and pain free out of the doctor’s office after, protecting himself with a large pillow, he encouraged me to hit him as hard as I could, imaging he was my landlord. Not speaking out, not striking out, against injustice and racism is harmful. It is too high a price to pay.

 

But this was not the most significant discussion I had with the doctor. When he listened to my frustrations, he asked what I thought was a strange question, “Why do you hate money?” I assured him I did not. He assured me that anyone who worked so hard as I did, with the level of education and intelligence I had, should not be poor. Therefore he explained I was avoiding becoming rich. The proverbial light bulb opened my vision into my motives and I realized he was right. Growing up, I saw how disinterested persons of wealth were in my family and my neighbors in the south side of town near the railroad tracks. I saw how the wealthiest people in town disdained my neighbors and my neighborhood. I knew first hand how difficult it was to escape poverty, as rich people grasped all they could to keep it from my grasp, doling out pennies they earned off my labor and keeping rolls of dollars for themselves. I did not want to be like them. The doctor offered a simple solution. Don’t. Get rich and give it all away. From that moment on it became a goal to give away all I could earn.

 

I no longer dislike rich people. I put aside my prejudice that day in the doctor’s office, and opened my heart to many wonderful rich people. Not all rich people are greedy. Most are kind-hearted. Most are generous with their time and money. Our cities would not be able to survive without their generosity. But the rift between rich and poor is widening and the fear each group has of the other is less easy to control. This is a situation ripe for political manipulation. We see it every day.

 

Some Democrats mistrust President Obama because he works so closely with bankers, brokers, and business leaders. Some Republicans mistrust President Obama because he works so closely with Acorn, Planned Parenthood, and the NAACP. Palestinian supporters mistrust him when he has discussions with AIPAC; and Israel’s supporters mistrust him when he holds discussions with Arab leaders. It goes on and on. The truth is, he works with everyone who offers ideas to build an America of future promise. How can any problem be solved without talking to all parties to a solution? Must we continually let our fears and prejudices impede pragmatic and lasting outcomes? Are we so blind to the interest of others that we can no longer see our own interest? That is where I once was, and it nearly brought me to my knees. The doctor was right. I needed to  speak out and fight for my interest, but without disparaging those who had already figured that out. Rich people. So, stop blaming President Obama for opening our eyes to uncomfortable truths. Poor people need rich people. Rich people need poor people. America needs each of us, working together.President Obama represents all Americans, rich and poor. He should work closely with both. Thank you Mr. President. Do not bow before the weight of our prejudice. We cannot pile that on your shoulders. We need to carry it ourselves , or discard it and stand tall, ready to solve this nation’s problems alongside you.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , , , , ,

March 7, 2012 · 2:36 pm

NO FUTURE TENSE: Post-Election Musings

NO FUTURE TENSE: Post-Election Musings

Louise Annarino

March 7,2012

In the Sicilian language, as in Arabic, there is no future tense. Imagine an America with no future tense? Impossible. So, while we mourn the loss of some campaigns and exult in the success of others, let us continue to plan for the future. The November election is only months away. The gains made yesterday in the primaries are yet to be confirmed in the general election. Stay involved. Get active. Every vote counts. Just as it takes only one ticket to win the lottery;it takes only one vote to win an election. Get every vote, one at a time. No vote is inconsequential.

Campaigns are a numbers game. It is a simple formula one plus one until the momentum of sheer numbers arouses a public whole. Then, numbers explode in a geometric progression. Which is why candidates hunger for momentum, and for an enthusiastic base. No base can get enthusiastic when numbers are low. One plus one, we move forward.

In Sicily, for 3,000 years of recorded history, the island was settled by one group after another, building upon the foundations of the people they overcame to build new settlements. Devastation and the threat of devastation cured any enthusiasm for building for the future. Sicilians simply lived in the moment, drawing joy from the basics of life; delicious food and wine, sweet music, family and village. These would survive any future loss; and, the very loss of a future.

Campaigns and elections come and go. Voters, like ancient Sicilians, have  3 choices: Wait out an election. Get involved with one side or the other and suffer the consequent joys or disappointments. Create their own political movement. In the United States we see all 3 options at play, including an amorphous and flexible joining of causes and movements. Why do we so often choose choice number 1? Why is voter turn-out so poor? Do we believe we have no future? How can this be?

Is it that when money, not candidates, wins elections the average citizen feels his or her vote does not really count? Is the middle class so overcome by Super Pacs funded by the same persons who outsourced their jobs, and stored America’s wealth in off-shore accounts that it has no future? Has the Republican plan to destroy our belief in a future which President Obama’s campaign of hope awoke by blocking his every effort to re-build the American dream succeeded?  We are not Sicilians. We are Americans. We believe in the future; and in our right and ability to influence it. The ugly hoards have descended upon our world through FOX News and in political ads. But, in America we have the power to stop their reign of terror. And, we have a president who has a clear vision of, and works every minute of every day to assure our future.

Ready to build our future? You can. You must.Some of us awoke disappointed in one or more election outcomes. Our candidate did not win? Too bad. We can be thankful for each candidate who ran, who had the courage to secure our future if we would allow it. But, that is the past. Those decisions are over. The future lies ahead. Get involved. One vote at a time until we build momentum and our future. Support President Obama. The campaign of hope in our future continues. We are Americans. We are the future.

1 Comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , , ,

March 2, 2012 · 10:18 pm

I AM A SLUT

I AM A SLUT

Louise Annarino

3-2-2012

 

Sandra Fluke, I stand with you. I am a proud “slut”. If I had a dollar for every slur against womanhood I have heard I would be a very rich woman. All women would. From my earliest memories I was aware that no one should “throw like a girl”, “cry like a girl”, or “complain” like a girl”. These comments were not simply illustrative, but derogatory. I felt such sadness hearing them, as I wondered why being a girl was “no good”; why just being “like” a girl was cause for ridicule. How much worse was it to actually “be” a girl?

 

High school taught me little was expected of me. Called into the Principle’s office one afternoon, I leaned that I would not be the class Salutorian, even though my grades were tied to the 4th. decimal place, and higher carried to the 5th decimal place, when compared with those of a male classmate. Father explained that being a young man such an accomplishment would help him in life; and, since I was a girl, it would mean nothing. It had been decided my accomplishment would not be acknowledged.

 

In law school I was chided for too much “color” in my voice, and using my body and hands to communicate during oral argument, even though I “won” the case. My male opponent was praised for gripping the podium and never changing his inflections, remaining “professional”, even though he lost the case.

 

Practicing law brought its own set of put-downs. After the first day in trial, I carried a photocopy of my Ohio License which I routinely placed in the judge’s hands as I introduced myself. The first day, as both attorneys and our clients stood before the bench,I had introduced myself to the judge stating, “Good morning, your honor, my name is Louise Annarino. I am an attorney with Columbus Legal Aid Society. This is my client Ms. X, the petitioner in this matter.”

 

The Judge responded, “Young lady, you can’t just waltz in here and represent yourself. you need an attorney.” I then reintroduced myself as the Judge an opposing counsel smirked knowingly to one another. The judge responded, “Well, little lady, you need a real attorney.” This happened two more times as those awaiting to be called for their case and their respective attorneys began laughing. My client leaned close and whispered, “Should I go get a real attorney?” We won the case, despite such outrageous treatment to my client and to me.

 

Such belittling, dissembling, sarcastic, disgruntled behavior in response to sharing power with women has got to stop. Yet, Rush Limbaugh uses his power, licensed over our airwaves, to attack women as “feminazis” and now “sluts”. Ms. Fluke did not deserve such an attack;no woman does. Mr. Limbaugh continued again today to abuse her publicly for exercising her constitutional right address congress.

 

In  July 1848, Elizabeth Cady Stanton (who kept her name when she married) wrote teh following in the “Declaration of Sentiments and Resolutions” presented at the Seneca Falls Convention:

 

“all men and women are created equal” and “are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights…” (man)”has usurped the prerogative of Jehovah himself, claiming it as his right to assign for her a sphere of action, when that belongs to her conscience and to her God.” (result?) “the establishment of an absolute tyranny over her.”

 

It is clear Rush Limbaugh and his supporters have more in common with men of 1878 than with fair-minded men and women of 2012. Sex sells in America and Rush and his ilk are using sex to sell oppression of women. This is not a new tactic.  Too often, religions and armies use sex to oppress and maintain power. Rush asked for tapes of Ms.Fluke engaging sex. He equated a stated expectation that women’s health care needs should be covered under insurance plans with asking for “paid for sex”, making Ms. Fluke a “prostitute”. He said her parents “would not be proud” of her. He called her a “slut”. Well, if she is all women are; because, all women expect to be treated equal to men in the United States of America. President Obama knows this and is fighting to protect women’s rights. And, after thanking her for speaking on behalf of women’s rights, he told Ms. Fluke in a personal phone conversation that her “parents should be proud” of her.

 

I once served briefly on a joint task force of women attorneys from across Ohio, sponsored by the Ohio Supreme Court and The Ohio State Bar Association,to address sex discrimination in Ohio’s legislation, law schools and courts. At the first meeting, I listened to the women who spearheaded the effort speak, followed by the male president of the Ohio Bar Association, and finally the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Ohio. At the close of remarks I felt myself rising to my feet unbidden to contest a comment from one of the men (I paraphrase since it has been so long ago):

 

“Be gentle with the men as you proceed, ladies. Any negative comments are very hard on the men and you don’t want to create a backlash. So take it slow as you petition for change, and be mindful of the men’s feelings.”

 

That is when I leapt to my feet announcing that it was Malcolm X’s birthday that day and  if he were alive he would remind us that, “Nobody can give you freedom. Nobody can give you equality or justice or anything. If you’re a man, you take it.”  And I added, “We women are not petitioning for freedom,equality, and justice; we are taking them. I have a hard enough time handling my own grief and anger over the injustice of sexism and racism to be asked to handle yours,too. Men need to take responsibility for themselves and handle their own feelings for a change.” And, I added, “if you have trouble with that, recall another comment of Malcolm’s, ‘If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.’ If you can’t handle yourself, and you can’t handle us then, at least, get out of our way.” One woman clapped and pins dropped throughout the room. No more.

 

Today, I ask women to take justice and seize your equal rights. Don’t ask for them from men. They don’t own your rights; you do! Stick together. Today, I am a proud “slut”.

 

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under COMMENTARY, POLITICS

Tagged as , , , ,

February 26, 2012 · 4:47 pm

HOLY COMMUNION

HOLY COMMUNION

Louise Annarino

2-26-2012

One role of government is to secure the safety of its populace. Government attorneys prosecute criminals. Individuals do not. Individuals may bring a civil claim for the injuries they personally sustained as a result of a criminal act. The criminal act is defined by city, state, county, or federal law. Government Prosecutors bring criminal charges on behalf of their entire communities. Crime is consider an offense not just against individuals; but, against the entire community. We have been told that the Occupy Movement, representing the 99% of the community, is dangerous to the community and must be shut down.

“Now here’s something astonishing. While the camp was in existence, crime went down 19 percent <http://www.ktvu.com/news/news/emails-exchanged-between-oakland-opd-reveal-tensio/nGMkF/> in Oakland, a statistic the city was careful to conceal. “It may be counter to our statement that the Occupy movement is negatively impacting crime in Oakland,” the police chief wrote to the mayor in an email that local news station KTVU later obtained and released to little fanfare. Pay attention: Occupy was so powerful a force for nonviolence that it was already solving Oakland’s chronic crime and violence problems just by giving people hope and meals and solidarity and conversation.”

Excerpt from

http://www.thenation.com/article/166394/why-media-love-violence-protesters-and-not-banks <http://www.thenation.com/article/166394/why-media-love-violence-protesters-and-not-banks>

Why? Human beings are social beings who seek close and meaningful ties to one another. We are not hatched from eggs; we come from the womb of another human being and yearn the rest of our lives for such intimacy with another human being. Even E.T. just wanted to go home. We all want to go home, to the place where we are heard, understood and accepted. This is why young people form gangs, fraternities and sororities, clubs, and Facebook friends. This is why we Tweet, and blog. We seek communion.

The Occupy Movement is a study in communion. It is a sacred act of humbling the self for the good of the whole. What can it teach us about reducing crime? It teaches us that meeting the basic needs of food and shelter, offering a safe haven for ideas and creative output, listening and responding to others’ fears and concerns, and acting to restore justice and mercy can heal a city; can reduce crime.

My First Holy Communion seemed magical. I dressed like a bride; even wore a veil circled with fragrant flowers. My heart sang a new melody when the Host dissolved on my tongue. I connected with God, the God whose Son humbled himself for the good of the whole. I understand communion. I understand what happened in Oakland. The Occupy Movement is a sacred act. Supporting the 99%, as President Obama does every day, is a religious act, a sacred act. Politics get dirty. The Occupy Camps get dirty. Life gets dirty; ask any kid who knows how to play it. Dirt does not make sacred acts less holy. “Ashes to ashes; dust to dust”; we all simply want to get dirty, and go home.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , , , ,

February 24, 2012 · 4:28 pm

A MAN'S WORLD BUT A WOMAN'S HEAVEN

A MAN’S WORLD BUT A WOMAN’S HEAVEN

Louise Annarino

February 24, 2012

 

“It’s a man’s world but a woman’s heaven,” Sister Robertine, Vice Principal and teacher of Latin would tell us girls as she took on the uncomfortable task of teaching girls’ religion class our senior year. It was clear she found comfort in such an idea. I had noticed her on many occasions staring down the Principal, Fr. MacFarlane, arms akimbo, the rosary beads hanging from her wide black belt shaking with passion. It was she who would tell me, “I’ll speak to Father about it” when I complained about a school policy or procedure I believed unfair to us girls. Later, when Father altered his position, I knew whom to thank; although, he never acknowledged Sister’s role in the matter. I wondered why he was called “father”, but she was called “sister”. Was she not his equal? Should she not be called “mother”?

 

Sr. Canisia was a master of power plays. She would stomp about the classroom shouting “Maozeedung!” as she stalked us from behind, trying to teach us world history. When she became utterly exasperated she slammed her fist against the blackboard, then picked up her pace and stomped about, stopping to push aside a desk to wake up a bored student. One such day she suddenly heard footsteps on the stairs. Since Father’s office was directly beneath the classroom, she listened for those footsteps. We all did. She rushed to her desk, put a finger to her mouth and said quietly, “NOT ONE WORD!”

 

Father strode into the classroom without knocking on the closed door, eyebrows and voice raised he asked, “What is going on here? We are trying to get some work done downstairs!” Her head hanging low Sister meekly replied, “I can’t do a thing with these heathens today, Father. They are simply uncontrollable. SIgh.” As Father began his lecture, Sister looked over the class, her glaze hardened against any potential traitors who would challenge her version of events. None dared. Father left, humphing and harrumphing. Students resumed breathing; and Sister smiled in triumph. She had pulled one over on him. She noticed my deepening grin and her eyes began to twinkle, recognizing a comrade in arms.

 

As the male caretakers of morality allow themselves to be used by the Republican Party to distract voters from the true sins of the world – poverty, joblessness, lack of health care, racism, sexism, homophobia, destruction of the environment – I think about those nuns who demonstrated feminism in action to teenage Catholic school girls. Their only comfort was a belief heaven awaited them. I wanted that heaven on earth for women, as it existed for on earth for men. I was unwilling to wait until after my death for equality.

 

Every nun in our high school had a Ph.D. or was working on a Ph.D. Yet, the only fields then open to women were nursing, teaching or secretarial work. A few were librarians or social workers. They had no other comfort than a belief the future would be better. And that belief fueled the girls whom they taught. We became lawyers, doctors, bankers, plumbers, carpenters, engineers, astronauts, and politicians. Heaven became possible on earth. But, not easy, never easy.

 

The male domination of the world continued. Men “allowed” us a few slots, and continued to believe in their natural right to dominate us. They refused to change the structures, policies and systems which met their needs and supported their success. The needs of women, especially, those with children, required a change in policies, structures and systems which men fought at every turn. In fact, without readily available birth control, most women could never have taken the stage alongside men. There is no need to rehash what we have each experienced for ourselves – women’s struggles to succeed in a “man’s world”. Those who do, do so because of the support of strong men who are not threatened by women’s equality, and with the support of other women. Women have little trouble admitting to ourselves that we cannot do it alone. We are genetically and chemically programmed to work in tandem with those around us, building communities of support within our families and within the larger family of man. We are strong supporters of the 99%.

 

It is no mystery that the male morality police have been seeking to stop our access to birth control as a means of restricting our options for escape from their dominance and control. They do not like our insistence on assuring the welfare of human beings as they seek wealth and power around the globe. Women cry out against wars. Women cry out against hunger,poverty,racism, homophobia,environmental degradation. They see the connection between such sins and the lack of a possible heaven on earth for anyone else.They cry out to protect their children,and every woman’s child. Face it; we women get in men’s way, and they have had enough! They are angry because they think that the more we have the less they can get. We expect them to share their toys; they want to take their marbles and go home.

 

Well, women have had enough, more than enough. Women are careful with their anger, realizing the possible harm which could come to their beloved husbands, sons and grandsons;most of whom gave up male despotism decades ago. Women tread lightly.

But, women tread their way to the polls. Women vote. The 2012 election is vital at the local, county, state and federal level. Do we want anti-science climate change deniers on our school boards? Do we want right to work laws which lower wages for all workers while busting unions enacted in our state house? Do we want to protect insurance company profits by returning to days when a pre-existing condition effectively denied you coverage by electing congresspersons who would dismantle Obamacare?

 

Do we want to live in communities across the United States which would approve Jim Crow laws, restrict to right to vote, deny women access to birth control, demonize immigrants and assure the fulfillment heaven on earth for white men? Or, do we want equal opportunity for all? Do we want the promise of a future heaven on earth because we support every single person’s right to pursue happiness? We cannot elect those who  tell us only the 1% have the know-how, the innate ability, and the wisdom to allow us to participate in their heaven. Don’t we really want our own heaven on earth? What arrogance to “allow” us what is our right!

 

Vote for President Obama, whose message of hope is not just for America’s sons, but for its daughters as well. Vote for President Obama, whose message of hope is not just for African-Americans or white Americans, but for all Americans. Vote for President Obama.

 

We women recognize voting for President Obama is not enough. we must vote for his support system. We must vote out those racists who undermine every move he makes on our behalf, simply because he is an African-American man. We must vote out those who undermine him simply to protect their golden parachutes. We must vote out those who undermine him simply to protect their excessive profits hidden in off-shore accounts. He is trying to rebuild this country to support ALL of us. we cannot elect those who undermine him simply because we are in their way. A man’s world and a woman’s heaven? Not for long, Not for long…

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , , , , ,

February 17, 2012 · 6:14 pm

HISTORY LESSON; Small Government or No Government?

HISTORY LESSON: SMALL GOVERNMENT, NO GOVERNMENT ?

Louise Annarino

2-17-2012

 

Republican and Libertarian 2012 presidential candidates have followed two themes: small government, or no government. In support of these complimentary positions they rewrite American history, even Mr. History Gingrich who should know better does so.

 

Colonial Americans did not dump tea in Boston Harbor because they opposed taxes; but, because they were unrepresented in the British Parliament. Initially, they did not want  to end government but to participate in it. The corruption and despotism of British monarch George III, the arrogance and disdain of the British Parliament toward colonial interests, and the overriding desire to refill a depleted British treasury following the Seven Years War on the backs of colonists stirred the minds and hearts of the American colonists who began to see themselves as simply “Americans”. They declared their independence from Britain and immediately started designing a government very like the one they overthrew, with some interesting twists learned from native American political structures.

 

For example, the British Parliament has two chambers: the House of Lords (aristocracy), and House of Commons (everyone else). One of the hottest arguments after the revolution was between those who wanted to call George Washington “King-Your Majesty-Your Highness” and those who wanted to avoid all things aristocratic and call him “Mr. President”. Mr. Washington insisted on the latter, and shunned all signs of royalty. Americans chose a bi-furcated legislative body, the Senate and The House of Representatives. Their response to despotism and the threat of autocratic rule was a “separation of powers” between the Executive,Legislative and Judicial Branches of government. “We the People, By the People, and For the People” was born.

 

Initially, they favored a “confederation” of quite independent states based on the Native American “confederation of tribes” model; but, soon recognized the need for a strong federal government, affirmed early on by The U.S. Supreme Court. The failure to directly address the slavery issue and women’s right to vote, despite Abigail Adams’ warning to her husband John to “mind the ladies”, remained a stain on self-government and equal rights for all citizens; and, eventually led to a civil war.

 

I have been watching Ken Burns’ THE CIVIL WAR. It is appalling that after such horrific suffering caused by secessionists and slave owners with the support of Southerners, including West Point graduates, among them Robert E. Lee, who abandoned their oaths to support the United States of America and called it “honorable”, that our current batch of presidential candidates would also suggest secession, states rights, and the honor of the American people as appropriate policy within the Republican Party. The Republican Party, The Grand Old Party (GOP) which gave us Abraham Lincoln as its first presidential candidate. It is shameful;how far the Republican Party has fallen.

 

We must not accept a discussion of secession to be considered a legitimate possibility. To attack President Obama as unpatriotic while behaving so unpatriotically themselves is the height of hypocrisy. They use the threat of secession as a means of attacking a strong federal government; just as it was used to instigate a civil war 200 years ago. Why would they risk such division among our citizens? The same reason they did then…money and power. Racist code talk, outright racist comments, and outright lies about President Obama’s policies and leadership should have been laid to rest 200 years ago.

 

Those, who argue a strong and active federal ( Paul,Perry,Gingrich,Romney et al) or state government (Governors Kasich R-OH and Walker R-WI) takes away our liberty are wrong. If by “government” one means government led by a despot this is true. But WE are the government. WE pass legislation, make rules, interpret laws through those WE elect to represent us in those endeavors while we go about earning a daily living. WE are not despots. WE are not deprivers of our own liberty. WE decide what government does;despite the fact George W. Bush “the Decider” alleged otherwise. The Government is not something apart from ourselves; it is US. When Republican candidates attack government, they attack US. WE are “we the people”. Why attack our governments? Because WE are all that stands in the way of those 1% “aristocrats” who want to make money at our expense. Have we forgotten the our history?

 

In the meantime, they distract us and delude us into thinking our governments, federal-state-local are attacking us. We are under attack, but not by government. Discover and support your own self-interest…your government.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

February 16, 2012 · 3:47 pm

CYNICISM VS. SKEPTICISM: POLITICIANS ARE NOT ALL THE SAME

CYNICISM VS. SKEPTICISM: POLITICIANS ARE NOT ALL THE SAME

Louise Annarino

2-16-2012

 

In Italian being “cynical” means being “unprincipled”; changing with the wind, switching sides without affecting conscience. A cynical person is an opportunist. “Skepticism” is entirely different. It is core virtue of reason, allowing flexibility of thought and change position based on the disclosure of truth. Cynicism is destructive; skepticism is healthy.

 

As a second generation Italian, Sicilian father and Napolitan mother, I can assure you no one is more skeptical than a Sicilian. It is in our genes. We question everything and everyone. The more powerful the authority, the more skeptical we become. For the upcoming campaign season, I suggest we all become a bit more Sicilian.

 

Negative campaign ads are part of the political climate, and are increasing in intensity. They are destructive for two reasons: first, lies repeated enough appear to be truth; and second, they build a climate of cynicism among voters.

 

Not all campaign ads are the same; neither are the political candidates, nor their parties. Yet, Republicans such as Mitt Romney, Joe Hannity, Karl Rove et al. consistently respond to any criticism of their unprincipled, change in the political wind distortion of past policies and legislation with a shrug “They all do it; Democrats are just as bad as Republicans”. Even  Chris Matthews at MSNBC falls easily into this trap of cynicism. In a recent on-air interview questioning a Republican guest about the extremely negative Republican presidential race, Matthews allowed his guest’s statement that President Obama ran a very negative attack-ad campaign in 2008. How soon we forget the campaign for change based upon hope. This is just one example of the pure cynical revisionism we will hear and see more of as election day nears.

 

Such willingness to behave so cynically destroys are faith in our political process. It drives people away from political involvement. While this may benefit Republicans whose numbers are dwindling due to changing demographics, an unwillingness to change, or to exercise flexibility of thought. However, it does not serve well the Democratic party. We need to get as many voters as possible involved in the political process, and to the polls. Our numbers are greater. Their best hope is to turn our hopeful voters into cynics. We must stop being cynical; and, instead be skeptical.

 

Not all political attacks are untrue. When President Obama warns that Republicans intend to dismantle/privatize Social Security he is basing this so-called “attack” on statements of fact by Republicans. Paul Ryan, Rick Santorum, Mitt Romney et al. have each proposed privatizing Social Security and Medicare, differing only on whether it would be a partial vs, complete privatization;and, each would raise the minimum retirement age. Their proposals would effectively gut funding, making the current program which is fully funded for next 30years, unsustainable. A cynic would argue that President Obama is engaging in negative attacks just as Republicans attack him – citizenship, patriotism, socialism etc. They are not the same. Cynical ad hominem attacks are a poor substitute for policy attacks.

 

A skeptic would check out the Republican proposals to see if what President Obama alleges is true, check out President Obama’s own proposals; then, decide whether his or her initial impressions were accurate. A cynic would merely ignore the cognitive dissonance such truth-telling engenders, shrug and say “politicians are all the same”. Cynicism never improved a single thing; it does not promote positive change. Only skepticism can do so.

 

Let’s get skeptical! Sing it out in tune to Olivia Newton John’s “Let’s Get Physical”…now, I am dating myself!

 

 

 

 

1 Comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , , , , ,