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 , , , , , ,

February 14, 2012 · 5:50 pm

OUT IN THE OPEN

OUT IN THE OPEN

Louise Annarino

2-14-2012

Hopefully, this is the last time I shall have to discuss the Roman Catholic Church and the opposition of its Pope and its most conservative of Bishops to progressive political theory, and at times, to President Barack Obama.

I will not discuss the church’s theological positions. It is none of my business. Catholic women are not part of the church hierarchy and have no positional power within its ranks. Some may have personal power with particular members of the church hierarchy; but, personal power is ephemeral at best. Therefore, I am not entitled to any opinion on theological teachings. That has been clear since my baptism.

However, as an American, I am entitled to an opinion on its espoused political positions, and its corporate climate. I am also entitled to question whether as a religious institution it has any right to take a political position. Jesus’ response to his religious hierarchy “Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s, and to God that which is God’s”, Matt 22:21, is not simply a basis for the separation of church and state; although, one could argue such. It was his brilliant repost to a group of rabbis trying to trick him into taking a political position, or to discredit himself as a rabbi. Jesus himself had made it clear he was not a political Messiah, John18:36. The Pharisee rabbis were trying to prove otherwise. The Roman Catholic Pope and Bishops would be wise to follow Jesus’ lead. They are not political Messiahs. They are behaving like Pharisees. Their objective is political and financial power, in the guise of religious freedom. No one has asked them to deny their religious teachings, or practice their faith as they see fit. Giving them the benefit of the doubt, President Obama adjusted the political and financial demands of women’s preventive health care to eliminate any possible religious entanglement argument. The church has been outed;it’s outcry was never about religion. It has always been about politics.When the Bishops met 7 months ago to prepare an attack on President Obama’s health care mandates, they behaved like Pharisees, trying to protect their turf from the President they view as the usurper.

Let’s be clear, a church hierarchy which has treated women and children as second class citizens and done little or nothing to protect them; and, has in fact attacked them with impunity ( witch hunts, pedophilia) posits it should be able to deny any woman, Catholic or non-Catholic, comprehensive preventive health care. Really? For, now that the issue of providing insurance coverage for such care is off the table, the only thing remaining is the health care itself. The Bishops’ continuing opposition is simply opposition to women’s comprehensive preventive health care, period!

Thank you, President Obama, for making it so clear. Now, let us ignore the Pharisees and move on.

At age 10 I wrote a letter to then-Senator John F. Kennedy, and received a personal reply. I sent him several pages  listing American Catholics from pre-revolution through 1962 who had served America without becoming a tool of the Catholic church. Presidential candidate Kennedy was deemed an unacceptable candidate since many believed the Roman Catholic Church would try to use him to foster its own agenda, in violation of the separation of church and state. Senator Kennedy used my research in his debate with Richard Nixon. He was the first Catholic elected President of the United States.We know from history that it is dangerous to mix church and state. Millions have died over the centuries as the church imposed its will on the state. Many fled to the wilderness of America to avoid oppression resulting from merger of state and religion. President Kennedy had to overcome this perceived threat. Now, politicians struggle to affirm their willingness to be guided by religious institutions in matters of state. The backlash, should this not be prevented, has a long and bloody history. Women have never fared well under church dominated state action.

I am weary of those arguing the state is denying them the right to practice their religion. They have no right to force me to practice their religion! I have a right to the same comprehensive preventive health care as any other woman, no matter who is my employer; just as I have a right to minimum wage, unemployment benefits etc. Religious belief has no place in determining who is eligible for employment benefits.

 

 

 

 

1 Comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , ,

February 9, 2012 · 4:20 pm

MONEY SPEAKS TO CITIZENS UNITED

MONEY SPEAKS TO CITIZENS UNITED

Louise Annarino

2-9-2012

 

Money speaks louder than words

which fall on deaf ears

plugged into Ipods

and Live

Streams.

 

And we poets must shout

to be heard above the din

of millions, nay billions

tuned on, seeping into

the unaware conscience.

 

Money

too often speaks

louder than words.

 

Money

too often

speaks louder

than words.

 

Money

too often

speaks

louder than

words.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

February 9, 2012 · 3:55 am

A SLAP IN THE FACE

A SLAP IN THE FACE

Louise Annarino

February 8, 2010

 

In the 8th grade, I experienced the Sacrament of Confirmation at my parish church along with the other 8th. graders at St. Francis De Sales Catholic School. Preparing for the big day was so exciting; we would be confirmed by the Bishop.

 

That night I dressed in a fancy dress and wore the gold crucifix given me by my parents. My cousin Dolores who was my sponsor processed into church by my side. Mom had pinned my first gardenia corsage on the dress near my left shoulder, just like a grown woman would wear it. I was ready to affirm my faith. I had chosen the name Bernadette,asking St. Bernadette Soubirous to guide my life.

 

When the Bishop began  questioning us on matters of faith I was the first to raise my hand. I yearned for the grace of the Holy Spirit, the third person of the Trinity of God, to descend upon me. Suddenly, it was time to approach the altar rail and kneel. As a female in 1962, this was the closest I was permitted to approach the altar. My knees and shoulders shook as I awaited the bishop’s approach. Since I was so short, I was the first to be confirmed.

 

The Bishop annointed my forehead with chrism, blessed balsam oil; and, continued with the “laying on of hands”. Next, he slapped my cheek, the sound echoing sharply off the back walls of the church. I heard a loud gasp among the on-lookers. The Bishop looked horrified, as did the other confirmees awaiting their turn.

 

I winced from the pain. We had been told to expect a small slap as a symbol of our willingness to defend, and suffer for, our faith. But, I didn’t expect my head to snap to the side from the impact. Nor did the poor bishop. His strength surprised him. He was quite gentle with those who followed. His handprint was still visible on my cheek at the celebration party, hours afterwards.

 

The effect of this sacrament is intended to give the courage and strength to deal with spiritual conflict as adults. It did so for me. When I took that slap on the face in confirmation, I was ready for any spiritual conflict life threw my way. I did not expect it would be my own church which would continually slap me in the face. Just as I did not see the pain coming from the bishop’s slap, I did not see it coming from my church.

 

I was aware that my church, and most others, have caused spiritual conflict for centuries. We learned about the Inquisition in grade school religion classes. We discussed the racism and sexism within the church in high school religion classes. And, while we learned of the church’s shortcomings, we also learned the social justice teachings of the church. We watched our priest and nuns march for civil rights, oppose unjust wars, and fight for those on death row. We learned the people of the church, including its clergy, are human. We had faith good would triumph over evil.

 

The horror of sexual abuse and rape of our boys and girls by priests wounded us immeasurably; but, the cover-up nearly destroyed us. For many of us it was the last straw; not, for our faith’s survival, but for our willingness to accept the leadership of the church hierarchy, a hierarchy which believed it was exempt from state law and common humanity.

 

The church has become increasingly political, ignoring the separation of church and state unless it benefits financially from the separation. Like all organizations, its first priority is the survival of the institution, at any cost. “At any cost” is the key.

 

The church now opposes full implementation of The Affordable Health Care Law. If it were based on its moral teachings, this position is sound. I believe it is a political, not a moral position. Consider the following from an on-line statement by James Salt, Catholics United:

 

  • No one is being forced to use contraception against their will.  The new rules simply require that employees have access to these services. Individuals who are opposed to the use of contraception do not have to make use of the coverage.
  • Churches are exempt from these rules.  The new rules require that institutions that employ and serve non-Catholics, such as hospitals and universities, are required to include contraception coverage in their health insurance plans.  No Catholic church or diocesan office will be affected.
  • There will be fewer abortions because of this decision.  Regardless of your beliefs about contraception, everyone should recognize that greater access to prevention services will result in fewer unplanned pregnancies.  Fewer unplanned pregnancies will result in fewer abortions.  And despite many false claims to the contrary, the contraception covered by this rule does not include abortifacients, like RU-486, that induce abortion.

 

Additionally, clergy and politicians are wrongfully, and knowingly, alleging that the insurance coverage required for all women would include abortifacients and abortion services. It does not do so. They are also ignoring the fact that President Obama and Kathleen Sibelius allowed a one year delay for the church in order to open discussions about how to implement the requirement without causing a crisis of conscience.

Why does the church lie to its members? Why does it allow and promote political attacks based on lies? Why does it escalate lies, and obfuscate truth? Is it trying to save itself, at any cost?

Why such an attack on women? Does the church oppose insurance coverage for penectomies, Viagra, STDS? Why is it only women’s health which is under attack? This has NOTHING to do with the church’s anti-abortion teaching. The required insurance coverage only covers contraception. Contraception is that which prevents the conception;not birth. 98% of Catholic women use birth control. Why is the church so afraid of contraception? The church teaches that the only purpose of copulation is conception. No sex allowed unless a woman agrees to possible pregnancy. Seriously? Does any thinking adult believe this reflects a moral high-ground ? The only conclusion I can reach is that misogyny led to such a stance. Keep them barefoot and pregnant.  Okay, now I am ranting. I admit it. Perhaps all that grace from confirmation has made me a female warrior, a woman willing to engage in spiritual conflict, even with my own church. Maybe, I have had one too many slaps.

1 Comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , ,

February 7, 2012 · 12:55 pm

MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING ?

Much Ado About Nothing ?

Louise Annarino

February 7, 2012

 

So much of what we read and hear about politics is “much ado about nothing”; while the important information is hidden on a back page, relegated to the lower left-hand column, or never reported. This is partly the result of voice votes scheduled or delayed until late at night or in the wee hours of the morning. For example the vote for Medicare Part D, after 2 days of debate in the House was wrangled to final vote, 216-215, in the very early hours of June 27. The Senate version passed on June 26, and the conference bill came to a vote at 3 a.m. on November 22. When it appeared the vote would fail (219-215) if allowed to proceed to the few final votes the House Republican leadership held the vote open for hours, convincing members to change their votes, passing (220-215) at 5:50 a.m. I recall staying up all night and watching this happen on C-Span. When it was suggested that then-representative Nick Smith (R-MI) switch his vote to “aye” if he wanted substantial and aggressive campaign support” (C-SPAN microphones picked up some of this conversation.See Wickipedia for explanation from Rep. Smith) from  from the Republican Party for his son who was replacing him, I realized this poorly constructed bill would pass. Finally, the problems have been corrected under Obama’s Health Care Affordability Act; the Donut Hole has been closed. Last night, the Transportation Department reauthorization bill was similarly manipulated by Republicans late evening.

The Proposed Transportation Reauthorization Bill  is a vital part of our economic recovery, maintaining  old jobs and creating new ones. It covers surface, rail and air transportation.

Below, are the hi-lights of the bill; one can easily see the importance of passing the bill:

Funding Highlights:

• Provides $13.4 billion in discretionary resources in 2012, a $1.3 billion decrease from 2010 levels. (This figure excludes $109 billion in obligation limitations for the surface transportation plan. Including surface transportation obligation limitations, Department of Transportation’s total budgetary resources increase by $53 billion over 2010.)

• Includes a six-year, $556 billion surface reauthorization plan to modernize the country’s surface transportation infrastructure, create jobs, and pave the way for long-term economic growth. The President will work with the Congress to ensure that the plan will not increase the deficit.

• Jump-starts productive investment and stimulates job growth with a first-year funding boost of $50 billion in 2012.

• Provides $8 billion in 2012 and $53 billion over six years to reach the President’s goal of providing 80 percent of Americans with convenient access to a passenger rail system, featuring high-speed service, within 25 years.

• Includes $30 billion over six years for a pioneering National Infrastructure Bank to invest in projects of regional or national significance to the economy.

• Continues to invest in the Next Generation Air Transportation System—a revolutionary modernization of our aviation system.

• Initiates Transportation Leadership Awards to create incentives for State and local partners to pursue critical transportation policy reforms.

• Reduces funding for Airport Grants, focusing Federal support on smaller airports, while giving larger airports additional flexibility to raise their own resources.

Click to access transportation.pdf

The above provisions are what President Obama sought; but, not what he is being asked to sign. Approval came after more than four years of disagreement over various provisions, which led to repeated short-term extensions and neither growth nor stability. The most recent short-term extension of the FAA funding will expire Feb. 17. If the President vetoes the bill, projects now in place could be shut down, and thousands of workers lose their jobs, creating even more unemployment.

Adding union-busting provisions to this bill were part of changes proposed in the Republican-controlled House Transportation Committee,and supported by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. A Republican-led effort to weaken rules governing union organizing at airlines and railroads was resolved in a compromise between the House and Senate. But unions are rightly angry with both Republicans and Democrats that new provisions seriously toughen requirements for holding elections. The vote to unionize a workplace moves from 35% to 50% of the workforce voting “aye”; and, non-voters would be counted as “nays”. Think how such a system would affect political elections; definitely an unfair and undemocratic system. Judges would no longer review National Mediation Board Rule changes; public hearings would replace that more efficient and less politicized procedure.

It appears that the bill eviscerates public transportation by rail, subway etc. by changing their funding source. It has been difficult to find details of what actually passed late last night versus what had been discussed during the day. News sources are vaguely supportive of the bill without fully disclosing what the final bill includes. What routinely happens is that this will soon become and old story, and no additional details will be reported upon. We the people will be left  with a bad taste in our mouth for both parties: those greedy self-serving Republicans, and those weak-kneed, caving Democrats. Neither of these descriptions is entirely true. If we stay on this story, we can readjust the flaws within this law. Don’t let this story fade from your memory. It is NOT much ado about nothing. The workers, our middle class, need voters with long memories and a willingness to pay attention.

It is easy to blame Democratic Senators and Congresspersons, and President Obama when he signs the bill into law) for “caving” to Republicans. But consider what was at stake.  Senator Cantwell (D-Wash) expects at least 12,000 jobs to be created in her state as a result. It moves the airports from outdated radar to the safer global positioning technology. It allows projects underway to continue without delays. it provides certainty so that other projects can be funded and get underway.

But make no mistake. This Law undermines the middle class and America’s workers. Long term those issues will have to be addressed. Changes will have to be made in new legislation regarding labor and union rights. This is one more example of Republicans holding our President and the Democratic Party hostage.The Republican Party, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce et al. must be held accountable for such blatant attacks on the middle class.

As President Obama stated repeatedly during the 2008 campaign “We are the change that we seek”.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , , , , ,