Tag Archives: Barack Obama

January 19, 2022 · 11:56 pm

Lift Every Voice and Sing,by Louise Annarino,3-2-2013

Lift Every Voice and Sing,by Louise Annarino,3-2-2013

Lift Every Voice and Sing,by Louise Annarino,3-2-2013


— Read on annarinowrites.wordpress.com/2013/03/02/lift-every-voice-and-singby-louise-annarino3-2-2013/

Leave a comment

Filed under COMMENTARY, POLITICS

Tagged as , , , , ,

November 19, 2013 · 6:51 pm

PROBLEM SOLVING OBAMA STYLE

PROBLEM-SOLVING OBAMA STYLE,By Louise Annarino,11-19-2013

 

 

PROBLEM-SOLVING OBAMA STYLE, By Louise Annarino,11-19-2013

 

The ability to think outside the box shows a courageous mind. The ability to restructure one’s thought processes and approach a problem from a different angle shows an agile mind. The ability to reframe questions to answerable formats shows a resilient mind. These abilities are tools used by pragmatic problem-solvers, the people who solve problems others are afraid to tackle.

 

This ability is one of the things I like most about President Obama. Others, faced with seemingly insurmountable odds, may resort to whining and name-calling. Their lack of courage, moral or political, pushes their resistance to change, strengthens their obstructionism, and saves them from accountability to others.

 

President Obama has no time for the petty pandering of those unable and unwilling to problem-solve. The leader of the free world must never allow whiners and fear-mongers to frame the problems America must solve nationally and globally. Persons who lack the courage to push at problems from all angles and seek their resolution simply lack the ability to lead or govern.

 

And yet, such obstructionists and panderers are given a stage on which to perform. Americans seem more willing to be entertained than educated, to be distracted than challenged, to be let off the hook and not held responsible. And our news media recognizes this weakness and plays to it to garner larger audiences, sell more ads, and rake in the cash. Sunday morning news programs are peopled with such panderers, interviewed by those just like them. The star of any political interview has now become the interviewer, not the interviewee. The VP of Entertainment has replaced the VP of News. And American democracy suffers. Unfortunately, the American public will get the government it deserves.

 

Meanwhile President Obama continues to problem solve as best he can. If the problem appears unsolvable, he simply changes his frame of reference so he can correct the problem. This is not lying; this is reframing the problem to solve it. He is not afraid or unwilling to point out how the problem evolves over time and to change his approach. This is not being “wishy-washy”; this is understanding and pursuing a problem to solve it. This may be too tedious for newspersons or the American public to follow. They may eschew any complicated discussion of such problems, favoring the easy way out: declare all politics disgusting and to be ignored; declare the panderers and obstructionists equally at fault with a president who is their opposite, and thus incomparable to them in any way; and, finally, allow themselves off the hook, avoiding any responsibility to hold the obstructionists responsible for the failure.

 

Such irresponsibility sinks nations, especially one like ours. Our nation relies on an informed citizenry to elect the best candidates to represent their views, to “watchdog” the process which controls elections, and to challenge unequal treatment of any citizen under the law. Our citizenry is reneging on this obligation, and it is this complacent acceptance of the value of entertainment over political responsibility which threatens our freedoms: not gun control, immigration, race-hatred, LGBT parity with heterosexuals, birth control and abortion…nor any other personally-held belief. When the republic falls, such citizens will be left holding their personal beliefs, but the American flag will have fallen at their feet. President Obama is doing all he can to solve America’s problems. He needs our full support, not our fearful withdrawal.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , , , ,

January 23, 2013 · 11:21 pm

Visions,Dreams and History:Barack Obama’s Second Inauguration,Louise Annarino,1-23-2013

Visions, Dreams and History: Barack Obama’s Second Inauguration,Louise Annarino,1-23-2013

We each use different words to describe singular events.Like the optical illusion in which some see an old woman with a large nose,and others see a young woman,we see more than a single meaning in President Barack Obama’s second inauguration.This one matters most to me.

b63462fc63eb11e2a97322000a1fb158_6

When I read DREAMS OF MY FATHER, just written by someone unknown to me named Barack Obama,my first thought was that this man could be our first African-American president, and a great American leader. From that moment I have watched him grow into both roles.

He is someone future generations of Americans will appreciate far beyond what we do today. As I listened to his second inaugural address I heard our history transformed into one closer to the truth. His words cut closer to the bone than anyone had expected. It was thrilling to watch him weave a tapestry of the development of our greatest ideals of “life,liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” from our Declaration of Independence,through a civil war, and into a civil rights movement which continues to create a more perfect union. He joins a clear line from George Washington and John Adams to Abraham Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt to Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Martin Luther King,Jr. There is a greatness and a challenge in President Barack Obama’s words which transform the American story, and opens our eyes to its great truths.

Liberals and conservatives alike are dissatisfied when they cannot construe Barack Obama’s efforts in a manner which serves their world view. Visionaries, like prophets of old, are often unwelcome in their own lands. To appreciate who they are we must stand outside the mundane boxes of our own making, and peer at them from afar. Only then, from the distance of time, do we fully appreciate the transformative process such leaders of men put in place.Those unwilling to make such a journey of the mind and heart will find my view an overblown adulation of a flawed man. I see the flaws but greatness makes them fade from view,allowing us to focus on what is truly important; i.e. we are a nation of the people,by the people, and for the people. Generations to come always deify those we vilified while visionaries challenged the status quo..

The British government put a price on the head of traitor to the king George Washington, and other founding patriots. He could have been hung. Attorney and patriot John Adams, who believed every person is entitled to a legal defense, was vilified and threatened for defending eight of the kings soldiers, six successfully, who shot to defend themselves against a mob in an event called the Boston Massacre. Abraham Lincoln was one of the most hated men in the nation by many in slave and non-slave states alike,who disapproved of his political maneuvering around the issue of slavery. Teddy Roosevelt was vilified for the obscene “dinner that shocked a nation” in which ex-slave Booker T. Washington ate with the president and his family at the White House. http://historynotebook.blogspot.com/2008/11/booker-t-washingtons-white-house-dinner.html He was no less hated by westerners for developing a national park system and protecting huge swaths of land against private development. Despite pulling the nation free of an economic depression,and successfully prosecuting a war, destroying the threat to human lives by fascism and anti-Semitism,and forging a peace which made friends of our former enemies Franklin D. Roosevelt was vilified and attacked.  Peaceful civil disobedience proponent and civil rights leader Martin Luther King,Jr. was hounded by the F.B.I. as a socialist/communist provocateur. He found his life threatened at every turn by white fear and loathing. Creation of a holiday in his honor brought renewed political opposition to his legacy.

Today, we forget the vilification of those we now call heroes,patriots,icons of American democracy;those who fought inch by perilous inch through a sea of hate and disdain, to create a more perfect union of the United States of America. Obama’s second inaugural speech will be remembered long after the snide comments of political pundits, and the short-sighted praise of his friends. It established a true rendering of the issues and events marking the era in which he served as the nation’s president. Our gret-grandchildren will know him,and us, by this speech.  For myself and for generations to come, I now thank him.

You can view the entire text and video of  President Obama’s speech at this link:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/obama_inauguration/7840646.stm

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , , ,

January 5, 2013 · 3:50 am

TRUTH-TELLING IS NON-PARTISAN,by Louise Annarino,1-4-2013

TRUTH-TELLING IS NON-PARTISAN,By Louise Annarino,1-4-2013

 

It was very difficult for the young recent OSU graduates to find jobs. One young man papered the walls of his dorm room with rejection slips. Others gave up the hunt for professional positions and became sales clerks, bar tenders and wait persons. Many returned to graduate school, piling up more debt, as aid to higher education failed to keep pace with increasing costs.

 

The recession was in full force. A war was ending, soldiers competed for jobs. Too many veterans suffered from PTSD, drug or alcohol addiction, joblessness and homeless. Delayed services by the V.A. and the declining economy complicated their return.

 

Companies were closing research and development departments, outsourcing jobs and off-shoring manufacturing plants. Some argued the loss of small businesses  and replacing local shops with shopping malls was good;t hat economies of scale would keep the price of goods down.Union busting was the new normal. The president himself  approved “scabs” to cross picket-lines,for the good of the airline industry.

 

Small family farms were unable to compete with mega farms;entire farm communities disappeared despite Farm-Aid concerts.Some argued that economies of scale would keep food prices down.

 

Lower income levels created tension between the age groups. School levies were no longer so easily passed. Small schools were combined to create economies of scale, losing the familial feel which had existed in neighborhood schools where every teacher knew every child in the school.Taxpayers resented the extra student perks such as school bands,art and theatre and music programs,and field trips. And, they resented the teacher perks such as summers off.

 

De-regulation was the cause celebre’ of business. Environmentalist climbed into the forest canopy and cut fish nets to protect the forests and oceans, and were snidely called “tree-huggers” and radicals. Ecology was not viewed as real science. Civil unrest by young persons protesting racism,sexism,homophobia and class warfare was contained by military-style response.

 

A few years later a charismatic and popular president was elected and gave people hope that things might change. But by then, many argued that the poor and working poor were really free-loaders looking for government handouts. The president agreed that “government was the problem not the solution” and should be made leaner and meaner,and thus fairer to wealthy job creators whose increased wealth trickled down to the masses.

 

Meanwhile,politicians reframed the focus of the nation from a community working together for the common good  to everyone can make it big. People were encouraged to invest in the stock market,open 401Ks and build a portfolio of wealth. Anyone who failed to make it rich in America just did not work hard enough or smart enough;and was underserving of support by those who did the right thing. We came to view people as big thinkers and doers or small thinkers and doers. Economies of scale were considered good for the social order.

 

The young graduates,with huge education loans and low-paying jobs were told the right thing was to use 1/3 of one’s income to pay living expenses,put 1/3 into savings/investments, and give 1/3 to charity. Doing this would assure a secure retirement and make social security unnecessary. Doing this would assure the poor would be cared for through private charity and make welfare,food stamps and medicaid unnecessary. Young people were told that social security and medicare were unsustainable and too costly, and would not be available when they retired. Elderly were described as free-loaders who felt entitled to government care, depriving young people of a chance for a strong economy in which they could thrive. They were told it was better to create a private retirement investment portfolio on Wall Street with a much higher return than any FICA tax could provide for them.

 

Doesn’t this sound like today’s headline stories? This was happening 35 years ago. This is my generation’s story.We were warned we would have no social security when we were ready to retire. We are now retiring, with social security. The fear-mongering was not true 35 years ago. And, it is not true now. And, thanks to President Obama, we do not see the massive savings and loans/bank failures experienced 35 years ago. Thanks to President Obama we see an increase in manufacturing;an entire auto industry saved and made more profitable, not lost like the steel and aluminum industries were lost 35 years ago. And, thanks to President Obama we do not have high inflation rates as we did 35 years ago.

 

I worry about putting social security on the table while discussing deficit reduction. Social Security has no relevance to the creation or elimination of the deficit. That will be easily explained. But, I expect the old attacks on Social Security will once again be trotted out to misinform and mislead younger voters. It will be framed as a job destroyer, siphoning off money which could be used to create jobs. It will be framed as a scourge on the growth of private retirement portfolios. It will make enemies of young underemployed recent graduates of this generation and those of my generation. My generation will recognize it as a pack of lies,because we have seen the lie exposed over time. But will the young believe us, or those who would lie to get their hands on a big chunk of change.  Investment managers will be tempted to take big risks to make big personal gains, which could leave future retirees holding an empty retirement bag. We now-old young people have watched this happen over and over again. We recognize the game.

 

We are being encouraged to raise this issue with our president,senators and representatives. And, we should do so.  We must also discuss this issue with younger people .This is an issue which should cross age barriers, not create new barriers. This is a chance to make our party stronger and more united. We cannot pass up this chance to strengthen our bonds. The republicans certainly will do all they can to weaken them. After all, they are even willing to default on our debts and throw the world’s economy into chaos, just to destroy social security,medicare and medicaid. This is serious business,and has been for decades.

 

This should not be a partisan issue, but it is. My republican friends will assure me they would never destroy these programs. They will argue that Democrats are no different than Republicans; that even the president says we agree on almost everything, including the need to fix entitlement programs. This is well and good.But we cannot ignore the differences set in stone in each party’s platform. Democrats promise to protect entitlement programs. Republicans promise to eliminate or reduce them. These positions are not the same;they are world’s apart. We must hold Democrats and Republicans equally accountable. Truth-telling is the only way to be non-partisan.

2 Comments

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , , , , ,

January 4, 2013 · 3:05 am

SIZE DOES NOT MATTER,By Louise Annarino,January 3,2013

SIZE DOES NOT  MATTER,By Louise Annarino,January 3,2012

 

Well, it is January 3rd. and the bills have all been mailed out. As usual, I overdid Christmas. I tried to raise my debt ceiling, but Target and Visa said, “What nerve you have. You bought gifts on the credit we extended to you; and, we expect you to honor your debts. If you don’t pay what you owe, we will ruin your credit.”  Actually, I did not really act so irresponsibly; nor did I have that conversation with my creditors. I am simply illustrating what  it means to raise the debt ceiling. It confuses us because on first hearing the phrase, we think it means seeking a higher limit on our credit line so we can make new purchases. But that is not really the way government finance works.

 

Congress passes a law to create program which costs X amount of dollars,and then authorizes a spending bill to implement the program. It must be certain that sufficient funds exist to pay for the program, because this new programs create new debt. The congressional budget office or CBO scores the bill. President Obama has made it a practice to only seek legislative action scored to stay within the current budget. Previously, we have gotten into trouble because congress, among other bills, authorized a war without raising the funds to pay for it.It was the first time in our history we did not raise a war tax. Instead, congress cut taxes to record lows, when it needed more taxes  not less to pay the billions the war would cost.

 

To cover this up, the war expenses were not included within the federal budget, so the war costs would not appear to create,and later increase, a budget deficit. The cost was hidden in the Pentagon budget,which is why the Pentagon repeatedly returned to congress asking for military spending increases to cover the costs. Who could turn down such a request for “our brave soldiers in the field”? When President Obama took office, he corrected this accounting trick. Some in congress now use this seeming jump in budget deficit as a ruse to attack entitlement programs, calling Obama a socialist/welfare president,destroying our grandchildren’s futures. No, war does that.

 

When a newly passed bill’s debt comes due, if insufficient funds are in the treasury to pay the debt, Treasury issues bonds to raise funds to pay the debt, asking congress to  raise the debt ceiling. Since congress approved the debt, congress should pay the debt to maintain the “full faith and credit” of the United States. Congress should raise the debt ceiling. This sensible approach had not been seriously questioned until Obama became president.Throwing the country into default has always simply  been unacceptable.

 

President Obama sought to increase taxes, AND raise the debt ceiling, AND cut program costs.This is the so-called “Grand Bargain” which Rep. Boehner at first agreed to 18 months ago,  but backed away from when he could not find the enough votes in his party to assure its passage. Instead, congress passed a sequestration bill which brought us to what some called a fiscal cliff. For weeks, Obama sought Boehner’s support and leadership efforts in congress to make a new grand bargain. Again, Boehner could not, or would not do so. Instead Boehner agreed to a reduced increase in taxes, and is holding out on raising the debt ceiling as a bargaining tool to force Obama’s hand and reduce government spending; not by making smart and balanced cuts, but by eliminating or starving government programs previously authorized by congress,and relied upon by our citizens: social security, medicare,medicaid. Now, Boehner tells us he will no longer deal directly with Obama, abdicating his House leadership role as representative of, and intermediary for his party.

 

We know suggested cuts to these programs are meant to cripple them and make them unpopular by making them useless, making it easier to eliminate them altogether. Raising the income cap on earnings for social security would increase FICA revenue and strengthen the program. Raising the retirement age would make it useless to many of our hardest working citizens, many who will die before receiving any benefits, or receive fewer years of coverage. Changing the cost of living formula would hurt older citizens in ways unimaginable to those who need not choose between buying a chicken or filling a prescription.

 

We all know our country is in a tough spot. Refusing to raise the debt ceiling would only make our situation worse, and it would leave a long-term, and totally unnecessary blot on the full faith and credit of the United States. Our economy is rebounding,slowly but surely. We cannot afford a congress which is willing to forsake recovery and economic growth under a mistaken belief that the size of the government matters more than the wisdom,purpose and good faith of the government.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

January 2, 2013 · 4:52 am

NEITHER HISTORIC NOR HEROIC,By Louise Annarino,Jan.1,2012

NEITHER HISTORIC NOR HEROIC,By Louise Annarino,Jan.1,2012

 

The self-congratulatory exclamations of “historic compromise” in the Senate’s 89-8/House’s 257-167 (only 85 House Republicans -“aye”) vote to pass “The American Taxpayer Relief Act” which saves unemployment benefits, secures health care payments for doctors, increases taxes on earned income and taxes on investment income from capital gains above $400-450,00.00, eliminates the unfair alternative minimum tax on middle class families, provide tax cuts for students etc. leaves one breathless. This is not historic nor heroic. These changes have been awaiting action despite bipartisan support for a long time. These changes,like other actions recommended by President Obama, by appointments he seeks as the nation’s chief executive, are opposed because he is opposed. The vow of many Republicans to never compromise with this upstart president stood in the way of an agreement.

 

Vice President Biden,as other vice president before him, was called in by Senator McConnell to broker an agreement.So far as I can tell, he did not broker an agreement which the president had not already suggested. Nor did he call in Biden because he could not work with Sen. Harry Reid (D-NEV). He did so for more nefarious reeasons. He did so because of a lack of respect for a president he alleged failed to lead, could not understand how the economy works,and refused to cut deficits. None of Senator McConnell’s representations are true. President Obama has repeatedly stated his principle has always been to do things in a balanced way, including doing more to reduce the deficit.

 

It appears he enabled Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Representative John Boehner (R-OH) to reach an agreement, without appearing to reach an agreement with the president, without appearing to agree with his balanced approach and his view that government has a role to play in protecting programs the 98% need to help build a middle class. McConnell’s asking for Mr. Biden was a dodge he could sell. It undermined the president’s leadership, and his positional  as well as personal power.

The disdain,even hate, which many in the 112th Congress have displayed toward our president would not have allowed a compromise with an African-American president;but, would allow one with a white vice-president.

 

This strategy was played out during the House discussion prior to the recorded vote in the House of Representatives. Time after time republicans stated that this agreement to concur in the Senate Amendments meant that everyone agreed that the focus ahead was on cuts to those entitlement programs which are the real cause of the nation’s deficit (i.e. social security,medicare,medicaid,Affordable Care Act);some even alluding to an agreed appreciation congress should not raise the debt ceiling. The message being developed is that this historic compromise  presages accession to austerity legislation yet to be introduced. Charges that Obama policies created and increased rising deficits is completely false;yet we will hear it repeated as if an incontrovertible truth, despite every independent study,report,record to the contrary.

 

Senators Levin, Rangel and others addressed the Republican representatives’ misrepresentations of the the bill’s provisions, and pointed out that nothing within the bill would suggest an agreement to cut middle class support programs. The need of republicans congresspersons to save face is obvious, and the need to justify a break from the Republican Party 2013 Platform had to be satisfied; but with outright lies which create false expectations for future negotiations and compromise. This not only pathetic but harmful.

 

Well-heeled funders of primary and general political races are the writers of the Republican script. It is they who block sensible economic policies recommended by the Obama administration. It is not only racism which fuels such seemingly inane congressional behavior, but money and the power it carries. However, it is racism which greases the skids for the money to flow to congresspersons willing to block any government action which reduces their profit margins, increases their taxes, regulates their corporate behavior, and enables a strong middle class to challenge their control over the nation’s assets and wealth.

 

Be prepared for talking points which berate Obama for moving from $250,000 to $400,000, for not including sequestration or other cuts, for seeking to raise the debt ceiling, for refusing to agree with changing the CPI formula for social security and other entitlement program increases, and for a host of other “failures” of this bill. Every one of these arguments is insincere and totally irrelevant,certainly neither historic nor heroic. Their sole purpose is to deny Obama’s right to a victory lap as he signs this bill into law. And worse, to undermine his efforts to protect  98% of Americans from the privileges sought and expected by the other 2%. The game has not changed. Neither has president Obama. Nor should we.

 

President Obama graciously thanked both Republicans and Democrats.leaders of the House and Senate, and especially V.P. Joe Biden.He went  on to discuss how unfortunate and costly it was that a lame duck congress could not agree to a broader plan. He agrees that medicare’s  costs due to irising medical care needs and costs for an increasing elderly population must be addressed. Unstated is how this can be done without harming those who rely on medicare. He stated that he also refuses to have another argument  with congress about raising the debt ceiling, and paying debts we have already incurred. “The deficit needs to be reduced in a way that is balanced…. (with) less drama, less brinkmanship”. He acknowledged the need to reduce the deficit;but not at the expense of failing to invest in research and development of our people and of our economic productivity, and protecting our country’s future.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , , , , ,

December 28, 2012 · 2:14 am

NOT ENVIOUS JUST HUNGRY,By Louise Annarino,December 27, 2012

NOT ENVIOUS JUST HUNGRY,by Louise Annarino, december 27.2012

On January 20, 2012 I wrote the following commentary.Sadly, near a year later, failure to address the issues I discussed are driving the country over a fiscal cliff, created by Republican intransigence and refusal to raise taxes. We may also be about to go over a social justice cliff with far worse consequences for this nation.

“Let them eat cake !” Marie Antoinette purportedly responded when told of bread riots in the streets of Paris; failing to heed the warning that her 1% lifestyle would not sit well with the 99% who were hungry, jobless and hopeless. Americans are hungry, jobless and homeless; but, thanks to the safety net of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment insurance, and food stamps they are not quite so hopeless nor desperate as those who overthrew the French monarchy. Everyone should be grateful we have a “food stamp president” !

Politicians used to understand that the social contract between the rich and poor was an essential cog in the economic engine of the country; and, the very thing which would allow citizens to amass wealth, without the threat of harm to the nation or themselves. Republicans and Democrats alike passed into law programs to create and protect a strong middle class. It was understood and agreed upon that the American dream was not built on envy, but on the Golden Rule “Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.”

The latest crop of Republican congresspersons seem to have forgotten this. The top 1% of investment earners (one cannot honestly call them wage earners) would have 99% of us wage earners believe that reminding them of this social contract is un-American, anti-capitalist, and irreligious.

Now, Republican congressional leaders undermine the Golden Rule, claiming, as men who are right with God, that anyone who oppose their economic and social order policies, must be wrong;and,not only are they wrong but they are evil, which carries the weight of immorality. Asking that the Golden Rule be applied to economic policy does not make the 99ers immoral, unpatriotic socialists, un-American, nor envious.

Years ago, before labor laws, civil rights laws, and a system of public education for all children created a middle class, the working class had to be satisfied with crumbs from the table. Labor unions, civil rights activists, and public education created a place at the table for workers. But now, Governors like John Kasich (R-OH) tell us we are envious when we ask for a menu, question why no food is being served to us, or ask how they arranged to have nearly all the food piled on their plates as it disappeared from our own.  They say we are envious. No, we are simply hungry, hungry for justice.

Today, I suggest it is not a budget deficit which will destroy this country; but, a social justice deficit. President Obama and Democratic leaders are right to insist on continued stimulus spending and safety net protection, and increased taxes on the top 1-2% ; any further efforts to compromise us into starvation will do more harm than good. Productivity, not hoarding seeds, is what puts food on the table.

1 Comment

Filed under POLITICS, Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , , ,

December 21, 2012 · 5:01 pm

NRA ADVERTISES FOR GOOD GUYS WITH GUNS,GUNS,AND MORE GUNS,By Louise Annarino,December 21,2012

NRA ADVERTISES FOR GOOD GUYS WITH GUNS,GUNS,AND MORE GUNS, By Louise Annarino, December 21, 2012

Ohio was a primeval forest with river channels best suited to flat bottom boats as transport for those intrepid New Englanders who had survived a revolution against King George III of England, and headed into the wilderness which was home of several Native American Tribes whose confederation of tribes served as an example for the structure of the new government being established by the revolution’s leadership. These shopkeepers,farmers,students and laborers strapped the rifle issued them as citizen soldiers to use as protection, and to bring down game to feed their families.

Some of the earliest skirmishes with the British soldiers stationed in the New World occurred when the king’s subjects raided the King’s arsenals to arm themselves. Discussions in the Virginia Assembly were deteriorating,and emissaries of American colonists sent to Parliament were failing to convince King George and Parliament to lower or eliminate taxes which had recently been imposed on British colonies.

The pre-revolution American colonists,as British citizens, understood that England’s war with France was costly, and Parliament needed to raise revenue to pay for the war. American colonists s were not opposed to taxes. But, they believed that those who were taxed should have a voice in Parliament. As colonists, they had no voice. There were those in Parliament who took up their cause, arguing colonials should be able to participate in Parliament.

While these political discussions went on in England, unrest grew within the colony. The King sent more troops to the American colony to “keep the peace” among the colonials. These troops had no military bases, so their leaders moved them into colonists’ homes, with or without the homeowner’s permission. Some colonials remained loyal to the King,while others became increasing hostile to being taxed with no right to vote,and housing British troops. tempers flared on both sides.

After the revolution,as the founders wrote a national constitution, they based it upon the Virginia Constitution, adding some amendments reflecting concerns of the various “states” ( a new term for areas which had been chartered by the King -the Carolinas, the Virginia Territory etc.).

The 1st.Amendment was free speech. People wanted a “voice” without fear of repercussion from government. This Amendment has been argued over in the courts and is restrained by reasonable guidelines. One cannot shout “fire” in a crowded theatre,for example.  Protesters, parades, commercial vendors etc. can be regulated as to time, place and manner so as not to disrupt the ordinary course of business. The CITIZENS UNITED CASE stretched the right to free speech by extending the legal fiction that corporations are people for campaign financing purposes, as they had been earlier characterized for business organization and legal remedy reasons.

The 2d. Amendment was freedom to bear arms. People wanted the freedom to arm themselves to defend their communities from an autocratic King who would quarter his troops in their homes,which as every British citizen knew, violated their belief that a “man’s house is his castle”. When the Revolution started in the American colonies, many armed themselves by raiding British arsenals. After the revolution, the Americans wanted the freedom to build their own arsenals. National Guard Armories exist within every small town as remnants of these arsenals. There was never any intent to amass personal armories. But, the soldiers of the revolution kept their guns, granted the freedom to do so by the 2d Amendment. Like the 1st. Amendment, the 2d. Amendment is also subject to reasonable constraints, regardless of gun industry refusal to acknowledge that fact.

NRA Executive Director Wayne LaPierre held a news conference a moment ago. He blamed the violent video games, their production companies and stockholders as partners and co-conspirators in violent acts. He described Americans as surrounded by deranged and evil persons, who cannot be understood nor contained to prevent the evil acts their “voices” propel them to commit.He denigrated those with mental health issues as demons, asserting that the “only way to  stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun”. He argued forcefully that we are all targets surrounded by great evildoers and we all must carry guns.

LaPierre’s suggestion? Arm teachers and principals with weapons and provide security guards at schools. He repeatedly referred to the president using Secret Service to protect himself, impliedly berating this president for protecting himself and failing to protect American children. Then, he reminded us that grants for school security were removed from the budget last year. His continued attacks against President Obama were beyond the pale. His real effort was to undermine the president’s comments and efforts to place restrictions on assault weapons.

He repeatedly asserted that many people are deranged and evil,calling for well-maintained data-bases on the mentally ill. This is the same man who opposes a data-base of gun owners. Scapegoating the mentally ill is not a solution to gun violence with assault weapons. Treating the mentally ill, and denying weapons to the mentally ill likely to harm themselves or others should be considered and discussed. Demonizing anyone serves no purpose other than to create fear among us, and justify violence by the “good guys”.

Lapierre announced  the creation of a new program, the National Model Schools Shield Program funded by NRA to provide armed guards at every school.  “We can’t wait. We can’t debate and pass legislation which will not work,”  was an indirect effort to undermine and supplant V.P. Joe  Biden’s efforts. He called for every teacher,administrator and state to ask for NRA help to protect its children, to arm its schools with good guys.

We cannot allow his one reasonable suggestion, provide more school security, to  stop all discussion about reasonable constraints over gun manufacture,sale,purchase and possession of assault weapons;background checks,waiting periods,registration and removal etc. This was not a news conference. This was an ad for an NRA effort to arm more persons, with no limits nor constraints. This was an effort to undermine President Obama, and anyone who calls for a reasonable review of current gun laws. The laws must be reviewed and changed for the common good and within reason. I doubt those first Americans would expect any less of us.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

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

November 9, 2012 · 10:32 pm

NOT CAN,BUT HOW? THE BUDGET AND DEFICIT REDUCTION,By Louise Annarino,November 9,2012

NOT CAN,BUT HOW? THE BUDGET AND DEFICIT REDUCTION,By Louise Annarino, November 9, 2012

At President Obama’s first press conference he stated a willingness to consider any idea which fairly addresses the nation’s fiscal needs. However, he clearly and unequivocally asserted that taxes on earnings above $250,000 must be increased. He went further asking congress to immediately extend tax cuts on earnings below $250,000 rather than waiting for negotiations on deficit reduction and balancing the budget plays out,stressing the need for stability and certainty for small business owners.

In effect, the president seeks to stabilize small businesses and encourage their creation and expansion, and continue tax policies which economists agree will stimulate middle class spending, and which will help those small businesses grow. This is basic and sound fiscal policy upon which any honest politician, of either party, could easily agree. The only reason Boehner might not agree is to use the middle class and small businesses as a political tool to continue to shelter wealthy supporters and their corporate interests, at the expense of average Americans.

Republicans also make no secret of their intention to eliminate, starve into extinction, or privatize the social safety net: social security,medicare,medicaid,food stamps,WIC,unemployment compensation etc.

Will Rep. Boehner insist on continuing tax breaks for Big Oil while  delaying the Social Security retirement age for a woman who stands on her aching feet all day at a cash register, or a mechanic whose arthritic hands can no longer twist a wrench without pain, or a security officer who must chase a teen robber up and over a fence? Or will he agree instead to lift the cap on FICA taxes,increasing contributions from higher income earners? Such choices matter.

Will Rep. Boehner insist the Ryan Budget must be accepted in whole or in part before the House is willing to even consider the President’s Jobs Bill? Will veterans continue to wait for House Republicans to approve a veterans’ jobs program included in the president’s bill? Will farmers wait for House Republicans to pass the Agriculture Bill unless it contains Ryan’s proposed cuts of $1.6 billion dollars a year (four times the amount spread over five years in the bi-partisan bill passed by the Senate) to food stamps, WIC (women,infants and children),and meals on wheels for seniors and the disabled? Why must we wait?

What can we do to put a stop to such nonsense? ASK our Republican representatives and senators to answer questions regarding their positions on specific cuts. TELL our Democratic representatives and senators that we expect them to stand strong and speak out on our behalf. Remind both that they will soon be up for re-election and that we will not forget what they do.

The news pundits,once again,focused on whether a deal can be reached with Boehner since Obama is willing to compromise, discussing the need for Democrats to give a little. Chris Mathews even suggested the president should appoint Mitt Romney Secretary of Business, chuckling that he would not do so, but should do something like this…throw Boehner a bone? No,such talk is throwing over an election, throwing over the middle class. The first person Andrea Mitchell interviewed for reaction to Obama’s press conference today was  House Assistant Democratic Leader James E. Clyburn (D-SC) who concurred that when negotiating everything must be on the table. Feeling a bit nervous, I listened  to him then suggest that even social security would have to be reworked because we want  it and programs such as medicare and medicaid to be there in the years ahead. Okay, I thought, that is a no-brainer. But then he suggested one likely change is delaying the age at which one may receive benefits. There are alternatives methods to reducing program costs which don’t deprive people of, or delaying access to, benefits they have a right to rely on, and which they desperately need to survive with dignity.

Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and food stamps are not frills. They are not “stuff.” These programs are life support. We are not a poor nation;we are a very rich nation. Budgets define our priorities in this country; and, not our wealth. We can reduce the deficit and balance our budget over time. Either party is capable of doing so. The real issue is not can we do so; but how we do so. Hopefully, we do so while maintaining life support for the aged, the disabled, the hungry, the unemployed, the uneducated, and even the planet itself. We count on our president and our Democratic senators and congressmen to remember this, and to fight for us. John Boehner will be fighting for his political life, and the survival of his party; but, unless I miss my guess,not for us.

Central Ohio Contact List ( Rep.Joyce Beatty (D-OH) info not yet available):

 

Rep. John Boehner (R-OH)

(202)225-6205

(202)225-0704 Fax

Rep. Pat Tiberi (R-OH)

3000 Corporate Exchange Drive,Suite 310

Columbus, Ohio 43231

(614) 523-2555.

(614)818-0887 Fax

 

Rep. Steve Stivers

3790 Municipal Way
Hilliard, OH 43026
(614) 771-4968
(614) 771-3990 Fax

Joyce Beatty for Congress

233 S High St Ste #300

Columbus, OH 43215

614-600-4231

beattyforcongress@gmail.com

 

Senator Rob Portman

37 West Broad Street,Room 300

Columbus, OH 43215

(614)469-6774

Toll-Free: 1-800-205-6446

 

Sen. Sherrod Brown

(614) 469-2083

(202)224-2315

Toll Free : 1-888-896-6446

 

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

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

November 9, 2012 · 10:10 pm

OUR VOTES COUNTED, BUT WE DIDN'T?By Louise Annarino,November 9,2012

OUR VOTES COUNTED, BUT WE DIDN’T?,By Louise Annarino,November 9,2012

 

If we are to believe the media-take on the re-election of President Barack Obama, we managed to have our votes counted; but, we still don’t count. Despite the fact that Barack Obama won by a greater margin than George W. Bush without the need for court intervention to seal the deal, corporate media refuses to acknowledge president Obama’s mandate. Instead it sees his presidency as one calling for accession to the demands of those whose candidate lost the election and the majority of the electorate’s support for Republican policies.

 

The list denying a mandate includes: CBS Evening News’ Bob Schiefer. Washington Post’s Dan Balz. Politico’s Glenn Thrush,Jim VandeHei,and Mike Allen. CNN’s David Gergen, and Gloria Berger. FOX News’ Charles Krauthammer.Time Magazine’s Joe Klein.

 

Even NPR’s Cokie Roberts failed to credit the value of those who voted for the President and handed him a mandate when she described his challenge to govern in this way: “It is a divide where he’s lost whites, he’s lost Southerners, he’s lost people of a certain income and age, and he’s really got to do something fast to deal with that.”

 

Oh, I see now whose vote REALLY counts: whites (but not those whites who voted for Obama), Southerners (but not those Southerners who voted for Obama), people of a certain income and age( but not those wealthy, older persons who voted for Obama). Interestingly, the need to address the concerns of African-Americans, Latinos, Asians, young people, women and LGBT community seems to be of no concern to Ms. Roberts. Apparently, she thinks she knows who should be driving the bus, and who should ride in the back.

 

It is not because she sees division as a concern which disturbs me; we are all concerned about the divisions within our country. But, because she weighs the interests of those who do not support Obama as a greater issue for his attention than the mandate the majority of voters handed him on November 6 to enact the change we need to secure America’s future for all its citizens. It is the diminished value corporate media places on an Obama victory for those who do not look like them, earn what they earn, live like they live. By diminishing his win, they diminish his right to govern and they diminish the value of our vote. That diminishes all Americans.

3 Comments

Filed under POLITICS

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