Tag Archives: obama

October 8, 2012 · 3:17 am

PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE ROUND TWO;By Louise Annarino,October 7, 2012

PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE ROUND TWO, By Louise Annarino, October, 7, 2012

 

If you think my last piece which suggested we do not need a bully in the bully-pulpit was mere spin on the lack of an effective response to Mr. Romney’s debate performance by President Obama and Jim Lehrer, rest assured it was not meant to be so. The willingness within human culture to overlook and even applaud bullying is more prevalent than we recognize. In schools, workplaces, even on debate stages it too often rears its ugly head. Tim Field, [bullyonline.org] who believes only the best are bullied, describes bullying in a way we cannot so easily overlook:
“Bullying is a compulsive need to displace aggression and is achieved by the expression of inadequacy (social, personal, interpersonal, behavioural, professional) by projection of that inadequacy onto others through control and subjugation (criticism, exclusion, isolation etc). Bullying is sustained by abdication of responsibility (denial, counter-accusation, pretence of victimhood) and perpetuated by a climate of fear, ignorance, indifference, silence, denial, disbelief, deception, evasion of accountability, tolerance and reward (eg promotion) for the bully.”

Tonight, while I sat in the atrium of the pizza parlor waiting to pick up a pizza, I noticed several middle school girls, accompanied by a few parents, enjoying a birthday party in the adjacent party room. The birthday girl stepped through the open double-pocket doors into the lobby area as the party seemed to wind down, only to have the other girls close the doors behind her and refuse to allow her back inside. The other girls laughed and teased her as she quietly asked them to open the doors. They would not budge; but only grinned and giggled. Her efforts to dislodge one door moved every girl to hold it fast against her. As she shifted to the other side, they shifted against her,relishing their power over her. As the intensity of her pleas increased in anxiety but not volume, their glee increased. The parents paid them no mind,as the jollity of the girls on the inside increased, and the girl shoved to the outside became more resigned to her powerlessness. As the fight went out of the girl being kept outside the group and the reliance on the kindness of girlfriends was lost in the darkness, the game became meaningless and was abandoned. The birthday girls’s wounded eyes belied her “thanks for coming” to the parting girls, still laughing over their prank.

 

How often do we see this type of interaction and not recognize what it is and the damage it does?  When the suggestion of a faculty member at a university committee meeting is ignored by the group, only to be applauded 3 minutes later when a member of the faculty in-group suggests the very same idea, do we recognize bullying? In those moments the pretense of collegiality was forever lost. On the day of the John F. Kennedy assassination as a unformed Catholic school girl quietly bears the shouts of public school students as she walks home following early dismissal, “Ha ha! Someone finally killed your fish-eating president, you dirty Catholic!”,do we recognize bullying? In those moments safe passage on a city street was forever lost. Would we recognize it in what Mitt Romney did as a high school senior when he organized an assault on a fellow student stating, “He can’t look like that. That’s wrong. Just look at him!” and proceeded to cut his hair as Romney’s friends held him down? In those moments his pretense of innocent prankster was forever lost.

 

There is a fine line between strong leadership and bullying; the two can be easily and unfairly confused. I do not believe I have done so in this case. There is a mistaken belief that bullies pick on the weak. But, often they pick on those whose greater strength threatens their perceived dominance and control, whose greater strength they fear. I believe this is what drove Mitt Romney’s hyper-verbal aggression, unwarranted rule-breaking, and laughter-filled domination at the first presidential debate. He was too comfortable making others uncomfortable, too gleeful when breaking rules, too eager to distort-deny-ignore his own policies, too satisfied with his own evasions. To me, these are traits of a bully; not a leader one can trust. To me Romney’s fearful excitement, fueled by aggression, was far more significant than whether he won or President Obama lost the debate.

 

I also believe these traits are what drives the unwarranted attacks against Barack Obama by Mr. Romney and Teapublicans who fear the changing demographics seemingly embodied in an African-American president. I am not the first to remark upon this phenomenon. But, do we recognize the behavior we are watching as  bullying? Perhaps we do not do so because our president is so strong. Perhaps we don’t because we fear by doing so he will be called weak. We cannot afford to ignore the bullying, because the world cannot afford a bully in the bully pulpit. Bullies often attack those whose strength they fear. There is no way to appease bullies;their fear is a bottomless pit. However, kind people instinctively try to protect the weak. Strong people instinctively hold back their strength to avoid worsening the bully’s fear. But, we need not deny our strength to make weak bullies feel better about themselves. That is their responsibility. The first step in confronting a bully is to define him as one.

 

President Obama must admit he faces a bully, and do what each of us who have faced bullies have learned to do – stand up to the bully and challenge his displaced aggression ,projection of inadequacy, subjugation,criticism, counter-accusation, abdication of responsibility, pretense of victimhood, denial, deception, evasion of accountability; perpetuated by a climate of fear and ignorance while insisting on approval. Bullies cannot be rewarded with a pretense that they are fair or strong leaders. When they are not attacking the strong, they are attacking the weak. And who will speak for the weak? The strong must be willing to do so. President Obama must speak for all of us: women, immigrants,people of color, LGBT community, middle class, poor, small businesses, corporations facing take-over, even mother earth. This is why President Obama’s supporters were disappointed in his performance;not because he lost a debate, but because he did not defend them against the bully.

 

I said it before, and I shall say it again, “Bullies must never be called winners.” We cannot allow a bully to be elected to the bully-pulpit. Anger at President Obama is misguided by our own fear of ,and distaste for, Mr. Romney. It is time to stand together;not let fear divide us. Mr. President, we are counting on you to lead us. every day, we face down these bullies during canvassing, phone banks, fundraising, writing Letters to the Editor, and blogging. We have your back. We know we can count  on you to have ours.  Bullies beware!

 

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

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

October 5, 2012 · 3:04 pm

NO PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE BULLIES IN THE BULLY PULPIT,By Louise Annarino,October 4, 2012

NO PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE BULLIES IN THE BULLY PULPIT,By Louise Annarino, October 4, 2012

 

The Merriam-Webster dictionary tells us that the word debate was originated in the 13th century. It is a Middle English word, taken from Anglo-French debatre, from de- + batre to beat, and from Latin battuere. Its first known use is in the 14th century

Today it defined as: a regulated discussion of a proposition between two matched sides. Its obsolete definition is : fight, contend.

 

Understanding the definition explains why the first Presidential debate had no winners,especially not the American people for whom this battle or debate of ideas was being waged across our screens. Many would blame moderator Jim Lehrer; but, that would be blaming the victim, as is so common in human nature, for the bully-behavior of one of the contenders, Mitt Romney. Mr. Romney brazenly and brutally shouted down the moderator and set his own rules,altering them to suit his attack. His rapid-fire delivery of disconnected thought bursts made it near impossible for a reasonable person to interject control over the proceedings. From his first comments the debate was removed from the moderator’s control to  Romney’s. From that moment on Romney  was free to lie, and he did so repeatedly.

 

I have written so often about his lies I won’t take time to repeat them today. There are many other sources fact-checking and reporting on them, if you will take time to read or listen. Before this first debate I described what to expect, a Romney shell game meant to sell Americans a bill of goods,and intimidation of the moderator. When President Obama calmly but decidedly pointed out Mr. Romney’s game, Romney called the president a liar. I predicted this strategy in my earlier blog. We all have experienced liars in our lives. We all have been warned by our mothers to tell the truth, that if you lie once you will have to continually lie to cover up the first lie, that after the first lie lying gets easier, that once you are known as a liar, no one will ever believe you. Nevertheless,this is the Republican strategy: Call our president a liar. Lie about your own unpopular and destructive policies, then call anyone who points out your lies a liar to confuse people and reinforce your own lies as truth. It is a brilliant one for those who don’t pay close attention to politics, or only watched the debate, or only watch FOX news.

 

Early in the debate, Mr. Romney called President Obama a liar to his face and obliquely referenced him as “boy” by using his own sons’ lies as a reference point for President Obama’s challenge to Mr. Romney’s lie. He said this with a smile on his face, speeding up his commentary and chuckling at his own wit. President Obama had to be disgusted. I know I was. The moderator remained silent. After this point, there was no debate happening. This was no longer a formal statement of position, with rules governing the manner in which each side argued for their position. Mr. Romney stated the president’s positions as his own, and when challenged called the president a liar. I cannot call what I watched a debate. It was the obsolete definition of a debate. It was battuerre or debatre. It was a fight.

 

Our president is a gentleman, a statesman, a leader who does not fight with his fists, nor fist-fight with his words. He does not lie to make a point;nor make a point to lie. He does not bully. He would never cheat and call it a victory, as Mr. Romeny’s own son tells us about his Dad with great pride as a reason to elect him president: Craig Romney: My Dad Cheats & “That’s What We Need in the White House.” Once a cheater,always a cheater, on income taxes, in debates, on the campaign trail [just review statements of other Republican candidates during the primary campaign],even in the White House.

 

Don’t mistake my words. President Obama knows how to fight. Both Mr. Lehrer and the president are the victims of a bully. For the beating they took we must blame the bully, not the victims. However, I do fault them and those who managed them for not anticipating they had a bully who would not play by the rules, who disdains rules, who is so privileged he believes rules should not apply to him and should apply only to lesser beings, certainly to the 47%. Did they not know who Romney is? Have they not been watching him campaign? Have they not seen his ad campaign? Do they think they are immune to bullying? They walked right into the trap. For that, I do blame them. But, that, does not make Romney a winner; just a lying, cheating bully not worthy of the presidency.

 

Romney can say whatever he wants, change positions all he wants. None of that matters. We know what the Ryan-Romney Budget [not a typo;Ryan will control the budget effort] will do to our economy, our middle class, our poor, women, children, seniors, immigrants, minorities, LGBT community, the arts and Big Bird. It is who he is and how he behaves which will betray our finest American ideals and our leadership throughout the world. No one can be safe with a bully running the neighborhood. Wake up America. GO VOTE for every democratic candidate on your ballots. The lying, cheating bullies must be defeated. In America we battere / debatre / fight withBALLOTS.

 

Republicans know this which is why voter suppression and intimidation is one tactic in their strategy to take back government. Bullies don’t know how to compromise; it is always their way or the highway. They have only one measure of success: how badly did they batter the other guy? Democrats are not bullies. This does not make us weak; it makes us brave, smart, and compassionate listeners and doers. Don’t judge President Obama or Mr. Lehrer by how they looked while being bullied.I’ve been bullied and it is not a pretty sight. Judge them by what they do for America, by how they behave toward others, by the dignity and compassion they show others, by the wisdom to know when to put up their fists and when to let the bully hang by his own rope. President Obama now knows Mitt Romney. He has felt his flying verbal fists in his gut. He will defeat Mr. Romney. Mr. Romney will never know what hit him.

 

VOTE OBAMA AND DOWN-TICKET DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATES ,INCLUDING JUDGES. VOTE TODAY.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

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

October 1, 2012 · 6:16 pm

DEBATING THE OPTICS,By Louise Annarino, October 1, 2012

DEBATING THE OPTICS, By Louise Annarino, October 1, 2012

 

Even Howard Dean is falling for Republican talking points today advising us to mute our televisions and simply watch the debate without sound. Newscasters on every cable and broadcast network are discussing the upcoming debates as if all the audience is capable of is watching body language,especially in camera shots of one candidate’s reaction to what the other is saying. The only value given to what is being said,rather than to how the candidates look saying it, is the search for zingers. I do realize optics matter; but, they do not matter more than the substance of what is being said. Such discussions as I have been hearing are disrespectful to the American public. We are not children. We are not fools. We understand the spoken word. We can think and we can analyze. We want and need to listen the details of where and how each man intends to lead our country. Romney consistently refuses, and so, does not want us to listen to President Obama tell us this. Distracting viewers from listening means Romney need say nothing; and what President Obama says goes unheard.

 

Certainly, newscasters and pundits do not intend to insult us. They need us to continue watching them. But,it is just so easy for newscasters to fall into the Republican trap. They understand optics because looking good means a wider profile and bigger bucks when delivering television news. It’s radio for the less lovely.  Howard Dean may have fallen into the trap because he recalls how the “Dean Scream” became a deflating debate zinger in his own run for the presidency. Republicans know they have messengers ready to fall into the trap. It is a brilliant strategy.

 

The Republican strategy is also brilliant,however, for more sinister reasons. If the debate can be reduced to optics only, Romney can appear on stage as President Obama’s equal. Both can appear equally presidential,even when only one sounds that way. Even worse, the white guy in the business suit almost always trumps the Black guy in the business suit. Although, with changing demographics, Romney may alter his tanning times to appeal to a broader audience, as he has done in the past. How better to attack an African-American president than to make the debate all about optics. This further broadens the appeal of Romney to subliminally racist viewers,without any use of coded language. The racial coding is within the image itself.

 

If we devalue what is said by the candidates,and focus only on how it is said we allow ourselves to be set up  for another Republicantactic Obama is a liar who uses his gifted rhetoric to lie to the American people. If no one is listening to his responses to the moderator’s questions, it is much easier to attack him in this manner. If we fall for an optics only debate,we fail our responsibility to be a fully informed voter.

 

Understanding the optics does give us additional information about each candidate. However, using optics as the central and most significant analytical tool while watching the debate is simplistic and makes us susceptible to propaganda. Listening to news analysis of the debate only from an optics viewpoint demeans American viewers. We deserve better. We have a right to be angry with those who are suggesting we set aside all of our senses to use only the one they can most easily manipulate.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

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

October 1, 2012 · 1:45 pm

A DEBATE OR A SHELL GAME? WHOM DOES ROMNEY THINK HE IS KIDDING?,By Louise Annarino, October 1, 2012

A DEBATE OR SHELL GAME? WHOM DOES ROMNEY THINK HE’S KIDDING? By Louise Annarino, October 1, 2012

 

My first debate was in my Catholic high school in 1967. The single question to be answered: “Should tax dollars be used to support private education?” My position; “No! It was an unconstitutional breach of the separation of church and state, and would weaken both institutions. I was unpopular; but,as we can see,I was right. I doubt the journalists who question President Obama and Mr. Romney on Wednesday night,October 3d.( http://www.2012presidentialelectionnews.com/2012-debate-schedule/2012-presidential-debate-schedule/ )will have an opportunity to reach the depth of discussion we did in that high school debate. The format does not allow for in-depth responses with so many questions to be answered.

 

Also, Mr. Romney has already stated he will be fact-checking the president. This is a back-handed way of saying he will be calling the president a liar, for any response he makes. This is a brilliant offensive tool meant to put the president on the defensive for factual statements he really need not defend. His record is clear. It is Mr. Romney’s record which is disturbingly murky. He hides behind past accomplishments;for example, taking credit for an auto bail-out he opposed when he argued that if the automakers “get the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye. It won’t go overnight, but its demise will be virtually guaranteed.”

 

He still has not released his financial records so we can understand just what his true business dealings are. He follows Niccolo`Machiavelli’s premise- “There is nothing more important than appearing to be religious.”- by using charitable donations to his church as his excuse for withholding his tax returns and supporting financial documents, which would answer our legitimate concerns that his business dealings are self-serving and bad for American workers. While one applauds charitable giving,most Americans would prefer he not out-source their jobs, keep his sizeable wealth in American banks to use as loans for further small business development, and pay his fair share of taxes.

 

He continually changes his positions, not because changing circumstances call for more nuanced responses; but, because his audience changes. He has been known to argue for alternative policies on the same day to two different groups (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/26/mitt-romney-small-business-owners-_n_1917556.html )for example, while campaigning in Ohio. “The first message, delivered early in the day in Westerville, was that small business owners should ‘not be expecting a huge cut in taxes.’ The second message, delivered later in Shaker Heights, was that ‘small business is crushed by taxes,’ and that Romney plans to bring ‘tax rates down for small business’.” Who knows what he will say during a debate;his focus will be on “fact-checking” his opponent rather than telling us his true position. There used to be a term for this behavior: the pot calling the kettle black.

 

A debate where one party’s focus is on fact-checking to cover up his own lack of consistent and verifiable positions? Where one party takes on the role of debate monitor rather than engage in the debate itself? Where one party asserts dominance and control by bullying the other debater? This is nothing more than Romney’s effort to continue the shell-game he has been playing since he entered the political fray. Actually, this may be why we cannot see his tax returns. Perhaps his business and charitable occupations have always been simply a massive shell game. Perhaps Mr. Romney himself is a shell of a candidate, not a real contender for the presidency of the United States.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

September 30, 2012 · 2:26 pm

FOUR MORE YEARS FOR OBAMA;By Louise Annarino,September 30, 2012

FOUR MORE YEARS FOR OBAMA; By Louise Annarino, September 30, 2012

 

My uncles could teach political operatives a thing or two. They were my campaign managers when I ran for student council during my freshman year of high school. Uncle Joe advised me to talk with and listen to everyone, ask them what they wanted done at the school and explain how I would work toward their goals, hand out some token gift with my name on it, and act certain of my success. Apparently, people vote for persons who make them feel appreciated, important, and secure. My Uncle Johnny advised me to not do it all myself; but, to get other people involved in my campaign. Let someone else buy what I needed, pass out the token gifts, and make signs for me. Uncle Frankie asked me why I wanted to make more work for myself;but if I did want the position,I should promise to work harder and be better than any other candidate. Dad told me to listen to my uncles; but, not be disappointed if I did not win. They each agreed all politicians are crooks,and I needed to stay a “good Catholic girl”, which would be difficult if I became a politician. This entire political education forum lasted about 15 minutes as I sat on a bar stool watching them prepare for the lunch crowd soon to arrive at the restaurant they owned and ran together. I won that seat in student council. The position was next to meaningless,I soon learned. Governance depended upon reaching compromises and acting within the dictates of the principal and the nuns;not exactly a chance to change the entire structure of Catholic education in Newark,Ohio.

 

The campaign was all exciting possibility; the governance afterwards was all harsh reality. It takes a special person to run for re-election. A person running for re-election knows the grueling demands of the campaign trail, and the grueling demands of governance; yet, is willing to face the simultaneous demands of both. Good health stamina is the one of the most important qualities in a leader. A person running for re-election must answer for past governance decisions,is challenged on performance outcomes,and is chastised for not being exciting enough the second go-round.

 

Have you ever been to a marriage renewal ceremony for a couple married 25 years? It is a much more relaxed and unexciting affair than the original wedding. The wonder is that there is any excitement left at all in the marriage! This is what re-election campaigns feel like. No one is overjoyed; but,no one can deny the sheer joy of still being together facing the campaign’s demands, and no one would choose a different partner. It just feels right. We know the next 4 years, or 25 years, will require the same skills which called us all together in the beginning: the ability to listen and hear one another, the ability to work toward common goals, faithfully give something of ourselves to one another, and maintaining hope in a better future. The marriage renewal ceremony is similar to re-election because we are all less naive and more scarred by experience.However, we are even more dedicated to making the marriage, or governance of the country, work for the good of all. Our hope and faith is not diminished;it is stronger than ever! “Four more years! Four more years! Four more years!” There is no better partner for America than President Barack Obama.

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

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

September 26, 2012 · 6:13 pm

GAMING AMERICA: CASINO POLITICS,By Louise Annarino,September 26,2012

GAMING AMERICA:CASINO POLITICS, By Louise Annarino,September 26,2012

 

The economic hardships Americans are experiencing have been a long time coming. There have been numerous signs along the path to our economic bust;most of them ushered through our consciousness by snake oil salesmen with booming voices,explaining away our intuitive discomforts as a housing market boom, and investment boom, an hedge fund boom, a stock-market boom, and a commodities boom. BOOM, BOOM,BOOM! Such charlatans blew up our manufacturing base, our banks, our mortgage companies, our insurance industry, and our personal economic lives.

 

“Put your money down,folks!” You, too, can make millions. These salesmen, for that is what they are, started small scale selling pyramid schemes. Americans who got into the game late moved on from home-based sales of baskets, bowls and toilet-bowl cleaners to become dealers themselves,selling others the right to sell and keeping real profits at the top of the pyramid. There was something wrong with this picture but it changed so rapidly, and the booming voices were so distracting that many simply moved from one scheme to the next.

 

Pyramid sales schemes attracted lower income wage earners who could see no way ahead to break out of their economic class to reach all that America seemed to promise. They watched the investment class drive the cars they could not afford to buy, build McMansions they could not afford to heat and looked for a way out.

 

Those born into the investment class who lived on the returns from investment portfolios their parents had created for them were satisfied for awhile.They, too, looked for a way to become wealthier. They would make that wealth work for them. They became skilled in moving around investments like pieces on a chess board, increasing wealth as they won the games they joined. They bet their winnings on bigger games for larger stakes.

 

But, rich or poor, enough is never enough for most of us. Like children, we always want more and don’t always know what is good for us. We don’t mind hedging our bets. Low earners hedged their bets on pyramid schemes; high earners hedged their bets on hedge funds, created by the snake oil salesmen of Wall Street.

 

Those playing chess with American corporations as pawns saw another avenue for wealth creation. Instead of merely playing the game, they bought the board and all the pieces on it,after talking other investors into buying a potential share of the profits from the game. “Put your money down,friends!” The only risk was losing the game, but this could be ameliorated by selling off the poor-performing pieces;and, sometimes the better-performing pieces, to keep the game competitive. THe trick was to keep the game going until enough investors paid back the new owners’ costs, plus massive profits. The game itself, and the pieces on the board, had become meaningless.

 

Those running the game soon realized that the pieces on the chess board did not always cooperate. These game pieces had formed unions in order to make sure the game was played by the rules. But playing by the rules was getting in the way of profits for those betting on the game. No longer did the chess pieces have value other than a means of greater profit.Safety,reasonable hours,equitable pay,moderate health care coverage, and secure retirement benefits interrupted the unbridled movement of the chess pieces. “What if,” the private equity company who bought the board asked, “we could get rid of unions?” “What if we simply move the game” to a different city, county, state, and eventually country where such rules don’t apply? And take our profits offshore as well to avoid taxes?” “What if we sell off the tables,chairs,benches,game board and pieces;then,declare bankruptcy because we can no longer play the game without a board and equipment,avoid any debts we owe and pay off the investors whose money we used to make our own profits?”

 

We know what happened. How did we allow it? How do we find ourselves with one of the best snake oil salesman as a presidential candidate? How do we stop this from happening again?

 

It was when a friend with no finance or business training or experience tried to sell me an investment portfolio after becoming a part-time employee of an insurance company that I first realized how far we were into the game. As mortgages changed hands several times a year, from bank to bank, and between investment groups it occurred to me that not only had I no idea who held my mortgage;but, the company holding my mortgage had no idea of its worth. The walls raised by Glass-Steagall had been removed. Security and Exchange Commission/SEC and Commodity Futures Trading Commission/CFTC oversight had been limited by staff cuts meant to down-size “Big Government” and de-regulation. Snake Oil salesmen moved between both worlds, as traders and as regulators. The rules were gone, the walls were gone; and, the fox was guarding the henhouse.

 

President Obama did bring change to Washington. He also brought change to the snake oil salesmen who are furious that their “game is now up”. They attack Obama for the failures wrought by their own failed gamesmanship. They insist he hates capitalism and doesn’t understand how the game is played. Oh, he understands alright! He simply insists that we regulate the game; protect the game board, pieces and assets; and, assure a fair game. America is ours to protect. The game belongs to all Americans. Only Obama has America’s best interest at heart; not the snake oil salesman who wants to get back to his rigged game.

 

Is it mere coincidence that states are turning to casinos to generate wealth? Isn’t it all of a piece? Isn’t the game the same as that being played by the Republican party? Isn’t that what “Citizens United” is all about? Isn’t that what voter I.D. laws are all about? We won’t be fooled this election. The “Booms” we heard crash did not fall on deaf ears. We know a rigged game when we see it. We want no part of it. Vote for President Obama. Vote for those Democrats who refused to become snake oil salesmen running rigged games.

1 Comment

Filed under POLITICS

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

September 22, 2012 · 1:45 am

YOU CAN RUN BUT YOU CAN'T HIDE: REPUBLICANS ON THE MOVE,By Louise Annarino, September 21, 2012

YOU CAN RUN BUT YOU CAN’T HIDE:REPUBLICANS ON THE MOVE, By Louise Annarino,September 21, 2012

Can Democratic candidates win control of the the House of Representatives? Will they retain control of the Senate? Republicans controlled redistricting in most key states, including here in Ohio, following the 2010 census. As a result, it has been commonly accepted that RepublicanHouse candidates have their races sewn up. If this is so, why are they running so fast to jump off Romney’s coat tails?

And do they think voters have forgotten it is House and Senate Republicans who have blocked the efforts of Democrats and President Obama to achieve economic recovery, job retention and creation, break-up of banks too big to fail, oversight of Wall Street, broader energy program, slow-down of climate change, more expansive coverage and lower costs for health care, extension of social security and medicare solvency, women’s rights, LGBT rights, veterans’ care and benefits? Their obstructionism justified simply because they preferred a 1 term presidency over the good of the country and ALL of its citizens?

Norm Ornstein and Thomas Mann who are well-known for their independence and non-partisanship put it this way: “In our past writings, we have criticized both parties when we believed it was warranted.  Today, however, we have no choice but to acknowledge that the core of the problem lies with the Republican Party.  The GOP has become an insurgent outlier in American politics.  It is ideologically extreme; scornful of compromise; unmoved by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition.”

They may run as far from Mitt Romney, and their House colleague and putative leader Paul Ryan; but, they can’t hide form the facts:

  • Due to GOP insistence on holding budget bill hostage to defunding Planned Parenthood and health reform it brought the US Government to the brink of shutdown in 2011.
  • Due to GOP insistence on defeating President Obama’s stimulus,it refused to raise the debt limit until a few hours before default. S&P downgraded the U.S. credit rating for the first time in history explaining, “We lowered our long-term rating on the U.S. because we believe that the prolonged controversy over raising the statutory debt ceiling and the related fiscal policy debate indicate that further near-term progress containing the growth in public spending, especially on entitlements, or on reaching an agreement on raising revenues is less likely than we previously assumed and will remain a contentious and fitful process.”
  • Due to GOP standoff as a budget extension expired 4,000 FAA employees were furloughed in a partial shut-down lasting 13 days,cost the government $200 million in weekly ticket tax revenue that airlines no longer had the authority to collect,and stopped work on dozens of airport projects around the country,
  • Due to GOP demanding Advanced Vehicle Manufacturing Program,which would cut 10,000 jobs it delayed emergency disaster relief.
  • Due to GOP refusal to accept Obama’s routine  proposal to extend the payroll tax cut for middle class families,leaving town as the payroll taxes were about to go up,refusing  to pass the Senate bill until Rep. John Boehner acceded to public criticism and maneuvered the votes needed to pass the bill at the last possible moment.
  • Due to GOP need defeat Obama in 2012 it continues to block the president’s American Jobs Act costing firefighters,police officers and teachers more than 1 million jobs.
  • Due to GOP need to ruin President Obama’s support by small business owners, it continues to block tax cuts for small businesses included in Pbama’s American Jobs Act.
  • Due to GOP desire to show Obama as incompetent, it continues to block essential infrastructure projects included in Obama’s American Jobs Act.
  • Due to GOP effort to pass ideological/morality-laden bills, it has delayed for months any action on the Senate’s version of the Transportation Bill, holding up Obama’s efforts to rebuild roads,bridges,rail lines,seaports,rail and truck depots essential to rebuilding the economy and increasing deportation of American-mad goods which improve our trade balance.
  • Due to GOP plan to remove student support for Obama it delayed reduction in student loan rates, and repeatedly blocked Obama efforts to remove private sector profit from student loan program. The changes Obama was able to accomplish should have been agreed to long ago.
  • Due to GOP plan to deny Obama the support of women voters and impose ideological strictures on women it delayed and blocked extension of contraceptive health care benefits for women, repeatedly refused to renew the Violence Against Women Act, opposed the Lily Ledbetter law, and denied Sandra Fluke’s first attempt to testify before a Congressional committee.
  • Due to GOP need to protect its wealthy donors in order to finance Obama’s defeat, it continues to hold middle-class tax cuts hostage unless tax cuts for the top 1% are maintained, and even increased.
  • Due to GOP disdain for science it has blocked Obama’s efforts to address the effects of climate change, insists on major cuts for pure scientific research,and plans to eliminate the Environmental Protection Agency.

GOP House and Senate candidates can run from Romney-Ryan ticket, but they cannot run from its recent history, nor from the Republican Party Platform, which would continue to hold economic recovery hostage to impose GOP ideology and protect its wealthy donors. How important are these donors? By most accounts Romney spends more time with them than he does on the campaign trail. As ABC’s Jonathan Karl reports: “At one recent Texas fundraiser, a donor told Romney, ‘I am happy to write a check, but why are you here? Shouldn’t you be in Ohio?'”

We have a choice in this election: Vote for Democrats who will support President Obama’s plans for economic recovery, job creation, energy independence, environmental and health protection,end of war in Afghanistan, avoidance of future unjustified wars, meeting the needs of veterans, aiding our military families, following a just foreign policy, and exerting every effort on behalf of all of us; or, vote for Republicans who will continue to block everything which would move us all forward unless we allow them to strip away our civil rights, reward the 1% with more tax breaks, increase middle-class taxes, demean and dismiss the working poor, ignore the indigent, forget our military and veterans, cripple our cities, and use foreign policy to make money for corporate war-mongers. Republicans should keep on running,and not let the door hit them on the back on their way out.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

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

September 20, 2012 · 5:07 am

"WHAT YOU DO TO THE LEAST OF THESE" OUR VETERANS,By Louise Annarino,September 19,2012

“WHAT YOU DO TO THE LEAST OF THESE” OUR VETERANS; By Louise Annarino,September19,2012

Today was a day of further frustration as Republicans blocked passage of a veterans jobs bill. Democrats needed 60 votes but got only 58,including votes of 5 Republicans who joined them in attempting to override a point of order raised by Sen. Sessions (R-Ala).  Senator/Chairperson of the Veterans Affairs committee Patty Murray (D-Wash,) hoped an amendment she introduced which included a provision by Sen.Burr (R-NC) as a compromise to satisfy Republican objections could have gotten to a vote. “At every turn, we have sought compromise. But instead of meeting us halfway, we have been met with resistance,” Murray said. “Instead of saying yes to the nearly one million unemployed veterans, it seems some on the other side have spent the last week and a half seeking out any way to say no.” She warned that such Republican obstruction threatens every effort to aid veterans.

The $1 billion Veterans Jobs Corp Act would have paid for itself over 10 years. It would have created job-training and assistance to obtain work in targeted fields including police work,firefighting,national park conservation, historic preservation projects etc. The same persons who had no problem sending our young men and women to war, with no money budgeted to pay for those wars, objected on a budget point of order to aide the veterans of those wars. The deficit they decry was partially created by borrowing money to pay for those wars in order to avoid raising taxes and upsetting Grover Norquist. The same persons who raised no objection when passing Medicare Part D without funding the expansion to cover prescriptions, and who refused to include language to require bulk rates by pharmaceutical companies to reduce the cost of this unpaid mandate, refused to even consider a bill to put our unemployed veterans to  work.

Sen Tom Coburn (R-Ok) opposed it because it duplicated other efforts; Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky), because it did not include a provision to force Pakistan to free Dr. Shakil Afridi, the doctor who led the US to Osama bin Laden. While I appreciate Dr. Afridi’s help, I also appreciate the soldiers who were sent to Iraq and Afghanistan to find Bin Laden and destroy Al Qaeda. Our soldiers should not be held hostage by Sen. Paul.The hypocrisy is overwhelming.

One appreciates even more Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown’s unwavering support for America’s veterans. Brown was an original cosponsor of the VOW to Hire Heroes Act, a key provision of which is VRAP, which offers job retraining assistance to veterans; up to 99,000 veterans will receive retraining assistance through March 31,2014.

The veteran jobs bill was expected to create at least 20,000 jobs at a time when one in four veterans are unemployed. But, then, they are part of Mr. Romney’s 47%, so perhaps Republicans think they are merely unwilling to take care of themselves, and feel entitled to depend on their government, and the people, all of us, who sent them to war. Here’s a novel idea: THEY ARE ENTITLED.

The Center for American Progress has put together this list showing the unfortunate facts behind veterans’ homelessness:

50 percent: Rate at which veterans are more likely than other Americans to become homeless. The Obama administration has set a goal of ending veteran homelessness by 2015.

About 75,000: Number of veterans who are homeless on any given night, according to estimates from the Veterans Administration.

About 20,000: Number of veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan who were homeless in the past five years according to the Veterans Administration.

5.5 percent: Percentage of homeless vets who fought in Iraq and Afghanistan in the overall homeless population, according to the Veterans Administration.

A Veteran Commits Suicide Every 80 Minutes, according to a Center for a New American Security Suicide report. And, according to armytimes.com. 1,868 veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan, in 2009 alone, made suicide attempts. Marine Corps veteran Jason Christiansen, 35, of St. Paul, Minn. watched his life unravel upon completing his service. He lost his job as an auto dealer in 2008, avoided debt collectors and fell into a serious depression, and considered suicide. Minnesota.publicradio.org reports. Should he be able to expect more from the nation he served at the risk of his life, over there and back here ?

Recent job initiatives by President Obama have helped veteran unemployment fall by six points over the past year. Between January 2010 and January 2011, veteran homelessness declined by 12 percentage points. Still, with wars winding down in Iraq and Afghanistan, those numbers could increase rapidly without government safeguards, according to the Center for American Progress.

Perhaps this explains why Republicans blocked this bill. They could not hand President Obama ANY success, even that of helping our veterans. The Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America reacted with strength,dignity, and disappointment. “Once again, this Congress let partisan bickering stand in the way of putting thousands of America’s heroes back to work,“ said Paul Rieckhoff, the organization’s founder. “Lowering veteran unemployment is something both parties should be able to agree on – even in an election year.” It’s the least our veterans should be able to expect from us.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

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

September 18, 2012 · 4:13 pm

ROMNEY SPEAKS HIS MASTERFUL TRUTH,By Louise Annarino,September,18,2012

ROMNEY SPEAKS HIS MASTERFUL TRUTH, By Louise Annarino, September 18,2012

 

One’s first thought when hearing of candidate Romney’s disparaging remarks about 47% of Americans, recently caught on tape, is “another politician caught in private conversation.” I’ll leave to others the discussion of the political fall-out, the ineptness of a candidate and his campaign staff, and how this impacts the Romney campaign overall. Something more profound than a single election struck me as I watched the tape and listened to Romney’s words.

 

This was a relaxed Romney, not the robot-Romney of the campaign trail mouthing meaningless, convoluted sentences meant to reveal nothing of his true intentions; nor the hesitant Romney reluctant to provide income tax returns, specify policy points, or detail cuts he would make to balance a budget and reduce the deficit. This was a self-assured man, comfortable in his own skin because he was saying exactly what he believes. This is what bothers me.

 

Racism is so ingrained in our thought processes that it flies right past us. A notion that the  47% to whom Romney referred to as his lost votes would not vote for him because he would cut taxes is silly. He is speaking to wealthy donors, the country-club set who do all they can to avoid paying taxes, people just like Romney. His comments had nothing to do with his tax policy. He felt comfortable and safe within this setting because it is his domain,too. These masters of American wealth live in the big house, surrounded by invisible people who take care of their every need. Romney was assuring them he understands the wealthy are superior to those who serve them.

 

Like the master of the big house during slavery, they talk in front of the “help” as if the help are not listening; or if they are listening, cannot understand what is being said; or  if they do understand, have no power to do anything about it. What did the person who cleaned the room and arranged the seating think of Romney’s comments? What about the chauffeurs who drove the guests to the event? What about the cook who prepared the food, or the bartender who served the drinks? What about the staff who cleaned up afterwards? What did these persons think when they heard Romney show such disdain for them, their parents, their sons and daughters, and their grandparents? After all, these are workers in the service industry, many of whom do not even earn minimum wage which would likely put them among the 47% Romney disparaged.

 

As abolitionists campaigned to abolish slavery, they made every effort to paint the real horrors of slavery in newspapers, by writing books, and by creating an extensive lecture circuit. The most effective speakers were those who had escaped slavery. The slaveholders countered the abolitionists by describing slavery much differently. They used the same altered reality within which they could justify their ownership of another human being, by which they could profit from the sale of their slaves, by which they could justify protecting their assets, by which they could justify destroying slave families to pass on all their wealth after death by splitting up slave families among the children of the deceased. The master of slaves protected his investment in his business, and sold off human beings without remorse to elevate his bottom line. How is this different form what men like Romney, the big donors in that room, are trying to do?

 

I am not comparing a political campaign to slavery. I am demonstrating the historical trend of the wealthy class in America to do whatever it takes to maintain its hold on wealth and power, even if that means creating an altered reality. I am not describing everyone who has made money; only those who sense their wealth is unmerited.

 

How did slave masters justify their actions? By describing slaves as not interested in nor able to care for themselves, lazy and shiftless, as happy to be cared for by their benevolent master, as willing to do whatever the master asked of them, as too stupid to be taught to read and write-educating them would be a waste, as naturally docile and subservient, as overly emotional; and they wanted  the master to take care of them.

 

We know none of this is true; but, we see Romney describing Obama supporters with a similar altering of reality. He has done so throughout the campaign. This latest video simply affirms what we have understood all along. He is not just out-of-touch; he lives in an altered reality. The altered reality used to hang on to his wealth is nothing new; it is Romney’s and many of his big-donor supporters’ reality.

 

 

Actually, as an Obama supporter I can attest that disdain for Obama supporters started when Obama first rose to prominence. Obama supporters are described as obsessed, think Obama can do-no-wrong, support him no matter what, are naive or too stupid to understand how America works, and too stupid to realize he is not even an American. They are overly emotional, don’t listen to reason (of their betters), cannot be taught, are lazy and shiftless,want the government to take care of them.

 

The interesting thing is that President Obama is cast as both master and slave; subject to the deceptive descriptions of his followers, and described as the master of the big house/government. This racist theme is clear and overt in Teapublican circles. To see the Republican candidate meeting with masters with the money and using the racist rhetoric of the past in the current political contest makes me cringe for the GOP.

 

We cannot blame the wealthy for this behavior. Those with unmerited wealth must alter their reality. How else can they justify American veterans living on the streets, American children living in homeless shelters, those Americans chronically ill unable to get health insurance, the elderly and retired barely able to make ends meet, the very existence of a class of Americans called the “working poor”. How else can they justify their secretaries paying a higher share of their income than they do? How else can they justify hiding wealth in off-shore tax-shelters to avoid paying taxes?

 

Human beings cannot mistreat those whom they love and respect, nor a country they love and respect. They justify their mistreatment by disdaining them.They create an altered reality to cover a resentment of sharing their wealth. They use their labor to make wealth for themselves and call unionists thugs, African-Americans gangsters, women-sluts, and the middle-class and working poor unwilling to care for themselves.

 

Candidate Romney is not inept; nor is he stupid. He knows those he disdains will not vote for him. But his altered reality tells him he is the master of the big house and he can say what he wants and do what he likes.He believes he rules the media and the polls. He really does expect that the rest of us will go along with him; not because we want to but because we must do so to survive. Let’s prove him wrong. The master may still feel he is in charge. He may try to suppress our vote. He may dissemble in public discourse while he shares truths in private. But we are not fooled. And, we are fired up and ready to go care for our country, our fellow Americans, and ourselves.

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

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

September 16, 2012 · 5:40 pm

TEDDY,BOOKER T. AND BARACK: JOHN 8:32,By Louise Annarino,September 16, 2012

TEDDY, BOOKER T. AND BARACK: JOHN 8:32,By Louise Annarino, September 16,2012

 

Republican Teddy Roosevelt has always been one of my favorite presidents. His Rough Riders embodied his personality when he charged up San Juan Hill on his way to the presidency. He was a man of action, admired by most, resented by party bosses in New York who tried to derail his political influence. They failed. Recently, I have been reading about his dinner with Booker T. Washington in the private quarters of the White House. Mr. Washington had been advising President Roosevelt on government appointments in the South,both men trying to find a common ground for the benefit of African-Americans facing horrific back-lash after initial political successes. Washington hoped to ease into place judges and other government administrators who would chart a fair and just path through institutional racism which was openly being laid through every governmental body. Roosevelt hoped to turn around the animosity of the Southern electorate toward Republicans, whose first president,Abraham Lincoln, had ended slavery and in the southern mind destroyed the south. These two men were fighting the nascent southern strategy. It is the same strategy put in play against efforts to elect,and re-elect, President Obama.

 

One evening, Roosevelt invited Washington to family dinner where he intended to discuss such issues. The two men had engaged in this endeavor secretly, to avoid the anticipated antipathy to such cooperation. The outcry to this dinner throughout the country was not because of what the two discussed; but, that Washington was allowed to share the table of white man and his family, with his wife present, in the White House no less. The sin committed was the sin of social equality. White America could not accept the right of a Black man to enter the white house except as a servant to the white man.

 

Today, I listened to the Sunday morning talk shows, to talking heads discussing the insult to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu because The Black Man did not invite the white man to the White House, the insult to Israel because the Black man did not follow the white man’s advice regarding handling Iran’s uranium enrichment activities. To be fair to Mr. Netanyahu, he is being used by the NeoCons to attack the Black man,and further their own agenda; but they are no friend to Israel,nor to Prime Minister Netanyahu. Using Israel and Iran as a political football is diplomatically dangerous. However, the need to dispossess the uppity Black man with the audacity (of hope) to dine (not set the table for others) in the White House, and invite whom he chooses to dine with him is just too easy a target for the right-wing ideologues, among which Netanyahu claims alliances.

 

This was not all which was discussed today. Megan McCain has joined Mr. Romney, Mr. Ryan et al in continuing the lie that President Obama apologized for and sympathized with those who attacked our embassies and killed our ambassador. Said a Romney Advisor: No Attacks If He Was Prez. Richard Williamson is a top foreign policy aide to Mr. Romney. Implying there would be no protests if Romney were in charge, he further stated  “There’s a pretty compelling story that if you had a President Romney, you’d be in a different situation…In Egypt and Libya and Yemen, again demonstrations — the respect for America has gone down, there’s not a sense of American resolve and we can’t even protect sovereign American property.”

 

This is hypocritical grandstanding considering that Mr. Williamson was an official in the Bush administration when embassies were engulfed by protesters offended by a Danish cartoon. President Bush rightly condemned the cartoon as “unacceptable” while repeating America’s dedication to free speech. Williamson was  a diplomat serving in the U.N. in 2003 when U.N. Headquarters in Iraq was savagely attacked which killed 22 people including its top envoy,causing with-drawl from Iraq for several years. Mr. Williamson applies a different test for President Obama than for himself or his party. This is the latest effort to paint Obama as un-American. It is the latest set of lies and distortions.

 

One hopes there is room for disagreements on foreign policy. One expects political attacks. One also expects some circumspection while our security apparatus hunts for American victims, and our embassies continue to go up in flames. Insight and wisdom must also be expected. Fairness and support toward our leaders in the field making the tough decisions moment-by-moment through a crisis is the least we should expect. Politics should never trump national security.

 

Attacks will soon enough be acceptable within the public discourse. However the political attacks must be truthful.Teddy Roosevelt would have agreed. The Kansas City Star reported his remarks on this subject on May 7,1918:

“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand  by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should bespoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else.”

Teddy Roosevelt learned much by listening to Booker T. Washington. In a letter to a friend he explained “I have always been fond of the West African proverb: “Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far.” THEODORE ROOSEVELT,A LIFE,Nathan Miller, page 337. President Roosevelt’s speech “Citizenship In a Republic”,delivered at the Sorbonne in Paris on April 23,1910 could describe both men:

“It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself for a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat.“

President Teddy Roosevelt could have been describing  Sean Smith, Glen Doherty, Tyrone Woods, and Ambassador Christopher Stevens. He could also be describing the embassy staff in Egypt who tried to prevent an escalation of anger by issuing a statement,American diplomatic staff throughout  the world, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. President Roosevelt could also have been describing President Barack Obama, who speaks softly but carries the big stick of Commander-in-Chief who brought to justice Al Quaeda’s leaders including Osama bin Laden.

Will America face difficulties in this rapidly changing,inter-connected world? Of course. At its helm I prefer a person who leads with dignity,wisdom,and a big stick while speaking softly. For a soft voice calms a room to quiet for those wanting to listen and willing to learn the TRUTH about America. Those who lie lose the attention of truth seekers, the peace-makers of the world. Those who love freedom love truth: “For you shall know the truth, and the Truth shall set you free” John 8:32.

President Obama has avoided the trap of putting politics above national interest. He follows a long line of presidents, Republican- like Teddy Roosevelt, and Democratic-like Teddy’s cousin Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who did likewise. Romney would be wise to follow their lead,but Teapublicans will never allow it.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

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