Tag Archives: Republican Party

October 14, 2012 · 7:13 pm

DEFICIT LIVES,By Louise Annarino, October 14, 2012

DEFICIT LIVES, By Louise Annarino, October 14, 2012

The effort to make Americans fear deficit-spending could be better used discussing what we should do to stop deficit-living. Core areas of our cities, small towns and rural areas are struggling to survive. Poverty has dug a hole, a social and personal deficit, in which large groups of our populace reside. The stimulus has stopped the slide into the hole for most, offered a hand up and out for many, but too many see no way out.

How did we get here, with holes so deeply torn in our social fabric that the middle class has fallen through those holes along with the impoverished? When we did we stop building and strengthening America so all of us could keep the American Dream alive? Instead we allowed charlatans in the think-tanks, lobbyist firms, and the media to paper over the holes, and keep us entertained so we would not notice that the pretty prints they used were mere paper. It started out slowly, but with fall after fall widening the holes entire sections of the fabric split wide open, until the entire fabric was in danger of slipping out of our hands. President Obama took a firm grip, and sewed stimulus patches made of strong material over the holes, all the while warning us that the cloth was worn and need to be replaced; that the holes had so weakened the fabric that major change was needed,and that the fabric could otherwise tear again. But those who met secretly during his inauguration to plot his own down-fall through those holes, pledged to keep them open.

Republicans blocked President Obama’s efforts to select and install a new fabric to support our lives. Many confuse this fabric with the ‘safety net’ strung below it; but, it is not just the safety net which is in danger from Republican policies and the Romney-Ryan Budget, it is the entire fabric strung above the net. Yes, the safety net is struggling; but, not because it was not well-designed, nor well-built, but because it is overloaded by those who fell through holes in our social fabric. It was never intended to hold so many of us. The one way we can relieve stress on our safety net is to replace the social fabric and pull as many Americans off the safety net and back up into the middle class as we possibly can. This is what President Obama intends to do, what he has been doing, and what he will continue to do if re-elected. We must cast our vote to re-elect him president, and cast our vote to elect Democrats to the U.S. House, U.S. Senate, and to state offices who support his vision and will work with him to get the job done. What we do not need are those who insist we cannot replace nor repair the whole cloth; but, must simply remove people from the safety net through privatization of medicare, social security etc.

The National Poverty Center reports that the poverty rate was  22.4 percent, or 39.5 individuals during the 1950’s. “These numbers declined steadily throughout the 1960s, reaching a low of 11.1 percent, or 22.9 million individuals, in 1973. Over the next decade, the poverty rate fluctuated between 11.1 and 12.6 percent, but it began to rise steadily again in 1980. By 1983, the number of poor individuals had risen to 35.3 million individuals, or 15.2 percent.” http://www.npc.umich.edu/poverty/.

I still recall the photos of starving children, eyes wide with uncertainty, on the porches of Appalachia and the Mississippi Delta which stirred President Lyndon Johnson to declare a War on Poverty in the 1960s, which led to the decline of poverty. President Ronald Reagan’s stance in the 1980’s was that we had lost the War on Poverty;and, that social safety net benefits did not justify its cost. We soon saw poverty levels increase.This Reaganomics view of poverty prevails today. But a new paper from Bruce D. Meyer and James X. Sullivan says it’s missing everything. “We may not have won the war on poverty, but we are certainly winning,” they write. When they looked at poorer families’ consumption rather than income, accounted for changes in the tax code that benefit the poor, and included “noncash benefits” such as food stamps and government-provided medical care, they found poverty fell 12.5 percentage points between 1972 and 2010.” In effect, they are explaining that the safety net does work.

The problem is NOT the safety net but growing income inequality in our social fabric. http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-09-12/record-u-dot-s-dot-poverty-rate-holds-as-inequality-grows During the last decade the highest quintile of earners saw their real income rise 1.6% and the top 5% saw their incomes rise 4.9%, while the middle class saw their incomes decline 1.9%. The very lowest incomes, those in the safety net, saw their incomes stay the same. None of this data means the income of those in the safety net is adequate. Nevertheless, the extremely poor (those with less than 1/2 of official poverty level earnings), remained at 6.6% of the population. The middle class has not fallen that low because President Obama’s policies stopped the fall. As more people returned to work in a steady rise over the past nearly 4 years, the fabric of America grows stronger as well.

More is yet to be done, as President Obama reminds us. We cannot reduce the deficit and continue Bush tax breaks for top earners. In fact we must increase their income tax rate,including an increase on capital gains. The estate tax must not be eliminated but increased for those at the highest earning bracket, who are the only persons currently required to pay estate tax, it having been eliminated for lower income earners decades ago. And we must end the round of ceaseless war which benefits military contractors, and corrupt government officials at home and abroad. President Obama, as Vice-President Biden affirmed in his recent debate with Congressman Paul Ryan insists that American troops will be out of Afghanistan in 2014. He suggests that we instead, rebuild America’s education and transportation systems, repair and further develop American infrastructure, invest in small business development and manufacturing, research and develop green and innovative technologies, reduce and redesign our military capabilities for more cost effective security at home and abroad.

We can do all this and reduce the economic deficit. But, we must also end our willingness to overlook poverty, especially for those most greatly affected by it, our women and children.We cannot grow our economy when our children are not given the tools they need to compete and succeed. The National Poverty Center reports: “The poverty rate for all persons masks considerable variation between racial/ethnic subgroups. Poverty rates for blacks and Hispanics greatly exceed the national average. In 2010, 27.4 percent of blacks and 26.6 percent of Hispanics were poor, compared to 9.9 percent of non-Hispanic whites and 12.1 percent of Asians.

Poverty rates are highest for families headed by single women, particularly if they are black or Hispanic. In 2010, 31.6 percent of households headed by single women were poor, while 15.8 percent of households headed by single men and 6.2 percent of married-couple households lived in poverty. (See the U.S. census chart below)

“There are also differences between native-born and foreign-born residents. In 2010, 19.9 percent of foreign-born residents lived in poverty, compared to 14.4 percent of residents born in the United States. Foreign-born, non-citizens had an even higher incidence of poverty, at a rate of 26.7 percent.” http://www.npc.umich.edu/poverty/.

Children Under 18 Living in Poverty, 2010
Category Number (in thousands) Percent
All children under 18 16, 401 22.0
White only, non-Hispanic 5,002 12.4
Black 4,817 38.2
Hispanic 6,110 35.0
Asian 547 13.6

SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2010, Report P60, n. 238, Table B-2, pp. 68-73.

Those like Paul Ryan who argue we must reduce the deficit by reducing the safety net, decreasing income and benefits, weaken labor unions, reduce the size of government and lay-off government workers, privatizing government responsibilities as means to reduce government costs are “whistling Dixie” in more ways than one. Paul Ryan voted for unfunded Medicare Part D, which President Obama, unlike President Bush, has now included in his budget and improved through Obamacare by closing the donut hole. Including this expense within the Obama budget is really a disclosure of previously hidden Bush budget expenses. This is also true for the costs of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars which were passed as emergency measures, not budget items; included by President Obama in his budget and added to official budget deficit figures, but not done so by President Bush.

One must also note that Bush war-funding was historically unprecedented. To pay for World War II, Americans bought savings bonds and put extra notches in their belts. President Harry Truman raised taxes and cut nonmilitary spending to pay for the Korean conflict. During Vietnam, the US raised taxes but still watched deficits soar. President Bush did nothing to control the burgeoning deficits of war. Republicans and Democrats, unwilling to leave troops in the field without funding, settled with uncompromising Republican leadership and allowed this strategic undercounting of the deficit to go unabated and continued to vote for emergency war-funding, outside the regular budget bills. The willingness to kick the can down the road has become a hallmark of Republicans as they block every Democratic bill to increase jobs, reduce deficit, and stimulate the economy during the Obama administration. They are not ashamed , but proud of this tactic in their strategy to make  President Obama a one-term president. In the recently released video of Mitt Romney talking with his well-heeled donors in May he takes this tactic a step further,when he said the Palestinians were not interested in peace, the chances of a peace agreement was remote and the whole issue should be kicked down the field. Kicking problems down the field seems to have become an accepted Republican strategy. The Bush tax cuts added some $2.8 trillion to the national debt, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Congressman Paul Ryan voted for those cuts. To his credit, Ryan also backed the Troubled Asset Relief Program bailout, most of which has been paid back, and the auto bailout.http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/08/is-paul-ryan-really-a-fiscal-hawk/261170/. I mention this because it is disingenuous and hypocritical to blame the deficit on President Obama and democrats in Congress.

I first noticed this Republican disregard for current reality and for balanced budgets during 6 months of debate over Medicare reform in early 2003. I had falsely believed that Republicans were fiscally more conservative than Democrats. Clearly,I was wrong. Reagan, I was aware, had little to no regard for fiscal responsibility, but he had once been a Democrat after all !

Like many others, I saw the need for prescription coverage for seniors and hoped new legislation would allow the government to negotiate for lower costs and formulary control similar to V.A. cost-control efforts. Big Pharma lobbyists blocked, and continue to block such an effort. The bill came to a vote at 3 a.m., just minutes before it was scheduled to close, the clock was stopped for 3 hours with the bill losing, 219-215 while Republicans on the floor, and including President Bush by phone, strong-armed congressman to change their vote. “Then-Representative Nick Smith (R-MI) claimed he was offered campaign funds for his son, who was running to replace him, in return for a change in his vote from ‘nay’ to ‘yea.’ After controversy ensued, Smith clarified no explicit offer of campaign funds was made, but that he was offered ‘substantial and aggressive campaign support’ which he had assumed included financial support.” http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/08/is-paul-ryan-really-a-fiscal-hawk/261170/.

At about 5:50 a.m. the bill passed the House 220-215. The bill itself was finally passed in the Senate 54-44 on November 25, 2003, and was signed into law by President George W. Bush on December 8. Now, Romney and Ryan threaten to eliminate Obamacare and its improvements of medicare, including Part D; plan to privatize medicare and social security. If these programs are more costly than they need be it is because of Republican refusal to rein in excess costs businesses extract from the program.

Medicare Part D did provide prescription coverage but did not reduce costs as much as it could have because of what it failed to include: it prohibits the Federal government from negotiating discounts with drug companies, and it prevents the government from establishing a formulary. It did, however, provide a subsidy for large employers to discourage them from eliminating private prescription coverage to retired workers (a key AARP goal). Obamacare now provides subsidies to small businesses which makes their overall provision of health care insurance affordable. Efforts to include negotiating costs for drugs under Obamacare was blocked by Republicans.

Clearly, it is not Obama’s efforts to reduce medical and insurance costs which makes these medial social fabric programs a drain on government coffers, but the effort of Republicans to protect and expand financial gain of private service providers. President Obama and Congressional Democrats do not seek unfair advantage over private providers; but seek to stop unfair advantage, fraud and abuse by such providers. Obamacare is already predicted to save medicare $716 billion in such provider and insurance company abuses. That money is being channeled to provide more preventive, cost-free health care services for medicare users. This is how we create a stronger social fabric for the middle class. Improving and increasing medicaid coverage is another part of strengthening American fabric.

During an economic downturn, individuals lose jobs, incomes drop, state revenues decline, and more individuals qualify and enroll in Medicaid which increases program spending. However,data indicate that declines in state revenues were a much more significant factor for state budget gaps than increases in Medicaid spending. “Total state revenues dropped by 30% in FY 2009 compared to total Medicaid spending increases of about 7.6% in that year,” http://www.kff.org/medicaid/upload/7580-08.pdf.

Today, 50 states plan or are implementing a new policy to control medicaid costs in multiple areas. State revenues have shown positive growth fro the last 7 quarters, as the unemployment rate continues to drop (now 7.8%) and the GNP continues to improve. States must continue to make delivery of service changes designed to improve care and control costs, thanks to Obamacare. Its “maintenance of eligibility” requirements generally prohibit states from restricting Medicaid eligibility or tightening enrollment procedures. Obama’s focus on wise and educated restructuring of programs for maximum efficiency and best practices in care delivery are another part of strengthening the American fabric.

But, and this is important, these improvements take time. They must however occur if the American Dream is to survive. While government works to  balance budgets, streamline and improve services, reduces fraud and waste it must never forget the impact of income inequality on those African-American, Latino and immigrant single-mothers. we must help them raise their children out of the safety net and up onto the social fabric of the middle-class. We must provide preventive health care, women’s reproductive health care, and children’s health care to everyone in America. We must be certain every child is well-fed, provided with stimulating day-care and pre-schools to ready them for a top-notch education. They need warm clothes for winter, safe after school and summer programs, neighborhoods free of crime and violence. We must not only show them a way out of poverty, but strengthen and empower them to follow the path. I am reminded of the United Negro College Fund motto “ A Mind Is a Terrible Thing  to Waste.” Our American middle-class motto must be “ A Child is a Terrible Thing to Waste.”  President Barack Obama and Vice-President Joe Biden would weave this motto into the fabric of America. They will not kick American children down the road, until the deficit is paid off. They will not continue and increase income inequality with tax relief to those who don’t need it. They will reduce the economic deficit AND the human deficit, by reducing income inequality.  That is how we strengthen the American fabric for all of us.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

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

October 13, 2012 · 2:53 am

HE HAD TO TAKE THE FIRST PUNCH,By Louise Annarino, October 11,2012

HE HAD TO TAKE THE FIRST PUNCH, By Louise Annarino,October 11,2012

This is what DAGOS and WOPS are taught by their 1st. generation immigrant mothers: “Never start a fight. Take the first punch. After that fight back.” I cannot speak for African-American parents because I am white. But, I can speak to the innate racism of white people because I am white which means I am a recovering racist; and for white bigotry because I have experienced it as a 2d generation Italian immigrant, a woman, and a Roman Catholic. I know the anger I swallowed when seeing Nazi swastikas painted ten feet tall on the wall of my Catholic high school gymnasium, when being spit on for being a dirty fish-eater, when being ignored by store clerks who waited on everyone who came after me when I was in my school uniform, for being refused interviews for jobs unsuitable for a woman, for being paid less than male colleagues with less education and experience while  performing the same job, when being dismissed by police officers when reporting a rape. Such experiences do not simply slide off a person, even one who quietly takes punch after punch. They settle deeply in the sinew and bone, weigh heavy on the soul, and slow down our response to future acts of bigotry.

Those who routinely suffer bigotry but want to make a good life for themselves and their children do what all ambitious but good people do. They become educated, self-aware and well-mannered, They learn patience and an ability to address bigots with dignity, kindness and a sense of common humanity. Often, this creates an illusion that bigotry is acceptable, even expected. It is neither. Why, then acquiesce in the face of bigotry? Why remain silent? In the Jim Crow south, African Americans faced not only the institutionalized racism of realtors, bankers, and politicians; but, public shaming, physical violence, severe injury, and even death for not moving off a sidewalk to allow a white man to pass, for keeping one’s head up and looking a white man in the eye, for using a white-only drinking fountain, or merely for showing up at a poll to vote.

We have learned that racial bigotry and jim Crow is not just a southern thing, but persists throughout this country. It has become institutionalized within our political parties, rather forcefully within the Republican Party whose policies do not attract diverse membership, and which seems to have succumbed to Teapublican leadership. The Democratic Party’s diverse membership subdues the racial bigotry within; but we must admit it still taints every white American, despite out best efforts. This is why I call us white Americans recovering racists, resisting our innate bigotry one step at a time.

We watched president Obama take the first punch during the first debate. We watched him looking down as the white man aggressively put him in his place. We cannot know why he did not vigorously fight back. But I know that had he done so he would have been attacked far more bitterly than Vice-President Joe Biden has been attacked for his vigorous effort  to keep straight the record of the Obama-Biden administration’s policies. Biden is being derided for is behavior, He is called rude for being a happy warrior, for immediately refuting each lie as it was spoken, for laughing at the most ludicrous comments by Congressman Ryan.

Can you imagine what President Obama, whom the right-wing Republicans define as a socialist-fascist-communist,un-American devil, would have been called? I know what white men call strong, assertive African-American men with the audacity to look them in the eye and challenge them. We all do. An African-American man, too often, must take the first punch;especially, if he is seeking the votes of the  3% undecided white voters. We saw the injustice of lies directed against him for what it is, an attack on at least 47% of us.

Some of us became angry with the president for taking those punches;because, we could feel them in our own gut. But, could we have done better with a first punch? Anyone who really understands what bigotry lay behind the demeaning language and verbally intense attack,anyone who had personal experience with such attacks would have shut down an immediate response to develop a strategy to emerge unscathed. Obama did not give Romney a chance to  define his image. An angry Black thug would not appeal to that 3%.

Things have changed as a result. Americans have given our African-American president permission to fight back and to throw punches at the white candidate. It should not be necessary for him to get our permission. Racism creates ridiculous rules. He will, never the less, be attacked much more severely than Vice-President Biden has been today. However, now we white voters are ready to see such attacks for what they really are: just as unfair and dishonest as Romney’s policies and tactics for taking back the White House.

I cannot speak for the president, for what he felt, or what his response meant to him. But, I know what it meant to me. Time to fight, Mr. President. We have your back.

2 Comments

Filed under POLITICS

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

October 8, 2012 · 1:50 pm

WE NEED LAWYERS TO MODERATE DEBATES,By Louise Annarino, October 8,2012

WE NEED LAWYERS TO MODERATE DEBATES, By Louise Annarino,October 8,2012

 

Yesterday, I discussed the need to identify and challenge bullying behavior in the workplace,at school, and on debate stages. While it may be impossible for human beings to refrain from aggression and dominance, such behavior can be restrained and redirected in positive ways. This is called the process of civilization. While some Americans made treaties and sought peaceful sharing of mother earth with Native Americans as they moved across new frontiers and ancient tribal grounds, others on both sides bullied their way, breaking treaties and attacking each other. When rules are allowed to be easily broken, when little is done to enforce them, when rule-breakers win without censure, nations and civilizations are destroyed.

 

The core restraints against bullies are rules. Rules must be established and enforced to restrain aggression and dominance. Every mother knows this. Every mother tames her children with rules, redirects their innate desire to dominate their world with rules. As a child matures into civility, she hopes empathy will take over her role as matron of rules. A mother can relax a bit once her child has learned good manners; but only if the child also has developed empathy. Some are incapable of empathy; some so privileged they do not believe rules apply to them. These persons must be compelled to follow rules even more closely in order not to abuse their innate drive to dominate and overpower others. Such persons abuse such power if their aggression is not contained within the rules, nor redirected by their own empathy.

 

When I was 18 I developed and directed a playground in small town inner-city neighborhood. The neighborhood’s poverty level was similar to my own. While it was predominately African-American, my own was predominately new immigrant. Neither viewed positively by the larger populace of the town. Each difficult to escape. Immigrants could eventually escape with education and very hard work; African-Americans could not escape even with education and very hard work due to red-lining real-estate transactions and discrimination. Each neighborhood had their share of bullies, as I am certain the wealthier white neighborhoods did as well. They must have because I met those bullies in college, in law school, and in the workplace.

 

It was easy to identify the bullies by their easy but tight smiles, chest-leading swagger and rapid fire delivery of directives and demands. When I questioned them they lied for the joy of misleading me. When I challenged them, they accelerated their verbal barrage against me, for the joy of dominating the conversation. When I held them to the rules, they became louder and more animated, for the joy of undermining my authority. And, they never stopped smiling those tight smiles. To diminish my personal or positional power, they demeaned me in front of others, passed false rumors regarding my character, and claimed my accomplishments as their own. I know bullies intimately.

 

To keep the other children and myself safe from the bullies, the neighborhood gang stayed nearby and moved in when the bullies became too aggressive. I did two things to address this situation. First, I organized a neighborhood election (parents and neighbors could also vote) for a Playground Congress to make rules, which selected a Playground Supreme Court to decide when rules had been broken and ordered punishment for rule-breakers, which selected a Playground Chief of Police to enforce the rules and punishment, and who selected his Playground Police Patrol. Congress made rules such as no knives, no guns, no matches, no drugs, no fighting, no cursing, no stealing. The Supreme Court selected the lead bully as Chief of Police. The Chief of police picked his adherents as police officers. The bully was now commissioned to abide by and enforce the rules, with assurance the Court would mete out justice. The aggression and need to  dominate of our bully was contained within rules and his energies redirected. He was incapable of empathy, but we had a means of civilizing his need to dominate and control others.

 

Fights were handled following my suggestion. Those whose arguments became either verbally or physically violent were sentenced to “the ring”. While I laced up miscreants’ boxing gloves, the leader of our local gang who agreed to manage the fight (who better able?) read the Queensbury Rules to the combatants. It was his job to keep the fight within the rules and assure no blows caused harm to either combatant. To say this was a novel approach for him is a gross understatement. However, he handled his role with the strong leadership qualities he displayed as a well-respected gang leader. He, like all good leaders, was not a bully. He was calm, reserved, soft-spoken, and saved his smiles for those surprising moments of utter hilarity which frequently erupt in the presence of young children. Watching these kids try to connect a punch wearing boxing gloves they could barely hold up created such fun that their arguments and need to fight quickly dissipated, while we all laughed together.

 

Looking back, I think I became a lawyer not because I like rules, but because I hate them. I hate the need for them. But I respect what rules,what the RULE OF LAW, can accomplish. It can civilize a nation. It can contain a bully. This is what The 10 Commandments are for Jews, their early rule of law. When Jesus was asked, “Rabbi, what is the greatest commandment?” He answered that there is but ONE commandment, “That you love one another, even as God loves you.” This requires empathy. When empathy fails, when one person just doesn’t “get” the other, only rules can replace empathy and create civility. Maybe we need lawyers to moderate debates.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

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

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 , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

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 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,