Tag Archives: women

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

FREEDOM OF SPEECH SAVED BY A WALL,By Louise Annarino,October 10, 2012

FREEDOM OF SPEECH SAVED BY A WALL, By Louise Annarino, October 10, 2012

Teachable moments are what I live for. At my core I am still Professor Annarino,even though I retired that nomenclature when I retired from Ohio University. The Arab Spring, and the role of President Obama and the United States of America as supporters of rising democratic republics across north Africa and the Mid-east have created a teachable moment. It was a sign of success when world leaders gathered at the United Nations and openly discussed the human right of freedom of expression. President Mohammed Morsi of Egypt and President Abed Rabbu Mansour Hadi of Yemen affirmed a belief in the right to freedom of expression, they expressed a need to limit hate speech, including speech that insults religion and religious figures. President Asif A. Zadari of Pakistan went further, arguing that such speech should be criminalized. These leaders are struggling with the ramifications of hate speech,as we all do. However, their recommended solution to restrict speech is not the only way to deal with hate speech. The United States has been dealing with this problem since its inception. Hate groups continue to plague us,sometimes engaging in homegrown terrorism.We understand  the issue. Our cultural institutions, med1a, schools and courts address the problems such hate speech create. These new leaders have hard choices ahead; difficult decades of discord before free speech takes hold.

To some calls  to limit speech may seem a disturbing turn of events. But it is not;it is chance to explore free speech more fully. Free speech protection has taken centuries to establish itself in Europe and America beginning with the fall of the “Sun-Kings” and “Holy Roman Emperors” of Europe. We continue the struggle to protect free speech today. The institution which held it back in Europe and The Americas,and continues to assault it today, is the institution whose nature is proscriptive due to its assigned task of “preaching the gospel”, the church. I would argue that one reason freedom of speech has become secured in American culture is the separation of Church and State. In America, no longer can a population be constricted from expressing beliefs contrary to what is preached from the pulpit on Sunday, the synagogue on Saturday, or the mosque on Friday. Witches are no longer being burned in Salem. Women can express themselves as they wish, without wearing Scarlet Letters. The separation of Church and State also stops the government from putting words into the mouths of those who preach, protecting all religions equally. We the People are the WALL which separates the two forces. Thus, it is inherent that we behave responsibly and fairly with one another to keep the wall strong.

Sometimes speech should be restricted. For example, to protect human life when speech threatens to kill. Verbal assault is a crime, if it places the recipient in fear of his life AND causes actual physical harm. But, we also believe “sticks and stones may break our bones but names will never harm us.” Nor are we free to shout “fire” in a crowded theatre; the outcome of panic in a confined space certain to injure or kill. We even allow reasonable restrictions on where speech can be voiced so as not to unreasonably interfere with the ordinary course of business. Nevertheless, reasonable accomodations must be made for the speech-giver.

The fact that the door is open to such discussion among world leaders is a good thing. Of course, these leaders face the same challenge early American leaders faced  taking on their ingrained cultural institutions, including their religious institutions, in order to implement and secure the unbridled right of freedom of expression. Their task is much harder than that of early American leaders, however. They do not have a thick wall separating church and state. Until they do, free speech for their people may be elusive. Imams preaching attacks on Christians, Jews and Infidels may cause fear in those groups since it may,and occasionally does, incite adherents to commit physical assaults. Also, a protester standing in Tahrir Square with a bullhorn shouting to attack the police,military or government may incite others to violence. In Somalia, opposition efforts to overthrow Siad Barre’s oppressive communist government declined to clan warfare, resulting in unspeakable violence and a Failed State. Freedom of speech can be a double-edged sword. Dealing with these issues is always difficult;but when there is no separation of Church and State, resolving them is nigh impossible. When church leaders insist governments deny freedom of expression by anyone who does not follow their religious teachings, including poets,artists, cartoonists and authors both institutions are compromised;and, no one is free. Those who give up free speech soon lose personal freedom.

Is this the cultural difference to which new leaders ask us to be sensitive? Do they want our walls between church and state removed? Most certainly they do. We cannot agree to break down our wall between church and state. Doing so means we lose the protections ingrained in our Bill of Rights.We would no longer be a free people. We must refuse to do so; not for other nations, nor for Christian fundamentalists in our own country.

However, we can be sensitive to this issue for it is one we continually fight. We have our own version of groups who dislike the Wall and insist America is a Christian nation, when in fact it is a secular nation with a majority of Christian citizens, and many non-Christians, and non-theists. The nation belongs equally to each person, and its laws are written for all, not simply for Christians. Some Christians constantly chip away at the Wall. They insist on prayer in public schools, tax-funded vouchers for religious schools, nativity sets on the public square, and faith-based “science” teaching.

We area free people with a Bill of Rights and separation of Church and State. We hold these rights sacred and believe they are human rights. We cannot, we must not abridge freedom of speech for any religion. Is this the real reason leaders of these countries justify violence against our embassies and citizens? Is it their Church or their State making such a demand upon us? Either way it is an impossible one. As Americans we define ourselves by our freedoms.

As we head into the final days of the 2012 election, consider which candidate has the sensitivity, experience, demeanor and resolute commitment to human rights, fairness, diversity and peaceful dispute resolution. Which one has the ability to pull together diverse supporters: Black-White-Latino-Native American, immigrant and DAR, Catholic-Jew-Muslim-atheist, artists-musician-scientist-environmentalist-Big Bird, Warren Buffet big businessmen-Elizabeth Lessner small businesswoman- unions, women, LGBT community, active military-veterans-Code pink-peace activists ? Which one is open to any idea so long as it is a good one, capable of solving a problem despite who brings it forward? Which embodies our American value of free speech by the diversity of his supporters? Which candidate can lead us forward in a diverse world, with new leaders, in new countries, seeking a new way to move forward? That candidate is President Barack Obama.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

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

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

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

POLITICAL GLOBALIZATION,By Louise Annarino,September 6,2012

POLITICAL GLOBALIZATION, By Louise Annarino,September 6,2012

It has been a curious fact to me that my blog is being viewed in over 35 countries, in addition to the United States. American political blogs, I must conclude, are of some interest to individuals across the globe. Emerging democratic republics watch us for insights into party politics. Democrats are an example of people united to move this country FORWARD, despite a well-financed opposition. This is the nature of political fights. However, the level of personalized hate-filled distortions by Super-PACS is exceptionally virulent this campaign cycle.

Could it be the reason our party politics seems to be in flames with incendiary rhetoric against our president and the Democratic Party is because of globalization? I watched much of the Republican convention and am now watching the Democratic convention. The differences are writ large. The diversity within the Democratic Party delegates mirrors that of the globe, while the delegates at the Republican Party convention were the face of an older,nearly all-white America. America has always been diverse but its power-brokers and political leaders have not. Not only did earlier political leaders not recognize nor respond readily to the needs of women, minorities, LGBT community,immigrants and others within America, they carried such chauvinism abroad.

The Democratic Party is the face of a new America. When Barack Obama was elected he changed the face of American politics and power,at home and abroad. There are 12 Democratic women serving in the United States Senate, more than any time in history; 55 in the House of Representatives. One-fourth of Democratic delegates to the convention are African-American. There are more than 800 Latino delegates,150 Native-American delegates. Americans know how to build consensus among diverse cultures and create an American political family called The Democratic Party. Following the practice among union members, Democrats address one another as brothers and sisters. The internet has joined the young people of the world as cousins, if not yet as brothers and sisters. The Democratic Party and the leader of the party, President Barack Obama welcome the nations of the world to join in building a thriving global community of mutual respect and prosperity. American voters should celebrate this;a few do not.

An appreciation and acceptance of diversity within America and across the globe is too often called “un-American”; when, in fact, it is totally American. Racial, cultural, and gender diversity is what built America and what keeps it strong. Diversity of ideas and viewpoints is what stimulates imagination and creates new technology and new enterprises. American prosperity was built upon the backs of a diverse labor group. American immigrants own 18% of small businesses, accounting for 30% of all private sector employment (see morehttp://fiscalpolicy.org/immigrant-small-business-owners-FPI-20120614.pdf). One can only hope that all nations will embrace such diversity within their borders,as we have within ours. What is disturbing is not such diversity but the virulent  disdain and destructive rhetoric the Republican Party rails against the party embracing it. This is what confuses those of us who know and love the American ideal of E Pluribus Unum, “One out of many” from those of us who are Americans, and those of us from other nations.

As businesses and multinational corporations moved jobs and companies abroad, they thought they could avoid organized-labor fair wages, safety precautions, environmental standards and U.S. taxation. Republicans say  they are the party which understands and appreciates globalization,and knows how to rebuild an economy. But, I think it is the Democratic Party which truly understands the value of globalization,and which is ready to embrace citizens of other nations as brothers and sisters for our greater prosperity through job creation. I can only imagine how millionaire investors fear the impact of the spread of American ideals on such a global scale,and how it will affect their bottom line. And of course, destroying or at least weakening the middle class here and abroad will create a labor force willing to accept low wages, few benefits and no ability to wield political power.

This is what is going on in American politics today. This is what readers abroad need to understand. Rest assured, the grassroots supporters of Barack Obama and Democratic Party candidates are working very hard to move America FORWARD 4 more years. Democrats understand politics can get down and dirty; but, neither President Obama nor his party will buckle under to hate, lies or vote suppression. The stakes for America and for the world are too high.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

NOW YOU'RE COOKIN',By Louise Annarino,September 4, 2012

NOW YOU’RE COOKIN’ By Louise Annarino,September 4,2012

 

Labor Day used to be the day when our industrial town celebrated with a huge parade. Every business seemed to have a float. Like the one I rode on every year with other students from Marjorie Pickerell’s Dance Studio, it was a simply-decorated flatbed borrowed from one of the many farms surrounding our small town. Our dance costumes and silly grins were the true decorative touches. A labor union marched in front of us, and the high school band always followed our float. Its bass drums thundering in my tightened belly, dehydrated from the sun shining mercilessly down on our heads,I could not wait to get down off that float. Too much heat ,for too long is sickening. My dad always magically appeared out of the crowd to lift me down among the crowd. Workers, not outdoor barbecues took center stage for me.

On this super-heated  Labor Day  I thought of all the grills getting fired up and ready to go. It reminded me of the current campaign season. Newspersons continual insistence that there is a lack of enthusiasm among Obama supporters compared to 2008 is all wrong. The enthusiasm of 2008 was for the first African-American president. We knew we were making history. And we loved Barack Obama for stepping Forward to lead the way. Our excitement was contagious. The entire world felt the upending of paternalism and racial domination by the voters who long for the means to fulfill middle-class dreams, and who value diversity. We believed the hopes we felt after passage of the Civil Rights act, Title VII, Title IX and Voting Rights Act were about to be fulfilled. The flames of that initial lighting of our minds and hearts was sky high. Yes, we were fired up!

But, no one can cook on that high a flame. One waits until the flames die down before starting to cook. This is the nature of governance and good cooking: low heat,slow simmer and the right amount of seasoning. in 2008 we were fired up and ready to go. Since then we have been cooking a wonderful meal with something for every taste. We are enthusiastic and well satisfied with our president. It is the guests who refuse to sit at the table with all of us, so many of us are not “their kind”,who threaten to ruin the meal. Don’t listen to them. Don’t vote for them. If they get hungry enough, they will come sit down with us, maybe even help cook during the next four years.

As Vince Lombardi said, “When you get into the end zone, act like you’ve been there before.” Well, we have been here before, in 2008. Don’t expect us to act like we have not. Stop looking for high flames. We are in the end zone now. We are fired up,ready to go and cookin’ it!

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

IT MUST NOT BE RAPE IF A WOMAN GETS PREGNANT,By Louise Annarino,August 20,2012

It Must Not Be Rape If A Woman Gets Pregnant,By Louise Annarino,August 2o,2012

As I write this I am listening to Tchaikowsky’s Sleeping Beauty Suite via Spotify, thanks to a helpful young nephew who downloaded it to my computer.Little girls love the story of Sleeping Beauty. Even those of us who are feminists to the core dream the most beautiful dream of all, finding our prince.  A few of us are lucky enough to have found him. Then there is rape, the stuff of nightmares.

Students moved into residence halls at The Ohio State University this week-end. Some of them will be raped; 1out of 4 is a commonly cited statistic. Another is that 90% knew their rapist; and yet another that 60% of male college students “indicated some likelihood of raping or using force in certain circumstances”(see more at http://www.crisisconnectioninc.org/sexualassault/college_campuses_and_rape.htm).

As a 19 year old student and Resident Advisor or RA at OSU I spent many nights in the University Hospital emergency room comforting such young women; and, sometimes comforting those who were hemorrhaging from a back-alley abortion. Abortions were then illegal. Sleeping Beauties, these young women, who sought to make a dream come true, woke up in a nightmare. Every 21 hours a woman is raped on a college campus.

It is not only college women, those uppity females who believe they are as smart and as competent as men, and able to compete with them who face sexual assault. Rape crosses all economic and sexual barriers. In a department of Justice Study 1 in 6 women and 1 in 33 men experienced rape or attempted rape. Yet, a 1992 report from the National Victim Center ( see more at http://www.911rape.org/facts-quotes/statistics )called rape the most underreported violent crime in America; with one in six victims reporting the rape. The 2000 FBI Uniform Crime Report states that a rape occurs in the United States once every 5 minutes.

The young are more likely to be sexually assaulted than adults. In the 1992 study the National Victim Center reported the following breakdown by age of victims:

29.3% were less than 11 years old
32.3% were between 11 and 17
22.2% were between 18 and 24
7.1% were between 25 and 29
6.1% were older than 29
3.0% age was not available

Getting lost in statistics? Each one is a human being just like you,your wife,daughter, mother,sister,niece. Rapists live among us as family, friends, neighbors. Rape is a violent crime not because of the nature of penetration, the level of force used, nor the behavior of a woman prior to the rape. It is because sex is used as a weapon to injure,maim,even kill a woman; body, heart and soul. Rape is meant to denigrate and defile a woman. To show her how worthless she really is. It is not a sexual act but a violent act using sex as the weapon.

While working on a graduate level project at a maximum security men’s prison in Ohio I discovered that most rapes are planned; inmates often described to me how they selected their victims. The reason most women report knowing their rapist is because he sets up potential victims by making innocent and deceptively friendly contact with her hours,days,weeks in advance; often, by simply asking for the time or directions and making conversation. Those women who respond favorably and kindly are selected. Those who ignore or showed distaste for the man’s advances are bypassed as likely to be a “problem”. I was told (women in the helping professions) teachers,nurses and social workers are particularly sought out. Since then, I am most unfriendly to any man I do not know and give a glaring look if asked for directions etc. Not very ladylike; I have no illusions about, nor dreams of being a princess.

I understood rape,finally, despite the hours I had spent with women who had experienced it, when I was nearly gang-raped while walking across the OSU campus in daylight, walking with two female roommates. I had taken several self-defense courses and like many women mistakenly believed I could take-down or escape a rapist, never imagining the possibility of pair or gang-rapes. 85% of rape survivors report they tried unsuccessfully to reason with the man who raped her. 55% of campus gang-rapes are committed by fraternities,40% by sports teams,and 5% by others.(http://www.oneinfourusa.org/statistics.php) In my case it was the intervention by the OSU football squad which saved me. GO BUCKS!

Which brings me to the Teapublican fraternity of men in the House and Senate who show their disdain for women by submitting bills to control them, deprive them of needed health care, and pay them less than men doing the same job. Recently, Representatives Todd Akin (R-MO) and Paul Ryan (R-WI) co-sponsored H.R. 3“No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act,” which initially included language which changed the definition of rape to forcible rape. Later,public pressure forced the bill’s supporters to remove that unacceptable and narrow definition. Perhaps Mr. Akin meant to say forcible instead of legitimate while defending his extreme anti-choice view because he believes some rapes are legitimate, and/or not all rapes are forcible. Either way the idea of rape held by Mr. Akin, Mr. Ryan and other Teapublicans is misguided. They discuss rape as if it were a sexual act, as if some sex is legitimate and some not; as if some sex is forced and some not. Rape does not illustrate a woman’s willingness or unwillingness to exert her sexuality. It can never be legitimate. It is inherently a use of force meant to denigrate and harm a woman. Rape is a weapon against women.It is a criminal act; and they don’t get it.

His very words over during a recent interview illustrate the Teapublican Akin’s failure to understand the problems women face: “First of all, from what I understand from doctors [pregnancy from rape] is really rare. If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.” Why is he talking with doctors about rape? Why is he not talking with criminal experts? Why is he talking about pregnancy resulting from rape? Why is he not talking about the injuries sustained by women resulting from rape? Why? Because he is not interested in rape. He dos not respect a woman’s right to be free of criminal attack when sex is the weapon.He is interested in stopping ALL abortions, even those resulting from rape. Abortion is his raison d’etre. SInce a woman who gets pregnant could not have been raped, there is no need to add an exemption for rape victims in legislation denying funding for abortion. This was no slip of the tongue;this is Teapublican policy espoused by candidates running on the Republican Party tickets across the country.

How would Akin and Ryan decide which rapes are legitimate or forcible, and which are not? If Akin’s scientific analysis is correct, any rape resulting in pregnancy would NOT be a legitimate rape since a legitimate rape “would shut that whole thing down”. If “that whole thing” did not shut down, then the rape must not be legitimate rape. The woman should not be protected nor her abortion/health care needs funded.

I resent having my female reproductive health system described as “that whole thing”. Akin and Ryan talk about God and religion so much one would expect a little more sanctity and appreciation for God’s design of women’s bodies. One would expect them to respectfully learn the truth about sexuality and reproduction. One would expect them to respect women and protect them from criminal violence;not parse such violence against women for political gain.

The Akin-Ryan denigration of women from the floor of congress and their campaign trails is painful and frightening to all women, but especially to those of us who have had to learn to overcome the hatred and disdain of the men who attacked us. Now,  presidential candidate Romney selects Rep. Paul Ryan to run as Vice-President. Mr. Akin, Mr. Ryan and Mr. Romney wound us anew. Of course they frighten us. They are the stuff of nightmares which have never gone away.

 

 

2 Comments

Filed under COMMENTARY, POLITICS

TEAPUBLICANS:UNSAFE AT ANY SPEED,By Louise Annarino,August 19,2012

TEAPUBLICANS: UNSAFE AT ANY SPEED,By Louise Annarino,August 19,2012

It is not easy for me to type the word Republican in the same sentence with words like “racism” http://open.salon.com/blog/chauncey_devega/2012/08/17/niggerization_toure_was_right_about_romneys_race_baiting: Obama (notice a title is never used) is an angry black man determined to destroy Christian America from within with his Muslim socialism,“war on the poor”: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/08/the-gops-war-on-the-poor/260983/ Obama gives out checks to black people who want free stuff but don’t want to work, “war on women” http://nymag.com/news/frank-rich/gop-women-problem-2012-4/index1.html America needs to turn back the Obama clock to days when women acted as women are supposed to act and let men take care of business,“attack on immigrants” http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/06/15/500607/mitt-romney-immigration-primary/ Mitt Romney would make life so miserable for immigrants they would “self deport” and Obama coddles them. “attack on education” http://www.alligator.org/opinion/columns/article_137d789e-8383-11e1-983d-0019bb2963f4.html Obama is uppity and overeducated.Not everyone needs an education, nor deserves one. Education should be privatized; ask your parents for a loan if you need financial help to pay for school.

I would like to believe this is not the position of the Grand Old Party- GOP. But, it has been for some time. I believe there are many republicans who are embarrassed by the current Republican platform, policies and candidates; who are ashamed of belonging to  party whose main goal is to make the black man a one-term president even when he adopts the very legislative approach sought by their once-heroes. Who no longer recognize the attacks being made, the lies being told, and the fostering of hate as defensible tactics. A political strategy based on racist ideology has been fully embraced by party leaders, who act as if they have little choice if the party itself is to survive. They seem almost eager to join the racists within their ranks. They seem to be in denial as they attack a black man defending himself against their racism as a racist himself. That is an old sorry tale. As Dan Rather would say “that dog won’t hunt.”

I believe in the power of words. It is time to embrace new terminology. From now on I will refer to the politicians who have embraced and use racism to “get out the republican base” as TEAPUBLICANS. I hope those republicans of good will, who are willing to join with democrats and independents to find solutions to serve the common good, who are willing to share in both sacrifice and success to lead America forward, and who refuse to wage war on fellow Americans to maintain unfair advantage-power-wealth will find a way to save the GOP. It is unsafe for the Republican Party to embrace the Teapublican Party in any way, at any level, at any speed. The Teapublican Party is headed for a crash. Republicans need to get out of the car and stand on their own. That is the only way the Republican Party will survive the years ahead.

Why do I care? Because I believe in a strong two-party system. Politics is a peaceful way to wage war and settle differences with one another. Politics no longer works when the parties no longer respect one another enough to fight the racist, sexist, ethnocentric, nationalistic, homophobic dark side of themselves. Teapublicans embrace false fear and false hate as tools. They walk on the dark side of life. If their fears were real and their hate justified, it would be a totally different story. But Teaparty hate is NOT based on reality: African-Americans are not scary, strong women are no threat, gay spouses won’t ruin heterosexuals marriages, immigrants don’t want your job. It is perhaps too late for republicans to “throw the bums out’ of the GOP;after all, their candidate for president and vice-president have stretched into ridiculous poses to adopt Teapublican positions and policies. But, it is not too late to get out of the car.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS

The Pro-Choice Ethic of a Faithful Roman Catholic: A Reflection by Kate Mroz

The Pro-Choice Ethic of a Faithful Roman Catholic: A Reflection by Kate Mroz.

Leave a comment

Filed under POLITICS