It's over; the only thing left to do is vote. Last night, Governor Romney and President Obama engaged in their final debate.
The general tide supports that Obama edged out Romney by a small margin. My favorite guru, Nate Silver over at the 538 Blog says that the debate is unlikely to provide Obama with a large bump but that a small bump will still be significant. I can't read the rest of the article because the blog is on the New York Times site and I've used up my 10 free articles for this month. If I want to read more articles, I have to be a paid subscriber or just wait to November for my next 10 free reads.
The debates were about as substantive as the "reality" shows that abound on the major networks. The moderators fail to ask substantive questions about matters such as climate change, the impact of the European economy on America, alternatives to fossil fuels and so on and so forth, and the candidates don't care if they answer the questions that are asked, only that they make points that their supporters will applaud.
The public plays a major role in this pretense of doing something meaningful. Far too many people have the attention span of a toddler and only wake up and focus when there is a zinger offered by one of the participants. The media actually writes reviews of the debates analyzing who gave the best zingers of the night. The President appears to have won the zinger contest in last night's debate with his reminder to Romney that the modern Navy is not just a bunch of ships but consists of aircraft carriers and nuclear submarines. Of course the memorable part of the chastisement was, "Governor,...we also have fewer horses and bayonets..."
The Huffington Post thinks that the President's zingers were "sharp but snarky." (Hunter Stuart and Oliver Noble) Various critics declared the President the loser of the first debate, chastising him for not offering any zingers. The talking heads on Good Morning America offered that the attack mode of the President in the last two debates may have upset women voters. Didn't bother me, but then I've watched Liam Neeson kick butt in Taken three times.
It would be nice if candidates could have real debates where they talked about the issues. Imagine scoring points with viewers by actually saying something substantive that required you to listen and follow the intricacies of the discussion. Everyone glued to the screen and not a single soul texting or playing Words with Friends on their electronic gadget of the moment.
I also hope for world peace. I'm a patron of impossible causes.
I support President Obama. I believe that he does think about matters of substance but realized that his initial efforts to engage in civil and substantive discourse wasn't playing well with Mr. and Ms. Average American. I enjoyed his zingers, but that's not why I am voting for him.
I'm casting my vote for Obama because I believe that this country needs a leader who thinks about what matters. A leader who is focused on our interaction with the rest of the world, who understands that foreign policy is not about threats and waving a big stick. I want a leader who believes that we are all in this together and supports domestic policies that address wealth distribution. You see, I don't believe that poverty is inevitable, that people are homeless because they are too lazy to do better, or that any child should go to bed hungry. I also believe that we can do better as a country, that we can work to build a society based on equity and fairness for all. I'm voting for Obama because in spite of the absence of any discussion of environmental issues in the debates, the President has demonstrated in practice and policies that environmental protection issues are high on his agenda.
Maybe next election cycle, we'll hear candidates engage in substantive discussions of the issues that should concern us all and maybe Denzel Washington will call me to chat. I work at being an optimist.
Tuesday, October 23, 2012
Monday, October 22, 2012
Romney, Iran, and Nukes
 |
| A Survivor of Hiroshima |
Foreign policy is the focus of the last presidential debate prior to election day. No doubt, one of the topics will be Iran's nuclear program.
The Iranian government declares that its nuclear program is for peaceful, energy producing purposes. However, in spite of Tehran's protestations that the goals of its nuclear program is to provide fuel for medical reactors and a non-oil based energy source, the U.S., Europe, and Israel are skeptical and believe that the goal is to create nuclear weapons.
A recent New York Times headline proclaimed that the White House has been in secret negotiations with Iran resulting in an agreement between the U.S. and Iran to engage in one-on-one negotiations over Iran's nuclear program. (NYT, 10/20/12) Before we all get excited that reason has prevailed, both the White House and Tehran are denying that any such agreement has been reached. (The Telegraph-UK, 10/21/12) The White House does assert that it is open to such negotiations.
In the meantime, the Israelis continue to advocate that the U.S. set "clear red lines" on Iran's nuclear program that if crossed would trigger military action by the U.S. against Iran. (NYT, 9/11/12) Prime Minister Netanyahu of Israel has publicly criticized what he considers to be President Obama's soft policy towards Iran, and avers that if the U.S. won't draw a line in the sand regarding Iran's nuclear program that the U.S. "...has no 'moral right' to restrain Israel from taking military action of its own." (NYT, 9/11/12)
Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney has made it clear that he feels that the President should stop Iran in its pursuit of nuclear weapons and specifically rejects the notion of using diplomatic channels to address this issue. Already, Republicans are rejecting the notion of any negotiations with Iran, asserting that even if Iran makes an offer to parlay, it is only a ploy to distract from its real goal of making a nuclear bomb. South Carolina's Senator Lindsey Graham (R), a Romney ally, offered his views on Sunday, "The time for talking is over,...we should be demanding transparency and access to the (Iranian) nuclear program." (USA Today, 10/21/12)
What is this red line that we need to draw? No one has made that perfectly clear. The Israeli government has indicated that it wants the U.S, to set a limit on the amount of enriched uranium (essential bomb making material) Iran may stockpile and enforce Iran's adherence to the limit with the threat of military force for a transgression. The Obama administration has rejected placing military action by the U.S. on the table as a possibility. Apparently, Romney doesn't share the President's views, as he has declared Obama to be soft on Iran and lacking in commitment to our ally, Israel.
The one question that I want Mr. Romney to answer tonight is what is his recommended course of action in dealing with Iran's nuclear program. I want specifics. Does he favor the red line spoken of by Netanyahu? If so, what will that line consist of? If elected, is Romney willing to take us into another war? Will he use military action if Iran crosses that red line?
I admit that I don't need an answer; I think Romney has already made it perfectly clear that his image is of America the macho, the world enforcer. I just want to hear him say it and just maybe more of my fellow Americans will hear his words and reject an ideology predicated on the belief that might makes right.
Mitt Romney as commander-in-chief is a very scary proposition. It's like putting a ten-year-old behind the wheel of a race car. There was a folk song popular in the 1960s that had the line: When will we ever learn? It became an anthem for the anti-Vietnam War movement of the 1960s. Unfortunately, we appear to be a nation of slow-learners.
Wednesday, October 10, 2012
The Presidential Election: Time to Turn the Debate to Substance
My friend Leslie over at Parsley's Pics posted an article, "God Forbid Should Biden Not Perform Perfectly," in which she chides "fickle liberals" for continuing to focus on bemoaning their disappointment in President Obama's debate performance last week.
Another friend commented that liberals finding Obama's debate performance to be lackluster are not responsible for Obama's slipping in the polls.
I agree that in spite of the incessant fixation on Obama's "poor" performance from some liberals, there is no direct correlation of the criticism from some of the President's base and current polls that show him with fewer Electoral College votes than last week.
However, the chronic complaining hasn't accomplished anything positive either. Liberals and conservatives have for the most part already decided who gets their vote. The target group in these last few weeks are the Undecided. As the candidates rev up their appearances and their ads, each hopes to grab those who are undecided and tip the scales in their favor in the hallowed swing states.
The problem that I have with liberals and the noisy critique from some quarters lamenting Obama's debate style is that it aides the opposition in keeping the focus on trivialities rather than substance. The other problem that I have is that the undecided are important and the way to snag them isn't with expressions of disappointment in the president's performance. He has a staff to evaluate the weaknesses of his debate performance and how to liven it up so that he too can present fluff over substance and thereby compete with Romney.
I just don't think that continued expressions of disappointment about the first debate communicates any reasons to the undecided why they should support the president. No one is going to be drawn to support a candidate whose own base keeps declaring him to be a loser.
It's similar to a business that's floundering. If you want to attract investors to shore up the business and make it profitable again, you don't do so by publicly focusing on the company's failings.
The media keeps rehashing the debate as if Obama's IQ suddenly dropped by 30 points. It was a misstep and instead of wailing and gnashing of teeth, my view is that we, meaning liberals, need to do everything that we can to shift the focus back to the issues and meet the fixation on style over content with solid facts. Facts are unchanging, unlike Romney's version of reality.
I'm not interested in in-house debates among liberals. We all want the same thing. What we have here is a difference in approach. I think that getting Obama re-elected is the priority and we need to do whatever it takes to make that happen, including cutting out all the in-house bickering among liberals about our candidate. As lousy as Romney is, and as much as some elements of the GOP are unhappy that he is the candidate, for the most part, they publicly stand behind him. Conservative bloggers don't as a rule express any serious displeasure with Romney's performance, even when he tells 27 lies in 38 minutes. (Fact Check: Romney Told 27 Myths in 38 Minutes During the Debate)
We've beaten the debate performance drum long enough; I think it's time for a new rhythm.
(I was feeling down after hearing on the evening news that Romney was polling higher after the first debate, until I checked out Nate Silver's blog, 538: "Mitt Romney gained further ground in the FiveThirtyEight forecast on Monday, with his chances of winning the Electoral College increasing to 25.2 percent from 21.6 percent on Sunday." All increases are not equal.)--Oct. 8: A Great Poll For Romney, In Perspective
Thursday, October 4, 2012
The Presidential Debates: Round One
The first presidential debate (10/3/12) focused on policy, not zingers to provide fodder for tomorrow's headlines. There were big, significant topics--entitlements, taxes and spending, the deficit, and education.
I wasn't enthused about Obama's performance but I didn't find his answers rambling as some are proclaiming; he actually said what he would do and why.
Romney spoke in negatives. He stated what he was not going to do but never said what he was going to do. For example he insisted that his proposed tax cut will not add to the deficit; however he never explained how a 20% reduction in each marginal tax rate, across the board, could be implemented without adding to the deficit Such a tax cut would result in a significant reduction in revenues and Romney's proposed tax plan also includes a $3 trillion increase in military spending, an increase that the military has not requested A decrease in revenues and an increase in expenditures don't add up to no increase in the deficit or as the President said, "It's math, It's arithmetic."
By the way, the President directly challenged Romney's assertions in clear, concise language:
"The fact is that if you are lowering the rates the way you described, governor, then it is not possible to come up with enough deductions and loopholes that only affect high-income individuals to avoid either raising the deficit or burdening the middle class," Obama said. "It's math. It's arithmetic."--ObamaI found it interesting that Romney's style was to claim agreement with Obama's policy on some key issues. Romney declares that he agrees that the financial industry needs regulation but wants to promote his own plan and wants to repeal the Dodd-Frank regulatory act. He alleges that he supports the version of Obamacare that he engineered as governor but finds fault with how Obama didn't obtain any consensus and shoved health care reform down our throats. He insists that he agrees that public education must be a key focus.
The question, which the President did raise, is why is Romney keeping the details of his alternative plans on these major issues secret? Are they too good to be true?
I don't think that the President hit a homer but neither do I think that Romney won. I'd call it a tie. Romney essentially said nothing except to parrot vague generalities about the need to get the country back on track with no specifics as to how he plans to do that.
President Obama didn't go for the jugular. It's not the man's style and frankly I think that his approach is more effective in the long run. Attack and confrontation provide temporary satisfaction but folks eventually stop listening to someone who shouts a lot.
It's one debate. I'm not ready to dismiss Obama as ineffective. In 2008, he didn't walk to the same drummer as most presidential candidates. The odds were against him getting the nomination. He didn't shout and confrontation was not his style. He was measured and detailed in presenting his platform. Why would anyone expect this man to morph into the Godfather? I'm not certain as to why, but this president is often judged based more on who his followers want him to be rather than who he really is.
Tuesday, October 2, 2012
My Day Sucked, And Yours?
There are days when you realize that you should have never left the house.
I had a routine doctor's appointment at 9:15 am. I arrived on time and proudly strolled into my doctor's office ready for praise. I'm not known for my prompt arrival at his office. I leave home with good intentions but his office is 23 miles away and necessitates travel on the inner or is it outer beltline? (I've only lived in Raleigh for 14 years; I know where the road is, just not what it's called.) Traffic is always congested in the early morning. (Yes, a 9:15 appointment is early.) I am not a morning person.
But this morning, I was on time! However, there was no praise as a staff member was out and the nurse was wearing dual hats as nurse and receptionist, so there was no one up front when I made my grand entrance.
Do not think me so shallow as to waste your time, dear reader, bemoaning my uncelebrated entrance. It was but a minor blight on my day compared to the horrors to come.
As I returned to my car, the gathering rain clouds suddenly evaporated and the sky turned an incredible shade of cerulean blue and I smiled. Then I put my key in the ignition and as the motor came to life, I heard a distinct dinging sound or perhaps it was more like the chime of a doorbell. Seatbelt was on, door's were shut tight, so why the dinging chime?
I stole a look at the dashboard and there were strange icons brightly glowing. I gasped! (Okay, I wasn't really that dramatic; it was more of a sigh than a gasp.) I grabbed the manual for my 2006 Pontiac G6 from the glove compartment and frantically searched for matches for the glowing icons. Check engine light...okay. The other glowing image warned that the Fates had put some serious mojo on the electrical system and that driving could drain my battery.
I did the only thing that I could, pressed my forehead against the steering wheel and repeated that great litany three times, "Oh crap!" I followed up with a few references to copulation.
I decided to come home. I did as the manual advised and turned off anything that was a drain on the electrical system--the daytime running lights, the radio, and the a/c. I made it halfway home before deciding that I had to have a/c. I rolled up the windows and turned on the a/c and as a blast of hot air hit me in the face, I found myself disparaging the parentage of male dogs. The a/c didn't work!
Arriving at home, I called General Motors (I believe in starting at the top). I explained that my car was six years old and only had 42,319 miles on it and I couldn't fathom why it was falling apart. I also reminded the nice lady on the phone that they had to replace the catalytic converter earlier this year and that GM had picked up the bill, agreeing with me that a car with such low mileage should not have turned into a rotting piece of fecal material. She agreed to call a local GM dealer, the same one that had done the previous repairs, and get them to agree to waive the diagnostic fees. I said that was a good start but that I would be very unhappy and unlikely to ever purchase another Pontiac if GM failed to cover all costs. We agreed that we would revisit costs once there was a diagnosis of the patient.
The service manager instructed me to have my car in their shop by 7:30 am tomorrow (Wednesday). I explained that I have a major interview tomorrow afternoon for my dream job combining my background in public education with my legal skills and need my car in working order by 12:30 pm.
Feeling bereft, I called my sister Rhonda and sobbed out my troubles. In full drama mode, I proclaimed, "I'm tired. It's always something; I just can't take it anymore," punctuated with barely suppressed sobs. I'm not a total wuss; this has not been a great year for me--I lost my job, spent my savings, went back to my old job, still looking for a more stable job and my personal life sucks. However, Rhonda always knows how to remind me that my theme song is "I Will Survive," the Gloria Gaynor version. She allowed me to be a drama queen, gave me sympathy and then she made me laugh with some silly story from the headlines that I can't recall.
Next I called Bob, Rhonda's husband. Bob is always far more rational that I am. His advice was so practical: "Take your car to the dealer now and you won't need to get up at the crack of dawn tomorrow. Don't worry about the job interview; I can take you if necessary."
So I headed out to leave my car at the dealership. Halfway there, a flashing message read simply, "Power Steering." As I wrestled with the steering wheel, I realized that the car had decided to tell me that the power steering was gone, gone, gone. Steering a reasonably straight line is a bit difficult without power steering but it's making a right turn that scares the hell out of you and causes you to use a lot of expletives as the person behind you blows his horn because you're not wrestling your steering wheel fast enough to suit him.
I made the turn and was all of a mile from the dealership when suddenly my car slowed to a crawl, chugging along at about 5 miles per hour. The guy behind me was riding my bumper as if he thought that I was inviting him to play bumper cars. As I exclaimed quite a few expletives, I heard a sound that I couldn't quite place at first, sort of like the popping sound of the final few kernels of popcorn. Then it registered, the door locks were popping up and down as my electrical system went haywire and then died.
A very nice man stopped and pushed my car onto the shoulder. Another young man, who is a mechanic, stopped and took a look under my hood and pointed out that my problems likely stemmed from the alternator belt which looked as if it had been through a shredder. A friendly young woman stopped to ask if I needed help. Finally, the tow truck arrived and took me and the car to the dealership. The car is there now and I'm at home.
I'm stressed and a bit addled, but the day wasn't a total wash. I was touched by the strangers who stopped to offer assistance. Next to Scarlet O'Hara, my favorite lady of southern literature is Blanche Dubois from A Streetcar Named Desire. This evening, I can truly recite Blanche's most well known line from the play, "Whoever you are, I've always depended on the kindness of strangers."
I had a routine doctor's appointment at 9:15 am. I arrived on time and proudly strolled into my doctor's office ready for praise. I'm not known for my prompt arrival at his office. I leave home with good intentions but his office is 23 miles away and necessitates travel on the inner or is it outer beltline? (I've only lived in Raleigh for 14 years; I know where the road is, just not what it's called.) Traffic is always congested in the early morning. (Yes, a 9:15 appointment is early.) I am not a morning person.
But this morning, I was on time! However, there was no praise as a staff member was out and the nurse was wearing dual hats as nurse and receptionist, so there was no one up front when I made my grand entrance.
Do not think me so shallow as to waste your time, dear reader, bemoaning my uncelebrated entrance. It was but a minor blight on my day compared to the horrors to come.
As I returned to my car, the gathering rain clouds suddenly evaporated and the sky turned an incredible shade of cerulean blue and I smiled. Then I put my key in the ignition and as the motor came to life, I heard a distinct dinging sound or perhaps it was more like the chime of a doorbell. Seatbelt was on, door's were shut tight, so why the dinging chime?
I stole a look at the dashboard and there were strange icons brightly glowing. I gasped! (Okay, I wasn't really that dramatic; it was more of a sigh than a gasp.) I grabbed the manual for my 2006 Pontiac G6 from the glove compartment and frantically searched for matches for the glowing icons. Check engine light...okay. The other glowing image warned that the Fates had put some serious mojo on the electrical system and that driving could drain my battery.
I did the only thing that I could, pressed my forehead against the steering wheel and repeated that great litany three times, "Oh crap!" I followed up with a few references to copulation.
I decided to come home. I did as the manual advised and turned off anything that was a drain on the electrical system--the daytime running lights, the radio, and the a/c. I made it halfway home before deciding that I had to have a/c. I rolled up the windows and turned on the a/c and as a blast of hot air hit me in the face, I found myself disparaging the parentage of male dogs. The a/c didn't work!
Arriving at home, I called General Motors (I believe in starting at the top). I explained that my car was six years old and only had 42,319 miles on it and I couldn't fathom why it was falling apart. I also reminded the nice lady on the phone that they had to replace the catalytic converter earlier this year and that GM had picked up the bill, agreeing with me that a car with such low mileage should not have turned into a rotting piece of fecal material. She agreed to call a local GM dealer, the same one that had done the previous repairs, and get them to agree to waive the diagnostic fees. I said that was a good start but that I would be very unhappy and unlikely to ever purchase another Pontiac if GM failed to cover all costs. We agreed that we would revisit costs once there was a diagnosis of the patient.
The service manager instructed me to have my car in their shop by 7:30 am tomorrow (Wednesday). I explained that I have a major interview tomorrow afternoon for my dream job combining my background in public education with my legal skills and need my car in working order by 12:30 pm.
Feeling bereft, I called my sister Rhonda and sobbed out my troubles. In full drama mode, I proclaimed, "I'm tired. It's always something; I just can't take it anymore," punctuated with barely suppressed sobs. I'm not a total wuss; this has not been a great year for me--I lost my job, spent my savings, went back to my old job, still looking for a more stable job and my personal life sucks. However, Rhonda always knows how to remind me that my theme song is "I Will Survive," the Gloria Gaynor version. She allowed me to be a drama queen, gave me sympathy and then she made me laugh with some silly story from the headlines that I can't recall.
Next I called Bob, Rhonda's husband. Bob is always far more rational that I am. His advice was so practical: "Take your car to the dealer now and you won't need to get up at the crack of dawn tomorrow. Don't worry about the job interview; I can take you if necessary."
So I headed out to leave my car at the dealership. Halfway there, a flashing message read simply, "Power Steering." As I wrestled with the steering wheel, I realized that the car had decided to tell me that the power steering was gone, gone, gone. Steering a reasonably straight line is a bit difficult without power steering but it's making a right turn that scares the hell out of you and causes you to use a lot of expletives as the person behind you blows his horn because you're not wrestling your steering wheel fast enough to suit him.
I made the turn and was all of a mile from the dealership when suddenly my car slowed to a crawl, chugging along at about 5 miles per hour. The guy behind me was riding my bumper as if he thought that I was inviting him to play bumper cars. As I exclaimed quite a few expletives, I heard a sound that I couldn't quite place at first, sort of like the popping sound of the final few kernels of popcorn. Then it registered, the door locks were popping up and down as my electrical system went haywire and then died.
A very nice man stopped and pushed my car onto the shoulder. Another young man, who is a mechanic, stopped and took a look under my hood and pointed out that my problems likely stemmed from the alternator belt which looked as if it had been through a shredder. A friendly young woman stopped to ask if I needed help. Finally, the tow truck arrived and took me and the car to the dealership. The car is there now and I'm at home.
I'm stressed and a bit addled, but the day wasn't a total wash. I was touched by the strangers who stopped to offer assistance. Next to Scarlet O'Hara, my favorite lady of southern literature is Blanche Dubois from A Streetcar Named Desire. This evening, I can truly recite Blanche's most well known line from the play, "Whoever you are, I've always depended on the kindness of strangers."
Wednesday, September 19, 2012
Inside Romney's Head: The Dead Zone
According to Mitt Romney, I'm a freeloader with a victim mentality. I'm not alone; forty-seven percent of Americans, Obama supporters every one, are as trifling as I am.
Addressing guests at a private fundraiser earlier this year, Romney declared:
According to Romney, Obama supporters in addition to being trifling, lazy folks with a victim mentality, have developed a notion that "...the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it."
Now, where would any of us get such a notion? Well, I'll be darned! Maybe it's from those socialist Founding Fathers.
A good friend offered the following observation that further illuminates the purpose of government under those founding documents that Romney and the conservative right purport to follow: Look also at the words that appear in the Preamble to the Constitution. We, United, union, common, general, ourselves, our. "Us" is our thesis. Not an "I me mine" to be found.--S. Gordon
Romney has refused to retreat from his disavowal of governmental responsibility to promote any efforts to mitigate financial inequity and economic injustice. Instead, as expected, Romney supporters have dragged out a 1998 video of President Obama in which Obama states:
Don't you? Or do you prefer the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few with little or no chance for the advancement of most? It's about redistribution of opportunities. No one, least of all President Obama ever said that the plan is to take money from some to give it to others; the oft expressed paranoia of those who buy into Romney's vision of freeloading, do-nothing, Americans sitting around waiting for government handouts.
Redistribution of wealth is about providing grants for students to attend college, or low interest loans for small businesses. It is about providing food stamps to mothers and children who have insufficient funds to buy food. A single parent of two who earns $10 per hour for 40 hours per week nets $1600 per month before taxes. Ten dollars per hour is more than minimum wage (federal minimum wage is $7.25) but it still isn't sufficient money for rent, childcare (if you are a working parent, you need childcare), food, health insurance, clothing, transportation, and food.
As a country are we really so heartless and stupid that we can't understand that trickle down economics is a grand pie in the sky lie perpetuated by the haves to insure that the have-nots waste their time worrying about nonexistent threats of impending socialism and don't notice class inequities?
Mitt Romney has made it clear as to what he thinks of nearly half of all Americans. In his own words: "[M]y job is is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives." (Secret Video...)
In November, we have a chance to tell Mitt Romney what we think of him. What will that message be? Will we support his view that nearly half of Americans are shiftless, unwilling to work freeloaders, waiting on a government handout? Or will we take a look at ourselves, our family members, and our neighbors and recognize that demanding that all of us have fair and meaningful access to the opportunities that this nation provides is the rightful purpose of government? The answer is up to us, the governed.
Note: Romney stated that he wished that the entire video had been released to place his remarks in context. Mother Jones has obliged. Someone should have reminded Romney of the adage, "careful what you wish for." Link to the entire video.
Addressing guests at a private fundraiser earlier this year, Romney declared:
There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what…These are people who pay no income tax. (Secret Video--Mother Jones)As an Obama supporter, I think that Romney may be talking about me. I need to stop paying income tax and demand that the government hand over my entitlement. You should too, if you're an Obama supporter.
According to Romney, Obama supporters in addition to being trifling, lazy folks with a victim mentality, have developed a notion that "...the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it."
Now, where would any of us get such a notion? Well, I'll be darned! Maybe it's from those socialist Founding Fathers.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,"--The Declaration of Independence (emphasis added)Interesting concept that the purpose of government--the reason that "governments are instituted"-- is to ensure access to those unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that health care, food and housing are encompassed in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and that it is an appropriate goal for governments to implement laws and policies to further the goal of securing these basic rights for all of its citizens.
A good friend offered the following observation that further illuminates the purpose of government under those founding documents that Romney and the conservative right purport to follow: Look also at the words that appear in the Preamble to the Constitution. We, United, union, common, general, ourselves, our. "Us" is our thesis. Not an "I me mine" to be found.--S. Gordon
Romney has refused to retreat from his disavowal of governmental responsibility to promote any efforts to mitigate financial inequity and economic injustice. Instead, as expected, Romney supporters have dragged out a 1998 video of President Obama in which Obama states:
The trick is figuring out how do we structure government systems that pool resources and hence facilitate some [wealth] redistribution -- because I actually believe in redistribution, at least at a certain level to make sure that everybody’s got a shot.--Barack Obama (Obama 1998 Loyola Speech)Apparently, we are to be shocked by this statement and declare Obama a socialist. Oh the horror! President Obama thinks that it is important to ensure that every American has a shot at fulfilling the promise of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness noted in that most American of documents, The Declaration of Independence.
Don't you? Or do you prefer the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few with little or no chance for the advancement of most? It's about redistribution of opportunities. No one, least of all President Obama ever said that the plan is to take money from some to give it to others; the oft expressed paranoia of those who buy into Romney's vision of freeloading, do-nothing, Americans sitting around waiting for government handouts.
Redistribution of wealth is about providing grants for students to attend college, or low interest loans for small businesses. It is about providing food stamps to mothers and children who have insufficient funds to buy food. A single parent of two who earns $10 per hour for 40 hours per week nets $1600 per month before taxes. Ten dollars per hour is more than minimum wage (federal minimum wage is $7.25) but it still isn't sufficient money for rent, childcare (if you are a working parent, you need childcare), food, health insurance, clothing, transportation, and food.
As a country are we really so heartless and stupid that we can't understand that trickle down economics is a grand pie in the sky lie perpetuated by the haves to insure that the have-nots waste their time worrying about nonexistent threats of impending socialism and don't notice class inequities?
Mitt Romney has made it clear as to what he thinks of nearly half of all Americans. In his own words: "[M]y job is is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives." (Secret Video...)
In November, we have a chance to tell Mitt Romney what we think of him. What will that message be? Will we support his view that nearly half of Americans are shiftless, unwilling to work freeloaders, waiting on a government handout? Or will we take a look at ourselves, our family members, and our neighbors and recognize that demanding that all of us have fair and meaningful access to the opportunities that this nation provides is the rightful purpose of government? The answer is up to us, the governed.
Note: Romney stated that he wished that the entire video had been released to place his remarks in context. Mother Jones has obliged. Someone should have reminded Romney of the adage, "careful what you wish for." Link to the entire video.
Wednesday, September 5, 2012
Racism: Ignorance Seasoned with Paranoia
I wasn't looking for trouble. I hadn't planned to write about race again any time soon. I just stopped by a post by one of my favorite bloggers, Tom Degan, of The Rant. The post, "Message to My Fellow White People," is about five weeks old but I had never read all of the comments on the piece.
There were lots of thoughtful and interesting responses to Tom's absorbing post, but there were also repeated comments by Anonymous, who under cover of his or her anonymity seemed more concerned with arguing "I am not a racist" rather than offering anything substantive to the discussion. Nonetheless, I did not plan to offer any commentary on Anon's meanderings until I got to the following comment from Anonymous:
Anonymous, I can't decide if you are a racist or just the most ignorant person in America. Maybe you're both. Clearly there is something seriously wrong with you. WTF are you talking about? Jim Crow period against white people! LOL!
Perhaps you should read up a bit on the history of Jim Crow; it was both a system of laws and of social etiquette to restrict the interaction of blacks with whites and to ensure that white superiority was recognized in all aspects of life.
I concede that there are some black folks who commit acts of violence against whites; mostly in the process of committing some other crime such as thievery but not because they hate white people but because they seek financial gain. Unacceptable behavior but not unique to black people. White people just steal on a grander scale. Ask Madoff and all those folks on Wall Street.
Here's how you'll know that Jim Crow has arrived for white people.
1. Black people will hold the political offices at the state, local, and federal area and white people will not be allowed to hold office.
2. White people will have to pay a poll tax and pass a literacy test in order to vote.
3. When white people are walking down the sidewalk and encounter black people, you will need to step out in the street, tip your hat, say good morning or good evening ma'am or sir, and wait for the black people to pass.
4. You won't be allowed to eat inside any restaurant but you can purchase food at the back door of some places.
5. There will be no white people in any upper level positions in business.
6. If a white male looks at a back woman or dares speak to her, then her family members will come and drag him out of his house in the middle of the night, even if he's just a 14 year old boy, and beat and torture him so badly that his own mama can't recognize his corpse. At the trial, an all black jury will acquit the killers and they will later brag about their deed in a national magazine.
7. Hospitals, clinics, and all businesses will have have an entrance for Blacks only and Whites will only be allowed to enter facilities that provide a separate Whites only entrance and a separate area for whites to conduct their business in the facility. If no such arrangement is provided you can't come in at all.
8. Be careful to adhere to all rules, don't ever act uppity in front of black people or you may find yourself being dragged out of your house by folks wearing white sheets. If you're lucky they will just beat the crap out of you and if not, they will hang you from a tree. They may burn you a bit first or castrate you and then lynch you.
These are just a few highlights that will signal the implementation of Jim Crow against white people. There were far too many racists practices and laws to enumerate in a single list.
Besides, I recognize that I'm wasting my time because you are an ignorant, whiny, paranoid racist. Only an ignorant racist would propose that anything that black people have done is even partially equivalent to Jim Crow. Don't bother to respond because I will not engage in additional communication with you. I've already wasted far too much time on the inane braying of a total jackass. google6b73f2f8eb0ba261.html
There were lots of thoughtful and interesting responses to Tom's absorbing post, but there were also repeated comments by Anonymous, who under cover of his or her anonymity seemed more concerned with arguing "I am not a racist" rather than offering anything substantive to the discussion. Nonetheless, I did not plan to offer any commentary on Anon's meanderings until I got to the following comment from Anonymous:
I love how liberals are either stupid or just amazingly ignorant of racial realities in this country.The new trend appears to be to insist that black people and liberals are the new racists but I have never come across anyone who goes so far as to declare that we have started the Jim Crow period against white people. The sheer ignorance of this statement is highly offensive and trivializes the very real denial of civil rights and relegation to second class citizenship of African-Americans for nearly 100 years post civil war. Following is my unpolished, from the gut response to Anonymous.
Between the numerous black gangs attacking white people in every city of America and the specific examples of the Wisconsin State Fair, Iowa State Fair and Peoria, Illinois, we have more than started the Jim Crow period against white people, and the media is fully complicit
Anonymous, I can't decide if you are a racist or just the most ignorant person in America. Maybe you're both. Clearly there is something seriously wrong with you. WTF are you talking about? Jim Crow period against white people! LOL!
Perhaps you should read up a bit on the history of Jim Crow; it was both a system of laws and of social etiquette to restrict the interaction of blacks with whites and to ensure that white superiority was recognized in all aspects of life.
I concede that there are some black folks who commit acts of violence against whites; mostly in the process of committing some other crime such as thievery but not because they hate white people but because they seek financial gain. Unacceptable behavior but not unique to black people. White people just steal on a grander scale. Ask Madoff and all those folks on Wall Street.
Here's how you'll know that Jim Crow has arrived for white people.
1. Black people will hold the political offices at the state, local, and federal area and white people will not be allowed to hold office.
2. White people will have to pay a poll tax and pass a literacy test in order to vote.
3. When white people are walking down the sidewalk and encounter black people, you will need to step out in the street, tip your hat, say good morning or good evening ma'am or sir, and wait for the black people to pass.
4. You won't be allowed to eat inside any restaurant but you can purchase food at the back door of some places.
5. There will be no white people in any upper level positions in business.
6. If a white male looks at a back woman or dares speak to her, then her family members will come and drag him out of his house in the middle of the night, even if he's just a 14 year old boy, and beat and torture him so badly that his own mama can't recognize his corpse. At the trial, an all black jury will acquit the killers and they will later brag about their deed in a national magazine.
7. Hospitals, clinics, and all businesses will have have an entrance for Blacks only and Whites will only be allowed to enter facilities that provide a separate Whites only entrance and a separate area for whites to conduct their business in the facility. If no such arrangement is provided you can't come in at all.
8. Be careful to adhere to all rules, don't ever act uppity in front of black people or you may find yourself being dragged out of your house by folks wearing white sheets. If you're lucky they will just beat the crap out of you and if not, they will hang you from a tree. They may burn you a bit first or castrate you and then lynch you.
These are just a few highlights that will signal the implementation of Jim Crow against white people. There were far too many racists practices and laws to enumerate in a single list.
Besides, I recognize that I'm wasting my time because you are an ignorant, whiny, paranoid racist. Only an ignorant racist would propose that anything that black people have done is even partially equivalent to Jim Crow. Don't bother to respond because I will not engage in additional communication with you. I've already wasted far too much time on the inane braying of a total jackass. google6b73f2f8eb0ba261.html
Friday, August 17, 2012
Boxing with Racism--Do Something!
Some of you have raised a legitimate question as to what can we do about such blatant racism as espoused at www.niggermania.com (NMC). It's time for those of us who believe that racism is a cancer that eats away at this country to make our voices heard. It doesn't work to look the other way and dismiss such vicious displays of racism because we don't want to give them attention. They are not going away because we refuse to look at them.
I've tracked down the host for the web site. It's a company called Black Lotus Communications (BLC).
BLC specializes in hosting sites that are looking for an extra layer of security to protect the site from attack. NMC complains about being shut down by hackers in the past and started a parallel site at dot net to make certain that their faithful fans are not shut out in case one site is hacked.
I spoke with someone in customer service at BLC (1-800-789-1977 or 1-866-477-5554) who stated that BLC does not check out the content of the sites that it hosts. When I expressed my disgust with the NMC site, he stated that I could send an email to BLC at abuse@blacklotus.net
BLC is also on Facebook. I liked the site so that I could post a copy of the email that I sent BLC via the abuse address.
Why focus on BLC? Because money talks. A business has a vested interest in how it is perceived by the public; it also has a responsibility for the choices it makes. Below is my email to BLC. Want to do something about racism, then tell BLC that you oppose racism and take issue with their role in providing it with a forum. Show www.niggermania.com that they are not in charge.
Feel free to use by email below, do make some paraphrases to make it your own. I signed my email and included my contact information.
My email to Black Lotus Communications:
I object to the content of two web sites hosted by Black Lotus Communications. The material contained therein consists of extremely racist language and ideology that offends common decency.
Black Lotus Communications hosts a web site at IP address 208.64.126.126. The IP address is for two sites, www.niggermania.com and www.niggermania.net. The administrator for both sites is Thomas Shelly.
I assume that Black Lotus Communications does not review the content of web sites for which it provides hosting services. You may want to rethink this policy.
These sites advocate for blatant racism and despite a facetious policy that the site allows no hate speak, the entire site is about hate speak.
The first amendment prohibits the federal or state government from impeding freedom of speech but the prohibitions against restriction of speech do not apply to private businesses. You are not compelled to provide hosting services for this type of racist filth. In addition, there is an exception that allows for even government censorship of hate speech intended to incite violence. I believe that some of the comments on these sites rise to that level.
These sites are offensive to any person with a sense of ethics and values, not just black people.
1. Visit the sites for yourself.
2. Read this article which I've posted about this site, Post Racial America? Hell to the No! Your name is not mentioned in it but it will be in my followup posts. It's up to you what is said about your business. I only write the truth. By the way, I'm also published at an online zine, LA Progressive.
3. Stop hosting this filth. Make it clear that the boundaries of decency do not allow room for such vile racism to be bandied about. Would you provide a forum for support of child abuse, domestic violence or other aberrant behaviors? Why provide a forum for racism?
I've tracked down the host for the web site. It's a company called Black Lotus Communications (BLC).
BLC specializes in hosting sites that are looking for an extra layer of security to protect the site from attack. NMC complains about being shut down by hackers in the past and started a parallel site at dot net to make certain that their faithful fans are not shut out in case one site is hacked.
I spoke with someone in customer service at BLC (1-800-789-1977 or 1-866-477-5554) who stated that BLC does not check out the content of the sites that it hosts. When I expressed my disgust with the NMC site, he stated that I could send an email to BLC at abuse@blacklotus.net
BLC is also on Facebook. I liked the site so that I could post a copy of the email that I sent BLC via the abuse address.
Why focus on BLC? Because money talks. A business has a vested interest in how it is perceived by the public; it also has a responsibility for the choices it makes. Below is my email to BLC. Want to do something about racism, then tell BLC that you oppose racism and take issue with their role in providing it with a forum. Show www.niggermania.com that they are not in charge.
Feel free to use by email below, do make some paraphrases to make it your own. I signed my email and included my contact information.
My email to Black Lotus Communications:
I object to the content of two web sites hosted by Black Lotus Communications. The material contained therein consists of extremely racist language and ideology that offends common decency.
Black Lotus Communications hosts a web site at IP address 208.64.126.126. The IP address is for two sites, www.niggermania.com and www.niggermania.net. The administrator for both sites is Thomas Shelly.
I assume that Black Lotus Communications does not review the content of web sites for which it provides hosting services. You may want to rethink this policy.
These sites advocate for blatant racism and despite a facetious policy that the site allows no hate speak, the entire site is about hate speak.
The first amendment prohibits the federal or state government from impeding freedom of speech but the prohibitions against restriction of speech do not apply to private businesses. You are not compelled to provide hosting services for this type of racist filth. In addition, there is an exception that allows for even government censorship of hate speech intended to incite violence. I believe that some of the comments on these sites rise to that level.
These sites are offensive to any person with a sense of ethics and values, not just black people.
1. Visit the sites for yourself.
2. Read this article which I've posted about this site, Post Racial America? Hell to the No! Your name is not mentioned in it but it will be in my followup posts. It's up to you what is said about your business. I only write the truth. By the way, I'm also published at an online zine, LA Progressive.
3. Stop hosting this filth. Make it clear that the boundaries of decency do not allow room for such vile racism to be bandied about. Would you provide a forum for support of child abuse, domestic violence or other aberrant behaviors? Why provide a forum for racism?
Thursday, August 16, 2012
Revealing the Boogeyman
My last post, Post Racial America? Hell to the No!, focused on a disturbing web site (www.niggermania.com) that has the most blatantly racist content that I've seen anywhere on the Internet. My good friend Mark left a comment on that post in which he expressed his mixed feelings about giving the site any attention: "It is so obviously designed to shock that it would seem that more attention is exactly what they want."
Mark has a valid point, but my focus isn't to give this site attention, at least not of the type that it desires. Ignoring the boogeyman doesn't make it go away; ask any five-year old. The wise parent turns on the closet light and reveals to the child that the boogeyman is just an over stuffed clothes hamper.
The depth of depravity that feeds racism at this level counts on being able to stay in the shadows. They don't want those of us who find their beliefs repulsive to see them. They want to skulk around in dark corners, leaking false information designed to influence the weak minded and fearful into sharing their beliefs. They provide links to studies rejected by legitimate researchers that purport to offer scientific proof of outlandish claims of the inferiority of those whom they hate. Their goal is to recruit followers.
They count on that the people who would find their beliefs reprehensible will remain unaware of their presence. They don't expect to appeal to everyone. Like any cult, they target the weak, those who believe that they have been marginalized by the larger society. The leadership of racist hate groups may have access to personal wealth but the rank and file followers are working class people. The power of the leadership arises from persuading those followers that the reason that they don't have the job, the house, the car, and all other material measures of success is because of the "lazy, shiftless, violent other" most often identified as Black or Hispanic.
Belief in these conclusions, which are presented as based in irrefutable fact, promotes a climate where legitimate protestations of discrimination made by black people are often met with accusations of "playing the race card."
People tend to form their worldview based on the prism through which they see the world. If you don't hold vile racist beliefs, it is harder for you to imagine the extreme levels of such beliefs as expressed on web sites like this one. We have a need to make sense of the world, to neatly order our belief system. I believe that the reason good people so often fail to take action to stop evil is because we have no frame of reference to help us see and understand the evil. We can't imagine that anyone possesses this kind of hate for others.
We need to open the closet doors, shine a flashlight under the bed and force the boogeymen out into the open to be revealed to be nothing more than sniveling cowards fixated on their own inadequacies. Desperate to persuade themselves that labeling others as inferior will somehow make them recover their long lost dignity.
Came across an interesting article that discusses another racist hate site and why it matters that we call out such sites on their promotion of racism.
Mark has a valid point, but my focus isn't to give this site attention, at least not of the type that it desires. Ignoring the boogeyman doesn't make it go away; ask any five-year old. The wise parent turns on the closet light and reveals to the child that the boogeyman is just an over stuffed clothes hamper.
The depth of depravity that feeds racism at this level counts on being able to stay in the shadows. They don't want those of us who find their beliefs repulsive to see them. They want to skulk around in dark corners, leaking false information designed to influence the weak minded and fearful into sharing their beliefs. They provide links to studies rejected by legitimate researchers that purport to offer scientific proof of outlandish claims of the inferiority of those whom they hate. Their goal is to recruit followers.
They count on that the people who would find their beliefs reprehensible will remain unaware of their presence. They don't expect to appeal to everyone. Like any cult, they target the weak, those who believe that they have been marginalized by the larger society. The leadership of racist hate groups may have access to personal wealth but the rank and file followers are working class people. The power of the leadership arises from persuading those followers that the reason that they don't have the job, the house, the car, and all other material measures of success is because of the "lazy, shiftless, violent other" most often identified as Black or Hispanic.
Belief in these conclusions, which are presented as based in irrefutable fact, promotes a climate where legitimate protestations of discrimination made by black people are often met with accusations of "playing the race card."
People tend to form their worldview based on the prism through which they see the world. If you don't hold vile racist beliefs, it is harder for you to imagine the extreme levels of such beliefs as expressed on web sites like this one. We have a need to make sense of the world, to neatly order our belief system. I believe that the reason good people so often fail to take action to stop evil is because we have no frame of reference to help us see and understand the evil. We can't imagine that anyone possesses this kind of hate for others.
We need to open the closet doors, shine a flashlight under the bed and force the boogeymen out into the open to be revealed to be nothing more than sniveling cowards fixated on their own inadequacies. Desperate to persuade themselves that labeling others as inferior will somehow make them recover their long lost dignity.
Came across an interesting article that discusses another racist hate site and why it matters that we call out such sites on their promotion of racism.
Wednesday, August 15, 2012
Post Racial America? Hell to the No!
It started with a vile comment that I read on a post at Yahoo.com. It was the typical racist crap and I paused to give it a thumbs down vote. The screen handle was "obanana" and the person posted repeated comments featuring the n-word.
I did a Google search of the screen name, curious as to how prolific the small-brained racist was. My search led me to a website bearing the title, www.niggermania.com. (In order to write about this site, I'm breaking my own rule and spelling out the n-word. You need to register to see all the wonders of the site. It's impossible to fully conceptualize how bad this site is without seeing it for yourself. You may sign in via my registration. User name: Lady J, password: maju2625)
The site proudly proclaims on its home page: Nigger mania is the best site for nigger jokes and facts about niggers since 2003. Please join our nigger-bashing forum too.
I know that this type of virulent hate is difficult to read. This site makes me feel physically ill; however, hate thrives best in the dark. We all know the oft repeated statement in its many variations that evil thrives when good people do nothing. I like this more precise statement by Edmund Burke: "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."
This site boasts that it has thousands of members and is still growing. People make donations to fund hosting of the site. A lot of bad people, men and women, have combined on this web site. The rest of us cannot allow such hate to grow unchecked and unacknowledged. Ignoring it will not make hate go away.
One of the site founders, Tom Shelly, insists that the site is not about hate. He's a liar. In his own words:
Personally, I do not hate niggers at all, I just correctly understand that they are not human and treat them accordingly. They are nothing more than wild niggers running around loose and one must act accordingly around them. A hundred and fifty years or so ago, people in this country treated niggers accordingly and kept them contained and controlled. We made them useful by managing their numbers, containing them, and forcing them to work and be somewhat productive. But the natural empathy of the White man caused him to unrestrain (sic) a species of animal (niggers) largely due to the fact they they mimick (sic) humans in their behavior and dress. Now that the genie is out of the bottle, he can't be put back in and we're stuck with living around 30 million wild niggers.--Tom ShellyThis site and its partner sites represent the most insistent, total racism that I've encountered in my 57 years on this earth. I thought that by now I knew racism inside and out. However, it has taken me aback that such blatant, vile racism is freely distributed in 2012. These people are pure evil and I see no possibility for their redemption. I think that they should be isolated from the rest of us. They are an infectious disease.
The blatant lies and twisted views are disseminated across the Internet. No doubt the comment maker who sent me on my journey based his conclusions on "facts" gleaned from niggermania.com. There are parental filters that can be used with some success to prevent children from surfing porn sites but what prevents them from being subject to the intentional indoctrination of hate sites?
What about black children? As an adult, my pulse grew more rapid and I began to feel that someone was standing on my chest as I read through this site. What about black children who stumble across sites that proclaim that they are not human and which cite to studies by Arthur Jensen featuring his declarations that blacks are inherently intellectually inferior to whites? What psychological damage is wrought by exposure to these unrelenting racist lies?
Sites such as these may make an argument for their right to exist as a first amendment issue. I suspect that they continually assert that the site is not about hate to protect themselves against a possible challenge of their 1st amendment rights based on the use of hate speech to incite violence against a protected class--race, religion, national origin, etc. I lack the skills to mount a cyber attack against the site as one of my friend suggested. Besides, it would accomplish nothing; they would still be slithering around corners fomenting racism.
What I would like to see is a lot of attention focused on these people. Turn the spotlight on their sickness and expose them for the rotting carcasses that they really are. They are vampires; they don't feed on blood but on ethics, on morality, and everything that makes us decent. A stake through the heart isn't the only way to end a vampire; dragging them into the light will render them into a pile of dust.
So pass along the information about these sites. Tell your friends. Tell anyone who insists that the only issue with race is that black people keep playing the race card. No matter how well intentioned, burying one's head in the sand and pretending that the monster doesn't exist never works out well. To save the day, the heroine must kill the monster and destroy its lair.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)