Tuesday, November 15, 2011

Scouring Pesky Democratic Stains Off Your City's Walks

A couple days ago I was talking to a friend, wondering how the Occupy movement could keep their protest sites clean, peaceful, healthy and safe, wondering how we could better work with local governments to continue spreading awareness throughout the winter, etc. etc.

But last night (at 1 am) the NYC police showed up to evict protesters with timing and tactics right out of a "How to Throw a Pogram in Your Neighborhood" manual.

Lesson from history:  No matter whose side you're on, whenever a large force armed with weapons and riot gear turn people out on the streets in the middle of the night with only the possessions they can carry, then trash whatever's left--that force will ALWAYS come across as the badguy.

This is America. We shouldn't be treating our citizens like a rat infestation.

In the last few days, it seems like the mayors and media have teamed up to put out the message that the Occupy movement is made up of misfits and anarchists. I'm including a video with this blog, which I hope will help remind everyone that the Occupy movement is made up mostly of reasonable students, teachers, seniors, workers, parents, labor unions and others who love their country so much that they won't stand by and let greed destroy it.

And lest any of you politicians out there forget (particularly the ones who order pograms at 1 am), the Occupy movement is made up of VOTERS.

muon
.

Sunday, November 13, 2011

Hooverville, 2011

I've been following the Occupy movement from Week 1, long before the media even knew they were there and began actively ignoring them. We've now even got an Occupy group in my hometown, though there's no one to protest against here. Corporations pulled jobs out of our area long ago. Main Street never recovered. Our local industries right now seem to be food banks and homeless shelters.

I was struck by a question posed on PBS News Hour's Facebook page today, with a link to an article about Occupy Portland :

"In your opinion, should Occupy protesters be allowed to
stay camped out in public spaces?"
 
The photos with my blog today aren't protesters' tents. They're American tent cities filled with those who've lost their homes. Shanty towns like these are springing up all over the country.

Amazing that the tents of a few Occupy protesters should be so offensive, while the tents and living conditions of our poor are so easy to ignore.

Please consider letting PBS and your government representatives know that protesters camping out is far preferable to seeing our next generation raised in tent cities.

muon

Friday, September 2, 2011

NEVER FORGET

by muon

I'm already hearing the news media link Labor Day events with decade anniversary of 9/11. I'm guessing, this year like last, we'll see all sorts of news items about Labor Day tributes to soldiers, veterans, police and firemen. We'll see a lot of flag-waving. I have nothing against those things, but not on Labor Day.

The first Labor parade was held in Toronto, Canada on September 5, 1872 in support of the Typographical Union's strike (they wanted a 58-hour work week. Imagine that?) On September 5, 1882, New York unions tried a Labor Day parade of their own. 30,000 workers took part. Each year thereafter parades were held on that day and the American Labor Movement really began to organize. Not that it did much good. Government was on the side of big business. Labor leaders were branded anarchists. Many were arrested and executed.

State militias were regularly called in to stop strikes. In the 1886 Bayview Massacre, 7 people, including one child, were killed by the Wisconsin state militia. In 1887, the Louisiana state militia shot 35 unarmed black sugar workers who were only asking for a dollar-a-day wage.

A series of strikes against the Pullman Company in 1893-94, involving a quarter million workers over 27 states, ended with Federal troops killing American Railway Union members. Strike leaders were imprisoned and the union dissolved. President Cleveland and Congress feared a backlash and tried to appease the unions by quickly declaring September 5th, Labor Day, an official holiday.

Unfortunately, troops were still used to quell union strikes. Shootings were common all the way up through the 1940s. Most famous is probably the Ludlow Massacre, where the Colorado National Guard murdered at least 5 men, 2 women and 12 children (every kid in the photo below), and wounding dozens more by riddling the union tent camp with a machine gun, then setting the tents on fire.



American workers and labor unions are once more being vilified by those in power, so the media's not mentioning labor much these days. In fact, FOX News is even saying that teachers shouldn't ask for more money because they're overpaid (on an everage salary of about $50,000). FOX News also claims that it's not possible to live on $250,000 a year and that people earning a quarter mil ought to be considered poor. Some people are now trying to say Ludlow wasn't a massacre but an 'incident.' Look at the photo above, realize none of those kids survived

We're constantly told to never forget 9/11. Fine, next week let's do that. On Monday, though, we should  remember the massacres at places like Ludlow, Bayview, and leaders like Joe Hill, as well as all the American workers and their families who gave their lives so today's workers could be slightly better off.

Let's also remember union-busting governors like Scott Walker and other politicians who care more about the campaign money they're getting from corporations like Koch Industries than in the working conditions of the average American.

This Monday, let's remember why workers still have to fight for a decent living. And let's all say a prayer for the unemployed.

Read more about the history of American Labor at http://www.lutins.org/labor.html

Thursday, August 25, 2011

TEAM HYPOCRISY - RAH RAH RAH!

by Ruth Sheets

Alabama has passed an ultra anti-immigrant law.  This law calls on citizens to report suspected undocumented immigrants. The children of these immigrants can’t attend school since they don't have a US birth certificate.  No one is allowed to hire any of these people and police officers can pick up anyone whom they feel just might be undocumented.

This law essentially turns neighbors into informants.  It is not necessary to “know” that someone is undocumented if one simply suspects it. 

Police officers become immigration officials.  One wonders how they “know” who is undocumented.  The suspect must just look like someone who is undocumented.  In other settings, that might be called racial profiling

Supporters of this law would shy away from any comparisons to life in Hitler’s Germany or Communist Russia, but this type of turning in a targeted group is not so far removed from those earlier periods in history.

It seems easy to target people whom one considers illegal, who didn’t follow proscribed rules for entering America. However, how many of these supporters come from families whose forebears came here without papers? 

In their attempt to “balance” news coverage, both sides must be represented.  Supporters of the law appear on every show.  I find it interesting how many of these supporters have names that clearly mark them as descendents of immigrants to the US during the last century.  Their parents may have struggled, but did well enough here to give their children significant opportunities they would not have had if they’d remained in their countries of origin.

Why are these 2nd and 3rd generation Americans so unwilling to offer the same opportunities to this century’s immigrants?  Hypocrisy, of course. 

And, to be sure to get other citizens on their side, they accuse immigrants of draining welfare, coming here just to have American citizen children, essentially , stealing America’s bounty.  Why does this apply only to the immigrants of today?  Hypocrisy, of course.

Team Hypocrisy has members all over America, trying to turn Americans into spying, stingy racists, yelling “freedom” and "democracy” but unwilling to extend the blessings of either to others.

"Illegal alien” is the term most often used.  Such terms make those so labeled seem different, deserving of being uprooted and deported even if they have lived here, contributing to  the American dream for many years.

When we deport people, what are we sending them back to?  Do we really care?  Are we so comfortable with ourselves in our righteousness that it doesn’t matter as long as they are gone?

We are a country of immigrants.  Immigrants have made us a great nation and will continue to do so if we step back and see that we can do better.  Our immigrant parents and grandparents would not be pleased to see us doing to a new generation of immigrants what was done to them.

Fellow citizens, let’s take up the challenge to stand bravely against Team Hypocrisy and fight for a more humane immigrant policy.  Let us ignore the calls to act badly toward our immigrant neighbors.  Let us fight against the un-American laws so eagerly being passed and stand with our neighbors who want to live an American dream too.


Thursday, August 18, 2011

PSEUDO CHRISTIANS?

by Ruth Sheets

As a Christian minister, I am appalled with the way Christianity is being tossed around by the Republicans these days.  It seems that claiming Christianity as the center of one’s life is all one needs to prove one is a “real American.” 

The candidates stand before the American public and declare that they believe in the Bible word for word and “know” that creation is just as described in Genesis (although which creation story, they are not always sure since there are two quite different accounts).  These candidates are also sure there is a “Second Coming” as described in psychedelic dream that is  the Book of Revelation.  In between, they also are committed to the one verse in Leviticus that condemns homosexuality.  So, we know they accept Genesis, Revelation and a verse of Leviticus, but what about the rest of the Bible? 

If one looks at the “deal” the Congressional Tea Partiers proposed and examine their plans for the future of America, it is hard to see that the gospels, for example, are any part of their public considerations and actions.  (I cannot speak for their personal lives.)

The conservative Republican proposals support the wealthiest Americans, yet, Jesus says that it will be harder for a rich person to enter heaven than for a camel to go through the eye of a needle.  He also told the rich young man in Mark, to sell all he has and give it to the poor and follow Jesus.  That doesn’t exactly sound like it meshes very well with what is happening among these professed believers and their relationship with the top 1 percent of American earners.

It is the “Good Samaritan” who stops to help the man along the road in Luke, not the wealthy religious travelers, and the Samaritan was of a hated race.  Jesus said “Go and do likewise. " I see no evidence of Tea Party support of anyone who is in need.  And, their attitude toward non-Christians is not particularly Christ-like.”

Jesus spent a lot of time teaching people, yet, education is certainly not a priority of the Republicans.  Well, sometimes it is, if they can introduce privatization, vouchers, and other destructive elements to “public” schools.  Who benefits?  It is rarely the children.

Jesus said “Love your neighbor as yourself.”  I don’t see the Republican representatives offering Americans the same kind of health care and pensions that Congress enjoys.  In fact, Republicans are doing everything they can to be sure American citizens never do.

Jesus fed the 5,000, yet the Tea Partiers would cut the programs that help to feed their fellow Americans who are not as privileged or lucky as they are.  Jesus never mentioned homosexuality, yet many Republicans across the country have eliminating gay rights as a centerpiece of their platforms, along with abortion which is also not seen as important enough for Jesus to mention either.

Instead of the gospel of love and caring, they read and understand a “Gospel of Prosperity” which tells them that they are receiving all the good things that America offers because they are God’s favored ones.  They pray loud and long in public so that everyone can see how pious they are.  It seems to me that if anyone chooses to claim Christ as their Savior, they must remember the saying of the Civil Rights Movement:  “You can’t just talk the talk, you have to walk the walk.”  We’ve all been hearing a lot of the “Christian” talk, but where is the walk?

Monday, August 15, 2011

American Fascists


By Ruth Sheets

I just finished reading the book American Fascists:  The Christian Right and the War on America by Chris Hedges.  This is one of the scariest books I have read in a long time. 

Mr. Hedges describes a group of Evangelical Fundamentalist Christians who preach and practice a “Gospel of Prosperity and rule of God’s law.”  If one is wealthy, God must have provided that as a reward.  If one lives God’s law, one too, might become wealthy.  Surrendering all to God (through God’s male representatives on earth) will lead to a life of peace and order.  And, surrender is required.  He convincingly compares this movement to those active in Germany during the 1930’s.

If the followers of this Gospel kept it within its narrow sphere one could say “let them do whatever they want.  It doesn’t affect the rest of us.  America is a free country.” 

But, this “Gospel of God’s law” has a political power component which is even more substantial.  You see, they want to control all aspects of government to make this nation fully “Christian.”  In their way of thinking, as a “Christian” nation, those  who do not confess Christ cannot be permitted to drain America’s resources.

This brand of Fundamentalists co-opts the language of freedom and Civil Rights, even quoting such figures as Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.  But civil rights and pluralism in any form are not part of their theology. 

Male absolute control in the name of God trumps freedom of speech, religion, press, or anything else that our founders stood for.  The strong, white, macho male as the ideal.  Women must be relegated to the home and spheres of limited influence.  The few exceptions (people like Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann, attractive and empty-headed) allow conservative women to think they are included.  The token black males can talk the talk, but are not welcome to actually walk the walk.

Right-wing Evangelical Fundamentalists prey on the most vulnerable among us, those whose lives have been difficult through poverty, divorce, unemployment, family dysfunction, etc.  People in personal crisis often value a system where someone else is in control and where there is a promise of something better.  Of course, they believe that “something better” occurs for these pathetic people after THIS life is over.

Mr. Hedges believes that the leaders in this right-wing Fundamentalist movement:  Pat Robertson, George W. Bush, et al, know exactly what they are doing and what they are supporting.  They are focused on their goal of power and there is little they won’t do to achieve it.

The Tea Party arose after this book was published, but I suspect Mr. Hedges would include them in the right-wing movement he described in his 2006 book.  Tea Partiers might resist such inclusion, but their words and actions would place them squarely within that group.  They fought for cutting programs that enable people to live a decent life in the name of lowering the deficit.  Their proposals are designed to help the rich become richer and businesses to do whatever they choose despite environmental problems.  Women’s rights are being challenged at all levels. Their leaders claim their FIRST goal is to remove President Obama from office. They were willing to take America to the brink of economic disaster to prove their political power.  Sounds like they fit right in.

What does Mr. Hedges suggest we do to protect our democracy?  He recommends that we become vigilant.  We must not tolerate the actions of this movement.  We need to stop being so “nice” to them, smiling and giving in to their demands.  We should stop saying “it’s a free country.  They have a right to their beliefs."  They do have a right to their beliefs as long as they don’t force them on the rest of us, and that seems to be what they intend.

Now is the time to stand up.  If we don’t start moving to block their insanity, their garbage, we may not have the free country we cherish.

Friday, August 12, 2011

Against Our Interests?

by Ruth Sheets
 
I have been listening to the returns from the special election in Wisconsin.  The Democrats needed to win three seats and only got two and are facing a challenge next Tuesday.  What amazes me is the fact that Wisconsin Republicans, like Republicans in many states continue to vote against their own interests.

Wisconsin Republicans went into office claiming that their major effort would be to add jobs and lower the state debt.  Their real intention was to bust public unions and cut services.  Voters don’t get it that they might not need governmental help at this moment, but that life throws surprises our way and any of them could be in the position of needing help.

We hear “We need small government.”  That seems to be the popular line with the Tea Partiers these days, but what are they willing to cut?  The programs that serve the most vulnerable, of course.  They are well aware of the reality that those citizens are least able to stand up for their needs, let alone their rights. 

Will the Tea Party willingly cut defense funds?  Probably not; they will more likely want to cut veterans money because that is easy.  Will they cut money for prisons, border patrols, funds for the war on drugs, programs for abstinence education, all programs that are wasteful and not as effective as claimed?  Not likely.  They don’t seem to care about value if the program supports their personal or social beliefs.

Cutting funds for education, food stamps, Medicaid, and other support programs seems a top priority for conservatives, even those who depend on these programs just to stay alive and to provide for their children. 
 
I heard a listing of the Federal monies that Michelle Bachman, a leading presidential candidate, has received throughout her life from the government. Hypocrisy rules even at the highest levels.  She cries “small government” while it is the government that has enabled her to be where she is. 

It is amazing how few Americans have noticed the widening of the gap between the rich and the poor.  The rank and file of the Tea Party and many other Conservative Republicans fall in the group that is moving toward the poor side.  They don’t even seem to realize what is happening.  They don’t see that none of the programs being advocated by their representatives will in any way improve their situation.  They don’t get it that their chances of moving into that higher group diminish with each day.

What is wrong with  us?  Are we hard-wired to be unable to recognize inconsistencies?  Is it part of our make-up that we stand against our own interests?  Is “the American dream” of wealth so strong that we believe we will one day be among the chosen few who are in the top 1 percent, the very wealthy?  Do we delight in the hopeful thought of being able to dictate to the rest of the poor suckers who just couldn’t make it, the ones who just didn’t work hard enough or weren’t lucky enough?

Maybe instead of teaching to tests in our schools, we should be teaching logic, ethics, basic economics, and statistics from very early grades.  That will require money and time for planning, both of which along with many other ideas are being cut.  Maybe what lies behind all the education cuts is that people who don’t know how to think for themselves are so much more easily frightened and manipulated by people who enjoy wielding power. 

Saturday, August 6, 2011

Want a Tax Cut? Create a Job


by muon

Here's a simple little plan that all of Washington ought to like.  They won't, though, because the plan doesn't make the other side of the aisle look bad.  That's pretty much all they'll consider these days.

They've now decided that marriage isn't just between one man and one woman, but is now between the truest love match you can find in nature--Congress and tax cuts for the wealthy.  No divorcing one from the other, no matter what the political affiliation.  The Tea Party, in particular, will defend their nests to the death. Tax cuts, they say, are needed to create jobs.

So let's create jobs with them.

Instead of across-the-board tax breaks for all folks who can already afford things like late-night cravings for imported lavender honey, I say let's make tax cuts contingent on whether taxpayers have created jobs in the past year. Create a new job for an American in 2011, get a tax cut in April 2012.  Create 2 new jobs, get 2 tax deductions. Eliminate American jobs, get penalized.  And no cheating: you can't downsize one year, then recreate those jobs the next and claim tax cuts for them.

That simple.  Give an American a job, get a tax cut.  Hoard your money, get squat.

Instead of giving handouts to our deadbeat millionaire brothers, I say, let's make them earn their keep by putting America back to work.

Wednesday, August 3, 2011

WHAT’S IN A WORD?

by Ruth Sheets
 
Have you noticed that in the past few years, twisting language to fit one’s own agenda has become very popular?  “Experts” are hired to say things in just the right way.  It is a form of deception that often happens without people even realizing that they are being manipulated.  It will be extremely difficult to drive the new language from their minds because of the power of the words used.  Here are some examples:

In the past decade, elected leaders have determined that the wealthiest Americans need protection.  For generations, states and the Federal Government have collected “estate taxes” to help limit family dynasties and to help the haves contribute to the general good.  When tax cuts were being considered for the well off, during the early 2000s, estate taxes were targeted as unfair.  Most Americans approve of such taxes, so they had to be renamed.  Estate taxes became “death taxes.” 

What is the image you get of a death tax?  To start with, it is not a pleasant thought. Our natural fear of death includes our aversion of the word. Tie the word to taxes, and presto, a tax that must be ended because it is abhorrent.  How can we tax a person’s death? If anyone questions this move, actors are hired to portray people of moderate means who complain that they worked so hard and should be able to pass everything they made on to their children, (even if those children earn more than the parents).

Staying with the word “death,” we come to “death panels.”  What image does that conjure? It is certainly not a positive one. This term was the Republican response to the concept that a patient might want to discuss end-of-life issues with their doctor. Because these discussions will take a significant amount of time if done properly and with compassion, it was recommended that doctors be fairly compensated for their time.

If a legislator or candidate has the goal of stopping a plan that makes sense to a lot of people, the language must change to induce the proper amount of fear and/or loathing.  The term “death panel” does that beautifully.  Even though there is no panel involved and the whole process only involves discussion and consultation, it doesn’t matter because death panel sounds so horrific few people will want to analyze it.

Within the past few months a new term has come forward.  It seems that it is no longer acceptable to refer to the wealthy or rich in those terms.  The new Tea Party term is “job creators.”  One can logically put a case forward that the wealthiest people should pay their fair share. But call them "Job Creators"-- imply that they are the only folks who will pull us out of this economic mess --and of course it would be wrong not to give them more money.

The tax cuts in the Bush administration predominantly benefited the top 2% of Americans and we are in the deepest recession since the 1930’s.  The wealthy have been getting tax cuts for nearly a decade now.   Where are the jobs they were supposed to be creating? 

There will always be people out there ready to misdirect us with the words they use.  Our task as thinking human beings is to look behind what they are actually saying and see who benefits from the misdirection.  Maybe instead of worrying so much about how well our students do on standardized tests, we should change our focus to developing effective critical thinking skills. 

Do you think the Tea Party and their friends would like to help fund that? 

Peace,
Ruth

Saturday, July 30, 2011

At-Risk Youth

Today's blog is an amazing essay written by a 13 year-old.  Because she's a minor, we've left off her last name and location. 

AT-RISK YOUTH

Last year, I was asked to go to a meeting for “At-Risk Youth.”  They invited us because we were youth council members and they wanted our input on how to help the kids who were acting up, failing and about to drop out of school. During the meeting everyone talked about the “At-Risk” youth and ways to help them do better.  But nobody ever really said what an “At-Risk” youth was.  I think they invited us to the meeting because they thought that we were not “At-Risk” since we were not failing or acting out in school.  I decided to write about at-risk youth.

After doing some research I found that there are a number of things that make a young person “At-Risk”.  One study showed that kids who come from poor communities, underperforming schools and broken homes are more “At-Risk” than others.  It also showed that Black and Hispanic kids are more “At-Risk” then White and Asian kids, males were more “At-Risk” then females and poor kids are more “At-Risk” than rich kids.  So, I guess being an “At-Risk” youth means that if you live in bad family and community conditions there’s a greater chance that you will participate in negativebehaviors.

While thinking about that definition, I realized that I too am an “At-Risk” youth. Even though I come from a two parent home, with two incomes, have two sisters, a nice little house pet, and enjoy learning, because of the school that I go to, my race, and the zip code where my parents happened to buy our home, I’m classified as “At-Risk”.

However, I  personally think that all youth are “At-Risk”,  in one way or another. Whether by poverty,  race, community, school, an unstable home, violence, drugs, bullying, or anything else. A reason why I think that all youth are at risk is because youth are so dependent on everyone else. They are dependent on their parents to provide a stable, loving home for them. They are dependent on the community to provide a safe environment and they are dependent on the schools to educate them so that they can succeed.   

As a young person, I know that kids can sometimes do bad stuff, but if you ask me, the reason we have so many “At-Risk” youth is not only because of the kids but because of the conditions that have been created for them to live in. 

Submitted by Shanae, age 13 

Thursday, July 28, 2011

DEEPER CUTS!!

by Ruth Sheets

Every news report this week has begun with the information that no compromise has been reached in raising the debt ceiling and the economy.  And, every report has an interview with at least one of the “Tea Party” congressmen who just keep saying that the spending cuts need to be deeper with no tax increases of any kind.

Since the Federal Government is so abhorrent to the Tea Partiers, I suggest that the deeper cuts begin in their own districts and states. If these super conservative, government-hating congress people received votes from more than 50% of those voting in their districts in 2010, my modest proposal is as follows:

1. Close military bases in their districts.
2. Cut Social Security payments to everyone in those districts who earn more than $100,000.
3. Increase the amount people in those districts have to pay toward Medicare up to the full cost of the insurance depending on their income.
4. Eliminate all subsidies to farmers, corporations, oil companies, etc. in those districts.
5. Eliminate the pensions, medical insurance, and other perks their retired Congress people and senators receive from the Federal Government.  They should have to be part of the same system everyone else depends on.  This is for every representative from now on.
6. Eliminate most contracted jobs in the military that soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen used to do.  If we don’t have enough military personnel to do those jobs, we can’t deploy.

I understand that none of this is in the “Tea Party” plan because their philosophy is “cut the government, but don’t cut my parts of it.  Everyone else is draining the system, not me or mine.”  This is hypocracy, of course, but isn’t that the subtitle for their whole movement?  We are paying less in taxes by percent than we have in generations, yet they cry “Taxes are too high."  The citizens in their districts benefit significantly from Government services and subsidies, yet they insight fear of the Government in the people

Tea Partiers refuse to see (or, perhaps are even glad to see) that the income gap between rich and poor continues to increase.  They can’t even imagine that fairness would demand the wealthiest Americans help to support the nation that gave them the opportunity to be where they are. 

Of course, it is easier to support the wealthiest and most powerful than to champion the most vulnerable.  You can just guess where the money for their next election is coming from.  And, an unmoving “pledge” not to raise taxes is easier than actually thinking about what is best for America, even what is best for the people of their own districts. 

Maybe the deeper cut we need is to cut them out of the Congress next year.  In the meantime, perhaps the media should place less emphasis on their childish whining and ranting.


Ruth

Friday, July 22, 2011

Growing Number of Americans Believe Obama is a Republican

President Asked To Produce Voter Registration Card


In the emerging field of GOP presidential candidates, only one acts remotely presidential. Maybe because he IS the president.  What's disturbing is that he's acting Republican, too.

The logic here is that something like 1/3 of registered Republicans believe President Obama is Muslim.  Many of them believe he was born in Kenya. I'm pretty sure ALL of them believe he's a liberal.  Well, it's been proven he's not Muslim, and wasn't born in Kenya, so doesn't it follow that he's not a liberal?

This week the president has been engaged in tete-a-tetes with Speaker Boehner.  The plan they seem to be agreeing on sounds an awful lot like Speaker Boehner's original plan, with maybe one or two concessions on the Speaker's part.  Seniors citizens will still be allowed to breathe, for example (assuming breathing isn't contingent on decent healthcare and a home to live in).  Millionaires and billionaires will still get a share of the tax money the rest of us pay in.  If all these rich folks would hire just one person per household with their ill-gotten tax-cut gains, more than 8 million more Americans could be employed.  A recent poll showed that none of the extremely rich are creating jobs at all.  Surely, if we're giving them money to create jobs, why aren't we demanding they do so?  If I give you $5 to go get me a sandwich, you'd better show up within a reasonable amount of time with my food or I'll come looking for you.  At best, I'd never trust you to go get me a sandwich again.  At worst, you'll know better than to volunteer again.

If President Obama is agreeing to all this nonsense, regardless of the fact that the plan won't pass the Senate, I think it follows that, in 2012, the president will be on the Republican ticket. Because, really, who else have they got?

But then, who have the Democrats got?

Peace,
muon

Wednesday, July 20, 2011

THE PLEDGE THAT CRIPPLES

Signing pledges these days seems to be the thing to do.  The thought is that signing a pledge is giving one’s word which, of course, one should never break.  When I hear that someone has signed a pledge, I wonder, is it a one-time thing?  If you sign a pledge you can never change your mind?  Is “signing” a pledge more powerful than saying a pledge? 

We say the “Pledge of Allegiance” to our flag for many occasions.  Is that because just saying it once doesn’t “make it so?”  Or, is it that the “Pledge” is just something we do from habit.  It is certainly not something that came in with the Founders.  The way people carry on about those who don’t recite the Pledge and the anger held by some regarding the phrase “under God,” you’d think it was a life or death issue.

Signing pledges seems to be in.  We ask teen agers to sign abstinence pledges as well as non-violence pledges.  We know that these pledges are not very effective, not because the intentions at the time of the signing weren’t honest, but because circumstances changed and the pledge wasn’t strong enough to stick.  Or perhaps, it is not reasonable to ask this of teens, then expect them to submit to it for the rest of their lives. As young people grow older, abstaining until marriage might not be practical or desirable, and if someone is acting violently toward them, they might need to respond in kind to save themselves or their family.

The Republican Party and conservatives in general, are stuck with the notion that voters expect their politicians to to “always” vote the party line, never even turning slightly toward another position, no matter how much sense that other position might make in the situation.   So now, it is not enough to SAY they support a particular position, they must sign pledges to declare for all time that they will always support a particular platform point.

The Temperance Movement of the 19th Century attempted the same thing.  Signing the Pledge meant that one would never again drink and would support prohibition candidates and legislation.  Well, we all know how well that turned out.  The crime system that arose at that time is still in place in many parts of the country, although the focus shifted from drink to drugs and other vices. 

Grover Norquist and his gang are currently trying to get all Republican candidates and legislators to sign a pledge to NEVER raise taxes.  Those who have signed, essentially shut down concerning that issue.  Even though we pay a lower percentage of taxes than Americans have for the past 60 years, we are told that we are suffering from taxes and because of the Pledge we NEED to keep lowering taxes.  It is clear that in the past 30 years, the wealthiest Americans have received the most breaks, but they can’t be expected to pay more like their fair share because we can’t raise ANY taxes, not even close loopholes!

Who are these people that were elected last November?  Were they elected to help govern a great, complex country or were they elected to protect those who need no protection.  We don’t really need legislators to do that, pledge or no pledge. 

When politicians sign pledges like those presented to the Republicans these days, they give up their ability to govern intelligently.  They are allowing a special interest to determine their votes.  They are unable to negotiate anything.  I guess that makes things easier for them because they don’t have to think or consider.  Their response can be “I signed the pledge.” 

The pledgers’ explanations for why they cannot compromise even in small ways are generally ludicrous and sound childish and memorized.  The even sadder part of this whole thing is that almost no one ever calls them on it nor points out the poor quality of their arguments. 

Let’s ditch the pledges.  If we need to have a pledge at all, let it be to our country and the betterment of ALL its citizens and guests.

Peace,
Ruth

Saturday, July 9, 2011

LOOKING FOR PC


One might think from the title that this piece is about buying a home computer or expecting people to be politically correct.  Neither is the theme for this blog.  I want to discuss “Political Courage.” 



As our president and congress are working their way toward some kind of deal for raising the ceiling on our ability to borrow money, and on cutting the deficit, I have heard a lot of talk about political courage. 



It began with Paul Ryan’s proposed budget proposal which was called “courageous”, particularly in the media.  When examined more carefully, it showed little courage.  How much courage does it take to cut critical programs and funding for the most vulnerable people?  It seems only the “bleeding heart liberals” will fight to stop that (and we all know how effective they are).



Republicans, especially the Tea Party variety, are so tax-averse that they can’t conceive of even the wealthiest 2% paying a bit more to help get the country on an even keel.  Where is the courage?  Since no one is exactly thrilled with having to pay taxes, it does not require courage to stand unmoving against any kind of tax increase.  There is no problem with cutting the poor, elderly, and disabled off because even inept representatives and senators will never be in that position.  Once one is in Congress, health care and pensions are taken care of for life (through taxes, of course).



The Democrats are desperately watching the programs to improve the well-being in the country evaporate.  They've always supported these programs and, thus,  cling stubbornly to every aspect of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.  These programs do need reworking and reshaping to reflect the needs of 21st Century America.  One can  understand their fear and reluctance to touch those programs because reworking them could devastate these supports, so desperately needed by so many.  Political courage requires respected Democrats to stand up and make realistic, practical suggestions for changes that would benefit everyone (e.g., have Social Security taxes paid on all income, raise the age to 70 years for collecting, discontinue Social Security for people earning more than $100,000.00 a year, but still allow Medicare when needed). 



And then there’s the military industrial complex!  Who has the guts to stand up to that monster?  No courage here!



There seems to be little courage on the state and local levels either.  Some governors and mayors are getting media attention by cutting programs, laying off state workers, blaming them for the state’s/city’s  woes.  It plays well, but isn’t true.  Now there are more folks unemployed.  Again, they hit programs that serve the disadvantaged who won’t make much of a fuss.  The politicians look like heroes because budgets are “balanced.” 



Political courage is standing up for what will be most helpful to the largest number of people.  It means holding personal standards of excellence and integrity that are reflected in one’s words and actions.  It requires one to explain positions to constituents in clear, honest language.  It also means acknowledging one’s weaknesses and mistakes and being able to grow in wisdom and understanding.

  

Courageous leaders might not be reelected, but they would certainly set a good example for the rest of America.  Maybe it could start a trend. 


Peace,
Ruth

Wednesday, June 29, 2011

FOR-PROFITS RUNNING OUR SCHOOLS? ARE WE NUTS?


OK, which fools came up with the idea that for-profit companies should be running public schools, or any schools for that matter?  Do we want companies making profits on the backs of our children.  For-profits deceive the voters with their unfounded claims that running public, tax-supported schools for profit is the American way. 

What are voters thinking?  Do voters know that when for-profits take over, they often lower salaries, decrease benefits, increase hours, and hire and fire at will.  This may sound economical on the surface, but who benefits?   The threat to workers--“If you don’t do whatever we tell you to do, with whatever resources we decide to give you, we will find someone else who will”-- is powerful.  How can employees complain?  The education of the children does not have to improve, but, who cares?  “It’s out of our hands,” the people say, and they are right.  By then, it’s too late.  The companies are accountable to no one. 

It is interesting that friends of legislators manage to open public charter schools and can make profits from running these “public schools.” Is this just another means of thanking campaign contributors?

A large segment of our government’s work has already been turned over to for-profits.  It is called outsourcing, contracting and a few other things, but it is all the same.  We citizens pay for a lot of the profits that go into the pockets of the wealthy.  Why do we allow it?  Why aren’t we screaming at this abuse of our taxes?

We are turning our children’s education over to people who seem to understand their mission as maintaining an American-born underclass to fill jobs they fear immigrants will want to come here to take.  It is also a technique for union busting since few charters have teachers who are part of a collective bargaining unit.  When private companies run charters, everything developed in their schools belongs to them and cannot be shared.  Many of us thought that charters were instituted to try out new teaching and organization strategies to improve education for all.  That’s what proponents told everyone.  I suspect that is one of the reasons the charter school movement had such momentum.

The reality is that charters, for-profit or otherwise,  are generally opened in poor communities who have already gotten the word that nothing they have to say about education or anything else matters.  Parents think they are going to get something better for their children, but that is not what happens most of the time.  Since nothing related to the basic poverty and lack of opportunity in the community changes, parents, their children, and taxpayers in general are just being taken for another ride to nowhere, and paying for the trip.

Ruth

Saturday, June 25, 2011

THE EASY CAUSE

 Thursday morning, I was listening to a report on NPR about the flocking of Republican candidates to the “Right to Life” convention in Florida.  It seems that they are falling over themselves to prove that they are the most anti-abortion candidate ever.  They are even signing pledges that if elected, they will only appoint “right to life” people to positions of power in their administration. 

As I listened to the report, it came to me as it so often does that abortion is the easy cause.  All you have to do to have credentials in their group is be willing to show photos magnified a hundred times of aborted fetuses and work to cut funding for any organization that tries to help women who cannot or should not be pregnant.  Usually the spokeswomen have a bunch of kids and claim to be super religious. The men aren’t too big on women’s rights in general.

If these people are so “right to life,” where is the signed pledge that they will find funding for struggling women and children?  Where did they sign that they will do whatever necessary to be sure that even the poorest children will have an education equal to that of at least middle class kids?  Where is their signature on the promise to get businesses into poor communities that will provide jobs for the young people and prices that residents can afford?  Where are the ads and quality films that promote giving children for adoption?  I don’t see the pen on the line promising health care for all children or decent housing for their families.

What I do see is a stampede toward a cause that has all kinds of emotional ties but few real risks.  Their efforts make a small core of people think that being anti-abortion says something important about their candidate’s character.  It is not even necessary to analyze what that is.  With one hand the candidates sign a ridiculous, probably un-American pledge while they raise the other to cut spending for the programs that would support and protect the children.  It seems the group’s name should be “Right to Birth” with a subtext that states, "Every breath you take after birth is at your own risk."

Peace,
Ruth

Thursday, June 23, 2011

OUR MOST VALUABLE RESOURCE

The school year has just ended for me and the news for the coming year does not look good.  Rumor has it that 40% of our teachers and support staff will be laid off.  Due to state and Federal budget crunches, our children will be sacrificed again. 

I hear so often “our children are our most valuable resource” and I even have a great T-Shirt with that thought on it.  I think that is the exact truth.  When one notes the way we treat our natural resources in general, one cannot be surprised that our “most valuable” resource should be treated so badly.  We clear-cut our forests.  We fish out our rivers and oceans.  We use our precious FRESH water to drive natural gas from deep in rocks.  We destroy our wetlands to provide entertainment spots for the wealthy.  We hunt animals to extinction.  We strip mine some of our most beautiful places. 

In that same spirit, we allow 25% and more of our children to live in poverty.  We blame teachers for student lack of success, then pile more and more children into their classes with fewer supplies, guaranteeing low success for the children in our poorest communities.  We allow for-profit organizations (charter schools) to suck the resources of the districts who are already tapping taxpayers out.  We drive our kids into prisons because we have no jobs for them.  We charge so much for college that it may take a lifetime to pay it off, that is if they can get work.

Like our other “cherished” resources, we fail to see that what we do or do not do now will sharply impact the future for generations.  What fools we are to choose to live only for the present, spouting our political nonsense while our children’s well-being goes the way of the dodo.

Peace,
Ruth

Wednesday, May 4, 2011

HERE’S TO INDIANA

I just learned that Indiana has “proudly” passed a law to refuse all state and federal funding to Planned Parenthood and any other organization that offers abortion to women.  The governor, a potential candidate for president, signed this law despite his claim to set aside divisive social issues in favor of dealing with the economy and other pressing problems.

How is it we allow conservative white men to decide for women what is right for us?  How is it we stand by when right-wing women tell everyone else that, because they believe something is evil, they have the right to impose their beliefs on everyone else?

If Sarah Palin is right and the Indiana folk are the “real Americans,” the majority of America is in trouble.  The least willing to think for themselves should not be dictating to those who choose to take the effort to think.

So here’s to Indiana, a triumph of the deceived.  Defunding reproductive service organizations does not decrease spending.  It will ultimately significantly add to it when the unplanned pregnancies bear fruit and the state has more children in poverty to support.  Oh, wait, they’re cutting funds that support those children, too.

Peace,
Ruth

Friday, April 29, 2011

THE JOBS OF PRINCES AND PRINCESSES

Last evening, I was watching ABC News.  At the very end, they did a story about what children around the world think princes and princesses do.  Some of the answers were cute, describing where they sit and that they do not work.  Other answers were really moving.  One child said that the princes and princesses help people like the homeless and children in orphanages.  It made me think that children really do count on people in authority for a lot. 

It occurred to me that maybe children count on all adults for a lot.  I wonder how often we disappoint them because we too often decide that our adult needs and interests supercede those of children most of the time.  If that were not true, we would not have so many children living in poverty, even in our country, the most wealthy in the world. 

Maybe we adults need to examine our priorities and start putting our children at the center of what we do.  We don’t have to be royalty to make a difference.  I know this is not profound, but seeing those children so serious and sincere, it made me want to commit even more strongly to the well-being of the youngest generation. 

We need schools more than prisons, good living conditions more than subsidies for corporations, decent healthy food more than a military that polices a world that doesn’t care for our actions, and health care for everyone more than for super rich people.  Let's get our priorities straight, O ye in Congress.  Worry less about abortion and more about the living breathing children who depend on you to act like princes and princesses who help people.

Peace,
Ruth

Thursday, April 28, 2011

The American Pandemic

America is in the midst of an epidemic.  I don't know the statistics, but based on the people I've talked to in the last year, I'd say at least 30% are infected, with another 10% highly susceptible.  One peculiar symptom of this disease is that the victims become proud of their affliction and reject treatment.  They infect their children, not by accident, but deliberately.

The epidemic?  Ignorance.

Bad enough a bunch of folks in Texas booed at a respected scientist because he said the moon reflected the sun's light.  No one's played that stupid card since Galileo was excommunicated.

Now take Donald Trump (please).  He calls himself a presidential contender yet, does he talk about the economy?  The budget?  The environment?  America's military involvements?  Anything that could be vaguely regarded as a real issue?  No, his main talking point is Mr. Obama's place of birth.  The certification above--what most of our parents took home from the hospital, in lieu of birth certificates--has been floating around the Internet for 4 years now, along with a copy of the president's passport, which you can't get without a US birth certificate.   That should have been enough for intelligent people.  But Donald Trump?  Nuh-uh.

Yesterday, the President asked the State of Hawaii to release his birth certificate to the public.  Did Trump act embarrassed when his claim was proven wrong?  No, he puffed out his chest and took credit for the birth certificate.

I remember a former president in this century who used to do that sort of thing.  You know, the president responsible for all the US soldiers killed in Iraq because of WMDs that never existed?  That whole "Mission Accomplished" thing?

I won't accuse Trump of being ignorant.  Just the opposite--he's cunning, and likes to manipulate people who are ignorant to get what he wants.  Frankly, he's not doing anything different from half the Republican politicians in federal and state governments.  Their policies call for cuts in education.  Why?  Because educated people can figure out when they're being conned.

Lincoln said that you can fool some of the people all of the time, or all of the people some of the time.  What it boils down to is, the more people you can keep ignorant, the more you can fool.  And really, you only have to fool 51% to win an election.

Do yourself a favor.  Seek the truth.  Insist that your politicians talk about issues.  Insist that they do their homework.

Don't be stupid.
muon

Monday, April 25, 2011

To NAP or NOT TO NAP

by Ruth Sheets

The media and transportation officials are hot now to do a “gotcha” on Air Traffic Controllers. It is like a rerun of 1981 when the ATCs tried to get a good contract and President Reagan shut them down (in the interest of public safety, of course). ATCs work under conditions most people could not begin to do and they have more lives in their hands every day than any other workers I can think of.

Instead of a acknowledging that the reason Air Traffic Controllers might fall asleep on duty is not related to character flaws or incompetence, they are suspended or fired when it happens. That leaves fewer people to do the job and puts more people at risk. When it is suggested that a brief nap might help relieve fatigue and stress, our Secretary of Transportation blurts out that they are not being paid to nap and that it won’t happen on his watch. 

 
I guess the word “nap” sounds wimp-ish, and if one just “bucks up,” one won’t need that baby rest. Words like “overwork” and "poor scheduling” sound like whining and can easily be dismissed as the complaints of the lazy.


Taking a brief refreshing nap during an already scheduled break could significantly increase alertness, but "if anyone finds out . . . " Maybe we could begin with such a simple, elegant, FREE partial solution to this challenge, but I suspect someone will be receiving a large paycheck to “study” the situation and will give the exact same “nap” a grown-up name like “temporary withdrawal from environmental stimulus,” that is, if anything is done at all.


There is always a rug to shove the problem under, and it will stay there despite the current “concern,” until there is another incident, or worse, an accident, due to overwork and poor scheduling. Of course, it will be the Controller’s fault.

Peace,
Ruth