Whenever I think of the brand Johnson and Johnson, I think of being stuck on Band-Aids, putting baby powder on one my children's tush or using baby shampoo which doesn't make them cry. It is a brand which evokes feelings of home and warmth, softness and fresh baby smells, a family putting out safe and simple products for us to use. Then I wake up and realize J&J is a corporation and they will do anything to make a buck no matter who gets hurt.
Johnson and Johnson has been in the news lately because they had to recall hundreds of thousands of bottles of infant's Tylenol. This comes at a time when the company has been hit with a series of quality control problems. Since 2009, they had had to recall millions of bottles of Tylenol, Benadryl, Motrin and Zyrtec. Metal shavings were found in some bottles. Others had incorrect levels of an active ingredient and still others stunk when you opened the bottle. The company was sanctioned by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) numerous times. It lost billions in sales because of the problems. It kept claiming the problem had been solved only to have to issue another recall. Its McNeil Consumer Healthcare unit is a disaster and has had to close at least one factory because of quality issues. The latest recall raises serious questions about the company's standards and practices. Corporate executives say they are positive they fixed the problem and the company is now headed in the right direction. This is corporate-speak for, "...how much do we have to spend to goose sales and is there a way to sell these products without losing profits by spending too much on quality control?"
It is important to never forget corporations are interested in one thing...how much money they can make and how cheaply they can fashion a product in order to maximize those profits. There is no such thing as a "good" corporation. Just ask Ben and Jerry...oh, you can't because they were forced out due to an excessive commitment to giving profits to charity.
I wouldn't be writing this if J&J hadn't popped up in the news for another typical corporate action. Another part of the company, the DePuy orthopedic division, was told by the FDA it could not sell a device used in hip replacement surgery in the U.S. Despite handpicking the surgeons to do a safety study, the FDA said it was inadequate and more information was necessary. It sent DePuy a letter refusing to certify the implant for sale in the U.S. This was in 2009. J&J never told anyone it had been turned down. Instead, they started to sell the product in Europe where the regulation is more lax. The implant was rejected in the U.S. because the company couldn't prove it was safe. Instead of fixing it, Johnson and Johnson just started selling it somewhere else. Unsuspecting European customers had no idea what they were getting.
It wasn't as if Johnson and Johnson didn't know there was a problem. They got the non-approval letter in 2009. In 2003 they were told the implant needed further trials, but few were done and no changes made in the design. In 2005, they used a loophole in FDA regulations to sneak a similar device into the U.S. market for hip replacements without "any" clinical testing. The company received hundreds of complaints about the device, but as recently as 2010, DePuy insisted the device was safe. They have since re-called both versions of the device worldwide.
They couldn't sell it in the U.S. in 2003, so they did an end run around the FDA and sold a version of it to unsuspecting American customers. The safety trials they conducted were inadequate, so they were turned down again for U.S. sales, so they started selling the defective implants in Europe. The company faces thousands of lawsuits. (They have set aside $3 billion to cover their exposure) Oh, the company never told stockholders the FDA has turned them down.
The moment you forget a corporation is a corporation, you are doomed. Google, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook and all the others in the chic tech world, try to create an image of being hip and having values and how much they care about their customers and users. Google even says its mission statement is to do no evil. Are you kidding me? The reality is they will do whatever they have to do to make a buck and ethics and morality are just buzz words that have no place in corporate boardrooms. (Do you really want to know the conditions people are working under to make your latest I Phone or I Pad?)
I have said numerous times, the United States Chamber of Commerce is the most evil organization in America. It is the lobbying and enforcement arm of corporate America. Its job is to weaken regulations and open paths for corporations to sell anything and damn the consequences. Their support for regressive Republicans is based on the GOP commitment to eliminating all regulations on all products sold in this country. Every time you hear Romney, Santorum, Gingrich and Paul railing against the regulatory environment foisted on this country by Progressives, remember Johnson and Johnson. As a professor of mine once said...a word to the wise is usually sufficient.
Friday, February 24, 2012
ONE MORE THING...
-P.G.& E. has been found at fault for the explosion in San Bruno. They are bemoaning the cost of testing all their pipelines despite years of neglect, incompetence and no record keeping. Now, they want customers to pay the $2.2 billion price tag of a pipeline safety overhaul needed to meet new safety requirements imposed on them by the federal government. (you remember the federal government don't you? It's the thing the regressives want to get rid of, as would P.G.& E.) So, they don't spend money for years to check how safe their pipes are...they don't keep records of safety checks (meaning they weren't done)...they put the wrong kind of pipe under cities and towns in California, and now they want customers to pay for all the safety upgrades they should have been doing for years. Now that is the definition of chutzpah!!
-A number of states are passing laws allowing parents to opt out of mandatory childhood immunizations. As more parents opt out, the CDC reports rising rates of whooping cough and measles. Can someone tell me who is responsible if my child sits next to a non-immunized child and gets sick? Pediatricians are reporting increasing incidences of firing families who will not cooperate with child immunizations. Good for them.
-America supposedly has natural gas reserves which could meet our needs for the next 50-100 years. Wells are being drilled all over the country from North Dakota to Pennsylvania, despite no studies on how the chemically treated water used to free the gas will effect the environment. There are also fears deep drilling may be causing earthquakes in regions of the country where they have been rare occurrences. Now, it's reported, the gas companies want government permits to build terminals in Louisiana and other states so they can export the gas. The Wall Street Journal reports natural gas prices will rise significantly because of the export of the gas. So let me see if I understand all of this. We are supposed to let them drill wherever they want...we are supposed to be seduced by all the money they will spend...we are to ignore serious environmental issues like contaminated drinking water...ignore increased seismic activity caused by deep drilling, and at the end of the day, let these companies export the gas and drive up its cost to us? Every time I turn on the news I realize again P.T. Barnum was right.
-The question on everyone's lips is how could all the scouts and prognosticators and experts fail to predict the rise of an Asian kid from Palo Alto with a 4.0 grade point average who went to Harvard and now is a star in the NBA? Gee, there's no racism involved in that question at all.
-Google says its mission statement is, "...first do no evil." It would seem spying on their customers, gathering sensitive personal, intimate data, selling it and destroying their privacy is just them being kind and looking after us. Google has now admitted to secretly inserting a code which enabled them to track you everywhere online when using Apple's Safari web browser. This, on top of announcing in March they will consolidate all your search and browsing information to sell to advertisers. If Google thinks this isn't doing evil, what do we have to look forward to from them in the future?
-How is it in Europe, they have stronger privacy protections online than we have in the United States? They have nowhere near the explicit constitutional protections we supposedly have, and yet they are much more concerned and tougher on Google and Facebook et.al than we are. How is that possible?
-The Obama campaign has concluded spending a bunch of money on a spell from a little business in Diagon Alley to make Rick Santorum attractive to Republican voters was worth it. Santorum and Romney are in Michigan trashing the government bailout of G.M. and Chrysler. There is a possibility Santorum could beat Romney and derail his presidential aspirations. You can imagine how this will play with autoworkers, parts suppliers and the tens of thousands who have jobs now who were u unemployed before the revitalization of the auto industry. If Santorum were to get the nod, you can already see how he will play with women, whose bodies he wants government to control, gays, Hispanics, independents and swing voters. All in all, they have concluded it was money well spent.
-I have been thinking about Whitney Houston. She was blessed with movie star looks and a voice from heaven, and yet she obviously wasn't happy and stayed in a toxic marriage which ultimately destroyed her. I think I understand it a little now. If you spend your life looking for the next "thing" to make you happy, it will never come. The key to life...the key to thriving in life...is the ability to wake up each day and say "thank you". I spent so much time thinking a national show, more money, more excitement; more recognition and attention would eventually make me happy. I was wrong. It will never happen and it didn't happen for Whitney. However, if you can say thank you every day...realize how lucky you are...appreciate what you have and understand happiness comes from inside not outside...you won't end up like Whitney or me.
-Am I the only one who wishes we could say to Afghanistan and Pakistan, "...a pox on both of your houses?"
-A number of states are passing laws allowing parents to opt out of mandatory childhood immunizations. As more parents opt out, the CDC reports rising rates of whooping cough and measles. Can someone tell me who is responsible if my child sits next to a non-immunized child and gets sick? Pediatricians are reporting increasing incidences of firing families who will not cooperate with child immunizations. Good for them.
-America supposedly has natural gas reserves which could meet our needs for the next 50-100 years. Wells are being drilled all over the country from North Dakota to Pennsylvania, despite no studies on how the chemically treated water used to free the gas will effect the environment. There are also fears deep drilling may be causing earthquakes in regions of the country where they have been rare occurrences. Now, it's reported, the gas companies want government permits to build terminals in Louisiana and other states so they can export the gas. The Wall Street Journal reports natural gas prices will rise significantly because of the export of the gas. So let me see if I understand all of this. We are supposed to let them drill wherever they want...we are supposed to be seduced by all the money they will spend...we are to ignore serious environmental issues like contaminated drinking water...ignore increased seismic activity caused by deep drilling, and at the end of the day, let these companies export the gas and drive up its cost to us? Every time I turn on the news I realize again P.T. Barnum was right.
-The question on everyone's lips is how could all the scouts and prognosticators and experts fail to predict the rise of an Asian kid from Palo Alto with a 4.0 grade point average who went to Harvard and now is a star in the NBA? Gee, there's no racism involved in that question at all.
-Google says its mission statement is, "...first do no evil." It would seem spying on their customers, gathering sensitive personal, intimate data, selling it and destroying their privacy is just them being kind and looking after us. Google has now admitted to secretly inserting a code which enabled them to track you everywhere online when using Apple's Safari web browser. This, on top of announcing in March they will consolidate all your search and browsing information to sell to advertisers. If Google thinks this isn't doing evil, what do we have to look forward to from them in the future?
-How is it in Europe, they have stronger privacy protections online than we have in the United States? They have nowhere near the explicit constitutional protections we supposedly have, and yet they are much more concerned and tougher on Google and Facebook et.al than we are. How is that possible?
-The Obama campaign has concluded spending a bunch of money on a spell from a little business in Diagon Alley to make Rick Santorum attractive to Republican voters was worth it. Santorum and Romney are in Michigan trashing the government bailout of G.M. and Chrysler. There is a possibility Santorum could beat Romney and derail his presidential aspirations. You can imagine how this will play with autoworkers, parts suppliers and the tens of thousands who have jobs now who were u unemployed before the revitalization of the auto industry. If Santorum were to get the nod, you can already see how he will play with women, whose bodies he wants government to control, gays, Hispanics, independents and swing voters. All in all, they have concluded it was money well spent.
-I have been thinking about Whitney Houston. She was blessed with movie star looks and a voice from heaven, and yet she obviously wasn't happy and stayed in a toxic marriage which ultimately destroyed her. I think I understand it a little now. If you spend your life looking for the next "thing" to make you happy, it will never come. The key to life...the key to thriving in life...is the ability to wake up each day and say "thank you". I spent so much time thinking a national show, more money, more excitement; more recognition and attention would eventually make me happy. I was wrong. It will never happen and it didn't happen for Whitney. However, if you can say thank you every day...realize how lucky you are...appreciate what you have and understand happiness comes from inside not outside...you won't end up like Whitney or me.
-Am I the only one who wishes we could say to Afghanistan and Pakistan, "...a pox on both of your houses?"
Thursday, February 16, 2012
RUM...ROMANISM...REGRESSION
The Catholic Church in America has rarely been a voice for progress. Up until the Second Vatican Council, American bishops and the bishop in Rome opposed the first amendment and its contention all religions should be treated equally by the state. (Jesuit Father John Courtney Murray was silenced by Rome for suggesting the first amendment was a good idea) the Church turned a blind eye to, or openly supported slavery. Priests and bishops refused to admit African Americans to their parishes in many parts of the South. It was a mortal sin to join a trade union. (In San Francisco, Peter Yorke Street is named for a priest who refused to follow the Church's dictums.) When Catholic cemetery workers tried to get higher pay and better working conditions in Boston, the cardinal used seminarians as strikebreakers and declared the workers to be committing serious sin by their actions. The women's rights movement saw little church support, nor did the Civil Rights movement. During the Vietnam War, draft boards were informed by the American bishops no Catholic could use their religion as a basis for a claim to be a conscientious objector to the war. The Church has led the fight against access to contraceptives and abortion and fought to defeat central elements of the gay rights movement.
It should not be a surprise, then, to see bishops rising up in anger over the decision by the Obama administration to require health insurance plans, offered by Catholic universities, hospitals and social service agencies, to cover employees who wish access to various forms of legal contraceptives. Now, the first amendment is being violated and the very foundation of the Bill of Rights shaken by telling Catholic institutions they cannot discriminate against women. If there was any doubt about the Church's true motivations, they are laid to rest by the American Catholic Bishop's rejection of the compromise Obama has offered. Under this new plan, the Church would not pay for contraceptives; the insurance companies would cover the cost of the benefit. The bishops complained the compromise doesn't go far enough. They want a policy in which "any" employer can refuse to grant employees access to contraceptive services based on religious convictions. Any employer, pharmacist...storeowner...trucking company...should be able to use their Catholic religion to discriminate against women and be safe from legal repercussions. They don't want compromise. They want capitulation.
This same group of bishops threatens to shut down adoption services in cities across the land if these agencies are required to treat same sex couples the same as they do heterosexual couples. Once again, they argue the law should not apply to them. Despite no evidence to support the contention gay parents cause their children more harm than straight parents, the Church insists it has the right to use religion to discriminate. This same logic would allow religious exceptions to racial discrimination laws. There are cases of landlords who have refused to rent to same sex or mixed race or unmarried couples based on their religious beliefs. The American bishop's position would suggest these landlords are on safe constitutional grounds to discriminate under the first amendment.
Ironically, as the American bishops wage their war on women's health, Pope Benedict XVI has issued a decree permitting the use of condoms in Africa if they are used to prevent the spread of disease. In other words, a Catholic can use a contraceptive device if there is a health concern at issue. The ability to prevent unplanned pregnancy is a serious health issue. Unplanned pregnancies produce premature and low birth weight babies many of who have debilitating developmental problems as they grow. Unplanned pregnancies can have negative mental health affects and many women lack access to the prenatal and other care necessary for a healthy pregnancy which results in serious health issues for the women including future infertility. The Pope recognizes the problem. Unfortunately, the American bishops refuse to confront the hypocrisy of their own position.
Catholic hospitals, universities and social service agencies receive federal and state tax dollars. The majority of taxpayers is not Catholic and are women. To take taxpayer funding, but expect you can discriminate against those same taxpayers with impunity is foolish and arrogant. If the bishops truly want clean hands, refuse to take any tax funding. Hospitals would refuse Medicare and Medicaid funding and turn down tax funding to cover the uninsured and indigent. Catholic Charities would refuse all federal monies for housing and food assistance as well as substance abuse problems. Do the American bishops feel so strongly about this issue to close Catholic universities, hospitals and social service agencies? When even the Pope allows for condoms for health reasons, will the American bishops cut off their nose to spite their face and abandon their commitment to serve the least of their brothers and sisters? The bishops want their cake and eat it too. They want federal money to pursue their mission, but rail against the constitutional protections that go along with the money.
It is no accident Newt Gingrich converted to Catholicism or that Rick Santorum is comfortable as a Republican regressive Catholic. In the last 40 years, the Church has become an adjunct arm of the Republican Party. George Bush went to Rome to ask Pope John Paul II to encourage the American bishops to support Republican policies and candidates. Four of the five most regressive justices on the Supreme Court are Catholic. (#5, Anthony Kennedy occasionally is a swing vote) The Church led the fight to pass Proposition 8 in California banning gay marriage. It has become the place of comfort for those who wish to return this nation to the Gilded Age.
Over 80% of Catholic women use contraception. Catholic women choose abortion at about the same percentages as non-Catholic women. 63% of Catholics believe women should have access to contraception at Church run institutions. 54% support the compromise Obama has offered. The punditocracy has made much of this fight between the bishops and Obama. They pontificate how this could cost Obama the Catholic vote and his chances for re-election in November. They are whistling past the graveyard. Catholics who oppose abortion, contraception and gay marriage weren't going to vote for Obama in the first place. However, solid Catholic majorities support his positions. Moreover, his position is very popular with women who represent the majority of independent and swing voters. Championing the rights of women to protect their health and ability to plan their families will never hurt Obama politically. Even as national Catholic healthcare associations support the compromise, along with the president of Notre Dame and leaders of other Catholic universities, the bishops are more isolated and, even worse, irrelevant to the serious moral discussions that have to go on in this nation. Constantly supporting regressive social positions...discriminating against women and gays even as the hypocrisy of their stance is obvious continues to undercut any moral credibility the American Catholic hierarchy may have once enjoyed.
It should not be a surprise, then, to see bishops rising up in anger over the decision by the Obama administration to require health insurance plans, offered by Catholic universities, hospitals and social service agencies, to cover employees who wish access to various forms of legal contraceptives. Now, the first amendment is being violated and the very foundation of the Bill of Rights shaken by telling Catholic institutions they cannot discriminate against women. If there was any doubt about the Church's true motivations, they are laid to rest by the American Catholic Bishop's rejection of the compromise Obama has offered. Under this new plan, the Church would not pay for contraceptives; the insurance companies would cover the cost of the benefit. The bishops complained the compromise doesn't go far enough. They want a policy in which "any" employer can refuse to grant employees access to contraceptive services based on religious convictions. Any employer, pharmacist...storeowner...trucking company...should be able to use their Catholic religion to discriminate against women and be safe from legal repercussions. They don't want compromise. They want capitulation.
This same group of bishops threatens to shut down adoption services in cities across the land if these agencies are required to treat same sex couples the same as they do heterosexual couples. Once again, they argue the law should not apply to them. Despite no evidence to support the contention gay parents cause their children more harm than straight parents, the Church insists it has the right to use religion to discriminate. This same logic would allow religious exceptions to racial discrimination laws. There are cases of landlords who have refused to rent to same sex or mixed race or unmarried couples based on their religious beliefs. The American bishop's position would suggest these landlords are on safe constitutional grounds to discriminate under the first amendment.
Ironically, as the American bishops wage their war on women's health, Pope Benedict XVI has issued a decree permitting the use of condoms in Africa if they are used to prevent the spread of disease. In other words, a Catholic can use a contraceptive device if there is a health concern at issue. The ability to prevent unplanned pregnancy is a serious health issue. Unplanned pregnancies produce premature and low birth weight babies many of who have debilitating developmental problems as they grow. Unplanned pregnancies can have negative mental health affects and many women lack access to the prenatal and other care necessary for a healthy pregnancy which results in serious health issues for the women including future infertility. The Pope recognizes the problem. Unfortunately, the American bishops refuse to confront the hypocrisy of their own position.
Catholic hospitals, universities and social service agencies receive federal and state tax dollars. The majority of taxpayers is not Catholic and are women. To take taxpayer funding, but expect you can discriminate against those same taxpayers with impunity is foolish and arrogant. If the bishops truly want clean hands, refuse to take any tax funding. Hospitals would refuse Medicare and Medicaid funding and turn down tax funding to cover the uninsured and indigent. Catholic Charities would refuse all federal monies for housing and food assistance as well as substance abuse problems. Do the American bishops feel so strongly about this issue to close Catholic universities, hospitals and social service agencies? When even the Pope allows for condoms for health reasons, will the American bishops cut off their nose to spite their face and abandon their commitment to serve the least of their brothers and sisters? The bishops want their cake and eat it too. They want federal money to pursue their mission, but rail against the constitutional protections that go along with the money.
It is no accident Newt Gingrich converted to Catholicism or that Rick Santorum is comfortable as a Republican regressive Catholic. In the last 40 years, the Church has become an adjunct arm of the Republican Party. George Bush went to Rome to ask Pope John Paul II to encourage the American bishops to support Republican policies and candidates. Four of the five most regressive justices on the Supreme Court are Catholic. (#5, Anthony Kennedy occasionally is a swing vote) The Church led the fight to pass Proposition 8 in California banning gay marriage. It has become the place of comfort for those who wish to return this nation to the Gilded Age.
Over 80% of Catholic women use contraception. Catholic women choose abortion at about the same percentages as non-Catholic women. 63% of Catholics believe women should have access to contraception at Church run institutions. 54% support the compromise Obama has offered. The punditocracy has made much of this fight between the bishops and Obama. They pontificate how this could cost Obama the Catholic vote and his chances for re-election in November. They are whistling past the graveyard. Catholics who oppose abortion, contraception and gay marriage weren't going to vote for Obama in the first place. However, solid Catholic majorities support his positions. Moreover, his position is very popular with women who represent the majority of independent and swing voters. Championing the rights of women to protect their health and ability to plan their families will never hurt Obama politically. Even as national Catholic healthcare associations support the compromise, along with the president of Notre Dame and leaders of other Catholic universities, the bishops are more isolated and, even worse, irrelevant to the serious moral discussions that have to go on in this nation. Constantly supporting regressive social positions...discriminating against women and gays even as the hypocrisy of their stance is obvious continues to undercut any moral credibility the American Catholic hierarchy may have once enjoyed.
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
30....LOVE
I have been married for 30 years, so Valentine's Day is a familiar ritual. Never having forgotten to acknowledge the day...always having some flowers, (graduating from the cliché of roses to the more thoughtful tulips)...procuring candy from Sees and presenting cards of various types, I was proud of not being the stereotype of the thoughtless male who just went through the motions or blew the day off completely. After all, I was an incurable romantic. Wasn't I?
A recent conversation with my wife shattered any remaining pieces of this romantic, thoughtful-man construction. The subject of Valentine's Day came up and she casually commented on how much of a no-show I was year after year. Shock was the only reaction I had to her observations. Reminding her of the flowers and the candy and cards, I made the case I was a romantic husband who never missed the chance to remind her how much I loved her. She laughed and proceeded to present a litany of unmet expectations, missed dates and hackneyed or stale attempts to seem like a modern day Don Juan wooing his ladylove.
At the top of her list was an annual event which started out as a stunt. The news director was looking for something to jazz up Valentine's Day on the afternoon news. He remembered I had been a priest and wondered if I could legally marry a couple. I told him I doubted I could, and went about my daily assignments. I got a call from the desk saying they researched the question and I could legally marry someone. "Go to City Hall,” they told me, "...go to the clerk's office where there will be hundreds of couples trying to get a license to be married and find a couple who want to get married on the air." The marketing department scrambled and got the Fairmont to offer a suite for the night and a local restaurant offered a free wedding meal. This sounded crazy and I tried to talk them out of it, as I doubted it was legal and I didn't want to look like an idiot. I lost the argument and approached a line of couples. I was told to,"...go away, hell no, do you think we are stupid?, someone call a cop," and other warm reactions to my offer. Eventually, I did find a couple. They had known each other years ago, gotten separated across the country, and now he was back to ask her to marry him after realizing she was "the one". They came back to the station, we cleaned up the green room, put some candles out and they were married on the air. It was weird, but romantic.
It turned out to be a triumph. Management loved it. The couple loved it. The audience loved it and the marketing department could market the hell out of it. It became an annual event which eventually involved a honeymoon trip, hotel stays, meals and all kinds of other goodies. Couples competed and sent in letters explaining why their circumstances were the most romantic and deserved to be picked. I loved the romance of it. (Rosie Allen loved it and would gush and we would talk afterwards on the air together) It was perfectly designed to appeal to my ego and my romantic self. I think we did it for 10-12 years in a row. My wife reminded me on each of those years I was preparing for the wedding on the air while dropping off the flowers and candy and card and telling her to listen on the air. Couldn't get more romantic than that could I? How could anyone not be moved by a husband so committed to making sure a new married couple got a great sendoff on their most important of days?
In our home, it's known as "The Day". It is a story my wife never fails to tell at least once around Valentine's Day. I will never live it down. We had arranged to meet, yes meet in person, for lunch at Perry's on Union Street for Valentine's Day. Lunch was perfect because it didn't interfere with my wedding performance later in the day. Why hadn't we thought of this sooner? We both loved Perry's and we could have a leisurely lunch...a romantic lunch.
She arrived a little after noon. I was running late after having dashed to get flowers and candy. I got my tulips from Mia's Flowers on Church Street. (Mia and Glenn were friends and one of the couples I married on the air years later) I headed out Divisadero Street heading towards Union. Stopped at a light at Post St., I looked over and saw an entire building burst into flames. I called 9-1-1 and in the next breath called the news desk to report this live, breaking news. (Breaking news is mother's milk to a reporter. Being first on the scene just adds to the thrill. I made my bones as a reporter on breaking news. I was better at it than anyone in the Bay Area. I could set the scene, paint the work picture, and communicate the drama and urgency in one minute or less. I loved it more than anything.) It looked like it could be a huge fire. (I was almost addicted to covering fires. As long as I can remember I could distinguish between the sirens of an ambulance, police car and fire rig. My dad kept a scanner by his chair in the front room. My brother is a firefighter, a chief, and I knew tons of SF firefighters. I was the only local reporter to make it into the midst of the East Bay hills fire) I kept making live reports as rig after rig arrived. They knocked it down quickly. As the black smoke turned to grey and then white, I caught my breath and saw it was almost 2pm. It dawned on me slowly. She was at Perry's. We were supposed to have lunch. I looked at the tulips and candy on the car seat. I went from high to low in a moment. Our friend Mike was bartending that day. I called him and asked him to explain what had happened. (a coward I know) I rushed over only to find she had left. I had blown the lunch, Valentine's Day, everything. I still performed the wedding that night on the air however.
On the phone, "the day" came up along with all the other misses and slights and it hit me I was all hat and no cattle when it came to Valentine's Day. I touted myself as a romantic, but it was clear I was in love with the idea of being in love and in love with my own ego, but I want not so in love I could do the little things necessary to nurture it. I was great with grand gestures, but had failed to realize she was an after thought, a duty to be fulfilled...one more thing to check off the list on this day.
For the last 4 Valentine's Days, I have had cards made by some talented local artists, and written streams of words. The most difficult realization to come from all of this is that her experience of Valentine's Day hasn't changed much in the years we have been separated. Gestures on Valentine's Day have no substance or power unless they reflect the work done the other 364 days of the year. I had created an image in my head of a romantic husband, when the truth was I put my ego and needs ahead of hers. Had I been a true husband, in total love with his wife, I wouldn't be here, because I would have seen how much this would hurt her and devastate her and derail her life. If my love were demonstrated daily, rather than with occasional grand gestures, I would have never risked losing her and being so cavalier about our relationship. I took her for granted and needed her to point it out.
Love initially can be combustible and exciting. It can eat up our emotions and leave us breathless. Eventually, though, we have to start breathing again, and the work of being in love and staying in love starts. It's work which has to occur every day and not just on a few special days. It's work which can be pushed aside for other priorities or demands, with the intention of returning to it later.
It turns out I sucked even at the one special time each year to highlight how much we love someone. It also turns out by some miracle I have a chance to take another shot at all of this in a year or two. I don't intend to take it for granted or depend on grandiose gestures. If you are in love, I hope you figure out a way to make it visible every day and don't wait for commercialized gestures. For me, Valentine's Day is one more event reminding me how far I had gone down the wrong track and how I need to take advantage of any second chance I am offered. I don't need tulips or candy or cards. I need to be present and to be thankful to have someone in my life who loves me in spite of my shortcomings. Now that should go on a card somewhere.
A recent conversation with my wife shattered any remaining pieces of this romantic, thoughtful-man construction. The subject of Valentine's Day came up and she casually commented on how much of a no-show I was year after year. Shock was the only reaction I had to her observations. Reminding her of the flowers and the candy and cards, I made the case I was a romantic husband who never missed the chance to remind her how much I loved her. She laughed and proceeded to present a litany of unmet expectations, missed dates and hackneyed or stale attempts to seem like a modern day Don Juan wooing his ladylove.
At the top of her list was an annual event which started out as a stunt. The news director was looking for something to jazz up Valentine's Day on the afternoon news. He remembered I had been a priest and wondered if I could legally marry a couple. I told him I doubted I could, and went about my daily assignments. I got a call from the desk saying they researched the question and I could legally marry someone. "Go to City Hall,” they told me, "...go to the clerk's office where there will be hundreds of couples trying to get a license to be married and find a couple who want to get married on the air." The marketing department scrambled and got the Fairmont to offer a suite for the night and a local restaurant offered a free wedding meal. This sounded crazy and I tried to talk them out of it, as I doubted it was legal and I didn't want to look like an idiot. I lost the argument and approached a line of couples. I was told to,"...go away, hell no, do you think we are stupid?, someone call a cop," and other warm reactions to my offer. Eventually, I did find a couple. They had known each other years ago, gotten separated across the country, and now he was back to ask her to marry him after realizing she was "the one". They came back to the station, we cleaned up the green room, put some candles out and they were married on the air. It was weird, but romantic.
It turned out to be a triumph. Management loved it. The couple loved it. The audience loved it and the marketing department could market the hell out of it. It became an annual event which eventually involved a honeymoon trip, hotel stays, meals and all kinds of other goodies. Couples competed and sent in letters explaining why their circumstances were the most romantic and deserved to be picked. I loved the romance of it. (Rosie Allen loved it and would gush and we would talk afterwards on the air together) It was perfectly designed to appeal to my ego and my romantic self. I think we did it for 10-12 years in a row. My wife reminded me on each of those years I was preparing for the wedding on the air while dropping off the flowers and candy and card and telling her to listen on the air. Couldn't get more romantic than that could I? How could anyone not be moved by a husband so committed to making sure a new married couple got a great sendoff on their most important of days?
In our home, it's known as "The Day". It is a story my wife never fails to tell at least once around Valentine's Day. I will never live it down. We had arranged to meet, yes meet in person, for lunch at Perry's on Union Street for Valentine's Day. Lunch was perfect because it didn't interfere with my wedding performance later in the day. Why hadn't we thought of this sooner? We both loved Perry's and we could have a leisurely lunch...a romantic lunch.
She arrived a little after noon. I was running late after having dashed to get flowers and candy. I got my tulips from Mia's Flowers on Church Street. (Mia and Glenn were friends and one of the couples I married on the air years later) I headed out Divisadero Street heading towards Union. Stopped at a light at Post St., I looked over and saw an entire building burst into flames. I called 9-1-1 and in the next breath called the news desk to report this live, breaking news. (Breaking news is mother's milk to a reporter. Being first on the scene just adds to the thrill. I made my bones as a reporter on breaking news. I was better at it than anyone in the Bay Area. I could set the scene, paint the work picture, and communicate the drama and urgency in one minute or less. I loved it more than anything.) It looked like it could be a huge fire. (I was almost addicted to covering fires. As long as I can remember I could distinguish between the sirens of an ambulance, police car and fire rig. My dad kept a scanner by his chair in the front room. My brother is a firefighter, a chief, and I knew tons of SF firefighters. I was the only local reporter to make it into the midst of the East Bay hills fire) I kept making live reports as rig after rig arrived. They knocked it down quickly. As the black smoke turned to grey and then white, I caught my breath and saw it was almost 2pm. It dawned on me slowly. She was at Perry's. We were supposed to have lunch. I looked at the tulips and candy on the car seat. I went from high to low in a moment. Our friend Mike was bartending that day. I called him and asked him to explain what had happened. (a coward I know) I rushed over only to find she had left. I had blown the lunch, Valentine's Day, everything. I still performed the wedding that night on the air however.
On the phone, "the day" came up along with all the other misses and slights and it hit me I was all hat and no cattle when it came to Valentine's Day. I touted myself as a romantic, but it was clear I was in love with the idea of being in love and in love with my own ego, but I want not so in love I could do the little things necessary to nurture it. I was great with grand gestures, but had failed to realize she was an after thought, a duty to be fulfilled...one more thing to check off the list on this day.
For the last 4 Valentine's Days, I have had cards made by some talented local artists, and written streams of words. The most difficult realization to come from all of this is that her experience of Valentine's Day hasn't changed much in the years we have been separated. Gestures on Valentine's Day have no substance or power unless they reflect the work done the other 364 days of the year. I had created an image in my head of a romantic husband, when the truth was I put my ego and needs ahead of hers. Had I been a true husband, in total love with his wife, I wouldn't be here, because I would have seen how much this would hurt her and devastate her and derail her life. If my love were demonstrated daily, rather than with occasional grand gestures, I would have never risked losing her and being so cavalier about our relationship. I took her for granted and needed her to point it out.
Love initially can be combustible and exciting. It can eat up our emotions and leave us breathless. Eventually, though, we have to start breathing again, and the work of being in love and staying in love starts. It's work which has to occur every day and not just on a few special days. It's work which can be pushed aside for other priorities or demands, with the intention of returning to it later.
It turns out I sucked even at the one special time each year to highlight how much we love someone. It also turns out by some miracle I have a chance to take another shot at all of this in a year or two. I don't intend to take it for granted or depend on grandiose gestures. If you are in love, I hope you figure out a way to make it visible every day and don't wait for commercialized gestures. For me, Valentine's Day is one more event reminding me how far I had gone down the wrong track and how I need to take advantage of any second chance I am offered. I don't need tulips or candy or cards. I need to be present and to be thankful to have someone in my life who loves me in spite of my shortcomings. Now that should go on a card somewhere.
HAPPY VALENTINE'S DAY!!!
I have been married for 30 years, so Valentine's Day is a familiar ritual. Never having forgotten to acknowledge the day...always having some flowers, (graduating from the cliché of roses to the more thoughtful tulips)...procuring candy from Sees and presenting cards of various types, I was proud of not being the stereotype of the thoughtless male who just went through the motions or blew the day off completely. After all, I was an incurable romantic. Wasn't I?
A recent conversation with my wife shattered any remaining pieces of this romantic, thoughtful-man construction. The subject of Valentine's Day came up and she casually commented on how much of a no-show I was year after year. Shock was the only reaction I had to her observations. Reminding her of the flowers and the candy and cards, I made the case I was a romantic husband who never missed the chance to remind her how much I loved her. She laughed and proceeded to present a litany of unmet expectations, missed dates and hackneyed or stale attempts to seem like a modern day Don Juan wooing his ladylove.
At the top of her list was an annual event which started out as a stunt. The news director was looking for something to jazz up Valentine's Day on the afternoon news. He remembered I had been a priest and wondered if I could legally marry a couple. I told him I doubted I could, and went about my daily assignments. I got a call from the desk saying they researched the question and I could legally marry someone. "Go to City Hall,” they told me, "...go to the clerk's office where there will be hundreds of couples trying to get a license to be married and find a couple who want to get married on the air." The marketing department scrambled and got the Fairmont to offer a suite for the night and a local restaurant offered a free wedding meal. This sounded crazy and I tried to talk them out of it, as I doubted it was legal and I didn't want to look like an idiot. I lost the argument and approached a line of couples. I was told to,"...go away, hell no, do you think we are stupid?, someone call a cop," and other warm reactions to my offer. Eventually, I did find a couple. They had known each other years ago, gotten separated across the country, and now he was back to ask her to marry him after realizing she was "the one". They came back to the station, we cleaned up the green room, put some candles out and they were married on the air. It was weird, but romantic.
It turned out to be a triumph. Management loved it. The couple loved it. The audience loved it and the marketing department could market the hell out of it. It became an annual event which eventually involved a honeymoon trip, hotel stays, meals and all kinds of other goodies. Couples competed and sent in letters explaining why their circumstances were the most romantic and deserved to be picked. I loved the romance of it. (Rosie Allen loved it and would gush and we would talk afterwards on the air together) It was perfectly designed to appeal to my ego and my romantic self. I think we did it for 10-12 years in a row. My wife reminded me on each of those years I was preparing for the wedding on the air while dropping off the flowers and candy and card and telling her to listen on the air. Couldn't get more romantic than that could I? How could anyone not be moved by a husband so committed to making sure a new married couple got a great sendoff on their most important of days?
In our home, it's known as "The Day". It is a story my wife never fails to tell at least once around Valentine's Day. I will never live it down. We had arranged to meet, yes meet in person, for lunch at Perry's on Union Street for Valentine's Day. Lunch was perfect because it didn't interfere with my wedding performance later in the day. Why hadn't we thought of this sooner? We both loved Perry's and we could have a leisurely lunch...a romantic lunch.
She arrived a little after noon. I was running late after having dashed to get flowers and candy. I got my tulips from Mia's Flowers on Church Street. (Mia and Glenn were friends and one of the couples I married on the air years later) I headed out Divisadero Street heading towards Union. Stopped at a light at Post St., I looked over and saw an entire building burst into flames. I called 9-1-1 and in the next breath called the news desk to report this live, breaking news. (Breaking news is mother's milk to a reporter. Being first on the scene just adds to the thrill. I made my bones as a reporter on breaking news. I was better at it than anyone in the Bay Area. I could set the scene, paint the work picture, and communicate the drama and urgency in one minute or less. I loved it more than anything.) It looked like it could be a huge fire. (I was almost addicted to covering fires. As long as I can remember I could distinguish between the sirens of an ambulance, police car and fire rig. My dad kept a scanner by his chair in the front room. My brother is a firefighter, a chief, and I knew tons of SF firefighters. I was the only local reporter to make it into the midst of the East Bay hills fire) I kept making live reports as rig after rig arrived. They knocked it down quickly. As the black smoke turned to grey and then white, I caught my breath and saw it was almost 2pm. It dawned on me slowly. She was at Perry's. We were supposed to have lunch. I looked at the tulips and candy on the car seat. I went from high to low in a moment. Our friend Mike was bartending that day. I called him and asked him to explain what had happened. (a coward I know) I rushed over only to find she had left. I had blown the lunch, Valentine's Day, everything. I still performed the wedding that night on the air however.
On the phone, "the day" came up along with all the other misses and slights and it hit me I was all hat and no cattle when it came to Valentine's Day. I touted myself as a romantic, but it was clear I was in love with the idea of being in love and in love with my own ego, but I want not so in love I could do the little things necessary to nurture it. I was great with grand gestures, but had failed to realize she was an after thought, a duty to be fulfilled...one more thing to check off the list on this day.
For the last 4 Valentine's Days, I have had cards made by some talented local artists, and written streams of words. The most difficult realization to come from all of this is that her experience of Valentine's Day hasn't changed much in the years we have been separated. Gestures on Valentine's Day have no substance or power unless they reflect the work done the other 364 days of the year. I had created an image in my head of a romantic husband, when the truth was I put my ego and needs ahead of hers. Had I been a true husband, in total love with his wife, I wouldn't be here, because I would have seen how much this would hurt her and devastate her and derail her life. If my love were demonstrated daily, rather than with occasional grand gestures, I would have never risked losing her and being so cavalier about our relationship. I took her for granted and needed her to point it out.
Love initially can be combustible and exciting. It can eat up our emotions and leave us breathless. Eventually, though, we have to start breathing again, and the work of being in love and staying in love starts. It's work which has to occur every day and not just on a few special days. It's work which can be pushed aside for other priorities or demands, with the intention of returning to it later.
It turns out I sucked even at the one special time each year to highlight how much we love someone. It also turns out by some miracle I have a chance to take another shot at all of this in a year or two. I don't intend to take it for granted or depend on grandiose gestures. If you are in love, I hope you figure out a way to make it visible every day and don't wait for commercialized gestures. For me, Valentine's Day is one more event reminding me how far I had gone down the wrong track and how I need to take advantage of any second chance I am offered. I don't need tulips or candy or cards. I need to be present and to be thankful to have someone in my life who loves me in spite of my shortcomings. Now that should go on a card somewhere.
A recent conversation with my wife shattered any remaining pieces of this romantic, thoughtful-man construction. The subject of Valentine's Day came up and she casually commented on how much of a no-show I was year after year. Shock was the only reaction I had to her observations. Reminding her of the flowers and the candy and cards, I made the case I was a romantic husband who never missed the chance to remind her how much I loved her. She laughed and proceeded to present a litany of unmet expectations, missed dates and hackneyed or stale attempts to seem like a modern day Don Juan wooing his ladylove.
At the top of her list was an annual event which started out as a stunt. The news director was looking for something to jazz up Valentine's Day on the afternoon news. He remembered I had been a priest and wondered if I could legally marry a couple. I told him I doubted I could, and went about my daily assignments. I got a call from the desk saying they researched the question and I could legally marry someone. "Go to City Hall,” they told me, "...go to the clerk's office where there will be hundreds of couples trying to get a license to be married and find a couple who want to get married on the air." The marketing department scrambled and got the Fairmont to offer a suite for the night and a local restaurant offered a free wedding meal. This sounded crazy and I tried to talk them out of it, as I doubted it was legal and I didn't want to look like an idiot. I lost the argument and approached a line of couples. I was told to,"...go away, hell no, do you think we are stupid?, someone call a cop," and other warm reactions to my offer. Eventually, I did find a couple. They had known each other years ago, gotten separated across the country, and now he was back to ask her to marry him after realizing she was "the one". They came back to the station, we cleaned up the green room, put some candles out and they were married on the air. It was weird, but romantic.
It turned out to be a triumph. Management loved it. The couple loved it. The audience loved it and the marketing department could market the hell out of it. It became an annual event which eventually involved a honeymoon trip, hotel stays, meals and all kinds of other goodies. Couples competed and sent in letters explaining why their circumstances were the most romantic and deserved to be picked. I loved the romance of it. (Rosie Allen loved it and would gush and we would talk afterwards on the air together) It was perfectly designed to appeal to my ego and my romantic self. I think we did it for 10-12 years in a row. My wife reminded me on each of those years I was preparing for the wedding on the air while dropping off the flowers and candy and card and telling her to listen on the air. Couldn't get more romantic than that could I? How could anyone not be moved by a husband so committed to making sure a new married couple got a great sendoff on their most important of days?
In our home, it's known as "The Day". It is a story my wife never fails to tell at least once around Valentine's Day. I will never live it down. We had arranged to meet, yes meet in person, for lunch at Perry's on Union Street for Valentine's Day. Lunch was perfect because it didn't interfere with my wedding performance later in the day. Why hadn't we thought of this sooner? We both loved Perry's and we could have a leisurely lunch...a romantic lunch.
She arrived a little after noon. I was running late after having dashed to get flowers and candy. I got my tulips from Mia's Flowers on Church Street. (Mia and Glenn were friends and one of the couples I married on the air years later) I headed out Divisadero Street heading towards Union. Stopped at a light at Post St., I looked over and saw an entire building burst into flames. I called 9-1-1 and in the next breath called the news desk to report this live, breaking news. (Breaking news is mother's milk to a reporter. Being first on the scene just adds to the thrill. I made my bones as a reporter on breaking news. I was better at it than anyone in the Bay Area. I could set the scene, paint the work picture, and communicate the drama and urgency in one minute or less. I loved it more than anything.) It looked like it could be a huge fire. (I was almost addicted to covering fires. As long as I can remember I could distinguish between the sirens of an ambulance, police car and fire rig. My dad kept a scanner by his chair in the front room. My brother is a firefighter, a chief, and I knew tons of SF firefighters. I was the only local reporter to make it into the midst of the East Bay hills fire) I kept making live reports as rig after rig arrived. They knocked it down quickly. As the black smoke turned to grey and then white, I caught my breath and saw it was almost 2pm. It dawned on me slowly. She was at Perry's. We were supposed to have lunch. I looked at the tulips and candy on the car seat. I went from high to low in a moment. Our friend Mike was bartending that day. I called him and asked him to explain what had happened. (a coward I know) I rushed over only to find she had left. I had blown the lunch, Valentine's Day, everything. I still performed the wedding that night on the air however.
On the phone, "the day" came up along with all the other misses and slights and it hit me I was all hat and no cattle when it came to Valentine's Day. I touted myself as a romantic, but it was clear I was in love with the idea of being in love and in love with my own ego, but I want not so in love I could do the little things necessary to nurture it. I was great with grand gestures, but had failed to realize she was an after thought, a duty to be fulfilled...one more thing to check off the list on this day.
For the last 4 Valentine's Days, I have had cards made by some talented local artists, and written streams of words. The most difficult realization to come from all of this is that her experience of Valentine's Day hasn't changed much in the years we have been separated. Gestures on Valentine's Day have no substance or power unless they reflect the work done the other 364 days of the year. I had created an image in my head of a romantic husband, when the truth was I put my ego and needs ahead of hers. Had I been a true husband, in total love with his wife, I wouldn't be here, because I would have seen how much this would hurt her and devastate her and derail her life. If my love were demonstrated daily, rather than with occasional grand gestures, I would have never risked losing her and being so cavalier about our relationship. I took her for granted and needed her to point it out.
Love initially can be combustible and exciting. It can eat up our emotions and leave us breathless. Eventually, though, we have to start breathing again, and the work of being in love and staying in love starts. It's work which has to occur every day and not just on a few special days. It's work which can be pushed aside for other priorities or demands, with the intention of returning to it later.
It turns out I sucked even at the one special time each year to highlight how much we love someone. It also turns out by some miracle I have a chance to take another shot at all of this in a year or two. I don't intend to take it for granted or depend on grandiose gestures. If you are in love, I hope you figure out a way to make it visible every day and don't wait for commercialized gestures. For me, Valentine's Day is one more event reminding me how far I had gone down the wrong track and how I need to take advantage of any second chance I am offered. I don't need tulips or candy or cards. I need to be present and to be thankful to have someone in my life who loves me in spite of my shortcomings. Now that should go on a card somewhere.
Tuesday, February 7, 2012
YOU'LL NEVER WORK IN THIS TOWN AGAIN...
President Obama asked Steve Jobs about all the jobs lost to China for manufacturing Apple products. Jobs famously told him those jobs would never return to this country. Why? Americans with a sense of decency and morality would never allow the working conditions at China's Foxcom industries. (My opinion of course...Jobs said it was because of all the anti-business regulations Obama foists on corporate victims.)
Current Apple CEO Tim Cook, tells about Job's dissatisfaction with the plastic screen on the original I Phone. Jobs demanded it be replaced with glass. They contacted Foxcom. Managers rousted sleepy workers from their dorms and put them to work. With 12-16 hour shifts, they re-tooled and began making thousands of I Phones with glass screens. No American company, says Cook, has the flexibility and workforce to pull off such an accomplishment. Also, no American company can pay it's workers $1 an hour, keep them on the premises 24 hours a day, separate them from their families, prohibit them from talking to the media or fire them if they complain about harsh working conditions or low pay.
Apple is no better than the people who owned the Triangle Shirt Factory in New York, the chicken processing plants in Georgia or the cotton fields of Alabama. Apple is the latest in a long list of American corporations, NIKE...automakers...and even the Kardashians come to mind....to exploit workers in other countries and drive up profits for themselves. What makes Apple's sins so egregious is their attempt to avoid taking responsibility for their actions knowing Americans care more about having a "cool" tech product than they do about how it was made and by whom.
CNN recently interviewed a Foxcom worker. She described slave-like conditions and pay. She was worn down by the crushingly repetitive boredom and soul-sucking environment she endures and declared she would be fired if anyone found out she was talking to the media. She says the workers are treated like animals. CNN reminded viewers 13 Foxcom workers committed suicide by jumping off their building forcing managers to put up nets to try to reduce the suicide rates. The suicides were the only way they could think of to protest the horrible conditions under which they labored. In response, Apple issued an unctuous press release proclaiming their love and respect for all the workers who assemble their products. Their commitment to the workers does not go as far as mandating better wages, food, living and working conditions, but Apple cares. Apple is not alone in their caring. Workers at a Foxcom plant assembling products for Microsoft mutinied over pay and working conditions. Microsoft insists it too cares about all those who assemble their products.
Can you imagine in your wildest dreams, Americans giving up their I Pads or I Phones because of moral outrage over how the workers who make them are treated? In this nation of tech chic, Americans are far more concerned about buying the latest cutting edge device than they are for Chinese laborers. Apple and Microsoft shareholders would scream bloody murder if prices for their products were raised to reflect higher wages and better conditions for those who make them. Profits before morality at all costs. Maybe a movement to shun or shame owners of Apple products could bring about a change in corporate culture....yeah right!
One of the forces, which drive this scandal, is free trade agreements. NAFTA, GATT and recent agreements with South Korea, Colombia and other nations, allow corporations to chase the cheapest labor dollar wherever it exists. President Clinton promised NAFTA and GATT would contain provisions requiring just pay and conditions for workers and for a process which would allow workers to organize. He lied. It never happened.
Since we know corporations will never, on their own, improve wages and the conditions under which workers operate, they have to be forced to do the right thing. There are two steps which could be taken to improve the situation. First, owners of Apple, Microsoft and other electronic products have to put pressure on the corporations to allow and encourage their sub-contractors to improve conditions even if it drives up the prices of their products. Independent inspectors have to be allowed into all these plants to assess conditions. (Despite Apple's glowing press release, this is a classic example of trust but verify) Second, the American government has to make unionization a part of any free trade agreement and assess trade penalties on products from any nation which balks. Right now, across the globe, union organizers are targets of orchestrated campaigns of assassination and intimidation instituted by nations and corporations bent on remaining attractive to manufacturers by keeping wages and benefits as low as possible and working conditions akin to slavery. Without pressure from America, they will never allow workers to organize.
What's going on in China is not new. Autoworkers, farm workers, Pullman porters, steel workers and coal miners also faced slave wages and life threatening working conditions in this country. It was only when people like Philip Randolph, Walter Reuther, Caesar Chavez and others came along and organized workers, changed laws and forced the capitalists to raise wages and improve working conditions which finally forced change to occur. Now we have to give Chinese workers the same opportunities.
Ironically, at the same time Chinese workers are fighting for their rights, American workers face Right to Work Less laws proliferating across the country and Americans feel antipathy towards unions. We can see how unions would benefit workers in China or Mexico at the same time as corporations and regressives dismantle them in this nation.
Will Americans give up their latest slick toy in order to show solidarity with the people who make them? Will we demand our government stop the widespread killing and intimidating of organizers internationally? Will Newt Gingrich be the first governor of the 51st state on the moon?
Current Apple CEO Tim Cook, tells about Job's dissatisfaction with the plastic screen on the original I Phone. Jobs demanded it be replaced with glass. They contacted Foxcom. Managers rousted sleepy workers from their dorms and put them to work. With 12-16 hour shifts, they re-tooled and began making thousands of I Phones with glass screens. No American company, says Cook, has the flexibility and workforce to pull off such an accomplishment. Also, no American company can pay it's workers $1 an hour, keep them on the premises 24 hours a day, separate them from their families, prohibit them from talking to the media or fire them if they complain about harsh working conditions or low pay.
Apple is no better than the people who owned the Triangle Shirt Factory in New York, the chicken processing plants in Georgia or the cotton fields of Alabama. Apple is the latest in a long list of American corporations, NIKE...automakers...and even the Kardashians come to mind....to exploit workers in other countries and drive up profits for themselves. What makes Apple's sins so egregious is their attempt to avoid taking responsibility for their actions knowing Americans care more about having a "cool" tech product than they do about how it was made and by whom.
CNN recently interviewed a Foxcom worker. She described slave-like conditions and pay. She was worn down by the crushingly repetitive boredom and soul-sucking environment she endures and declared she would be fired if anyone found out she was talking to the media. She says the workers are treated like animals. CNN reminded viewers 13 Foxcom workers committed suicide by jumping off their building forcing managers to put up nets to try to reduce the suicide rates. The suicides were the only way they could think of to protest the horrible conditions under which they labored. In response, Apple issued an unctuous press release proclaiming their love and respect for all the workers who assemble their products. Their commitment to the workers does not go as far as mandating better wages, food, living and working conditions, but Apple cares. Apple is not alone in their caring. Workers at a Foxcom plant assembling products for Microsoft mutinied over pay and working conditions. Microsoft insists it too cares about all those who assemble their products.
Can you imagine in your wildest dreams, Americans giving up their I Pads or I Phones because of moral outrage over how the workers who make them are treated? In this nation of tech chic, Americans are far more concerned about buying the latest cutting edge device than they are for Chinese laborers. Apple and Microsoft shareholders would scream bloody murder if prices for their products were raised to reflect higher wages and better conditions for those who make them. Profits before morality at all costs. Maybe a movement to shun or shame owners of Apple products could bring about a change in corporate culture....yeah right!
One of the forces, which drive this scandal, is free trade agreements. NAFTA, GATT and recent agreements with South Korea, Colombia and other nations, allow corporations to chase the cheapest labor dollar wherever it exists. President Clinton promised NAFTA and GATT would contain provisions requiring just pay and conditions for workers and for a process which would allow workers to organize. He lied. It never happened.
Since we know corporations will never, on their own, improve wages and the conditions under which workers operate, they have to be forced to do the right thing. There are two steps which could be taken to improve the situation. First, owners of Apple, Microsoft and other electronic products have to put pressure on the corporations to allow and encourage their sub-contractors to improve conditions even if it drives up the prices of their products. Independent inspectors have to be allowed into all these plants to assess conditions. (Despite Apple's glowing press release, this is a classic example of trust but verify) Second, the American government has to make unionization a part of any free trade agreement and assess trade penalties on products from any nation which balks. Right now, across the globe, union organizers are targets of orchestrated campaigns of assassination and intimidation instituted by nations and corporations bent on remaining attractive to manufacturers by keeping wages and benefits as low as possible and working conditions akin to slavery. Without pressure from America, they will never allow workers to organize.
What's going on in China is not new. Autoworkers, farm workers, Pullman porters, steel workers and coal miners also faced slave wages and life threatening working conditions in this country. It was only when people like Philip Randolph, Walter Reuther, Caesar Chavez and others came along and organized workers, changed laws and forced the capitalists to raise wages and improve working conditions which finally forced change to occur. Now we have to give Chinese workers the same opportunities.
Ironically, at the same time Chinese workers are fighting for their rights, American workers face Right to Work Less laws proliferating across the country and Americans feel antipathy towards unions. We can see how unions would benefit workers in China or Mexico at the same time as corporations and regressives dismantle them in this nation.
Will Americans give up their latest slick toy in order to show solidarity with the people who make them? Will we demand our government stop the widespread killing and intimidating of organizers internationally? Will Newt Gingrich be the first governor of the 51st state on the moon?
WHEN JOHNNY COMES MARCHING HOME AGAIN...
The New York Giants are getting a ticker-tape parade, (since there are no more tickers, where do they get the tape?), down Broadway. Veteran's groups are demanding the same from President Obama. They want a parade to celebrate the end of the Iraq war. Obama is planning a state dinner at the White House featuring 200 guests representing all the various branches of the military. The veteran's groups say it isn't enough.
What exactly would a parade symbolize? It cannot be a victory parade. The United States didn't win anything in Iraq. The country is in danger of a civil war with the Kurds breaking away and declaring a separate nation. If there is a victor in Iraq, it is Iran. Would a parade mean we approve of what the military accomplished in Iraq? We replaced one dictator with another wannabe. Prime Minister Malicki is locking up his political opponents, harassing and shutting down opposition media, ignoring the Parliament and courting Iran. We left the country in ruins still unable to provide clean water or electricity 24 hours a day. We leave behind hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis and over one million fled the country and have yet to return.
A parade would signal the nation's approval of entering and conducting this war. The Iraq war was built on a foundation of lies and media manipulation not seen since the days of Hearst and yellow journalism. The list of lies is endless starting with the need to enforce United Nation's resolutions, to eliminating weapons of mass destruction to getting revenge for Saddam Hussein's role in the attacks of September 11, 2001. The White House set up a working group to sell the war to the American people and the corporate media cooperated eagerly. Judith Miller, a reporter for the New York Times, was one of many who worked in league with Scooter Libby and Vice President Cheney to produce story after story about mobile weapon's labs, nerve gas, even hidden nuclear weapons. Do you remember Colin Powell testifying in front of the U.N about Hussein's ability to arm rockets with biological warheads in 45 minutes or less? When Scott Ritter insisted the weapons inspectors had found and destroyed all the weapons of mass destruction, MSNBC, CNN, Fox and the major networks ignored or ridiculed his statements. When journalists at the Washington Post wrote stories critical of the Administration's claims, the stories were either killed or put on page A18 out of sight and out of mind. American troops will march in New York to celebrate all of this deception and propaganda?
The Iraq war was an immoral war. You don't have to take my word for it. The Roman Catholic Church, Episcopal Church, Lutheran and Methodist churches as well as Unitarians and Quakers, all declared the Iraq war to be immoral and unjustified. The military who executed this policy was composed of volunteers who now must face the reality they participated in an immoral action. There is no honor in what America did in Iraq. The United States used illegal chemical weapons in Fallujah killing and maiming thousands in violation of international law. They violated the rights of POWs. They destabilized the nation and then watched as it turned into a civil war. To put on a parade...to cheer as members of the armed services march down the street...to wave American flags and play patriotic music would be a tacit endorsement of one of the darkest moments in modern American history. The Iraqi people did not attack us. They posed no imminent threat to our national security. We were not acting in self-defense. Joe Wilson told the truth about the threat of yellowcake from Niger and look what happened to him and his wife. This was an act of naked aggression promulgated by a group of people determined to show democracy could be advanced through force and committed to eliminating a threat to Israel. I'm not making this up. Read the manifesto of the Project for A New American Century and it's all laid out in concise language.
Even the state dinner is too much. If it were to be a dinner to call attention to disabled and wounded vets...if it was a dinner to call on American businesses to hire former vets...if it was a dinner to drum up support for a larger and more comprehensive Veterans Administration...maybe it would make sense. Having a dinner to honor the military for their participation in an illegal and immoral war which ended up weakening this nation and giving aid and comfort to our enemies would not happen were this not an election year. Too cynical?
Many are afraid to be honest about Iraq, because to do so opens them up to charges of hating their country, criticizing brave men and women of America's armed forces, being soft on terrorism and other personal insults. However, honesty is the only way to prevent a tragedy like this from happening again. Could it happen again? Just listen to the drums beating to get us into a shooting war with Iran. The same tools, the same media, the same hype is being produced to once again stampede Americans into another war.
A parade down Broadway might seal the deal.
What exactly would a parade symbolize? It cannot be a victory parade. The United States didn't win anything in Iraq. The country is in danger of a civil war with the Kurds breaking away and declaring a separate nation. If there is a victor in Iraq, it is Iran. Would a parade mean we approve of what the military accomplished in Iraq? We replaced one dictator with another wannabe. Prime Minister Malicki is locking up his political opponents, harassing and shutting down opposition media, ignoring the Parliament and courting Iran. We left the country in ruins still unable to provide clean water or electricity 24 hours a day. We leave behind hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis and over one million fled the country and have yet to return.
A parade would signal the nation's approval of entering and conducting this war. The Iraq war was built on a foundation of lies and media manipulation not seen since the days of Hearst and yellow journalism. The list of lies is endless starting with the need to enforce United Nation's resolutions, to eliminating weapons of mass destruction to getting revenge for Saddam Hussein's role in the attacks of September 11, 2001. The White House set up a working group to sell the war to the American people and the corporate media cooperated eagerly. Judith Miller, a reporter for the New York Times, was one of many who worked in league with Scooter Libby and Vice President Cheney to produce story after story about mobile weapon's labs, nerve gas, even hidden nuclear weapons. Do you remember Colin Powell testifying in front of the U.N about Hussein's ability to arm rockets with biological warheads in 45 minutes or less? When Scott Ritter insisted the weapons inspectors had found and destroyed all the weapons of mass destruction, MSNBC, CNN, Fox and the major networks ignored or ridiculed his statements. When journalists at the Washington Post wrote stories critical of the Administration's claims, the stories were either killed or put on page A18 out of sight and out of mind. American troops will march in New York to celebrate all of this deception and propaganda?
The Iraq war was an immoral war. You don't have to take my word for it. The Roman Catholic Church, Episcopal Church, Lutheran and Methodist churches as well as Unitarians and Quakers, all declared the Iraq war to be immoral and unjustified. The military who executed this policy was composed of volunteers who now must face the reality they participated in an immoral action. There is no honor in what America did in Iraq. The United States used illegal chemical weapons in Fallujah killing and maiming thousands in violation of international law. They violated the rights of POWs. They destabilized the nation and then watched as it turned into a civil war. To put on a parade...to cheer as members of the armed services march down the street...to wave American flags and play patriotic music would be a tacit endorsement of one of the darkest moments in modern American history. The Iraqi people did not attack us. They posed no imminent threat to our national security. We were not acting in self-defense. Joe Wilson told the truth about the threat of yellowcake from Niger and look what happened to him and his wife. This was an act of naked aggression promulgated by a group of people determined to show democracy could be advanced through force and committed to eliminating a threat to Israel. I'm not making this up. Read the manifesto of the Project for A New American Century and it's all laid out in concise language.
Even the state dinner is too much. If it were to be a dinner to call attention to disabled and wounded vets...if it was a dinner to call on American businesses to hire former vets...if it was a dinner to drum up support for a larger and more comprehensive Veterans Administration...maybe it would make sense. Having a dinner to honor the military for their participation in an illegal and immoral war which ended up weakening this nation and giving aid and comfort to our enemies would not happen were this not an election year. Too cynical?
Many are afraid to be honest about Iraq, because to do so opens them up to charges of hating their country, criticizing brave men and women of America's armed forces, being soft on terrorism and other personal insults. However, honesty is the only way to prevent a tragedy like this from happening again. Could it happen again? Just listen to the drums beating to get us into a shooting war with Iran. The same tools, the same media, the same hype is being produced to once again stampede Americans into another war.
A parade down Broadway might seal the deal.
Monday, February 6, 2012
Freedom of Speech - The Lion of the Left SuperPAC - Also a note about comment moderation
Hi there, this is Ed the IT guy with a message. It appears that there is some confusion over exactly how this blog works. Some people posting comments seem to think that Bernie Ward is in control of this blog, directly posting to it in violation of some kind of ban he might be under, restricting his use of the Internet. I am not sure of the legal specifics of such a ban, or if he is indeed under one or not. HOWEVER, "The Lion" does not do the posting, nor does he have editorial control over the content of this blog, as it is maintained entirely by The Lion of the Left SuperPAC, who post select writings on various issues of the day that we have come upon. Most of these do happen to be written by The Lion of the Left, and in exercising our freedom of speech, as the Supreme Court, in it's infinite wisdom has said SuperPACs are allowed to do, we at The Lion of the Left SuperPAC choose to post these well-thought out commentaries for those who may wish to read them. THE LION OF THE LEFT SUPERPAC DOES THIS ENTIRELY OF OUR OWN VOLITION, AND HAS NO DIRECT LINK WITH HIM, ALTHOUGH WE OFTEN CHOOSE TO POST WORDS HE MAY HAVE WRITTEN. This is entirely legal, as decided by the Supreme Court in the Citizens United case. Also just because a man is in jail, he does not lose the right to communicate with the outside world in the United States. As long as we continue to recieve his insightful words, we at The Lion of the Left SuperPAC will continue to exercise OUR freedom of speech and post them as we see fit.
As some of you may have noticed, there has been someone who, with entirely too much time on their hands, has decided to carry out a childish vendetta through our comments section. As a result, we at The Lion of the Left SuperPAC will be reviewing all comments BEFORE they are published. We have tried to keep this an open discussion by allowing comments to be published immediately, but this process has been abused by a very small group who are obsessed with repeatedly posting multiple copies of comments that are only personal attacks, having nothing to do with the topics being discussed, and so now comments will be moderated. We will not block comments merely for being in disagreement with a view posted here, as we encourage discussion of the issues, but comments that are only personal attacks will not make it to the blog for public viewing. ALSO: THERE IS NOT OR EVER WILL BE ADULT CONTENT ON THIS BLOG, AND ANY COMMENT WITH INAPPROPRIATE CONTENT WILL NOT BE PUBLISHED! Whoever you are, (and you know who you are), you have the freedom to start your own blog if you wish to spend so much of your time and energy defaming "The Lion", and discussing details of his case. "The Lion" has addressed the issue as you requested, and now we're on to other topics-case closed! Again, start your own blog if you wish; but this is not the place for that. Regrettably, this will cause somewhat of a delay for the rest of your comments to show up, but we will try to get any legitimate comments up as soon as possible. Thank the vast majority of you for your support, yours truly, Ed the IT Guy
As some of you may have noticed, there has been someone who, with entirely too much time on their hands, has decided to carry out a childish vendetta through our comments section. As a result, we at The Lion of the Left SuperPAC will be reviewing all comments BEFORE they are published. We have tried to keep this an open discussion by allowing comments to be published immediately, but this process has been abused by a very small group who are obsessed with repeatedly posting multiple copies of comments that are only personal attacks, having nothing to do with the topics being discussed, and so now comments will be moderated. We will not block comments merely for being in disagreement with a view posted here, as we encourage discussion of the issues, but comments that are only personal attacks will not make it to the blog for public viewing. ALSO: THERE IS NOT OR EVER WILL BE ADULT CONTENT ON THIS BLOG, AND ANY COMMENT WITH INAPPROPRIATE CONTENT WILL NOT BE PUBLISHED! Whoever you are, (and you know who you are), you have the freedom to start your own blog if you wish to spend so much of your time and energy defaming "The Lion", and discussing details of his case. "The Lion" has addressed the issue as you requested, and now we're on to other topics-case closed! Again, start your own blog if you wish; but this is not the place for that. Regrettably, this will cause somewhat of a delay for the rest of your comments to show up, but we will try to get any legitimate comments up as soon as possible. Thank the vast majority of you for your support, yours truly, Ed the IT Guy
Thursday, February 2, 2012
NOTE FROM GIRL FRIDAY...
The Lion has written two new blogs. The IT Guy and I are amazed that Bill O'Reilly would even notice us or comment about this blog on his program. I am all for free speech as long as it is tasteful and not pointless, derogatory diatribe. As concerns the commentator who is robo-posting massive amounts of inappropriate drivel...go ahead and post all you want; all your postings will be deleted no matter how many times you robo-post them. Of course, I know you are just as pure as the snow on top of Mount Everest; so you have every right to spend your time being infuriated at The Lion. I have noticed all my life that the people who criticize other people the most have the most to hide about themselves as they pretend to be sacredly pure. The Lion has a lot of fascinating insights and historical knowledge to share with us. I feel blessed that most of the commentators to this website write interesting material that is certainly worth publishing. I really hope that everyone votes in the next election and that everyone continues to write in the spirit of free speech!
SELECTIVE OUTRAGE...
From pulpits across the country, Catholic priests read letters from their bishops outraged at a decision by the Department of Health and Human Services. HHS, with the approval of the Obama administration, refused to exempt the Roman church from a requirement which mandates health insurance plans, for employees at Catholic institutions, must cover all approved and legal methods of birth control. The Church did receive an exemption for parish operations and any institution where the primary purpose is worship. However, Catholic hospitals, universities, social services etc. would have to offer employees insurance plans which include birth control coverage.
The National Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a blanket condemnation of the new rules. The Church is officially opposed to all forms of artificial birth control. The new rules violate the first amendment's freedom of religion clause, according to the bishops. The government is forcing them to enable women employees, or the spouses of male employees, to use birth control to plan and control the size of their families. The Church is being forced to provide assistance for an act it considers immoral. Catholics have been urged to contact Congress and the White House to put political pressure on both bodies and get this decision reversed. It is a full-court press.
HHS Secretary, Kathleen Sibelius, stands by the rule change. She points out Catholic hospitals, universities, elementary and secondary schools, as well as other businesses, employ large numbers of non-Catholic workers. Workers are covered by new healthcare regulations in all other businesses in the nation, and Catholic institutions shouldn't be treated any differently.
The position of the bishops reeks of hypocrisy and selective outrage. Catholic Healthcare West, a corporation which runs hospitals in Northern California, already provides such coverage to its employees...a fact the bishops failed to mention nor have they put a stop to it. While there still may exist the quaint image of a hospital full of caring nuns, and universities chock full of Bing Crosby-like priests teaching and preaching, the reality is hospitals, schools and other "Catholic" businesses employ high numbers of non-Catholics and are no different than any other business. They may be a non-profit operation for tax purposes, but walking into St. Mary's Hospital in San Francisco is no different than walking into Valley Medical Center in San Jose. Simply because you are employed by a "Catholic" institution, whose primary function has nothing to do with faith or worship, should not mean you are a second class citizen with benefits other employees at "secular" institutions enjoy not available to you. The first amendment restricts government interference in religious affairs, but does not apply when the Church is operating commercial enterprises which serve much larger populations than just Catholics. Notre Dame deserves no more special status than do Harvard, Stanford or UCLA and their employees should be treated the same.
The outrage by the bishops also deflects attention from another reality. Over 85% of the Catholics in the pews listening to the bishop's rant, admit to using birth control and do not believe Rome should be able to tell them how to manage their families and fertility. They do not believe they are committing a sin by using technology for their benefit. The Church's position on artificial birth control is not infallible or even universal. In 1968, Pope Paul VI commissioned a study to see if the rules on using birth control could be eased. The committee's majority produced a report supporting the use of artificial birth control and recommended the Pope change the rules. Regressive forces in the Church convinced the Pope such a move would be a disaster for the Church's moral credibility, so the Pope rejected the majority report and issued the encyclical Humanae Vitae, prohibiting all forms of artificial birth control. A firestorm of criticism rained on Rome with priests and theologians and gum-chewing Catholics attacking the Church for being out of touch. Priests left the church in droves out of protest.
The Pope added insult to injury when he encouraged Catholics to use the rhythm method of birth control. (It was natural and naturally would get you pregnant) In other words, if one Catholic family intended to have sex, but didn't want to procreate, and used rhythm, it was proper, but if another family, also intending to have sex and not get pregnant, uses the Pill it is immoral. Even though the intention is exactly the same, one is a sin and one isn't. Catholics rejected Rome's position en masse and still do to this day.
The punditocracy quickly seized upon the Obama administration's decision as a political blunder which could cost the President the Catholic vote in November. Since over 85% of Catholics disagree with the Church's position and since those same Catholics use artificial birth control to plan and control the size of their families, how could this decision cause them to suddenly not vote for the President? If anything, women have to see that under regressives like Romney, Gingrich and Santorum, their access to birth control and abortion would be dramatically curtailed. The same men who talk about smaller government and less regulation are on the record as believing government should be able to tell a woman what to do with her body and what kinds of medicine and other steps she can take to manage her fertility.
What really shows the bishops have no clothes is the extent and force of their objections. The American bishops have come out in opposition to the spate of anti-immigrant legislation and sentiments expressed mainly by regressive Republicans. The Church condemned cut backs in programs for the poor and hungry. They decided the war in Iraq was immoral and they oppose the use of capital punishment. Yet, not once in recent memory have the bishops seen fit to blanket the nation and the pulpits with letters expressing their outrage. Priests did not stand and, under orders, direct their congregations to contact Congress and the White House to right these wrongs, restore the social safety net and develop a more humane immigration policy. Catholic politicians like Santorum and Gingrich are not condemned by the bishops for policies they support which the Church opposes.
The credibility of the American bishops is at an all-time low. They spend their efforts fighting against gay marriage, abortion and artificial birth control methods but are nowhere to be found on issues ranging from rapacious and crony capitalism currently wrecking families and communities to the growing rates of poverty and loss of homes and even calls for a new war with Iran. They make a mighty noise about sexuality issues while barely a peep is heard as the military might of this nation kills hundreds of thousands, children go hungry and the gap between the rich and the poor widens. While the bishops concern themselves with the bedroom, the exhortations of Matthew 25 are ignored in Washington, on Wall Street and across this land.
The National Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a blanket condemnation of the new rules. The Church is officially opposed to all forms of artificial birth control. The new rules violate the first amendment's freedom of religion clause, according to the bishops. The government is forcing them to enable women employees, or the spouses of male employees, to use birth control to plan and control the size of their families. The Church is being forced to provide assistance for an act it considers immoral. Catholics have been urged to contact Congress and the White House to put political pressure on both bodies and get this decision reversed. It is a full-court press.
HHS Secretary, Kathleen Sibelius, stands by the rule change. She points out Catholic hospitals, universities, elementary and secondary schools, as well as other businesses, employ large numbers of non-Catholic workers. Workers are covered by new healthcare regulations in all other businesses in the nation, and Catholic institutions shouldn't be treated any differently.
The position of the bishops reeks of hypocrisy and selective outrage. Catholic Healthcare West, a corporation which runs hospitals in Northern California, already provides such coverage to its employees...a fact the bishops failed to mention nor have they put a stop to it. While there still may exist the quaint image of a hospital full of caring nuns, and universities chock full of Bing Crosby-like priests teaching and preaching, the reality is hospitals, schools and other "Catholic" businesses employ high numbers of non-Catholics and are no different than any other business. They may be a non-profit operation for tax purposes, but walking into St. Mary's Hospital in San Francisco is no different than walking into Valley Medical Center in San Jose. Simply because you are employed by a "Catholic" institution, whose primary function has nothing to do with faith or worship, should not mean you are a second class citizen with benefits other employees at "secular" institutions enjoy not available to you. The first amendment restricts government interference in religious affairs, but does not apply when the Church is operating commercial enterprises which serve much larger populations than just Catholics. Notre Dame deserves no more special status than do Harvard, Stanford or UCLA and their employees should be treated the same.
The outrage by the bishops also deflects attention from another reality. Over 85% of the Catholics in the pews listening to the bishop's rant, admit to using birth control and do not believe Rome should be able to tell them how to manage their families and fertility. They do not believe they are committing a sin by using technology for their benefit. The Church's position on artificial birth control is not infallible or even universal. In 1968, Pope Paul VI commissioned a study to see if the rules on using birth control could be eased. The committee's majority produced a report supporting the use of artificial birth control and recommended the Pope change the rules. Regressive forces in the Church convinced the Pope such a move would be a disaster for the Church's moral credibility, so the Pope rejected the majority report and issued the encyclical Humanae Vitae, prohibiting all forms of artificial birth control. A firestorm of criticism rained on Rome with priests and theologians and gum-chewing Catholics attacking the Church for being out of touch. Priests left the church in droves out of protest.
The Pope added insult to injury when he encouraged Catholics to use the rhythm method of birth control. (It was natural and naturally would get you pregnant) In other words, if one Catholic family intended to have sex, but didn't want to procreate, and used rhythm, it was proper, but if another family, also intending to have sex and not get pregnant, uses the Pill it is immoral. Even though the intention is exactly the same, one is a sin and one isn't. Catholics rejected Rome's position en masse and still do to this day.
The punditocracy quickly seized upon the Obama administration's decision as a political blunder which could cost the President the Catholic vote in November. Since over 85% of Catholics disagree with the Church's position and since those same Catholics use artificial birth control to plan and control the size of their families, how could this decision cause them to suddenly not vote for the President? If anything, women have to see that under regressives like Romney, Gingrich and Santorum, their access to birth control and abortion would be dramatically curtailed. The same men who talk about smaller government and less regulation are on the record as believing government should be able to tell a woman what to do with her body and what kinds of medicine and other steps she can take to manage her fertility.
What really shows the bishops have no clothes is the extent and force of their objections. The American bishops have come out in opposition to the spate of anti-immigrant legislation and sentiments expressed mainly by regressive Republicans. The Church condemned cut backs in programs for the poor and hungry. They decided the war in Iraq was immoral and they oppose the use of capital punishment. Yet, not once in recent memory have the bishops seen fit to blanket the nation and the pulpits with letters expressing their outrage. Priests did not stand and, under orders, direct their congregations to contact Congress and the White House to right these wrongs, restore the social safety net and develop a more humane immigration policy. Catholic politicians like Santorum and Gingrich are not condemned by the bishops for policies they support which the Church opposes.
The credibility of the American bishops is at an all-time low. They spend their efforts fighting against gay marriage, abortion and artificial birth control methods but are nowhere to be found on issues ranging from rapacious and crony capitalism currently wrecking families and communities to the growing rates of poverty and loss of homes and even calls for a new war with Iran. They make a mighty noise about sexuality issues while barely a peep is heard as the military might of this nation kills hundreds of thousands, children go hungry and the gap between the rich and the poor widens. While the bishops concern themselves with the bedroom, the exhortations of Matthew 25 are ignored in Washington, on Wall Street and across this land.
STIFF UPPER LIP...
One of the hottest TV shows is Downton Abbey. Set at the turn of the century, it is the story of an upper class English family worried about how to preserve their home and lifestyle. It is written in the spirit of Upstairs/Downstairs. Upstairs are the rich upper classes and downstairs, the working class. In the United States, it would be called 1%/99% and it would capture the same dynamics of class and preserving power and wealth. As Romney, Gingrich, Santorum and Paul struggle to represent the regressive movement and try to gain enough popularity to be the standard bearer, they do so in a nation looking more and more like a British drama written for the BBC.
Americans have been raised on the myth of Horatio Alger. It is a myth which crosses all classes and lines and populations. All you have to do is work hard, play by the rules and anyone can go from rags to riches. They can pull themselves up by their bootstraps and grab a piece of the proverbial pie. Whether it's Lincoln writing his lessons on the back of a shovel or stories about the rise of Rockefeller and Carnegie, Americans have been told they too can access the American dream and rise from working to middle to upper class. This is the primary reason American voters have consistently voted Republican in such large numbers. This myth is so powerful; they are willing to vote against their own enlightened self-interest in the hope one day they will strike it rich. Tax cuts, which don't apply to them, are popular because one day they will be able to take all those breaks the rich have built into the code.
On the campaign trail, Romney, Gingrich et.al. sing from the same hymnal. Obama hates capitalism and wants America to adopt a European socialist model. He wants America to look like Germany, France, Norway or Sweden. This is a reason to throw him out of office. He doesn't believe in American exceptionalism and genuflect at the mention of the American capitalist experiment. He engages in class warfare and demonizes the Brahmins of Wall Street and their acolytes like Mitt Romney. (Sean Hannity quoted me in his first book as an example of a liberal who hates America. He asked me if I believed America was the greatest nation on earth, and when I answered, "...for whom?" He rested his case.)
I don't know how many times I have said publically Horatio Alger is dead. The myth is a lie. For most of our history, economic upward movement was limited at best. By the time we reached the era of Downton Abbey, America's Gilded Age, our nation was awash with men of great wealth and power. (Morgan, Stanford, Vanderbilt... and tens of millions living in abject poverty.) There was a small middle class, a weak central government, no income tax and even less regulation. (Nirvana to today's crop of Republican wannabes) It was the time of poor houses and orphanages, slums and ghettos set in contrast to the mansions of New York, Newport and Nob Hill. The average American worked very hard...worked themselves to death and got little benefit for their efforts.
Horatio was resurrected in the 20th century by the Progressive movement. Starting with Teddy Roosevelt and his busting of trusts and monopolies, support for workers rights, and starting the conservation and environmental movements we benefit from today...through his cousin Franklin who built the firewalls to protect us from Wall Street and made it easier for workers to organize...to Lyndon Johnson whose Great Society lifted an entire population of seniors out of poverty and ended Jim Crow, it became possible to "move on up" as George Jefferson would say. A vibrant middle class served to funnel people out of poverty and to a share of the American dream. (Truman and Eisenhower also contributed through government programs like the G.I. Bill which sent a whole generation to college which would never have gone otherwise, constructed the interstate highway system creating thousands of jobs and building our economy and pushed the desegregation of the military and the modern Civil Rights movement).
In 1960, almost 40% of Americans were unionized, the top tax rate was 90% and the distance between a CEO and his or her employees had not yet become wider than the Grand Canyon as it is today. As recently as 1974, a single worker could provide enough income for his or his family to own a home, a car and send the children to college with the belief they would receive even greater economic benefits. Since 1980, and the election of Ronald Reagan, income disparity in the United States began to increase. Today, we more resemble the Gilded Age than at any time in over 100 years. In a recent column, New York Times writer Paul Krugman sites reporting the paper has done establishing the fact we have less generational economic mobility than many other advanced nations. The chance someone born into a low-income family will end up with high income, or vice versa, was significantly lower in the U.S. than in Canada, Europe or Scandinavia. The gap between the 1% and the 99% is sited as one of the main reasons for the lack of economic mobility. Today, the economic status of your parents is a determining factor in how far up the class ladder you will climb. (Sounds like the England of Downton Abbey doesn't it?)
CNN interviewed seniors in Florida asking them about the issues which mattered most to them in this year's presidential election. At the top of their list was not concern about Medicare or Social Security. They were most concerned about their children and grandchildren and their economic health. They are right to be concerned. For the first time in over 100 years, America is not an upwardly mobile nation economically. The beneficiaries of American capitalism are a smaller and smaller set of the "haves and have mores" to quote George Bush. The primary culprit is the 1% who use their financial resources to dominate the political agenda and debate (with some help from a regressive Supreme Court and its Citizens United decision).
Obama may leave a lot to be desired, but at least he isn't afraid to bring up the facts and denounce national policies which have brought us to this place. (tax cuts, de-regulation of the Roosevelt firewalls, tax policy which values investment income more than earned income) He wants the 1% to pay taxes at least in a 30% tax bracket. (Remember it was 90% in 1960, so they have still seen a 60% cut since then. How much have working Americans seen their taxes cut?) He wants to tax revenue kept outside this country (like Romney's accounts in Switzerland and the Grand Caymans). He wants more money for community colleges to train Americans and to cut federal funds for colleges whose tuition increases exceed inflation. If you create a job in this country, you get a tax break. If you kill a company in order to sell its parts and reap the profits, you pay higher taxes on that investment. Is it enough? No. College needs to be free; which we could do it with the revenue from letting the Bush tax cuts expire. Workers need to be able to organize and bargain over wages and working conditions. Health care has to be available to everyone so employers won't be able to hold health care premiums over the head of workers during negotiations.
I worry every day about the future for my children. They live in a nation where hard work is not rewarded, but moneyed contacts are. (Harvard, Yale or Stanford anyone?) They face huge debts just to get through college while many of their competitors are subsidized by their 1% parents. Children of the 99% look to the future with trepidation and I hate that fact. As Warren Buffet has said more than once, "...there is a class war going on in this country and my class is winning." The election of 2012 is the latest battlefield. If Obama can transform this nation to closer resemble Canada or Scandinavia, shouldn't we be leading the cheers for our children's future? The question this year is do we continue to regress or do we return to the Progressive Era which truly made this country great?
Americans have been raised on the myth of Horatio Alger. It is a myth which crosses all classes and lines and populations. All you have to do is work hard, play by the rules and anyone can go from rags to riches. They can pull themselves up by their bootstraps and grab a piece of the proverbial pie. Whether it's Lincoln writing his lessons on the back of a shovel or stories about the rise of Rockefeller and Carnegie, Americans have been told they too can access the American dream and rise from working to middle to upper class. This is the primary reason American voters have consistently voted Republican in such large numbers. This myth is so powerful; they are willing to vote against their own enlightened self-interest in the hope one day they will strike it rich. Tax cuts, which don't apply to them, are popular because one day they will be able to take all those breaks the rich have built into the code.
On the campaign trail, Romney, Gingrich et.al. sing from the same hymnal. Obama hates capitalism and wants America to adopt a European socialist model. He wants America to look like Germany, France, Norway or Sweden. This is a reason to throw him out of office. He doesn't believe in American exceptionalism and genuflect at the mention of the American capitalist experiment. He engages in class warfare and demonizes the Brahmins of Wall Street and their acolytes like Mitt Romney. (Sean Hannity quoted me in his first book as an example of a liberal who hates America. He asked me if I believed America was the greatest nation on earth, and when I answered, "...for whom?" He rested his case.)
I don't know how many times I have said publically Horatio Alger is dead. The myth is a lie. For most of our history, economic upward movement was limited at best. By the time we reached the era of Downton Abbey, America's Gilded Age, our nation was awash with men of great wealth and power. (Morgan, Stanford, Vanderbilt... and tens of millions living in abject poverty.) There was a small middle class, a weak central government, no income tax and even less regulation. (Nirvana to today's crop of Republican wannabes) It was the time of poor houses and orphanages, slums and ghettos set in contrast to the mansions of New York, Newport and Nob Hill. The average American worked very hard...worked themselves to death and got little benefit for their efforts.
Horatio was resurrected in the 20th century by the Progressive movement. Starting with Teddy Roosevelt and his busting of trusts and monopolies, support for workers rights, and starting the conservation and environmental movements we benefit from today...through his cousin Franklin who built the firewalls to protect us from Wall Street and made it easier for workers to organize...to Lyndon Johnson whose Great Society lifted an entire population of seniors out of poverty and ended Jim Crow, it became possible to "move on up" as George Jefferson would say. A vibrant middle class served to funnel people out of poverty and to a share of the American dream. (Truman and Eisenhower also contributed through government programs like the G.I. Bill which sent a whole generation to college which would never have gone otherwise, constructed the interstate highway system creating thousands of jobs and building our economy and pushed the desegregation of the military and the modern Civil Rights movement).
In 1960, almost 40% of Americans were unionized, the top tax rate was 90% and the distance between a CEO and his or her employees had not yet become wider than the Grand Canyon as it is today. As recently as 1974, a single worker could provide enough income for his or his family to own a home, a car and send the children to college with the belief they would receive even greater economic benefits. Since 1980, and the election of Ronald Reagan, income disparity in the United States began to increase. Today, we more resemble the Gilded Age than at any time in over 100 years. In a recent column, New York Times writer Paul Krugman sites reporting the paper has done establishing the fact we have less generational economic mobility than many other advanced nations. The chance someone born into a low-income family will end up with high income, or vice versa, was significantly lower in the U.S. than in Canada, Europe or Scandinavia. The gap between the 1% and the 99% is sited as one of the main reasons for the lack of economic mobility. Today, the economic status of your parents is a determining factor in how far up the class ladder you will climb. (Sounds like the England of Downton Abbey doesn't it?)
CNN interviewed seniors in Florida asking them about the issues which mattered most to them in this year's presidential election. At the top of their list was not concern about Medicare or Social Security. They were most concerned about their children and grandchildren and their economic health. They are right to be concerned. For the first time in over 100 years, America is not an upwardly mobile nation economically. The beneficiaries of American capitalism are a smaller and smaller set of the "haves and have mores" to quote George Bush. The primary culprit is the 1% who use their financial resources to dominate the political agenda and debate (with some help from a regressive Supreme Court and its Citizens United decision).
Obama may leave a lot to be desired, but at least he isn't afraid to bring up the facts and denounce national policies which have brought us to this place. (tax cuts, de-regulation of the Roosevelt firewalls, tax policy which values investment income more than earned income) He wants the 1% to pay taxes at least in a 30% tax bracket. (Remember it was 90% in 1960, so they have still seen a 60% cut since then. How much have working Americans seen their taxes cut?) He wants to tax revenue kept outside this country (like Romney's accounts in Switzerland and the Grand Caymans). He wants more money for community colleges to train Americans and to cut federal funds for colleges whose tuition increases exceed inflation. If you create a job in this country, you get a tax break. If you kill a company in order to sell its parts and reap the profits, you pay higher taxes on that investment. Is it enough? No. College needs to be free; which we could do it with the revenue from letting the Bush tax cuts expire. Workers need to be able to organize and bargain over wages and working conditions. Health care has to be available to everyone so employers won't be able to hold health care premiums over the head of workers during negotiations.
I worry every day about the future for my children. They live in a nation where hard work is not rewarded, but moneyed contacts are. (Harvard, Yale or Stanford anyone?) They face huge debts just to get through college while many of their competitors are subsidized by their 1% parents. Children of the 99% look to the future with trepidation and I hate that fact. As Warren Buffet has said more than once, "...there is a class war going on in this country and my class is winning." The election of 2012 is the latest battlefield. If Obama can transform this nation to closer resemble Canada or Scandinavia, shouldn't we be leading the cheers for our children's future? The question this year is do we continue to regress or do we return to the Progressive Era which truly made this country great?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)