YOUR RIGHTS...MY NOSE!

The Puritans fled England in order to worship free of government interference.  The first they did when setting up the Massachusetts Bay Colony was prohibit religious practices other than theirs.  Despite the ratification of the 1st amendment, Americans have tried to use their religious views for the purpose of discrimination for over 200 years.  Arizona is the latest battleground.

     The amendment prohibits a national religion.  Its purpose was to allow citizens to worship in any form they chose.  However, for a long time that meant your choice was to be white, Anglo-Saxon and Protestant or find yourself excluded from the political and social life of this nation.  (usually it meant a white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant, male)  Under the guise of practicing their free religious beliefs, Americans sanctioned slavery, war and sanctified male chauvinism.  They constructed a public school system that denigrated Catholicism and Judaism, approved restricted clubs and organizations, and passed laws limiting the rights of fellow citizens using God and the Bible for justification.

     In Oregon, a state that had a large Klan presence in the early 20th century, a law was passed prohibiting parents from sending their children to anything but a public school.  This was aimed at the Catholic schools that dotted the state and originated from a hatred of the Church and its influence.  (it was overturned by the Supreme Court in its Pierce vs. the Society of Sisters decision)  When women started to agitate for the right to vote, the pulpits were filled with voices excoriating the idea of a fully enfranchised woman as being antithetical to biblical exhortations demanding women be obedient and subservient to men.  It was scripture which was used to justify the expansion of this country from coast to coast with adherents claiming God gave them a manifest destiny to conquer all the lands and either kill, or convert, the "heathens" they found.  Ironically, when Mennonites and Quakers pointed to their biblical, religious commitment to pacifism, and refused to serve in the military, they were thrown into federal prison.  I guess religious preferences can only go so far.  Despite the first amendment, their religious views did not supersede the nation's need for war.

     Across the land today, the cry of religious freedom rings.  It is the new way discrimination and prejudice are being packaged.  Catholic bishops claim they have the right to deny coverage of contraception to employees in their health insurance because they oppose contraception on religious grounds.  (not really since these same bishops approve of the use of the rhythm method which involves the same intention as any other form of birth control)  Landlords are trying to use religion to justify not renting to unmarried couples who might be engaging in biblically prohibited adultery or breaking other commandments behind closed doors.  (how do they know?)  Owners of pharmacies claim they should be able to refuse to sell the morning after pill because they oppose abortion for religious reasons.  (despite the scientific evidence which shows the Plan B pill is not an abortafacient)  And now, states like Arizona are attempting to pass laws permitting business owners to discriminate against same-sex married couples because of biblical jeremiads against homosexuality.  The action in Arizona continues an unbroken chain from Massachusetts Bay to Phoenix, of Americans trying to use their first amendment religious protections to impose their views and deny fellow citizens similar privileges guaranteed them in the Bill of Rights.

     Imagine if the Arizona bill allowed businesses to refuse service to mixed race couples.  You laugh?   Less than 50 years ago laws existed throughout this nation which made it illegal for an African-American to marry a white person.  The laws were defended by evangelical preachers using the Bible which, according to them, prohibited such arrangements in order to protect against the mongrolization of the races.  (do you remember the rule at Bob Jones University prohibiting races from dating each other; again claiming it was in accordance with their religious beliefs?)  Imagine if Arizona's law allowed businesses to refuse service to Catholics or Jews.  Jews?  Christian religious views have been used to massacre Jews and discriminate against them for 2000 years.  Prominent fundamentalists like Jimmy Swaggert, Oral Roberts and Pat Robertson have consistently claimed God doesn't even hear the prayers of Jews.  This is the same crowd which called the Catholic Church the whore of Babylon.  (we had a whole political party dedicated to anti Catholic sentiments called the Know-Nothing Party).  The Pope was frequently accused of unspeakable crimes.  How deferent should the constitution be to these views?

     In San Francisco, the Olympic Club was forced to admit women...Augusta National Gold Club shared the same fate...what if they claimed a religious belief in the subordination of women and were opposed to women and men mixing in social settings?  Could they engage in such discrimination?  Regressives have chaffed for years over their inability to impose their cultural norms on everyone in this nation.  They rail against a court system which has checked them each time they attempted to impose their views and to take away rights from other Americans.

     When the Catholic Church is engaged in religious activities in its churches and parishes, it should be, and is, free from government scrutiny.  However, when the Church operates secular institutions...secular businesses...such as hospitals, adoption agencies, universities, charities and is engaged in the secular world serving all people and employing many non-Catholics, it is subject to the same rules and constitutional strictures as any other business.  (the Catholic Church opposes divorce...should a Catholic employer be able to fire an employee who divorces his or her spouse?)  When a fundamentalist Christian opens a pharmacy, it isn't limited to serving only other Christians.  They engage in commerce and are open to all customers.  Their religious freedom stops at the tip of a customer's nose.

     Throughout our history, religion has been used to justify prejudice and discrimination and eventually the courts have stepped in, and sometimes actual Christianity has prevailed, prohibiting such actions.  Arizona regressives want to turn back the clock, instead of turning the other cheek, to an era when religion could be used as a cudgel to enforce and justify bigotry and prejudice.  The struggle continues and this too will end up in the courts at some point.  It is a shame the tenets of the little Jewish carpenter from Nazareth have been used for such immoral purposes rather than to draw us closer to God and each other.  I'm sure She wishes it were otherwise.

A MUSING'S...

 ...At least one anonymous NFL executive told ESPN his locker-room was not ready for an openly gay Michael Sam to be a part of that environment.  He didn't see how he could fit in or mix with the other players.  A New Orleans Saints player worried about showering next to a gay teammate.  If you substitute African American for gay you would think this a trip in the Wayback machine to 75 years ago in baseball and football front offices.  Do we never learn?

     ...Am I the only one to notice the Winter Olympics is not the most ethnically diverse athletic contest?  Does it matter?

     ...It appears Congress is going to pass a "clean" bill raising the debt ceiling.  This is on the heals of a bi-partisan budget agreement at the end of last year.  Experts say raising the debt ceiling without any drama, or threats of default, will go a long way to calming financial markets and the American economy.  Who should get the credit?

     ...It seems every other week there is another tweak to the Affordable Care Act.  Regressives scream each time that this is proof it has to be repealed and is a disaster and unconstitutional and the end of the world.  It is amazing how poorly it was written considering all the input lobbyists for the health insurance industry, the chamber of commerce etc were given into its construction.  (perhaps it would have been easier to just eliminate the insurance market completely)  It might be of note to remember when George Bush rolled out his Medicare prescription drug benefit, millions of seniors were immediately dropped by their pharmacies and could not get access to the medicine they needed.  Democrats in Congress immediately passed a number of fixes, including paying pharmacies to issue drugs to seniors, simply acknowledging it was a need that had to be met.  Can you see regressives doing the same thing?

     ...I like the sport of curling.  It seems to me to be shuffleboard, or bocce ball, on ice and while it should be as interesting as watching paint dry, I found it fascinating and like watching the skills involved.  (just once Id love to see one of them throw what is called in here a "hater" stone which is thrown as hard as possible with the purpose of just slamming into anything and everything in its way)

     ...Taking shots at Justin Beiber is like shooting fish in a barrel.  What would you have done if you were given millions of dollars when you were 16 or 17 with no parental supervision?  Come on...admit it...you would be just as obnoxious and out of control.  No excuse for his behavior, of course, especially driving while impaired, but don't lump him in with Miley Cyrus.  I suspect Dolly Parton is right when she observes everything Cyrus has done has been calculated to gain attention, press, and to expand her brand while Beiber hurts his by being a train wreck and not a wrecking ball.

     ...I'm still depressed by the 49ers loss to Seattle.  I think Seattle coach, and Marin County native, Pete Carrol is a coach who broke every rule he could to win some national championships at USC and was rewarded with a job in the NFL and left just in time to miss the sanctions and punishments his actions resulted in from the NCAA.  However, this is three chances for Jim Harbaugh and he is 0 for 3 and maybe it's time to stop the adulation and start asking some serious questions about his performance in big games.

     ...Have you watched the Crazy Ones with Robin Williams on CBS?  It is getting better and better and funnier and is my favorite new comedy, along with Mom, for the year.

     ...I want to highly recommend Doris Kerns Goodwin's new book about Teddy Roosevelt and William Howard Taft.  Even though it takes place more than 100 years ago, it could easily be describing the economic conditions in America today particularly the growing gap between the 1% and everyone else.  Then, Americans rose up, voted out the corporate stooges and benefitted from a Congress, and president, committed to advancing the cause of working folks and growing the middle class...a Congress which created the 8 hour day, 40 hour week, overtime pay, outlawed child labor, regulated safe working conditions, set aside national parks, broke up monopolies, created union friendly labor law and set the scene for 70 years of prosperity and the expansion of the middle class. (it's called progress and they were called Progressives)  So why can't the same thing happen again today?

     ...I know this is heresy among the morning news cognoscenti, but the CBS Morning News is the most watchable of the morning news shows.  I can't take the smile and smarm of George Steppinalloverit or Matt Lauer or the faux camaraderie orchestrated by ABC or NBC.  For at least the first forty-five minutes, CBS gives a straightforward, comprehensive presentation of the news.

     ...The founder of the Home Depot says he might not donate some of his millions to refurbish St. Patrick's cathedral in NYC because he is offended by Pope Francis I criticism of trickle down economics and his call for the Church to have a fundamental commitment to helping the poor and disenfranchised among us.  Ken Langone goes on to say he knows other wealthy Catholics who share his distaste with a Pope who condemns the powerful for exploiting the powerless.  Somehow I don't think Mr. Langone owns a WWJD bracelet do you?

     ...Average, working class folks are finding it harder and harder to afford to live in San Francisco.  If you could, how would you address this growing gap between those who live in the city and those who are paid to maintain it for all the rest but are excluded from the privilege of living within its boundaries?

     ...I'm being asked what job I should seek when I am no longer a guest of the federal government.  I would be interested in any ideas or tips you may have.

GOTCHA...

 Bill O'Reilly helped write books about the killing of Abraham Lincoln and Jesus.  Based on his performance before the Super Bowl, if given the opportunity to interview both men, O'Reilly would have asked Lincoln why his wife was spending so much of the tax payers money on sprucing up the White House, and for her own personal wardrobe, and he would have asked Jesus why He ran away from his parents...caused them so much anxiety and acted so irresponsibly when He was 12.

     In a ten-minute interview before the game, O'Reilly interrogated President Obama.  This interview comes at a time when, amazingly, Democrats and Republicans admit the gap between the rich and everyone else is the widest its been in over 100 years...economic stagnation has crushed mobility meaning if you are born poor you are likely to stay poor...(so long Horatio Alger)...Syria isn't getting rid of its chemical weapons or destroying the weapon's factories...Iran is still pursuing a nuclear weapon and wreaking havoc in Syria and throughout the region...tensions in Asia between China and its neighbors are rising...cyber attacks are now a bigger threat to this nation than physical terrorist attacks...stocks are taking a beating...we now know the N.S.A. is spying on every phone call, email and all internet activity including anything on your Facebook page, Twitter feeds and any web site you have ever visited (you would think he might be interested in the gutting of the 4th amendment)...job growth is anemic and what new jobs are being created don't pay enough which is why there is a huge debate about raising the minimum wage...and Jersey Shore has been replaced by a group of southern crackers who make Snooki look like a Rhodes scholar.

     So what does O'Reilly do with his precious ten minutes?  He jumps on Obama about the Affordable Care Act, firing Kathleen Sibelius, the attack on the consulate in Benghazi and the I.R.S. investigating regressive political organizations.  He wants to know if telling people they could keep their insurance if they liked it was Obama's biggest mistake in his entire presidency?  Really?  (in the latest polls, most Americans don't like how the law was rolled out, are skeptical about increasing costs but also say leave it alone and quit trying to repeal it)  O'Reilly went for the "gotcha" question right out of the box.  He continued with questions about why Obama didn't fire Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sibelius?  (also something Americans waiting for the Super Bowl to start were vitally interested in)  In his way-back-machine-like questioning, O'Reilly moves on to challenge the president on Benghazi, "what did you know and when did you know it?"  "Did anyone use the word terrorism in front of you?"  "Were you covering up just to win the election?"

     As stated before, the Affordable Care Act is a settled issue for most Americans.  They aren't sure if they like it...don't know how it will affect them ultimately...millions have insurance who never had it before...and they say "enough" leave it alone except to tinker if necessary.  No one, except a Fox habitué, cares if Sibelius was fired or not...the Senate just issued a report from a bi-partisan commission, which did not find any Benghazi cover-up linked to the President...and due to the I.R.S. "scandal" the rules have been changed so regressive Republican rich guys can't hide behind non-profit 501(c)4 groups while they attempt to hijack elections.

     O'Reilly didn't ask a single question about what the American people worry about on a daily basis.  He played to his audience.  He failed any journalistic test.  (Which is ironic since he was apoplectic when I told him he wasn't a journalist, but rather just a talk show host, when I appeared on his show.  Sunday proved my critique was spot on.)

     Recently, the publication "The Week” ran an item about a poll showing Americans who neither watched nor listened to news on a frequent basis were better informed on issues than viewers of Fox News.  Glenn Beck now admits everything he said and did on Fox was a setup, a hustle, a sham intended to play to the audience and follow the Roger Ailes playlist.  Now, O'Reilly reinforces all of this by playing "gotcha" with the President, exploring no new ground, and only informing his Fox minions leaving the rest of the audience out in the cold.

     President Obama did not exactly cover himself in glory during the exchange.  When asked about his "...if you love it, you can keep it" comment, he admitted he shouldn't have said it, but didn't add much more than that, nor did he ask O'Reilly what his or Fox's substitute would be if the law were repealed.  (this could be because regressives have steadfastly refused to offer any alternative knowing it wouldn't cover as many people, nor would it reduce costs)  When asked about Sibelius, the President claimed he always held people in his administration accountable for their actions, even as he gave Sibelius a pass and did not fire her, which is exactly what he should have done.  Score one Bill.  On Benghazi, he would not say what then Secretary of Defense Panetta told him in the early moments after the attack, dancing around the word terrorism, when he should have answered straight up that the talking points issued after the attack were wrong and misleading.  (while pointing out all of the false "facts" put out by Fox and repeated by O'Reilly.)

     It was interesting to see O'Reilly so obviously toadying for his Fox bosses and the older, white, mostly male audience the network caters to, instead of demanding from the President what he will do now to create jobs...rebuild the nation's infrastructure...enunciate our foreign policy position vis-à-vis the Middle East, Ukraine, China and the South China Sea...why he has been so unable to address the real concerns of Americans on Super Bowl Sunday.

     O'Reilly decided to shoot some fish in a barrel...pick off some low-hanging fruit...pander to his base...boost his own ego...rather than do the responsible thing and push the most powerful man in America about issues most Americans, other than Fox aficionados, wake up every day filled with worry.

     On Super Bowl Sunday, in those ten minutes running up to the kickoff, there was no new chapter in Profiles in Courage written by the "journalist" from Fox.

THE STATE OF THE UNION...

Two new blogs from The Lion:

Despite what the President says in the official State of the Union speech, most Americans know the state of the union sucks.  (unless you are in the 1%.  A recent study claims 85 people have more wealth the entire populations of India and China and the developing world.)  It is considered bad form not to be optimistic around the state of the union.  (we are supposed to act like its opening day of baseball season where every team in every town has the same chance to go to the World Series...yeah right, go Cubs)

     The President himself acknowledges some of this reality.  The gap between the rich and everyone else is growing exponentially.  It hasn't been this wide since the Gilded Age of Morgan, Harrriman and Rockefeller.  The Horatio Alger pull- yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps myth is officially dead.  Both the Democrats and Republicans admit hard work will not guarantee economic success.  (just ask farm workers if you don't believe me)  College is no longer the universal antidote especially when young people graduate owing tens of thousands of dollars with the only jobs available ones for which there is no need for a college degree and they spend their time being baristas or drones in an Amazon warehouse.  The nation's roads and bridges are one good shake away from collapse.  The electrical grid more and more resembles those in Iraq or Egypt rather than one in the richest and most technologically advanced nation on earth.  We have no idea what to do about illegal immigration or what to do with the long-term unemployed.  As the world boils and brews, we have no national consensus of what the U.S. role should be in foreign affairs and Edward Snowden has revealed an intrusive, spying, government apparatus which strips Americans of any shred of privacy they might have still been clinging to.  (N.B.C. reports, based on documents from Snowden, that U.S. intelligence agencies are piggybacking on British intelligence agency’s actions, not bothered by the pesky 4th amendment, where they are hacking into anyone's Facebook account to spy on friends, likes and all manner of personal information.)  Topping it all, the 2016 presidential campaign has started with Sen. Rand Paul, he of the high and mighty libertarian morality, implying no one should vote for HIllary Clinton because of the actions of Bill when he was in office.  So much for the tenor of this debate.

     Before you have someone remove all sharp objects from easy reach, allow me to offer some ways to make the state of the union less sucky.  (few of these suggestions are original with me)  The President should propose, and Congress pass, an infrastructure bank.  The government would put in millions matched with private investment.  The bank would then be used to fund the repair or replacement of the thousands of roads and bridges that are falling apart in this country.  (of note is the president of Brazil in Davos, Switzerland last week begging for private investment to build more roads saying they are the key to future economic growth in her nation.)  Rebuilding infrastructure creates good paying jobs as well as helping the American economy to grow and reducing costs of goods and services.

     There needs to be a tax imposed on all utility companies with the additional revenue earmarked for a new digital, high-tech electrical grid.  (yes, I realize they will pass the cost on to us)  They should also be required to bury all electrical lines so that future super storms don't knock out power to the entire East Coast costing the nation's economy billions of dollars.  Once again, not only is this necessary for economic growth, as access to bandwidth becomes crucial to economic success, but is also a matter of national security and the ability to compete internationally for business.  It too will create allot of jobs.

     Instead of posturing with an eye on the midterm elections, or 2016, we should demand Congress address the need for greater college access.  Community colleges need more funding.  States have to increase contributions to state college systems.  (California cannot continue to afford to spend more on the prison system than on the U.C. system)  Instead of fighting about abortion, same sex marriage or guns, Congress should be focusing on what will grow the middle class.  Abolish the corporate income tax, but tax every dollar corporations continue to hide offshore.  Require Americans to pay into Social Security no matter what their income level.  (currently payments stop around $100,000)  Allow Medicare to do what the Veteran's Administration does and use its buying power to force pharmaceutical companies to reduce the price of drugs.  Create health care bonuses where each year an American stays healthy, however you wish to define that, they get a reduction in their income tax burden.

     The state of the union sucks...I know there is a fancier way to express this but sucks sounds just perfect... but it doesn't have to stay that way.  We need to elect people who talk about nothing but jobs and growth and support policies which give everyone an opportunity to succeed.  These are not red or blue issues.

     Are there other issues to concern us?  Yes.  They are for another day when we have the luxury to address them.  Unless we grow the middle class...unless Americans agree everyone has the chance to do better than their parents...unless we have good roads and bridges and constant supply of electricity...the other issues won't matter as we will cannibalize each other from within and accomplish what our enemies can only dream about without ever lifting a finger.

A DIMON IN THE ROUGH...

J.P. Morgan Chase and Co.'s board unanimously voted to raise the pay of C.E.O. James Dimon by 74%.  Dimon will receive a salary of $20 million for 2013.  Dimon's raise comes after his company paid more than $20 billion in legal payouts for scandals ranging from fraud to malfeasance.  In 2013,the Dimon led Chase admitted to criminal culpability in a number of instances.  This, according to the board of directors, is a resume which warrants a huge reward.

     The list of ways in which J.P. Morgan Chase lied, cheated, finagled and acted like a criminal enterprise is extraordinary in length.  The company paid fines for cheating or lying to investors about the quality of sub-prime mortgages it sold.  The case of the "London Whale" had Chase ponying up fines for ignoring flagrant abuses of trading rules and taking illegal risks with bank money.  Chase was involved in the LIBOR scandal (London interbank offering rate) affecting over $3 trillion in transactions worldwide.  Chase was even fined for aiding and abetting Bernie Madoff to pull off his Ponzi scheme.  It goes without saying, even as Mr. Dimon reaped his rewards, no one, not a single person, at J.P. Morgan Chase has ever been indicted, let alone tried and convicted of any criminal wrong doing.

     We are told one of the central tenets for why taxpayers spend $8-10 billion a year on a federal prison system is for its deterrence value.  Prison, or at least the threat of prison, keeps people in line...keeps them from committing crimes...gives them second thoughts about the wisdom of their actions.  It turns out this is a lie...falsehood...prevarication foisted on us by those who get economic benefits from the prison/industrial complex.  Prison is meant to deter "us" but not "them".  Mr. Dimon, and his ilk, are some of "them".  He presided over a criminal enterprise with its oily hands in every financial con and flimflam possible and he has been "deterred" by a 74% raise.

     Perhaps a better way to think of this is the $20 billion paid out in fines and penalties is just a cost of doing successful business in this country.  When the mob runs an operation, they factor in all the bribes and kickbacks they have to pay to judges, cops, lawyers, and politicians and subtract those costs when figuring out their profit.  Dimon has been given millions in a raise because the stock price for his company increased by 33% in 2013.  In other words, they ignored the $20 billion payout as simply part of doing business...they rewarded him for not having to pay out more...he got a raise because as the company was cheating and stealing from average Americans, stockholders were doing very well thank you.

     No lesser a godlike figure in business than Warren Buffett, the oracle of Omaha, sings Dimon's praises.  "If I owned J.P. Morgan, Chase, he would be running it."  Buffett says he would hire Dimon to run Berkshire Hathaway in a minute if he could.  Adding insult to injury, the board praised Dimon for how well he handled all the "regulatory" problems the company faced in 2013.  This won for the board the annual Euphemism Award given by the Bonanno/Gambino foundation for American enterprise in New York.

     Proving he is a hands-on manager who revels in the small details which separate great companies from also-rans, when asked by the U.S. Attorney why certain people who were involved in failure in oversight and management were still with the company, Dimon says the company only fires people for incompetence which wasn't the case in these instances.  They still work for Chase because they weren't incompetent.  They did exactly what they were told to do by Mr. Dimon.

     Dimon's raise puts the lie to the Obama Justice Department's claim that the fines were enough to change this culture of criminality and moral hazard and prevent future abuses.  It exposes to sunlight the dirty little secret that the really rich and powerful have a different set of rules to live by.  The raise sends a message to all Chase employees about what they need to do to get ahead.  (what do you think Dimon would have done to an employee who blew the whistle on company crimes?)

     Dimon, in 2013, is responsible for a company, by no means the only one on Wall Street, which admitted to behavior which would make a "made-man" blush, and he is rewarded with millions of dollars and the thanks of a grateful board and satisfied stock holders.  Now that is a bedtime story every little American should hear and warm the cockles of their tiny Christian hearts.

IT'S JOBS STUPID!!!

  Two more blogs from the Lion:

The last couple of weeks have been spent reading wrap-ups on 2013 and looks forward at 2014.  Economists are taking polls about how much the economy will grow...stocks will rise...what bond prices and commodity futures will look like.  Pundits are commenting on the civil war in Syria, Iran's nuclear program and whether there can be a peace treaty between the Israelis and the Palestinians.  China appears to be flexing its muscles and there is a call for a reassessment of America's role in the Middle East and foreign policy in general.  Crystal balls are being polished and rubbed as cognoscenti opine on how many cars will be sold, and homes purchased, and big oil companies are pushing to lift the restrictions which prohibit them from exporting domestic oil.  (more on that later)  We are told Congress has to deal with extending long-term unemployment benefits and food stamps, the military budget and all the appropriation bills.  No where, in all the reading I have done, does anyone talk about the elephant in the room...we needs jobs.

     There are not enough jobs and the jobs that are available do not pay enough.  The Dow Jones Industrial Average and the Standard and Poor's 500 hit record highs in 2013 and are projected to continue to rise in 2014.  Corporate profits are through the roof.  Initial public offerings, like Twitter, are skyrocketing and merger and acquisition activity is more intense than it has been for years.  The top 1% of earners have seen their wealth increase year over year as the gap between them and everyone else continues to grow.  Yet, where are the jobs?  Where are the wages?  Where are the benefits for the average, gum-chewing working American?

     The new mayor of New York ran on a platform about a tale of two cities.  John Edwards tried to do the same thing on a national scale.  The mayor succeeded but Edwards failed.  Why?  Perhaps Edwards was ahead of his time.  New polls suggest Americans are finally waking up to the fact some people are doing very well at the expense of everyone else.

     Have you read a single piece on what Congress will do to increase jobs?  Not one of the agenda items for the 2014 session, as of now, focuses on job creation.  President Obama says he will spend the rest of his second term focusing on combating income inequality, but offers no specifics.  We are told this whole congressional session will be concentrating on positioning both parties for the mid-term elections in November.  Screw the mid-term elections.  The party that creates jobs should get everyone's vote and the other suffers the loss of political power.

     Anytime in the next 6-8 months you hear a politician speak on a subject, ask yourself what it has to do with creating jobs.  Immigration reform?  What jobs will it create other than those for border and prison guards?  Raising the debt ceiling?  How does this create jobs?  Reduce the deficit?  Show me the jobs it creates.  Taxes?  If taxes go up on the rich how will this create new jobs?  No one should get away with a public appearance without being asked about jobs.

     Jobs, as a topic, by necessity also raise questions about wages, benefits, medical coverage, housing costs, day-care access and more.  If the Affordable Care Act accomplishes its goal, medical coverage will not be able to held hostage any more for employees.  Workers won't have to choose between a raise or an increase in their health insurance premium.  If...

IF there is no clear connection, other than trickle-down theories, between deficit reduction and jobs, ignore it.  If you get a chance to go to a town hall meeting, or decide to write or tweet or email your representative, the topic should be jobs, what they are doing to create them and why are they wasting their time on anything else?

     There are things which could be done right now if we are so inclined.  First, create the 2014 versions of the W.P.A. (Works Progress Administration) and the C.C.C. (Civilian Conservation Corps).  State and federal governments should announce a hiring call.  Anyone who wants a job will be hired.  (with proper vetting, of course, as we don't want felons and former criminals to be working)  This is counterintuitive, but listen.  Hire everyone.  See how many people you have.  Pay them a living wage.  (can you imagine the impact on young people if they knew there was a job for them right now?)  Give them free passes on mass transit where possible...or give them a bike or scooter.  Now start finding things for them to do.  Everything from filling in potholes, (which most cities cannot afford to do these days) to cleaning parks or building new ones.  No more talk of " shovel ready" projects.  Hire and then come up with jobs for them to do.  Is there anyone reading this who couldn't come up with 100 needs which could be filled by this workforce?  Second, require testing and skills assessment of anyone hired and if remedial education is required then add funding to community colleges for literacy, math skills, writing and anything else considered a priority.  Of course, you would need to hire more teachers...oops more jobs.  Third, work out a deal with the trade unions.  Pay them to expand apprenticeship programs for anyone under 30.  Plumbing, electrical, carpentry and other unions could train, and pay while being trained, a whole generation of skilled trade people...(oh btw it is predicted the nation is going to have a huge shortage of such workers over the next 20 years) Pass legislation giving union workers first dibs on new construction and other jobs if their union participates in this idea.  Finally, make college free.  (at least at state institutions)  Offer admissions to anyone who qualifies.  Wave their tuition if they enter majors which will add jobs or which will be necessary for future jobs.

     This list does not even begin to exhaust all the possibilities.  Its purpose is to stimulate more thoughts and perhaps you can come up with more examples of ways to create more jobs.  (please !)

     The gap between the rich and poor is not what we should worry about.  The shrinking middle class should care the hell out of everyone in this nation.  We need working Americans.  It is the most important national security issue we face (thank you National Security Agency).  A strong America can never be defeated by terrorism or international adversaries.  America can only be destroyed from within.  (something Osama bin Laden realized and proved after September 11th.)  If your public leaders are not talking about jobs, they are more traitorous than Edward Snowden and willing to create more fear and hatred than any terrorist.

DUCK, DUCK, GOOSE...

 The historian, John Hope Franklin, chaired a commission on race during the Clinton Administration.  He concluded America could never get to the root of its racial problems until it admits for over 300 years; this nation has been based on the philosophy of white supremacy.  Despite what you may think of Duck Dynasty's Phil Robertson, and his comments on homosexuality, proof of Franklin's conclusion is contained in the deafening silence which accompanied his comments on race and African Americans.'

     Imagine what the reaction would have been if Robertson had denied the Holocaust.  He would have been condemned as ignorant, deluded, bigoted and wrong.  Robertson made no comments on Jews, I'm guessing it's only because he wasn't asked, but his observations about "black" people show just how engrained racial prejudice is in our culture and how it doesn't even cause the winds of criticism to stir.

     "...I never heard one black person say, 'I'll tell you what; these doggone white people...Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, you say: Were they happy?  They were godly; they were happy; no one was singing the blues."

     It's difficult to know exactly where to start to deconstruct this screed, but we can start by acknowledging these comments did not cause any outrage...A&E did not suspend him over them...it was as if they had been said in apartheid South Africa by the screaming silence which followed their utterance.

     "I never heard a black person say...those doggone white people."  In the Jim Crow south how could it have been any different?  What good would it do to complain?  If you did it loud enough you could end up dead.  To whom would they complain?  Robertson never heard them complain, therefore things had to have been hunky dory for black people in Louisiana in the 40's and 50's.  There was no need for a civil rights movement... no need for a Martin Luther King...no need for Medger Evers...no need for marches in Selma and Montgomery and no need for freedom riders because black people were happy.  To be sure, the laws and discrimination in the north were not any better than Jim Crow, but in Robertson's home it was vertically integrated into every facet of life.

     "...Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare...were they happy?...  they were happy; no one was singing the blues."  Really?

     The very nature of the blues came out of the black experience in this white supremecist nation.  It was white performers covering blues written by African Americans, not the other way around.  Pre-entitlement?  Robertson believes the granting of civil rights to African Americans was giving them an entitlement...a privilege...something they didn't need...a favor?  Being able to vote, own a home, marry whomever you wish, live wherever you desire, be free from lynchings and church bombings, being able to drink out of any water fountain you wished...these expectations, according to Robertson, are entitlements?

     Pre-welfare?  Does Robertson understand more white people are beneficiaries of welfare benefits than African Americans?  Is he suggesting poverty programs only are aimed at the black community?  When Lyndon Johnson declared a war on poverty, is Robertson saying he conscientiously objected because blacks would benefit disproportionately?

     "They were happy;” I recently watched Gone With the Wind for the fourth or fifth time, and Robertson's comments and observations about "black" people could have come out of the mouths of any of the southern men in the cast and would not have been anachronistic in the slightest.

     Why is it Robertson's gay pronouncements caused so much of an uproar?  He believes homosexuality is wrong...it's immoral...it's a sin...it's against nature...a vagina makes more sense than an anus...what's next bestiality?  His opinions are repeated by national religious leaders, national politicians, celebrities and common folk.  His views are mainstream, fundamentalist Christianity.  Perhaps they might have been more diplomatic, but Billy Graham and Pope Benedict XVI would not disagree with Robertson.  Yet, A&E suspended him for the bias and bigotry the remarks represent without even a single comment on anything else he had to say.

     When he denies over 100 years of Jim Crow...when he whitewashes the struggle and prejudice and bigotry African Americans faced and still face in this nation...when he denies how oppressive and back breaking the southern culture, and its institutions, was for African Americans...when he cavalierly states in Louisiana, in the 40's and 50's, blacks were happy and he never met a black who acknowledged the 24 hour, 365 days a year of second class citizenship they were forced to endure...nothing happens.  No one gets upset.  A&E ignores it, as do their advertisers.

     14 million Americans reportedly watch Duck Dynasty each week.  They watch a family which publically supports all the positions their patriarch espouses, including those that are racist and homophobic, without a second thought and the Robertson's are taking this apathy, and their 19th century claptrap, to the bank because they are funny, seem to get along with each other, are quirky...eccentric...don't shave, and we need something to entertain and divert us.  Would those same 14 million continue to watch if the Robertsons occasionally put on sheets with eyeholes cut out?  What's the difference and what does it say to John Hope Franklin's point when Robertson denies 300 years of systematic oppression and discrimination...300 years of racial bigotry, and instead of paying a price...prospers?