Patrick McHenry is my congressman. He represents me in the United States House of Representatives. He is also on Facebook where he seeks "friends" to advise him on matters of our state and nation. I became his "friend" and enjoyed making suggestions to him and asking him questions. Some of his other "friends" apparently did not care for my suggestions or questions, Both my intelligence and my integrity were called into question, then covered with contemptuous comments Finally, I began to notice that no more comments were forthcoming from Mr. McHenry, and slowly it dawned on me that I had been "de-friended". All for asking the one questions of why we even need health insurance companies at all. We have the supply-demand equation between the medical profession and the American people. All we need to add to that is for the federal government to regulate the industry and provide its own insurance to the people, since the nation itself is the real beneficiary of having healthy workers who can be efficient, effective and productive.
After I realized what had happened, I wrote an "Open Comment" to Mr. McHenry asking why I had become de-friended since I was only trying to help him as one of his constituents.
A week and a half later, Mr. McHenry answered saying that "that" Facebook page was for his "Friends", that "others" could contact him on another Facebook page. So I went there and found I still had to become a "Fan" of Mr. McHenry, and I did. Then I wrote that same question from before and sent it. I watched it after it was sent and was rereading it to make sure there were no errors when it disappeared! Wow. So I wrote another question asking Mr. McHenry I can't ask him any questions, sent it and was looking at it when it disappeared too. At least I taped the second question attempt.
Mr. McHenry wrote me again today and said "you can ask me any questions you want." Yeah, sure.
Thursday, October 08, 2009
Thursday, October 01, 2009
Get Rid of Health Insurance Companies
Why do we even HAVE health-insurance companies? Health care is basically a supply-demand equation and we Americans know how to handle that. We buy groceries, houses, computers, automobiles, clothing, education and so on without any insurance “gatekeepers” to tell us “OK, you can have a Ford but not a Pontiac” or “no, you can’t buy a coat this winter, you bought one last year.” Or "you can't have anymore generic DVDs, you will have to buy these which cost ten times as much." And it’s not like we don’t all use health-care. Americans use health-care to get born, we use a lot of it when we die, and we all need teeth repaired and glasses. From time to time, we all have accidents and get sick and we all need health care. We "demand" medical services and we have a top-notch medical industry of doctors, nurses, hospitals, and organizations who can "supply" those services. Why do we think we need a gate-keeper to tell us we can have this but not that, or a certain procedure will cost more than we can afford so we can't have it, or that pills the doctor has prescribed will cost $600 a month?
We can take care of ourselves together as a nation like we used to do on the frontier, and supply-demand will work in this industry like it does elsewhere. All of the money these insurance companies get is money we pay to them, then they give a little bit of it back to us in the form of permission to get some medical service, and the rest goes for their own profit, to their rich CEOs and to buy off our senators and representatives. Let's get rid of ALL health insurance companies and let the citizens of the United States collectively provide for our own general welfare.
We can take care of ourselves together as a nation like we used to do on the frontier, and supply-demand will work in this industry like it does elsewhere. All of the money these insurance companies get is money we pay to them, then they give a little bit of it back to us in the form of permission to get some medical service, and the rest goes for their own profit, to their rich CEOs and to buy off our senators and representatives. Let's get rid of ALL health insurance companies and let the citizens of the United States collectively provide for our own general welfare.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Joe Wilson and Hitler
South Carolina congressman Joe Wilson pointed his finger at President Obama, while the president was delivering a message to the American people, and shouted loudly “You lie!”. Wilson later apologized and said he was sorry. He acted “spontaneously”, he said. I couldn’t help but wonder if he would have shot at the president had he brought his gun.
Wilson’s attempt to disgrace the office of the President of the United States, cast immeasurably more contempt upon the Congress itself, and the house in which he acted. Meanwhile, before the Wilson outburst, the Republican part of the chamber occasionally resembled a snake pit, with the sound of hissing coming from there. There were occasional boos heard also. Some of the Republican representatives had placards, one wore a sign around his neck, others waved pieces of paper in the air. Apparently the Republican leaders felt all this was all part of a civil discourse, even though the only thing they have told the American people for the past seven months is the word "No!".
The Republican Party is beginning to look more and more as if they have been remade into a different political party, with the Hallway Hooligans of Miami as their Founding Fathers. Their new symbol is the belligerent shout and pointed finger, the threat, the talking points screamed again over and over - even though they contain no truth. Talk about Hitler? His real trademark was not his pathetic mustache, it was The Big Lie. That has become the New Republican marching banner. The Screamed Big Lie.
Nontheless Wilson may have really accomplished something of worth - something that President Obama couldn’t do on his own: the unification of the Democratic Party.
Wilson’s attempt to disgrace the office of the President of the United States, cast immeasurably more contempt upon the Congress itself, and the house in which he acted. Meanwhile, before the Wilson outburst, the Republican part of the chamber occasionally resembled a snake pit, with the sound of hissing coming from there. There were occasional boos heard also. Some of the Republican representatives had placards, one wore a sign around his neck, others waved pieces of paper in the air. Apparently the Republican leaders felt all this was all part of a civil discourse, even though the only thing they have told the American people for the past seven months is the word "No!".
The Republican Party is beginning to look more and more as if they have been remade into a different political party, with the Hallway Hooligans of Miami as their Founding Fathers. Their new symbol is the belligerent shout and pointed finger, the threat, the talking points screamed again over and over - even though they contain no truth. Talk about Hitler? His real trademark was not his pathetic mustache, it was The Big Lie. That has become the New Republican marching banner. The Screamed Big Lie.
Nontheless Wilson may have really accomplished something of worth - something that President Obama couldn’t do on his own: the unification of the Democratic Party.
Friday, September 04, 2009
The New American Imprint
It wasn't really the fault of the “No Child Left Behind” act, but the law was new and available, and particularly after the attacks of 9-11 it worked. Here's how.
In order to implement that program a series of procedures and tests were developed and added to the practice of education in the United States. This included a cascading series of program measures and performance standards implementing several new and different methods of teaching and providing measurement of the effectiveness of all teaching. New standardized tests were designed so any qualified manager or administrator, including those with no knowledge of the profession of teaching, could evaluate the work of the teaching professionals and these controls were fed back into the schools. Teachers and administrators who trained their students to score well on those tests were rewarded and those whose students did poorly on the standardized tests were sometimes remediated, demoted or even eliminated. Retention of teachers began to depend upon their students’ scores.
One of the results of this program is that an increasing number of students are now being taught answers rather than processes. Instead of learning to observe, analyze, test, question, evaluate, make decisions and then express their conclusions in writing, they are learning that the finding and identification of answers is the ultimate objective and goal of the education process. Too many of our children now go through school, taking tests, passing them, graduate and go on into the workforce still looking for answers without ever having ever learned how to ask important questions or to explore unfamiliar circumstances.
Now come issues into their lives. Health care for example. Not having been truly educated, they quickly look for answers. And answers are always available. News programs appear before them. Some provide an overview of applicable events with discussion and analysis, others provide authoritative answers that are often attributed into or authorized by religious, cultural or regional belief systems which also provide only answers, and which also prohibit any observation, analysis or questioning.
Now, once you know the answer (THE answer) to an issue, any counter claim is clearly specious. If people attempt to develop counter-observations, it would have to be because they don’t know the right answer. If they continue after they have been told the right answer, their purpose is deemed false, insulting and pernicious, and often tied into alien religions, cultural, regional or even racial prejudices. Scientific theories fall under the power of religious "knowledge", progress into new technologies are regulated by laws and understandings of the late 1700s, economic conquest of the free market system is OK because it is good to be selfish - economically, that is.
Thus the groundwork has been set to develop and nurture a generation of young adults who appear smart, act confident and seem knowledgeable. Yet they are also unable to function in a political, economic and social environment that is or has been filled with confusion and uncertainty. Their training leads them to provide answers, or to look for them. Under these conditions, a SMALL GROUP OF INDIVIDUALS in any country can begin to insert their intentions into a stable order. An issue is made to become contentious. An assembly of the people is called, then interrupted by demonstrations, discussion by screaming and shouting. Claims are advanced and connections are shown to traditional religious, ethnic, cultural or regional beliefs. Under conditions such as these, particularly when people have been properly imprinted during their learning years, fascism and totalitarianism can appear to be friendly, familiar, comfortable and intelligent alternatives. Here is where the answers are provided after all, and the instructions can not be far behind.
In order to implement that program a series of procedures and tests were developed and added to the practice of education in the United States. This included a cascading series of program measures and performance standards implementing several new and different methods of teaching and providing measurement of the effectiveness of all teaching. New standardized tests were designed so any qualified manager or administrator, including those with no knowledge of the profession of teaching, could evaluate the work of the teaching professionals and these controls were fed back into the schools. Teachers and administrators who trained their students to score well on those tests were rewarded and those whose students did poorly on the standardized tests were sometimes remediated, demoted or even eliminated. Retention of teachers began to depend upon their students’ scores.
One of the results of this program is that an increasing number of students are now being taught answers rather than processes. Instead of learning to observe, analyze, test, question, evaluate, make decisions and then express their conclusions in writing, they are learning that the finding and identification of answers is the ultimate objective and goal of the education process. Too many of our children now go through school, taking tests, passing them, graduate and go on into the workforce still looking for answers without ever having ever learned how to ask important questions or to explore unfamiliar circumstances.
Now come issues into their lives. Health care for example. Not having been truly educated, they quickly look for answers. And answers are always available. News programs appear before them. Some provide an overview of applicable events with discussion and analysis, others provide authoritative answers that are often attributed into or authorized by religious, cultural or regional belief systems which also provide only answers, and which also prohibit any observation, analysis or questioning.
Now, once you know the answer (THE answer) to an issue, any counter claim is clearly specious. If people attempt to develop counter-observations, it would have to be because they don’t know the right answer. If they continue after they have been told the right answer, their purpose is deemed false, insulting and pernicious, and often tied into alien religions, cultural, regional or even racial prejudices. Scientific theories fall under the power of religious "knowledge", progress into new technologies are regulated by laws and understandings of the late 1700s, economic conquest of the free market system is OK because it is good to be selfish - economically, that is.
Thus the groundwork has been set to develop and nurture a generation of young adults who appear smart, act confident and seem knowledgeable. Yet they are also unable to function in a political, economic and social environment that is or has been filled with confusion and uncertainty. Their training leads them to provide answers, or to look for them. Under these conditions, a SMALL GROUP OF INDIVIDUALS in any country can begin to insert their intentions into a stable order. An issue is made to become contentious. An assembly of the people is called, then interrupted by demonstrations, discussion by screaming and shouting. Claims are advanced and connections are shown to traditional religious, ethnic, cultural or regional beliefs. Under conditions such as these, particularly when people have been properly imprinted during their learning years, fascism and totalitarianism can appear to be friendly, familiar, comfortable and intelligent alternatives. Here is where the answers are provided after all, and the instructions can not be far behind.
Thursday, September 03, 2009
Health Insurance, or Insurance Insurance?
No one should die because they cannot afford health care. No one should go broke because they get sick. No one should be denied medical care by their own insurer or because of any preexisting conditions. No one should stay in a job because they are afraid to lose their insurance.
What we have in America now is not concerned about anybody's health, or even about medical care. It is only about money. It is a way of transferring money from working people to hugely profitable insurance and pharmaceutical companies. If you can't pay money, they don't want you. You can go die for all they care. Their ONLY objective is to make more money this quarter than they did last quarter. What do they do with all that money? A lot of it goes to pay your senators and congressional representatives to "help them out" with money for fundraising in return for favorable legislation and regulations. (And if those in congress don't see it the way the companies want, that money can go for someone to run against them!)
The idea that you can only buy medical insurance from the place you work makes no more sense than if they had to approve of your wife or husband before you could get married. That you lose your insurance if you quit or move means that people who are now ill or injured HAVE to remain with that same company the rest of their life - or until they get let go. That the businesses themselves have to pay part of their employees medical insurance is to severely handicap them in the current global economy - German businesses don't pay those costs, neither do Great Britain's, or France's, or Canada's, or Spain's or anywhere in Europe.
We have a GOOD government health care now already in place. There is Medicare and the Veterans care programs. Medicare For All can be implemented quickly. The insurance companies don't like Medicare because it sets prices at a fair value, not the inflated value charged by the doctors and hospitals. The problems that Medicare is now encountering is because doctors and hospitals don't want to have to settle for that "fair" rate because they need more money so they can pay THEIR insurance companies.
The insurance companies want to continue the current program because they can now negotiate with 50 different states, and a large number of different hospitals and providers. That creates inefficiencies, inequities, confusion and forces most of the states and providers to negotiate from a position of vulnerability and uncertainty.
Let's have one payer, one collector. Let it be the United States Government. The bureaucrats will not check your pulse, palpate your prostate, listen to your lungs or anything else - they will monitor the costs, help medical people develop generally accepted medical procedures and tests, and provide for the payment of all bills.
Taxes will go up? What do you call the "tax" you now pay to your insurance companies for continued apprehension and uncertainty? With government regulating the single-payer system, you will not only have real medical care but you will also have MORE money left over. And you can't EVER get wiped out if you get really sick or have a really bad accident. All the rest of us will help you out like back in the old frontier days. How's that for REAL insurance?
What we have in America now is not concerned about anybody's health, or even about medical care. It is only about money. It is a way of transferring money from working people to hugely profitable insurance and pharmaceutical companies. If you can't pay money, they don't want you. You can go die for all they care. Their ONLY objective is to make more money this quarter than they did last quarter. What do they do with all that money? A lot of it goes to pay your senators and congressional representatives to "help them out" with money for fundraising in return for favorable legislation and regulations. (And if those in congress don't see it the way the companies want, that money can go for someone to run against them!)
The idea that you can only buy medical insurance from the place you work makes no more sense than if they had to approve of your wife or husband before you could get married. That you lose your insurance if you quit or move means that people who are now ill or injured HAVE to remain with that same company the rest of their life - or until they get let go. That the businesses themselves have to pay part of their employees medical insurance is to severely handicap them in the current global economy - German businesses don't pay those costs, neither do Great Britain's, or France's, or Canada's, or Spain's or anywhere in Europe.
We have a GOOD government health care now already in place. There is Medicare and the Veterans care programs. Medicare For All can be implemented quickly. The insurance companies don't like Medicare because it sets prices at a fair value, not the inflated value charged by the doctors and hospitals. The problems that Medicare is now encountering is because doctors and hospitals don't want to have to settle for that "fair" rate because they need more money so they can pay THEIR insurance companies.
The insurance companies want to continue the current program because they can now negotiate with 50 different states, and a large number of different hospitals and providers. That creates inefficiencies, inequities, confusion and forces most of the states and providers to negotiate from a position of vulnerability and uncertainty.
Let's have one payer, one collector. Let it be the United States Government. The bureaucrats will not check your pulse, palpate your prostate, listen to your lungs or anything else - they will monitor the costs, help medical people develop generally accepted medical procedures and tests, and provide for the payment of all bills.
Taxes will go up? What do you call the "tax" you now pay to your insurance companies for continued apprehension and uncertainty? With government regulating the single-payer system, you will not only have real medical care but you will also have MORE money left over. And you can't EVER get wiped out if you get really sick or have a really bad accident. All the rest of us will help you out like back in the old frontier days. How's that for REAL insurance?
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Western Carolina Peace Initiative
A Presentation by John Womack
A speech delivered at the
Western Carolina Peace Initiative
Western Carolina University
February 28, 2003
by John Womack
Friends, I salute you for standing out here in this cold rain and making an important commitment for democracy and world peace. Today we are poised at a great turning point in world history and we watch together in awe as great energies sweep across our country and the world. Problems seem to create more problems and we all know that something has to be done, yet many Americans are uneasy with a constant focus on war as the solution to any of those problems. Quite literally, issues of heaven and hell are being secretly decided in Washington, D.C., and the people of the world have not been consulted, and have not been listened to. Well, this is our response!
First, congratulations on the name you have chosen: the Western Carolina Peace Initiative. I applaud your important emphasis on "peace" rather than war. If someone is antiwar, they are tied to a war, and on some level they need a war so they can continue. But if you work for peace then you have a different objective, a different focus, and will build and serve a different agenda. In some ways it is too bad the Vietnam antiwar movement dispersed, but they were not able turn their great momentum into a force for peace. The message we learn from their victory and subsequent dispersal is that a lack of a war is not necessarily Peace. But those antiwar people of a previous generation did their job well and they prepared the ground for those who would follow them. Now, it is our job. Understand this: we are not trying to overthrow our own government - or any government for that matter. The only "regime changes" we seek are those that take place through peaceful and legal procedures. What we are saying by gathering here today and tomorrow, and all those other tomorrows yet to come, is that: War Doesn't Work! War is no longer a legitimate way to solve problems! Our message becomes simply this: We Must Find Another Way!
Let's be fair about it, we are not rejecting war out of hand. We are not faulting war on some theoretical concept, but on absolute empirical proof. We have tried war; we have tried and tried and tried again - all of us are guilty, every nation - Americans have tried especially hard to make war work. We gave it our best shot - and it still didn't work. We have fought everybody in the whole world: the British, the French, Germans, Russians, the Spanish, Mexicans, Chinese, Iraqis, Iranians, Koreans; we've fought Japan, Italy, Panama, the Philippines, Cuba, our own Native Americans, the black slaves and Asian coolies we imported to do our dirty work for us, and we've fought each other too. Forgive me, did I forget Vietnam? No, I will never forget Vietnam. I served three combat tours over there and it is a part of me still today and will be for the rest of my life. By the way, it didn't work either.
The war we face today in Iraq is not a preemptive war. That occurs when two belligerent nations face each other with armed troops and one of them strikes first because they think the other is about to do the same. That is how a large number of wars do start. This war in Iraq is not a preemptive war, it is an elective war by a powerful military force against one too weak to resist; it is a "war" of opportunity that is being promoted by some in our administration as a great "adventure," our president has even called it a "crusade." It is not a war we "need" to fight, it is a war our president wants to fight. It is a war of domination and imperial conquest. We have inspectors present on the ground in Iraq currently disarming the country we are preparing to attack. It is a cowardly assault on a nation that poses no real threat to us. It will not be a war with Iraq, it will be a war in Iraq. We hear about "shock and awe," a "tactic" that will scare the Iraqis into peace. The real message though, will not be for Iraq, but for the rest of the world. Last time that happened, it was called "blitzkrieg." That one scared the rest of the world so badly everybody united together to fight Germany, and six years later Germany had lost 3.5 million troops and 3.8 million civilians; their ports, autobahns, and railroads were gone. Many of their great institutions of commerce, education and religion were destroyed and their survivors were totally at the mercy of the four nations who had taken their country away from the German people. Blitzkrieg was bad; Shock and Awe could be worse. Our leaders speak of "collateral damage" and sadly shake their heads, they appear to worry for a moment about all those children who will be "left behind," then they brighten up and go forward, possibly now thinking about the "collateral profit" that will fall to them and their families from this war; important people these American rulers are, associated with international giants of corporate and imperial enterprises whose brand names are as familiar as family to those who give orders from the Oval Office.
Today, the world confronts another despicable dictator, one not unlike Hitler and those many other despots who will always haunt history. This time his name is Saddam Hussein. The difference today is that the U.N. is there. We, the people of the United Nations of the World have Iraq surrounded, and our inspectors are at work in his country destroying his weapons. Charges may be brought against Hussein, he may be indicted and tried as a war criminal either in person or in abstentia. It is said that he is "evil," and the charges against him are awful, so give him his days in court! Want to impress the rest of the world? How about that for real Shock and Awe? And how's that for sending the right message to the right people! And think for a moment how it could have been if the League of Nations had been there, on the ground, destroying German weapons in the 1930's. Think of the difference that might have made. Perhaps we could have gotten rid of Hitler and prevented the Second World War! Perhaps such a disarmament could have saved 64,000,000 people from being killed in the hatred which followed. The League of Nations was ineffective though, because of the United States. Even though the League was created largely by U.S. efforts, our senate refused to ratify the treaty because of political reasons, and the League functioned under that great disability until it was terminated in 1946 to make way for the United Nations.
Perhaps the most important aspect of our opportunities today is that such options have never existed before. Not that every nation is ready to lay down its arms, we are far from that, but at this moment the great military and political powers of the world could unite into a great force for peace that might include France, Germany, Great Britain, the United States, Spain, Russia, China?, Japan, South Korea and others too. Many issues would remain to be resolved, many fights would continue to flare, but if the UN worked for peace using the resources of those nations just named, it's influence would be immense. That is the prize for which we work today, and that prize is slipping out of our grasp, not because of Saddam Hussein, but because of the United States! Our president now stands alone as the most powerful man who has ever walked the face of the earth, and he sometimes seems intent on using the power which belongs to the American people for the secret purpose of a very narrow right-wing group of extremely wealthy people.
Yet, the force that confronts the United States president is more powerful than he. That force is the people of the United Nations of the World who are forming together as one nonpolitical body, not going over the heads of our own governments, or discarding our governments, but working together with each other to fulfill the higher purposes for which each of our governments were instituted. We are calling our elected officials to an accountability for their actions, not seeking perfection or infallibility, but honesty, integrity, and devotion to our common ideals. We are affirming that Peace is a right of all people, and that none can have Peace unless all have Peace. We don't have to slide back down that gory slope into the pit of war again! Peace is possible today, but people have to make it happen. Our president says "We gave peace a chance . . ." then he pauses, raising his eyebrows and clenching his fist, the glare in his eyes implying that peace didn't work. But Mr. Bush, Peace is more than just a game of chance, it needs a home, a place to grow, somewhere it can be cared for, watered, fed and cultivated. It needs to be protected and cherished and it needs to be shared. Too many times people work hard for war, spend money for war, train young men and women for war, are always ready to fight, and then will give peace just "a chance." While wars are caused, peace is left to happen by accident. If we are ever to have real peace it will have to be wanted, prepared for, paid for, trained for and we will need specialists who can become experts in the arts and sciences of peace. Impossible? Not really. What if we did create a Department of Peace in our national government? Just started it off and gave it a place to grow, supported it and shared it? We might find a miracle there someday, instead of just more consequences. How do we get such a radical thing started? It really begins at home, right here at Western Carolina University, in Sylva, Dillsboro, Cullowhee, Franklin and the other small towns of our great southern mountains. Peace is not like a game of chance at all, it's more like planting a garden, or raising a child. Peace must be caused to happen.
Peace will not be handed to us by our government. In order to achieve Peace, we must want it enough to work for it, plan for it, and strive for it. We may have to seize that right in the same manner as the Suffragettes did in the 1920s, as Ghandi did in the 1950s and the Civil Rights workers in the 1960s. There are people who profit from war. They are rich and they possess much power and have influence in the highest levels of all governments, but they always have to work on hidden agendas and invoke false issues like patriotism, nationalism, glory, and emotional appeals to base instincts - all of which are aimed at the common fears of people. They try to divide people into groups and pit them against each other. Increasingly, we members of the world community realize that those unimportant divisions of mankind are neither significant nor dangerous. We must make our government leaders understand that war is no longer acceptable. Only then can we experience the joys and cares of Peace.
Peace will not be a state of endless bliss; it is always a balance between different forces. It will be messy. It will require hard work and will be frustrating more often than it will be fulfilling. Only when war is no longer a valid or legally accepted way of solving problems will all nations be willing to engage in the vexatious, frustrating, and often confusing balancing act of making Peace happen, and treat Peace as if it were really important. But the prize of Peace is a double prize. The first prize is that Peace will give us all those things for which we fight wars, and which war, by its very nature, also prevents us from obtaining. The second prize is the absence of war. Remember this: War kills, it is not a game like Mr. Rumsfeld sardonically implies, it kills; the people it kills don't come back, except maybe as ghosts - they don't raise their children or work for a better world. Almost every single person killed in war is innocent of any significant crime or error. Our president says that getting rid of Saddam Hussein is worth any cost, Does he mean that to include up to 100,000 Iraqis - some 99,992, of whom, presumedly are innocent souls? Maybe they don't "count" in some fundamentally apocalyptic way since they are Islamic, not Christian? Mr. President, you haven't explained that very well. Those who suffer most in any war are always the children. Children get killed in combat, they get injured by falling things, they get run over and run down, they become sick and there is no medical help available. One might shout out "No child left behind!" for a campaign boast, but in war that is a savage joke. Children get lost all the time and they are always left behind. Some die of hunger, some from lack of care, or a broken heart, some are actually scared to death. Many who do survive are raised by those ghosts who haunt such places, and they grow through childhood quickly and become terrorists with enough hatred in their souls to give their life to kill anything.
Finally, we are the first people in history to know that we live on a planet that is dying. We need to spend some time with our lovely planet and care for it with love in its days of its last, great sickness. Perhaps if we can end wars and find ways to live together, we can share not only Peace but even find ways to heal our planet together.
Friends, I salute you! Your work is important and your cause is the most noble in all of history!
Namaste.
A speech delivered at the
Western Carolina Peace Initiative
Western Carolina University
February 28, 2003
by John Womack
Friends, I salute you for standing out here in this cold rain and making an important commitment for democracy and world peace. Today we are poised at a great turning point in world history and we watch together in awe as great energies sweep across our country and the world. Problems seem to create more problems and we all know that something has to be done, yet many Americans are uneasy with a constant focus on war as the solution to any of those problems. Quite literally, issues of heaven and hell are being secretly decided in Washington, D.C., and the people of the world have not been consulted, and have not been listened to. Well, this is our response!
First, congratulations on the name you have chosen: the Western Carolina Peace Initiative. I applaud your important emphasis on "peace" rather than war. If someone is antiwar, they are tied to a war, and on some level they need a war so they can continue. But if you work for peace then you have a different objective, a different focus, and will build and serve a different agenda. In some ways it is too bad the Vietnam antiwar movement dispersed, but they were not able turn their great momentum into a force for peace. The message we learn from their victory and subsequent dispersal is that a lack of a war is not necessarily Peace. But those antiwar people of a previous generation did their job well and they prepared the ground for those who would follow them. Now, it is our job. Understand this: we are not trying to overthrow our own government - or any government for that matter. The only "regime changes" we seek are those that take place through peaceful and legal procedures. What we are saying by gathering here today and tomorrow, and all those other tomorrows yet to come, is that: War Doesn't Work! War is no longer a legitimate way to solve problems! Our message becomes simply this: We Must Find Another Way!
Let's be fair about it, we are not rejecting war out of hand. We are not faulting war on some theoretical concept, but on absolute empirical proof. We have tried war; we have tried and tried and tried again - all of us are guilty, every nation - Americans have tried especially hard to make war work. We gave it our best shot - and it still didn't work. We have fought everybody in the whole world: the British, the French, Germans, Russians, the Spanish, Mexicans, Chinese, Iraqis, Iranians, Koreans; we've fought Japan, Italy, Panama, the Philippines, Cuba, our own Native Americans, the black slaves and Asian coolies we imported to do our dirty work for us, and we've fought each other too. Forgive me, did I forget Vietnam? No, I will never forget Vietnam. I served three combat tours over there and it is a part of me still today and will be for the rest of my life. By the way, it didn't work either.
The war we face today in Iraq is not a preemptive war. That occurs when two belligerent nations face each other with armed troops and one of them strikes first because they think the other is about to do the same. That is how a large number of wars do start. This war in Iraq is not a preemptive war, it is an elective war by a powerful military force against one too weak to resist; it is a "war" of opportunity that is being promoted by some in our administration as a great "adventure," our president has even called it a "crusade." It is not a war we "need" to fight, it is a war our president wants to fight. It is a war of domination and imperial conquest. We have inspectors present on the ground in Iraq currently disarming the country we are preparing to attack. It is a cowardly assault on a nation that poses no real threat to us. It will not be a war with Iraq, it will be a war in Iraq. We hear about "shock and awe," a "tactic" that will scare the Iraqis into peace. The real message though, will not be for Iraq, but for the rest of the world. Last time that happened, it was called "blitzkrieg." That one scared the rest of the world so badly everybody united together to fight Germany, and six years later Germany had lost 3.5 million troops and 3.8 million civilians; their ports, autobahns, and railroads were gone. Many of their great institutions of commerce, education and religion were destroyed and their survivors were totally at the mercy of the four nations who had taken their country away from the German people. Blitzkrieg was bad; Shock and Awe could be worse. Our leaders speak of "collateral damage" and sadly shake their heads, they appear to worry for a moment about all those children who will be "left behind," then they brighten up and go forward, possibly now thinking about the "collateral profit" that will fall to them and their families from this war; important people these American rulers are, associated with international giants of corporate and imperial enterprises whose brand names are as familiar as family to those who give orders from the Oval Office.
Today, the world confronts another despicable dictator, one not unlike Hitler and those many other despots who will always haunt history. This time his name is Saddam Hussein. The difference today is that the U.N. is there. We, the people of the United Nations of the World have Iraq surrounded, and our inspectors are at work in his country destroying his weapons. Charges may be brought against Hussein, he may be indicted and tried as a war criminal either in person or in abstentia. It is said that he is "evil," and the charges against him are awful, so give him his days in court! Want to impress the rest of the world? How about that for real Shock and Awe? And how's that for sending the right message to the right people! And think for a moment how it could have been if the League of Nations had been there, on the ground, destroying German weapons in the 1930's. Think of the difference that might have made. Perhaps we could have gotten rid of Hitler and prevented the Second World War! Perhaps such a disarmament could have saved 64,000,000 people from being killed in the hatred which followed. The League of Nations was ineffective though, because of the United States. Even though the League was created largely by U.S. efforts, our senate refused to ratify the treaty because of political reasons, and the League functioned under that great disability until it was terminated in 1946 to make way for the United Nations.
Perhaps the most important aspect of our opportunities today is that such options have never existed before. Not that every nation is ready to lay down its arms, we are far from that, but at this moment the great military and political powers of the world could unite into a great force for peace that might include France, Germany, Great Britain, the United States, Spain, Russia, China?, Japan, South Korea and others too. Many issues would remain to be resolved, many fights would continue to flare, but if the UN worked for peace using the resources of those nations just named, it's influence would be immense. That is the prize for which we work today, and that prize is slipping out of our grasp, not because of Saddam Hussein, but because of the United States! Our president now stands alone as the most powerful man who has ever walked the face of the earth, and he sometimes seems intent on using the power which belongs to the American people for the secret purpose of a very narrow right-wing group of extremely wealthy people.
Yet, the force that confronts the United States president is more powerful than he. That force is the people of the United Nations of the World who are forming together as one nonpolitical body, not going over the heads of our own governments, or discarding our governments, but working together with each other to fulfill the higher purposes for which each of our governments were instituted. We are calling our elected officials to an accountability for their actions, not seeking perfection or infallibility, but honesty, integrity, and devotion to our common ideals. We are affirming that Peace is a right of all people, and that none can have Peace unless all have Peace. We don't have to slide back down that gory slope into the pit of war again! Peace is possible today, but people have to make it happen. Our president says "We gave peace a chance . . ." then he pauses, raising his eyebrows and clenching his fist, the glare in his eyes implying that peace didn't work. But Mr. Bush, Peace is more than just a game of chance, it needs a home, a place to grow, somewhere it can be cared for, watered, fed and cultivated. It needs to be protected and cherished and it needs to be shared. Too many times people work hard for war, spend money for war, train young men and women for war, are always ready to fight, and then will give peace just "a chance." While wars are caused, peace is left to happen by accident. If we are ever to have real peace it will have to be wanted, prepared for, paid for, trained for and we will need specialists who can become experts in the arts and sciences of peace. Impossible? Not really. What if we did create a Department of Peace in our national government? Just started it off and gave it a place to grow, supported it and shared it? We might find a miracle there someday, instead of just more consequences. How do we get such a radical thing started? It really begins at home, right here at Western Carolina University, in Sylva, Dillsboro, Cullowhee, Franklin and the other small towns of our great southern mountains. Peace is not like a game of chance at all, it's more like planting a garden, or raising a child. Peace must be caused to happen.
Peace will not be handed to us by our government. In order to achieve Peace, we must want it enough to work for it, plan for it, and strive for it. We may have to seize that right in the same manner as the Suffragettes did in the 1920s, as Ghandi did in the 1950s and the Civil Rights workers in the 1960s. There are people who profit from war. They are rich and they possess much power and have influence in the highest levels of all governments, but they always have to work on hidden agendas and invoke false issues like patriotism, nationalism, glory, and emotional appeals to base instincts - all of which are aimed at the common fears of people. They try to divide people into groups and pit them against each other. Increasingly, we members of the world community realize that those unimportant divisions of mankind are neither significant nor dangerous. We must make our government leaders understand that war is no longer acceptable. Only then can we experience the joys and cares of Peace.
Peace will not be a state of endless bliss; it is always a balance between different forces. It will be messy. It will require hard work and will be frustrating more often than it will be fulfilling. Only when war is no longer a valid or legally accepted way of solving problems will all nations be willing to engage in the vexatious, frustrating, and often confusing balancing act of making Peace happen, and treat Peace as if it were really important. But the prize of Peace is a double prize. The first prize is that Peace will give us all those things for which we fight wars, and which war, by its very nature, also prevents us from obtaining. The second prize is the absence of war. Remember this: War kills, it is not a game like Mr. Rumsfeld sardonically implies, it kills; the people it kills don't come back, except maybe as ghosts - they don't raise their children or work for a better world. Almost every single person killed in war is innocent of any significant crime or error. Our president says that getting rid of Saddam Hussein is worth any cost, Does he mean that to include up to 100,000 Iraqis - some 99,992, of whom, presumedly are innocent souls? Maybe they don't "count" in some fundamentally apocalyptic way since they are Islamic, not Christian? Mr. President, you haven't explained that very well. Those who suffer most in any war are always the children. Children get killed in combat, they get injured by falling things, they get run over and run down, they become sick and there is no medical help available. One might shout out "No child left behind!" for a campaign boast, but in war that is a savage joke. Children get lost all the time and they are always left behind. Some die of hunger, some from lack of care, or a broken heart, some are actually scared to death. Many who do survive are raised by those ghosts who haunt such places, and they grow through childhood quickly and become terrorists with enough hatred in their souls to give their life to kill anything.
Finally, we are the first people in history to know that we live on a planet that is dying. We need to spend some time with our lovely planet and care for it with love in its days of its last, great sickness. Perhaps if we can end wars and find ways to live together, we can share not only Peace but even find ways to heal our planet together.
Friends, I salute you! Your work is important and your cause is the most noble in all of history!
Namaste.
Thursday, August 20, 2009
Health Care
Congress has the athority in section 8 of the constitution to lay and collect taxes to provide for the general welfare of the United States. What could be more significant to the nation’s general welfare than one of the its greatest resources, the health of its citizens? Health care also provides for 1/6 of the entire national production of goods an services and is the leading cause for Americans declaring bankruptcy.
Insurance companies have been protecting the health of the United States for many years, and now almost 50,000,000 Americans have no health care at all, and an unknown number are not sure of what they have. Meanwhile, the amount of money Americans pay for their second (third?) rate health care is TWICE as much as the citizens of any other developed nation in the world pays.
President Obama and SOME members of the Democratic Party have a plan for a big change in this program. The Republican Party and the "Blue Dog Democrats" just say no. No program, no plan, no change. Just "no".
Think about this for a moment. The insurance companies are making enormous profits. Many of their CEOs are making one million dollars a month. When the republicans vote "no" - and have no plan - what does that tell us about who they represent?
Insurance companies have been protecting the health of the United States for many years, and now almost 50,000,000 Americans have no health care at all, and an unknown number are not sure of what they have. Meanwhile, the amount of money Americans pay for their second (third?) rate health care is TWICE as much as the citizens of any other developed nation in the world pays.
President Obama and SOME members of the Democratic Party have a plan for a big change in this program. The Republican Party and the "Blue Dog Democrats" just say no. No program, no plan, no change. Just "no".
Think about this for a moment. The insurance companies are making enormous profits. Many of their CEOs are making one million dollars a month. When the republicans vote "no" - and have no plan - what does that tell us about who they represent?
Monday, August 17, 2009
Pull the Public Option? Really?
One of the most important resources of any nation in the world is the health of its citizens. That is too important to be left to a commercial industry who must subordinate that resource - the health of American citizens - to its own need for profit.
Commercial businesses operate on a short-term basis, usually quarter-to-quarter. The health care of the nation is an on-going, long term project.
Our present system has produced probably 50 million Americans with no insurance at all, perhaps 50 million more who are under-insured. Those Americans who depend on their employer to provide their health-care, are dependent upon and bound to that company. American businesses who have to carry this additional cost find themselves at a disadvantage as they compete in the global economy with companies from other nations who do not carry these costs.
It will cost money in additional taxes? Probably. But America is currently paying - for its dangerously ineffective system - about twice as much for health care as any other nation in the world and getting about half the benefit that they do, Taxes may go up, but the price we are paying for health insurance may vanish! Not only will the nation begin to become heather, but we will have more money too!
Finally, health care can not be a free market service. No individual can negotiate on a free market basis with health-care insurance companies like Blue Cross or Cigna, or any of the others. Health care must be regulated by government.
Commercial businesses operate on a short-term basis, usually quarter-to-quarter. The health care of the nation is an on-going, long term project.
Our present system has produced probably 50 million Americans with no insurance at all, perhaps 50 million more who are under-insured. Those Americans who depend on their employer to provide their health-care, are dependent upon and bound to that company. American businesses who have to carry this additional cost find themselves at a disadvantage as they compete in the global economy with companies from other nations who do not carry these costs.
It will cost money in additional taxes? Probably. But America is currently paying - for its dangerously ineffective system - about twice as much for health care as any other nation in the world and getting about half the benefit that they do, Taxes may go up, but the price we are paying for health insurance may vanish! Not only will the nation begin to become heather, but we will have more money too!
Finally, health care can not be a free market service. No individual can negotiate on a free market basis with health-care insurance companies like Blue Cross or Cigna, or any of the others. Health care must be regulated by government.
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Town Hall Meeting with Patrick McHenry.
Attended the "Town Hall" meeting of Patrick McHenry, the representative of North Carolina's 10th district. I left after about an hour and a half and there were still large numbers of people standing in the aisle to ask him questions or make comments. It was a demonstrative audience of perhaps 1,000 people and the meeting was very civil with no arguments or shouting being apparent. And of course, it was a meeting for a republican representative.
My observations: There is the presence of power here. It is evident in numerous small groups of men standing together, looking very knowledgeable. But the feeling went much farther than that, I felt an echo from my childhood back in a different place and a very different time. But there was the feeling of hidden power. McHenry made a number of disparaging remarks about the current administration but was not directly disrespectful to the president. It was apparent from the applause that President Obama is extremely unpopular with the group here present and so is the Democratic Party. Most of the derogatory remarks toward Obama were made by a few of the questioners. One man who identified himself as an MD here in Hickory, stated in absolutely positive terms that Obama's health care plan would place him in the role of advising older patients to terminate their life and he didn't like that. (I would have thought him to be a "plant" except for his claiming to be a local MD - someone in the audience mentioned though that he was an outspoken critic of Obama). A woman said that the 48 million people with no health care was due to illegal immigrants (Loud applause). McHenry himself indicated that many of those 48 million people were under the age of 25 and thought they would live forever. Another woman said that because of Obama's plan, our tax dollars would be used to pay for abortions - she didn't think that was right. (Very loud applause). McHenry made some awkward comment about there being several versions of the plan, and the abortion thing being smuggled into it while he and other men were in the rest room. (Or something like that - several times I found myself wondering if McHenry was intentionally playing the role of bumbling confused person simply to dodge an issue and change the topic - I suspect that is one of his characteristics.)
McHenry said he wants to provide tax credits so we can buy insurance, and he wants no discrimination for pre-conditions. Again my observations indicated that most of the people who were questioning or commenting seemed to be looking for help, many of them seemed open to government sponsored health care. There was a small group of people who applauded that idea on three or four occasions. Whenever McHenry seemed confused he would run to his platitudes and make a comment about Obama, or end of life screenings, or abortion and the applause would bring a satisfied-looking smile to his face. One woman asked McHenry why the administrative costs of the average insurance company was 30% of their total costs while Medicare and Medicaid were only 3%. I could not hear his answer to this because of a baby screaming in the audience.
Signs of plants? 1) Certainly when McHenry came in, a small tight group of men in the front rows stage right rose with shouts and clapping. Most of the crowd then rose too. 2) Clearly the doctor seemed to be a plant, although one wonders if an MD would compromise his position in the community. 3) When Tort Reform was mentioned, that same group of men stage right in the first several rows whopped, rose and cheered - and of course, so did the rest of the audience. 4) Again when one woman blamed the illegal immigrants for the medical problem, and 5) When a couple of women said we would all have to pay for abortions. In summary, if these were plants they fell far short of the "Hallway Hooligans" of the Florida Recount, and would have been pathetic in comparison with other contemporaneous ones we have seen on TV, and they were basically washed away by the personal stories some of the people told.
Saturday, August 01, 2009
I Don't Care if I Ever Get Back
“Beer!” Someone shouted loudly over to my left.
The pitch comes in hot and a little high. “Strike two”, the umpire said matter-of-factly.
Not to be outdone someone on the right called out “Cold Beer!”
The next pitch came in slow and low “Ball two” said the umpire very quietly.
ICE Cold Beer” Someone else behind me screamed out above the crowd.
The next pitch hit the batter. “Take yer base,” the ump pointed toward first.
Somebody right in front of me screamed out as if in pain, “PeaNUTS!, Get yer peanuts HERE!”
And there are “Hot Dawgs!” here, and “Coco COla!” there . . . how quaint that all seems today.
Yes, those were the good old days. Time between innings were spent in casual, sometimes elegant conversations among friends and even strangers who were sitting around you. You talked mostly about baseball, how the game was going and what would probably happen in the next inning. We were telling each other what to look for. There was some music, usually the National Anthem before the game began, and then the “Take Me Out to the Ball Game” in the 7th inning, but otherwise it was all pure baseball abmience, usually watching the shadows lengthen and pool into darkness as the nighthawks swooped above the brilliantly-lit playing field.
Today it is different. The game is no longer so matter-of-fact. Things are always spectacular now. The umpires dance and spin and shout out and gesture. The players hop like bunny rabbits over wrongs, whether actual or perceived. There is constant music, or just plain amplified noise, interrupted for breathless moments of pregnant silence as the pitch is delivered, then - thank God, the music starts up again with its mindless ditty which is never completed because there is always another next pitch.
The vendors in the stands too have changed their wares now, here in the year of our Lord, 2015. You still hear the cry of “Beer”, ICE Cold Beer”, and “Peanuts” but now we have come to hear “Get yer Steroids Here!” Somebody over to the left will shout out “AnaBOLIC steroids!” “Hot Dogs!” calls out somebody else, and a kid over to the far right calls out “Stanozolol! Get it NOW”. A sprightly -looking old codger carries a tray and shouts out “Human Growth HorMOAN!” A sign up on the concession stand reads “Deca-Durabolin” and beneath it is written “Need a Dr. prescription? - We GOT a doctor! Come on up! Get Yours NOW!”
Well, looking back now we can see that these performance-enhancing drugs made their entry into our society through the games played by young boys. Somewhere around the 1960s and 1970s, money got into the game in a really big way. Those who were good got paid well, those who were very good got paid very well. Then the drugs quietly tiptoed into the scene. Skinny players popped out like the Michelin Man, hallowed records were shattered into oblivion. The need to get into drugs crept down from the major leagues right onto the sandlot and highschool games. And as every sports fan knows, if you don’t begin “developing” until high school, it will be too late for you and you will miss out on glory. And worse, on the money too.
So instead of getting drugs out of the game we had to admit they were “necessary” to help the human body and mind reach the Performance-Enhanced levels required to cope in modern life. So we made them legal. Now that everybody is using them, where can you go to stand out now? “Psssssst . . . let me show you something
The pitch comes in hot and a little high. “Strike two”, the umpire said matter-of-factly.
Not to be outdone someone on the right called out “Cold Beer!”
The next pitch came in slow and low “Ball two” said the umpire very quietly.
ICE Cold Beer” Someone else behind me screamed out above the crowd.
The next pitch hit the batter. “Take yer base,” the ump pointed toward first.
Somebody right in front of me screamed out as if in pain, “PeaNUTS!, Get yer peanuts HERE!”
And there are “Hot Dawgs!” here, and “Coco COla!” there . . . how quaint that all seems today.
Yes, those were the good old days. Time between innings were spent in casual, sometimes elegant conversations among friends and even strangers who were sitting around you. You talked mostly about baseball, how the game was going and what would probably happen in the next inning. We were telling each other what to look for. There was some music, usually the National Anthem before the game began, and then the “Take Me Out to the Ball Game” in the 7th inning, but otherwise it was all pure baseball abmience, usually watching the shadows lengthen and pool into darkness as the nighthawks swooped above the brilliantly-lit playing field.
Today it is different. The game is no longer so matter-of-fact. Things are always spectacular now. The umpires dance and spin and shout out and gesture. The players hop like bunny rabbits over wrongs, whether actual or perceived. There is constant music, or just plain amplified noise, interrupted for breathless moments of pregnant silence as the pitch is delivered, then - thank God, the music starts up again with its mindless ditty which is never completed because there is always another next pitch.
The vendors in the stands too have changed their wares now, here in the year of our Lord, 2015. You still hear the cry of “Beer”, ICE Cold Beer”, and “Peanuts” but now we have come to hear “Get yer Steroids Here!” Somebody over to the left will shout out “AnaBOLIC steroids!” “Hot Dogs!” calls out somebody else, and a kid over to the far right calls out “Stanozolol! Get it NOW”. A sprightly -looking old codger carries a tray and shouts out “Human Growth HorMOAN!” A sign up on the concession stand reads “Deca-Durabolin” and beneath it is written “Need a Dr. prescription? - We GOT a doctor! Come on up! Get Yours NOW!”
Well, looking back now we can see that these performance-enhancing drugs made their entry into our society through the games played by young boys. Somewhere around the 1960s and 1970s, money got into the game in a really big way. Those who were good got paid well, those who were very good got paid very well. Then the drugs quietly tiptoed into the scene. Skinny players popped out like the Michelin Man, hallowed records were shattered into oblivion. The need to get into drugs crept down from the major leagues right onto the sandlot and highschool games. And as every sports fan knows, if you don’t begin “developing” until high school, it will be too late for you and you will miss out on glory. And worse, on the money too.
So instead of getting drugs out of the game we had to admit they were “necessary” to help the human body and mind reach the Performance-Enhanced levels required to cope in modern life. So we made them legal. Now that everybody is using them, where can you go to stand out now? “Psssssst . . . let me show you something
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Sgt. Crowley Did Act Stupidly.
So did everybody else involved in this mess. Dr. Gates apparently acted even more stupidly. But perhaps most stupid of all was President Obama for calling Crowley stupid after saying he (Obama) knew nothing about the issue. But talk about the perfection of stupidity will lead you to swoon in admiration over the brilliant stupidity of the nation’s press, no longer a contender for any mythical “Joe Friday Award” for patient questioning and keen observation, but now the clear winner of a “Headless Chicken Award” for most spectacular flapping and running around wild while your head lies in the dust unseeing but still screeching. Originally, I even thought the most stupid of all was Lynn Sweet for wrapping up the press conference with her dumb question which just lay there for a moment before slowly unfolding into a Harry Potter-like death-eater, and flying with the speed of the internet through the minds of the civilized world. EVERYbody involved with this now looks stupid. Even the lady who called the initial 911 call was made to look stupid by some in the press before she caught on and started acting stupidly on her own. I’m sure I look pretty darn stupid for having even noticed it, even more so for writing about it.
But. Beer heals all. Too bad Gates didn’t offer Crowley any that night. Too bad Crowley didn’t bring any with him. It would all be different now. We all know beer will calm disagreements. Ask any bartender. Or bouncer. What will they serve? My recommendation is a beer from the Oskar Blues Brewery in Lyons, Colorado. It’s the one they call “Mama’s Little Yellow Pilz”, a smooth pilsner which makes all other things seem irrelevant.
Still, questions remain. This was presented as a pretty simple breaking-and-entering thing, right? So why did Sgt. Crowley
along with an unknown number of Cambridge and Harvard police officers botch up this nonevent so badly? The police Incident Report doesn’t say how many police officers were called in to back-up Crowley but it indicates that Crowley called them all out to take care of administrative matters only. According to the report, the Cambridge police were just to question Ms. Whalen (the 911 caller)! The Harvard University police were called only to verify that Dr. Gates Harvard University identification card was valid! (Apparently Sgt. Crowley did not call the Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles to verify that Gates’ drivers license was actually legitimate - at least that is not mentioned in the report.) One More Thing - Let's remember that Dr. Gates was still in the act of returning from China. So you could make a pun and say he was dis-oriented - and I have never returned from China - but I do know that whenever I return from Europe, I am also disoriented for a day or so - it's a big change. We schedule NOTHING for the first day back. Dr. Gates might have handled the incident differently had he had not just come from the other side of the world.
Now let the blame fall where it may, but this much is to be remembered - Incidents such as this can be expected more often as police increasingly trade in their traditional constabulary role for that of the military assault team. Look out. It could be playing in a theater near you soon.
(The bottom photo - the police Incident Report will enlarge if clicked upon)
Friday, July 24, 2009
NRA , Sotomayor and Treason
The NRA wrote a letter to Senators Harry Reid and Mitch McConnel, and copied all 100 senators calling for a "no" vote on Judge Sotomayor for the Supreme Court. The last paragraph reads:
We believe any individual who does not agree that the Second Amendment guarantees a fundamental right and who does not respect our God-given right of self defense should not serve on any court, much less the highest court in the land. Given the
importance of this issue, the vote on Judge Sotomayor's confirmation will be considered in NRA's future candidate evaluations. (emphasis provided here is mine).
Thank you for your attention to our concerns. Should you have any questions or wish to discuss further, please do not hesitate to call on us personally.
Sincerely,
Wayne LaPierre Executive Vice President Executive Director Chris Cox NRA NRA-ILA
cc: Members of the United States Senate
This type of action highlights and underscores the serious problem that is - in fact - destroying the government of the United Sates of America. Our nation has become a corporate nation now. We citizens are still permitted to contact our senators, we each have two of them, and our single representative, and we can ask them to please do or not do a certain thing, maybe donate a small amount of money and that's about it. The great corporations and organizations though, like the NRA, or Blue Cross, or those in the pharmaceutical or armament industries, contact 100 senators, and 435 members of the House, and lobby the president's administration, with expertly designed propaganda, LOTS of money, and now as the NRA letter shows - THREATS.
So what is the recourse? What should we do? First - we should become aware of what has already happened. Then we should examine and verify that it has occurred. Then we need to talk with each other. We are living in a time of treason. If we act early enough we can save our nation, many in government share our concern.
We believe any individual who does not agree that the Second Amendment guarantees a fundamental right and who does not respect our God-given right of self defense should not serve on any court, much less the highest court in the land. Given the
importance of this issue, the vote on Judge Sotomayor's confirmation will be considered in NRA's future candidate evaluations. (emphasis provided here is mine).
Thank you for your attention to our concerns. Should you have any questions or wish to discuss further, please do not hesitate to call on us personally.
Sincerely,
Wayne LaPierre Executive Vice President Executive Director Chris Cox NRA NRA-ILA
cc: Members of the United States Senate
This type of action highlights and underscores the serious problem that is - in fact - destroying the government of the United Sates of America. Our nation has become a corporate nation now. We citizens are still permitted to contact our senators, we each have two of them, and our single representative, and we can ask them to please do or not do a certain thing, maybe donate a small amount of money and that's about it. The great corporations and organizations though, like the NRA, or Blue Cross, or those in the pharmaceutical or armament industries, contact 100 senators, and 435 members of the House, and lobby the president's administration, with expertly designed propaganda, LOTS of money, and now as the NRA letter shows - THREATS.
So what is the recourse? What should we do? First - we should become aware of what has already happened. Then we should examine and verify that it has occurred. Then we need to talk with each other. We are living in a time of treason. If we act early enough we can save our nation, many in government share our concern.
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Second Amendment
A big vote today on authorizing people to carry concealed weapons across state lines. It was defeated but the vote was close. Why now? This seems strange in light of the number of people who have been shot and killed in our country over the past several weeks. Policemen sometimes find themselves out-gunned in exchanges with criminals, and we are shooting ourselves down far better than the Taliban or Al-Qaeda could ever do. Even the number killed on 9-11-2001 is racked up again and again about every 40 days by American terrorists using guns. And while I sit here and write this I almost KNOW that another big shooting is coming later this week or maybe next week.
What is the second amendment anyway? Believe it or not, most people don't know. What does it really say? What does it mean?
I sometimes tell people that the second word in the second amendment is the word “regulated”. That’s not quite true but it's not far off the mark. Actually the amendment reads: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
It’s pretty simple. A single sentence with two clauses. Five words immediately stand out. "Militia", "State", "people", "Arms", and "infringed". These words can be very interesting.
"Militia". This word has many different meanings, but their common connection seems to be related to a concept of “military” control, with various civilian modifications. There seems to be no doubt that all militias will perform under the authority and guidance of a responsible leader who had been chosen and deputized by the officials elected by citizens of the “state” which would be protected by these militias. It is the authorizing clause of the entire amendment and clearly the reason upon which the second clause is dependent.
"State". Almost certainly refers to the individual states who will ratify the constitution of the United States.
"People". Interesting use of the designee of this right. It does not say “citizens” or “persons”. There is no right for “citizens” to keep and bear arms . . . or for “people” to do so. The right is assigned to “the people”.
"Arms". Fascinating choice of words here with many meanings from anatomical to clothing and nautical and several others. The two main ones which probably apply to this amendment are 1) the ability to physically carry a weapon and 2) to serve as a member of a military force. Which one applies here? Obviously, the one related to being part of a military force would complete the first clause of the amendment which refers to “militia”.
"Infringed". To "infringe" is to weaken a right that has been awarded. For example, if “citizens” had been the subject of the
Second Amendment instead of “the people”, all American citizens would now be able to carry their guns, concealed or otherwise, into airports, onto commercial airliners, military installations, schools, jails and prisons, the House of Representatives, the Senate, into presidential press conferences, sporting events, and many other places where the carrying of guns are currently, and traditionally have been "infringed" - by being prohibited.
Going back to “arms” we wonder about assault rifles. That would seem to be applicable to the “militia” part, but then why not hand grenades too? Or flame-throwers, tanks, rockets, high explosives, phosphorus chemicals, mustard gas, Agent Orange, atomic and nuclear weapons, missiles, air planes and so on? They could all come in handy on various occasions. Even when the amendment was written, back in the late 1770s, the scope of military “arms” included weapons sufficient to destroy fortified castles. This seems to reinforce the understanding that the right which is reserved to “the people” to “keep and bear arms” in “militias” for the purpose of providing security for “the State” is to be accomplished under the direction and control of deputized personnel who are acting under the authority of that state.
So what does this bill that would permit unknown people to secretly smuggle guns across state lines have to do with the second amendment? It looks like a way to shoot holes in the constitution. Come on Senators Hagan and Burr, you can do better than that - who do you REALLY represent?
John Womack
This post is not copyrighted and is intended to be in the public domain.
What is the second amendment anyway? Believe it or not, most people don't know. What does it really say? What does it mean?
I sometimes tell people that the second word in the second amendment is the word “regulated”. That’s not quite true but it's not far off the mark. Actually the amendment reads: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
It’s pretty simple. A single sentence with two clauses. Five words immediately stand out. "Militia", "State", "people", "Arms", and "infringed". These words can be very interesting.
"Militia". This word has many different meanings, but their common connection seems to be related to a concept of “military” control, with various civilian modifications. There seems to be no doubt that all militias will perform under the authority and guidance of a responsible leader who had been chosen and deputized by the officials elected by citizens of the “state” which would be protected by these militias. It is the authorizing clause of the entire amendment and clearly the reason upon which the second clause is dependent.
"State". Almost certainly refers to the individual states who will ratify the constitution of the United States.
"People". Interesting use of the designee of this right. It does not say “citizens” or “persons”. There is no right for “citizens” to keep and bear arms . . . or for “people” to do so. The right is assigned to “the people”.
"Arms". Fascinating choice of words here with many meanings from anatomical to clothing and nautical and several others. The two main ones which probably apply to this amendment are 1) the ability to physically carry a weapon and 2) to serve as a member of a military force. Which one applies here? Obviously, the one related to being part of a military force would complete the first clause of the amendment which refers to “militia”.
"Infringed". To "infringe" is to weaken a right that has been awarded. For example, if “citizens” had been the subject of the
Second Amendment instead of “the people”, all American citizens would now be able to carry their guns, concealed or otherwise, into airports, onto commercial airliners, military installations, schools, jails and prisons, the House of Representatives, the Senate, into presidential press conferences, sporting events, and many other places where the carrying of guns are currently, and traditionally have been "infringed" - by being prohibited.Going back to “arms” we wonder about assault rifles. That would seem to be applicable to the “militia” part, but then why not hand grenades too? Or flame-throwers, tanks, rockets, high explosives, phosphorus chemicals, mustard gas, Agent Orange, atomic and nuclear weapons, missiles, air planes and so on? They could all come in handy on various occasions. Even when the amendment was written, back in the late 1770s, the scope of military “arms” included weapons sufficient to destroy fortified castles. This seems to reinforce the understanding that the right which is reserved to “the people” to “keep and bear arms” in “militias” for the purpose of providing security for “the State” is to be accomplished under the direction and control of deputized personnel who are acting under the authority of that state.
So what does this bill that would permit unknown people to secretly smuggle guns across state lines have to do with the second amendment? It looks like a way to shoot holes in the constitution. Come on Senators Hagan and Burr, you can do better than that - who do you REALLY represent?
John Womack
This post is not copyrighted and is intended to be in the public domain.
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Wise Latina? Hmmm.
“I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life,”
Bold statement? Well, she didn't claim that those experiences WOULD lead to better conclusions but only that she HOPED they would. I really doubted that she knew what she was talking about. However, Lindsey Graham, Jeff Sessions, John Cornyn, Jon Kyl, Orin Hatch, Mitch McConnell and several other white males who had evidently not lived very rich lives proceeded to exhaustively PROVE she was RIGHT. Boy, those senators are really good, aren't they?
Bold statement? Well, she didn't claim that those experiences WOULD lead to better conclusions but only that she HOPED they would. I really doubted that she knew what she was talking about. However, Lindsey Graham, Jeff Sessions, John Cornyn, Jon Kyl, Orin Hatch, Mitch McConnell and several other white males who had evidently not lived very rich lives proceeded to exhaustively PROVE she was RIGHT. Boy, those senators are really good, aren't they?
Friday, July 17, 2009
Apollo - The Great Mistake
40 years is a long time even in biblical terms, but it seems even longer since Apollo 11 made its journey to Tranquility. Many of us who were already in the missile business at that time felt that it was a mistake to go to the moon before we were ready, but even we had no ideal that it would turn out to be as bad as it did.
The great alternative of course was to build space stations. Not just one but several. One basic pattern called for six. Four of them would be spaced evenly around the earth more or less equatorially and two others in a general polar orbit, one north, one south. Another plan called for placing a collection of stations together in one area of the sky to be used as a storage/repair/construction/command location. From these staging stations, journeys to the moon and elsewhere in the solar system would be much easier since they would be free of the heavy lift required to escape the earth’s gravity and also free of the earth’s weather. A true Space Command would become an integral part of the United States Air Force available for both defense and humanitarian missions, and accidents like those which destroyed the Columbia could have been easily avoided.
How much money would this have cost? Not that much - considering what we did spend elsewhere. The total cost of the Apollo space program itself is commonly given as $25 billion, adjusted to 2005 dollars this would approximate $135 billion. Meanwhile, the American war against Vietnam cost $686 billion in 2008 dollars, and the American war against Iraq has cost over $900 billion in 2008 dollars. We could have several permanent stations on the moon and explored Mars for those outlays alone. And of course, the money spent on the space stations would have had positive results for our national economy, education system, military defense and opportunities for international leadership and cooperation.
But when Project Apollo reached the end of its road with number 17, the ships and rockets were taken apart, the facilities were stripped down, the engineers and scientists let go to get a “real” job, and that incredible capacity for space flight was blown into the void. Now, 40 years later, we’re still trying to build one space station. And we currently have no space ships left to even reach that one station. Russia, China, India are moving on. America is fighting needless wars and celebrating footprints in the dust.
The great alternative of course was to build space stations. Not just one but several. One basic pattern called for six. Four of them would be spaced evenly around the earth more or less equatorially and two others in a general polar orbit, one north, one south. Another plan called for placing a collection of stations together in one area of the sky to be used as a storage/repair/construction/command location. From these staging stations, journeys to the moon and elsewhere in the solar system would be much easier since they would be free of the heavy lift required to escape the earth’s gravity and also free of the earth’s weather. A true Space Command would become an integral part of the United States Air Force available for both defense and humanitarian missions, and accidents like those which destroyed the Columbia could have been easily avoided.
How much money would this have cost? Not that much - considering what we did spend elsewhere. The total cost of the Apollo space program itself is commonly given as $25 billion, adjusted to 2005 dollars this would approximate $135 billion. Meanwhile, the American war against Vietnam cost $686 billion in 2008 dollars, and the American war against Iraq has cost over $900 billion in 2008 dollars. We could have several permanent stations on the moon and explored Mars for those outlays alone. And of course, the money spent on the space stations would have had positive results for our national economy, education system, military defense and opportunities for international leadership and cooperation.
But when Project Apollo reached the end of its road with number 17, the ships and rockets were taken apart, the facilities were stripped down, the engineers and scientists let go to get a “real” job, and that incredible capacity for space flight was blown into the void. Now, 40 years later, we’re still trying to build one space station. And we currently have no space ships left to even reach that one station. Russia, China, India are moving on. America is fighting needless wars and celebrating footprints in the dust.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
The News Issue
In a capitalistic system, if you are going to go public, your company will have to not just make a profit, but to increase that profit each quarter. To do that you will have to 1) cut expenses, 2) increase prices, 3) increase market share, 4) introduce new products, or 5) expand into other commercial activities.
Your biggest bang for your buck is to get rid of people - amazing, your productivity will always increase, current costs will drop quickly and balance sheets will rise, legacy cost decreases will lift your P & L and make your stock shine, beep, and say “howdy” on the market. You won’t have to charge customers more money for your product, become creative, try to kill one of your current competitors, or take on a new batch of competitors.
Newspapers have been in an increasing downhill spiral since the radio began broadcasting news. Now with radio, TV, internet, Twitter and all, newspapers have been shoved out of the “breaking news” business all together, and their “scoops” now come in the form of in-depth analysis and prolipsis announcements that can only come from great knowledge about the places and things about which they are reporting.
The business of news - call it The Press or The Media - has clearly changed dramatically in the last twenty years. We always long for the “good old days” to return, no matter what the issue. Truth is, they don’t - they never do - because they can’t. (And we would be miserable if they did!) News has not only become faster but also more fragmented. We’ve always had propaganda and sensational information but now they mingle with reputable news organizations. Paul Krugman publishes on the Steven Colbert program, they each have a part of the news - together they get “it” (meaning something) out to more masses.
It may be that in the same sense that IBM moved from the typewriter business into the information storage and retrieval business, so too newspapers have changed from the newsprint business into some new business. To name this “new business” will take someone who is more familiar with the issue than I.
The BIG TRICK is how to pay highly qualified people an income commensurate with the work they do - much of which requires comprehensive technical and professional expertise, and also has an extremely low productivity factor in sometimes lengthy initial stages.
There is a lot more to be said on this issue but it will have to come in another post. I need discussion from someone else.
Your biggest bang for your buck is to get rid of people - amazing, your productivity will always increase, current costs will drop quickly and balance sheets will rise, legacy cost decreases will lift your P & L and make your stock shine, beep, and say “howdy” on the market. You won’t have to charge customers more money for your product, become creative, try to kill one of your current competitors, or take on a new batch of competitors.
Newspapers have been in an increasing downhill spiral since the radio began broadcasting news. Now with radio, TV, internet, Twitter and all, newspapers have been shoved out of the “breaking news” business all together, and their “scoops” now come in the form of in-depth analysis and prolipsis announcements that can only come from great knowledge about the places and things about which they are reporting.
The business of news - call it The Press or The Media - has clearly changed dramatically in the last twenty years. We always long for the “good old days” to return, no matter what the issue. Truth is, they don’t - they never do - because they can’t. (And we would be miserable if they did!) News has not only become faster but also more fragmented. We’ve always had propaganda and sensational information but now they mingle with reputable news organizations. Paul Krugman publishes on the Steven Colbert program, they each have a part of the news - together they get “it” (meaning something) out to more masses.
It may be that in the same sense that IBM moved from the typewriter business into the information storage and retrieval business, so too newspapers have changed from the newsprint business into some new business. To name this “new business” will take someone who is more familiar with the issue than I.
The BIG TRICK is how to pay highly qualified people an income commensurate with the work they do - much of which requires comprehensive technical and professional expertise, and also has an extremely low productivity factor in sometimes lengthy initial stages.
There is a lot more to be said on this issue but it will have to come in another post. I need discussion from someone else.
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
A Meeting of Raw Emotions?
Wow - the computer hiccuped and published a White House statement on Facebook in Spanish, "Las declaraciones iniciales de la Jueza Sotomayor". The United States then erupted into in a great collision of comments by both erudite readers and those barely able to grunt. After reading this fascinating recital of Comments, I have a new outlook on my country. Now I see more clearly that the term “United States of America” refers not to New York, Texas, California, Kansas, Florida and such others, but rather to Schizophrenia, Borderline Personality Disorder, Rationally Normal, Narcissism, Obsessive-Compulsive, and oh yes, Post-traumatic Stress Disorder. Me, I’m now clinically depressed. And by the way, FaceBook says they translate through 64 languages - all but Urdu, the 6th most spoken language, I am told, on the planet.
Thursday, July 09, 2009
Bob McNamara
Whiz kid. Phenom. The best of the best and the brightest of the brightest. But he was wrong. Terribly wrong. Tragically wrong. Brilliantly wrong. His reasoning was right - it always was. But he was still wrong. He knew too much, but he didn’t know the story. He had facts like some people have collections of crystal, or fine works of art, or great writings in literature - Bob had his facts. And he KNEW. He really did know. But he was wrong because he couldn't see the story, and his ignorance was responsible for the deaths of more than two million human beings. Why? Because he didn’t know the story that was taking place all around him. He didn't know the story that he himself was telling. He only knew the facts.
How did this happen? McNamara was open to John Stuart Mill’s art of questioning power, he loved logic and he lived to reason with other people. He held nothing so “sacred” that it could not be challenged. “Challenge me!” He seemed to beg, with that famously confident McNamara smile which seemed to say “I want to know if I am wrong - PROVE to me that I am wrong!” But he lived in a world of facts, not a world of stories. His facts told him what he already knew was true. But that wasn’t the way things really were. There was a real big story involved here and Bob didn’t know anything about it.
He held his own with the press of the world. He answered ALL their questions and they finally shut up. He met with the congress of the United States. He answered their questions. He would sit at the table in the senate meeting rooms that became silent following all their questions and he would ask THEM - “any more questions?” They would stare at their tables. If they had questions, he had answers. And his answers all had facts. He KNEW. And he knew he knew. And they knew he knew. But he was still wrong because he didn’t know what he was really talking about - he only knew the facts - he didn’t know the story. When other people would begin telling him the story he would interrupt them with facts, and they would stop.
So, anyway - McNamara built a great edifice of Facts. Facts on how to kill, how to bomb, how to destroy, how to deny, how to contain, how to blow up. He was good at his facts. But he didn’t know the story. He didn’t know any of the stories. He had degrees in economics, philosophy and a Harvard MBA. He taught at Harvard, served in the military for three years, rose to Lt. Colonel, selected targets for General LeMay, Was Kennedy's second choice for Secretary of Defense but got the job anyway, leaving Ford as its CEO. He was the mastermind of the American War against Vietnam.
McNamara apparently died a bewildered man. He knew everything except why the war didn’t work. He was probably the most rational man who ever lived and he knew how every thing worked. That’s probably why he didn’t understand war, or people, or democracy, or life.
He knew his facts and he could string them together but what he never did know is that the world is not rational. Bob McNamara was a freak. And that is a fact. And that is also the story.
How did this happen? McNamara was open to John Stuart Mill’s art of questioning power, he loved logic and he lived to reason with other people. He held nothing so “sacred” that it could not be challenged. “Challenge me!” He seemed to beg, with that famously confident McNamara smile which seemed to say “I want to know if I am wrong - PROVE to me that I am wrong!” But he lived in a world of facts, not a world of stories. His facts told him what he already knew was true. But that wasn’t the way things really were. There was a real big story involved here and Bob didn’t know anything about it.
He held his own with the press of the world. He answered ALL their questions and they finally shut up. He met with the congress of the United States. He answered their questions. He would sit at the table in the senate meeting rooms that became silent following all their questions and he would ask THEM - “any more questions?” They would stare at their tables. If they had questions, he had answers. And his answers all had facts. He KNEW. And he knew he knew. And they knew he knew. But he was still wrong because he didn’t know what he was really talking about - he only knew the facts - he didn’t know the story. When other people would begin telling him the story he would interrupt them with facts, and they would stop.
So, anyway - McNamara built a great edifice of Facts. Facts on how to kill, how to bomb, how to destroy, how to deny, how to contain, how to blow up. He was good at his facts. But he didn’t know the story. He didn’t know any of the stories. He had degrees in economics, philosophy and a Harvard MBA. He taught at Harvard, served in the military for three years, rose to Lt. Colonel, selected targets for General LeMay, Was Kennedy's second choice for Secretary of Defense but got the job anyway, leaving Ford as its CEO. He was the mastermind of the American War against Vietnam.
McNamara apparently died a bewildered man. He knew everything except why the war didn’t work. He was probably the most rational man who ever lived and he knew how every thing worked. That’s probably why he didn’t understand war, or people, or democracy, or life.
He knew his facts and he could string them together but what he never did know is that the world is not rational. Bob McNamara was a freak. And that is a fact. And that is also the story.
Friday, July 03, 2009
Independence Day 2009
As we celebrate our national day of Independence from the British crown, let us also acknowledge the presence of some the things upon which we have become dependent.
We have a declining status in the world in part because our citizens are DEPENDENT upon an education system which is not preparing our children to live in the modern world. OECD scores now rank America 31 out of the 57 nations it rates, in spite of the money America spends on education. An increasing number of American schools have ended instruction in arts, music, literature, foreign languages, philosophy and other “unimportant” subjects to “save money” and to “improve” test scores.
Our “criminal justice” system now houses more prisoners than any other nation in the world both in numbers and percentage. Almost none of its inmates are being prepared to live independently after release. Americans are DEPENDENT on this system which creates different forms of terror, one affecting the law-abiding citizens, another for those who break the laws and are caught and sentenced.
Our health care system is ranked 37th among industrial nations in terms of effectiveness and is the most expensive in the entire world. The main reason that Americans now declare bankruptcy is for medical bills. We resist governmental health care because of “higher taxes” yet many families are DEPENDENT on private policies for which they pay cost close to $1,000 every month, and which can suddenly increase in price or even terminate, especially if they lose their job or are laid off.
Americans are DEPENDENT upon automobiles for transportation. Buses, trolleys, subways, and trains are not available for the average American. Most families must have two or more cars for their basic transportation. And to drive these cars, America is totally DEPENDENT on foreign oil.
The American people are DEPENDENT on an economic system which has frozen the purchasing power of the average American wage since the late 1970s. This has happened during a period of astonishing increases in productivity, since almost all of its increases in capital have been accumulated by fewer and fewer owners and the American middle class has not prospered but appears to find itself shrinking.
Americans are DEPENDENT upon supporting a Capitalistic system which proclaims the virtue of the “free market” and “private property” even as it seizes and destroys both of them. To Americans, Capitalism IS a free market because the Capitalists tell them it is free, even as their purchasing options continue to be restricted. Americans believe a “free” market is one which is “free” FROM government control, instead of understanding that a truly “free” market is really “free” because OF governmental regulation. No one would believe the outcome of a major football game played without referees, much less one in which the referees were all hired and paid by one of the two teams, but that is the kind of system that Americans are DEPENDENT on for their economy.
America is totally DEPENDENT upon waging war. We not only wage “wars” against poverty, cancer, disease, terrorism, pollution, global warming, drugs, AIDS, obesity, pornography, but we have been almost constantly at war with some sovereign nation. We have fought the British, the French, Germans, Russians, the Spanish, Mexicans, Chinese, Iraqis, Iranians, Koreans; we’ve fought Japan, Italy, the Philippines, our own Native Americans, the black slaves and Asian coolies we imported to do our dirty work for us, and we’ve fought each other too. I fought in our wars in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, and we have fought since then in Kuwait, Iraq, and now Afghanistan (and Pakistan?). And that is overlooking Granada, Cuba, Guatemala (three times), Panama, Nicaragua, Venezulea, El Salvador, Columbia, and others right here almost at home. Now American is building one of the largest mercenary armies in the world, arming people who are not sworn to fight for their country and bound by its laws and treaties, but to kill for a for-profit corporation. Americans are DEPENDENT upon providing for its vast military to “protect” itself from the world.
Americans are DEPENDENT upon corporate cabals which rule its legislative and executive branches of government. Powerful groups from pharmaceutical and medical, financial, petroleum, prison, religious and armament industries among others, direct the nation's actions and determine what is in its “national interest”. One such single group, the National Rifle Association rules congress with a “cocked pistol” held to the Congressional and presidential “head” even though somewhere between 14,000 and 30,000 Americans are killed by guns (by other Americans) every year. If a foreign terrorist kills 3,000 Americans in one day, that is cause for a Trillion dollar, never-ending war, but American terrorists kill that many about every 40 days - year around.
Americans are virtually DEPENDENT upon a press which has become a 24/7 presentation of opposing fascist propaganda machines. Truth - absolute Truth - is no longer sought by the American press except that both sides seek it out to find it out and kill it before normal people find out about it. The American press has become dedicated to misinform and detract its viewers from reality.
Americans are increasingly DEPENDENT upon actions from a religious fundamentalism which creates fear and hatred among its followers and denounces selected scientific findings with totalitarian fervor and threats of “eternal damnation”. Any attempts to operate “independently” of this religious fundamentalism may be met with terrorist activities which include warnings, threats, intimidation and even killings as “directed by the will of God”. No American can any longer support scientific findings without at least considering the impact they may have on the Christian fundamental terrorists in this country.
So - let’s pause for a moment and try to think - what are we Americans to do this Independence Day? Well, we can watch TV, we can drink beer and eat hot-dogs, watch fireworks, and - oh yes - wave the flag (better carry your gun too). That’s important because no matter how DEPENDENT we have become, it is very important that we act like we think we are “independent.”
I wonder what people from other nations is the world really think. But I would only want to hear from them if they were willing to also list some of the main things they are DEPENDENT upon. And if anyone reads these words and disagrees with them, please let me know what has been misstated or needs clarification and I will check that out and correct any errors I find.
Somewhere there has to be a basic “thing” that we can all call “humanity”, and somewhere there has to be a will to build on the wreckage of those great ideals upon which all our nations were once founded and which are still good and sound, but need to be applied to the real world in which we all now live.
We have a declining status in the world in part because our citizens are DEPENDENT upon an education system which is not preparing our children to live in the modern world. OECD scores now rank America 31 out of the 57 nations it rates, in spite of the money America spends on education. An increasing number of American schools have ended instruction in arts, music, literature, foreign languages, philosophy and other “unimportant” subjects to “save money” and to “improve” test scores.
Our “criminal justice” system now houses more prisoners than any other nation in the world both in numbers and percentage. Almost none of its inmates are being prepared to live independently after release. Americans are DEPENDENT on this system which creates different forms of terror, one affecting the law-abiding citizens, another for those who break the laws and are caught and sentenced.
Our health care system is ranked 37th among industrial nations in terms of effectiveness and is the most expensive in the entire world. The main reason that Americans now declare bankruptcy is for medical bills. We resist governmental health care because of “higher taxes” yet many families are DEPENDENT on private policies for which they pay cost close to $1,000 every month, and which can suddenly increase in price or even terminate, especially if they lose their job or are laid off.
Americans are DEPENDENT upon automobiles for transportation. Buses, trolleys, subways, and trains are not available for the average American. Most families must have two or more cars for their basic transportation. And to drive these cars, America is totally DEPENDENT on foreign oil.
The American people are DEPENDENT on an economic system which has frozen the purchasing power of the average American wage since the late 1970s. This has happened during a period of astonishing increases in productivity, since almost all of its increases in capital have been accumulated by fewer and fewer owners and the American middle class has not prospered but appears to find itself shrinking.
Americans are DEPENDENT upon supporting a Capitalistic system which proclaims the virtue of the “free market” and “private property” even as it seizes and destroys both of them. To Americans, Capitalism IS a free market because the Capitalists tell them it is free, even as their purchasing options continue to be restricted. Americans believe a “free” market is one which is “free” FROM government control, instead of understanding that a truly “free” market is really “free” because OF governmental regulation. No one would believe the outcome of a major football game played without referees, much less one in which the referees were all hired and paid by one of the two teams, but that is the kind of system that Americans are DEPENDENT on for their economy.
America is totally DEPENDENT upon waging war. We not only wage “wars” against poverty, cancer, disease, terrorism, pollution, global warming, drugs, AIDS, obesity, pornography, but we have been almost constantly at war with some sovereign nation. We have fought the British, the French, Germans, Russians, the Spanish, Mexicans, Chinese, Iraqis, Iranians, Koreans; we’ve fought Japan, Italy, the Philippines, our own Native Americans, the black slaves and Asian coolies we imported to do our dirty work for us, and we’ve fought each other too. I fought in our wars in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, and we have fought since then in Kuwait, Iraq, and now Afghanistan (and Pakistan?). And that is overlooking Granada, Cuba, Guatemala (three times), Panama, Nicaragua, Venezulea, El Salvador, Columbia, and others right here almost at home. Now American is building one of the largest mercenary armies in the world, arming people who are not sworn to fight for their country and bound by its laws and treaties, but to kill for a for-profit corporation. Americans are DEPENDENT upon providing for its vast military to “protect” itself from the world.
Americans are DEPENDENT upon corporate cabals which rule its legislative and executive branches of government. Powerful groups from pharmaceutical and medical, financial, petroleum, prison, religious and armament industries among others, direct the nation's actions and determine what is in its “national interest”. One such single group, the National Rifle Association rules congress with a “cocked pistol” held to the Congressional and presidential “head” even though somewhere between 14,000 and 30,000 Americans are killed by guns (by other Americans) every year. If a foreign terrorist kills 3,000 Americans in one day, that is cause for a Trillion dollar, never-ending war, but American terrorists kill that many about every 40 days - year around.
Americans are virtually DEPENDENT upon a press which has become a 24/7 presentation of opposing fascist propaganda machines. Truth - absolute Truth - is no longer sought by the American press except that both sides seek it out to find it out and kill it before normal people find out about it. The American press has become dedicated to misinform and detract its viewers from reality.
Americans are increasingly DEPENDENT upon actions from a religious fundamentalism which creates fear and hatred among its followers and denounces selected scientific findings with totalitarian fervor and threats of “eternal damnation”. Any attempts to operate “independently” of this religious fundamentalism may be met with terrorist activities which include warnings, threats, intimidation and even killings as “directed by the will of God”. No American can any longer support scientific findings without at least considering the impact they may have on the Christian fundamental terrorists in this country.
So - let’s pause for a moment and try to think - what are we Americans to do this Independence Day? Well, we can watch TV, we can drink beer and eat hot-dogs, watch fireworks, and - oh yes - wave the flag (better carry your gun too). That’s important because no matter how DEPENDENT we have become, it is very important that we act like we think we are “independent.”
I wonder what people from other nations is the world really think. But I would only want to hear from them if they were willing to also list some of the main things they are DEPENDENT upon. And if anyone reads these words and disagrees with them, please let me know what has been misstated or needs clarification and I will check that out and correct any errors I find.
Somewhere there has to be a basic “thing” that we can all call “humanity”, and somewhere there has to be a will to build on the wreckage of those great ideals upon which all our nations were once founded and which are still good and sound, but need to be applied to the real world in which we all now live.
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Sanford - Resign? No - Impeachment and Trial.
Mark Sanford, still the sitting governor of South Carolina is trying to figure out whether he should stay on or step down. That should not be his decision. He has violated his oath of office, deserted his position and stolen money from the people of his state. People in South Carolina who hold up a convenience store and get $15 can go to prison for years, he should be treated no differently. He has earned the right to a fair trial.
In America we almost always don't hold our elected officials to the oath they took when they assumed the authority and responsibilities of their office. Even if they intentionally violate that oath, we tend to say - in effect - "aw shucks, well, maybe he has learned something."
Sanford says he wants to show his boys how someone "can pick themselves up and carry on. . . " He needs to show them what happens when someone disappears from his job, violates sacred oaths he freely took, and steals from other people.
He has earned an impeachment and a fair trial.
In America we almost always don't hold our elected officials to the oath they took when they assumed the authority and responsibilities of their office. Even if they intentionally violate that oath, we tend to say - in effect - "aw shucks, well, maybe he has learned something."
Sanford says he wants to show his boys how someone "can pick themselves up and carry on. . . " He needs to show them what happens when someone disappears from his job, violates sacred oaths he freely took, and steals from other people.
He has earned an impeachment and a fair trial.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)