Enough already!

Enough already!

In his book titled The Age of Jackson, Arthur Schlesinger, JR. wrote about how American history has been marked by recurrent swings between conservatism and liberalism. Without a doubt, the period between the years 2000 and 2008 heavily favored those of the conservative persuasion. And, true to history, many social issues that needed to be addressed were ignored. Two long-lingering wars, a deep recession, high unemployment, uninsured Americans, a banking system in disarray, and a whole host of other issues that needed to be addressed were given little genuine attention

Although as history shows, the pendulum has always swung between conservatism and liberalism, the last swing to conservatism was something to behold.  The little people were all but forgotten-forgotten when it came to reaping some of the fruits of their labor. Conservative politicians and talking heads convinced many of their followers that this thing called trickle-down economics, fashioned and put into play by the Regan Administration was still applicable and adhering to this philosophy continued to be in their best interest. In its simplest definition, it says, let those at the top get most of the wealth of this nation and they will let it trickle down to the masses. Some are wondering when will the trickle-down phenomenon begin.

In 2008 Obama, a true liberal, was elected President of these United States. And, as has history clearly shows, he entered into office with the grim and unenviable task of solving the above mentioned problems as well as several new problems that surfaced on his watch. If history repeats itself, at some point, the public will feel the nation has swung too far to the left and once again, conservatism will again rule the day.

In their efforts to right the course of the ship, will the Obama Administration overcorrect and swing too far to the left?  Is America ready to be taken where the Obama Administration is trying to take it? Will his health plan crumble under its own weight? These and other lingering questions will be answered between 2013 and 2016.

The current budget impasse is a classic example of politicians letting things pile up. Some people think those in Washington charged with solving our budgetary problems are incapable of doing so. Others feel they may be capable, but are not willing to put aside their biases long enough to get anything done. Isn’t it amazing how easy it was for them to set aside their differences and put into place the mechanism to go to two wars, but will not use the same logic to craft a budget both sides can agree on?

Many of the issues the Obama Administration is dealing with have to do with the wealth of this nation. Although cloaked in something else, if one takes the time to remove the outer-garment, they will find the almighty dollar is driving the debate. A politician from Caroline had it right when he wrote the following way back in the 1800s. “Wealth, like suffrage, must be considerably distributed, to sustain a democratic republic; and hence, whatever draws a considerable proportion of either into a few hands, will destroy it. As power follows wealth, the majority must have wealth or lose power.”

Taylor saw two threats to the natural economic order. He states the following” there are two modes of invading private property; the first by which the poor plunder the rich….sudden and violent; the second, by which the rich plunder the poor, slow and legal.” He felt the poor could not become dangerous until the concentration of wealth greatly increased their number. The real peril he believed lay in the second mode; plunder from above; orderly and legalized. The secession of privileged orders through history-the priesthood, the nobility, now the banking system showed how every age has shown its own form of institutionalized robbery by a minority operating through the state.

Will the US Government ever be strong enough to wrest the power from those who have the real power in this nation. After-all, wealth equals power, and power equals control.  Have the majority  been conditioned to accept the fact that a few people with vast amounts of wealth control this nation and feel there is little that can be done to alter the situation? How does a Nation break up the mass concentration of wealth without wealth redistribution accusations obscuring and shrouding the issue?  How does one convince those controlling and owing most of the wealth of America that this situation could and probably will, eventually lead to the destruction of this thing called capitalism? This nation will eventually self-destruct if drastic action isn’t taken to insure more people share in its wealth. It is easy to see how the American way of life is being torn apart by companies and individuals seeking profit and wealth.  One of the simplest ways to get more wealth into the hands of the masses is to simply pay them a little more. After all, one can argue that without them, who would produce the wealth of this nation?

Something must change. There will be change. Will it be controlled change, or will it be forced uncontrolled change? Those elected to guide this nation must put aside their differences and make decisions based on the will of the people and/or for the good of America.

12/28/2012

Getting rich no matter the consequences

I discovered an article by Keller dated January 5, 1916. In the article, she makes a case against America getting into World War I.  Helen Keller is well-known in most quarters for her accomplishments despite being blind. This article is a must read for all who are eager to send our young into harm’s way under false pretense.  Helen Keller realized the real reasons most nations go to war. Her analysis of who derives what from the act of war is particularly eye-opening.    Ms. Keller writes about the US excuse for sustaining a large standing army. Ms. Keller, in her writings suggests that the real motive for the US having a large army was to protect the capital of American speculators in foreign countries.

As in Ms. Keller’s lifetime, labor continues to be exploited and capital piled up.  Those who own all of this capital (wealth) are constantly looking for ways and places to invest and obtain even more wealth. Nations having resources (i.e. oil natural gas) and other minerals are prime targets for American speculators.  Let us not forget America’s love for cheap labor. Ms. Keller suggested that according to US capitalists thinking, a dollar not used to make a slave of some human being is not fulfilling its purpose in the capitalistic scheme.

Today, we have American interest all over the world. It is fondly referred to as the global economy. Fair Trade agreement is another phrase tossed around. Take a close look at the real impact of this so-called global economy. One can see who has gained and who has lost, since its implementation. China’s economy is robust and growing rapidly. Much of this growth can be directly linked to jobs once held by American workers being done by Chinese workers in China. Decent paying factory jobs, once the backbone of America’s labor force, is largely a thing of the past. Of course one industry that continues to strive in the US is the defense industry. Americans have been convinced that some nation, largely unnamed since the end of the cold war, is out to destroy this nation. Therefore a large and powerful military is necessary.  In the meantime, virtually the entire US defense apparatus (though not outwardly admitted) is to protect America’s business interest abroad.  One has to wonder how much it cost to build, supply and man the US armada of Aircraft Carriers, Submarines and other naval vessels that patrol the seaways and protect America’s shipping interest. One has to wonder how much it cost to keep US troops in South Korea.  After all, they have been there since the early fifties. What does it cost to keep troops in the Middle East?

Very little has changed in this thing called war. Motivations to go to war are the same as they have been for many centuries. The ability to make war is where the biggest difference lies America’s business interest abroad must be protected at all cost.  If anything, despite no obvious threat to the US, many people, especially those of the Conservative persuasion are easily convinced that an attack against this nation is just around the corner. Just think-today the US has these things called Drones. These aircrafts remotely control pilot-less aircraft, armed with missiles can strike targets with deadly accuracy virtually anywhere in the world.

As I researched this article, I came across an article published in the Columbus Sun on February 17, 1865.  The article titled “The Class that suffers” and reads as follows. Upon poor women and children, upon solders who are toiling and bleeding for liberty, upon salaried men who have not the time, or who desire to speculate, this whole weight of this fearful struggle falls.  Men of wealth, who are hoarding thousands, put up the piteous cry of exorbitant-rates-more bitterly than ever just after increasing the prices one thousand fold, while upon ragged blood-drenched soldiers, upon weary despairing, heart-sick women, and those whose only dependence is a pitiful yearly sum must be made to bitterly suffer…… What matters life or death, so avarice can be gratified? What is honor unattended by wealth? What is liberty unless money can be hoarded by millions? What, if the country be ruined, its women ravished, its homes desolated, its alters violated and freedom forever perished-what matters all so the almighty dollar may be massed in piles? What care men of the present day whether their county sinks so property maybe secured, and the price at which liberty can be bought rest as light as possible upon their patriotic shoulders….. That is right. Pile up wealth-no matter whether bread be drawn from the mouth of the soldier’s orphan or the one limbed hero who hungry walk your streets-take every dollar you can, pay out little as possible, deprive your noble warriors of every comfort and luxury, increase in every way the necessaries of life, make everybody but yourself and non-producers bear the taxes of the war; but be very careful to parade everything you give to the public-talk boldly on the street corners of your love for country, be a grand home general-and when the war is over point to your princely palace and its magnificent surroundings and exclaim with pompous swell “These are the results of my patriotism.”

Take note people, especially those of you who call Conservative Talk Radio and Fox News Network blowhards Great Americas. It is indeed painful to hear an accolade of the magnitude heaped on the likes of Hannity, Boortz and Limbaugh. The above paragraph describes them to a T.

When the subject of wealth distribution comes up, those of the conservative persuasion quickly interject the words-class warfare. They suggest that those wishing to get a larger share of American wealth are stricken with something called wealth envy. This daily tirade and propaganda serves to harden the hearts of those who have the majority of this nation’s wealth. Leo XIII Pope (1810-1903) suggests there is no natural divide between those who have and those who have not.  He penned the following:  a small number of the very rich have been able to lay upon the teeming masses a yoke a little better than that of slavery….The great mistake made in regard to the matter now under consideration, is the notion that class is naturally hostile to class, and the wealthy and the workmen are intended to live in mutual conflict. So irrational and so false is this view, that the direct contrary is the truth.

Union busting at its worst

Some folks believe the new emphasis on Union Busting is a new phenomenon. Quite the contrary. One of the more notable incidents bringing light to the subject was a Douglas Fraser’s Resignation Letter to the Labor-Management Group dated July 19, 1978. Douglas Fraser became president of the United Autoworkers Union (UAW) in 1977. In 1978 he resigned from a committee of eight corporate executives and eight labor officials chaired by former Secretary of labor John T. Dunlop. This committee represented an attempt to forge cooperation between labor and management.

Fraser’s involvement and interaction with this committee gave him the impression that U.S corporations, by their actions had no real interest in working with labor, instead choosing to wage a one-sided class war against working people, the unemployed, the poor and minorities. Fraser also felt corporations were waging a war against young folks, old folks and the middle class of the United States.

Fraser stated in his resignation letter that he believed that leaders of the business community, including industry, commerce and finance, with few exceptions have broken and discarded the fragile, unwritten compact previously existing during past growth and progress.  Despite profound differences, labor and management has always managed to come to general agreements that benefitted labor and management.  Today those who control the wealth of this nation feel they no longer have to negotiate working conditions with most US workers. These same, US Corporations, operating from a position of extreme, financial, and political power, and backed by the Federal State and Local Governments, feel they can make any demands they wish on US workers.

As Fraser mentioned in his resignation, the United States Capitalistic system has always worked best for the haves in our society, rather than the have-not. Despite this well-known and indisputable fact Capitalism remains because the very foundation of this concept remained grounded on one simple concept.  Fraser surmised that in the past, when things got bad enough for a segment of society, the business elite “gave” a little bit-enabling government or interest groups to better conditions somewhat for that segment. Not so today.

The Haves of this nation are not willing to give a little more for the benefit of this nation.  It is a well-known fact that this nation is slowly but surely losing its middle class. At the same time the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.  What has brought on this out of control greed and a need for even more of this nation’s wealth? Why are business leaders willing to destroy America’s middle class for the benefit of a few at the very top of the wealth ladder?

What can be done to reverse the continued flow of America’s wealth to the people at the top of the money chain?  Corporations have a strangle-hold on the US government.  They use their enormous wealth and political persuasion to demand and get almost anything they ask of the federal government.  Many Americans, to this point, have felt there is little the common man can do to change the situation.  Two recent actions by average Americans suggests that the common man banding together can impact how our government governs. The Tea Party was the first action to get a lot of attention and persuaded many politicians to change their behavior. Later, the Wall Street Occupiers caused quite a stir.

The current meltdown of the world’s economic system, largely brought on by unscrupulous and greedy American Capitalists caused many people to say “Something must change.” “Although the powerbrokers have most of the wealth of this nation, something must change.” “Although Congress has been bought and sold, something must change.”   Today’s actions by people all around this nation and abroad, makes it plain that people are dissatisfied and fed up with the way so called capitalism is managed in the United States.  People are taking to the streets as they did in the seventies to protest the Viet Nam war.  US politicians and money handlers should not take lightly what is taking place. Those people participating in sit-ins all over this nation and abroad are not willing to sit back and do little else.

People it is time to do more than spout simple rhetoric. It is time to turn off the radio and TV and take to the streets. It is time to stop supporting businesses that support Conservative Talk Radio and Fox News Channel. These outlets programming regularly call for the destruction of labor unions.  Those of you who are not in favor of labor unions and clamor for their demise, just wait, your wages and benefits are next.  Non-supporters of organized labor-do not think for one minute that the robber-barons of this nation are only after the dollars they pay union workers. They are determined to control most of the wealth of this nation and workers and are willing to use whatever means necessary to achieve this goal.

Thus far, those of the conservative persuasion, along with Conservative Talk Radio and Fox News Network have successfully used labor Unions as wedge issues-quite successfully.  Who will be next?  Do not think for one minute, Union workers are the only ones they feel are overpaid.  Remember the hue and cry each time a vote to raise the minimum wage came up? Remember when conservatives said raising the minimum wage would bankrupt small businesses. Divide and conquer still works.

By what hook and crook has the Republican Party, with and free propagandized assistance from Conservative Talk Radio (CTR) and Fox News Network (FNN) managed to convince millions that there is nothing wrong with a few Americans having the majority of the wealth of this nation.  Despite untiring efforts by Warren Buffett, Bill Gates and other super-rich Americans, Republican lawmakers continue to beat back any attempt to get a few more bucks from the richest of this nation.

Father Ambrose Bishop of Milan made the following quote: How far, oh rich do you extend your senseless avarice? Do you intend to be the sole inhabitants of the earth? Why do you drive out the fellow sharers of nature, and claim it all for yourselves? The earth was made for all, rich and poor, in common. Why do you rich claim it as your exclusive right?

A careful observation of how wealth is distributed in the United States and abroad brings to mind something John Adams,(1735-1826) 2^nd President of the United State coined. In every society where property exists there will ever be a struggle between rich and poor. Mixed in one assembly, equal laws can never be expected; they will either be made by the members to plunder the few who are rich or by the influence to fleece the many who are poor. It is quite clear who is doing who in America.

Cheap labor no matter the cost

Americans are thoroughly frustrated and at times confused as they try to place the blame for the current economic quandary squarely where it belongs.  One thing is certain, it matters very little which party is in power when the glue which binds America’s capitalistic system fails.  What is the glue that holds it together? Someone compared our system to a three-legged stool-Capital, labor and consumer. If either fails or is shorten, the entire system suffers. According to current news outlets, there is plenty of capital available. However, job losses (those actually gainfully employed) shorten the labor leg. Shrinkage of those gainfully employed, with disposal income, shortens the consumer leg of the stool. When the consumer leg and labor legs fail, the capital leg is unable to support the stool and will collapse under its own weight.

Just listen as economists and politicians look for signs that the economy is rebounding. Two industries usually take center stage-construction and automotive.  When either product (new homes and new automobiles) sales are flat because of low demands, the US economy suffers. Why are the demands for these products so low? The answer is very simple.  Today, as in the Great Depression, entirely too many Americans have lost their purchasing power. This is one of the inherent dangers of allowing a few people to have most of this nation’s wealth.  Instead of buying power distributed among millions, it is in the hands of a few who have to reason to spend most of it.  It is a well-known fact that most middle and lower income Americans will spend if they have the money. Why do you think middle and low income Americans save very little of their earning? Simple-they love to spend money. When you take away this purchasing ability by putting the wealth of this nation in a few hands, you effectively kill the very thing that keeps the US economy energetic and growing. Pay people less and they will buy less. Create a tax system that spares the rich and disproportionally negatively impact the people whose income is modest at best, puts additional burden on those least able to pay.

US Job losses due to US companies moving operations overseas have had a devastating effect on the US economy. Jobs traditionally held by US workers (especially manufacturing) are now firmly in the hands of foreign nations.  China is a prime example.  Unemployment creates surplus workers. Surplus workers give employers incentives to lower wages and benefits.  Workers unemployed for long periods of time put undue stress on unemployment compensation programs. Social service programs designed to help the needy are hard-pressed to help all who desire or need help.  Much of this hardship is avoidable if US companies would keep manufacturing jobs in the US.  Loss of these jobs and related infrastructures also means the eventual loss of skills and a highly trained workforce vital to the needs of this nation. This nation was built on people making things. If US consumers purchase and use an item, why not make it in the US?

One sure way to stop the flow of manufacturing jobs 0verseas is to stop using US military might to protect shipments from overseas markets. It is ironic that our military men and women are protecting shipments of products from overseas markets.  These products are owned by the very companies that laid off their friends, relatives, closed plants and rebuilt them overseas. The same goes for the US taxpayers who foot the bill for our military. After all, they are the ones who pay for this military might.  Some call it, protecting US interest abroad. Stop pretending; just say “protecting US companies business interest abroad?”

Collective bargaining at risk

There is a clamor from the Republican Party, Conservative Talk Radio (CTR) Fox News Network (FNN) and other opponents of organized Labor Unions to weaken and or destroy the collective bargaining apparatus in the United States. What is so alarming is the fact that many people who enjoy benefits gotten by organized labor are on the side of those trying to destroy labor unions. The only way to fully appreciate the positive impact organized labor has had on working conditions, is to roll back working conditions to where they were before unions came on the scene. Surely those who enjoy shorter workdays, a safer work environment, decent pay and other negotiated benefits in the work place can see the gains many American workers enjoy. Most people in all walks of life that oppose organized labor refuse to admit that they enjoy workplace benefits garnered by the sweat, blood and tears of union workers. Workdays were shorten by organized labor actions. The eight-hour workday is undeniably the results of organized labor. Safer workplaces are certainly attributable to union activities and demands. Livable wages in many occupations are the direct results of collective bargaining. It is easy for those opposed to labor unions to see them as nothing but a drain on big business and governments at all levels. If one takes the position that labor need business more than business needs labor, then it is easy to see why some want organized labor to got the way of horses and buggies. One must understand and appreciate the need for some kind of balance between workers and big business. Samuel Gopher (1850-1924) one of the founders of the American Federation of Labor (A. F. of L) spoke of the need for collective bargaining. Gopher put it this way: Collective bargaining means that the organized employees of a trade or industry, through representatives of their own choosing, shall deal with the employer or employers in the making of wage scales and working conditions. Collective bargaining is the only practical proposal for adjusting relations between management and the workers in a business way, assuring a fair deal on both sides. CTR and FNN talking heads constantly beat the drums to a tune called democracy, while advocating autocracy, especially in the workplace. Now, politicians of the Conservative persuasion feel comfortable singing the same tune. They want a work environment where management dictates every aspect of the workplace. CTR, FNN and those of the Conservative persuasion constantly paint a dismal picture of unionized workers. This constant drumbeat has attracted the attention of workers not represented by organized labor and created a certain amount of jealously and reluctant admiration for the wages and benefits negotiated by labor unions. All employees in any workplace want are decent wages, benefits and a safe work environment. Having been a union member for several years and a supervisor and manager of union members for several years, I will tell you there must be give and take on both sides. I was involved in negotiating labor agreements representing management and never felt management was forced into positions that were detrimental to the authority and ability of management to manage the workplace and contain labor costs. Union members are well aware that they are taxpayers; property owners and an integral part of the community in which they live and are not about to deliberately take a position detrimental to the well being of said community. Although, at times it appears organized labor positions are hard and fast, most are willing to sit down and negotiate decent and fair contracts that benefits labor and management. The current atmosphere and dire straits many communities, including states and local governments find themselves in, financially, lead some community leaders to assume the time is right to arbitrarily take back many things negotiated and agreed to in labor contracts. Actually there has never been a better time for both sides to sit down and negotiate a contract that benefits both parties. There needs to be a general agreement as to what the problems are and the best way to solve them in a manner both sides can agree to. Workers, in recent years, in several industries made huge concessions to management to help keep businesses afloat. The same thing should and can happen with teachers, firemen, policemen and other public employees. However, arbitrarily changing conditions of employment negotiated in good faith is not the best way to get sorely needed changes and concessions in labor contracts.

Individualism

Let us start this article by defining individualism. In its simplest term, it means uniqueness, selfishness, eccentricity, egoism, independence or individuality. If you listen to Conservative Talk Radio (CTR) and Fox News Network (FNN), you often hear the word individualism tossed around like a hot potato. Talk hosts on these outlets will swear on a stack of Bibles that the United States of America were founded on pure and unadulterated individualism. Hubert Hoover, President of the United States often spoke of individuality, and his writings suggest he truly believed in this principle. However, he was careful not to take it to the extreme, often expressed by talking heads on CTR and FNN. Some would argue that it was unfettered individuality that brought this nation to its knees during the Great Depression. Listen as those who preach a pure individualism theory support their position on one simple fact; individuals are suppose to be self-supporting and anything that suggests people doing anything together for the good of all is tantamount to socialism/communism. There is one possible exception to their position on individualism. They see nothing wrong with our young men bonding together as military units, going off to foreign countries, and fighting senseless and useless wars. They see nothing wrong with these same units using their military might to impose the will of American businesses on foreign countries. Some how, some way the individualism philosophy gets lost when it comes to sacrificing our young people, supposedly for the good of this nation, when in actuality, only a few share in the fruits of our young soldiers’ labors. As this nation struggles to right its economic ship, there are those who are unwilling to accept any changes to the economic and political principles on which this nation is purportedly founded. This unwillingness is causing immeasurable and irreparable damage to several segments of American society. For decades, several economists, politicians, spiritual leaders and the like have repeatedly admonished those who lead this nation about the dangers of a few having so much and so many having so little. Those who subscribe to raw and unadulterated individualism see absolutely nothing wrong with the continued spiral of wealth to the top, with little left for those in the middle and practically nothing left for those on the bottom rung of American society. Despite criticism for the hardships brought on by the Great Depression, President Hubert Hoover had it right when he made the following profound observation relating to individualism:  “No doubt, individualism run riot, with no tempering principle, would provide a long category of inequalities, of tyrannies, dominations, and injustices. America, however, has tempered the whole conception of individualism by the injection of a definite principle, and from this principle, it follows that attempts at domination, whether in government or in the processes of industry and commerce, are under an insistent curb. If we would have the values of individualism, their stimulation to initiative, to the development of hand and intellect, to the high development of thought and spirituality, they must be tempered with that firm and fixed ideal American individualism-an equality of opportunity. If we would have these values, we must soften it hardness and stimulate progress through the sense of service that lies in our people.” President Hoover further stated the following: “While we build our society upon the attainment of the individual, we shall safeguard to every individual an opportunity to take that position in the community to which his intelligence, character, ability and ambition entitle him; that we keep the solution free from social strata of classes; that we shall stimulate effort of each individual to achievement; that through an enlarging sense of responsibility and understanding we shall assist him in his attainment; while he in turn must stand up to the emery wheel of competition.” Look around people, it is not difficult to see what President Hoover predicted would happen with unfettered individuality. Specifically, equality of opportunity in many areas ceases to exist.

Home Sweet Home

Home is where the heart is.

Where is the heart of this nation? Where is your heart? Have entirely too many Americans allowed their need for things to overtake their need to have compassion for the less fortunate. What is behind the hardening of the hearts of so many Americans? Many will argue, and with some justification that Americans gives freely to many nations all over the world. However, we should not neglect the needy of this nation. How in God’s name can a compassionate people drive by a homeless woman virtually living in shopping carts in all kinds of inclimate weather, and not stop to see if they can be of assistance. I have taken a personal interest in this individual and have spent several hours observing how those driving and walking by this individual responds. In most cases, there are no visible responses. I am sure many people feel sorry for her and wish her situation were different so they do not have to drive by and see this terrible, heart-wrenching, wretched and pitiful scene daily. It is entirely possible that many who drive by this situation do not really see what is taking place. It is said that we sometime neglect what we do not like to see, and sometimes we neglect because we do not see at all.
The Christmas Holidays are in full swing and judging by the number of people in shopping centers, a giving mood exists. The question is-who is giving to whom? Are we inclined to give to people who already have more than they need? Are we inclined to give to those from whom we expect to receive? It is written that it is better to give than receive. How many of us actually believe and live by this creed?

Keep your money. Send your child!

While traveling north from Stone Mountain Georgia to Akron Ohio, I happened upon the Neil Boortz show emanating from Atlanta Georgia. He was doing his usual thing-complaining about the tax burden of the rich. He is famous for selecting statistics that appear to show that the rich bears most of the burden of supplying the needs of this nation. Of course, he is careful to deliberately omit many of the important things and people that support this nation. After all, it is not totally about money. I dare Mr. Boortz to cite statistics that shows how many sons and daughters of millionaires have died in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. I dare him to cite statistics that show how many millionaires sons and daughters are permanently physically and mentally wounded due to the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Mr. Boortz, cite the statistics that shows how many millionaire families will spend this Thanksgiving and Christmas without the presence of a father, mother, brother, sister, uncle or aunt because they are in far away countries fighting two wars. How many children of millionaires will never see their fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters and other relatives alive again because they were killed in wars? How many millionaire mothers will have to explain to their children why their millionaire father is not coming home alive from the war? How many millionaire families will make the slow walk behind a flag draped coffin, listen to the sorrowful and moanful sound of a bugle as a love one is put to final rest? Many American are paying with something more precious than money. They are paying with their lives or the lives of their love ones. This is the ultimate sacrifice. It is possible to make more money. It is impossible to bring back a deceased love one. I say to millionaires, keep your money, and send your children off to war to protect your interests. Let your children get a taste of war. Become one of the grieving parent of a son killed in war, before he had a chance to really live. I want Mr. Boortz to explain to his listeners and dedicated followers why he spends so much time trying to protect the rich from spending more money protecting this nation, but make no effort to help protect the lives of our young men and women, by not supporting useless and non-winnable wars. The Boortzs of this nation primary concern is being rich, getting richer and passing it on to their kids. They devote little  time ascertaining what it takes besides tax dollars to support this nation. I repeat, keep your money and send your child.

The sky is falling

Are Conservative Talk Radio and Fox News Network forms of mass communication? What best describes these communication outlets? The Commission on Freedom of the Press made the following observation. These instruments (press, radio and other means of mass communication) can spread lies faster and farther than our forefathers dreamed when they enshrined the freedom of the press in the First Amendment of the Constitution. Much of the accountability envisioned by those who amended the Constitution to allow Freedom of the Press had to too much faith in the goodness of those responsible for mass communication. They felt they would always be accountable to the public by meeting its communication needs. The never envisioned communication outlets becoming big business beholding to big business and owned by big businessmen. They never envisioned communication outlets acquiescing to special interest groups. Twenty four hour programming laced with outlandish propaganda never crossed their minds. Let us agree that Conservative Talk Radio and Fox News Network are communication outlets and cut from the same mold, and their programming reflects the same thinking. Keep this in mind as you read what thinkers of old had to say about the press and mass communication.

Maxim Gorky Russian novelist, playwright (1868-1936). It is no exaggeration to say that the press in Europe and America busies itself assiduously and almost exclusively with the task of lowering the culture of its readers, a level already sufficiently low. Is he talking about Conservative Talk Radio (CTR) and Fox News Network (FNN)?

William Godwin English Novelist Philosopher (1756-1836). When truth stands in the mind unaccompanied by the evidence it depends, it cannot be properly be said to be apprehended at all.

Nelson Antrim Crawford. American Writer, editor, Author (1888) made the following observation; closely related to ignorance and inertia, but even more powerful in its influence against complete and impartial truth-telling by newspaper is fear. Fear is a characteristic not simply of newspapers; it is a characteristic of the American people.  It is not a physical fear; Americans have shown courage and endurance times without numbers. It is rather an intellectual and spiritual fear, based on nothing tangible, on nothing that affords a reasonable basis for fear. It takes most conspicuously the form of fear of and deference to the herd, the whole body of people within the nation.

Are these folks talking about Conservative Talk Radio (CTR) and Fox News Network (FNN)? There are certainly newspapers and other communication outlets that fit of what they speak. However, CTR and FNN stand far above the rest. Those who tune into these outlets are constantly fed a barrage of garbage designed to instill fear in them. Using fear as a tool, they helped the Bush Administration convince listeners that Saddam Hussein, President of the nation of Iraq had a stockpile of Weapons of Mass Destruction. They also convince listeners that these weapons were a threat to the United States. Hannity, Boortz, Beck, Cunningham, Levin and a whole host of other Conservative blowhards frequently spoke of mushroom clouds-a reminder of the clouds over Hiroshima and Nagasaki.  The mere mention of mushroom clouds caused immeasurable fear in the minds of many people-especially those exposed to daily doses of Conservative fear-mongering.  Those of us old enough to remember the get under the desk drill we went through during the fifties as we prepared for a Russian nuclear attack.

CTR and FNN constantly talk about taking from the rich and giving to the poor. They call it wealth distribution. Never mind that statistics appears to show that wealth is flowing upwards and not downward, they have convinced their listeners/believers that wealth  is flowing out of the coffers of the rich and into the coffers of the poor. Only through fear have they managed to convince their audience that the wealthiest among us are losing ground and the poor are gaining ground.

CTR and FNN used the same tactic in an effort to convince their audience that the stock market was the place to invest social security money. Using fear tactics suggesting that social security was virtually broke and the stock market would better serve future social security recipients. They caused panic in the minds of many of their listeners. When the stock market took a dive, not one CTR or FNN loudmouth said one word about what would have happened to social security dollars had they been in the market.

Will someone please tell Conservative Talk Radio and Fox News Network loyal listeners and believers that the sky is not falling.

The Newer New Deal

Shades of twenty nine

Let your mind wander back to the days of the Great depression. Are there similarities to what is taking place in the United States and the rest of the World? Was President Franklin D. Roosevelt forced to put in place programs that permanently altered the role of the Federal Government? If so, how were the Roosevelt Administration programs received by the public? Some argue that the Roosevelt intervention prolonged the depression by several years. Many people feel, especially those of the conservative persuasion that left to their own devices the private market will eventually right itself.  Given the depth of the depression and the current-some would argue depression, it is foolish to think those with capital are willing to risk it to prop up the market that have served them so well. If private capital is available to right our economic ship when it is adrift, what kept it from interceding with any success, in the current situation and in the thirties?  There were certainly halfhearted efforts to inject some private dollars during the great depression. However, the injection of private dollars quickly halted. Arguments made during the Great Depression are made today. Those on the Right say the Obama administration is interfering too much and threatens to destroy the United States Capitalistic economy system. Those on the left insist that the Obama Administration is doing too little for those most in need and have capitulated to the needs of American businesses.  Who is right? Who or what aspect of the United States society are most in need during a depression/recession. Who has the capacity to best weather the storm-and recover the quickest? Certainly not the poor and needy.  If this is a fact, why are those with the most quickest to get relief?

If one looks closely at what took place in 2009 and 2010, it is obvious who got relief the quickest. I suppose using Conservative logic, eventually, the trickle down effect will kick in. Despite those with the most getting the quickest relief, those of the Conservative persuasion continue to complain. Despite the fact that tax payer’s money was used to bail out the banks and wall street where the rich stood to lose fortunes, Conservatives continue to complain. Despite the fact that a significant portion of the American Automobile industry was saved, Conservatives continue to complain.

It takes a lot of imagination to see a time when there are no Americans Auto factories.  Who is supposed to make our fighting vehicles-China, maybe Russia?  Those who are willing to sacrifice one of the backbone industries of this Nation, in order to break organized labor, access cheap labor and make a few people rich are traitors of the worst kind.  It is especially troubling since these same folks constantly wrap themselves in Old Glory and declare their loyalty to our fighting men and women.

As with the Roosevelt Administration, the Obama Administration has one tall order to fill. It must stop the economic bleeding. It must do this before it has any hope of rebuilding the US economy. Some argue that private industry should be the one responsible for rebuilding it. The Obama Administration is fighting an up hill battle. Not only does it have to overcome our current economic situation, it also has to overcome the constant negative propaganda perpetuated by Conservative Talk Radio (CTR) and Fox News Network (FNN).  This is a tall order, since a large number of Conservatives understanding and assessment of the current economic situation is based solely on what they hear on CTR and FNN-nothing else.

CTR and FNN have convinced their listeners that the Obama Administration should have righted the economic ship in less than two years. How gullible and stupid can one be?  The current recession borders on a depression. CTR and FNN listeners do not have a clue as to how long it took this nation to recover from the great depression. These same folks do not realize that WWII finally got the US out of the great depression.  We are talking about twelve years. Any right-thinking well-informed individual of any political persuasion should realize that it is unreasonable to expect the current recession to end in less than two years. The American people must give the Obama Administration efforts a chance to succeed.