What does being an Independent really mean?

Jackie Salit, Pres. CUIP

When the Independent voting movement began to get wind in its sails, a group called the Committee for a Unified Independent Party (CUIP) was formed and has become the spokespeople for those who don’t wish to be connected to either political party.  There are a lot of those folks these days and the ranks have swollen to 40 percent of the voting public.  They have helped decide recent elections and will continue to do so in the future.  The big question for most of us is what do they look like?

According to Sarah Lyons, Director of Communications for CUIP, The Washington Post called them “The Misunderstood Independent.”  If you were a former Democrat, you might have joined the group because they sounded like a bunch of progressives.  If coming from the Republican side, you might have imagined the makeup was more conservative.  Well, it’s neither, at least in specificity, rather a formerly meandering crowd of disgruntled voters that found their way with the amazingly simple designation of Independent.



CUIP was there to pick up the pieces and mold these wanderers into a meaningful body of serious voters that are passionate about their country, but have demands that don’t neatly fit into the Dems or GOP framework.  CUIP has not pursued a third party and there is no central manifesto on which they operate.  You have to learn to understand this philosophy or trying to figure out an Independent will drive you crazy.  Pew Research says it is Americans trying to ditch the kind of partisanship that has brought Congress’ approval rating to the lowest ever. 

If you look at the Pew study, "Beyond Red vs. Blue: The Political Typology,” it makes it clear that Independents aren’t the center of the American political system; they are in fact a contradictory band of individuals who have strong beliefs that they want to see materialize in Washington.  And they don’t feel the job is getting done by either Republicans or Democrats.  Linda Valdez of the Arizona Republic quotes Vincent Hutchings, professor of political science at the U. of Michigan, as breaking down Independents one-third each Democrat, Republican and true independent.

Lyons of CUIP says Pew came up with the same findings they have during their organization of Independents over the years:  “Independents are not in the middle between Democrats and Republicans. Rather, they want to move beyond the confines of parties altogether.”  She adds: “independents are attuned to the fact that partisanship is not a behavioral issue—it is a structural one.”  They are questioning the very structure of the current political system and want to do something about it.  Like adding open primaries and nonpartisan elections.

But if the Independent threat in their numbers is meant to change Congress from its dysfunctional state, it has failed so far.  At least on the GOP side that refuses to even consider raising taxes on the rich.  An interesting recent survey came up with the fact that more than two-thirds of Americans want to increase taxes on the wealthy, including a majority of Republicans.  Even larger numbers feel that Medicare and Social Security should remain untouched.  If I was the GOP, and I mean at every level of office in this country, I would be scared to death.  But the question, of course, is will these people vote their opinions or fall back into the rut of backing a comfortable incumbent?

The movement to remove members of Congress in-mass is a valid cry for help from the American public.  All 435 House members and one-third of Senators are up for reelection every two years.  We have a chance to knock off all of the House and a third of the Senate in 2012.  If we don’t complete the job next year, there’s still 2014 to get the rest of the House and another third of the Senate.  Maybe even put some Independents in office.  By then if we haven’t scared these morons in Washington and convinced them who they are working for, we finish the job in 2016.

Iowa attacks Romney on religion, Obama on being socialist

Outwardly, social conservatives in Iowa have labeled Mitt Romney as a “flip-flopper,” while others challenge his Mormon faith.  These people are scrambling for a candidate they can endorse that will beat Romney in the upcoming first-in-the-nation caucus on January 3, 2012.  So far it looks like Newt Gingrich is in the lead with Ron Paul following and Romney coming in third.  Perry, Bachmann, Santorum and Huntsman pretty much out of the race.  So what are they worried about?

Actually this was all happening before Gingrich’s recent surge in the polls that many wonder if it is for real or just another phase in the republican race of candidates no one really wants.  There was skepticism, however, whether or not the Iowa social conservatives could support any of the candidates.  These include groups like the Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition, The Family Leader, the group Iowa Right to Life, and a representative for the Iowa chapter of Concerned Women for America.

This anti-Romney movement appears to be located only in Iowa, which is known for having its religious preferences.  What is most disturbing is the fact that having the first election in 2012 on January 3 draws a lot of attention to the state, and so far all we are hearing is a religious bias toward the Mormon Church.  This sounds very similar to the critics of John F. Kennedy running for president in 1960 when they questioned whether a Catholic should be elected to the office.



There was also an official cloak of secrecy over the meeting with participants agreeing not to divulge what took place.  A Marshalltown church minister claims social conservatives are really not sure of Mitt Romney’s positions on marriage between the same sex and abortion.  Same-sex marriage in Iowa became legal on April 3, 2009.  The latest year I could find a record for abortions, 2007, there were 6,637.  Either the social conservatives are not keeping up with the facts or they are fighting a losing battle.

And then there’s the radical, in another world, Iowa Tea Party and their continued fight against President Obama.  Hey you lunatics, he won in 2008 and he’ll win again in 2012.  Ryan Rhodes, a member of the Iowa Tea Party Revolution, and from Decorah, complained to Mr. Obama that the Democrats have accused the Tea Party of being terrorists.  As far as I am concerned TPers are just simple minded people with double-digit IQs, no matter what part of the country they come from.

As the President was leaving the event, Rhodes was quoted as saying he believes Obama is a Socialist.  I am surprised this fruitcake didn’t ask him for his birth certificate.  Pathetic.

Is political reform hopeless?

In a recent “Lexington” column in The Economist written by Peter David, he asks: “Is anybody not complaining about the present state of American politics?” Well, maybe some of those so apathetic they never bother to participate in the political process, yet are still the ones who complain the most. Like we used to say in the Navy, ‘there’s always that 2 percent.’ But they aren’t the ones David is talking about, rather, those of us who do get involved, some on a daily basis, and still cannot figure out what’s going on in Washington.



Congress in gridlock

 What we are involved in is the antithesis of two political parties with ideologies that conflict at every level, with one side never willing to negotiate and the other too willing at times. Based on a representation of the extremes with all Republicans and many Democrats, the majority of voters remain unrepresented. Republicans refuse to even consider a tax increase, based on a commitment to Grover Norquist, and Democrats continue to pander to the GOP on this issue plus agreeing to cut entitlements.

Although Barack Obama is not facing a challenge in the primary, he might have if some deep-pocketed Democratic donors had had their way. They looked for someone to yank the campaign out of its centrism position and pull it back to the left, and apparently Russ Feingold, former Wisconsin Senator, was the choice. But success eluded the group because nobody wanted to run; some say the reason was they didn’t want to be the one to topple the country’s first Black president.

But others believe 2012 could end up like 1948, when the newspapers had already announced Thomas Dewey as the winner, and in fact Harry Truman had won the election. Another case, if Mitt Romney wins the nomination, the right wing conservatives could decide to run their own candidate or Ron Paul could run as an Independent or with the Libertarian Party. This would split the Republican vote, giving Obama a distinct advantage. Once again, ideology over common sense.

There is still one more situation that could throw a wrench into both the Dems and GOP. A new group calling itself “Americans Elect” will hold an online nominating convention of its own in June. The purpose is not to create a third party, but rather it will hold an online nominating convention. AE will use the Internet to select a presidential candidate from any party who will then choose a running mate from a different party. Peter Ackerman, a philanthropist, is one of the wealthy backers.



The key is getting on state ballots, and so far they have 2 million out of the 3 million necessary to accomplish this. There is even hope that the Americans Elect campaign could attract such high profile figures as Michael Bloomberg. The New York Mayor decided against running as an Independent in 2008, but this new approach to the election process could get him or others interested. It sorta puts a dent in the Independent movement, even though their claim to fame seems only to split voters from party affiliations into a non-party affiliation. They apparently have no interest in running their own candidate.

Whatever happens, we can’t afford the case where an independent gets enough votes to prevent a majority. In that case the Constitution turns the decision over to a GOP controlled House of Representatives, which would prove a disaster for progressives and the rest of the country as well. So what do we do? Returning to the original question, “Is political reform hopeless?” You be the judge because if it is to be successful, it depends on you and me. If it is hopeless, we are getting closer and closer to the fall and decline of the American democracy.

Arizona’s tough Sheriff Joe Arpaio challenges Obama birth certificate

This is one of those, ‘how many times are they going to go down this road’ issues.  Every time it is pursued, there is conclusive proof that the President’s birth certificate is valid. But Arpaio dredged it up again, probably for the publicity it will get him, giving it the credibility of an investigation demanded by the people of Maricopa, County in Arizona.  But then, what else would we expect from a state that has given us a bogus Gov. Jan brewer, and a racist bigot who led the state Senate, Russell Pearce?

And where else would the complaint Arpaio is investigating come from other than the Tea Party?  These are the same people, although from another local chapter, who placed fake candidate Olivia Cortes on the ballot in the recall election of Russell Pearce.  Legitimate challenger Jerry Lewis won handily, hopefully putting Pearce out to pasture permanently.  Arpaio backed Russell Pearce, as he did Andrew Thomas, who is facing disciplinary hearings with the Arizona state bar over questionable prosecutions.  And the latest, Sheriff Joe supports Rick Perry for president.

You have to wonder about this man’s judgment.  Randy Parraz, who organized the recall against Pearce, says Arpaio is next if he doesn’t back off on the “extremist brand of politics” exhibited by Thomas and Pearce.  Arpaio even looked bad in an investigation by fellow Sheriff Paul Babeu of nearby Pinal County, which resulted in the dismissal of three of Arpaio’s top deputies.  With newly energized Hispanics from the Pearce recall, at the worst Arpaio could be voted out in 2012 due to his actions against illegal immigrants.

Racist Russell Pearce with Joe Arpaio

Latinos accounted for 13 percent of the voters who supported Jerry Lewis in the recall election against Russell Pearce.  Lewis won by 53.4 percent to 45.3, proving that the Hispanic vote will determine the outcome of several elections in 2012.  It could rid the state of a bunch of conservative radicals that have placed Arizona in the limelight of ridicule for the past couple of years.  And there are many who say, if the progressives can pull it off in Arizona, they can do it throughout the U.S.

And while Arpaio continues his sweeps of illegal immigrants, arrests of illegals along the U.S., Mexico border are at the lowest level since the Nixon administration.  Even the Border Patrol is now concentrating on illegals with criminal records, realizing many of these Hispanics are working at jobs here and making a contribution.

But the latest that Sheriff Joe has to contend with are charges that he failed to investigate over 400 sex crimes over a three-year period ending in 2007.  Some of these were molestations of undocumented immigrants.  In El Mirage, where the sheriff provides policing services, suspects were even known in all but 6 of 32 cases.  Victims were as young as two, but the Arpaio’s deputies failed to follow through, leaving the cases hanging in limbo.

Obama with birth certificate

So the residents of Maricopa County, and the whole state of Arizona, should be wondering why Joe Arpaio is placing emphasis on some inane investigation of Obama’s birth certificate, when he should be going after predators who prey on the state’s children.  But again, no one ever seems surprised by the boneheaded politics of Arizona.  It’s just the way the state does business…at least today.

It’s time to show Congress the voters mean business



Congress in a word



There are so many failures by Congress in the last few years that one needs a scoreboard to keep the record straight.  According to Kathleen Hennessey on TheDay.com, “Not even Congress is big on Congress.”  She says the body has developed “low self-esteem” because of its “dysfunction, occasionally impaired judgment, and inability to get things done.  Let me add two more: incompetence driven by a fanatical ideology, the latter label assigned to the GOP. 

Less than 10 percent of the public approves of the job they are doing.  Sen. Michael Bennet, a Democrat from Colorado, said, "I guess we can take some comfort that Fidel Castro is at 5 percent."  Comparing Congress to a communist regime probably doesn’t amuse many conservatives, and is certainly no excuse for the complete ineffectiveness of our lawmakers.  But they have reasons not to worry come 2012, unless, the voting public decides to punish these neer do wells.

Current partisan Congress

According to the Wall Street Journal, the primary reason Congress can stick to their partisanship, voting with the party and not addressing what is right for the country, is that the American voting public has never punished these deadbeats. So they continue their major reason for entering politics, to get reelected each year.  And you have always accommodated them in the past.  I am suggesting we should not do that in 2012 and, as the saying goes, “throw out the bums.”

The WSJ says even with Congress’ approval tanked, and with voters exclaiming they hate their bipartisanship these same voters reelect again, while punishing those who dare to cross party lines.  It’s time for you people to put up or shut up.  But it all comes down to the redistricting process that draws the lines that place particular voters in certain districts.  J Gerald Hebert of the non-partisan Campaign Legal Center says political leaders can choose their voters, rather than the other way around.

This has worked comfortably for California which, in the last 212 elections, has seen only one case where the party changed hands.  The sunshine State tried to break this hold on the redistricting process, as have other states.  Arizona voted for a separate commission to draw districts some time ago, but when this assembly did its job recently, fake Gov. Jan Brewer fired the Independent member of the council because the new maps were not more favorable to Republicans.

It is core partisanship that reelects these inept politicians, and there isn’t a lot of hope the extreme right or left will change radically.  Sometime I wonder if these people even bother following the news, or maybe they just aren’t playing with a full deck.  Either way, it is up to progressives to bring out the vote that could not only oust a bungling Congress, it could also get rid of most of the GOP in Washington that is responsible for this insane ideology on absolutely no taxes.

LBJ and Dirksen

There is a balance and it can be negotiated, but not up against the current static credo of the Republicans.  Lyndon Johnson did it when he was in the Senate and as President.  Everett Dirksen did it as a U. S. Representative and later as a Senator.  But the congress of those days still considered what was best for the voters and the country foremost.  Sure, they wanted to be reelected and most were when they took care of the business of the people.

But this pitiable group of lawmakers will push the envelope as long as possible.  Voters can blame themselves for what has happened and with your continued apathy toward this whole mess, we can expect more of the same in 2013.  But if we make it clear next November that we’re mad as hell and not going to take this anymore, Howard Beale’s famous words in the movie Network, (You Tube below) not only will we change things for the better, but it will be a warning to future members of Congress, they work for us.

http://www.theday.com/article/20111125/NWS13/311259926/-1/today

David Gergen quotes from Ronald Reagan book to cover Mitt Romney campaign

Gergen’s article, “Mitt Romney – Where’s the rest of him?,” all but clones the title of Ronald Reagan’s autobiography, “Where’s the Rest of Me?,” published in 1965.  The title was taken from what was considered his best movie, Kings Row, where a sadistic surgeon amputated both his legs.  Reagan wakes up from the anesthesia and says, “Where’s the rest of me?, referring to his lost limbs.  In his book it pertained to the fact that he didn’t consider himself whole until converting from a liberal to a conservative.

I know.  I was there.  My job as District Manager for then Meredith Publishing Co., whose subsidiary, Duell Sloan & Pearce, published the title, was to assist in the promotion and publicity of the book in the Southern California area.  Our New York office set up an autographing for Reagan in Tustin, CA, in the middle of Orange County, a bastion of extreme right-wing politics.  The man arrived, followed shortly by his daughter, Maureen, and the book signings began.

As a professed liberal then—that’s before we became progressives—I kept my distance from most of the weird looking minglers.  However, Maureen was approached by a guy who demanded her attention for some time, and I could tell there was consternation on her face.  Finally, once she had shed her ear bender, she rushed over to me and said, “We have to get him out of here,” meaning her father.  Apparently her talker was a John Bircher and was accusing everyone in government of being a communist, plus more.

I finally convinced her it would cause more uproar to just yank him out of the autographing than to let it run its course, then make sure it never happened again.  She finally agreed and I let our New York Office know to keep me in the loop on any future plans for promotional events.  But most of the Southern California publicity was set up by me using my contacts set up over the years.  One such incident was an interview on the Bob Crane radio talk show.  Crane would go on to star in Hogan’s Heroes.

I had just picked up Reagan from his home in the Pacific Palisades and we were now on our way through the CBS parking lot in Hollywood.  He apparently stepped on some gum and stopped to do something about it.  Taking a piece of paper out of his pocket, and standing with his leg bent to access the bottom of his shoe, he placed the paper over the gum, and we continued walking.  He looked at me after a few seconds and said, “Now you see what I did?  By the time we get to the studio, the paper will be gone and so will the gum.”

I have never forgotten that because it reflected a down-to-earth practical person that, with all his celebrity baggage, could easily deal with the simple problems.  I also wondered if he was just putting me on.  He did the interview which was good, with Bob Crane holding back on his normal antics and zany sound effects to address Reagan’s political issues.  There was a small bump in sales from this and other interviews with Los Angeles radio personality Michael Jackson, but for the most part the book was a flop.  People weren’t taking Reagan seriously at the time, and wouldn’t until he ran for Governor of California. 

Back to Romney, David Gergen describes “the rest of Him” as his personal and religious life.  Thinks Romney is missing a bet by not addressing his Mormon faith as John F. Kennedy did his Catholicism in 1960.  Gergen even praises the Mormon people saying they “…they build strong families, create successful businesses, and serve as outstanding citizens.”  What’s not to like?  He also described a completely different Romney in the Parade interview he did as warm and personable, compared to the normal business-like demeanor. 

Although I have no intention of voting for Mitt Romney, I will fight to the death for his right to run a normal campaign based on his qualifications, and not be judged by religious zealots.

Black Friday violence and human nature

Human nature is defined as those characteristics in the way we think, feel and act that come naturally.  Exactly what these characteristics are and what causes them and how they work in our every day life has been the study of Western philosophers for years.  They should have been around for the recent Black Friday sales, particularly at Walmart.  Police say a California woman used pepper spray in the process of making her purchase of a video game console.

Los Angeles firefighters treated the 15 that were hit by the spray but no one was sent to the hospital.  In the mêlée, the woman was able to pay for her purchases and leave the store.  Now what does that say about human nature?  This person obviously brought the pepper spray with her to shop, meaning it was a premeditated act of hostility toward her fellow human beings.  Screw the rest, I want my video game and am willing to go to whatever extent it takes to get it.

The reasoning is similar to the person that sees someone lying on the street in need of help and charts a wide path around them and just keeps going.  Other incidents occurred in South Carolina, North Carolina, Florida, New York, Alabama and Connecticut with most happening at or near a Walmart store.  In 2008 a Walmart employee was trampled in New York as he and associates tried to unlock the doors at 5 AM.  Other occurrences nationwide included fights, even shootings.

Since the problem seems to be confined mostly to Walmart stores, you have to wonder if it is just outstanding discounts, or is it the shopper profile.  Walmart says its core shopper is lower-income minorities.  A Business Week study found that they are socially conservative, pro-gun and live in rural areas.  Jeff Gardere, a psychologist, blames it on retailers orchestrating sales that just ask for hard competitive behavior by desperate people in a bad economy.  “I think people are whipped into a frenzy, physically, psychologically," he said.



But then came the gun violence; remember the Walmart shopper is pro-gun.  One shooting in San Leandro, CA left someone hospitalized in a Walmart shopping lot.  In Myrtle Beach, SC 2 people had injuries from an apparent armed robbery.  In Kinston, NC a security officer had to use pepper spray to stop a disturbance at a Walmart store.  A man in a Florida Walmart was arrested for resisting arrest, and yet another Walmart in Rome, NY had a brawl break out sending 2 people to the hospital.

There are more, similar to the above occurring in or around Walmart stores.  So, in all fairness, add to the questions of whether this is all about hyped up sales or the Walmart customer profile the possibility that some or all of these effected stores were in bad locations.  Any way you look at it, though, Walmart seems to attract an undesirable element in its shoppers’ actions, at least on days featuring top discounts like Black Friday.

In closing, human nature is dedicated to the investigation of the person’s inner self considering biological, social and environmental factors that effect human behavior.  All of these factors are mutually interactive including our evolution, biology and sociological processes, according to editor, J. Lancaster from the book Human Nature.  But with all due respect, I cannot envision myself, or my family, or many of my friends doing anything like the violent events of this past Black Friday.

Scottsdale (AZ) Gun Club extends the state’s stupid streak on firearms

Young boy holding assault rifle

It is no longer appropriate to say, “Just when you think you’ve heard everything,” about the bizarre antics of the gun nuts in Arizona, because there is no end to their idiocy.  The latest, and this is its second year, are the pictures from the Scottsdale Gun Club featuring families with an array of weapons from handguns to assault weapons.  There are also machine guns included in some of the photos you can’t even own legally.  Probably a portent of the National Rifle Assn.’s next move to legalize new firearms for the average family.

There is one of a young boy proudly holding something like an AK-47, a baby caressing the same, a pregnant woman, yes, another assault rifle, and two complete groups decked out with AK-47s, apparently the gun of choice.  They are taken with a Santa that looks less then pleased with what is going on around him.  Many of the photos will end up as Christmas cards, which, when sent out of Arizona, will give sane minded people across the country just one more reason to lavishly ridicule the state.

And here is a comment to end all gun bubba comments by gun club member Richard Jones: “I think it’s going to be all in fun from those who support the second amendment and those who don’t.”  Only a moron would surmise mentally sound individuals would think this kind of lunacy could be fun, and the gun control advocates must be running to sympathetic members in Congress right now saying, “we told you so.” 

Baby caressing assault rifle

This is arrogance at its worst, and a clear indication from the Arizona gun fruitcakes that there is no end to how far they will push gun ownership and the right to carry.  The state already has the loosest weapons laws in the country, and has recently tried to make it legal to take a gun to school.  Because of these alarmingly inadequate laws, Arizona could become the state that puts hundreds of unqualified gun owners on the streets across the country if the Right to Carry Reciprocity Act is passed by Congress.

 

Jennifer Dove, another club member, said, “There's a huge community that's interested in firearms as a sport and a hobby. There's no reason they can't express their holiday spirit and their passion for that hobby.” You will never convince me, and anyone else who doesn’t let the NRA do their thinking, that the AK-47 is the kind of toy you create a hobby around. It’s for the military and law enforcement, stupid.

The story has gone viral around the world with much of the media just laying out the event with pictures provided by the Scottsdale Gun Club you can see in the above link, and statements such as those mentioned in this article. For those who have a reasonable attitude toward gun ownership, that is sufficient to paint the members of the Scottsdale Gun Club and many other gun-totin’ fanatics in Arizona as something less than bright.

Jennifer Dove, another club member, said, “There's a huge community that's interested in firearms as a sport and a hobby.  There's no reason they can't express their holiday spirit and their passion for that hobby.”  You will never convince me, and anyone else who doesn’t let the NRA do their thinking, that the AK-47 is the kind of toy you create a hobby around.  It’s for the military and law enforcement, stupid.

The story has gone viral around the world with much of the media just laying out the event with pictures provided by the Scottsdale Gun Club you can see in the above link, and statements such as those mentioned in this article.  For those who have a reasonable attitude toward gun ownership, that is sufficient to paint the members of the Scottsdale Gun Club and many other gun-totin’ fanatics in Arizona as something less than bright.



Pregnant woman holding assault rifle

 Arizona state Rep. Steve Farley who has proposed a ban on large-capacity magazines like Jared Loughner used in Tucson in January to kill 6 people and injure many others including Arizona U.S. Rep. Gabby Giffords was outraged. 

Farley commented, "To involve machine guns and Santa in a celebration in the birth of Jesus Christ is the worst kind of heresy I can imagine.  I would suggest that the people who created this read some of the New Testament."

Well, Merry Christmas to all you Scottsdale Gun Club crackpots, and hopefully you won’t suffer for your family the same carnage that has been going on in Arizona and throughout the nation that has resulted from loose gun laws like those in Arizona.

2-months into the new revolution – Part 2

Write your own text

In yesterday’s post, we defined revolution and its relationship to a social movement, both of which involve beginnings that emphasize what is wrong, rather than dwelling on the solution.  As Robert Reich said: “Every social movement in the last half-century or more, it started with moral outrage…and the actual lessons, the specific demands for specific changes, came later.”  It seems to me that we first have to spend time determining what is not right, finally placing what we have found in priorities, that then becomes the basis for demands.

John Hirschhorn says, “…the Occupy movement in the US offers the possibility of being seen, eventually, as the seed of a successful Second American Revolution…”  Since he is convinced this is needed to fix a “…corrupt, dysfunctional and unfair government, political and economic system,” the question remains just what happens next.  Although the bulk of the Occupy Movement may not know it, they have essentially followed the correct parameters to induce social change.    

History reveals that violence against the uprising almost always becomes necessary for the overthrown of a “Hated” political system.  Then comes the time period involved in cleaning up the mess and making the necessary changes.  All of the factors discussed so far have been integral parts of the Occupy Movement, including the violence displayed by police against protesters in Oakland and elsewhere.  Although there is no measure to determine the success of the movement, the fact that one-third of the country is destitute due to an avaricious Wall Street and an inept Congress, is enough to keep things going.

Pew research has asked the question of Americans, “although our people are not perfect, but is our culture superior to others?”  Only 49 percent agreed recently compared to 60 percent in 2002, the first time this question was asked.  This flies in the face of conservatives who regularly wave the flag over U.S. “exceptionalism.”  And the young ages 18 to 29, were lower in their opinion of our country compared to young citizens in Germany, Spain and Great Britain.

Poll after poll finds that Americans are convinced their country has declined in its place in world powers and an NBC News/Wall Street Survey recently discovered the public no longer thinks the U.S. is a world leader with the pessimistic view that neither the President nor Congress can do anything about it.  But many analysts see the Occupy Movement as a means to change.  James B. Stewart’s article, “An Uprising With Plenty of Potential,” is a good example. 

Stewart ends his article with a statement from Cornel West, a Princeton professor who has emerged as a prominent voice of the movement.  It said that he didn’t know where the movement was going, but “you can’t evict an idea whose time has come.”  In Hirschhorn’s article, he wonders if the Occupy Movement is truly the seed capable of producing a Second American Revolution.  As the saying goes, only time will tell.

Read more here, here and here.

2-months into the new revolution

Occupy Movement demonstrations went all-out on Thanksgiving Day to celebrate the two-month anniversary of the start of the “new” revolution.  At the same time, cities have become more aggressive in cracking down on protesters, issuing ultimatums to disperse in some instances…or else.  As an example, 20 people were arrested in Los Angeles, in Chicago, they made historic Grant Park off-limits for encampments, and 17 people were arrested in Dallas.  But Oakland was relatively quiet.

A Berkeley student tried to explain why the occupiers continue to do what they do in the face of opposition that says the movement doesn’t know what it wants.  He quoted Robert Reich’s recent speech from Sproul Plaza: “Every social movement in the last half-century or more, it started with moral outrage…and the actual lessons, the specific demands for specific changes, came later.”  Kevin Gorman, a student writing in The Berkeley Daily Planet, says Occupy, with its explosive growth and no top-down direction, which he thinks is proper for the time being, needs no explicit goals now.

Business & Government greed

The question arises, is this “social movement,” as described by Reich, actually a social revolution of sorts that could change the business and political makeup of this country?  For the better.  Balance the economic inequity on the backs of big business CEOs and an incompetent government.  Wikipedia defines revolution as a “fundamental change in power or organizational structure that takes place in a relatively short period of time.”  Aristotle gives us two types:

·       1. Complete change from one constitution to another

·       2. Modification of an existing constitution

I don’t think anyone wants a new constitution, just some tweaks in the current one, reserving the major changes for the greedy ones who are presently running the corporate world and Washington.  Joel Hirshhorn says, “…the Occupy movement in the US offers the possibility of being seen, eventually, as the seed of a successful Second American Revolution…”  He goes on to indicate that many “…believe {it} is desperately needed to fix our corrupt, dysfunctional and unfair government, political and economic system.   

Hirschhorn is the author of Delusional Democracy - Fixing the Republic Without Overthrowing the Government.  His op-eds have appeared in the Washington Post, New York Times, Baltimore Sun, and Chicago Tribune, and he writes for several progressive websites such as The Progress Report.  The main point of his article emphasizes the fact that in the beginning of a “movement,” it is almost completely about what the demonstrators are against.  Fighting a tyranny that has been advanced against the common folk.

Part 2 next.

The Joe Paternos will ruin college athletics

When you put a winning record ahead of common decency and what is right for young people, the end result is exactly what happened at Penn. State.  Disgrace.  Not only did Jerry Sandusky get away with what he did, he got away with it for ten years while others, like head coach Paterno, looked on and either turned their head or made minimum efforts to do something about it.  Sandusky was arraigned on 40 counts of sexual abuse of young boys over a 15 year period.  The man is married with six adopted children.



Jerry Sandusky arrested

The assistant coach is charged with seven counts of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, eight counts of corruption of minors, eight counts of endangering the welfare of a child, seven counts of indecent assault plus other offenses.  Back in 2002 another asst. coach Mike McQueary, a graduate asst. at the time, says he surprised Sandusky as he was anally raping a ten-year-old boy.  He reported it to Paterno, who then reported it to Tim Curley, athletic director.  It is alleged that Sandusky was only barred from bringing children to the football building then.

Vicki Triponey with Paterno

Curley and Gary Schultz, overseer of the Penn. State police dept. were both charged with perjury and failure to report suspected child abuse.  Joe Paterno and President Graham Spanier have been fired, the coach ending an otherwise supposedly illustrious 41 years at the school.  Although that was questioned repeatedly by the university’s former disciplinarian Vicky Triponey whose opinion was that Paterno felt football players should be coddled and treated different than other students.

Several incidents occurred involving the players both before and after Triponey arrived at the school in 2003 from the U. of Connecticut.  She suspended one student which drew Paterno’s ire, and in an email to Curley she complained that “…football players were getting in trouble at a ‘disproportionate rate’ from other students, often for serious acts.”  She even indicated to president Spanier that she didn’t support the way Paterno was running the football program.

After Triponey suspended another player and Paterno had him suit up for the next game anyway, she advised the player he could face expulsion if he played.  It was at this point that Paterno gave Spanier an ultimatum: either fire Triponey or he would no longer do fundraising for the school.  Spanier visited Triponey at home and let her know that if this choice had to be made, she would be out of a job.  Triponey eventually left Penn. State in 2007, followed by accolades from former Connecticut coach Randy Edsall, who had nothing but good things to say about her when she worked there.

And like they say, the rest is history.  Much like the old adage, “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it,” in college football, if the program’s winning and making money, don’t touch it.  And therein lays the Paterno-like problems that are going on at campuses across the country.  Not necessarily sexual abuse, but the kind of favoritism that gives preference to athletes over other students.  Other than the latter and player run-ins with law enforcement that can often be serious, they get special treatment within the school administration like registration partiality and placement with teachers who are sports fans.  Some have actually been paid money to play and given automobiles to sign up with a particular school.  Most of this can be attributed to alumni who also put winning ahead of ethics.

It remains to be seen if the Penn. State uproar will change anything.  This sort of revelation has done little in the past to improve the system.  Most would agree that the secret to the problem is balance, so that one side is not overpowering the other, which is pretty much true of anything we do.  Did Paterno do enough?  Not likely. 

Let me leave you with a couple of quotes from Vince Lombardi, former coach of the Green Bay Packers.  First: “Show me a good loser, and I'll show you a loser.”  And: “Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing.”  Peace!