Page 20 of 27

Posted on

WHEN IS A LIE NOT A LIE? WHEN IT’S THE TRUTH!

The “right” is upset, again.  The “right” has been outflanked, again.  The “right” has been out “strategized,” again.  The “right” has been out-maneuvered, again.

What has become painfully obvious is that the Romney campaign, indeed the entire Republican campaign, to unseat the President, is ill-prepared for the task.

At some point the Romney campaign strategists had to know this and other situations would arise to call into question the candidates’ past, his present, and to challenge his vision of the future for the nation, he desires to lead.  They were not ready, it seems, leading one to suspect that they are not ready for the questions and challenges to come.  We’ll see.  In the meantime, they whine.

You’ve got to at some point wonder are they upset at what the Democrat’s did, or are they upset that they did it?

Let’s start with what the Democrat’s did.

At the beginning of the week Priorities Usa, a Democrat leaning super-PAC rolled out an ad titled “Understands.”  The ad features Joe Soptic, a steel worker at a plant named GST Steel, that was purchased and then managed by Bain Capital, beginning in 1993.  The company took on hundreds of millions of dollars in debt while, at the same time paid Bain investors millions in dividends.  The company filed for bankruptcy protection in 2001 and ultimately closed it’s Kansas City, MO plant.  700 employees lost their jobs, their healthcare and portions of their pensions.  (Their pensions were partially protected by the federal government.)  Joe’s wife, Ilyona, was still employed at that time and maintained her healthcare. After later losing her job, and health insurance, Ilyona was diagnosed with cancer.  At that time, neither of the Soptic’s were covered and less than a month after her diagnosis, Ilyona succumbed to her illness.

The Republican’s, from the party to the pundits, were horrified.  The President was accused of accusing Romney of killing Joe’s wife.  Bill Burton’s Priorities Usa PAC was accused of lying.  Joe Soptic was accused of lying.  The President’s campaign was accused of complicity in the accusing of candidate Romney of being complicit in closing of the plant, and it’s subsequent consequences.  From the House to the Senate, from the Romney campaign to the pundits, all were up in arms [that] such an assertion could be made.  But, their assumption about the assertion, misses the mark.  For those who are upset, about the ad, I’ve got a “movie parable” for you.  This is from the movie “Enter The Dragon,” Bruce Lee’s character speaking:

Lee: …..It’s like a finger pointing at the moon.
[Looks at student who is looking at the finger; smacks student again]
Lee: Do not concentrate on the finger or you will miss all of the heavenly glory!
[Student bows; Lee smacks him again]

The right is so busy focusing on Joe Soptic, they are missing the entire point of the argument [that] the ad raises.  Actually there are two arguments raised, successfully.  First, had the “Affordable Care Act” been law at that time, both Joe and his wife would have been able maintain their healthcare after losing their jobs.  (A fact that was pointed out by a Romney spokesperson when she was challenged by a reporter about the ad.)  Second, the ad demonstrates what Bain Capitol did, and, does to workers and their communities.  What Bain does is by no means illegal.  But, let’s be clear, their purpose was/is not to save jobs.  What Bain does [is] try to save companies,  If jobs are saved in the process, good.  If jobs are saved at that job location, well that’s even better.  But that is not their purpose.  Even saving companies is secondary to making profits for their investors.  Now, again I say there’s nothing illegal with what they do, but what they do is germane to the discussion about Romney, because he touts his experiences at Bain as, an example of, his qualifications to be President.  We as citizens “do” get to ask, if the way Bain Capital operates is the way the country will operate, under a Romney presidency?  If so, then, is “that” the country we want?

The ad does not accuse  candidate Romney of anything other than being associated with, indeed the leader of a company that has had a profound effect on this individual’s life, and other’s at GST Steel.  The ad could have and should have gone further.  It should have told about the effect that losing 700 jobs out of a community, can have.  The effects on the dry cleaner, the corner store, and other small entrepreneurial business’ that depended on them to survive.  It should have told about the loss of revenues to the city, the county, even the state due to lost tax dollars.  How those lost revenues affect public safety, teachers, and community services.

Now the right can and will make all manner of nuance based arguments about the ad.  The timeline, the offered buyout from Bain, the fact that Joe’s wife had healthcare (after Joe lost his job), until she didn’t.  But, nothing in the ad is untrue.  Nuance can sometime be a tricky thing, though.  It can sometimes lead to truth and the truth can sometimes be painful.  Just ask, Romney spokesperson, Andrea Saul.

This ad is about a man, and a community, that was hurt by Bain Capital.  And that’s the TRUTH!

Can you imagine the surprise around the right-wing world when this ad was presented.  My guess is that their surprise matched or even exceeded their horror.  This type of attack is not what those, on the left, are known to use.  They’ve dropped their dichotomous passive aggressive nature, or at least the passive part, and have began to pursue answers to questions the right is not accustomed to being asked.  They are being challenged in areas that democrats past have feared to tread.  That’s where the real failure of Romney’s campaign rests.  Areas such as the economy (Congress’ failure, not the President’s), foreign policy (Bush’s wars, not the President’s), and taxes or should we say tax fairness are now off the table for Republicans.  Not that they won’t try, though.

What’s left is personal and personality.  Personality first.  Mitt Romney is no match for President Obama in this regard.  The Presidents “favorable” ratings are much higher than Romney’s, and among independents, the gap between the two is widening.

As for personal, well, there are some who will not vote for President Obama for any reason.  They didn’t before and they won’t now.  One can read into that whatever one choose’s.  We know, though, that it is not because he pulled us back from the brink of depression, that he saved the auto industry (saving more than a million jobs), that he passed financial reform, or the affordable care act.  It’s not because he gave everyone making under $250,000 a year, a tax break.  It’s not because he ended one war and is ending another.  We know it’s not because he killed bin-Laden (and about 20 other terrorist leaders).  We know he’s done these things, and many other’s, with little or no help from the republicans in the legislature.  There is a painful TRUTH in there, as well.

And that’s no lie!

Posted on

Let’s Ban Guns!!!

In the wake of the recent tragedy in Aurora, I was going to sit down and angrily write about the need for some form of ban on gun’s.  After a few days I thought, well, maybe we only need to ban automatic and assault type weapons.  Then on reflection I decided that perhaps we need to do away with hand guns (pistols), and concealed weapon permits, the “whole schmear.”

Now before I get the NRA and other 2nd Amendment right’s advocates upset, let me continue.  I thought about this over several days, considered the pro’s and con’s, and came to the conclusion [that]  banning guns is not practical.  I was going  to say “we’re not going to be able to do that!”

Guns.  Guns. Guns.   Sure, some are used for protection.  They’re also used for hunting.  Even for Sport.  But more and more they seem to be misused as a tool to express prejudice and bigotry, fear, hatred, racism, and crime.

I was going to say, let’s try a different track.  Instead of removing guns from our society, let’s remove some of the reasons for gun misuse.

Let’s ban prejudice and bigotry.  Now, from what I understand, prejudice and bigotry are among the reasons that people hate.  With America being this “melting pot,” with so many cultures and creeds living, working, playing, socializing together, this is not the place for bigotry.  But then look around, look and listen to the rants.  Our born in America President is somehow foreign.  Muslims can’t be trusted, they are trying to infiltrate us, trying to convert us all to Islam.  Trying to impose Sharia Law on America (right, like any law could get passed with this “do nothing” congress).  Mexicans and other Latin Americans are invading our borders, taking our jobs.  Using our safety nets.  These people will never “learn what it’s like to be a real American.”  Ok, ok, we’re not going to be able to do that.

I was going to say, let’s ban hatred, then.  I don’t know, hatred has been around for an awful long time.  A lot of people have invested heavily in hate.  Some people have hated for so long, they are not even sure why they hate.  Hatred is fueled by fear.  Fear of the unknown and the known.  That something is unfamiliar or just plain different is no reason to fear, but we are kind of lazy and it’s easier to fear and denigrate than it is to learn and understand.   Hatred has two nature’s.  One is as a driver for racism.  What we saw back in 1957 at Little Rock Central High School was prejudice and bigotry fueling the hatred that drove some of the citizens of Little Rock to commit some racist acts.  As egregious as those acts were they paled when compared to the hate filled racist act of shooting and lynching Emmet Till,  the Birmingham church bombing, the shooting of Viola Liuzzo. and the assassinations of Medgar Evers and Martin Luther King.  The other is personal.  It is driven by the fear of retribution the hater has of the hated.  It is real, to the hater, simply because they know how they would feel were the situation’s reversed.  Ok, ok, we’re not going to be able to do that.

So let’s say [that] we ban racism.  Racism is the “action arm” for prejudice and bigotry.  Racism driven by hatred (imagine racism riding in the back of the limo, with hatred driving, chauffeur’s cap and all) strives to contain and control.  Empowered by prejudice and bigotry, racism limit’s opportunity for growth.  It creates laws that limit access to power.  Racism is “Dred Scott v. Sandford.”  It’s “Plessy v. Ferguson.”  Racism is “Jim Crow laws.”  Racism is “segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever,”  said by, Gov. George Wallace at his 1963  Alabama inaugural.  Racism is vigilante lynching’s.  Racism is Rosewood, Florida and the Greenwood neighborhood of Tulsa, Oklahoma.  Racism is colored only signs, it’s being forced to ride in the back of the bus.  Racism is attack dogs and fire hoses.  Racism is standing in the doorway at the University of Alabama, racism is the gauntlet of epithets and intimidation at Central High School in Little Rock.  From past Supreme Court decisions to the current  hearts of men, racism is so ingrained in our society, that banning it, well, we’re not going to be able to do that, either.

So now, we have racism, driven by hatred, fueled by fear, empowered by prejudice and bigotry, then you add guns to that mix and therein lies the rub.  Guns become a means of expression for these things. ( Hmm, I wonder if guns can be designated as people, and bullets protected as free speech?  Make’s about as much sense as “Citizens United,” doesn’t it?)  Anyway, banning these things has proven to be virtually impossible throughout our history.  Battles over property or treasure can be resolved with negotiated borders.  Battles over ideology seem to know no such boundaries.

Let’s ban crime.  Let’s make all crime illegal. Lets’s make any crime committed, that involves a gun, a special circumstance crime, with a specific set of penalties.   Oops, we’ve already done that.

Consider this, a group of people (any people) who have been institutionally excluded from significant segments of a society (any society), a people who have been ostracized and demonized by that society, do you see how that people would have a problem with respecting the rules of that society?  These exclusions could be a result of color, creed, culture or class bias’, or any combination thereof.   There are a number of thesis’ that speak to the fact that prejudice and bigotry, hatred and racism are driver’s (some say primary driver’s), of crime.  Specifically, crimes against person’s.  Prejudice and bigotry are used as justification for oppression.  At some point, the oppressed seek relief.  When relief is not found within the system, it is sought elsewhere.  Racism, is the tool used to deny an oppressed people even an opportunity to grow and succeed.  At some point, the denied seek redress.  When redress is not given within the system, it is sought elsewhere.  The elsewhere in these cases is sometimes found outside of the law.  One can argue that crime justified by prejudice, bigotry, hatred and racism is not rational.  That is true.  But, prejudice, bigotry, hatred and racism are not rational, either.

The truth is, these days there is no way to discuss guns, or race relations, for that matter.  Guns, like the Bald Eagle, have become emblematic of who we are as a society.  Any attack on the “right’s” of gun owners is deemed to be an attack on America itself.  That, though, is not true.  Owning and using gun’s, when viewed within the context of our history, shows their value.  Their value, though, is as a tool, not as a god.  We are allowing guns to define us, as opposed to us defining  them, and their utility.  As for race relations, well as long as we have prejudice and bigotry creating the fear, that is fueling the hatred, that is driving the racism…..

I was going to say all of this, and then this happened:

“WISCONSIN SHOOTING:  SEVEN PEOPLE KILLED AFTER SHOTS FIRED AT SIKH TEMPLE”

So now, again, I’m saying “LET’S BAN GUNS!!!!!”

To the citizens of Oak Creek, Wisconsin:

My thoughts and prayers go out to all of those killed, injured and victimized by this senseless act.  (I’m getting so tired, so very tired, of saying that sentence.)  May God bless you, keep you, and give you peace.