Uncomfortable Essays

/in , , , , , , /by

The document which makes up the title of this post is 48 pages and was written by Dick Bernard between September, 2008, and July, 2012. It speaks for itself, including, especially, the word “Uncomfortable”.
Uncomfortable Essays 2008-2012
It consists of 17 Essays on assorted topics which could generically be considered thoughts on more effective organizing for the peace and justice community.
An earlier 4-page document, initially written in the Fall of 2002, generally articulated the same ideas to the same general audience. It can be read here: MAPM organizing Dick B Recs Jan 2003
The organization to which the thoughts are addressed is the Minnesota Alliance of Peacemakers (MAP), founded in September, 1995, and still in existence. You can see more about MAP here.
The author of the Essays has been active in MAP since 2002, and was President of the Alliance for three years 2005 through 2007.

#319 – Dick Bernard: "Watching" the State of the Union

/in , , , /by

I “watched” the State of the Union address in its entirety last night. The word is in quotes, because, while I sat in front of the TV, I mostly watched with my eyes closed.
In other words, I listened, like one would be forced to listen in pre-television and instant analysis days which in historical terms are really very recent.
I didn’t stick around for the responses of Reps Ryan and Bachmann. In historical terms, such responses are really very recent.
I have my own e-mailing list, and when I awoke this morning sent out the four overnight analyses received on internet, the first from the President himself, and advised readers that from this point out I’d send out only their own personal commentaries. The punditry and political ‘blab’ will be interminable and predictable. Talking heads, talking.
Nothing is left to chance in today’s management of news and images. Every single person sitting in the House Chamber last night knew that they were potentially on-camera every second. Their focus was likely not really listening either. Rather it was to have the appropriate stage-look: enthusiastic, bored, angry…. “You lie” was out this year, and good riddance. Rep. Gabby Giffords empty chair spoke volumes without saying a thing.
Personally, I thought the speech was very good, but that’s simply personal opinion. I’m a strong supporter of this President.

The President’s “Sputnik” comment really resonated with me: I was a Senior in high school when Sputnik launched in October, 1957, and in those years we occasionally watched Communism blink over Capitalism in the clear night sky of North Dakota: in those years, the newspaper published where and when to watch for the blink as Sputnik tumbled, reflecting light from the sun. I wish I would have kept one of those Fargo Forums including a tracking map.
I hadn’t cleared my Freshman year in college when Castro took over Cuba in 1959, and I was a Junior in college when John F. Kennedy was elected U.S. President in 1960; and in the Army during the Cuban Missile Crisis of October, 1962. I saw the transition from then history to newer history, ‘boots on the ground’.
All of that was then. Back then, the war was over ideology; today, I believe, the War is over how or whether the generations which follow mine will survive or thrive. 1957-58, even with the much-played Red Menace of the Soviet Union, was a really simple time compared to today. We couldn’t imagine, then, even the possibility of running out of things, like oil; or other things, like the internet which has already been so much a force for good…and, yes, evil.
Now the debate begins about the future.
Frankly, I have zero interest in what the pundits say, or who the politicians blame.
I will focus on two quotations, one of Margaret Mead, the other of Gandhi, which “frame” the home page of my website which acknowledges the contributions of two of my personal heroes, Lynn Elling and Prof. Joe Schwartzberg.
Our future is NOT a spectator sport.
Either we’re on the Court helping to constructively fashion the solutions for our future in small or large ways, or we have no right to complain about the results.

#318 – Dick Bernard: The President's State of the Union Address…and the Carnival of our National Insanity

/in , /by

Tonight President Obama gives his State of the Union before a joint session of Congress.
That this will happen is no surprise: it is an annual event with a long, long history in our country.
This year, beyond any in my own memory, this one is preceded, will be attended and followed by, numerous ‘clowns and jesters’, all attempting to influence, disrupt and confuse, though there will be an atmosphere of (I hope) at least fake civility in the chamber itself.
We seem to have descended into the pit that happens when a community of priorities – what is good for society at large – is replaced with millions of first and non-negotiable personal priorities. (We live in a homeowners association of 96 owners living in 24 buildings. As an owner, we can’t decide how to modify our 1/96th share of common property. Sometimes it seems that every citizen of this nation of over 300,000,000 thinks they have the pre-eminent right to whatever it is they demand….)
As an Army veteran myself, I always used to scoff at the Army Recruiting Slogan, an “Army of One“, where the recruiting pitch was the inference that you could be in the Army and do what you wanted to do. For me, any illusions about freedom and independence in Army life ended when I stepped off the bus at Fort Carson, Colorado 49 years ago this month…. (I didn’t have those fantasies, then, and I doubt any of my colleagues did either. We were “in the Army now”, and that meant peeling potatoes, and buzz cuts, and on and on.)
So, back to the street theatre of the Presidents address tonight.
It is impossible to escape the boatload of top priorities – absolute non-negotiables – conveyed by everyone who has even the tiniest notion of shared priorities (that number seems to be decreasing, to our peril).
Rather than focusing on how we can be better as a society, there is this constituency demanding this top priority in the State of the Union; that constituency demanding exactly the opposite; a passel of folks whose goal is to be sure that the President is a failure, so that they can then ride to “success” in two years, and on and on and on. Afterwards there will be the relatively recent tradition of the opposing parties response, and, of course, the President’s party response as well. This year, my more-or-less “congresswoman” will give the Tea Party response (I put her title in quotes, since she is our Congresswoman by name only. She was elected here, yes. But by her actions, which I experience, she could care less about the 6th Congressional District of Minnesota. She’s got bigger fish to fry.)
The President and his advisors know all of this, of course.
Tonight will happen, and those who think the President laid out a good agenda will canonize him; the ones who want him to fail will demonize him; most will care not a whit….
There were times when we more or less reached national unity, and they were times of crisis, as Pearl Harbor, or the Kennedy assassination, where we came together as a nation.
But times seem to be too good now, and they fog over a very rocky road ahead. While the focus will be on 9% unemployment tonight, we know, today, that there is 91% employment in this country. It is pretty hard to get those 91% riled up to help out those who too many think are ‘shiftless and lazy’ (unless, of course, the unemployed persons are in your own family, as we experience ourselves, today.)
Politics and policy are not a spectator sport, with winners and losers.
Luckily, we are still one country.
I hope we act like that is the case.

#293 – Dick Bernard: Continuing the tax cuts

/in , , /by

For the record, some time ago, before the November elections, I wrote my U.S. Senators arguing in favor of letting the tax cuts expire for everyone at the end of 2010 – including my own.
My wife and I are small fish in the economic pond that is the U.S., but even for ourselves I demonstrated by actual numbers that the net effect of those ill-considered tax cuts earlier in this decade had quite a dramatic impact on our personal tax bill. I said that these were tax savings we neither needed nor could the country afford them. We were destroying our grandkids futures, I argued.
I think of this two page letter to my elected representatives in the wake of yesterday’s announcement of agreement in principal between President Obama and the Republicans and the resulting rhetorical tsunami particularly from the left (with whom I am most often in agreement).
The most well reasoned opinion I’ve seen about the compromise is this one from a west coast blogger I have come to like. It speaks for itself.
But Outside the Walls is my blog, and how is it that I think the President of the United States did what he had to do in dealing with a very tough reality?
I spent most of my working life as a teacher’s union representative, charged with making some sense out of the abundant nonsense that litters every one of our lives: trying to help resolve petty and profound disagreements between individuals and groups of individuals and labor and management.
In such a setting you learn rapidly – and then live within – the reality that nothing is ever as simple as it most often is portrayed by the advocates from one side or the other. Even the stark line between ‘friend’ and ‘enemy’ blurs.
As I read and listened yesterday I kept thinking of a specific situation that occurred in about 1996 in the very town in which I now live.
It was a bitterly cold January, and the local union here – actually two competing unions which were finally cooperating – was at death’s door heading to a Strike.
In fact, everything was in place for the strike: picket signs, captains, schedules, etc. The strike was to happen at 7 a.m. the next morning.
The State Mediator called the parties together for one more attempt to reach agreement, and anyone who’s ever negotiated knows the scenario: labor and management were in separate rooms in an unpleasant place, sitting with stale donuts and old coffee, considering a mutual reality. If we didn’t settle below our sacred rock bottom bottom line, one side would be out on the streets, and both sides would have to figure out how to save face later.
I said that there were two competing unions in this scenario. I was representative for the smaller of the two. My local President wanted a strike in the worst way.
The night wore on and nobody was budging. The mediator was going back and forth.
Finally came the moment of truth: somewhere around midnight or after the Mediator called out our chief negotiator, as well as managements, and let them know the lay of the land, which was pretty dismal. Essentially, he said ‘you folks figure it out, or its your problem’.
Time went on interminably, and then the chief negotiator, representing the majority union, came in the room and asked me to join him.
The reality struck home. This was what we were going to get. Period. Were we going to strike for the difference? No. I supported settling.
The bargaining team sitting in the room agreed; my local President did not. He was very angry. He’d had a large stake in having that long overdue strike.
It was a stormy, snowy night, and the telephone tree went into effect well after midnight: no pickets in the morning. The 20 miles solitary drive home was very lonely.
A short while later we held a meeting to ratify or reject the agreement. Several hundred teachers came and heard the presentation, and voted in secret ballot. In my recollection, the contract we thought was so deficient was overwhelmingly ratified.
My local President – the one who wanted the strike – held me responsible for selling out and had nothing to do with me for the remainder of his term of office.
Life went on. He retired, and a couple of years later he called and asked me a question about something or other.
It was his way of saying “it’s okay. Life goes on”. And it did.
President Obama did what he had to do. It’s not the best, but the best that is attainable.

#268 – Dick Bernard: On BEING the Change YOU Can Believe In.

/in , /by

Quite frequently we have an 11-year old house guest – we’re his kid-sitter for, usually, a few hours.
He’s a nice kid. Invariably, though, at some early point in his visit he’ll make the declaration, “I’m bored“, with the direct implication that it is our responsibility to un-bore him.
I don’t take the bait. Life is too short to have to entertain a kid who’s apparently learned that he has no responsibility to entertain himself.
I think of this young person in context with the election upcoming in two days.
Even though President Barack Obama is not on any ballot, anywhere, it seems that he was made to assume, on election in 2008, the sole responsibility for accomplishing the “Change” 67,000,000 people elected him to achieve. His was by far the largest vote total for any President in United States history. (John McCain: 58,000,000)
The people who despise Obama for having the audacity to win the 2008 election are one thing. They are their own special breed.
It is harder to be understanding of the masses of people with infinite (and differing) priorities who, it seems, expected Obama to not only win the election, but to then do all of the heavy lifting required to accomplish even small increments of change in the last 21 months. This includes assorted Congresspersons and Senators and activists who first climbed on, then deserted, the bandwagon. If they lose, they will blame Obama, when it is they, themselves, who should share the blame, along with their oft-ill informed constituents.
Change is difficult. I’m old enough to have experienced – numerous times – the difficulties of change. But not changing is far, far more costly. And I don’t mean giving a new group not even half a chance to attempt to re-direct our nation from what was a self-destructive course.
But we seem to want change to happen instantly, painlessly, without any effort or discipline on our own part.
We want what we want. Period. That’s the lesson I think I’ve seen this election cycle. We’ll see on Wednesday,November 3, how this all plays out.
A week or so ago I saw President Obama in Minneapolis. As it happened, he appeared across the street, literally, from the University of Minnesota football stadium, where, at the exact same time, Minnesota was playing Penn State. While preparing to enter the Fieldhouse, I heard at least one roar of the crowd, which meant that Minnesota had done something good on the field a block away.
I don’t follow sports much, but I did ask a University Student when the new outdoor stadium had been built, and when the recently fired coach Tim Brewster had come to the University of Minnesota. Groundbreaking was 2006, occupancy 2009; Brewster hired in 2007.
A few days earlier Brewster had been fired as University head coach – he apparently hadn’t brought “change you can believe in” to the University. And on this day I saw the President, the Golden Gophers lost again, in their new stadium, now named for a bank, which was to bring pride back to the University of Minnesota again..
Change they could believe in didn’t happen right away. “Outa here, Brewster.”
Yesterday, the Golden Gophers were shellacked, this time by Ohio State, again at home.
At some point along the way there will be a new head football coach, and everyone will be saying we’ve found the man for the job. We’re back.
They said the same with Tim Brewster, too.
Will we ever learn?
Our “I’m bored” kid will hopefully learn early on that he is the primary cause in the matter of his own non-boredom.
So must we come to grips with our cause in the matter of our own success. Deserting Obama when he’s barely had an opportunity to begin needed Change is not a way to success.
Will the adult version of “I’m bored” prevail on Tuesday? We’ll see.
NOTE: There are many previous posts on Election 2010, at Sep 29 & 30, and Oct 5, 15, 18, 23, 24, 25, 28, 29 and 30.
Retrospective from late 2008:

#263 – Dick Bernard: President Obama comes to the Twin Cities

/in , , /by

NOTE: The video of the entire speech by President Obama in Minneapolis on October 23 is accessible at the end of this post.

Sometimes I hear talk of Democrats and Republicans being the same: “they’re both alike“; “they’re all liars”; “Democrats are only the lesser of two evils“. This kind of rhetoric comes from both left and right. It is an excuse to vote Republican, or to not vote at all.
I beg to differ. There is a big difference, crucial at this time in our history.
In my life I’ve had a few ‘close calls’ with sitting Presidents of the United States.
The first was about 1953 when we saw President Eisenhower in a motorcade in Minot ND. We lived in an area town, I was 13 or 14, and he made a big impression. He was in an open convertible, personable and waving. He was likely there to inspect the site then being considered for the major Minot Air Force Base.
In the summer of 1975, I was within arms length of President Gerald Ford when he visited Bloomington MN. My kids, a couple of neighbors and I were on the other side of a rope line, which was all that separated the President from the onlookers. He was very engaging. The Secret Service was nervous.
In January, 1980, I was at a meeting in the Cabinet Room of the Carter White House. The President wasn’t in, but it was a heady experience nonetheless.
I’ve had other close brushes: Jimmy Carter’s Plains GA in 1977; the Eisenhower library in KS; a couple of tours of Harry and Bess Truman’s home in Independence MO, and the Truman Library; the Bill Clinton Library in Little Rock; Lyndon and Lady Bird Johnson’s home in Texas…plus the house where LBJ grew up; Abe Lincolns home, tomb and environment in IL several times and his KY birthplace; George and Laura Bush’s Crawford TX. Perhaps I’m missing one or two….
June 20, 2003, I traveled out to suburban Minneapolis to perhaps catch a glimpse of President George W. Bush as he came to a meeting at a small manufacturing facility. The meeting was so closed, and Bush was so elusive, that even his supporters who wanted to at least see the limo didn’t know he had arrived and gone in a back way…and they were irritated, to put it mildly. The only way any of us knew GWB was inside was when a cheer came through the walls of the building he was in. To get into a Bush event, you needed to be vetted and ticketed: it was invitation only. The common scrum? Forget it, even if you were a loyal Republican.
Then came Saturday, October 23, 2010. President Barack Obama came to town to stump for Minnesota Democratic Party candidates (DFL), especially for gubernatorial candidate Mark Dayton. What a day. (Some photos at the end of this post.) No ticketing. Come as you are, first come, first admitted.
I don’t know how large the crowd was Saturday, but it certainly filled the University of Minnesota fieldhouse (capacity 7000) to the brim, and apparently there was closed circuit television outside for those who could not get in. It was a responsive, yet very polite group. It appeared that at least a majority were students, perhaps a large majority. And they were enthusiastic. There was no comparison with the 2003 Bush event.
In these still-charged days of paranoia around ‘terrorists’, going to yesterday’s gathering was a breath of fresh air. Security was crisp and quick but non-intrusive: clear rules, but a welcoming place. This I also experienced a while back at another event featuring Vice-President Joe Biden.
Having a Press Pass gave me an excellent vantage point, and much more freedom of movement than those who patiently stood in line for at least a couple of hours to get inside the Fieldhouse.
President Obama made his entrance, and his exit, in close proximity to, and engaged with the people in the hall. His stump speech, even with the terrible acoustics of the Fieldhouse, was powerful, and elicited a very loud and positive response. (Originally the event had been planned for outdoors, but they weren’t sure of the weather and moved inside.)
A few protestors were outside, but no heckling indoors. A couple of people fainted…those were the only tense moments.
An appearance by the President of the United States does not decide an election, but one gets an impression of leadership and without a doubt the assembled group left highly energized and ready to work.

Part of the long line on the Northrop Mall waiting for the doors to open.


A view of the crowd, President Obama at right.


The President speaking to the crowd


There might be some pessimism in some quarters, and some glee in others, that Obama and the Democrats have lost their competitive edge – that they’re just “Republican lite”.
That certainly wasn’t in evidence at the University of Minnesota Saturday.
As for the Republicans vs Democrats: the Democrats are working very hard and in a positive direction; there are two Republican parties currently at war with each other, and the one currently in control is one which inspires much more fear than it does confidence. Today’s Republican Party is not the party of Dwight Eisenhower.
Related, here.
Video of President Obama’s remarks in Minneapolis here.

#262 – Dick Bernard: A reflective moment

/in , , /by

Earlier this morning I was at my daily hangout, the Caribou Coffee in Woodbury MN. It’s been my daily day-opener for ten years now. I like the place and the people – regulars and staff. I guess it could be considered part of my daily ritual.
One of the staff came by this morning, noting I seemed deep in thought. I was.
Indeed, thinking is an important part of every day for me, legal pad in front of me, newspaper, oft-times other things. Most every day, Caribou is where I gear up for the day ahead.
Today is an unusual day.
President Obama is in town, and I plan to go. I decided, somewhat on spur of the moment earlier this week, to request a Press Pass, and an e-mail late last night confirmed I am on the approved list. My “street creds” are 262 blog postings at this site. That’s it. This is the first time I’ve ever been part of the Press Pool, so to speak. I’ll report on that experience tomorrow.
Earlier this morning I had read the entirety of the opinion page of the Minneapolis Star Tribune, specifically three commentaries generally on the upcoming election by J. Brian Atwood, Syl Jones and Johnathan Gurwitz. Brian Atwood and Syl Jones know me – I hope positively; I’ve met them both; Johnathan Gurwitz is off my radar. All three columns are well worth the time to read.
I was most interested in the Gurwitz commentary, which distressingly reflects today’s American electorate, and I fixed mostly on this quotation which led his column “When workers in the former East Germany had the temerity to rise up against their Marxist masters in 1953, members of the communist Writers Union distributed leaflets demanding that the workers labor twice as hard to win back the confidence of the government.”
I’ll take Gurwitz at his word – that his quote accurately reflects the history.
When the Caribou staffer walked by this morning, I was thinking specifically about the Gurwitz commentary, and I had hen-scratched onto my note pad a few random thoughts:
1. East Germany workers and others did indeed tear down the Berlin wall, but it took 36 years after 1953 to accomplish this, and it was not the mythological Ronald Reagan who hurried the deed by saying “tear down this wall” in 1987; it was the East Germans themselves (late 1989). The East German regime in 1953 outlasted 23 years of Republican U.S. Presidents: Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Reagan; and 13 years of Democrat Presidents: Kennedy, Johnson, Carter.
“Power to the People” is not a spectator sport. “Throw the bums out”, a common contemporary narrative of the “populists” and their spokespeople and backers, is more than angrily marking a ballot in the passion of the moment.
2. There is a distressing – and exploited – tendency for people to make decisions based on Anger. Anger is not a good emotion on which to make short or long-term decisions. Prisons are full of people who killed somebody in Anger, and felt good about it afterward – only waking up later to the consequences of their deed. Making decisions based on National Anger is unproductive and dangerous. (The root of “Decide”, is the same root as for words like “suicide”, “homicide”….)
3. We are a society full of people who are, at best, half-empty on essential information on which to make informed decisions. Too many don’t know the other side of the story, and furthermore, don’t want to know. Worse, we often focus on our own side of our own single issue, as if it is the only thing that matters. Then we associate only with people who agree with our point of view. This is not healthy. Neither is it healthy to take an anti-intellectual position. We need people who are able to think things through and make wise decisions based on complex data.
Shortly I’ll leave to see the President. If past is prelude: it is an investment of an entire afternoon, mostly waiting. He will probably speak for 20 minutes or so, which will then be distilled down into perhaps a maximum of a minute max of sound bites for television, two minute total segment, and summary reports in tomorrows papers.
More tomorrow.
More personal thoughts on Election 2010 here.

#260 – Dick Bernard: The Honeymoon Trip; and "I hope he fails."

/in , , , , /by

This post is about American politics. I have made it a practice to be well informed politically, and this has been a practice for many years.
This post – in two segments – is considerably longer than most items I write (several typewritten pages). Please don’t let that deter you. Some things cannot be summarized in a few words. (While my ‘base’ is in Minnesota – I’ve lived here for the last 45 of my 70 years – I know enough about the national scene to be aware that what is happening in my state is happening in varied ways in other places as well.)
My point of reference: since the beginning of this blog a year and a half ago, I’ve identified myself as a “moderate, pragmatic Democrat“. I’m comfortable with that label. Please don’t let that deter you. A trait I share with most liberals I know is a basic and very positive conservatism. We are not reckless. We seem more ‘conservative’ than most of those who proudly label themselves ‘conservative’. My best political friend till his passing several years ago was a retired Republican Governor of MN. Were he alive today, I’d likely be very favorable to Dwight D. Eisenhower as President. He was President in my high school and college years. I am active on the local level in the Democratic party. I care deeply about where our country is headed.
*
Part I: The Honeymoon Trip:
October 30, 2000, my wife Cathy and I flew to Washington D.C. to begin a short trip after our marriage.
We had planned this honeymoon trip for some time, and divided the week into two segments: the first in Washington, D.C.; the second in Concord, MA.
This happened to be a Presidential election year. A bit earlier in October I had sent my personal ‘campaign’ letter regarding the 2000 Presidential election to family, friends and colleagues. (If interested, here it is:family letter oct 2000001.)
Among our stops in Washington were tours of the White House and U.S. Capitol, as well as a few other ‘high spots’ of tourist DC.
At the Capitol, we learned that the U.S. House of Representatives was having an unexpected evening session on Halloween, October 31, so we contacted our local Congressman’s office, and got gallery tickets.

U.S. Capitol October 31, 2000


There were about a dozen of us in the gallery that evening, strangers all. It was against the rules to take photographs, so I had to leave my camera with the guards. What we witnessed ten years ago was at the same time fascinating and deeply troubling.
Down on the floor of the House, the issue was Ergonomics legislation. Congresspeople were speaking to the C-SPAN camera, while to their left and to their right were two gaggles of Representatives, with only a few people actually sitting down. The gaggles were not paying any attention to the debate, and were clearly of opposing political parties. (That evening, and for the previous five years, the U.S. House of Representatives was dominated by the radical right wing of the Republican party, as was the U.S. Senate.Congress and Presidency001).
The scene that Halloween was sufficiently odd so that a Congressman came up to the gallery to visit with us. He introduced himself as a Republican Congressman from Illinois and he was a very nice man. He was there to apologize, personally, to us for what we were witnessing below – essentially, the obvious division and lack of decorum in the House of Representatives of which he was a member.
I would give you the Congressman’s name, but I don’t recall it. Rules didn’t allow us to record the proceedings in the House. He wasn’t running for reelection, and besides, his House district was to be reconfigured as a result of the 2000 census. All I recall was that he was a very decent individual, embarrassed by the spectacle we were seeing in his and our “House”. I often wonder where he is today, and what he really thinks about today’s polarized politics.
Evening session concluded, and another day or so in Washington on vacation, and we left for Concord MA to visit our friend, Catherine. Concord is home, of course, to great names of history: Louisa May Alcott, Henry David Thoreau; Ralph Waldo Emerson; the Concord Bridge…. Historic Concord even today is a relatively small town, but a tour of the cemetery is a tour through the riches of American history from near the beginning of the United States. We saw the sites. Concord is an ancient epicenter that modern “Patriots” seem to like to imagine might be “the good old days.” We walked the Concord bridge, and we walked from downtown Concord to the famous Walden Pond.
We arrived back home in time to vote in the 2000 election. As all will still remember, the Presidency was decided that year by the U.S. Supreme Court on December 12, 2000, ‘and the rest is history’.
None of us had any way of knowing what was ahead of us then.
Now, ten years later, we have a better idea of acts and their consequences, and we’re about to cast our votes again, this time in an ‘off-year’ election for every one of our Congresspeople, many Senators and Governors, to say nothing at all about other offices. In many ways, this years election is more important than the Presidential election in 2000.
*
Part II: “I hope he fails.”
2010 is a year where our vote will matter and matter immensely, perhaps more so than any time in American history. We are at a fork in the national road. (Karl Rove’s bunch has chosen to call this “fork” an “American Crossroads”. They’re working for a restoration of radical control of government. There is an ideological war in progress in which we may already be victims, regardless of ‘side’. This is not about “Republican” or “conservative”. Be very careful what you hope for.
What Cathy and I witnessed on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives October 31, 2000, was juvenile and small-time compared with what is happening today, only two weeks till the 2010 election. What was in the open in 2000, is now covert and thus far more dangerous to our republic and democratic form of government.
Back in January, 2009, even before President Obama was sworn into office, Rush Limbaugh made what many thought was an outrageous statement about the incoming President: “I hope he [Obama] fails.” How could any citizen of this country want their President to fail, much less crow about it? But Limbaugh did publicly make that declaration, and in the entirety of Obama’s term, now 21 months old, and that of the Democrat Congress and Senate that came in with him, every effort has been made by the opposition to make sure essential reforms fail. “Throw it out and start over.” For them, “success” is “failure”, or as near as possible to failure. This has played out through a Republican minority in Congress and Senate that are virtually unanimous in voting against or dismissing anything, however watered down it might be, which might be considered major reform initiatives. In my state (and doubtless most others with Republican Governors and Attorneys General) there have been similar actions against “Obamacare”, economic stimulus, etc.
There is a logical piece of rationale for rejoicing over failure: if the people can be made to despise their ‘government’, then it is easier to campaign against that government, and it facilitates taking control of that very government we have learned to despise. It is counter-productive to the functioning of a free society, but it works well politically – “throw ’em out”.
Big business is a big part of the current problem. It has had, it has been reliably reported for some months, piles of unused money, which could create tens of thousands of jobs and help with the economic recovery, but they are cynically sitting on their bankrolls. The very wealthy and the very powerful feel threatened, and use the tools at their disposal to convince the vast majority of us to give in to their demands.
President Obama and the Democrats have been blamed for the economic crisis and debt that they inherited less than two years ago, which came from eight years of spending on a national credit card between 2001 and 2009.
The facts to substantiate all of this are easily accessible to anyone who cares to look. Most do not care to look. Some celebrate the alleged failure of reform, and keep working to make sure that failure continues. Some demand instant and unqualified success, which is equally unrealistic. Those who celebrate failure are celebrating their own failure.
We are dealing, this year, with Corporations which have won the legal right to present themselves as “citizens” with full rights and privileges to spend tens to most likely hundreds of millions of dollars on well disguised attack advertising, most of which is anonymously funded and innocuously named. This is new and unique in recent U.S. history. The floodgates opened with the Citizens United case a few months ago. Major players like the big-business centered U.S. Chamber of Commerce are effectively orchestrating the campaign, largely in advertising.
We have a supposedly populist and individualistic Tea Party movement which apparently, without most of its members knowledge, was organized and is tied together with and has been largely funded by the the wealthiest among us. Wealth effectively calls the shots, stirring up anger, and really could care less about the Tea Party members populist concerns or long term interests; but cynically uses these anti-government types as its ‘base’. (The Tea Partiers do not own exclusively concerns about their national government. But overthrow is not reform.)
In my own state, the Archbishop of my own Church recently accepted an acknowledged immense contribution from an anonymous donor who may or may not even be from my state to attempt to influence the vote on MN political races through hundreds of thousands of DVDs mailed to all Catholics in Minnesota. The anonymous donation is likely tax deductible, and the donors anonymity is protected, and the separation of Church and State is difficult to effectively challenge: the Church has good lawyers and public relations people too, and they can find the loopholes and develop the public relations ‘cover’ that ordinary people cannot. This is a matter of great concern to me. It should be of great concern to everyone, even those who might agree with the position taken or the politicians effectively supported by this free and anonymous political advertising.
The Congresswoman who (unfortunately, in my opinion) represents me in my Congressional District has raised over $10 million in campaign contributions – a record in the entire United States, I understand. Most of this funding comes from outside her district, and probably most of that from outside the state of Minnesota as well. Money buys those offensive attack ads. She is a national spokesperson of the Tea Party fringe, and revels in that designation…and could care less about her constituents in our 6th Congressional District. I’m one whose policy question, respectfully and properly submitted to her office a year ago, which was a simple question to answer, was ignored not once, but five times. The question was never answered, even though it related to a position the Congresswoman was on record about.
It wasn’t as if she was far away or too busy. She and I live in the same community, she has a large staff, and one of her offices is in this community as well.
Bluntly, at stake in this election in every place in this country is power and control by interests who do not care about the well-being of the vast majority of the citizens of this country.
We are well advised to be very careful what we listen to and who we ultimately vote for November 2, 2010.
If you wish to see needed reform continue, now is definitely NOT the time for a change. If we wish to assure catastrophic results, put the radical faction of Republicans back in charge of House and Senate November 2, and effectively derail reform and eliminate reforms made in the last two years. It is as simple as that.

Other recent posts on this general issue: here, here and here.
Other recent posts on other topics: here, here and here.

#241 – Dick Bernard: The Tyranny of the Minority; and the (theoretical) Power of the Majority

/in , , , , , /by

Last night on the national news of one of the Big Three (CBS, NBC, ABC) I watched a reporter contextualize for viewers the conflict over allowing 2000-era federal tax cuts to sunset (expire) for those earning over $250,000 a year. The over-$250,000 group is said to represent about 2% of American taxpayers. For the rest of us, the holiday would continue.
In order to be “fair and balanced” (I suppose), the perhaps-three minute report focused on the negative impact on “small business”, and employment, if the two percent over $250,000 small businesses would lose their tax break in 2011. Two business owners were interviewed, and of course, said that they’d have to cut some jobs if they had to pay more taxes.
At the end of the segment, the reporter took pen to white board, and gave his interpretation of reality: as I recall the numbers, he said that 2 1/2% of small businesses are in the $250,000+ category. BUT this represents almost 900,000 small businesses.
Segment over, back to the news…. Those poor business owners.
One might feel sympathy for these entrepreneur small business owners, and especially for the employees they say they’ll have to let go, but there is a “wait a minute” aspect to this – an aspect not touched (intentionally, I believe) by the news program.
What was not stated was that 97 1/2% of American small business, apparently nearly 24,000,000 of these businesses, the overwhelming vast majority, would not, under the Presidents plan, be faced with the possibility of going back to 2000 era tax rates. Only the two or so percent who are the wealthiest among us would have to wear the hair shirt of the additional tax, which means only going back to the rates prevailing at the time the ill-advised tax cuts were made.
We should feel sorry for those over $250,000 folks for having to help the lessers among us recover from near catastrophe?
Sorry.
(I don’t think the break point of $250,000 is nearly low enough. But that’s for another conversation.)
I think back to my own work experience. I worked an entire career, and within my constellation of relatives and friends, I would probably be considered to have made a really good living.
In my working years, it would take several YEARS of earnings to equal $250,000. I never got close to reaching a six figure annual income. Nonetheless, I lived well (by my standards). By no measure could I be considered “poor”…or “wealthy” either.
The ‘tax holiday’ between 2001 and the present was good for me. I have all my old tax records so can retrace all of those steps, and do an essentially ‘apples to apples’ comparison. Federal tax went down; state tax stayed pretty constant; property tax went up, but not by a lot.
I had ‘more jingle in my pocket’ those tax-holiday years, but I can’t really say that it did me any good at all. And when I compare it against the catastrophe it spawned in huge federal debt to pay for a war; and all of the credit card debt we all incurred living outside our means, it certainly wasn’t worth it.
I’m within the 98% of Americans who will indirectly benefit if the tax holiday is lifted for the top 2%.
Why, then, can the top 2% high-income folks count on the rest of us fighting their anti-tax battle for them, which is exactly what they are counting on?
Tables-turned, they’ve generally never been in the corner of the least among us.
It’s very simple: we have been taught to fight amongst ourselves, and to want what is unhealthy. To be rich is a positive value….
Have we learned anything? I’ll see how election day 2010 plays out.
If we choose to go back to the days of the 2000s that almost killed us, it’s our fault…and it will be our problem.
COMMENT received from Michelle Witte September 9 2010
Dick – what has become of facts? If I were in charge of the DNC
communication machine I would run 24 hour ads about what the facts really
are around these initiatives. For example – when we in Minnesota had the
transportation/gas tax bill in the state in 2008… there were dire reports
of businesses closing, the evils of taxes, etc. I then calculated what the
FACTS were and how it would affect our family. I figured that based on our
Honda minivan driving about 12,000 miles a year at 16MPG we would pay
perhaps $38 dollars A YEAR extra. And for $38 I would get…. an amazing
array of infrastructure improvements. $38. I can’t even fill a hole on my
driveway for that. Get a grip people – taxes allow you to access resources
for a much lower cost than you could if we just all got our cash and then
hand to build our own roads, levies, social security system, food protection
system, schools, ambulance, fire… on and on.
So, let’s look at the sunset of the Bush Tax Cuts – first of all – they are
not RAISING taxes. They are putting back in place a tax structure which
COMPLEMENTED the highest economic growth in the last 30 years during the
Clinton Administration. Those soaring profits we all once enjoyed came on
the back of those taxes being in place. So, we’re now talking about simply
restoring those taxes.
The Wall Street Journal recently reported that a family with income of
$300,000 per year would be paying approximately $3,995 more in taxes under
Obama’s plan. That sucks. But it’s certainly not crippling. AND… looked at
the way it should be – those families got 10 years of a tax BREAK while the
rest of us did not.
My neighbor is an accountant and actually voted for Dems after seeing the
effects of the Bush tax cuts on her wealthy clients. They got huge
$10-20,000 checks back from the government after doing their taxes that
first year – they didn’t need it, weren’t expecting it, and clearly, it did
NOT lead to a robust economy where all those people who were business owners
were hiring employees, etc. Instead, people simply extended their credit and
greed and put the economy in the tank. Why would we repeat that again?

#237 – Dick Bernard: "Howze your boy doin'?"

/in , /by

A couple of national surveys in the past week have caused me to think back to a conversation in Minneapolis in mid-December, 2009.
I had gone to the premiere business club in Minneapolis to hear a panel discussion on Minnesota politics. It was a breakfast meeting, and I sat down. Presently, someone joined me. The name sounded familiar, and we compared notes. We had had some contacts 25 years earlier on a particular issue.
We talked on this-and-that as new acquaintances do. At some point we tip-toed into politics. My breakfast companion said he’d voted for Barack Obama in 2008. He also recounted an apparently recent business meeting where somebody he knew well, a mover-and-shaker in the business community, had come up and said, “Howze your boy doin’?”, a direct reference to now-President Obama.
We went on to other things, but the one thing I have never forgotten about that breakfast conversation was the “boy” reference to Obama. I’m left to fill in all the blanks. “Boy” is not a compliment to African-Americans.
This past week came two national surveys which were rather startling in their dissonance. In one, over 70% of the American people surveyed laid responsibility for the dismal state of our country on Republican policies particularly in the eight years of the Bush administration. But another survey, one taken since the 1940s, said that if given the choice, over half of the respondents would vote for a generic “Republican” in November, and only slightly over 40% for a generic “Democrat”. This was a greater gap between the parties than there has ever been.
The two surveys, side-by-side, make absolutely no sense: a collective death-wish perhaps? But in this case, the figures don’t lie.
How can all of this insanity be?
It is, likely, a combination of many circumstances. Some percentage, probably distressingly large, just don’t want a “boy” in the White House.
The Democrats, charged with the responsibility of cleaning up the abundant messes left behind in the wake of the years preceding 2009 are left with very disagreeable work…and the minority Republicans are doing an excellent job of obstructing every attempt at progress, and the resulting inadequate progress will, paradoxically, be politically useful against the very people who have been the leaders in even limited initiatives for change.
Business, naturally closer to Republicans, might be doing less than it could to increase employment: cruelly, hardship among the rabble is to its advantage in the short term. (Other reports indicate business is awash in available money which it has so far been reluctant to use for assorted reasons.)
Then there are those on the left who are angry because Obama and the Democrats have taken too moderate a course.
Of course, every one has their own pet issue which is NON-NEGOTIABLE.
We all want what we want, apparently. The common good be damned.
Thursday I was out at the Minnesota State Fair, just walking around, and happened by the booth of the Independence Party. I happened to notice the parties slogan: “Real solutions. No special interests“, and that slogan intrigued me.

Minnesota State Fair booth September 2, 1010


Rather than having “no special interests“, the Independence Party, the party of Jesse Ventura, is totally comprised of people with their own special interests. It is more special interest laden by far, than the traditional parties. It’s members don’t want to be constrained by other peoples priorities.
Maybe the American people at the national and local levels will wave their magic wands in November, and vote back in the very crew that they know almost destroyed them in the eight years prior to current Obama/Democrat administration. They will all do this self-righteously.
I’d only suggest that they all be very, very careful what they hope for….