The Politicization Of Everything.

The publicity for the Trayvon Martin killing served to emphasize the depths of our culture.  When the Samford, Florida Police Department announced that the killer, George Zimmerman, would not be charged, Martin’s family was understandably outraged.  They asked MSNBC’s Rev. Al Sharpton to pick up the case and publicize it nationally.  Of course, that meant that Fox News Channel and right-wing radio had to take the side of George Zimmerman.

If a travesty such as the Martin case can be politicized, I guess we shouldn’t be surprised that every other part of our culture is viewed through the same divisive lenses.  We have politicized science, education, health care, contraception, religion, race, women’s rights, the environment, the military, our judiciary, veteran’s affairs, Social Security, Medicare, guns, energy, agriculture, sports and, of course, journalism.

That hasn’t always been the case.  Prior to the early 80s, evolution was considered settled science.  Few questioned our education system.  Religion did not intrude in the classroom, except in parochial schools.  Outside of our military, no one carried guns except police and criminals.  And the media were bound by high standards of objectivity.

What changed?

Following the debacle of Watergate, the moribund Republican Party made an unholy alliance with evangelical leaders. Later, the Fairness Doctrine was repealed unleashing conspiracy talk radio.  Evangelists flooded radio and cable television with conservative politics and the message that Christianity was under attack.  Greedy right-wing mouthpieces like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck filled the airwaves with their theories of a New World Order.  Rupert Murdoch built a media empire on hate and Teapublican talking points.  And worst of all, the National Rifle Association and American Legislative Exchange Council began writing legislation and recruiting state legislators to serve their ideological agendas.

And our conservative-leaning populace sucked it all in.

So here we are…arguing about racism, judicial “activism,” contraception, the origin of “personhood,” immigration, Bible studies and prayer in the classroom, religious messages in government buildings, cutting taxes for the rich, guns on campus, etc., etc., etc.

And all the while we’re arguing, the real problems such as a crumbling infrastructure, economic inequality, the exodus of high-paying jobs, too-big-to-fail corporations, climate change, the extinction of wildlife, an increasingly inaccessible and unaffordable health care system, and massive national debt are only getting worse.

Conspiracy Talk Radio.

“Thug, socialist, bully, liar, un-American, racist, most dangerous president in US history, the food stamp president, Kenyan, communist”…these are only a few of the things that are regularly said about President Barack Obama on talk radio.

Conservative hosts raise fears about a “New World Order.”  They talk about President Obama’s “Czars.”  They claim that the auto industry bailout and “Obamacare” are the beginning of a “complete government takeover.”  They claim that Republicans were shut out of the negotiations for “Obamacare.” They insist that liberals are trying to take away religious freedom.

Of course, none of these things are true.

But, for those who rely on the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Michael Medved, Michael Savage, Dennis Miller, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, G. Gordon Liddy, Michael Reagan, et al, for their news, these things have been accepted as absolute facts.

When the Fairness Doctrine was abolished in 1987, large media conglomerates began adding conservative talk radio shows.  By 2007, 91 percent of talk radio was conservative.  In cities like Philadelphia, Dallas and Houston, conservatives controlled 100 percent of talk show content.  In no major city did progressive content match or exceed the conservative rants.  Even in so-called liberal San Francisco, conservative content overwhelmed progressive content 69 percent to 31 percent.

Of course, Teapublicans still claim the media is dominated by liberals.  And, when confronted with the facts, they claim the reason for conservative dominance is that these talk shows appeal to the majority of Americans.  Again, that’s not substantiated by the facts.  In 2010 (a big year for conservatives), a Gallup poll found that liberals and moderates outnumbered conservatives 55% to 42%.

So what’s driving the conservative ideology in our nation’s media if it doesn’t reflect the beliefs of the majority of Americans?  It’s propaganda intended to shape beliefs.  Why?  Conservatives tend to support large corporations, and media conglomerates are large corporatons.  Their propaganda appeals to those who are inclined to believe that government is evil…that it’s squandering their money…that lazy “others” are living off their hard-earned money.  Moreover, many of those same people want to believe that their problems are not their own fault.  They’re the fault of “pointy-headed, over-educated liberals.”

Contrary to claims by conservative radio hosts that they’re telling the “truth that the lamestream media are hiding from you,” they’re presenting half-truths and falsehoods in order to increase ratings and profits.  Their manufactured hatred of Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama have made them tens of millions.  If you doubt that, just look at the lifestyles of Boss Hawg Limbaugh and Glenn Beck.

So what can be done about this growing barrage of nonsense?  Ignoring it won’t make it go away.  The best way to fight back is to hold the advertisers accountable.  Write letters and make phone calls to the sponsors of these hate-filled talk shows.  Tell them you will no longer buy their products.  And be sure to tell them why.

I still believe that, when confronted with the choice, most advertisers would rather make money than make political enemies.

Where’s The War On Human Trafficking?

This week, Yuri Fedetov, head of the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, told the UN General Assembly that 2.4 million people around the globe are victims of human trafficking.  Although some are exploited for manual labor, most are sex slaves. 

Let me repeat.  2.4 million women, men and children are being held as slaves at any one time!  And only 1 in 100 is ever rescued!

So what is the world doing to stop this $32 billion/year industry?  Not much.  We sometimes revictimize the women by arresting them as prostitutes.  We sometimes arrest the “Johns” who use the victims and are largely unaware of their circumstances.  But comparitively little effort is expended toward disrupting the flow of traffickers.  And virtually no effort is made to arrest the heads of this international crime industry.

We take the same approach to drugs.  We have imprisoned tens of thousands for drug use and as small time dealers.  But we have had little success in bringing the large dealers and industry leaders to justice.  And when we arrest one leader, another quickly takes his place.

Could the fact that these industries control billions of dollars have something to do with the fact that we seem unable to stop the illegal trafficking?  We’ve seen the Mexican drug cartels use their money to buy politicians, police and the courts, and to intimidate the populace.  And these tactics are not unique to Mexico.  There’s little doubt that traffickers of humans and arms in other countries (including the US) do the same things.

Likely, the people at the very top of these industries do not appear to be criminals.  They are people of great wealth and influence.   They have built a network of powerful friends which makes them seem invincible.

So what can we do to stop them?  For one thing, we can make sure that our family and friends are aware of the problem.  We can tell our state and federal representatives that these industries need to be stopped.  We can demand that our governments change their approach to these crimes and, instead of attacking the victims and the lowest levels of these enterprises, use our resources to track down and attack the very highest levels.

We have the capability to end human trafficking.  The question is:  Do we have the will?

The Real Three Stooges.

The Three Stooges movie, which will soon be opening at a theater near you, is puzzling in many ways.  Why try to recreate a trio so iconic to American culture?  Is Hollywood so devoid of creativity that it can’t find something new?  More important, if you are going to make such a movie why not cast the starring roles with a contemporary trio of individuals who, in their own way, are every bit as comedic as the originals?

With apologies to Moe Howard, Curly Howard and Larry Fine, certainly the movie producers could do no better than Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum.

For months, these three have appeared in a hilarious television series on most of the major networks.  They have toured the country displaying their comedic talents to millions.  They have presented statements and ideas even more outrageous than the originals.  Moreover, they need no writers.  They seem to think up this stuff all by themselves!

All that we could hope for is that they add some slapstick physical comedy to their routines.  How hilarious would it be to see Newt poke Rick in the eyes?  Or to see Mitt slap Newt’s head and stomp Rick’s foot?  How could it fail?

The actors in the new feature film have some big shoes to fill.

Trayvon Martin Murder Shows Danger Of Carrying Handguns.

No matter what happens to the “neighborhood watch captain” who gunned down an unarmed 17-year-old in Florida, two things are clear:  A promising young man’s life has been cut tragically short, and those who carry guns are all too inclined to use them.

Despite NRA claims, handguns in the hands of untrained citizens pose a greater danger to innocent people and to themselves than to violent criminals; a fact that is overwhelmingly supported by gun violence statistics.

In my opinion, there are two types of people who choose to carry handguns: 1 – Those who are seeking trouble.  2 – Those who have an irrational fear of others, particularly those who look different.  It appears the Florida shooter fits both categories.

George Zimmerman reported a “suspicious” person to 911.  But despite being told by the police dispatcher to avoid the young man, he followed Trayvon Martin with his gun drawn and he shot him.  We don’t know Mr. Zimmerman’s state of mind.  And we don’t know what led him to shoot.  But we do know that the shooting was unnecessary.  George Zimmerman could, and should, have kept his distance and allowed police to do their jobs.

So what now?

The best way to pay tribute to this young man is to do our best to ensure that others aren’t victimized by gun-toting Dirty Harry wannabes.  We can start by making sure that George Zimmerman is charged with murder (manslaughter at minimum).  Since 911 calls prove that Zimmerman pursued Martin, a claim of self-defense should not be an option.  Next, Florida’s law needs to be changed to require the shooter to prove that he shot in self-defense.  Not the other way around.  Ideally, we would also eliminate all handguns in the US.  Unfortunately, that genie is out of the bottle.  There are simply too many to destroy.  But we can discourage people from carrying handguns.  And we can require anyone who owns a handgun to obtain training and a license so that we can minimize the number of George Zimmerman’s on our streets.

Why should it be more difficult for someone to obtain a license to operate a car than to carry a handgun?

Teapublican Mandated Nonsense.

We all know that Teapublicans have their knickers in a knot over the insurance mandates in President Obama’s Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Not only are individuals mandated to carry insurance. Organizations are mandated to offer insurance that covers many types of preventative care, including (OMG!) contraception!

Teapublicans claim that such mandates are unconstitutional and must be repealed immediately. They claim that mandates are evidence of the “socialist, out-of-control big government of the Obama administration.”

But what about the Teapublican-ordered mandates that have been forced upon us?

Teapublicans have been pushing mandates on the American citizenry for many years. Indeed, the idea for health insurance mandates began with the very conservative Heritage Foundation. The idea was promoted by Richard Nixon and Bob Dole, and it was first implemented by Teapublican presidential frontrunner, Mitt Romney.

In a number of states, Teapublicans have mandated ultrasound exams for pregnant women considering an aborton. In most states, Teapublicans have mandated that voters present a photo ID with a current address. Most states have mandated that businesses, bars, even churches post signs if they choose not to allow guns in their establishments. In Florida, Teapublicans have mandated that those down on their luck pay for drug tests before receiving public assistance. In Arizona, Teapublicans are pushing a mandate that the unemployed pay for drug tests before they can receive benefits from their unemployment insurance. And, in many states, Teapublicans have mandated that funds intended for public schools be used for private and parochial schools.

And that’s just scratching the surface. We could also include such Teapublican mandates that marriage be only between and man and a woman, that the sale of the Plan B contraceptive be banned because they consider it tatamount to abortion, etc. And, of course, we can’t forget all those Teapublican–sponsored mandates that either failed to become law or were tossed out by the courts, such as mandatory prayer in schools, religious symbols in government buildings and mandates that the US be officially recognized as a “Christian” nation.

It seems that, for Teapublicans, a policy is only a mandate if you disagree with it.

Guns Don’t Kill People. Gun Laws Do!

There are more than 200 million guns in ciruclation in the US. More than 40 percent of households claim to have one or more guns in the home. And those numbers have grown dramatically ever since a man of African-American heritage was inaugurated as president.

According to statistics compiled by the CDC National Center for Injury Prevention and Control and calculated by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, in a single year almost 100,000 Americans are shot or killed with a gun. Of those, 31,593 people die from gun violence, including the 12,179 who are murdered. Another 66,769 Americans survive gun injuries, including 44,466 who are shot in an attack. In one year, 18,223 Americans kill themselves with guns, and 3,031 more survive a suicide attempt with a gun.

Among 23 populous, high-income countries, 80% of all firearm deaths occur in the United States.

Obviously, we need more gun control. Not less. But hunters and gun collectors need not worry about common sense regulations for hunting rifles and shotguns. Gun violence statistics overwhelmingly apply to handguns.

For example, in 2005, 75% of the 10,100 firearm-involved homicides in the United States were committed using handguns. That compares to just 4% with rifles and 5% with shotguns. The remaining 16% were committed using an unspecified type of firearm. So it’s clear that merely limiting the sale and carry of handguns could greatly diminish gun violence in the US.

As for Teapublican and National Rifle Association (please note the word “rifle” in the name) claims that guns are needed to prevent crimes, statistics clearly expose those claims as fraudulent. According to the FBI, each year private citizens are responsible for approximately 200 legally justified self-defense homicides. An even more inconvenient statistic for handgun proponents is from a 2009 study which found that people in possession of a gun are 4.5 times more likely to be shot in an assault!

Guns are used to intimidate and threaten 4 to 6 times more often than they are used to thwart crime. They are 4 times more likely to be used in an unintentional shooting than for self-defense and 22 times more likely to be used in a suicide.

Further, it’s estimated that gun violence in the US costs $100 billion annually.  So limiting the sale and possession of handguns could even help lower our national debt!

The Teapublican Time Machine.

For several years, Teapublicans, especially white pre-Baby Boomers, have fondly remembered the days of their childhood when life was simple. When they could gas up the ’57 Chevy for $3.00 and cruise Main St. all night. It was a white-dominated “Father Knows Best” society of tidy neighborhoods with white picket fences.

Now those same Teapublicans seem determined to take us back to that era.

They can’t seem to grasp that those post-war days are really gone. Those days simply can’t, and won’t, be duplicated. Moreover, Teapublicans can’t seem to grasp the cultural dynamics that created the era they so fondly remember. It was an era of union-based manufacturing jobs that paid well enough to allow Mom to stay home with the kids. It was an era of small retailers, instead of big box chains; of neighborhood diners, instead of fast food chains. It was an era when everyone understood the importance of government and of working together – an attitude necessary for the defeat of Hitler and Hirohito. And it was an era when most of the products we used were made in the USA.

What these nostalgia-loving Teapublicans too easily forget are the seamy underpinnings of that era. African-Americans were segregated and denied the vote. Women were left out of business and politics. Young women were disdained and abandoned if they were unlucky enough to get pregnant before marriage. They were not allowed to attend school. Many were sent away to religious schools to be “rehabilitated” and have their babies in seclusion before giving them up for adoption. Many were simply barred from leaving home so the neighbors wouldn’t find out that they had become “fallen” women. If they chose to keep their babies, they received no child care payments. And if they didn’t want to have their babies, their choices consisted of tumbling down stairs, coat hangars, lye or back-alley butchers.

Yet the Santorum and Gingrich led Teapublicans want to revisit those days. Indeed, the policies being pushed by these candidates may well turn the “way back clock” back past the 60s and 50s, past the horrors of World War II, past the Great Depression, and past the Roaring 20s…all the way back to the 1800s, the days of Robber Barons. A time prior to the formation of the middle class. A time when there were no safety nets for those who were down on their luck. A time when rich industrialists ran everything, and when everyone else slaved 7 days a week to scratch out an existence.

Lest you think I exaggerate, consider the following legislative initiatives and proposals: All of the Teapublican candidates are on record as saying they would cut taxes, especially for the rich and for large corporations. They would eliminate capital gains taxes for the wealthy. At the same time, they would raise taxes on the poor. They would repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act making it impossible for tens of millions Americans to afford health insurance. And they would cut or destroy Medicare and Social Security.

They would drastically cut government, eliminating the Departments of Education and Commerce at a time when our economy is just beginning to show signs of recovery. They would eliminate the Environmental Protection Agency allowing large corporations to pollute our water and air at will with no consequences. They would continue or increase oil subsidies under the GOP’s “drill, baby drill” mantra. At the same time, they would eliminate subsidies for sustainable sources of energy.

They would likely start yet another war by attacking Iran, unleashing a torrent of hatred from the entire Muslim world and destablizing the Middle East and most of Asia. They would deny women the right to control their own bodies, even making it more difficult to obtain contraception. And perhaps most alarming of all, they would weaken the Constitutional separation of church and state.

Interestingly, despite the Teapublican candidate’s promises to shrink the federal government and cut the national debt, their fiscal policy proposals would actually increase the national debt according to the non-partisan US Budget Watch, while President Obama’s proposals would begin to shrink the deficit!

Even if you’re not a progressive as I am, a trip backward in the Teapublican time machine has to be an alarming prospect for all but the most right wing religious zealots.

Arizona: A Nice Place To Visit, But You Probably Don’t Want To Live Here.

Aside from our scorpion-eating and finger-wagging governor, our racist anti-immigrant bills and our fear-mongering politicians, there are plenty of other reasons to avoid setting up residency in the Grand Canyon state. For example, as Arizona celebrates its centennial year as the 48th state, look at the people it has chosen to celebrate as part of its heritage.

The entire state pays tribute to the cowboy despite the fact that the term was once reserved for ruffians, rustlers and thieves. Arizona annually pays homage to Wyatt Earp despite the fact that the man was little more than a serial killer who was allowed to write his own history. And many of the Arizona’s most celebrated businessmen were mine owners who lived in luxury while their employees worked in dangerous conditions and were paid so little they could not break their dependance on the company store.

Okay, so the state has an inglorious history, you say. Things surely must be different today.  Not really.

Arizona is home to the Hell’s Angels’ Sonny Barger, founder of one of the world’s most dangerous gangs and largest criminal enterprises. Arizona is home to Joe Arpaio, the self-proclaimed toughest sheriff in America, who forces prisoners to eat the same meal twice a day, 365 days a year; the same man who misspent nearly $10 million of county funds, who failed to investigate hundreds of sexual attacks and who is, himself, under investigation by the US Department of Justice for civil rights violations.

Arizona’s legislature is actually proud of the fact that it invests less money per student than all but one other state. Arizona’s government is proud that it “saved” the state budget by further cutting funds for education and refusing Medicaid to as many as 250,000 poor children. Arizona is the state that proclaimed the Colt revolver as the state gun and rolled back gun control to pre-Tombstone era laws. The state that sold its own capitol building in order to continue cutting taxes for the wealthy and corporations. The state where starting salaries for public school teachers are so low they automatically qualify for food stamps and Medicaid.

So please come enjoy the natural beauty of our geography. Enjoy our hotels, resorts and restaurants. Enjoy our warm climate. Purchase lots of trinkets and souvenirs inflated by, in some cases, sales taxes in excess of ten percent. But don’t be tempted by home prices that have fallen over a cliff.

Unless you’re an angry, white, right-wing idealogue, you really won’t enjoy living here.

Ending “Drive-By” Politics.

Over the past decades, I’ve noticed an increasing trend among Teapublicans. They tend to make a snide statement about Democrats or Democratic principles secure in their belief that you’ll either agree with their statement or remain silent.

They say things like, “We’ve got to get that damned socialist out of the White House.” Or, “This president is going to bankrupt all of us.” If you say you disagree with them, or want to debate the issue, they walk away saying, “I don’t want to talk politics.”

Really? They’re the ones who brought it up!

But, according to these Teapublicans, they’re not being political. They’re just stating a “fact.” I don’t know about you, but I refuse to allow them to spout the latest talking points from Fox News Channel and walk away. Certainly they have a right to their opinion, and they have every right to say it. But I have a right to politely refute their statements and debate the issues. I have a right to call their statements as I see them: Drive-by cheap shots.

According to political correctness, there are two things that should never be brought up in polite conversation: Politics and religion. However, for many years, it has seemed that Teapublicans and Christian evangelists have felt free to say whatever they want. For what it’s worth, here is my policy going forward. If someone asks about my religious beliefs, I will tell them it’s none of their business. Religion is a very personal and private matter of faith.

On the other hand, if someone makes a political statement – even as a drive-by – I will not let them walk away without expressing my point of view. I hope you’ll join me. Polite debate of the issues is not only healthy for our nation. I believe it’s our responsibility. We cannot afford to bite our tongues and allow the uneducated, the uninformed, and the misinformed to dominate our political dialogue.

Our silence has made it all too easy for big money interests and their supporters to take over our government.