Democrats Should Listen To Nader.

For some time, I’ve written about the Democratic Party’s appalling ineptitude with regard to branding and messaging. The party seems utterly incapable of communicating a clear, concise and cogent message.

Most voters can recite the Republican brand – “Less government. Lower taxes.” But what does the Democratic Party stand for? What is its brand? Ask a hundred Democrats and you’ll get a hundred different answers. Ask a hundred independent voters and you’ll likely hear them parrot back some version of the Teapublican talking points – “Democrats are tax and spend liberals who are weak on foreign policy.”

In other words, Teapublicans have been more successful in branding Democrats than the Democrats themselves.

What accounts for such failure? In an article for the Huffington Post, Ralph Nader hit the nail on the head by suggesting that the party’s corporate consultants are part of the problem. Nader writes about a recent mass mailing from Nancy Pelosi, “The Pelosi mailing, uninspiring and defensive, is another product of the party’s political consultants who have failed them again and again in winnable House and Senate races against the worst Republican Party record in history.” Nader continued, “These consultants, as former Clinton special assistant Bill Curry notes, make more money from their corporate clients than from political retainers. Slick, arrogant and ever-reassuring, these firms are riddled with conflicts of interests and could just as well be Trojan horses.”

While Teapublican candidates want to destroy the government and any form of corporate regulation, Democratic candidates represent the working public…the vast majority of Americans. Yet, with few exceptions, the party has failed to tap into the smoldering, populist anger in the country. They’ve allowed the Tea Party to do that. Even though we have a Democratic president and a Democrat-controlled Senate, much of the debate in Washington has been controlled by a group of anti-government, anti-education, anti-science nitwits like Michele Bachmann, Ted Cruz, Louie Gohmert, Steve King, and Rand Paul.

These are people who want to take America back to the days of the Robber Barons and indentured servants. They are little more than an American version of the Taliban. But they’ve tapped into the anger generated by the collapse of our economy caused by large financial institutions. And because Democrats failed to articulate their political views and the actual causes of the crash, Teapublicans were able to redirect the blame to the victims of the crash…the people who lost their homes due to unregulated lending; the people who lost their jobs and needed to rely on unemployment insurance; the people who could no longer feed their children and needed to rely on food stamps; the so-called “moocher” class.

They blamed the victims. And the Democratic Party was so inept they let Teapublicans get away with it.

Even though Ralph Nader has been instrumental in passing legislation Democrats now claim as their own – the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the Consumer Credit Disclosure Law, the Consumer Product Safety Act, the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act, the Freedom of Information Act, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Mine Health and Safety Act, the National Automobile and Highway Traffic Safety Act and much, much more – Democrats now vilify Nader on the mistaken belief that he cost Al Gore the presidency in 2000. He didn’t. (The result actually had more to do with fraudulent absentee ballots, voter suppression in Florida counties and a partisan Supreme Court.)

No one has fought harder for American consumers and workers than Ralph Nader. Democrats would be wise to listen to him now instead of their overpaid, underperforming corporate consultants.

What Good Are Geneva Conventions If We Refuse To Enforce Them?

By signing the Geneva Convention on torture, the US agreed that it would never resort to torturing prisoners, and that it would prosecute or extradite anyone who did. So why has the Obama administration refused to press charges of war crimes against George W. Bush, Richard “The Dick” Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice, et al?

The Senate Intelligence Committee has now documented torture during the Bush administration and President Obama has confirmed the findings. If that’s not enough evidence to generate indictments, Bush officials have confessed to their crimes in their published memoirs and on television. Not only have they admitted knowledge of “extraordinary renditions,” aka torture. They have bragged about their “extreme interrogation techniques” and stated that they would not hesitate to use them again.

In other words, they are self-confessed war criminals.

So why hasn’t the Obama administration pressed charges according to the Geneva Conventions? Why have they not extradited the perpetrators to countries that will? Aren’t we supposed to be a nation of laws? Don’t we brag about our commitment to human rights? Don’t we accuse and prosecute the officials of other nations for war crimes?

If we can’t live up to our own rhetoric and promises; if we can’t abide by the treaties we sign, what good are they?

Where Will This Nonsense End?

This week, the United States House of Representatives voted along party lines to sue the President of the United States for the first time in history. The basis for the lawsuit? Teapublicans claim that President Obama overstepped his legal authority by extending the deadline for the Affordable Care Act’s employer mandate for another year – yes, that Affordable Care Act – the one congressional Teapublicans have voted to repeal more than 50 times. Never mind that every Chief Executive before President Obama has made such decisions. They were not Kenyan-born, black Muslims who were overwhelmingly elected with the help of African-Americans and Latinos.

In fact, President Obama has signed fewer executive orders than any president since World War II. He has signed 183 to George W. Bush’s 291 and Reagan’s 381.

But in order to truly understand the reason for the lawsuit, we must look at how we got here. In 1974, Democrats called for impeachment of President Richard Nixon over the break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters in the Watergate office complex. Despite the fact that, by ordering the break-in and the ensuing cover-up, Nixon had committed “high crimes and misdemeanors,” Republicans were spoiling for payback. They spent $70 million of taxpayers’ money on a witch hunt in order to find cause for impeaching President Clinton, ultimately impeaching Clinton for lying about an extra-marital affair – a “crime” likely committed by more than half of the presidents that served before him.

The impeachment backfired, making Clinton more popular than ever and further enraging Republicans. Then, when the George W. Bush administration tanked our economy, Republicans were determined to make the newly-elected Obama look worse. It’s as if they were saying, “Sure, our party made a mess of the country, but we’re going to block any attempt to fix it. We’re going to pin this mess on you.”

Even before Obama’s inauguration, Republican leaders announced that they intended to do everything within their power to make his presidency fail and to make him a one-term president. In attempting to do so, Republicans set a new standard for obstruction through filibusters, a refusal to put forward names for nomination to fill court vacancies, and investigations of manufactured “scandals.” Even worse was the deceit of pretending to work with Democrats to craft the Affordable Care Act (a Republican idea) by adding a variety of amendments in committee, then refusing to vote for it. In his second term, matters have only grown worse, with the 113th Congress doing even less than Harry Truman’s “Do Nothing” Congress and many Teapublicans calling for Obama’s impeachment.

All of this begs the question, what next?

I believe that the next time a Republican is elected president, Democrats will have little choice but to return the favor in kind. Indeed, they will have to raise the stakes. They will have to filibuster every bill and appointment. They will have to sue the president and threaten impeachment. Anything less would be seen as weak and cowardly. It won’t be easy. After all, how can you top the 113th Congress for obstruction?

Unless things change, we may as well just close Congress and declare a permanent recess.

Where Is Our Conscience?

If the events of this past week disclosed anything, it’s that the people of the United States have no conscience. We not only support a government waging war on civilians, including women and children, resulting in 860 dead and more than 5,000 wounded. We have accelerated deportations of desperate mothers and kids escaping the violence and poverty of Central America.

One must ask why? What happened to us? Where is our concern for our fellow men, or more accurately, our fellow women and children? Where is our sense of charity? Where is our morality?

For many years, we have unconditionally supported Israel. That made sense when the Arab nations around it refused to accept its right to exist. But that is no longer the case. Now Israel is the baddest bully on the block, with state-of-the-art weaponry purchased with our money. The Israeli government has made Gaza a prison and every so often, in the words of Israeli military leaders, it invades Gaza to do “a little lawn-mowing.” Israel refuses to negotiate a permanent two-state solution with the PLA because, in its view, the PLA has nothing of value to offer. It has no weaponry other than rocks. Israel also refuses to negotiate with those Palestinians who are armed…Hamas…probably because Hamas provides Israel a reason to justify its repression of Palestinians and its development of Palestinian territory in the West Bank.

So what is the US attitude to the violence in Gaza? Secretary of State John Kerry is working hard to negotiate a cease fire, saying that any agreement must first assure Israel of its security and Palestinians of an economic future. Not to villify Kerry, but why just talk about Israel’s security? It is the Palestinians who are being killed!

As for the refugees from Central America, why are their lives of so little value? Why are we deporting them when we have accepted refugees from around the globe who were facing similar conditions? Are Guatemalan lives worth less than Somalis? Are Honduran lives worth less than Romanians?

Conservatives preach that our entitlements will soon be bankrupt because, as baby boomers retire, there will be fewer people to contribute portions of their salaries to add to the trust funds. They say that we will soon have more people “on the dole” than people working. If that is true, why not accept refugees who have come here looking for jobs? Don’t the taxes and contributions of Latinos count as much as those from Sudanese, Ukranians, Russians, Vietnamese, Cambodians and all of the other refugees we have welcomed?

If we can so easily watch Palestinians die with our complicity; if we can so angrily turn our backs on desperate people seeking our help, we may as well remove the inscription from the Statue of Liberty. We must admit that we are no longer the beacon of freedom for the world. We must admit that we no longer hold the moral high ground.

We must admit that we have no conscience.

Why Does The Right Feel Free To Interpret Science But Not The Constitution And The Bible?

If anything, it should be the other way around. The Bible is not only full of contradictions. Most of it was written hundreds of years after the events it portrays, and it has lost meaning with each translation. As for the Constitution, not even its authors thought it was infallible. Indeed, the Founders expected it to be modified regularly. Jefferson even suggested that it be revisited every generation. And the Constitution addressed the principles and issues of the time. The Founders could not have imagined the issues of today.

As a result, both the Bible and the Constitution may be interpreted in a myriad of ways.

Science, on the other hand, is based entirely on evidence. Science takes a hypothesis and tests it in order to determine if the principle is correct. Only when the results have been repeated on multiple occasions does science accept the hypothesis as fact. For example, gravity was once considered a theory, but every experiment and observation proved it to be true, so it is now accepted as fact. The same is true of evolution and human-caused climate change. In each case, there is an abundance of evidence. Yet conservatives continue to challenge the principles with a few anecdotal experiences based on personal opinion.

In other words, on these issues and many others, conservatives have things backward.

Conservatives continually want to replace science and other evidence with opinion to suit their own ideologies. For instance, they deny the positive impact of Keynesian economics which has been proven by economists on multiple occasions. Instead, they want to rely on Reaganomics which has never proven to work. Even the two architects of Reagan’s trickle down theory have abandoned the concept as a failure and a fraud.

Conservatives actually believe that the poor are lazy despite the fact that most work full-time jobs. Conservatives believe that giving tax breaks and subsidies to large corporations will actually increase federal revenue and create jobs. Conservatives believe that using contraceptives makes women sluts. They believe that preaching abstinence to teens prevents unwanted pregancies despite all evidence to the contrary. They believe that defunding abortion, denying food stamps and school lunch programs for children and declaring war halfway around the world makes them “pro-life.”

Conservatives deny that our national obsession with coal, gas and oil is destroying our planet despite the findings of the world’s most respected climatoligists and evidence of the rapid melting of the planet’s largest glaciers. Conservatives believe that allowing industries to police themselves will maintain our environment. Conservatives believe that allowing the wealthy and large corporations to influence elections is protecting freedom of speech.

There’s a word for such people…and it’s not conservative. It’s delusional!

Conservative “Values.”

Whenever I hear someone talk about “values,” I silently prepare myself to endure yet another lecture about religion, hard work, freedom and patriotism. That’s because conservatives assume that they are the only ones who appreciate such things – the only ones who admire hard work, dedication to family and the benefits of living in the US.

Conservatives talk about religion, but they spout hateful ideas. They talk about freedom, but they want to discriminate against those who look different and those with whom they disagree. They talk about hard work, but they refuse to see others rewarded for it. They talk about getting the government off their backs, but they don’t want anyone to touch their Medicare or Social Security. They rail against illegal immigrants while denying equality to the First Americans. They spout quotes from the Founding Fathers, but ignore the statements from those Founders with whom they disagree.

They talk about patriotism, even as they are at war with our federal government.

For the so-called “values voters,” everything is black or white; us against them; Christians against heathens; fiscal conservatives against spendthrifts; cut-and-save against tax-and-spend. There simply is no room for middle ground. As stated by former president George W. Bush, “you’re either with us, or against us.”

I suspect this will fall on deaf ears, but here’s some news for conservatives. Caring for and helping others is a value. Negotiating peace is a value. Showing compassion for those less fortunate than yourself is a value. Leaving the environment in the same shape you found it is a value. Helping to educate others is a value. Honoring knowledge and accomplishment is a value. Tolerance for other lifestyles, ideas and religions is a value. Moderation and compromise are values. And you can be patriotic without waving the flag, shouting “USA” or supporting yet another war.

I understand, dear conservatives, that these may be distasteful and foreign concepts to you. But these are values shared by most of the developed world. In fact, your “values” of greed, anger, hate and intolerance are reviled by most of those who are educated and enlightened. You remember who used those words to describe themselves and their aspirations, don’t you? We refer to them as the Founding Fathers.

Immigration Issues Tied To Foreign Policy.

Conservatives, especially those in Arizona, California and Texas, are using the recent influx of unaccompanied children from Central America to “prove” that President Obama is neglecting our southern border. They can’t seem to comprehend the fact that the children have been apprehended while crossing the border. They weren’t just given a pass into the US. They also fail to understand that the transport of immigrant children from Texas to facilities in other states has to do with the fact that our holding facilities are overflowing. The Border Patrol could not have been prepared for the mass influx of children who were sent northward to escape the violence and poverty in their own countries.

This is not simply a border crisis. It’s a humanitarian crisis.

The seeds of this crisis were sown more than 100 years ago when the US allowed its corporations to divide up the impoverished nations of the Western Hemisphere. The United Fruit Company (Chiquita Brands International) and the Standard Fruit Company (Dole Food Company) seized control of large tracts of land along with the banana trade of Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador and other parts of the Caribbean. With the military might of the US behind them, these companies dominated the politics of the region. It was this fact that led to the term “Banana Republics.” And it is the primary cause of the long-term poverty of these nations.

But the meddling of US corporations didn’t stop there.

Following the ratification of CAFTA (Central American Free Trade Agreement), large US-based agri-businesses began dumping corn on Mexico and Central American countries. This led to the financial ruin of small farmers. With no way to feed their families, the farmers were forced to move to the slums of cities in hopes of obtaining jobs. Finally, in desperation, some turned to crime. Many more immigrated north.

Although the current crisis may be caused by misinformation, rumor and greedy smugglers, in many ways, the flood of illegal immigrants across our borders is the result of our own actions (rather the actions of our large, greedy corporations). Without an immigration policy that accounts for the causes of immigration…all of the causes…it will continue and the problems associated with illegal immigration will be magnified.

What Is Patriotism?

On this Independence Day weekend, movoto.com published a map showing the most and the least patriotic states in America. I might not have paid it any heed except for the fact that it ranked my former state of Minnesota at #49. The criteria used included the number of National Historic Landmarks per capita (WTF?), the number of veterans per capita, money spent to fund veterans, percentage of residents who voted in the last presidential election, people who use Google to buy American flags (double WTF?) and people who list America as an interest on Facebook (triple WTF?).

Obviously, the realtors who constructed the map have no clue of the true meaning of patriotism.

My ancestors fought in all of America’s wars going back to the Revolution. Many could be considered war heroes. Yet there were no showy displays of flags. They paid tribute to other veterans and to the nation, but to my knowledge, they never received nor expected special treatment for their own courage. Most were also religious, but they never made a show of their faith nor tried to force their beliefs onto others.

In short, they were true patriots.

All of this reminds me of an essay contest I was asked to judge a few years ago. It consisted of judging essays on patriotism written by a middle school class. Despite the many grammatical errors and spelling errors, the worst aspect of the competition was the fact that the children seemed to equate patriotism with flag-waving and our military might. The essays focused on war…on defending our freedom from outside interests. But there was no mention of defending our freedom from those inside our nation who would try to take away our rights. There was no mention of devotion to our nation, its principles and its Constitution. There was no mention of our responsibility to vote; to pay our fair share of taxes; to conserve our nation’s beauty; to conserve our environment. No mention of ensuring equal rights for all of our citizens.

Knowing then what I know now, I shouldn’t have been surprised. On movoto.com’s list, Arizona ranked #10 for patriotism. But, in my view, what passes for patriotism in Arizona today is far too much about show…displaying flags and military toys…than substance. By itself, a flag is just a few scraps of colored cloth. It’s what the flag stands for that is really important. Unfortunately, that fact is lost on far too many people. Some of the people who wave the flag the most and shout USA the loudest disavow our federal government. Some would deny others the right to vote, the right to control their own body and the right to marry whom they love. Some destroy signs of their political opponents. Some vandalize property of those who display election materials for the “wrong” candidates. Some shout angry epithets at members of other political parties. Some threaten and bully those who display political stickers with which they disagree. Some carry the Gadsen flag and openly carry guns in order to intimidate their fellow citizens. Some fly the battle flag of the Confederacy and make racist threats. Some cheat or refuse to pay taxes in order to deny funding for the government. All the while, like most of the South, the State of Arizona receives far more in federal funds than it pays in taxes.

Minnesota, on the other hand…the state that ranked #49 in patriotism on movoto.com’s list…leads the nation in voting. It pays a far larger share of income taxes than it receives in federal funding. Indeed, Minnesotans create a disproportionate number of jobs nationally and pay a disproportionate amount in taxes. Minnesotans played a key role for the North in the Civil War. On the other hand, the state that was ranked most patriotic by movoto.com is South Carolona…the first state to secede from the Union and to declare war on the United States.

Now tell me, which state is really more patriotic?

Israel’s One-Sided “Justice.”

Although it didn’t make international news, not long ago, two Palestinian boys were kidnapped in the Israeli-Occupied West Bank and killed. Apparently, that is what led to the senseless kidnap and muder of 3 Israeli teenagers. A day after their bodies were found, Israeli jets bombed and strafed Gaza in reprisal for their killings. Not content with the military strikes, which Israel claimed were aimed at Hamas for attempted missile attacks, Israeli demonstrators called for further reprisals leading to the kidnap and murder of another Palestinian teen.

Now Israeli leaders are urging calm, asking Palestinians to rely upon the legal system. But that begs the question, why did Israel not make the same request for the previous murders? Why the difference?

The bombings in Gaza were not justice. They were indiscriminate killings. They may have killed or injured those responsible for the murders. Since no one has claimed responsibility for the murder of the Israeli teens, no one knows. Almost certainly, the bombings killed or injured innocents. Indeed, they were probably less precise than the United State’s use of drone missiles in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen.

If Israel is ever to escape the cycle of violence and revenge killings, it must rely on its legal system more than its military. It must be as outraged by the murder of Palestinians as Israelis. It must treat all people as equal. It must stop its expansion into Palestinian territory. It must end its policy of disproportionate violence as revenge. It must negotiate peace.

Moreover, the US must stop its unwavering support of Israel regardless of its actions. It must hold both Palestine and Israel accountable for violence and revenge killings. It must stop inflaming the situation with more weapons. Instead, it should place restrictions on foreign aid to ensure that it is used to help the poor and those in need. Not the military.

Loyalty is a good thing. But blind loyalty is not. It’s time for US politicians to remove their blinders and look at the actions of our belligerent “little brother.” It’s not a pretty sight.

Vengeance Is Mine?

In Romans 12:19, Bible readers are warned, “Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.’” Apparently that message is lost on most so-called Christians in the US. After all, we rank among the top five nations for executions. We also lead the world in total number of prisoners, as well as the percentage of our population that is incarcerated.

To show the disconnect between Christ’s teachings and his conservative followers, consider the Republican primary debates of 2012. Many conservatives who count themselves as “Christians” loudly cheered Texas governor Rick Perry when he responded to the question if he ever lost sleep over his state’s large number of executions by saying, “I’ve never struggled with that at all.”

In fact, we should all lose sleep over our policies of incarceration, solitary confinement and executions. Modern DNA testing has shown that 4 percent of the prisoners kept in isolation on death row are, in fact, innocent. That begs the question, “How many innocent people have been executed in the past?” How many more will be killed as the result of sanctioned, pre-meditated murder by the states?

These killings are not going to change the crimes committed by the prisoners. They do not save money. (Studies have shown that it costs 10 times as much to execute a prisoner as to imprison them for life.} They do not even deter other crimes. One study after another has shown that the death penalty does not prevent murders. So why do we continue to sentence people to death? Why are more than 3,000 Americans sitting on death row?

In a word, revenge.

Revenge is also the reason we continue to sentence children to prison for relatively minor crimes. Oh, that’s right…we’re forbidden to call it prison. It’s “juvenile detention.” And these children are not placed in cells. They are in “rooms” or “dormitories.” Likewise, these children are not subjected to punishment. They are subjected to “safety and security measures.” In reality, we’re simply introducing these children to the prison system at an early age. And we’re teaching them how to be real criminals. You can read more in Nell Bernstein’s Burning Down The House.

What then, you may ask, should we do with children who have committed serious crimes? There’s a new movement that has shown to have much better results than punishment. It’s the system of Restorative Justice. In this system, the children are required to meet and talk with the victims of their crimes. They are required to explain their actions. They are forced to hear and see the consequences of those actions. Then the children and their victims negotiate an equitable restitution. Only if they are defiant or refuse to participate are they sent through the traditional, punishment-oriented system.

Our system of revenge often has racial and profit motives. Private prisons are quite profitable – the more prisoners, the greater the profits. (An example of the effects of this is “Kids for Cash” scheme involving two Pennsylvania judges.) And revenge is easier to commit against someone who looks different than you. That’s why our prison populations are disproportionately minorities.

Of course, revenge is not limited to our justice system. It’s the cause of most wars. Israel is notorious for disproportionate revenge killings, such as the current bombing campaign against Gaza. Muslim extremists have committed thousands of atrocities based on offenses against Islam both real and imagined. And the US? Revenge and greed were the key components in our genocide of Native Americans. Revenge for what was falsely perceived as an attack on the USS Maine led to the Spanish-American War. Revenge and misunderstandings led to World War I. And revenge was the motive for our involvement in Afghanistan. Worse, our expectation of a threat is what led us to pre-emptively strike Iraq, and the Middle East is now suffering the consequences.

Certainly, a venegeful response is sometimes necessary as in the case of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. But we all would be a lot better off if our justice system and our government leaders practiced the advice often given to toddlers. Take a few deep breaths and consider the consequences of your actions. Will revenge really accomplish justice? Or will it simply satisfy the more animalistic and weakest aspects of our beings?