They did not hesitate when the towers first were attacked and then fell. They labored long, agonizing months to rescue survivors, to find and identify the victims, to cleanse the gaping wound ripped through the heart of America's iconic city.
They worked while fire burned for months after the attack. They had inadequate haz-mat protection but they persisted.
For nine years politicians and pundits have taken their name in vain for rhetorical effect - using their contributions as a shining example of the best the American people offer - heroism, patriotism. In the meantime, the heroes themselves have been suffering from prolonged exposure to the nightmare that was ground zero. To deny them relief after so ruthlessly laying claim to their accomplishments would be to admit that rank hypocrisy and double-speak drive our public discourse.
Last week on Comedy Central's Daily Show Jon Stewart supported their cause far more eloquently than I could.
Here's what I think...
Monday, December 20, 2010
Sunday, December 19, 2010
DADT - Goodbye and Good Riddance
Let me take a brief moment to celebrate and savor a rare victory. Yesterday the Senate passed the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell, putting an end to the distasteful mandate that gay members of the military lie about who they are in order to serve their country.
A "tip of the hat" to all who voted to repeal the law. A "wag of the finger" to those who opposed repeal (apologies to Stephen Colbert).
In its waning days this Congress finally got something right.
Now if we could only get the Defense of Marriage Act repealed... .
A "tip of the hat" to all who voted to repeal the law. A "wag of the finger" to those who opposed repeal (apologies to Stephen Colbert).
In its waning days this Congress finally got something right.
Now if we could only get the Defense of Marriage Act repealed... .
Monday, December 13, 2010
Why do our leaders refuse to pay the piper?
I just tuned in (and out) of Fox's "Hannity" who was ranting about making the Bush tax cuts permanent. Why does no one stand up and say that it is bad policy to wage wars on a credit card that is owned by foreign governments (China, Japan, Saudi Arabia et al)?
Why do the same folks who shout about America's exceptionalism insist we do not actually have to pay for the costs of America's activities abroad and challenges at home?
Why do they never seem to equate "supporting our troops" with supplying our veterans with the medical and social services they need to recover from their arduous, often traumatic service in foreign lands?
Why do the American people put up with being treated like idiots incapable of understanding the demands our country's policies place not only on them, but on their children and grandchildren?
I have heard it said that only people who have hope of changing things protest. Can it be that we have lost that hope? Are we resigned to bearing the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune with no recourse?
Why do the same folks who shout about America's exceptionalism insist we do not actually have to pay for the costs of America's activities abroad and challenges at home?
Why do they never seem to equate "supporting our troops" with supplying our veterans with the medical and social services they need to recover from their arduous, often traumatic service in foreign lands?
Why do the American people put up with being treated like idiots incapable of understanding the demands our country's policies place not only on them, but on their children and grandchildren?
I have heard it said that only people who have hope of changing things protest. Can it be that we have lost that hope? Are we resigned to bearing the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune with no recourse?
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
President Obama's Second Term?
If President Barach Obama wants a second term as president, it is beginning to look like he will have to run as a Republican. After all, he has played a significant role in making Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell the most powerful legislator in America.
After lambasting President Obama last night for his total abandonment of the progressive principles that originally secured him the presidency, Keith Olbermann began a "countdown" to the next presidential election.
In a press conference yesterday the President announced the tax package he had brokered with Republicans. The absence of input from legislators of the President's own party was evident in the stunned horror of many of its members. The deal included extension of unemployment benefits, a temporary cut in employment taxes and a two-year extension of ALL the Bush Era tax cuts. The President insisted this debt-swelling deal was the most beneficial agreement possible and neither side got everything it wanted. Senator McConnell's obvious delight with the deal during his own press interview belied this statement.
During his speech, the President once again "wagged his finger" at progressive members of his own party who have expressed growing disillusionment and frustration with his administration. It did not seem to occur to him that the folks who elected him took him at his word when he promised elimination of the Bush tax cuts to the wealthiest among us that increased polarization of America's "haves" and "have nots;" when he vowed to take on the insurance industry and fight for single-payer health coverage for all Americans; when he stressed the importance of structural reform of the financial industry; when he swore he would close Guantanamo Bay; when he outlined "change you can believe in."
It is true the diversity of the Democratic Party worked against him. Conservative Democrats are often ideologically closer to Republicans than their own party's mainstream. Corporate money flows in the coffers of elected officials who support corporate agenda and money talks - often, stridently, effectively.
But the man who penned "The Audacity of Hope" is one lousy poker player. From the beginning he folded solid hands to aggressive bluffs. Now, even if he makes the final table, which is very much in doubt, he will do it with a short stack that will not survive the first few blinds.
After lambasting President Obama last night for his total abandonment of the progressive principles that originally secured him the presidency, Keith Olbermann began a "countdown" to the next presidential election.
In a press conference yesterday the President announced the tax package he had brokered with Republicans. The absence of input from legislators of the President's own party was evident in the stunned horror of many of its members. The deal included extension of unemployment benefits, a temporary cut in employment taxes and a two-year extension of ALL the Bush Era tax cuts. The President insisted this debt-swelling deal was the most beneficial agreement possible and neither side got everything it wanted. Senator McConnell's obvious delight with the deal during his own press interview belied this statement.
During his speech, the President once again "wagged his finger" at progressive members of his own party who have expressed growing disillusionment and frustration with his administration. It did not seem to occur to him that the folks who elected him took him at his word when he promised elimination of the Bush tax cuts to the wealthiest among us that increased polarization of America's "haves" and "have nots;" when he vowed to take on the insurance industry and fight for single-payer health coverage for all Americans; when he stressed the importance of structural reform of the financial industry; when he swore he would close Guantanamo Bay; when he outlined "change you can believe in."
It is true the diversity of the Democratic Party worked against him. Conservative Democrats are often ideologically closer to Republicans than their own party's mainstream. Corporate money flows in the coffers of elected officials who support corporate agenda and money talks - often, stridently, effectively.
But the man who penned "The Audacity of Hope" is one lousy poker player. From the beginning he folded solid hands to aggressive bluffs. Now, even if he makes the final table, which is very much in doubt, he will do it with a short stack that will not survive the first few blinds.
Sunday, December 5, 2010
It's Sunday Morning - Time for the NY Times Editorial Page
[This post's title links to today's edition]
Decades ago, when I was a college freshman, the daily issue of the New York Times was required reading. A requirement I tended to overlook, preferring to spend my time pouring over the sports page of the Boston Globe for the latest articles about the Red Sox and the Celtics. When I married a devoted reader of the Times, I would grab the crossword puzzle and leave the rest to him. I relied upon televised news broadcasts for information on current events. Post 9/11 I became addicted to NPR during long solitary road trips to visit my first grandchild and CNN when television was available.
My addiction to NPR endured. But the television 24-hour news cycle devolved into obsessive coverage of notoriety and endless analysis of politicians' sound bytes. Then the day arrived when I got DSL on my home computer and discovered Google. And lo and behold, decades after leaving the growing pile of New York Times unread on my bedroom chair, I began to read the op ed pages of the "grey lady".
Last Sunday my disappointment at Maureen Dowd's absence from the page was mitigated by a wonderful piece by Thomas Friedman. Today Dowd is back, her acerbic, incisive style turned toward the all-too-slow dismantling of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," and John McCain's mystifying opposition to ending this abomination.
Next I turned to a Frank Rich piece about Obama's suffering from "Stockholm Syndrome." Rich brought a creative approach in his superbly-written lament about the disappearance of the dynamic progressive candidate into a president of empty words and lackluster leadership.
Finally I turned to Thomas Friedman's analysis of Wikileaks' release of classified U. S. documents and how they illustrate the decline of U. S. leverage on the global stage. Any newspaper that offers such a magnificent variety of contributors is worth a little time. It may not make me feel better about the world, but it makes me exercise my brain cells and increases my understanding of the challenges we face.
Can folks rely on the New York Times as their only news source? Certainly not. But it is a damn good place to visit on Sunday morning.
Decades ago, when I was a college freshman, the daily issue of the New York Times was required reading. A requirement I tended to overlook, preferring to spend my time pouring over the sports page of the Boston Globe for the latest articles about the Red Sox and the Celtics. When I married a devoted reader of the Times, I would grab the crossword puzzle and leave the rest to him. I relied upon televised news broadcasts for information on current events. Post 9/11 I became addicted to NPR during long solitary road trips to visit my first grandchild and CNN when television was available.
My addiction to NPR endured. But the television 24-hour news cycle devolved into obsessive coverage of notoriety and endless analysis of politicians' sound bytes. Then the day arrived when I got DSL on my home computer and discovered Google. And lo and behold, decades after leaving the growing pile of New York Times unread on my bedroom chair, I began to read the op ed pages of the "grey lady".
Last Sunday my disappointment at Maureen Dowd's absence from the page was mitigated by a wonderful piece by Thomas Friedman. Today Dowd is back, her acerbic, incisive style turned toward the all-too-slow dismantling of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," and John McCain's mystifying opposition to ending this abomination.
Next I turned to a Frank Rich piece about Obama's suffering from "Stockholm Syndrome." Rich brought a creative approach in his superbly-written lament about the disappearance of the dynamic progressive candidate into a president of empty words and lackluster leadership.
Finally I turned to Thomas Friedman's analysis of Wikileaks' release of classified U. S. documents and how they illustrate the decline of U. S. leverage on the global stage. Any newspaper that offers such a magnificent variety of contributors is worth a little time. It may not make me feel better about the world, but it makes me exercise my brain cells and increases my understanding of the challenges we face.
Can folks rely on the New York Times as their only news source? Certainly not. But it is a damn good place to visit on Sunday morning.
Saturday, December 4, 2010
Same Old Same Old
I don't think I want to be a political junky anymore. It is depressing. The same platitudes, uttered by different faces. The same ideological catch phrases. The same use of red button issues to distract the American people from the deep economic and social problems it faces.
Unemployment has risen to 9.8%. That only includes those who are unemployed and actively looking for work. It does not include folks who have been out of work so long they have lost hope.
Elected officials still give lip service to fiscal responsibility while striving to extend the Bush Era tax cuts. Republicans insist balanced budgets can be achieved with lower taxes and spending cuts. Unless they intend deep cuts in Defense, Social Security and Medicare, they are whistling in the wind. If they do intend deep cuts in the country's economic safety nets, they will push us into much wider economic polarization.
Let us not forget those members of the middle class who did everything right and are still facing the stark reality of an impoverished retirement. Their pensions have disappeared as companies went bankrupt and shed their pension liabilities. Their 401ks and IRAs were battered by the 2008 stock market crash. Those who chose the "safer" options of CDs for their retirement accounts have watched those funds languish in an "interest free" zone for years.
Perhaps it is time to find a new hobby.
Unemployment has risen to 9.8%. That only includes those who are unemployed and actively looking for work. It does not include folks who have been out of work so long they have lost hope.
Elected officials still give lip service to fiscal responsibility while striving to extend the Bush Era tax cuts. Republicans insist balanced budgets can be achieved with lower taxes and spending cuts. Unless they intend deep cuts in Defense, Social Security and Medicare, they are whistling in the wind. If they do intend deep cuts in the country's economic safety nets, they will push us into much wider economic polarization.
Let us not forget those members of the middle class who did everything right and are still facing the stark reality of an impoverished retirement. Their pensions have disappeared as companies went bankrupt and shed their pension liabilities. Their 401ks and IRAs were battered by the 2008 stock market crash. Those who chose the "safer" options of CDs for their retirement accounts have watched those funds languish in an "interest free" zone for years.
Perhaps it is time to find a new hobby.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
