Showing posts with label Civil War. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Civil War. Show all posts

Friday, July 26, 2019

Move If You Want to Save the Republic


Volunteers needed: Who wants to move to Pennsylvania?

Or Michigan? Or Wisconsin? Maybe you would prefer a sunnier clime? Okay. How about Florida or Arizona? 

It is all for a good cause. It doesn’t have to be permanent, but it does require a residential move relatively soon that would appear to be forever but has to last through November 2020. 

If you haven’t figured out my idea yet, then you haven’t read Nate Cohn’s recent analysis in The New York Times that swing states Donald Trump barely won in 2016 may be sliding further into his Electoral College victory column despite an expected national surge in popular votes for the Democratic nominee no matter who she or he may be (https://nyti.ms/2Y7SdX9).

Since Trump won the Electoral College votes of Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania by a combined 77,744 votes it is simply a matter of realigning residencies for some, okay, many, anti Trump voters from sure-win Democratic states to battleground states to turn them from red to blue. 

So, are you with me? Who enjoys cheese? Who can visualize themselves in the fall wearing a tricornered cheesehead hat cheering on the Green Bay Packers? Forget how cold and snowy Wisconsin can be come December. Your patriotic duty to defend our country should warm the cockles of your heart, even as your fingertips and toes tingle with early stage frostbite (of course, you can buy those glove and sock warmers for the one season you’ll be  exposed to a Wisconsin chill).  

Or maybe you’re a Revolutionary War or Civil War buff and would like to live closer to where the action was, say in Valley Forge or Philadelphia or Gettysburg. See, it’s not as if you have to move away from East Coast civilization to save our democratic republic. You could be happy in Pennsylvania. 

We can’t take anything for granted in 2020. No doubt, Republicans will get wind of this plan and try to pass laws that require at least two years of residency before a newly arrived citizen may vote. Let’s be thankful Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin have Democratic governors who would veto any such legislation because we all know which way the Supreme Court would rule if a court challenge ever reached its once hallowed hall of justice. 

Saving a democracy requires commitment. It won’t be enough to spend a few days in a battleground state canvassing districts or driving seniors to the polls. You have to be like the pig in the old joke about breakfast and the roles played by a chicken and a hog. For a bacon and egg breakfast a chicken must make a contribution. A pig must make a commitment. 

Keep in mind you can return to your posh liberal quarters after November 2020. In the meantime, you could Airbnb or VRBO your home. Saving our republic can be concurrently profitable and patriotic.


Thursday, October 25, 2018

The Future Hinges on Voters of Suspect Intellect




Less than two weeks until the fate of the country is decided. Not specifically on the ballot are the futures of Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Obamacare, civil rights, voting rights, gender rights, labor rights, nuclear arms control, environmental laws and a host of other issues that will directly affect the lives of most Americans, even if they don’t realize it (for example, those who complain about socialism overtaking our daily existence do not comprehend that Social Security and Medicaid are forms of socialism, as are public schools and public police forces and fire departments).

Let’s be honest. You’re probably as sick and tired of election coverage as I am. That goes doubly for having to see and listen to Donald Trump at rally after rally as he foments crowds into raw meat delirium. How hypocritical of him to blame the media for inciting incendiary behavior.

Now let’s be really honest. You’re probably melancholy, perhaps more than a bit disappointed, maybe even angry that Barack Obama didn’t fire up his faithful in 2010 and 2014 to defend his progressive platform, as the provocateur-in-chief is doing almost every day with his rabble of a following. Had he done so maybe we wouldn’t have so many Republicans currently in office on the national and state levels.  

For now, I am beyond soaking up all the minutia of 435 House races, 35 Senate square offs and countless state house and gubernatorial contests. I just want it to be over, like I wanted the Mega Millions lottery to finally find a winner (I am really disappointed my five tickets contained no more than one of the picked numbers; I didn’t fare any better with Wednesday’s Powerball drawing). I’m even too exhausted to watch Stephen Colbert and Seth Meyers skewer Trump, or listen to Brian Lehrer on WNYC public radio impart more reasoned analysis of our disastrous political state. 

That could be the Trumpster’s plan all along. To rope-a-dope us all into submission. 

I wonder how many people under 45 would get that rope-a-dope reference. Muhammed Ali used that strategy on October 30, 1974, in the Rumble in the Jungle fight to tire out George Foreman. Ali allowed Foreman, the reigning heavyweight champion of the world, to barrage him with punches through seven rounds while he nestled on the ring’s ropes, a tactic that allowed Ali to dissipate much of the impact of each punch. His energy spent from swinging lefts and rights to little effect, Foreman succumbed to Ali’s assault before the bell rang to end round eight. 

Why did I pick 45 as the age factor? Because a recent national survey found that just 19% of those 45 and younger could pass a citizenship test if it were required of Americans born in the United States. 

“With voters heading to the polls next month, an informed and engaged citizenry is essential,” Arthur Levine, president of the Woodrow Wilson Foundation, which conducted the study, said in a statement. 

“Unfortunately, this study found the average American to be woefully uninformed regarding America’s history and incapable of passing the U.S. Citizenship Test. It would be an error to view these findings as merely an embarrassment. Knowledge of the history of our country is fundamental to maintaining a democratic society, which is imperiled today.”

Citizens 65 and older fared much better, scoring passing grades 74% of the time, the highest mark for any age cohort. (An actual citizenship test is just 10 questions, six of which must be answered correctly. Take a longer—96 question—test by clicking on the “select all questions” button in the link: http://www.citizenshipstudyguide.com/member/citizenship-test-questions-quiz.php.)

According to the foundation’s press release, “The survey also found that:
  • 72% of respondents either incorrectly identified or were unsure of which states were part of the 13 original states;
  • Only 24% could correctly identify one thing Benjamin Franklin was famous for, with 37% believing he invented the lightbulb;
  • Only 24% knew the correct answer as to why the colonists fought the British;
  • 12% incorrectly thought WWII General Dwight Eisenhower led troops in the Civil War; 6% thought he was a Vietnam War general; and
  • While most knew the cause of the Cold War, 2% said climate change.

Simply put, too many of our electorate are dumb. Without basic knowledge of our history, our founding principles and values, it is no wonder that a lying, uninformed autocratic bigot can manipulate the truth and lead a throng of morons to repudiate what this country has stood for domestically and internationally for more than eight decades. 

Monday, October 8, 2018

News Updates: Kavanaugh, Living in a Bubble, Trump's Week, Building a Name and Wiring Rod


Brewski Anyone? As Brett Kavanaugh takes a seat on the Supreme Court consider how awkward it will be at day’s end, any day’s end, when someone, perhaps Kavanaugh himself, suggests unwinding with a beer or two…

The continental political and social divide the country finds itself in is difficult to fully fathom until one encounters real-life proof that the respective sides live in distinctive bubbles with little chance they will meld together.  

Case in point: Recently Gilda met a Harvard law school graduate. A resident of the Washington, DC, metro, he related that he grew up in Kentucky. Yet, upon earning his law degree and returning to his home town he found the region preferred lawyers with social ties rather than legal scholarship. Fitting in was more important than knowledge. 

Gilda and I encountered the same primitive mindset more than four decades ago when we moved to Connecticut. Connecticut had an aura of being a state populated by sophisticated, educated residents. Home to headquarters of Fortune 500 companies. 

But there were plenty of factory workers, as well. Trouble was, in the Lower Naugatuck Valley where I was assigned as a reporter for The New Haven Register, hard times had befallen the workers who toiled in the brass mills of Seymour, Derby, Ansonia, Shelton and surrounding towns. Factories cut back production, laid off workers or closed down completely. Still, the dream of most fathers was to have their sons join them straight out of high school on the assembly line. Few aspired for an education-based escape from the Valley. 

Gilda’s acquaintance went on to detail his Kentucky education. The Civil War, he explained, was called the War Between the States as the teacher said it had everything to do with states’ rights and nothing, nothing to do with slavery. Indeed, slavery was not discussed. The war was hardly studied. Students learned about a few battles won by the South. Imagine his consternation upon being exposed in college and law school to the full historical record.  

Unable to find a job in Kentucky, he took his Harvard law degree to Washington.

Alternative facts. Fake News. Outright lies. When the assault on truth comes directly from the White House it reinforces provincial attitudes that are in conflict with principles of equality and tolerance.


The Week That Was: Whatever it was—a napkin or toilet paper—stuck to Donald Trump’s shoe and clearly visible as he ascended the stairs to Air Force One last Thursday, the embarrassment was palpable, the humor undeniable. He surely can blame an inattentive staff, or maybe Deep State conspirators, for the humiliation seen around the world (could the Deep State really have infiltrated his bathroom, or his dining area?). The trail of paper was as bad as when a wind gust last February swirled through his combover exposing his scalp as he climbed stairs into Air Force One.  

Then there were the optics of Melania’s trip to Africa. Ordinarily, dispensing much needed books to schoolchildren would result in laudable coverage. But the very educational programs Melania was endorsing in Malawi have come under attack by her isolationist husband who has disparaged African countries and who wants to cut aid to them. In one of its few acts of spine and resistance Congress rejected Trump’s budget cuts (https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/08/politics/melania-trump-africa-trip-wrap/index.html).  

Perhaps the unkindest but appropriate cut of all, Trump was denied the Nobel peace prize he so desperately covets. Rather than award his still vague peace and denuclearization overture with North Korea, the Nobel was given to Denis Mukwege of the Democratic Republic of Congo and Nadia Murad of Iraq for their efforts to end the use of sexual violence as a weapon of war and armed conflict. 

How ironic that sexual violence was the dominant theme in the United States last week. Regardless of your opinion on the veracity of Christine Blasey Ford’s claim of sexual assault by Kavanaugh (Trump has moved from saying her testimony was “credible” to her being part of a Democratic “hoax” to discredit Kavanaugh), it is clear that gender relations will be a more hot button election issue in November than the economy, taxes, foreign relations and health care.   


Trump’s campaign for a peace prize, this year or in the future, probably took a hit with his addresses at the United Nations. It took a high degree of chutzpah to stand at the podium of a world organization dedicated to peaceful coexistence and shared values and spout selfish bromides. 

Trump likes to project toughness and a singular focus on America First. He did that to the approval, no doubt, of his base and even to many who liked his no-nonsense non diplomatic rhetoric. How refreshing for them to hear candor at the UN where obfuscation and deceit are practiced arts. 

The UN is the ultimate global entity. Trump all but tore up its charter before the world’s eyes. Patriotism, not globalism, was his mantra. Inside your borders do what you wish as long as you don’t impinge on America’s self interests. 

You could visualize tyrants the world over smiling. The world’s policeman, the country that had corralled their basest instincts, was hanging up its night stick. Abandoning its beat. Throwing away its handcuffs in favor of a free-for-all posture as long as you said nice things about its orange-faced, golden-locked leader. Play to his ego, not his humanitarian sensibilities. 

Okay. Through our archaic political process we elected Trump to a four year term. He can legally reverse the course of U.S. history and with it the future of the world. 

But only so far as we the people enable him. November will be the first referendum on America’s choice for tomorrow. 


Building a Name: If Democrats gain control of the Senate, this year or in some future election, they should move to rename the Russell office building for the recently deceased Senator John McCain. 
Never mind that McCain was a Republican. He was a strong symbol of integrity and patriotism. Though a Democrat, Richard Russell embodied the white suprematist, racist attitudes current among Republicans. Russell served before Southern Democrats converted en masse to Republicans. 

By initiating the renaming of the building, as minority leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has proposed, Democrats would be sending a message of unity, though to be honest, those who support Trump and his distaste for McCain, would not welcome such an action. To them Russell is an icon. 


The Wire: Lost among all the excitement surrounding Kavanaugh was the postponed meeting between Trump and deputy attorney general Rod Rosenstein. 

Rosenstein, who oversees special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe into Russian interference in the 2016 election and more, has at various times been accused of wearing a recording device while with Trump. The New York Times also reported several weeks ago he entertained the idea of organizing cabinet secretaries to invoke the 25th Amendment to remove Trump from the presidency. Rosenstein has denied both allegations.

If ever there was a time for Rosenstein to wear a wire, that postponed meeting with Trump would be the day.

Even though Trump has recently said he is not ready to fire Rosenstein, the dissembler-in-chief is not a credible communicator (see above about his thoughts on Blasey Ford). 

So Rosenstein’s tenure toehold seems to be more precarious with each passing day. An announcement of his departure, never officially distributed, was even prepared for dissemination by the Justice Department on the presumption the meeting with Trump was going to occur, according to the Daily Mail (https://dailym.ai/2OU2iiF). 

Rosenstein is in a seemingly can’t-win situation. Trump has long wanted him out so someone more to his liking can be installed to control Mueller. So what has he got to lose by wearing a wire so he can capture Trump in his firing element?

Now, we’ve all watched Homeland, Mission Impossible and other thrillers that rely on high-tech listening and speaking devices embedded on a body so as to be non detectable. Surely Rosenstein knows intelligence officials, current or former, who would be willing and able to outfit him for sound. Heck, maybe even Mueller’s team would be a possible link-up option. 

Tuesday, October 31, 2017

Someone Get Me Rewrite!

Sometimes you need a good editor to make your writing better. I was a good editor, but it’s not easy improving your own text, ergo the thankful acknowledgment by many a revered author to his or her editor. That’s a longwinded way of saying I just realized that a cutesy paraphrase of a biblical saying included in a posting two weeks ago could have been sharpened by an editor. 

Concerning the controversy over the status of monuments to Confederate generals and soldiers, Columbus and other notables, I wrote, “In a variation on what Jesus said, let he who is without sin be memorialized with a statue.” 

Reading that line today I believe it would have been better if I had written, “In a variation on what Jesus said, let he who is without sin be cast in stone.” 


Behind the Scenes: Now that Paul Manafort and Rick Gates have been indicted in a federal probe linked to the election of Donald Trump, I was wondering, why is it that just those two were named in a scheme to launder foreign money and evade taxes? Are we to believe that Manafort and Gates had the smarts and wherewithal to hide their activities without the aid of lawyers, accountants, bankers and others, perhaps a few real estate agents, who might have provided counsel on how to circumvent without detection federal law? 

I know, you’re probably saying they were caught, so it proves, or at least strongly suggests, they acted alone. I think not. I am waiting to see who else might be entangled in their web of deceit.

Meanwhile, for an eerily revealing behind the scenes look at the dynamics of Manafort, his family, and his alliance with Trump, there’s hardly any more enlightening read than the emails his daughter, 31-year-old Andrea Manafort Shand, exchanged with friends from March through August 2016: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/paul-manafort-daughter-trump-texts_us_59f748b6e4b03cd20b832fe0.


Kelly Turns Green, as in spoiled or rotten. There are few better feelings for a journalist than to be proven correct in an assessment of a character. I feel good that my repudiation of John F. Kelly, Trump’s chief of staff and by many accounts the White House executive looked to as ballast to Trump’s excesses, is being confirmed by Kelly’s own actions.  

Having been shown to be a dissembler of truth when it came to the controversy involving the death in Niger of Sgt. La David T. Johnson and Trump’s condolence call to his widow, Kelly’s appearance Monday night on the Laura Ingraham show on Fox News reinforced his jaundiced view of history. Asked about removing plaques of George Washington and Robert E. Lee from a church in Alexandria, Va., Kelly said,

“I would tell you that Robert E. Lee was an honorable man. He was a man that gave up his country to fight for his state, which 150 years ago was more important than country. It was always loyalty to state first back in those days. Now it’s different today. But the lack of an ability to compromise led to the Civil War, and men and women of good faith on both sides made their stand where their conscience had them make their stand.”

Historians have excoriated Kelly for his depiction of followers of the Confederacy and the idea that failure to compromise resulted in war. Here’s a sample:  http://wapo.st/2gRznMq?tid=ss_tw-bottom&utm_term=.b8f3e02ab210. 

Let’s look at his evaluation of current loyalties, specifically his comment that “It was always loyalty to state first back in those days. Now it’s different today.” 

Has Kelly been asleep during the repeated assault by states, almost always Republican controlled, to push back against federal laws and regulations in the interests of “states’ rights”? Individual states have fought against the legalization of abortion rights, environmental safeguards, worker benefits, national parks and monuments, voting rights, gender equality and civil rights.


Indeed, a central plank of Trumpism is a dissolution of federal power in favor of state authority. 

Retired Marine Corps general John F. Kelly may have been a solid leader of men in battle but he is a flawed advisor and gatekeeper to the equally if not more flawed leader of our country.

Wednesday, September 27, 2017

Trump's Next Patriotic Move and Kim's Secret Plan To Invigorate North Korea

I have a prediction about Trump’s next move in his escalating crusade espousing patriotic signs of loyalty, plus an explanation for North Korea’s war of words with the bully-in-chief.

I predict Trump will mandate that all cabinet meetings begin with the Pledge of Allegiance, possibly followed by a rendition of the Star Spangled Banner (heaven help the secretary who doesn’t sing loud enough or warbles off key. Trump might even designate, on a rotating basis, one cabinet member to sing the national anthem solo, a cappella. If so, expect resignations or sheepish cries of laryngitis prior to their respective turns).

Trump doesn’t have to pressure Speaker Paul Ryan and Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to begin their respective chamber’s proceedings with the pledge and/or the national anthem. They already do.

Woe to the elected or appointed official who does not conform to the symbols Trump deems patriotic.

On WNYC public radio Monday morning, Brian Lehrer noted that after the disturbances in Charlottesville Trump said it was okay for peaceful demonstrators to protest the removal of a Civil War statue even if they marched with neo-Nazis and white extremists. He dismissed the idea that the statue of Robert E. Lee, or the Confederate flags or the torch light parade or the neo Nazi flags represented slavery, bigotry and the suppression of equal rights. Yet, he sharply and profanely criticized the peaceful demonstrations by athletes protesting racial inequalities while seeking an end to police mistreatment and killings of minorities. 

My friend Linda, on the other hand, sent along a reminder that refusing to say the Pledge or to engage in other symbolic gestures of patriotism was a right protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution. In West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in 1943—during the height of World War II, no less!—that the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment protected students from being forced to salute the American flag and say the Pledge of Allegiance in school. Furthermore, they could not be forced to stand while others recited it.

But the Barnette case applied only to public officials and government actions. Private employers may well have the power and legal right to fire employees if they violate a corporate policy to stand for the national anthem. The outcome of any such incident may rest on the individual’s employment contract and if a collective bargaining agreement exists. 

In other words, there is no settled case law, and though Barnette is now the law of the land for the last 74 years, it is instructive to realize Barnette overturned a previous Supreme Court decision (Minersville School District v. Gobitis) that was just three years old. 

So Trump’s verbal assault on athletes, asserting those who don’t stand for the national anthem should be fired, might, just might, be within legal bounds. Or not. We apparently won’t know as the National Football League and many of its team owners do not seem eager to test the issue. Indeed, the league and some owners have distanced themselves from Trump.

Trump, meanwhile, is like the old fashioned advertising executive seen as Juror #12 in the film 12 Angry Men. To advance the dialogue during the deadlocked jury deliberations he says in advertising you throw out ideas, run them up the flagpole and see if anyone salutes.  

When Trump speaks publicly he tosses out provocations and waits to see if they resonate with his base. If they do, he hunkers down, doubles down and attacks anyone who questions his wisdom. So it was with his anti-athlete diatribe that began with a speech last week in Alabama. 

The national debate isn’t likely to go away soon (it is, after all, just week four of the NFL season), which seems to be overshadowing the after-hurricane crises in Puerto Rico, Houston and Florida, the debate over health care, the quest for peace in the Middle East, the need to overhaul the country’s infrastructure, cyber security, tax reform, the Paris Climate Agreement, the Iran nuclear deal, and the standoff with North Korea over nuclear arms development. 


Grand Fenwick Redux: This much we know about North Korea and its enigmatic leader Kim Jong-un: The country is impoverished and ruled by a dictator who enjoys movies. 

I don’t have it on good authority but I suspect Kim has seen the movie The Mouse That Roared, the 1959 Peter Sellers satire based on the 1955 novel of the same title, about the down on its luck Duchy of Grand Fenwick that concocts a get-rich-quick scheme. Its leaders declare war on the United States with the intention of losing as they believe America would then rebuild its vanquished foe much as it did with Germany and Japan. 

Kim, no doubt, can’t possibly hope to win a confrontation with the U.S., but he could extract invaluable tribute from Washington. It would be the least Trump could do to reward the third generation tyrant for being a puppet antagonist to his patriotic protagonist. Of course, Kim would have to agree to live in exile, but I am confident he could find a more hospitable environment somewhere on this earth.


Wednesday, August 16, 2017

Charlottesville and Lessons of History

Have we forgotten history, or just not been instructed in it? As a people, have we forgotten that prior to World War II, thousands, tens of thousands, of our citizens rallied in support of the German-American Bund, an organization dedicated to the principles of Nazi Germany?

It is not just today that we are confronted with a fringe element of society that harbors fascist thoughts that advocate white supremacy, anti-Semitism, racism and xenophobia. It is part of our history.

Let’s face it. Buried deep in many an American soul there is latent prejudice. Maybe not outright bigotry, but definitely a feeling that some of our fellow residents are not as equal as we are. 

Over more than a century our culture has masked that bias, has tried to alter reality by substituting a sepia-tinged fictional record of history. From James Fallows of The Atlantic, I learned today on WNYC’s Brian Lehrer Show, that in the aftermath of the Plessy v. Ferguson U.S. Supreme Court decision of 1896, permitting legal segregation in public and private institutions, many Confederate Civil War monuments were erected until 1919 when race riots broke out in numerous cities. Yet Confederate monuments are still being built in this century, even in states outside the South.

The monuments revere men who fought to break up the Union, who believed it was God’s will to permit the enslavement of another person because they were inferior beings. 

Popular culture portrayed Southerners as high-minded, virtuous and chivalrous. No poor white trash among them, except one scene in Gone with the Wind when Scarlett O’Hara is assaulted as she tries to drive her wagon passed a camp of unemployed white men disaffected by Reconstruction, fiction’s link to today’s angry Trump alt-right supporters. Not to worry. The “good folks” of Atlanta knew how to deal with those miscreants. 

Few older movies portrayed slavery as a reprehensible assault on human dignity and family relations. Only in the last few years have we witnessed a collection of films from a black person’s perspective, movies such as Django Unchained, 12 Years a Slave, The Birth of a Nation (not to be confused with the silent film by D.W. Griffith that heralded the origin of the Ku Klux Klan). 

It wasn’t just the templars of Southern society who exuded righteousness. From 1959 to 1961 the TV show The Rebel, starring Nick Adams as Johnny Yuma, chose to portray the defeated Southern soldier as a knight errant wandering the West righting wrongs. Two decades later the General Lee, an orange Dodge Charger with a Confederate battle flag painted on its roof, was a prominent part of The Dukes of Hazzard. The Dukes fought the swamp of political corruption in their own comical way. 

(A personal digression: I watched The Rebel, but never The Dukes of Hazzard, though my father for some reason did. Indeed, when our son was young, less than 5, they would watch the show together. I found this out one day when we drove to a friend’s house and Dan asked to get out of the car “like the Dukes do.” I didn’t understand, so he explained that the General Lee had no windows so the Dukes would shimmy out through the window slots. I let him do it that one time.) 

No one is more exalted by Southerners than Robert E. Lee, the commanding general of the Army of Northern Virginia. Given a choice of fighting to preserve the United States, Lee, a West Point graduate, chose to fight to shatter it.

Facts have a way of hiding behind the seams of history. Take, for instance, the evil of slavery in the United States as I was taught in school. As you might recall from past postings, I attended 12 years of Hebrew school education. We learned to call it the Civil War, not the War Between the States, as Southerners preferred to categorize the conflict. But I cannot recall ever learning about Jewish complicity in the slave trade, nor were my classmates and I advised that Judah P. Benjamin, a Jew, was a prominent member of the Confederate cabinet, at various times serving as attorney general, secretary of war and secretary of state.

When a people are oppressed it is not uncommon for them to react violently to symbols of that oppression once it is lifted. Think back to the toppled statues of Saddam Hussein and the image of the man beating the sculpture with his shoe, a potent act of disdain in the Arabic world. Likewise, when the Iron Curtain was lifted, monuments to Lenin and other Communist leaders came tumbling down. Others were removed to less public places. 

Removing Confederate monuments from display in public places should be a priority for all levels of government.

The heritage of the South is part of our nation’s history, but it is not one we should venerate. As dedicated as the common Confederate soldier and their generals were, they swore allegiance to a vile, repressive society. There can be no excusing their treason and inhumane actions any more than one can accept a president of the United States, or any citizen, failing to remonstrate most violently and without equivocation against Nazi ideology. 

The moral authority of the office of the presidency and of the United States of America as world leaders has been tarnished and diminished by Donald Trump. 


Reporting the News: Here’s an interesting comparison of evening news outlets. Following Trump’s explosive news conference Tuesday afternoon, CBS News, currently anchored by Anthony Mason, devoted its full telecast of reports (roughly 21 minutes) to the ongoing coverage of the Charlottesville, VA, violence and its political aftermath. 

The multi-faceted story generated just 11 minutes of coverage from David Muir of ABC News. Lester Holt of NBC News spent 14 and a half minutes on the story.


Teaching Hate: Bragging rights for the most liked tweet of all time belongs to former president Barack Obama. He quoted former South African president Nelson Mandela: 

“No one is born hating another person because of the color of his skin or his background or his religion … People must learn to hate, and if they can learn to hate, they can be taught to love … For love comes more naturally to the human heart than its opposite.”

A noble sentiment which reminded me of a song written by Richard Rodgers and Oscar Hammerstein II for their Pulitzer Prize winning musical South Pacific. The 1949 musical included the following song, You've Got to Be Carefully Taught,” a warning about racism. Here are the lyrics:

You’ve got to be taught to hate and fear
You’ve got to be taught from year to year
It’s got to be drummed in your dear little ear
You’ve got to be carefully taught

You’ve got to be taught to be afraid
Of people whose eyes are oddly made
And people whose skin is a diff’rent shade
You’ve got to be carefully taught

You’ve got to be taught before it’s too late
Before you are six or seven or eight
To hate all the people your relatives hate
You’ve got to be carefully taught

To hear it sung, click this link: https://youtu.be/l0Kam23fsMg








Thursday, June 29, 2017

From Worst Cabinet Secretaries to Monuments Supporting Upholders of Slavery

Did you see results of the unscientific poll as to whom is the worst member of Donald Trump’s cabinet?

As reported by Gail Collins in The New York Times last week, the “winner” was Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos (https://nyti.ms/2sTmSr3). 

I disagree. For me, it is a three-way tie.  

Cabinet picks are both political and enabling choices. A president selects people who supported his election and who are willing to carry out his agenda, especially if it parallels their own. 

So Betsy DeVos was a perfect choice by Trump as secretary of education. However, she is not his worst pick as she is doing exactly what she has always professed to believe. As is Scott Pruitt at EPA. 

The winners, yes winners, for worst cabinet members are Rex Tillerson at State, James Mattis at Defense and Jeff Sessions as attorney general, the first two because they have subjugated the best interests of the United States to their loyalty to an incompetent leader set on a course of destroying the credibility and standing of America throughout the world, and the third for not realizing his obligation is to be the chief legal officer of the country and defender of the Constitution and not to be the servant of a president with little or no allegiance to rights won through years of sacrifice both at home and abroad.

Tillerson, Mattis and Sessions are the true enablers of the Trump presidency. 


Trumped by Spellchecker: Having railed against spelling mistakes generated by an over-reliance on Spellchecker and a lack of proofreading context, I was hoisted on my own petard the other day. 

Spellchecker didn’t catch that I misspelled “countermand” when stating nobody is able to overrule a president’s nuclear strike order. I had written “counterman,” not countermand. 

No one advised me of my mistake except my brother who wrote, “As they say in the old country, please don’t countermand the counterman. He knows what you want to eat.”  

For me at the deli it’s usually a tongue sandwich on seeded rye with a side of cole slaw and french fries or potato knish. Washed down with either a Diet Coke or diet Dr. Brown’s black cherry soda. 

Right now I’m eating crow.

Spellchecker isn’t the only application that’s done me wrong lately. My British friend Dave Banks sent me a note, meaning to end it with a “Thanks, Mur.” When I received the email it read, “Thanks, Murban.” 

Asked, “Where the heck did Murban come from?,” Dave replied, 

“Mur!
“I wrote MUR!
“I hate predictive text!!!”

So do I.

In case you’re wondering, murban is a term for a man’s turban (http://www.refinery29.com/is-the-male-turban-becoming-a-fashion-trend?utm_source=email&utm_medium=email_share). Or it could refer to the Murban Bab Oil Field 84 kilometers northwest of Abu Dhabi Islands. 


Frosted Glasses: Another one of my early adulthood touchstones has disappeared. 

The last Lum’s restaurant, a freestanding unit in Bellevue Nebraska, outside Omaha, closed May 28 (if you’re wondering how I found out about the closing, Gilda read an article in the Omaha World-Herald. She reads it every day. It’s her way of staying current with what’s going on where Ellie, Donny and CJ live. Here’s the article that Gilda uncovered in The World-Herald: http://www.omaha.com/news/goodnews/man-who-dined-and-dashed-years-ago-sends-to-last/article_f454a6b6-55fc-11e7-821d-df15ec7c719a.html. It’s an interesting story about paying back a long-term debt.). 

It was in a Lum’s on Route 5 in Dewitt, east of Syracuse, NY, in 1971-72 that I learned to love beer served in a frosted goblet. I would go there with Steve Kreinberg, a fellow graduate student at the Newhouse School of Public Communications of Syracuse University. 

Lum’s was a chain of family restaurants whose signature dish was hot dogs cooked in beer. I preferred their basket of fried shrimp dipped in cocktail sauce, but what made a visit to Lum’s special was the frosted mugs used to serve the beer. To commemorate those days I keep a few tall glasses frosting away in the freezer. Here’s more on the history of Lum’s: http://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/local/rocroots/2016/11/05/whatever-happened-lums/93327386/


Monuments to an Infamous Past: During the Civil War, 11 states seceded from the Union to form the Confederacy in defense of slavery. The South has many monuments to “the cause.” Richmond, VA, is the latest city considering removing Civil War monuments from positions of prominence.

Sounds reassuring. So how do you explain that, according to USA Today, there are between “700 and possibly more than 1,000 Confederate monuments in 31 states—in public parks, courthouse squares and state capitols”?

Many, said USA Today, “were created by the United Daughters of the Confederacy, which was advancing the spurious idea that the South left the Union and fought the Civil War over states’ rights, not slavery.” (http://amp.usatoday.com/story/101870418/)

Those 20 non Confederate locations include Union states, such as “Massachusetts, Iowa and Pennsylvania and states that in 1861 were mere territories, such as Montana, Arizona and Oklahoma.”

North Carolina, once considered a template for a New South of tolerance and equality, has added 35 monuments since 2000, according to a University of North Carolina survey, USA Today reported. 


We have a long way to go as a country when we still venerate soldiers who fought to keep fellow human beings as slaves. 

Tuesday, July 7, 2015

Symbol of Oppression

I can’t explain or understand why, but one of my father’s favorite shows when he was just a few years older than I am now was The Dukes of Hazzard. Friday nights after dinner, whether we were visiting my parents in Brooklyn or they were with us in White Plains, he’d watch Bo and Luke Duke do their shenanigans while riding around in the General Lee, their orange Dodge Charger with a Confederate battle flag painted on the roof. To enter and exit the car the Dukes had to climb in or out through the side windows.

Sitting next to my father during these TV times would be our son Dan, all of five years old when the series ended its six-year run. So it shouldn’t have come as too much of a surprise to me that one day during his formative years, when Dan and I were riding around in my Chevy Vega hatchback, he asked if he could get out of the car “like the Dukes.” 

The General Lee is back in the news. After the massacre of nine Afro-American parishioners in Charleston, SC, by a white supremest who posed for pictures with the Confederate battle flag, professional golfer Bubba Watson has removed the flag from his copy of the General Lee, replacing it with an American flag.  

As a symbol of oppression, the Confederate battle flag ranks right up there with the Nazi swastika and the Communist hammer and sickle. And, if we’re going to be historically correct and objective, with the Christian cross and the crescent of Islam, both religious symbols used to subjugate and annihilate millions of non-believers down through the centuries, throughout the world. Perhaps in another posting I’ll delve deeper into the realm of religious conflagrations that continue to this day, in the case of Islam, for example, or the once daily strife in Northern Ireland, or the genocide in Bosnia. In the interim, you can look up the histories of numerous wars, invasions and mass murders done in the name of religion.

For now, let’s confine ourselves to the table talk discussion at hand, the meaning, and thus the fate, of the Confederate battle flag. Flying the flag, its supporters say, respects those who died fighting for the Confederacy, the heritage of the South, its history, its way of life. They reject any suggestion that it stands for racism, segregation and white supremacy. 

The flag went into battle, they say, in the War Between the States.

In not recognizing that conflict as The Civil War, they fail to understand and accept that the cause they so faithfully cherish was fought, and the soldiers who fell under its banner died, to preserve the right to own another human being! 

The whole foundation of the South was built on slavery. Today’s Republican electoral domination of the South is based on gerrymandered districts and restrictive voting rights laws that diminish the power of Afro-Americans. 

The Confederate battle flag has come to represent a distilled segment of disobedience, of rejection of the common good. Rebellion. A belief that majority rule does not apply if it undermines outdated, biased, principles. 

It is interesting to recall that during the anti-Vietnam War demonstrations, or the resistance to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, no one, to my memory, ever rallied dissenters by waving the Confederate flag. Yet, when the nation finally started to recognize and do something about inequality in the 1950’s and into the 1960’s, the Confederate battle flag reappeared across the South. 

Coincidence? Hardly. The Stars and Bars were meant to send a signal that just as Afro-Americans were not equal citizens in the Old South their status would be no different in the New South.   

Anyone who defends the public showing of the Confederate flag except in a display inside a museum just doesn’t get it. And if they haven’t after all that happened in Charleston and around the country over the last year, they probably never will.




Sunday, July 13, 2014

Little Doubt, War Is Hell

Here’s an exercise for you—every time you see the word “South,” substitute Gaza; every time you see “North,” read it as Israel. See how prescient and current these comments are:

“You people of the South don't know what you are doing. This country will be drenched in blood, and God only knows how it will end. It is all folly, madness, a crime against civilization! You people speak so lightly of war; you don't know what you're talking about. War is a terrible thing! You mistake, too, the people of the North. They are a peaceable people but an earnest people, and they will fight, too. They are not going to let this country be destroyed without a mighty effort to save it … Besides, where are your men and appliances of war to contend against them? The North can make a steam engine, locomotive, or railway car; hardly a yard of cloth or pair of shoes can you make. You are rushing into war with one of the most powerful, ingeniously mechanical, and determined people on Earth — right at your doors. You are bound to fail. Only in your spirit and determination are you prepared for war. In all else you are totally unprepared, with a bad cause to start with. At first you will make headway, but as your limited resources begin to fail, shut out from the markets of Europe as you will be, your cause will begin to wane. If your people will but stop and think, they must see in the end that you will surely fail.”

That’s a quote from a December 24, 1860, letter sent to Prof. David F. Boyd of the Louisiana State Seminary by William Tecumseh Sherman, the famous Civil War Union general, reputed to have coined the saying, “War is hell.” It’s not important if he did or did not. What is relevant is his first had knowledge of the consequences of war. 

From his 1864 Letter to Atlanta (substitute Gaza):
“You might as well appeal against the thunder-storm as against these terrible hardships of war. They are inevitable, and the only way the people of Atlanta can hope once more to live in peace and quiet at home, is to stop the war, which can only be done by admitting that it began in error and is perpetuated in pride.”

For the last week, since the aerial war of rockets, bombs and missiles has ripped through Israel and Gaza, I have been tense with dreaded belief that the only way terrorists will be stopped from launching attacks is by ground, door-to-door combat which will inflict heavy casualties on both sides as Israel roots out underground caches of war materiel the Palestinians have chosen to amass rather than invest in making Gaza a land of peace and prosperity. 

As you may recall, I am involved with Shalom Yisrael, a group of Westchester-based volunteers that annually has brought to America for two week vacations first responder-trauma care providers from the Israeli settlements adjacent to the Gaza Strip. One of our guests this year, Lilach, a midwife who lives in Nirim, a kibbutz some four miles from the southern border with Gaza, and who works in Be’er Sheva, sent a note this morning:

“The last week has been very difficult. We were forced to leave our home in Nirim after the education system here was shut down, to help families with young children from the kibbutz relocate to a safer haven in a kibbutz in the north - Mishmar Ha’emek. I (Lilach) am here with the families (and also continue to work at the hospital in Be’er Sheva, about 2 hours’ drive from here), while Esther remained in Nirim to help maintain a life routine there. 

“The kibbutz suffered several direct rocket hits within its perimeters, but luckily no one was injured, and there was only relatively minor damage to property. But normal life has been completely interrupted and we are unable to work the fields. The bombings from Gaza and the ongoing bombardments from the Israeli Air Force mean that life in Nirim is accompanied by an unending soundtrack of war. We know that people on the other side of the border are also suffering, and think of them as well—even now. 

“The worst aspect of this situation is the uncertainty and inability to plan ahead—will it take a few more days or a few more weeks? So far we have been able to provide plenty of good time for the children, but they have also started asking, when do we go back home? We cannot answer, and this is very difficult. 

“Thank you all for thinking of us and for your great support and concern. It means a lot, and gives us strength. Hopefully, this terrible conflict will be over soon. 


“Shalom” 

Thursday, September 15, 2011

Musings on Home, Intelligence and Blame

Home Sweet Home: The man responsible for building our home died Monday at age 81. He didn’t actually hammer the nails into the frame, or do any other type of manual labor. But Martin Berger, along with his partner Robert Weinberg, created our residential neighborhood as a prelude to transforming much of Westchester County and specifically White Plains into a thriving commercial district through projects developed by the Robert Martin Co.

Our little subdivision, known officially as Carriage Hill, was built in 1966. The three streets created within the development bare the names of Berger’s business and family relationships: Romar Avenue after Robert Martin; Teramar Way after his then wife Terry and Martin; our street, Brad Lane, named after his son, Brad.

Back in 1990, while attending a UJA meeting for an upcoming family trip to Israel, I sat in a room with perhaps 40 others. As we went around the room introducing ourselves, the maybe 30-something young man with long, curly, prematurely grey hair sitting next to me said his name was Brad Berger. I couldn’t resist telling him I lived on his street.

According to his father’s obituary, Brad now lives in Beverly Hills, Calif.


Proof Positive: I’m normally a cynic when it comes to the intelligence of the electorate. Here’s a clip from Jay Leno’s Tuesday show that provides more than ample proof I have much to be worried about: http://www.nbc.com/the-tonight-show/video/citizenship-test-9-13-11/1355026

(In case you have difficulty opening this link, Jay questioned young adults, all citizens, about their knowledge of American history, questions he culled from the test administered to immigrants seeking U.S. citizenship. Here are some of the answers provided by three people interviewed by Leno:

Who fought in the Civil War? The U.S. and Britain
Who was president during the Civil War? George Washington
Who assassinated President Lincoln? Lee Harvey Oswald
When was the Declaration of Independence written? 1935
How many Supreme Court justices are there? Two
How many U.S. senators are there? One
How many U.S. senators are there? 52, because there are 52 states
Who is the current chief executive of the country? Greenspan
Name a country that borders the United States? Europe)

How could these people allow themselves to be shown on television exhibiting such utter stupidity? I guess getting 15 seconds of fame was worth more than keeping their veil of dignity and intelligence.

Leno had a response I found acceptable. He ended each person’s interview by suggesting they enter a nearby van so they could be transported across the border where they could learn more about America before being permitted to re-enter.


The Next Phase: We’re moving into the next phase of the election process—the blame game for who’s responsible for the lousy economy. For all you old timers, it’s like the “who lost China” debate of the early 1950s, and the “who lost Vietnam” debate of the 1960s and 1970s.

I think I can safely say both political parties share the blame for the economic distress we find ourselves wallowing in. From Clinton through Obama and their respective congressional partners, the leadership of our country has enabled corporate America and wealthy Americans to escape taxes, or at least their fair share, while ignoring the deterioration of the middle and working classes’ buying power. They’ve allowed more people to slip into poverty. You know the rest, the soaring national debt, etc., so I won’t detail it.

Democrats and Republicans clearly are not able to work together. So here are two tongue-in-cheek solutions to consider:

First, let’s give Republicans a chance to implement their program, on the condition that if GOP ideas to get people back to work don’t produce substantial results by September 2012, say, an unemployment rate of 8% or lower, they will agree to adopt the Democratic plan. If the GOP plan works, no doubt they’d be swept into office in November 2012. But if it doesn’t work they have to accept the Democratic plan for one year regardless of how the election turns out.

My second suggestion is to stop federal spending in states where governors and legislators complain about excessive federal spending. So, in a state like Texas, Gov. Perry could not request any federal disaster relief for the wild fires that are consuming his state. Nor could he ask for FEMA funds if a tornado or hurricane struck. And Perry’s constituents would stop receiving monthly Social Security checks since it’s just a Ponzi scheme, anyway.

Residents of states opting out of federal funding would have to decide if they want to continue to live in those states. That will force them to decide if the federal government really is the bane of their lives, or if they care more for the opportunity to carry a concealed weapon, or if they want their children to learn about Creationism, or some other value that overrides being part of the national budget.

Sunday, September 11, 2011

Reflections on September 11

Inside my cranium all sorts of thoughts, emotions and memories swirl about, battling for supremacy.

I get it. I understand media fixation on the 10th anniversary of 9/11. But I’m struggling with my own acceptance of the commemoration, as if paying respect to the dead in some way can assuage the tragedy that has befallen our nation by the subsequent acts of our elected leaders who chose to plunge us into two intractable, interminable wars and into a political no-fly zone where government by negotiation and compromise is as foreign as an al-Qaeda peace offering.

I can’t bring myself to read but a handful of the articles spewed out by the omnipresent media. I can’t bring myself to watch special after special depicting the loss of our seeming innocence 10 years ago. September 11 without a doubt was a national catastrophe, but it was not the first time our country suffered physical and emotional scars, some deeper and more conflicted than the sudden though perhaps expected assault by an enemy committed to our destruction as a beacon of civilization.

We lost 2,983 mostly civilian souls 10 years ago. An almost incomprehensible tally. But not unprecedented, not in sheer numbers the largest of any one day toll, nor the biggest in percentage to total population. On the killing fields of Antietam, near Sharpsburg, MD, on September 17, 1862, the armies of the North and South inflicted the highest single day carnage in our nation’s history: 3,654 died, almost 20,000 more were injured. The dead represented .00011% of the U.S. population of 31,443,000. Put into perspective, the equivalent loss of life against 2001 census figures would have been 31,361. Antietam. Aside from Civil War buffs, hardly anyone takes note of September 17, I’d venture to say.

We do remember and commemorate Pearl Harbor Day, December 7, 1941, when 2,459 perished, .000018% of our then population. Film of the sneak attack was as visible in its day as the tumbling of the Twin Towers.

Other seminal moments have been seared into our national conscience: 274 sailors killed in the the sinking of the USS Maine in Havana harbor February 15, 1898, that precipitated the Spanish-American War; the sinking of the Lusitania May 7, 1915, with the loss of 1,198 passengers and crew, including 128 Americans. Though a British ship, the torpedoing of the Lusitania fueled U.S. entry into World War I two years later after Germany began a new campaign of indiscriminate U-boat attacks on Atlantic shipping; the now refuted attacks by North Vietnamese gunboats on the USS Maddox in the Gulf of Tonkin August 2-4, 1964. No one died in that incident; from 1965 until U.S. involvement in Vietnam ended in 1975, nearly 58,000 Americans perished.

Perhaps part of my antipathy to September 11 is I knew no one who died that day, though one of our friends surely escaped death by having the good fortune to reschedule a morning meeting to his midtown office rather than in the headquarters of AON in 2 World Trade Center.

Perhaps another part of me is disturbed by the failure of our government to seek shared sacrifice in the war on terror. I’m not an advocate of a draft, but paying for the wars with a more equitable tax schedule, especially for the wealthy, would have been appropriate. Moreover, equipping our troops with the right materiel should have been a no-brainer, along with providing top notch veterans medical care and employment help once their tours of duty ended. Of course, launching an undermanned, trumped up war in Iraq instead of pursuing al-Qaeda in Afghanistan cannot be ignored, either.

Perhaps I’m distant from the commemorations because on September 11, 2001, I was in Phoenix, attending a technology conference. I turned over in bed at 6 am and decided to alter my usual business travel routine. Instead of turning on the TV to watch the news, I picked up the USA Today at my front door and returned to bed to read. A half hour later, 9:30 in New York, I called my office to listen to voice mail. My brother Bernie in Maryland had left a cryptic message asking if I was all right. I transferred to Mary Beth, our managing editor. Perhaps she could explain why he might have asked a question so strange 10 years ago, so commonplace today. She stunned me saying two planes had flown into the Twin Towers, one of which had already imploded. For the next several hours I lay transfixed in bed watching hell transform lower Manhattan.

I called Gilda. Along with the rest of the Beth Israel Medical Center staff, she was assigned to prepare and wait for survivors who never materialized. At 8 pm, she was sent home.

I was marooned in Phoenix until Saturday. Sunday morning, after an overnight stop over in Chicago, I flew back to LaGuardia Airport, a trip I had made some 25 times a year for the prior 25 years. More than 500 approaches to the city, in daytime and evening, never tiring of the spectacle under wing. At first, if not at a window seat, I would crane my neck to snag a view of the stalagmites of steel and glass rising from the bedrock of Manhattan.

Now, on September 17, 2001, as the flight from Chicago descended in the sky above New Jersey, from 50 miles out plumes of smoke could be seen still rising from the spot where the World Trade Center stood less than a week earlier. As the plane glided up the East River, even without the Twin Towers the Manhattan skyline was still spectacular, as majestic as the Rockies or the Grand Canyon.

I had visited the World Trade Center many times for business meetings. I had eaten in Windows on the World, taking in the food and the view. I was a dazzled tourist on the observation floor, sitting in the scooped out seats flush against windows that let you peer almost straight down from more than 1,000 feet in the air. I miss the towers.

But perhaps because I’m from an ethnic culture that has known more than its fair share of trauma, unspeakable, often unimaginable, offenses, and yet extraordinary resilience and rebirth, I can’t stop for a day dedicated to one event. I can pause and hope we will be vigilant enough to prevent a similarly invasive assault on our way of life. I hope those who lost loved ones always remember them. I hope their fellow countrymen never forget them. But I also hope we keep our collective grief in context while rededicating our nation to values that made America the most remarkable and envied in the world.

Thursday, June 16, 2011

Don't Know Much About History

I like history. But I’ll freely admit I hardly cracked a book in high school. That didn’t prevent me from scoring a 98 on the American History regents exam (the teacher, Mr. Moroze, deducted 2 points from my essay because I included a fact he was unaware of and therefore thought was incorrect. After I showed him evidence to support my claim, he shrugged and said I shouldn’t complain about a 98).

To this day I’m still pretty good when it comes to history. That’s why I was particularly saddened by a new study that revealed just 12% of high school seniors are proficient in the subject (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/15/education/15history.html?hpw. For a sample of questions asked to 12th graders, and also 8th and 4th graders, follow this link: http://abcnews.go.com/US/12-percent-high-school-seniors-proficient-history/story?id=13840331).

Not knowing history is a real problem in a nation that prides itself on its heritage. Not knowing where reality starts and ends, and where myth takes over, can undermine our national fiber. Our history binds us together, or at least should. Not knowing or forgetting, for example, that we’re a nation of immigrants, that much of our country was settled by Hispanics before other European settlers descended on the land, might be a reason some who claim to be real Americans are intolerant of newcomers, legal and illegal. Or it might lead to people still believing owning slaves was a states rights issue and its abolition not a good enough reason for the Civil War to be fought. Of course, Lincoln entered the war with the purpose of preserving the Union, but his mission changed as the conflict dragged on.

I have long thought too many of the electorate were dumb, voting too often with emotions rather than brains. If this new study is any indication, the ranks of the dumb and dumber are growing. We cannot hope to maintain world leadership if we fail to appreciate our heritage, and that of other countries.

What’s to be done? As sportscaster Warner Wolf used to say, “Let’s go to the videotape,” or more precisely, to the movies. Don’t laugh. It’s pie-in-the-sky to think kids will voluntarily, or not, begin to read history books. Instead, they could learn history, both facts and context, from a careful, controlled curriculum of films depicting historical events, eras and societal norms. I know reading books would be better, but we live in an increasingly visual age. So let’s play, I mean teach, to our strength, not our weakness. I offer myself as proof that a sophisticated viewing of movies can enrich and educate.

Is there a better movie than The Grapes of Wrath to convey the desperate lives of Dust Bowl families of the 1930s? Colonial America comes to life through the lens of Drums Along the Mohawk. All Quiet on the Western Front evinces the futility of war, from the German perspective of WWI, while Paths of Glory spotlights the corruption of the French military during that same “war to end all wars”. Most people would pick Dr. Zhivago to show the Russian Revolution. I prefer Knight Without Armor, a 1937 flick starring Marlene Dietrich and Robert Donat. The first three hours of Gone with the Wind is marvelous storytelling about a culture that didn’t recognize its flaws. Watch Hester Street and be transported to the immigrant world of the Lower East Side of Manhattan at the turn of the 20th century. The challenge of integrating soldiers returning from battle with their loved ones and with jobs that lack the same meaning they had before they went off to war is powerfully portrayed in The Best Years of Our Lives.

Sure there are exaggerations and inaccuracies in many films (I wouldn’t, for example, pick JFK as an example of historical honesty. But Platoon and The Deer Hunter revealed the degradations young men suffered through in Vietnam). Teachers can put the films in perspective, correct the mistakes, add on layers of meaning with additional facts.

I can’t guarantee high school students will do as well as I did, but I can confidently predict they’ll enjoy history more and be more knowledgeable.

Tuesday, April 12, 2011

The New Civil War

Today marks the 150th anniversary of the start of the Civil War, the contest that determined human beings are not to be defined as property. Regrettably, while we are still engaged in the pursuit of equal rights and opportunity for people of color, our society is immersed in a latter day civil war of many fronts, a battle that pits haves against have-nots, blue states against red states, politic and polite people against the impolitic and the impolite, sexists vs. non-sexists.

It’s hard to imagine a pacific end to this multi-dimensional conflict. Perhaps the most depressing aspect of this struggle is the lack of statesmanship exhibited by our political leaders. I’m sorry to have to pick on Arizona again, but I’m left little choice when one of its U.S. Senators, Jon Kyl, gratuitously dismisses a blatant lie he spoke on the floor of the Senate as a “remark not intended to be a factual statement.” In arguing against funding for Planned Parenthood last week, Kyl said 90% of its money is used to provide abortions. The true figure is 3%.

Like the erroneous front-page newspaper article followed days later by a page 15 correction, it’s the original story that stays in the public’s mind. Kyl didn’t apologize on the floor of the Senate. His spokesperson read a clarifying statement.

What once had been a chamber categorized as the “world’s greatest deliberative body” has been reduced to a schoolyard taunting field of lies and ignorance.

How sad for our country, our nation, our people. Our future.

Tuesday, February 22, 2011

Look for My Union Label

Let’s get my bias out in the open at the very beginning—30 years as a manager, yet I still identify with my two years as a union member back at the New Haven Register in 1975-76.

Perhaps that’s one reason I sympathize with public service employees in Wisconsin, Ohio and elsewhere who are threatened with the loss of collective bargaining rights by newly emboldened Republican governors and state houses. Don’t focus on the demand to require civil servants to pay more for health care coverage and to contribute more toward their pensions. That’s an appropriate take back. Budget deficits are real and deep, with benefit liabilities a major factor. Belt tightening should be across the board and include government workers.

But the right to collective bargaining is a mainstay of union activity. Any action to strip that collective bargaining right is a first step in doing away with unions, both in the public and private sectors. For sure, not every union is pristine. Likewise, not every management team or politician is abusive or regressive. But history has shown time and again that unions have led to greater employee benefits for all (for non union workers and managers, as well), and that without union protection individual workers are vulnerable even if they are first-rate workers. A teacher I know in California, for example, received exemplary ratings from both her principal and independent test scores last year, but for some unknown reason this academic year has lost the confidence of this same administrator to the point that without a union to protect her she might well have lost her job or she would have had to resort to a costly, personal civil law suit.

The bogeyman du jour, probably des annes, is the labor union. Strip away public and private sector unions, the theory seems to go, and our economic woes will be on the road to solvency, our government deficits made less deep and our exceptionalism restored. If we eliminate unions, maybe we’ll be able to reduce, or even do away with, the minimum wage and worker benefits, especially that darned social security that we keep hearing is going to be bankrupt by the time baby boomers all retire. Who needs it anyway, since the economy is in such bad shape no one will be able to retire except the very rich, and since when do they need government help? If we could only do away with all those government entitlements and regulations perhaps then we’d be able to compete on the global labor market, compete with countries like Bangladesh, China, India, even Mexico. Without those costly wage levels and benefit programs plus OSHA and EPA rules to follow, we’d easily resolve our illegal immigration crisis. No self-respecting Latino would want to jump border fences or wade across the Rio Grande to enter a country that doesn’t provide any better earnings prospects and worker conditions than their native land. Without inflated union workers costs, no more manufacturing plants would be shut down in the United States, their jobs shipped overseas to lower labor markets. We’d go back to the way it was mid-last century, when all we did was close down northern plants and move the jobs to cheap-labor southern states. But at least we’d be keeping those “good” jobs in the good ol’ US of A, thus bringing more power to states that are the true core of our country’s creed, states that still believe the Civil War was a conflict based on states’ rights, not the exploitation of labor and human rights better known as slavery.

See, it all begins with getting rid of those damned unions. And the place to start is with public sector unions because we all know government workers, especially teachers, are slaggards, what with their two months off in the summer and all those winter and spring school breaks. Those damn teachers work just 180 days a year, while most others have a 261-day work year, before vacation and holidays. Those teachers have it cushy, considering we keep hearing education test scores keep dropping. They keep complaining parents aren’t helping out with good follow-up at home, but that’s merely a cover-up for no accountability. And, did you ever see state workers working hard at the motor vehicle department? And why is it my street never gets snowplowed until late afternoon? And building inspectors, why can’t they ever show up on time? Don’t they know they’re delaying my project, and when they do show up they are capricious, with no consistency from inspector to inspector? But that’s the type of service you get when jobs are guaranteed and you’re afraid to criticize because someone might go “postal” on you.

Those people in the badger state sure know which way the wind’s blowing. Let me tell you, that Gov. Walker, he’s a rising national star. He’s a man of principle. He’ll make those trains run on time in Wisconsin, or else.

The tragedy of it all is that too many workers—even some private sector union members, according to a NY Times article today— don’t realize they benefit directly and indirectly from the working conditions unions collectively attain for their members. They see an imbalance in civil servant contributions to health care and retirement benefits and selfishly turn their backs on their working class brethren. Ever since Richard Nixon and then Ronald Reagan convinced working class voters to vote with their hearts and not their minds, or pocketbooks, the American worker has had his and her earnings power reduced. It might be patriotic to support U.S. war efforts, but it is downright unpatriotic to vote into office legislators who sanction corporate rip-offs, be they unsafe products, unsafe working conditions, tax dodging schemes and plant closures that have transformed our economy from a manufacturing to a service-centric base. We no longer produce goods. All we do is create services to service the wealthiest segment of our population without taxing them appropriately.

Don’t worry about the rich. They have a union to protect them. It’s called the Republican Party, Tea Party members included.