Boehner's Suit

I survived the midnight fireworks and the crowds over the weekend. I love my sleep, but I love this nation more. I love celebrating our Declaration of Independence from the rule of a King who had no sympathy for minority views and no tolerance for folks of different mindsets. For George, it was his way or the highway, so we took the highway and look at the nation we built!

But, I just read Speaker of the House Boehner’s rationale for suing President Obama. Wow. Let me get this straight: the President proposes Congressional action, the Senate approves, and the House does not. The President then acts using Executive Authority. The House single handedly has shut down the government and threatened to do so multiple times, demanded a cut in spending in a time of recession, fought raising taxes on millionaires, blocked immigration reform, fought to undo the first national health care reform ever, and now the Speaker wants to sue the President? It appears to me that the dominant party in the House is convinced the government can’t do anything right, they got elected, and then set about proving their theory is correct. I am aghast.

I remember when George Bush went on national TV and told Saddam Hussein to get out of Iraq in 48 hours or we were coming in. That’s right. The US told a foreign leader in another country to abandon his position or face war. Again, I was aghast. At a Rotary Club meeting I expressed my concern about an American preemptive strike on a sovereign nation and I was told in no uncertain terms that my position was unpatriotic, un-American, and damn near treasonous. This same group supports suing the President of the United States now? Come on. Grow up.

 I get it that Boehner wishes he and his fellow Republicans could control the country. He must hate that the President and the Senate continue to find ways to implement action while the House continues to find ways to be obstructed. But to have the Speaker of the House announce a suit against the President of the United States because Boehner has not had the power to totally rule the United States of American, and to do so on the 4th of July weekend, is the most un-American act by an elected official since McCarthy and Nixon. If Boehner does not understand politics and the American way he should resign.

Or, If Boehner’s logic makes sense, then the US Senate should sue him and the US House for usurping the power of the Senate and the President. Boehner would have no grounds to oppose such a suit. It would be his own public rationale for suing the President that is a clear admission of culpability.

Yep, the Senate should sue Boehner. In this nation it may be time for a new suit to help inform Boehner of what the USA is really all about.

There. This little old lady is now happy having celebrated her right to express her opinion. Hope Boehner doesn’t sue me. Happy Independence Day!

Posts, Not Postal

What shall I say on this my 125^th post?  My posting frequency has declined as one might suspect of an 86 year old woman.  My passion has not.  Now as ever I love this nation, I love our civil liberties, I view democracy as so much more important than commerce, fellow humans more important than corporations, and public schools as the bastion of this democracy.  Ah yes, I am an endangered species: an Anglo Texas female liberal.  I rage against the forces that would undue our rights for the sake of profit or their own personal belief systems, and I rant against the forces that would attack public education because those forces resent taxes and hate the notion of educating all kids.  I shall not stop that raging and those rants.  I do not believe I am crazy, though that may be the major attribute of crazy people. 

And yet I grow weary of our failure to learn: 

Election to office does not endow humans with omnipotence or expertise, and yet we allow elected non-experts to continue to craft public education policy influenced by billionaire experimenters and wealthy testing companies when those legislators have absolutely no business doing so.  Would they write the specs for asphalt or cement for Texas highways?  No, and yet they do so for public education, a much more sophisticated and complicated and important realm than highways.  (It is interesting to me that the specifications for a highway are outlined in a document published in 2004, have not changed since and was written by experts in the field.  Education specs, on the other hand, are amended every time the Legislature meets!) A highway flaw is patchable, children not so much.

The same is true of amassing a fortune.  Because a person is worth a billion dollars does not make that person worthy of writing policy in areas where they have no expertise.  Knowledge, wisdom and understanding are not income-based in a way that more money in the bank automatically increases expertise.

Civil liberties remain the most important distinction of this democracy and other governments.  There is absolutely nothing unusual on planet earth today or in all of human history for the ruling group and/or the majority to force its beliefs and will on the citizens.  The conflict in the mid-east is grounded in belief systems where religious fundamentalists insist that their belief system become the law of the land, and worse, that anyone who does not subscribe to their beliefs is pagan and punishable.  We approach that same scenario here with clear adoption of Christian beliefs supported by our government.  It is now ok to pray to a Christian God prior to public meetings of elected officials.  It is ok to discriminate against homosexuals and the same time it is heresy to say anything discriminatory about a racial group.  I do not get it.  We should have the right to believe what we choose to believe.  We should not have the right to act on those beliefs if they harm others.  The government should never imply one belief system is supported while others are not.  You may be a bigot.  You may not discriminate.  You may be anti-gay.  You may not discriminate.  Period.

When will we recognize that if everyone in this country who was eligible registered to vote and actually voted our nation would be led entirely by Democratic rather than Republican officials?  Hence the Republican effort to make voting and registering so much more difficult.

When will we recognize that if you earn less than $400,000 or so Republican policies hurt you?

When will we recognize that every time Republicans have controlled the federal elected branches and acted in ways to deregulate industry we have headed for terrible recessions as the top 1% prosper more and more?

When we will recognize that when we allow corporations and wealthy individuals to donate money to elections without limit we are allowing our government to rule us via a philosophy of wealth generation and protection, not philosophy of all men are created equal?  The rich have already won economically and seek to win even more by controlling our government.

It appears we will not learn.  Hence I feel it is my calling as a retired educator to continue to seek to teach.

I shall continue to post, to vote, to contribute to political campaigns that seek to implement the kind of government our forefathers dreamed about, not the kinds of governments they fled.

I grow weary.  My flesh is weak though my spirit is strong.  I shall take a nap and engage again in another instructional episode.  I shall maintain my passion, I shall maintain my anger and my frustration, I shall post, but I shall not become violent.  I shall post and not go postal.

Women's Day

Happy International Women's Day! 
 
This year’s theme is, "Inspiring Change."  I suspect many of you were not aware of this day designed to highlight the role of women on planet earth.  I find that amusing in that 50% of the humans on the planet are women.  (The International Men's Day was November 19^th and I flat missed it.  Still trying to figure out why we need one of those.  Isn’t every day men’s day?) 

A cursory review of today/s headlines is an indicator of the state of women today, at least from this granny’s point of view:

A Duke University female freshman student finds filming pornography to be “freeing” because women remain sexually repressed.  OK.  Is that the kind of freedom we want?  Do men in the porn business think the same way?  I do not know.  Would an interview with a male porn star result in such coverage?  Doubt it.  Do men feel sexually “freed” by starring in porn movies?  Doubt it.  Men are never the stars of porn movies, I hear.  Would the press be as enamored of a male college student starring in porn movies expressing the fact that he feels sexually freed for doing so?  I think not.  Male college students have always been one of the most sexually free beings on the planet.  Most cannot spell monogamy.  Though I am sure there are some who would stand in line to see naked males, the line to view naked females has always been longer and more lucrative.  Is this some kind of advantage women have over men?  I think so.  We are prettier and sexier.  We merit the longer lines.  We are the ones who say no, or at least, not yet.  So, to our Duke darling, enjoy the moment, but you are in fact not news.  Women have progressed little in light of your experience.  There remain more female prostitutes than male, more female bawdy burlesque shows than male, and women making more money in the porn industry than males.  None of these are facts indicating we have moved much beyond the notion of females as mere male sex objects.  In fact, as we continue to attempt to round the corner of sexual equality with males your so-called “freeing” may be more historic slavery than an emancipation proclamation.

A list of the world’s wealthiest women is released by Fortune Magazine.  I am so embarrassed.  Each of the billionaire broads amassed their billions via inheritance from a male.  No Bill’s or Mark’s or Warren’s or Sam’s in this list: just the women around such men who profit from their good fortune or demise.  There are very wealthy men who accumulated their wealth in the same way and make other lists.  But we take time out to celebrate the women who bask in some male’s productivity.  We need a list of self-made wealthy females as role models.  Oprah?

Massachusetts just passed a new law making it a misdemeanor to take pictures or videos up a skirt or down a blouse.  Really?  First, the mere fact that a predominantly male legislature in a liberal state considered such nonsense in the first place is depressing.  Secondly, I have never dressed in revealing clothes and expected men to come to my rescue should someone be interested in what I planned to reveal.  Nothing could be more sexist or chauvinistic.  If you do not want a man looking at your cleavage or down your blouse then dress accordingly.  Ditto with up skirt shots.  In fact, I am for abandoning skirts altogether as another vestige of sexism.  Until men wear skirts with the same frequency as women we should simply do away with this article of clothing.  If we did, we would no longer have to worry about hemlines going up and down with the fashion world dictates.  I am sure the intent of the Massachusetts Legislature felt noble.  However, the mere fact that they acted implies woman need protection from unsolicited and unapproved photos and videos.  If your skirt is too short, don’t sit.  If your blouse is too low, don’t bend over.  I would prefer that women either become more aware of the message we are sending and the flesh we are showing without protection from daddies and brothers.  How is it that men go through their entire lives with no women ever claiming successful shots of male flesh while they are clothed?  Wonder how many women are likely to be prosecuted under this new law?  Men still dictate what women wear.  Surely women did not invent the skirt.  We have got to get over that and move on.

I will always be befuddled by Michelle Bachman and Sarah Palin, and others of their ilk.  Two women who clearly desire power, influence and prestige, yet base their arguments on a return to old fashioned family values.  Has anyone told these two ladies that old fashioned family values would prohibit them from speaking out in public, to seek power and prestige?  They reflect, for me, the greatest oxy-morons of our day.  I am so embarrassed they are female.  But my perspective is much more historical.  I remember corsets.  When in World War 1 women stopped wearing corsets to save materials for the war, adopting a bra was a truly liberal act on the part of women.  Imagine how confused I was in the 60’s when women felt liberated burning their bras.  A woman dressed without a bra is not now nor has it ever been a liberating example for me.  Rather it is an example of marketing based on male sexual proclivities.  Most men would prefer that women not wear bras, except for their wives, mothers and daughters.  Further I find it funny that neither Michelle nor Sarah ever dress in a way that might attract males.  I find that liberating!  Perhaps they are closet liberals after all.

And finally, Melinda Gates writes on ways to truly empower women.  Melinda.  Gates.  As the young’uns would say, I am LMAO!  If Melinda is empowered then she should not share in husband’s wealth and earn her own way.  She is clearly a conservative, but she is more than willing to bask in the wealth generated by others.  And her bottom line regarding how to empower women?  Get more data.  She actually says that she knows more about software sales in Kansas than she knows about the state of women in the world.  I almost blew a gasket.  Who in the world ever told Melinda and Bill that data gathering in areas that are qualitative not quantitative means anything?  I firmly believe that the things we care most about are not subject to objective data gathering.  My love of my children is not quantifiable, or my love for a spouse or my love for my fellow church members, or my passion for political and educational causes.  Those things which mean the most to me are not measurable.  You can gather my height and weight and health history all you want.  Those data mean little to me.  So, when Wealthy Melinda starts with her plan for improving the lot of women she wants more data?  And therein is the flaw with the Gates approach to improving schools:  standardized data gathering.  Works for Microsoft, should work for schools and women.  It does not.  I would recommend that Melinda abandon her castle and enter the workforce to seek employment.  Then in her guts she will detect the sexism that remains in America.

And the sexism in the rest of the world is horrible.  Men continue to prescribe what women can and cannot do.  If nothing else, reasonable men should recognize that we are wasting close to 50% of our intellectual, artistic and labor contributions via sexism.  What a waste. 

So here, in one of the most literate nations in the world, though not the most literate, and one of the nations in the world that supports female equality, though not the most supportive, we find that the state of women in the United States is still not equal with men.  The rest of the world tends to be worse. 

 

So, happy International Women’s Day!  Hope you enjoyed the celebration as much as I did.

Letter From a Confused Heterosexual

I have a dear friend, much younger than I, and also a blogger.  We exchange ideas frequently and find that in most cases we are on the same page, or screen.  He recently sent the following letter:



Dear Eileen,

I grow increasingly disturbed and confused.  Will you please allow me to bounce some ideas off you and respond if you would be so kind?  I am not comfortable posting this on my own blog as it may be too revealing, so I am copping out and sending it to you.

I am so glad I am not a homosexual.  There was no conscious choice in my childhood to be sexually attracted to women and only to women.  I think I recognize attractive males, but I am not attracted to them.  So?

When in college I remember thinking I was so glad that I was not African-American or Hispanic or female.  I knew that had I been born to a race other than Anglo and a gender other than male I would be a militant for the equal rights of my race and gender.  I am liberal enough as it is without taking to the streets for equality.  My protest is rational, not personal.

So, when I awoke to the alarm at 5:30 while dreaming about the similarities between Uganda and Arizona I almost laughed out loud.  Who in the world would have linked an ultra-conservative state in the US with a small Black nation in Africa?  They are literally worlds apart, save for their agreement that homosexuals are disgusting.  Arizona’s legislature wrote a bill empowering retailers to discriminate against homosexuals.  Uganda has passed similar laws and is publishing the names of known homosexuals.  Russia is no better and it is equally funny that they now have common ground with Arizona.  All are blatant acts of discrimination that I cannot fathom, much less tolerate.

And, my beloved Presbyterian church is splitting into two factions over this issue.  The conservatives oppose gay clergy.  The traditional do not.  First Presbyterian Houston barely voted to stay with the traditional church, but the required 2/3 vote almost happened.  That means a majority still want to split.   How can this be?

What is so scary about homosexuality?  What merits persecution of this private issue of attraction, affection and taste?  Are we subjected to public viewing of homosexual acts?  Is it contagious?  Are young children likely to decide to become gay if they see a gay person?  I do not get it.  Haven’t all gay people seen heterosexuals and remain gay?  

I know in my heart of hearts that there is no way I could have a gay sexual encounter.  Just would not happen.  My equipment would not work and I would be repulsed.  But I am shocked that we are more supportive and comforting and tolerant of folks with HIV than we are of folks who are gay.  We should be supportive of HIV folks.   The same for gay folks.  I do not mean to imply that being gay is an illness.  Far from it.  HIV is an illness that is transmitted by human interaction.  If we can tolerate such an illness, why can’t we tolerate a birth characteristic?

Or is that it?  Do the homophobes believe homosexuality is a disease of choice?  If we believe that being gay is a “sin” rather than a state of being, would it not make more sense to legalize the marital union of gays to reduce the sinful nature?  A gay couple by definition cannot have children so there is no risk of increasing the number of gays by allowing them to marry.  Do we think the adopted children of gay couples grow up gay?  As you would say, poppycock and balderdash.

I recall studying behaviorism in college where I read all the works of B.F. Skinner.  I remember in Beyond Freedom and Dignity, Skinner said sex is just pleasurable friction and culture decides with whom and with what and when and where this friction is acceptable.  I am not a behaviorist, but a lot of that statement makes sense to me.  We have wrapped sexual encounters with such mystique, such emotional baggage that it is amazing we ever produce another generation.  Mammals have a sex drive.  We have a sex drive.  Mammals exhibit homosexual behavior; or to be more accurate, bi-sexual behavior and masturbatory behavior.  Is sex with yourself homosexual? How could you argue otherwise?

Our western civilization is grounded in Greek and Roman notions.  Both cultures blatantly accepted not only homosexuals but bisexuals.  Perhaps it is the Judeo-Christian influence that raises such ire.

Is all of this anti-gay stuff Biblical?  I am not an expert, but if memory serves it is the Old Testament where we find all the rules and laws including those regarding sexuality.  Paul probably said something about it, but Paul is a psychiatrist’s dream patient flipping from one belief extreme to another and clearly anti-sexual in general.  I do not care much for the letters of Paul.  I prefer Jesus’ commandment to love thy neighbor as thy self.  Even if the neighbor is a transgender, cross-dressing homosexual.

Am I nuts?

I would so appreciate your thoughts on this.

As Always, Bob

How shall I respond?

Does Wealth Determine Value?

While I ponder and worry about the fate of our countrymen and countrywomen after the snow storm, especially the poor, the homeless, the powerless, I turn to the CNN website for updates.  Once there I browse the news, click buttons on topics of interest, and catch up with events.  I did not know there was a controversy surrounding our Olympic athletes’ uniforms.  I did not know the Japanese have developed a bra that only un-hooks if the wearer is in love.  I did not know the earth swallowed historic Corvettes.  These and other buttons lead me to articles of interest and I know I am better prepared to play “Wait, Wait Don’t Tell Me”, the hysterical NPR weekly news quiz show.  I browse and click again.

Billionaire Tom Peters suggested, perhaps tongue in cheek, that the wealthy should get more votes than other people.  He said if you pay a million dollars in taxes you should get a million votes.  He further said that if you do not pay taxes you should not be allowed to vote.

Clicking another button I read that the top 1% of income earners is mad as hell.  They feel like they are being persecuted.  They feel like they will be asked to pay more in taxes.  They feel like there is a conspiratorial war against them that may harvest more money from their personal wealth for public coffers.  Meanwhile, they continue to do very well and the gap between what they earn and the rest of us earn grows annually.

I click another button and learn that the billionaire Koch brothers are pouring money into the races where it appears Democrats have a chance to unseat Republicans.

I click another button and learn that Bill Gates continues to subscribe to the notion of alternative choices to public schools and continues to fund those schools of choice despite the fact he is not an educator and lacks a college degree.  He is just rich.

I am at first outraged.  I rage.  I throw crochet hook, doily and yarn across the room.  I swear.  (Yes, little old ladies may swear when they are alone and not in the company of others.  The words chosen, however, must be suitable, applicable words and not typical generic street cussing.  Typically only “hells” and “damns” are appropriate.)  While I am worried about poor folks under a bridge, families shivering in the cold without electricity, and folks imprisoned in their vehicles these wealthy men are worrying about how to preserve their wealth and how to use their wealth to impact public policy. 

Taking a deep breath it comes to me that this is absolutely nothing new.  Despite thousands of years of human civilization and an amazing accumulation of technology and knowledge, we remain subject to the most banal of human wants, wishes and needs.  The rich do not want to share.  The rich do not think they should share.  The rich perceive themselves as superior human beings.  The rich believe they should make the rules by which all others play.  The rich do not like Democracy and yearn for a ruling aristocracy.  The billionaires of today are no different than feudal lords.  Other humans exist only to serve their will and meet their needs.  They should rule because they have more value than other humans because they have more money than other humans.  Wealth equals human value.

I totally disagree.

Harsh?  I do not think so.  I believe the human condition is capable of evolving.  I believe we can and ought to pursue more lofty goals than promoting the accumulation of wealth by a few at the expense of the many.  I believe some of our most powerful myths, beliefs, legends and folk lore have depicted this evolution to a higher plane:  The Midas Touch, the Emperor’s New Clothes, the Miser, the Goose with the Golden Eggs, the Rich Young Ruler, the Camel Through the Eye of the Needle, the Widow’s Offering, the Good Samaritan, and on and on.  Humans who serve others, especially those less fortunate, are honored and valued.  Humans who are self-serving, greedy and misers are despicable and not to be honored or valued.

In other words, the billionaires have it backwards.  When it comes to public policy such men should have less voice than others while they promote the accumulation and protection of their own wealth.  Simply because they have the wherewithal to implement their will does not make them right, superior, better, or of higher value than the poorest of the poor.  In fact, our morality plays imply just the opposite.

Sadly, the Peters, Koch brothers, Gates, Broad, etc. do not get this.  They do not want to get this.  Sadder is the fact that there are millionaires in the Senate and House who seek to protect the billionaires.  Beyond sad to the point of tragedy are the middle class, blue collar, working poor who have bought into the notion that wealth determines value. 

Not I. 

As human beings we are of equal value.  We are created equal.  Rich and poor; Red, Yellow, Black and White; God does not make junk.  Our mission is to help the poor and the needy.  It is not to protect the wealthy and empower them further.  That is why I am an educator.

 
And when seeing first hand those of deep needs and daily suffering I am humbled knowing that there but for the grace of God go I.