Dissonant Deliberations

Listen to the speak and spin of ideologues on both sides of the aisle.  I’m not talking people with strong passions.  I’m talking about the people who use the same wording to berate the other side while actually making no new, useful points of their own.  You know - the all anger, no answers, party-line people who couldn’t have an original thought of their own.  Some on TV and some in person.  Some of them are paid to spin.  Others just repeat what their pundit demigods feed them, never realizing the taste of the bile in their own mouth. Maybe you’re one of them. If you are an ideologue, you probably aren’t reading this, because I often use words with more than two syllables.  

What I’m talking about here is propaganda.  Disseminate information that keeps the people uninformed and/or arguing and you can do whatever you want.  It’s what has kept people in power long before this country was founded and it will be the same long after you or are are dead.

Since shortly after WWII, the US government has not been publicly in the propaganda game, here in the United States.  Of course they have spun and will spin everything until we get dizzy. However, with the 2 party system, the hope was that each other’s spin would cancel out each other and we end up where we start.  Outside of the US, the American government propaganda is thick and viscous trying to sway the citizens of other countries to the position(s) of the U.S. Government.

There is currently a bi-partisan bill in congress about to change all of that.  Read all about it here.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/mhastings/congressmen-seek-to-lift-propaganda-ban

The limitation of freedoms and the use of propaganda all in the name of safety.  All while we’re busy arguing about same-sex relationships.   This is not an Obama or Bush or any future mainstream President thing- they are all owned by the same donors and power brokers (the same power brokers that put out the pundits to keep us occupied).  No matter what the argument is about any other issue, misinformation and propaganda is not what the founding fathers had in mind.

Political debate is only as effective as political action.  We live in a time where the opposition party can block whatever they want to.  Why even debate politics if nothing actually gets done?

When I hear people saying Obama this or Romney that, my thought is I don’t care.  Unless you are rich enough to get a tax break from Romney or poor enough to get subsidized by Obama after the next election, the fact is that life doesn’t really change for the middle class.  This is what most people arguing about politics don’t understand.

I hear the fears from both sides of what may be if the other is elected….but as I looked at the similarities of their top campaign contributors, I quickly realized that they are essentially the same person when it comes to what will happen to me.

The middle class is the lip-service afterthought of the two party system.  We will continue to struggle no matter who gets elected.  So left and right continue to debate your points loudly on your respective cable outlets.  You are all a bunch of simian puppets for your base and your backers.  Prove to me that you actually care about the middle class struggling to build any kind of savings. Don’t scream that your opponent doesn’t care - anyone who can think for themselves already knows that.

Here’s how you can prove it:

1) Stop taking special interest money

2) Stop Super PACs

3) Speak in something other than talking points

4) Get out of Afghanistan - and I mean really out, not thousands of “support troops” and corporate paramilitary (like is still in Iraq - and get out of there too). If Halliburton, GE, and your other multinational corporate puppetmasters want the billions of dollars worth of rare earth minerals in the mountains, tell them to get it themselves without the loss of American troops via dragging out a war that won’t end.

5) Take care of small businesses.  They, and not the multinational banks and corporations, are what will rebuild this economy.

6) Defense spending is good - how about giving more to the soldiers and less to the contractors.

7) Let me make my own economic and moral decisions.

Finally, talk with us and not at us.  Find out who we are an what we need.  

It’s not too hard is it?  As a side note, please realize that a vote for you in the general election is not a mandate.  You are the lesser of two evils, but we still view you both as an evil. Should a viable third party come along, you and your cronies will be gone so fast it will make your ideological head spin.

WTF?

For those of you keeping count, the government has won another battle in its war on the Bill of Rights.  And very few people are outraged.  Most, probably, because they think it won’t happen to them.

Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders

Not Florence and the Machine.  Not Florence Henderson.  Florence v Board of Chosen Freeholders is the Supreme Court decision that did away with the 4th Amendment concept of reasonable search and seizure.

If you don’t know what this case is about, this short video pretty much explains it better than I could type it.

For most of the news illiterate or apathetic American public - and I can only assume illiterate or apathetic because of the lack of outrage - this really is the case that will be the first domino to fall regarding unreasonable search and seizure.  

And before you start taking partisan sides on this issue - this was a case that was argued in favor of these searches by the democratic administration and ruled in favor of searches by the conservative judges.  This is a decision that crosses party lines. 

I hear most people saying “I will never get arrested, so this won’t happen to me.”  The person in question got arrested for a fine he paid, but somehow it was shown as unpaid.  What’s to stop a computer or human error from putting you in the same situation?

The real issue is that, once again, protecting the greater good out of fear something bad may happen has put our own liberties on hold.  What is to stop the government from raiding your home if they fear something bad may happen? Who is to determine what a reasonable search and seizure is?  Obviously not the Supreme Court. The term reasonable is gone from the last branch of our government that could have laid claim to it.

But I have to ask this…As our liberties erode to promote “Safety” - how safe will you feel when you the government can come in and unreasonably search you, too? 

I have heard a lot of not-too-nice talk on both sides since the whole Limbaugh-Fluke thing blew up in the media.  When sex, politics, and religion interweave with ad-driven polarizing infotainment in this puritanical-pretending-to-be-open-minded-country, all hell tends to break loose.  In my view from the center, there is so much both sides have wrong here.  I’m not going to comment on the actual issues of the debate (religion, women’s health, and healthcare) - and I use the term “debate” loosely in today’s lack of respectful political environment. 

Personally, I find it interesting that such a diversion is being created right before Super Tuesday…but that’s a story for another time

To everyone:  This is a transcript.  It lets you be informed before shooting your mouth off.  You have to actally read it and not rely on everyone else to tell you what’s going on.

http://www.whatthefolly.com/2012/02/23/transcript-sandra-fluke-testifies-on-why-women-should-be-allowed-access-to-contraception-and-reproductive-health-care/

Before anyone starts spouting off before reading it - No where does it say someone wants to be paid for having sex.  It does intimate that contraceptive care should be part of their insurance policy or their student health services - something already paid for by a student’s tuition. The issue here is that Georgetown is a private, Jesuit university - which was the original debate of what President Obama said). 

To the left.  Rush Limbaugh is a polarizing radio host who often uses gross hyperbole to make his point.  He gets paid well and has created a media empire doing so. Regardless of any freedom of speech argument, the market will decide when he’s gone too far.  Ask the companies who have already pulled advertisements…and the ones that are probably lined up to take their places.   Also, before Fluke testified, this debate started out about religion and healthcare.  The Democrats bringing her in for an unofficial hearing changed the scope of it to create more polarization and rally the base during an election year.

To the right:  A woman has been called a slut for advocating for other women. Treating a woman this way so publicly cheapens women and keeps them in a lower stratus than men in the eyes of many of his less intelligent listeners.  These ignorants are going to be the ones who do not realize that people like Rush are using hyperbole to make a point when they beat up you, your sister, or your daughter for being a slut for what ever inert reason.    I’m sure you’ll feel the same way you do now when it’s your bloody daughter in the hospital.  Just put them in burkas and mutilate their genitalia while you’re at it ( <——-hey look - its grossly overstated hyperbole!).   The point is this: Anything that makes women less than equal does everyone in this country a great injustice.  Shame on you all for not standing up for women. 

Back to everyone again:  Could we try to have a real debate of the issues without having to rely on polarizing extremes and gross hyperbole?  No? I didn’t think so. Just thought I’d ask.

I’m no financial wizard, so someone please help me out, because I truly do not understand the stock market.

I think I understand the concept of buying stock in a company.  You buy stock, you own a share of the company.  If you multiply the total number of shares a company has sold/given as bonuses etc, times the price per share = the value of the company.

But every day the stock market goes up and down based on some arbitrary data that, often, has nothing to do with the worth of the companies.

Does a debt crisis in Greece mean that AT&T is worth less money?  Does a drop in the price of corn mean Microsoft is a more valuable company?

As far as I can tell, when everyday people start buying and selling shares of companies based of the fear of the day, they are always a step behind - they never sell at the peak or buy at the lowest.  It seems to me that causing overreaction to the fear of the day is an underhanded way to get people to sell off potential future gains in a company’s real worth and place those gains in the already wealthy and influential hands of the finance industry.

Am I wrong? Then tell me how.  I really am interested in knowing exactly how a tropical storm that never makes landfall makes WalMart a less valuable company.  If a company’s worth goes down it should be about the company, not the release of this month’s nationwide unemployment figures.  

But I could be wrong.

Centrist does not mean wishy washy.  

A centrist is someone that agrees with certain views from each side.  

A centrist is someone who believes that zealous fervor solves nothing, but a passionate heart and open mind can change the world.

A centrist doesn’t care whose fault it is - just how we’re going to fix it.

A centrist does not believe that compromise is a bad word.

A centrist believes that both major parties have neglected the people.

A centrist sees the vitriol spilled out from each party to the other as smokescreens for their own failures.

No matter what anyone tries to tell you, any politician that accepts money from special interest groups does not vote based on the interest of his or her constituents.

See whose interest your representative really represents:

http://www.opensecrets.org/states/index.php?ql3&srch=zip

A centrist sees the money trail and realizes that we, the people, truly stand unrepresented, regardless of soundbites and rhetoric.

So…today is the blackout day for SOPA & PIPA bills.  I agree with the concept wholeheartedly.  I will rally against any instances of a major lobbying group trying to push through legislation that benefits them and not the people of the country.

I ask you though…Where was this outrage as the government and/or lobbyists have have been doing away with other freedoms of ours?

Why haven’t we been as upset with The Authorization of Use of Military Force of 2001, the Patriot Act or the NDAA as we are with SOPA?  All are heinous violations of our freedoms, but we only rally, en masse, against this one. 

It deeply troubles me that, generally speaking, we care more about saving our rights to watch kitten videos on YouTube more than protecting ourselves from government wire taps, habeas corpus and big brother always watching.  I know what you’re thinking…I always use the internet, but I’m not a terrorist, so those things don’t hurt my freedom…Well remember the words of Martin Niemöller:

First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.

Hopefully we will use this as a spark to demand the rest of our freedoms back as well….or maybe, by then, we’ll be too busy looking up music videos on YouTube and posting them to Facebook.

There I said it.  

Happy holidays.  

Not Merry Christmas.  

Not Happy Chanukah.  

Not Happy Kwanza. 

No remark about Festivus.

Why?  I’m not waging a war on Christmas.  Far from it.  Fact is, with so many people I know having so mant different winter celebrations, it’s the easiest thing to say.

That being said… I do have some complaints about those who claim there is a “War on Christmas”

1) If someone wishing you a happy holidays has an effect on the way you view Christmas, then you have a problem with the strength of your faith.  Keep Christmas in your heart and be happy that we are wishing each other well.

2) Watch the commercials.  Retail America took the Christ out of Christmas in the public sphere long ago.  The same corporations that the Supreme Court deme as “People.”  So if anyone has really waged war on the real meaning of Christmas (hint: it’s not buying as much stuff made in China for people you don’t necessarily care for) look to the boards of the people…I mean corporations…that have been pushing these products and sales on you since Halloween.  Nothing says the spirit of Christmas quite like a big red bow on a Lexus few of us can afford.

3) I’m not for groups suing to take down nativity scenes…I think that is ridiculous.  Let everyone celebrate and if they want to do so publicly, that’s fine.  However it is equally as ridiculous for people who claim to “Support Israel” to complain about a menorah being on the same lawn as the nativity scene.  The irony there, of course, is that Jesus was Jewish.

4)  For those who complain about “X-mas”: Shut up and read a book or watch a documentary.  X-mas is not erasing Christ out of the word Christmas.  ”X” is the Greek letter “Chi” Chi, also being the first letter of and short for Christ.  Just because you’re culturally illiterate doesn’t mean that your ignorance is reality.

Whatever you may celebrate, remember - the true spirit of the season is to celebrate your faith, family, and friends and also to reflect on the people we have been through the year and figure how to be better people as we look forward to next year…and with that, I wish you all happy holidays.

I have an idea that will make congress earn the money we pay them and also not force no votes for good bills.

Outlaw riders.  Now for those of you who are aren’t exactly sure what I mean, let me start with the definition from dictionary.com:

3. an additional clause, usually unrelated to the main body, attached to a legislative bill in passing it.

The fragment of that sentence that says “usually unrelated to the main body” is the problem here.

Riders are way to side-step Congressional procedures; they don’t go through committee hearings or rarely full debate. They generally do one of two things:

1) Push through policies that would otherwise never make it into law

Or

2) Create opposition for a bill based solely on items unrelated to the actual bill.

For example:  Both sides of the congressional aisle think, for the most part, that extending the payroll tax cut is a good idea.  The last thing that either side needs in an upcoming election year is to do a de facto tax raise by allowing the cut to expire. However, that is about to happen.  Why?  Riders. 

The house bill approving the tax cut extension includes riders to pave the way for an oil pipeline that the democrats oppose.  The senate bill includes riders imposing tax increases on the wealthy to offset the revenue – policy that the republicans oppose.  The result is that the citizens that these idiots are supposed to represent are screwed once again.

This happens to almost every bill.  Why?  So instead of progress for us, congress gets ammunition for the blaming on failures.  Disagreement over riders destroys good bills that both sides can agree upon.  Bills the people want or need.  Bills that do Americans good.

How to fix this:  Stop riders.  If a bill is to be amended, that amendment must have to do with the bill being discussed.

If congress votes for every issue on its own merit, they will not be able to vote along divisive party lines and have to vote based on what is best for each representative’s constituents. We, the people, will know where everyone stands.

Riders have put a kibosh on effective governing.  It’s time to put a kibosh on riders.  

As a songwriter, I try to be an observer of society as it can provide much fodder.  With the anti-corporate protesting I am highly interested in seeing just how much holiday shopping is done this year.  My early money is that rampant consumerism will win.  Since the 80s a good sale has done far better than ideals.

Here’s the problem with these sales:  The trade deficit takes away American jobs and American capital and devalues American products.  We should be just as worried about how much of our American money we send to the countries making the crap we buy and drilling the oil we burn as we are about the 1% in our own country. 

As the chart (courtesy of www.census.gov) shows in the month of September this year our trade deficit was at 43.1 billion.  That means that we, as Americans are receiving 43 billion dollars worth of merchandise than we are sending out.  It’s quite simple, really.  We like our products cheap and convenient.  Until we are willing to spend more on items made in America, and sold by local small businesses, we will continue to not be as economically viable as we can be. We spend less on foreign goods, we keep more of our money in America.

There is a gap between the wealthiest 1% and the rest of us and I do not begrudge them the chance to make money…but part of the divide is because we aren’t shopping withing our own communities, buying local produce, and going out to a non-chain restaurant.  You want more money in your community?  Spend money that stays in your community.  Once it goes to China and Saudi Arabia, or a multi-national corporation, odds are it isn’t coming back.

We live in a world of spin, hype and sound bites.  One’s perception is, in essence, the reality of a person.  Often our world views are formed by our parents, informed by our schools, and solidified by whatever spin machine media outlet we choose to align ourselves with.

Regardless of our political, ideological, social, economic, religious, or whatever leanings we have as individuals, one thing I have noticed is that we, generally, are ignorant when it comes to the world outside of our borders. Myself included.  Who needs to know what’s going on in India or Zimbabwe or the Ivory Coast when Kim Kardashian is getting a divorce or Michael Jackson’s doctor is on trial?  I can’t even blame the media on this - we, as media consumers, have spoken.  The market dictates what is put on air.  If we want drivel, we get drivel by the truckload.

One of the things I learned in my international communications class for grad school was that most of the world is unlike us and is very globally aware.  They know what’s going on in other countries - and they are keenly aware of the images coming out of the United States.

You may be asking yourself what my point is…and I am about to get to it.  One thing that studying communications has taught me is the power of imagery. Imagery (and not reality) shapes perceptions and those perceptions shape individual and collective thoughts and feelings.

Regardless of your viewpoints on the merits or lack-there-of in regards to the Occupy Wall Street protests, one thing is patently clear.  In terms of world perception, the imagery of police and government crack-downs on protesters is bad for America.  

How can we be trusted as a country that spreads democracy, when a picture shows batons being shoved into student ribs on the UC Berkeley Campus or a soldier has his head bashed open?

How can we be seen as compassionate when the imagery says that riot police are our answer to protest?

Why should the world want us to be its police force when the video shows our own police forces attacking our citizens? 

Here’s the issue:  perception has nothing to do with the back story.  Images drive perception. Actual reality is not the least bit important when it comes to perception.  Because of the imagery, right now, we are not doing a good job looking like an America that stands for its own principals.

I know that the Declaration of Independence is not legally binding.  However the idea of the pursuit of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is one that transcends the document and should be a consideration behind the human impact of all laws written.

I will also admit that I have never been big on the welfare system - either corporate or personal welfare.  

Many people believe we are entitled to life, liberty and happiness. The first two are rights, but happiness is not the right, but the ability to pursue it is. That being said, there are two groups that I believe should receive our assistance in their pursuit, if needed and deserved. Not necessarily government assistance, but assistance none-the-less. 

The first is the elderly.  Many have worked hard to have pensions taken away or never had the skills or education to work a job with an adequate pension.  They have given much to the country and community, and deserve to have their closing chapters filled with dignity.  Those who have been denied their pensions have been denied the pursuit of life and liberty.  Those who are denied their dignity towards the end of their lives are denied their final pursuit of happiness.  

The second are children.  Children do not choose their parents.  Many need things their parents cannot give them.  Books.  Clothing. Food. An attitude of the importance of education and citizenship.  

Working for a school district I have seen the impoverished struggle more than those who come from a home where they have adequate food and heat.  Many of these students do not have books at home to read, or parents who are able to read to them -either from multiple low-wage jobs, illiteracy or both.  Throwing welfare or charity money at the household usually does not change the culture of the homes in which they were born. Their only crime is the situation into which they come into the world.  The school lunch program helps them with food 180 days a year.  But what these kids need are time with people who care enough to show them the value of education, the value of reading, the hope that they can break the cycle of poverty.   Denying these kids that kind of level playing field perpetuates that cycle and denies those children the pursuit of anything.

I have had the honor of being a mentor reader.  One thing that I can tell you from the experience is that these kids want to learn - even the ones that front before the huge wall they’ve put up.  What it takes is a ton of patience and the ability to see past the situation the child may be in or the student’s reaction to their home life and into the potential of the child.  It’s not a racial thing.  It really is socio-economics.  

How many people even care if many of our own youngest citizens will never know their own potential because their parents never cared enough to show them that they were better than the cycle of poverty in which they were born?  If you say you care, prove it with actions…they don’t need welfare money their parent(s) may not spend in their best interest. They need to believe in themselves.  They need someone to believe in them.  They need to believe that the pursuit of happiness is something that they, as Americans, are entitled to - not a handout that keeps them in the cycle.

I’m not sure how the best way to assist these two groups are.  I just know that we are not living up to the ideals of the Declaration of Independence if we don’t.

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the case before you today is not whether the conservatives or liberals are correct, though the media and politicians may try to convince you of that.

The case is not one to determine if the free market or government can provide better for the people.

The case is about government influence and the effect of unchecked moneys and perks on that influence.

Don’t tell anyone, but the Tea Party people (who think they are protesting the government) and the Occupy Wall Street people (who think they are protesting corporate America) are really protesting the same thing.  They are just looking at it from different angles - and both of them are the wrong angle.

The problem with the system is the influence of corporate, special interest, union, and PAC monies on the political system.  Show me a politician who takes money from any of these three and I will show you someone whose soul is bought.  Party is irrelevant.

First, let me make a few things clear:  We are a republic.  We are not a democracy.   Seriously.  Every time I hear from someone that we live in a democracy, I realize that, as a whole, we are a group of people whose education system failed them.  That being said, review an elementary school social studies text if you forget the difference.  The distinction between democracy and republic  is a very important one.  In a democracy where majority rules, there would be very little ability for the personal kind of influence from special interests, PACs, unions and corporations that our politicians enjoy.  True democracy makes politicians impotent, but its ability to turn into mob mentality is also frighteningly close to anarchy.

In a republic, we (theoretically) elect officials to represent us and our local interests on both local and national stages.  However, campaign finance laws and the system of political giving have usurped the authority of the electorate by buying the influence of the politicians that are supposed to be looking out for us.  I would like to think that we can elect officials that are above it, but money is a aphrodisiac. 

I have no issue with companies making as much money as they can.  That’s what they are in business for.  I do take umbrage to them buying my representatives away from me, though. 

I have no problem with the government trying to help the poor.  Our “Christian Nation” is so full of selfish bastards that are not willingly taking care of our own, someone needs to do it.  I do however have an issue with the poor and middle class not having a real voice in what that nation’s government looks like.

The best way to deflect the public’s understanding of this influence is to create hate instead of debate.  If the opposing extremes are busy hating each other with misplaced ideology they will never come together and attack and fix the real problem - we are not adequately represented and therefore fucked by a system of which we can never be a part.