An Article by: 

Ben Tanosborn 

In my mind you don’t trot around the world creating havoc and taking peoples’ lives to defend your “envied freedoms.”  For all the shame we may rightly accumulate as we send young people to die for our elite’s lust for power and greed, we don’t have to lie to our enlisted military by mockingly making them martyrs and heroes when, sadly, they are just being played for chumps.  Our freedoms and rights need to be protected, but right here, not in some battlefield or neighborhood somewhere in the Middle East. And we, Americans, have done a very poor job in fighting domestically to preserve them.

A couple of mornings ago a thought occurred to me just as I was reading an article by H. Josef Hebert (AP) on how Bush rhetoric on energy strayed from the facts.  Of course, it wasn’t the headline that caught my eye; as I see it, Bush rhetoric on most everything has always been light years away from the facts!  But it was the mere thought of this persistent and hopeless liar, that went off like a flash – and just like there is a liar ready to divert any and all facts from a given story, or there is a vice for every virtue, or an antonym at the opposite end of a synonym, or even that science fiction idea of parallel universes, why can’t we come up with a set of anti-freedoms, one that can quantify the degree to which we, Americans, have become complacently enslaved?

During the six plus years since 9/11 and the passage of the pseudo-patriotic Patriot Act, we have slowly become aware of fundamental and diminutional changes to Americans’ constitutional rights under this embryo-fascist government embodied by the faith-based Bush administration, and a condescending, peoples’ unrepresentative Congress. 

Freedoms of association, information and unreasonable search; as well as rights to liberty, legal representation, and a speedy and public trial… all were confiscated and warehoused – only borrowed, ‘mind you – so as to relieve us from our heavy load of fear and make us all think we’re assisting in “terror investigation.” Notice that I haven’t included “freedom of speech” in the list although the government may prosecute librarians and other record keepers if they tell anyone that the government subpoenaed information related to a terror investigation.  Actually the freedom of speech, or expression, had long been under attack almost two generations before George W. Bush came to the political scene… and it was done without the aid of any specific legislation.    

To journalists and commentators, the first freedom that comes to mind is an easy one: freedom of speech or expression.  For those of us left with the option of writing for our peers and a compressed audience of progressives, freethinking coreligionists, plus the occasional lost souls who might be reading us as result of boring curiosity or perhaps cyber-randomness, we know that freedom of expression is for the most part a cruel hoax.  No, it isn’t that we aren’t free to write (or say) what we please; it’s just that such writing means very little if it cannot be readily accessed, be available to a mainstream audience; and people must travel to the underground of verboten ideas that could never make it through the red-white-and-blue strainer of our nation’s unfree corporate press.

Soon after World War II, to keep our country uninfected from the diseases of that malignant world of foreign socio-political ideas, our freedom of expression was quietly modified without much planning or fanfare to include patriotic clarifications and purifications via a filtering layer added to the strainer, one capable of removing all foreign viruses that could challenge the “American way of life.”  These impressions have been very meticulously carved in the American psyche for almost three generations, and they render any deviation from capitalism or individualism – the way we define them – as sacrilegious; down and out heresy.  The Spanish Inquisition of 1478 had been de facto transplanted to America, in both cases to preserve the faith (Christianity for the Spaniards, and Americanism for the Americans) and with it the nation’s unity.  In fact, it isn’t just Socialism that Americans have been taught to hate and also to ridicule, but anything that is part of, or prefixed by, the word social; or another neutral word, welfare, which for no good reason has lost its primary meaning of well-being in the US.  

Our citizens must be guarded against all those foreign social remedies that seem to plague much of the industrialized world, particularly those Northern European countries; just how sick can those forsaken foreigners be when they exchange an indomitable and survivalist spirit for a system of welfare from cradle to grave?  Obviously Elitist America is willing to throw overboard half or more of Americans to the seas of the Third World in its globalization attempt.

Someone told me the other day that the Statue of Liberty should have Emma Lazarus’ poem on that bronze plaque welcoming the tired and the poor, re-inscribed with the new reality… “Welcome to America, Land of Human Recycling.”  Grotesque perhaps, but true!  And all because we have surrendered the free flow of ideas in our nation, our true freedom of expression, with the captivity of impression of an immutable Americanism unable to grow and transform.

Like birds in a cage Americans are free to flutter, but haven’t we been forced into economic and political submission with the control held by an elite few?
 

Tags: democracy, empire, Global
Categories: Commentary, Global, Democracy, Empire
No Comments »

An Article by:

Steve Hammons

Originally published in the AmericanChronicle.com

http://americanchronicle.com/articles/53747

The recent controversial remarks from Cincinnati radio personality Bill Cunningham about Barack Obama at a McCain rally can be instructive about the Cincinnati region and Ohio.

I was born and raised in the Cincinnati area, was given the mandatory Ohio history classes in school and later went to college in southern Ohio at nearby Ohio University in Athens, a couple of hours east of Cincinnati.

The Cincinnati and southern Ohio region has a unique history that may be relevant in the run-up to the Democratic primary and the 2008 elections. This history and current flavor of the whole state might also be of interest.

We know that Ohio has been in the news during recent elections. Concerns about questionable election processes in Ohio have been part of this.

After Cunningham made his comments at the McCain rally, another Ohio politician followed him to address the crowd … former Congressman Rob Portman who represented the Cincinnati area.

Portman has been mentioned as a possible vice-presidential running mate with McCain, and a possible presidential candidate in 2012.

SPECIAL ELECTION

Portman left his congressional seat in 2005 to take a position in the George W. Bush administration as U.S. trade representative, which carries the rank of ambassador.

From 2006 to 2007, he took another position in the Bush administration as director of the Office of Management and Budget. He currently is working at a law firm in Cincinnati.

What is interesting is that when a special election was held for Portman’s congressional seat in 2005, the solidly Republican-voting area almost elected another attorney and Marine Corps Reserve major who had served in Iraq, and was running as a centrist Democrat.

That person was Paul Hackett, and during the campaign he said that he had opposed the Iraq war, yet felt it was his duty to volunteer to serve there.

In the congressional race in August 2005, Hackett, who notably opposed gun control, gained attention by referring to George W. Bush as a “chicken hawk” for avoiding combat service in Vietnam during that war.

Hackett also said Bush made “stupid” remarks such as “bring it on,” challenging insurgents in Iraq to attack U.S. troops there.

Hackett reportedly bluntly stated about Bush, “I’ve said I don’t like the S.O.B.”

Hackett’s opponent, Jean Schmidt, strongly supported Bush and the Iraq war.

Hackett lost by about 3,500 votes, getting about 48 percent of the vote in a district that routinely elected the previous Republican congressman there by about 70 percent.

This was a very surprising development in southwestern Ohio.

Obama’s stance on the invasion and occupation of Iraq may resonate in Ohio, where many active duty and reserve Army and National Guard personnel have been killed and wounded. Active duty Marines and Marine reservists from Ohio have also been killed and injured in high numbers in Iraq.

GEOGRAPHY AND DEMOGRAPHICS

The hilly country of southwestern Ohio around Cincinnati is very much like southern Indiana next door and northern Kentucky, just south across the Ohio River.

If you go further east, the southern neighbor becomes West Virginia and southeastern Ohio is considered part of the Appalachian region, as the western foothills of the Appalachian Mountains start there. There is coal mining in this region.

Many people in southern Ohio speak with a slightly or markedly southern-type accent.

An ancient glacier that flattened central and northern Ohio stopped just short of the still-hilly southern part of the state.

In that flat central Ohio area, there are plenty of farms, small and medium-size towns with the state capitol of Columbus right in the middle.

Northern Ohio has a lot of the industrial areas around Lake Erie that have had historical links with Detroit and other centers of the old “rust belt” regions.

Many people here speak with a somewhat northern type of accent.

There are many good union people in Ohio. Sometimes their social and political views are centrist and they might find positions and candidates of either major party to be valid.

Some Ohioans who have benefited from unions and have a middle class or even upper middle class economic status are educated enough to know that the struggles of the union and labor movements over the decades resulted in the benefits they have now.

Some realize that the social, economic and political forces in America that supported or opposed working people and the unions were associated in certain patterns with the two major political parties. Some Ohioans who have benefited from unions may not fully understand this history.

Obama’s efforts and results in Ohio will be related to many of these these factors.

OHIO HISTORY AND ETHNICITY

Will Obama’s mixed-ethnicity be a factor? Probably. There are not too many Ohioans who had a father from Kenya, Africa.

Although Ohio is not as diverse as Hawaii, where Obama mostly grew up, raised by his grandparents from Kansas, there is some interesting ethnic and historical background.

Today, you can find people of virtually every ethnic background living in Ohio.

Italian-Americans in northern Ohio, German-Americans in southwestern Ohio, you name it. People from Eastern Europe often came to work in Ohio’s steel mills and mines.

In the early 1800s, Germans were a dominant ethnicity that settled early Cincinnati.

There reportedly were German or even Nazi sympathizers there before and during U.S. entry into World War II.

At the same time, some local German-Americans, including some distant relatives of mine, thought about changing their very German names to avoid problems during the war years, such as being thought of as “the enemy.”

It could be that some German-Americans in Cincinnati then went overboard the other way, feeling that being a “super American patriot” required certain political and social positions.

Going further back in history, during slavery, for a period of time, laws provided that escaping slaves who crossed north of the Ohio River into southern Ohio could not be returned to slave owners and were, as a practical matter, free.

Subsequent laws required escaping slaves to reach Canada to be free from slave catchers.

Amish and Quakers are found throughout areas of Ohio. The Underground Railroad was very active in southern Ohio during the slavery era. Some Quaker relatives of mine, according to stories and rumors, were involved in the Underground Railroad in the rural areas of southwestern Ohio.

There is a problematic element here. Next door in southern and central Indiana, the KKK is quite strong and active. This is also an aspect of the region in general.

My grandfather told a story about a relative of ours who, decades earlier, had run for sheriff in Kentucky. One night the KKK came to visit him, white robes and all. They told him if he was not on board with the KKK, he would not get elected.

He apparently told them he was not on their side … and he did not get elected sheriff.

Many people entering southern Ohio in the 1800s and 1900s were migrating from the Appalachian Mountain regions in Kentucky, such as some relatives of mine, and from elsewhere in the Appalachian region.

In more recent decades, many Appalachians chose to escape the poverty, oppression and violence of the coal-mining regions. Cincinnati was a center for these escapees too.

Among these migrating groups were people who were mixed-ethnicity European and Native American Indians such as the Cherokee whose native lands were in the Appalachian region.

Many early explorers in the 1700s had intermarried with the Cherokee and generations of mixed English-Scottish and Cherokee families lived in the region.

In the years before the 1839 “Trail of Tears” forced march west, and the confiscation of Cherokee lands and homes, many mixed-ethnicity families blended into the mainstream society, with only a few family stories or suspicions remaining about the Indian connections in the family tree, such as my own family.

Another interesting aspect of Ohio is that after the American Revolution, many Revolutionary War veterans and their families moved over the mountains to settle in eastern Ohio. Today, in the cemeteries of southeastern Ohio, you can find the gravestones of many who fought in the American Revolution.

Ohio University, where I went to college, was founded by Revolutionary War veterans.

I am happy to say that I had ancestors who fought in the Revolutionary War and were associates and relatives of George Washington and the other American leaders of that period.

I also recently learned that, according to a genealogy researcher in the family, Obama and I are distantly related too.

How do all of these and many other cultural, ethnic, geographic and historical elements fit together in our current political landscape as we approach the Democratic primary and then the general election?

We will soon be finding out.

Obama will probably have significant support in Ohio from a wide variety of people.

I bet that many Ohioans will be thinking long and hard about Obama, about the invasion and occupation of Iraq, about the direction our country has been going in for the last few years and about themselves and their core beliefs, deep down inside.

Tags: democracy, ohio, politics, race, race relations, society, sociology, Steve Hammons
Categories: Commentary, Society, Democracy, Politics, Sociology, Steve Hammons
No Comments »

An Article by:

Ben Tanosborn

It must have been Harry S. Truman, the plainest amongst our plain presidents, who scared us all into having idiots running our government by saying: “Whenever you have an efficient government, you have a dictatorship.”  Of course, he failed to acknowledge the possibility that we could have the worst of both worlds: inefficient government and dictatorship.  And at this moment, we seem to be marching in step to get there soon. 

Are our nation’s best and brightest so repulsed by the bureaucracy in the public sector that decidedly prefer to take up arms running the predatory wing of the private sector?

Maybe some of the “brightest” are doing that, but they cannot also be called “best” while allowing themselves to be corrupted by a heartless capitalism equally ready to reward its bright leaders as it is to deny countless people from sharing the economic trough. 

It does look more and more as if both public and private sectors are being ran by the very same gang of thieves, all operating from a single “carnivalesque” den, where the larcenous elite pick the lazy, career-politicians as their lead carneys for deceit.

And these lead carneys are seldom the brightest, and definitely never the best! 

Americans have done it in the past… so why not again?  I mean… elect the village idiot to be mayor… well, president and CINC for this US-village we live in.  No disrespect intended, not for the sake of disrespect; certainly not by simply calling a dumb ass who aspires to be America’s supreme leader by a first, middle and last name, all in one.  And every village, we are told, is expected, certainly entitled, to have one.  An idiot, that is!

One would think that hitting on nine out of ten prognostications would make most of us who are humility-challenged, a bit giddy zigzagging in haughty satisfaction; almost as if invited to a seminar conducted, ex officio, by none other than Nostradamus – in spirit, of course.  But to me, this nine out of ten “good guesses” that I’ve attained during this past year lose any and all merit when the error, the incredible miss, involves the man of the hour, Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the soon-to-be standard bearer for the GOP in the coming presidential election.  And that’s how I messed up, big time, when last May in one of my columns I prematurely called this politician a has-been, and laid to rest his presidential ambitions with an obituary that read R.I.W. (Rest in War) instead of R.I.P. 

Foolish me!  Of all the predictions I’ve made throughout the years, this one I thought to be a cinch, a sure thing… an “almost-certainty” with an infinitesimal margin of error.  I was almost embarrassed to even consider it a prediction instead of a factoid.  Pleassse! How can the Grand Old Party consent to be represented by anyone like John McCain… a person irrelevant in just about every aspect of the party’s conservative tradition; a true morbid warmonger just like the present occupant of the White House; a phony funny-racist; an inarticulate man… one lacking minimal brain power?  How, may I ask?

Could it be that Americans prefer not to have anyone smarter than their surrounding mediocrity leading them?  Or that after having been submerged at the bottom of iniquity with George W. Bush for eight years, we might fee the need for a decompression stop presidency before our nation resurfaces without suffering from the bends? Nonsense… a McCain presidency would be no different from a Bush’s third term… equal opportunity idiocy, and more thieveries of the filthy, or cleanly, rich.

One cannot fathom McCain as the next president of the United States… the new scorn of the gooks and their new replacements, the terrorist Islamo-fascists! Not this burnt scrap from the bottom of Annapolis’ kettle.  But then again, Americans more often than not seem to side with the perceived underdog, particularly when seen as a hero-patriot, and it would be hard to find a greater underdog than the village idiot.

Don’t count McCain out… at least for now!  It’s an indisputable fact that in America, money is total power, and at the end of the day power always grabs the reins.

Tags: Ben Tanosborn, congress, corporations, corporatism, democracy, economics, government, homeland security, imperialism, politics, power, social responsibility
Categories: Commentary, Democracy, Power, Politics, Congress, Corporations, Homeland Security, Imperialism, social responsibility, Ben Tanosborn
No Comments »

An Article by:
Steve Hammons
First Published on AmericanChronicle.com

The local newspaper reporter in Stephenville, Texas, who helped cover a UFO sighting case there is no longer working at the Stephenville Empire-Tribune newspaper, effective last Thursday, Feb. 7.

Journalist Angelia Joiner had been covering the UFO story which broke early in January and brought national and international news media representatives and researchers to Stephenville, other nearby small towns and the surrounding region.

Mainstream media such as the Associated Press, CNN and other major TV networks and newspapers covered the incident with great interest. The international press also paid special attention to the UFO sightings in Stephenville and towns in the area.

Media personalities such as CNN’s Larry King and NBC’s Today show host Matt Lauer explored the sightings on their shows.

In Stephenville, Joiner was a staff writer at the small-town newspaper there. She did an excellent job of researching and interviewing local residents who were surprised, curious and concerned about the very unusual objects they reportedly saw.

As national and international interest in the case grew in January, Joiner was contacted for information as the reporter on the scene with some of the best knowledge of the local community.

Her articles helped inform not only local residents who relied on professional reporting for their community, but also assisted other Americans and people internationally understand that Stephenville people and residents in the area were down-to-Earth, solid and of good character.

The factual and level-headed journalism Joiner provided helped the national news media understand and respect the citizens in these communities. This resulted in some of the most serious and credible reporting in the national media on such an incident in recent memory.

The AP article was carried in hundreds of papers and news outlets. People like Larry King and Matt Lauer talked about the subject with intelligence and open minds.

All these outcomes were related in part to the high level of credibility of local witnesses who were courageous enough to come forward and the professionalism of local reporter Joiner and her colleagues in the national and international news media.

However, some of these witnesses and Joiner seem to be paying a price for doing their civic duty and communicating about an incident that appeared to be very significant, and could even have affected the public safety of the communities in the area.

CENSORSHIP AND “NEED TO KNOW”

According to information obtained for this report, management at the Stephenville Empire-Tribune did not want further coverage in the paper of the sightings by local citizens of something that appeared to be highly unusual. Pressures may have been placed on newspaper management to discontinue articles on the subject.

According to the newspaper’s Web site, “The Stephenville Empire-Tribune is a mid-morning paper published six days a week by Erath Publishers, Inc., a Consolidated Southwest Media company which is owned by American Consolidated Media. The Empire-Tribune is a member of the Associated Press, Texas Press Association, West Texas Press Association and the Inland Press Association.”

Publisher Rochelle Stidham and Managing Editor Sara Vanden Berge were contacted for their comments for this report but did not immediately respond.

Did the paper’s management face pressures to end coverage of the UFO sighting by a local peace officer, respected businessman and pilot and reportedly dozens of other local citizens? Did they back away from accounts of local citizens who said they were apparently being threatened for talking about what they saw?

Is this a case of media censorship or self-censorship and political correctness? Is it about professional courage and moral integrity? And, can the newspaper now be trusted by the community to cover important aspects of public health and safety, local political activities and other sometimes sensitive topics?

These seem to be questions for the citizens who read and subscribe to the paper and advertisers who use that newspaper.

The corporate owners of the Empire-Tribune (Consolidated Southwest Media, American Consolidated Media) and the professional news and journalism organizations with which the paper is affiliated (Associated Press, Texas Press Association, West Texas Press Association, Inland Press Association) might also want to review developments there.

As for the former reporter Joiner who had covered the concerns and accounts of local citizens so professionally, life goes on.

She appears to be confident that she did the best job she could have for her community as a responsible local journalist who realized something important had happened to her fellow citizens, neighbors and friends.

“I appreciate the opportunity I have had at the newspaper,” Joiner said. “A story of this magnitude drained the limited resources a small newspaper has. I performed my other duties to the best of my ability.”

Even as the national and international media interest calmed down somewhat, other ominous developments were occurring in the Stephenville area.

A local resident stated he had been received threatening phone calls and threats of implied bodily harm or death for talking publicly about what he saw.

An intruder had also appeared on his rural property at 1 a.m., causing the resident to be concerned about the safety of his family.

See my Feb. 7 article: “Texas UFO witnesses threatened for talking to media?”

As Joiner was covering this more serious aspect of the UFO sighting case (in articles published Feb. 3 and Feb. 4) which appeared to be a law enforcement and criminal matter affecting public safety, she was reportedly told by newspaper management to back off.

“My directions were to move on to something else,” Joiner said.

The reason given to Joiner for this was, “because our readership had grown tired of the UFO stories.”

However, Joiner was still a contact person and resource for community residents, researchers, news media representatives and others.

While trying to obey management’s directives to cover topics other than the UFO sightings and related developments, Joiner said, “It was a difficult task to achieve. I was still receiving a surprising number of e-mails and phone calls on the subject.”

“I tried to direct those calls and interviews to after hours or during lunch hours. And I forwarded e-mails to my home so that I would not be giving newspaper time to the subject. I honestly tried to do as they had asked.”

The apparent irregularities and journalistic priorities of what was starting to emerge at the Empire-Tribune probably also started to dawn on Joiner as she realized things were not going in a good direction at the paper.

She gave her two-week notice, then was told to leave immediately.

“I had given notice when I realized my boss was unhappy with my performance, but was unexpectedly asked to pack my things and leave Thursday,” she said.

Joiner apparently felt that people in her community had “a need to know” about what was going on when respectable citizens came forward with their accounts and subsequent serious incidents reportedly involved the safety of and threats to a local family.

GOING FORWARD

The Stephenville UFO sighting incident is not the first and will not be the last. The responses by local and regional public safety officials to such incidents have also occurred before, and will again. Local, national and international news media professionals are also part of the picture, past, present and future.

Americans wearing the military uniform of our country and our intelligence professionals are certainly also parts of the puzzle involving UFOs and how our society deals with an apparently sensitive and complex situation. Their respect and support for good American citizens will remain crucial in the days ahead.

Many of the residents of the Stephenville region are just such good Americans. Reporter Joiner knew this because she knows the people of her community.

Local journalists typically work on topics involving all kinds of community activities: the local schools and hospitals, area peace officers and public safety personnel, businesses and employers, civic groups and organizations. And when they do, reporters often feel a sense of responsibility to do their best for their neighbors and their communities.

This works in reverse too, at the local and national levels. Our newspapers, TV and radio media, Web-based news and other similar information platforms are sometimes only as good as the standards we expect of them, and the support we give to honorable and ethical journalists.

Like the old saying, “In a democracy, citizens get the government they deserve,” the same can be said about our news media. We get the newspapers and news media we demand, deserve and support.

If we continue along a path of the “dumbing down” of Americans, as many have alleged, the fabric of our communities and our nation may deteriorate.

If we search for truth, integrity and honor within ourselves, our media and our government officials, we may just find that too.

The citizens of the Stephenville region, and all the rest of us, must decide about the directions we want to take. Do we want to continue being dumbed down? Do we want to stick our head in the sand and close our eyes?

Or, do we want greater respect as American citizens and intelligent human beings who have the ability to understand sensitive, complex and, yes, even highly unusual and unexpected situations?

When events occur that affect public health and safety, public information, our rights and responsibilities as citizens, what are our roles and those of our institutions such as local and national government and the news media?

These are questions that, it appears, must be faced and dealt with if our communities, our society and our nation will continue to thrive.

NOTE TO READERS: Hammons is a former reporter for newspapers in the San Diego area. He covered public health and safety, the “police beat,” U.S. Navy and Marine Corps topics, Pacific Ocean and beach area stories and other subjects. He studied communications and journalism at Ohio University, Athens, Ohio, home of the prestigious Scripps College of Communications and E.W. Scripps School of Journalism, recognized as two of the top such programs in the United States. Hammons is also author of two novels – MISSION INTO LIGHT and the sequel LIGHT’S HAND.

Tags: democracy, establishment, flying, government, journalism, Steve Hammons
Categories: Commentary, Democracy, government, journalism
No Comments »

An Article by:

Ben Tanosborn

I no longer care how popular the voting concert is, I refuse to pay homage to those untalented, tone deaf rockers!  Every four years we are regaled with the very same quadrennial political tour, the same Evil Brothers, whatever names they may go by this time around, giving us the misconception that there is political choice in our lives.

Sorry, folks, but I have had it with those two brothers engendered by an incestuous relationship. Greater and Lesser, as far as this writer is concerned, although not twins, carry almost identical DNA’s.  And it is precisely our covering up for all of Lesser’s misgivings, election after election, that we are where we are – politically – today.  After the snow dust settled in Iowa’s caucuses and New Hampshire came undone, I finally made an irrevocable resolution, not just for the New Year but one to honor for a lifetime: Never again!  Never again will I be shamed into voting for that lesser evil candidate – or party; for evil, of any kind, does not deserve anyone’s vote, certainly not mine.

While America’s Fuehrer tours the palaces of his moneyed-buddies in the Middle East, ranting incessantly – and stupidly – about Iran… and the inconceivable and “personal” promise of regional peace, the present Democratic pretenders to the Pennsylvania Avenue domicile, who also anticipate dominance over a Reichstag just a short jog away, deliver soft blows at each other as if all these non-sense, non-issues really meant anything.  Anything relevant, that is, to the chaotic economic and foreign policies that define the sorry state of our nation these days!  And these babbling pretenders under the banner of change are throwing barbs at one another without the slightest clue as to what “change” should be.  Obama and Clinton, a total disgrace, yet it’s likely that one or the other, maybe even both, will adorn the Democratic ticket for this naught-eight.  Ugh!  Lesser evil, anyone… to whatever these Republicans will try to concoct in their wrongly rightist ways?

As in the past, it is America’s media “aiding” in the decision as to what politicians make the acceptability cut, and for Democrats, whatever the reasons, people like Biden, Dodd and Richardson never had a chance.  And the Press made sure that Kucinich’s peace message was kept as short as his physical stature.  So from the very start it was just a beauty contest with three semi-finalists: Clinton, Edwards and Obama.  And now, to make it more interesting – in the tradition of American Idol – it’s beginning to look as if the media judges have decided that Edwards is beginning to look too angry, maybe too controversial for our “centrist” politics.  So it’s down to Obama and Clinton, Clinton and Obama… the man who can deliver a spirited message from the pulpit, just like an emotive evangelical preacher, but who to date has not shown us any “beef”; and that warrior, bionic woman who could have the White House renamed the Clinton House if she were to add two terms to her husband’s.  America’s centrists both… from the center of America’s corporate money!

And the only hope and compromise for American progressives that Edwards’ candidacy might represent appears to be gone.  Edwards is by no means what many of us would consider a true progressive candidate, but he seems trustworthy enough to help change the direction of America, domestically and internationally, and not just talk about it.  No sacrilegious talk (on peace) like that expressed by Hillary, after her victory in New Hampshire that would have us leave Iraq only under the proper conditions… definitely the language one would expect from a transvestite Dubya.

Of course, Iraq has ceased to be Americans’ main concern, and now the headlines are starting to tell us that voters are far, far more worried about the economy than any war; naturally, as long as it is waged elsewhere.  And the economic bloodbath soon to come in snowballing fashion, unstoppable by any so-called economic stimuli – which would entail additional borrowing from our already bankrupted future generations and nothing but a temporary postponement of the inevitable – will uncover a third stage of a cancer that has been with American society for too long: we consume, or waste in unnecessary weaponry, far more than we produce… and we elect government leadership that enable us to do so.

Only thing that the Democratic Party presumably had going all these years, as stupidly as it sounds if you believe it, was having a “big umbrella” for diversity.  Except that when it came to the moment of truth, those who advocated social justice, domestically, and peace in the world, were never represented in the party.  They had neither voice nor vote.  Yet, at election time, the Democratic Party apparatiks would always come to that 5 to 10 percent of progressive voters, asking us with a sardonic smile to vote for them… the Lesser Evil!  And most of us have succumbed to that totally flawed rationale.

Had progressives stood firm to their convictions during the past quarter of a century, and had organized as a true “umbrella party” to the many advocacies for a better and more just and peaceful society – even if small in numbers – this 2008 presidential election could have turned out to be one to really change America.  Instead, we’ll have an election where our citizenry is insulted once again… with more of the same.

If anyone approaches me prior to the November 4 election sermonizing why I need to vote once again for “Lesser Evil” my answer will be fulminatory and terminal, and I will say it without fear of remorse: Go f… yourself!

Tags: Ben Tanosborn, big brother, democracy, empire, fascism, foreign policy, Global, government, homeland security, imperialism
Categories: Commentary, Global, Democracy, Empire, Homeland Security, Foreign Policy, Imperialism, Ben Tanosborn
No Comments »

An Article by:

Steve Hammons

also published in AmericanChronicle.com

Results from Diebold electronic voting machines used in New Hampshire’s primary are being questioned this week as apparent anomalies in voting patterns there are examined.

According to published reports, in areas of New Hampshire where Diebold machines were used, Hillary Clinton may have received significantly more votes than Barack Obama, compared to regions where Diebold machines were not used.

Despite repeated reports by experts that these types of voting machines can be hacked and voting results altered, the devices continue to be used around the country.

Questions were raised in 2004 presidential election about the accuracy of voting results in Ohio.

Some of these concerns were also related to Diebold electronic voting machines.

After the 2000 presidential election and problems counting Florida’s punch-card ballots, federal funds were made available for local jurisdictions to purchase different voting technologies.

Many of these funds were spent on electronic machines such as the Diebold devices.

DEMOCRACY AT RISK

Vote tampering in the U.S. and elsewhere is nothing new. But, reasonable efforts have often been implemented to attempt to minimize some of the more egregious activities regarding election fraud.

Now, with questionable electronic voting devices used throughout the nation, high-tech election manipulation is clearly a possibility, probability or maybe even established fact, according to some researchers and experts who have investigated the situation.

Because election and voting procedures vary around the country, there are not uniform and consistent standards for voting devices and other elements of election processes.

Although many people have called for increased universal standards to assist in maintaining the integrity of elections, little has been done.

In addition to questionable voting machines, other irregularities have been documented, reported and investigated. These include confusing ballots, inadequate numbers of polling places, polling places strategically located to influence voting patterns, removal of qualified citizens from voting eligibility lists and other concerns.

According to some observers, these kinds of circumstances may have significantly affected national and local elections in recent years.

CORRECTIVE ACTION

What can be done to improve the integrity and accuracy of our election processes? Experts and researchers of all kinds have made many valuable suggestions, based on extensive investigations of many aspects of current election problems.

Yet, there does not seem to be an adequate consensus about what steps should be taken.

Do we implement mandatory national standards or keep elections in local hands? And, how will decisions be made about things like electronic voting technology. Unwise and corrupt decisions can just as easily be made at the federal level as at the local level, as we know all too well.

Politically neutral organizations could create groups of experts to make logical recommendations about how to proceed. In fact, many such groups already have. But the problems persist.

In the case of Ohio’s 2004 elections, other similar questionable election processes and now in the New Hampshire primary, real or perceived irregularities are damaging American democracy.

If it is true that flawed voting machine technology is inadvertently making errors or allowing outright criminal voter fraud, we have a serious problem.

If other aspects of our election processes, inadvertently or intentionally, are also wrongly disenfranchising citizens, creating phony election results and helping put people in office who were not truly elected, our democratic system is truly damaged.

Tags: congress, constitution, corporations, democracy, economics, Elections, fascism, federal government, government, information technology, politics, privatization, self governance
Categories: Commentary, Economics, Democracy, constitution, government, self-governance, Politics, Congress, Corporations
No Comments »

An Article by:

Russell Cole

The purpose of this essay is to bring scrutiny to an alarming trend in American governance. This growing practice is propounded by differing groups in our society, ranging from the neoconservatives to the quasi-academicians occupying fellowships at the politically moderate Brookings Institute.

In a publication produced by members of the Brookings’ Institute, the emerging practice has been labeled with the following expression, “Governing by Network.” This philosophy of governance looks to institutions and organizations outside of government in order to outsource the work of government; thus, privatizing many of the functions that would, otherwise, be implemented by governmental agencies and the civil professionals who work under their auspices.

The purpose of this brief essay is to refocus this governing philosophy through the lens of an entirely different interpretative framework, in order to bring to the fore some of the alarming outcomes that might result from this practice of outsourcing government. I will make the case that governing by network is tantamount to corporatism, and, therefore, poses a threat to the already compromised democracy that we, as Americans, have historically struggled to enact and, presently, continue to enjoy; although in recent years our democratic system of polity has suffered a flurry of incursions made by the current Imperial Presidency.

At first glance, this might appear to be a sound policy. Looking toward corporations in the economy and NGOs in civil society might provide a means by which to rely upon organizations in society that are already specialized in particular types of operations, making them more efficient and effective agents for carrying out the missions underlying government initiatives. In the language of neoconservatism, privatizing the military, for instance, will make America’s war machinery subservient to the pressures of the market; subsequently, ensuring that America’s mechanisms for carrying out its foreign policies that rely upon militarism are the most fit for that purpose.

This whole arcade of mercenary contractors waging war in Iraq is by no means an ad hoc appendage to the military proper, whose idea and implementation were incited solely from the contingencies of the Iraqi campaign. Rather, the privatization of the military had been, from inception of the Bush Presidency, a guiding-principle for Rumsfield and his efforts to reform the American military complex. From the beginning of his tenure as the Secretary of Defense, Rumsfield had been working with his favored contacts in the private sector in order to facilitate the outsourcing of many of the functions of the military and the Pentagon; thus, increasing the role of private contractors in America’s military affairs. This protracted endeavor to outsource as many military operations as possible was part of a metaphorical war being waged against the military bureaucracy; a complex – according to Rumsfield, and in accord with neoconservative thought patterns – of obsolescent bureaucratic institutions, which burdened the American state with inefficiency, resulting in governmental waste.

There are, of course, manifold examples to cite when it comes to illuminating the concrete manifestations of the emergent doctrine, governing by network. To cite a more seemingly benign example, Bush’s policy of funding faith-based organizations for the purposes of providing social welfare services to the dependent and needy constitutes an instance of governing by network, because it involves integrating organizations that exist in civil society into the operations and functions of government; relieving the state from the encumbrance of constructing the institutional architecture required for it to perform these tasks on its own.

Although, prima facie, these uses of the private sector to facilitate the execution of public policies might appear innocuous and, even, pragmatic. Nevertheless, there is a more sinister dimension to these practices, which reflects a motivation possessed by the adherents of this public policy philosophy that needs to be rendered transparent, so that the full scope of consequences brought about by governing by network is apparent to the American citizen.

In the initial paragraph of this essay, I pointed out that the privatization of governance can alternatively be referenced under the term, corporatism. By this, I am indicating that the privatization of government will have the entailment of creating a political system in which the distinctions between polity and the economy are effectively blurred; resulting of the integration of the economy, along with the elites who control it, with the institutions and decision-making mechanisms of government. I say this because private entities in the economy can just as well affect the policy making processes belonging to the politic sphere of society - and will have a much greater incentive to do so if government is outsourced – through interventions such as their corporate lobbying and the campaign donations extended to politicos by corporate elites – as can the body politic impact upon the firms in the economy through the adoption of government policy.

Therefore, by privatizing governmental services, we run the risk of having corporations influencing what policies will be implemented by affecting political decision-making outcomes in an attempt to ensure revenue through governmental contracts. This networking of polity with the economy and civil society will precipitate working relationships among the agencies in all three of the affected social spheres:  polity, civil society, and economics.  Resultantly, the policies taken up by government might reflect the economic interests that stand to benefit from particular policies; rather than having government policy address the needs and desires of the populace; members of society who do not necessarily possess the wealth and influence to countervail the corporate interests that stand to profiteer through particular types of policy implementations. In short, the government and the economy will merge into a union whereby policy and the motivations that underly it will be identical with interests emanating from the economic sector and from the advocacies associated with NGOs in civil society; a collection of non-governmental agencies that stand to benefit by virtue of the contracts that will ensue from the networked administration of public policies.

There is an even more alarming aspect to the consequences engendered by governing by network: The constitutional protections that restrict governmental interference in the private and civic affairs of citizens can effectively be circumvented by implementing the policies of government through the employment of private institutions that are not beholden to the same limitations imposed upon government by the Constitution. This is what makes the discussion among neoconservatives so disconcerting, in which they are presently entertaining the prospect of outsourcing domestic intelligence gathering to private firms who will then be entrusted with spying upon American citizens.

This plan that is being advanced by the in-member ideologues of the current Administration in conjunction with their sympathizers and consultants occupying positions in various neoconservative think-tanks, if allowed to materialize, will result in more than the “soft fascism,” described by Ron Paul in his warnings about corporatism; it presents the possibility of effectively imposing a rather profound and extensive form of authoritarianism upon the American public. We will be subjected to the unfettered intrusions and spying eyes of private entities outside the constraining parameters that have been, heretofore, erected by Constitutional Rights. We will have to fear with whom we associate and with whom we transact communications – let alone indulgences in vice; or contributions to radicalized political advocacies – because we will have no expectation that we can maintain any seclusion of these activities in the sense that we will not be able to conceal information and curtail knowledge about our engagements, as private citizens, from institutions who might react punitively if presented with such renderings of our social activities. When in the hands of private firms conducting domestic intelligence gathering, what is to stop our employers from purchasing such information in order to assess our interactions outside of the workplace, so the firm can successfully impose a lifestyle – through the threat of occupational termination upon those who deviate – that they deem appropriate for those assuming positions in the ranks of their employment.

Consider, even, the current push to centralize and digitize our health records. Of course, they attempt to assuage our concerns by emphasizing the improvements to the administration of health care that will be actualized through the availability to health care professionals of an archive containing our complete medical histories that can be instantaneously retrieved via information technologies. However, what other possibilities will be enacted through the creation of such a repository of personalized information regarding matters of our biographies that we consider to be, oftentimes, sensitive and highly private? Might we be obliged by potential employers to permit their human resource agents to investigate for what we have received treatment by physicians and when that treatment was administered?  For some us, we risk even having to disclose out relationships with psychiatrists and other practitioners of mental health care. Additionally, through the nexus between the economy and polity that will be formed under the conditions depicted in the not so distant futurism that I am detailing, what recourse could we possibly have to prevent government agencies from obtaining the health records that will already be in the hands of corporations with whom government will have working relations? The rights to privacy that were referenced by the attorneys entrusted with the criminal defense of Rush Limbaugh will not be violated, they will simply be circumvented, bypassed, through the creation of cooperative enterprises involving both law enforcement and private entities in the economy or, perhaps, civil society, which might have access to personal medical records.

It is important to stress that the argument that I am making is not a polemic advancing a position in support of expanded government. However, I am quite explicitly warning against solutions to “Big Government,” that advance an agenda of privatizing government operations by outsourcing their functions to corporations and NGOs. The best remedy for inflated bureaucracy is the diminution of government and the services that it provides. The very worse trajectory in our social development would be pursuing the path followed by the ideologues in the Bush Administration, who are quite actively working to expand the powers of the Presidency; an expansion of authority that is leveled at the peril of civil liberties.

Tags: bill of rights, constitution, corporations, corporatism, democracy, economics, fascism, governing, government, homeland security, liberty, neoconservatism, politics, power, privatization, Russell Coles Blog, self governance
Categories: Commentary, Economics, Democracy, liberty, constitution, bill of rights, government, Russell Cole's Blog, self-governance, Power, Politics, Corporations, Homeland Security, neoconservatism
No Comments »

An Article by: 

Ben Tanosborn

For this chronologically-challenged socio-political commentator, multitasking is severely restricted to a couple of things: one active, writing; and one passive, undemonstratively viewing sports on television.  Bi-tasking would probably be a more appropriate name.

So today, on this New Year’s afternoon, I am trying to write my first column of the year while watching the Rose Bowl on TV; reminiscing about New Year’s ‘63 when I was seating at that stadium wearing student body-white in what came to be known as the greatest Rose Bowl game ever – Ron VanderKelen, the legendary quarterback for Wisconsin, almost stealing the glory from Pete Beathard and the USC Trojans in those final 12 minutes. 

While the teams from Southern Cal and Illinois take to the field, I can’t help but think of the first political primary contest which is to take place in two days: the Iowa Caucus for 2008.  It’s been three decades since this middle-America state stole the thunder from New Hampshire’s primary by giving the spotlight to presidential aspirants while also keeping the limelight onto itself.  A state probably best known for giving the nation the time-tested standard in educational testing for basic skills, ITBS, has been now trying to add to that prestige, but this time in the dubious realm of American politics.

Unfortunately for Iowa, the reality of American politics might not even be worth minimal spinning efforts, for the US may be the only nation on the face of the planet purporting political diversity while sporting only one and one-half political parties: Republicans and quasi-Republicans wearing ID tags as Democrats; both attached to Corporate America by the same bi-forked umbilical chord that provides continual nourishment (money).

A caucus, presumed to be a North American Indian word of Algonquin origin, was a sort of official get-together for Native American chiefs who ruled before the White Man came and implanted his own rule.  Now, duopoly string players – career political bosses – use caucusing to make policy decisions and also select loyal party candidates to run for office… as it will happen this January 3^rd in Iowa.

It is difficult to make any sense as to the number of ways in which Republicans (11) and Democrats (4) select their delegates for the presidential conventions, but something is strange and different about Iowa.  For a state not even scratching 1 percent of the nation’s population, both political parties assign it a very “undemocratic” high share of political influence, based on the state’s percentage of delegates: 1.68 for the Republican Party and 1.41 for the Democratic group, which also tells us in an unmistakable way that Republicans consider Iowans at least 15 percent “more relevant” than do Democrats.  Democracy American style… from the very heartland!

Do we really care which candidate wins in Iowa in each of the two parties?  Aren’t all major candidates from both parties really painted in the many different shades of red (force, power, aggression and shame) as exemplified by the stated beliefs of Romney, Clinton, Giuliani, Huckabee, Obama, and McCain?  Edwards, more of a populist, may be the only major acceptable candidate outside of the red zone, and more into the purple domain (healing ability, dignity and compassion).  Needless-to-say, people like Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul, both proponents of peace and foreign policy change, are considered not to have the “right stuff” to run the nation, much less lead the empire.  Why would Americans want to give renewed hope to Palestinians or other people in the Middle East and South Asia!  After all, that’s Israel’s decision, not America’s!

As the game in Pasadena is coming to a close, I feel that those Trojans from USC are extremely gifted at playing our game of football (American football), and perhaps should have been made a contender for the BCS championship; besides, the team appears to be well-coached beyond the game itself, and familiar with the term “cruel and unusual punishment;” and probably made aware before game time that the statement is not only listed in our Constitution (Eighth Amendment), but also adopted by the UN (1948) in its Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article Five).  It was intended for individuals, but it seems valid to apply it to teams, peoples and nations; after all, everyone deserves to be treated with a modicum of dignity.

Pete Carroll’s team did not have to worry about holding back, for it was a very good Illini team they beat 49-17, and the final score is definitely not an indication of USC inflicting cruel and unusual punishment by running up the score. 

Entering 2008, I’ve come to the realization, for the umpteenth time, that both football and politics are played differently in our nation from the way they are being played in the rest of the world; and that the United States has neither mankind’s consent nor a divine mandate to establish, and then enforce, the rules of those games; and that trying to spread democracy forcefully, and gratuitously, in our own “American style” is certain to be considered by other nations and peoples as inflicting on them cruel and unusual punishment.

www.tanosborn.com     

Tags: Ben Tanosborn, democracy, direct democracy, government, political parties, politics, self governance
Categories: Commentary, Democracy, government, self-governance, Politics, Direct Democracy, Ben Tanosborn
No Comments »

Being reflective; personally taking stock of a situation, or issue, seems to be antonymic to the nature of most people who prefer that matters be handled by leaders of groups they belong to.  Whether the issue is government, war, crime, drug-addiction, or most anything else, they are quick to pass the buck, determining that it really isn’t up to them to take stock… with that 50’s mentality that “father knows best.”  And as a year comes to an end, instead of personally taking stock and weighing what is happening to their nation, Americans’ choice is to keep the mind relaxed and let the President tell them in January’s State of the Union speech “how things really are.”  Let the lies and b-s roll!

My background as a business counselor compels me to help close this 2007 calendar year with a socio-economic and political statement of “profit and loss;” its bottom line soon to be incorporated into a balance sheet that will give us a snapshot of what we, the stockholders of the Empire, hold as equity entering 2008.

Before we look at the revenue and expense components of America’s P&L, we should take a look at that bottom line, which to no one’s surprise appears as the blood-spilling continuation of embarrassing failures for the seventh straight year, courtesy of the most incompetent management team ever to run the Empire.  Our nation has been piling up losses during this time in such a spendthrift and indurate way to the point all retained success built into the balance sheet throughout the years has been now wiped out, and the losses are already eating away into our investment, our until now untouched legacy of democratic capital.  Bush has succeeded not only in mismanaging the nation’s affairs but he is recklessly leading us into un-chaptered political bankruptcy… sure to happen by the time a new same-old-face president is inaugurated in January 2009.

Few years as this 2007 have brought the United States so little in political and socio-economic revenue, either foreign or domestic.  In the domestic front there was little the government would provide via judicial determinations by the tilted-right Supreme Court (evidenced by the partial abortion and a half dozen other rulings); or needed legislation from Congress; or any constructive leadership by the White House and its appendage, the Pentagon.  Although both houses of Congress were controlled by the lesser-evil party, they could not muster the votes to overrule a veto-happy Bush, whether on issues of war or even providing healthcare for the nation’s children.  It would be difficult to come up with just one significant thing that could be construed as something of value for the nation as a whole coming from any of the three branches of government.

As far as revenue from foreign policy investments, which have been mostly made in the currency of war and threats to other nations, one could hardly expect positive returns.  There was a lower count of dead Americans in Iraq – the only ones we care to count – attributed to the military surge, and little else.  One cannot think of any dividends from foreign sources that could add economic, military, social, or political value to the P&L.  Even in the area of global warming, we antagonized the entire world, losing at year’s end the support of the other Kyoto non-signer, Australia.  A final tally of foreign and domestic accomplishments (revenues) yields nothing but a big fat zero.

Ah!  But if our successes were few or inexistent, our failures can be measured in grand scale, both internationally and domestically.  Our expenses reached levels we would expect from a teenager at the mall having a credit car with “no limit” stamped on all four corners.  Monetarily, our insatiable borrowing, not only from the savings of people in other countries but from our own future generations, reached a level not only difficult to understand mathematically, but impossible to accept morally.  And our dysfunctional, make-believe, consumption-driven economy has brought the nation to the edge of the precipice, with overvalued assets in both real estate and stock market to a figure now approaching the nation’s entire annual GDP of over US$13 trillion.

Little needs to be said about our overseas failures, not just in the Middle East, where we have erred miserably in an unjustified and chimeric pseudo-protection of Israel, but everywhere else as well.  After seven years of trying, Bush finally succeeded in making Russia once again a potential enemy of the US, instead of a friend and partner in seeking harmony for the world.  And the tally of potential enemies, and disappointed friends, grows as nations in both Africa and Latin America no longer see a mutuality of interests between the United States and themselves.

One could easily conclude that the US government is not only coldhearted towards the peoples of the world, but cares little about its own citizenry, its interest being solely in self-perpetuating its power, and the financial welfare of a select-few who control the lion’s share of wealth and power, in America and elsewhere where capitalism flourishes.

This exiting 2007 was for me one more session for Bush et al to chisel at the shrinking equity that Americans have in America; a year in which a mendacious government continued  whittling away on those unalienable rights of man, stated in our Constitution as life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

For years we have observed how social and political events have taken place in this nation clearly pushing it towards the path of fascism, American fascism; real fascism, but rooted in this United States; a fascism different from Hitler’s, or Mussolini’s or even Franco’s, but fascism nonetheless. These days, our own NS-Frauenschaft provides the nation with fascist whores who trot with impunity up and down Main Street, anywhere in this land of ours, dressed in vibrant, patriotic red-white-and-blue colors; dollar-stars in their eyes; silver crosses as pendants; and, yes, unabashedly toting bibles.  Our Lady Liberty has now been replaced by replicas of a fascist libertine; a libertine venerated as the immaculate virgin-mother of corporate, military and evangelical America.

Yet, with such clarity provided by this year’s socio-economic and political statement, Americans remain undeterred, meekly consenting to everything the government puts on their plates, eating their soylent green as if it were the greatest gourmet delicacy.

© 2007 Ben Tanosborn

www.tanosborn.com

Tags: congress, democracy, economics, empire, Global, government, history, imperialism
Categories: Commentary, Global, Economics, government, Congress, Empire, History, Imperialism
No Comments »