Conspiracy-o-rama, or Conspiracy-o-Bama?

Mother Jones magazine has cleverly compiled and organized the various conspiracy theories surrounding President Obama. I'm relieved the majority of voting Americans don't believe them.

The Salvation Army - just say NO

Read the article here to find out why no self-respecting LGBT person should support the Salvation Army. Then print out the vouchers below and place them in the SA kettles in place of money. There are many other charities more worthy of our hard earned money.

Costco versus Wal-Mart

Over the weekend, I participated in Small Business Saturday, and I hope you did, too. But there is one chain that will always have my loyalty. Apparently, they have their employees' loyalty as well, and it's not hard to see why.

Murray Perahia - a fitting tribute

Sony Classical has produced a beautiful boxed set containing all of Murray Perahia's recordings for that label.

Click here to read my review.

Religious Freedom, or Christian Privilege?

Driving to and from work, I’ve passed many political lawn signs over the last few months. Most are the usual candidate signs, with a few devoted to state or local issues. One sign I saw was is a simple white sign with black print: Protect Religious Freedom. Despite the election’s passage, many continue to be displayed.

I’ve done some research on the group behind these signs. Called Faith 4 Freedom on the signs, the organization is Catholics United 4 Freedom. Color me unsurprised that the group is Christian based – it’s part of a continuing pattern.

There is a small but very vocal group in this country which believes that religious freedom is under attack in the United States. Whenever I hear someone complain about infringements upon religious freedom in this country, the complainer invariably is Christian – usually a hard core evangelical, fundamentalist, or conservative Catholic. One almost never hears this complaint from a Jew, Episcopalian, member of the United Church of Christ, or even a Muslim. (This, of course, is separate from the very real prejudice and discrimination which unfortunately still exist against Jews and Muslims.) Not coincidentally, these are the same people who demand equal time in the teaching of Creationism versus Evolution in public schools.

I would be quite surprised if any of the yards hosting these signs were owned by anyone other than Christians of the fundamentalist variety. Indeed, I suspect that, if you asked these people off the record what religion they think President Obama belongs to, a high percentage would reply “Muslim.”

There is a line that this country has been allowed to cross, the line which marks the demarcation point between religious freedom – as defined by the First Amendment – and Christian privilege.

As a refresher, let us read the text of the First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

In the simplest terms, that means the government must remain neutral on matters religious. It is an indisputable fact that Christians in the United States are accorded special accommodations that are rarely given to members of other religions: For example, Christmas is a national holiday. (At this point, let me disclose that I celebrate Christmas – though in an entirely secular manner.) Although there are individual municipalities and school districts where Jewish or Muslim holy days are recognized, only Christianity gets a Federal holiday. But that’s not good enough for the zealots. They want more, and see any attempt to separate the religious from the secular as an infringement upon their sacred rights.

When Christian groups whine about not being able to place a Christmas display on public property, their true complaint is not about religious persecution, but the waning of their Christian privilege. Were a similar Muslim display, say for Ramadan, to be erected, there would be a hue and cry from these very same people who claim to “protect religious freedom”.

What the religion protectors demand is their right to impose their religious beliefs on others, regardless of the individual’s own religious beliefs or lack thereof. For example, they believe they should have the right to ban same-sex marriage for everyone – no matter the religious belief of those wanting to get married. Never mind the fact that no one seeking a same-sex marriage has ever demanded such a ceremony be performed in or recognized by any church. Religious zealots are unable to separate civil from religious concepts, even though Jesus himself said “Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s, and unto God what is God’s.” They also demand that politicians – most of whom happen to be male – legislate whether a woman be allowed to use birth control or have access to abortion. The religious protectors are the very people who have made the United States a laughingstock to much of the civilized world. But it’s nothing to laugh about here, because these are the people who want to turn America into a Christian Iran.

Over the last century, particularly in the period after the Second World War, America has become more religiously diverse – that’s a good thing. A recent survey from the Pew institute indicated that one in five Americans declared themselves affiliated with NO religion – that’s an even better thing. One wonders what the reaction would be if a monument to atheism/agnosticism – or simply to “separation of church and state” – were to arise.

The recent trouncing the right wing faced in the recent elections – with the Republicans losing the Presidential race, seats in both chambers of Congress, and marriage quality victories in four states – are harbingers of a trend that our country is on the path to a more rational, more secular, less fundamentalist future. For that, we can thank whatever god we believe in – or not.

2012 Election Endorsements

For president: Barack Obama. No president since Franklin Roosevelt has faced a greater mess than Barack Obama confronted when he took office. Unlike FDR, Obama didn’t have three years to come up with solutions - the financial crisis emerged after he’d gotten the nomination. FDR used to compare the nation’s business people to an injured patient: “Some of these people really forget how sick they were. But I know how sick they were. I have their fever charts. I know how the knees of all of our rugged individualists were trembling four years ago and how their hearts fluttered. They came to Washington in great numbers. Washington did not look like a dangerous bureaucracy to them then. Oh, no! It looked like an emergency hospital. All of the distinguished patients wanted two things—a quick hypodermic to end the pain and a course of treatment to cure the disease. They wanted them in a hurry; we gave them both. And now most of the patients seem to be doing very nicely. Some of them are even well enough to throw their crutches at the doctor.” President Obama acted quickly to staunch the bleeding by passing both the stimulus and auto rescue packages. Then he achieved something which presidents since Teddy Roosevelt have tried and failed to do: push through comprehensive health care reform. Ironically, if the recession had been sharper and deeper, Obama might have an easier time of reelection. Too many Americans have forgotten the state of our nation four short years ago - not just economically, but how we were despised by much of the world for our misadventure in Iraq and embrace of torture. Many Americans have also forgotten how health insurers routinely denied important medical procedures, denied coverage due to pre-existing conditions, and tossed 18 year olds off their parents’ insurance. Many also have forgotten how credit card companies raised interest rates on a whim, without providing adequate notice. We have a long way to go to gain complete economic prosperity and international security - but anyone who thinks America is worse off today than in 2008 has their head in the sand. Joe Biden put it succinctly: “Osama bin Laden is dead and General Motors is alive [as is Chrysler].” Hopefully, a healthy majority of the American people will have longer memories and vote to reelect President Obama. But those with short memories need only look as far back as this week, and the President’s calm, resourceful leadership in responding to Hurricane Sandy. Mitt Romney, on the other hand, does not meet the character qualifications required to be President. With everything he's done, from bullying a student he perceived to be gay, his treatment of his dog, to his conduct as Governor of Massachusetts and his dishonest Presidential campaign, Romney has proved that, at best, he is a sociopath.

For United States Senate: Sherrod Brown. On the basis of the auto rescue package alone, Sherrod Brown deserves the gratitude of Ohioans - both in and out of the auto industry. Consider this: It’s not just those who work in the auto plants who benefited from the bailout, it’s those who work in the dealerships - the sales people, mechanics, and support staff; it’s the parts suppliers; it’s the vendors - who provide everything from food to toilet paper; it’s the local stores and restaurants; and it’s those who receive the money spent by all of the above. The auto rescue is a large part of why Ohio is ahead of the curve on the recovery. Brown has stuck to his principles, which - like them or not - are resoundingly liberal. Ohioans knew this from Brown’s many years in the House when they elected them to the Senate in 2006. He has never sold his vote to the highest bidder or the richest lobbyist or SuperPAC. Brown’s opponent, Josh Mandel - backed by Karl Rove’s Crossroads GPS - has run the most mendacious campaign in recent memory, easily enough to disqualify him from public office.


State Issues

Issue 1 - Constitutional Convention: This issue pops up every twenty years. In the words of former Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren Burger, a Constitutional Convention would be a “grand waste of time“. No good would come of this convention, and the potential for mischief is great. It would take little effort for Bible-thumping gun lovers to flood the convention and enact amendments outlawing firearm registration, abortion, and public schooling. The proper way to amend the state constitution is via the established process of bringing the issue directly to the voters. Vote NO on Issue 1.

Issue 2 - Redistricting reform: Despite the scare tactics bandied about by Republican Super PACs, this initiative is a good thing. It would take the process of redistricting necessitated by the Census out of the hands of the legislature and make it the responsibility of an appointed, bi-partisan panel. Republicans would be in favor of this issue if Democrats were running the show. In a swing state ardently courted by Federal politicians, a more equitably balanced Congressional map will only enhance Ohio’s importance. The Gerrymandering done to Ohio’s districts this year is particularly egregious, and passage of Issue 2 ensures future redistricting would be more equitable. I strongly urge a YES vote on Issue 2.


Cuyahoga County Issue

Issue 108 - Cleveland-Cuyahoga County Port Authority Levy: YES. Angry suburbanites have been voicing opposition to this levy on the basis of poor management in the past and, after all, the port is Cleveland’s problem. But if we’re going to embrace regionalism, we need to embrace regional solutions and abandon the specious notion that Cleveland and Cuyahoga County are unrelated entities. Fact is, people from all over our county and beyond enjoy the river and benefit from the port. Greatly needed work, such as the repair of Riverbed Road, needs to be done, and in a time of declining state and federal assistance, this is the only way to pay for it. This levy would only cost $1.65/month per $100,000 in home value and its’ passage is a no-brainer.


South Euclid Issues

South Euclid City Confirmation Deadline Amendment: Yes. This issue provides for an important check and balance that is de-riguer in most cities but not in South Euclid: it merely requires that the city council must confirm or reject the mayor’s appointment of the law director.

South Euclid City Garbage Tax Amendment: No. This is merely another attempt by the same group of individuals who ran - and lost - in last year’s mayoral/council elections to enact the Tea Party’s stated goal: Starve the Beast. Constitutionally, we elect governments to, among other things, pass laws and levy taxes. If we feel the laws or taxes they have levied are unreasonable, we tell them so and they act accordingly (such as when the council reversed its decision to repeal the tax credit for residents who work outside the city in 2010), or we un-elect them.


School Levy:

Issue 115: The South Euclid-Lyndhurst school district has weathered some tough times over the last few decades. Declining population and enrollment have led to the demolition of several schools, while declining property values and the loss of state revenue have necessitated belt tightening. The previous operating levy was supposed to carry the district through another two years, but the district was able the make those funds last twice that long. After a brief drop into Continuous Improvement status last year, the district overall has returned to the Effective rating it has held for eleven of the last twelve years. The district’s previous superintendent, who was double-dipping while the district was sinking, has been replaced with a young a motivated superintendent: Linda Reid. She has stated that, while she welcomes a return to an Effective rating, she is not satisfied and wants to work to get the district into Excellent status. Some critics would contend that further improvements should take place before any such levy is granted. But the fact is, with the aforementioned cuts, the budget has already been cut to the bone, which makes further progress impossible. The additional cost would be $15/month per $100,000 in property value – the cost of two fast food “value” meals. I believe it’s time for our property owners – even those, like myself, who do not have children in the district schools – to step up to the plate and give superintendent Reid a chance. I urge a YES vote on Issue 115.

The Plain Dealer endorses Barack Obama

Cleveland’s sole newspaper, The Plain Dealer, has endorsed President Barack Obama’s reelection, thus proving the axiom that even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

The Plain Dealer tends to tailor its editorials to meet the opinions of its readership, which skews to an older, and thus more conservative, demographic for its print edition - so this editorial is something of a surprise.

The PD’s editorial board has a short collective memory, as evidenced by their description of President Obama’s successful efforts to bring about the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. First, they describe it as a “decades old dream of Democrats”. In fact, every President since Theodore Roosevelt (a Republican) has tried to grapple with America’s health care system. Truman went so far as to advocate for what he called National Health Insurance - today known as Single-Payer. Then there is the PD’s accusation that Obama “ceded too much freedom to doctrinaire Democrats”, a statement that would raise the eyebrows of those who were advocating for Single-Payer or at least a government option. In fact, the template for what the Republicans call Obamacare was drawn by The Heritage Foundation - a right-wing think tank - in the early 1990s as an alternative to Hillarycare. It’s no coincidence that Romneycare as it was enacted in Massachusetts and Obamacare are essentially the same thing.

But this is nothing new.

Skim through the PD’s presidential endorsements from 1936 onward, and anyone with knowledge of history is in for a chuckle.

In 1936, the PD reluctantly endorsed Franklin Roosevelt’s re-election - which was virtually a certainty anyway - despite their complaint that Roosevelt “pays too little heed to what these programs cost and who must pay the cost”. Poor FDR must have been reading the PD’s editorial, because when he took their advice and cut back spending in 1937, the economy contracted, the stock market crashed again, and a two year recession ensued.

Four years later, the editors endorsed Wendel Willkie because, as a businessman, Willkie knew that “insolvency and disaster lie down the road of continuous deficit spending”. There is no mention of the war in Europe in the editorial snippet - although there might have been as originally printed. A side note, Willkie died in October 1944, and his running mate, Charles McNary, died in February of that year, which means if he Willkie had been elected, his Secretary of State would have become President (this was before the order of succession was changed by the 25th Amendment).

1944 - “Communists and other left-wingers who want to revolutionize the American form of government by establishing some form of state-socialism are becoming more and more entrenched in the government.” Well, we can certainly see where Joseph McCarthy got his inspiration when the Plain Dealer endorsed Thomas Dewey for President, which they did again four years later.

1960 - The PD endorsed Nixon in his run against Kennedy - indeed, Ohio went Republican in 1960, bucking the national trend. Nixon’s disastrous presidency a decade later serves as testament to the PD’s lack of insight into his character. But can anyone imagine how a Nixon presidency in the early 60’s would have fared? How would Nixon, not known for grace under pressure or cool-headedness, have handled the Cuban Missile Crisis? None of us might have been left to cluck at the Plain Dealer’s editorial board’s idiotic statement that “Mr. Nixon is more mature and stable in his thinking and attitudes” than John F. Kennedy.

1984: In their slavish lauding of Ronald Reagan, they fail to mention the spiraling budget and trade deficits that would lead to the 1987 stock market crash and 1990 recession.

1996: The PD editors rightly endorsed Bill Clinton, but their condemnation of “an ill-advised $16 billion ‘economic stimulus’ package” (which touched off the greatest economic expansion in post-war American history and was to result in budget surpluses) is not one of their great crystal ball moments. Clintonomics worked - which is more than could be said for Bushomics.

2000: Again, the PD editors were right about one aspect of George W. Bush: his “authenticity”. He was a genuine idiot - and as Americans learned painfully over the next eight years: beware the power behind the throne.

2004: There is no denying that Senator John Kerry was a weak candidate, unable to explain his vote for the Iraq war, which he was for before he was against. But in the Plain Dealer’s refusal to endorse any candidate, they also failed to punish Bush for the worst intelligence failure in American history and two incompetently waged wars which costs thousands of American lives. No presidency since Richard Nixon’s (whom the PD endorsed thrice) had such a high body count. How interesting that the Plain Dealer makes no mention of the issue they harped on in 1936 and 1940: the budget deficit and federal debt - which skyrocketed during Bush’s term, obliterating the Clinton surplus. I suppose they followed Dick Cheney’s dictum that “deficits don’t matter”.

In this year’s endorsement, the Plain Dealer only hints at what I’ve been stating for months: If Barack Obama is turned out of office, it would be the single most egregious act of ingratitude in American political history.