It's amazing to us sometimes how transparent and yet embarrassing certain stories in American politics can be. It's also amazing how thick-headed and tin-eared some politicians can become when certain well-funded political backers support the politician in question.
This week, there are at least two examples of that kind of embarrassing and thick-skulled action going on in the Governor's offices of both Nebraska and Wisconsin.
In the case of Wisconsin's Gov. Scott Walker - a man who's become well-known for his anti-worker, pro-corporatist hypocrisy - no amount of PR baloney could hide the groveling and cowardice he displayed on Wednesday of this week.
Initially, Walker was to meet President Obama when he flew in to Wisconsin. Then the two of them would travel to tour the Master Lock manufacturing facility that the President touted in his state of the union speech. Not only has Master Lock brought jobs back to America, but the company chose to bring them back to a union workplace. Master Lock officials have said more than once that bringing jobs back to the union workplace in Milwaukee was cheaper, and the product quality is better - something we're not surprised at in the least.
What we also weren't surprised at was when Gov. Walker begged off from the factory tour with the President, claiming that the Governor had caught the flu. Video of the Governor meeting President Obama at the Milwaukee airport for a short visit, before the President went on to the lock factory, appears to show a Scott Walker who looked anything but ill with the flu.
For one thing, if Governor Walker had truly been ill, the President's security team would not have likely allowed the Governor as close as he was to the President. To us, it's obvious Gov. Walker - a man who will likely be recalled soon - was simply running away from the labor workers and the success story at the Master Lock factory.
In a similar fashion in Nebraska, Gov. Dave Heineman has been insisting, in nearly every way possible, that he's going to cram a bevy of new tax cuts through the 2012 Nebraska state budget. This, in a year when the state needs every penny of revenue just to keep its meager services operating at minimum levels.
The Governor's biggest push has been to get rid of the Inheritance Tax. This particular tax supports a surprising number of local government actions - like roads maintenance - but Heineman wishes to eliminate it for the benefit of a relatively few, highly wealthy sources. In fact, Gov. Heineman's plan to impose that $327 million tax cut was initially endorsed by two of the wealthiest farming organizations in the state, the Farm Bureau and the Nebraska Cattlemen.
Yet, a funny thing seems to be happening on the way to Heineman and his rich backers getting out of paying the inheritance tax.
Nebraska's state legislators - who have to face the citizens they serve far more often than the Governor does - appear to have no intention of doing Governor Heineman's dirty work.
In fact, the eight member Revenue Committee of the Nebraska legislature made it clear this week that they couldn't support the repeal of the inheritance tax, and would not support it going forward. The sizable protest at Nebraska's capitol on Tuesday, by eight different groups all protesting the Governor's unaffordable tax cut, gave the legislator's refusal a large and loud punch of active citizen punctuation.
Politicians like Walker and Heineman need to learn, and learn fast; their tricks will no longer be tolerated by Americans of all political persuasions.
The people - regardless of party loyalty - are tired of being given surprise sucker punches by their politicians. They may very well punch back this year - like the recall of Gov. Walker will likely soon prove.
Thursday, February 16, 2012
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
Held Down & Held Back - But Not By Color
As we promised at the beginning of 2012, we haven't been myopically focused on the Presidential political horse race much so far this year, and we're not likely to start being super-concerned with it anytime soon. With the GOP candidates faring increasingly worse against a President and an economy that both appear to be continuing an upward climb, the news items that are catching and holding our attention have little to do with who's up and down this week in popularity polling.
No, the story that's got us in its grip has been developing over the last forty years in America, and it's a topic that only one 2012 Presidential candidate has addressed recently.
According to several recently released studies quoted in the New York Times and The Atlantic magazine this past week, the worst battle against inequality in America today isn't between blacks and whites, or any other two racial groups. It's about how America's kids are doing today - and what the economic status of their parents will do to help them out, or weigh them down, in the future.
According to the research, since 1940, the achievement gap in schools has narrowed considerably between white children and black children, while the gap between the wealthy and the poor has increased by 40 percent. Further, since 1980, the children of rich parents are almost 50 percent more likely to complete college than those with lesser financial means.
To put it another way, the oft-told myth of American economic mobility that lies at the heart of many political arguments today - especially those from the conservative right - has become just that: a myth.
American economic mobility is now FAR behind that of many other so-called "First World" nations. According to the most recent calculations, kids born in most of Western Europe, Japan, New Zealand, Singapore, and even Pakistan have a better chance of moving up the economic ladder, and doing better than their parents than American kids do today.
We won't deny; some of the drag on economic mobility has to do with the failures of our current educational system - specifically teaching to tests, instead of teaching critical skills.
To that end, President Obama last Friday released ten states from the well-intended, but poorly implemented 'No Child Left Behind' statutes. Those states include Florida, Indiana, and Oklahoma, where we know some of our readers are intimately involved with both education and communications. Schools in these states will still be held to a set of academic standards agreed to by both the states and the Federal government, but the specific rules behind the 'No Child' law will no longer apply to them.
That's cold comfort to the children who've already started their school careers weighed down by the weight of their family's economic status.
We all agree that what the studies prove - that American children are less weighed down by their race than ever before - is fantastic news. Racism is still a long way from completely going away in America, but at least American children aren't being penalized against their future success as much by the color of their skin as they once were.
Sadly, those same studies show that even more kids are now being penalized due to the size of their parent's bank account when they're born. The worst part about it is that those penalties don't just get applied during the child's school years. The punishment of being born poor weighs people down for the rest of their lives - and decreased the overall success of America.
If Americans leave things the way they are now in our educational system, the extremists will continue to perpetuate the feudalistic lie that the children of the rich are better people, in large part because they were born rich. That idea is both sick and factually wrong.
Severe economic inequality and economic immobility need to be put back where they both belong: Deep-sixed to the Davy Jones' locker of history.
No, the story that's got us in its grip has been developing over the last forty years in America, and it's a topic that only one 2012 Presidential candidate has addressed recently.
According to several recently released studies quoted in the New York Times and The Atlantic magazine this past week, the worst battle against inequality in America today isn't between blacks and whites, or any other two racial groups. It's about how America's kids are doing today - and what the economic status of their parents will do to help them out, or weigh them down, in the future.
According to the research, since 1940, the achievement gap in schools has narrowed considerably between white children and black children, while the gap between the wealthy and the poor has increased by 40 percent. Further, since 1980, the children of rich parents are almost 50 percent more likely to complete college than those with lesser financial means.
To put it another way, the oft-told myth of American economic mobility that lies at the heart of many political arguments today - especially those from the conservative right - has become just that: a myth.
American economic mobility is now FAR behind that of many other so-called "First World" nations. According to the most recent calculations, kids born in most of Western Europe, Japan, New Zealand, Singapore, and even Pakistan have a better chance of moving up the economic ladder, and doing better than their parents than American kids do today.
We won't deny; some of the drag on economic mobility has to do with the failures of our current educational system - specifically teaching to tests, instead of teaching critical skills.
To that end, President Obama last Friday released ten states from the well-intended, but poorly implemented 'No Child Left Behind' statutes. Those states include Florida, Indiana, and Oklahoma, where we know some of our readers are intimately involved with both education and communications. Schools in these states will still be held to a set of academic standards agreed to by both the states and the Federal government, but the specific rules behind the 'No Child' law will no longer apply to them.
That's cold comfort to the children who've already started their school careers weighed down by the weight of their family's economic status.
We all agree that what the studies prove - that American children are less weighed down by their race than ever before - is fantastic news. Racism is still a long way from completely going away in America, but at least American children aren't being penalized against their future success as much by the color of their skin as they once were.
Sadly, those same studies show that even more kids are now being penalized due to the size of their parent's bank account when they're born. The worst part about it is that those penalties don't just get applied during the child's school years. The punishment of being born poor weighs people down for the rest of their lives - and decreased the overall success of America.
If Americans leave things the way they are now in our educational system, the extremists will continue to perpetuate the feudalistic lie that the children of the rich are better people, in large part because they were born rich. That idea is both sick and factually wrong.
Severe economic inequality and economic immobility need to be put back where they both belong: Deep-sixed to the Davy Jones' locker of history.
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
As Good As Any Other
In case you hadn't checked your calendar yet - or seen the piles of candy, cards, and teddy bears in stores leading up to today - this is officially Valentine's Day - though it's known by a whole host of other nicknames if you ask some of our friends, colleagues, and clients.
For many men in committed relationships, today is also known as "Guys Can't Win Day" - a day that Hallmark, Hersheys, florists, and jewelers everywhere count on for a boost to their annual bottom line. We say this with our collective tongues planted firmly in our collective cheeks. We're well aware that many women - including our staff member, Amy - don't expect nearly as much from their men on Valentine's day as modern American advertising leads us to believe.
No cars with massive bows needed. Just a small cup of her favorite Ben & Jerry's ice cream at home, or a simple night out without the kids, may be just the right display of affection that shows you care and also doesn't break the bank.
Of course, unless your partner is a great storyteller with that kind of gift, we don't recommend that simple course of action.
When she goes on Facebook, or Twitter, or Pinterest, or talks to her flock of friends, you naturally want her to brag about how awesome a gift-giver you are, and how thoughtful you can be. One of our staffers has a gay friend who took his partner to Vegas for Valentine's Day a few years ago - and all of the partner's female friends still remind their husbands of this every year.
Don't worry if you can't afford the lights, glamour, and big tiger shows of Vegas. The fact is, no matter how good a gift you give, no matter how big or how small, there's no real way for men to win on a day like today.
Even single men can get into trouble.
Among certain people we know, Valentine's Day is also known as "Singles Awareness Day" - and that's not necessarily meant in a good way. At one office we know, every year on this day people bring in all kinds of sugary sweet treats and foods, and all the single people eat too much - and then loudly complain in a completely unnecessary display of self-loathing. One guy at the office in question blew all his pocket change, and even a bit of bill money last year, so he could buy every woman in the place a single rose, like in "The Bachelor" television show.
Unfortunately, one of his co-workers was allergic to the roses placed all over the office, and another two read more into his gesture than he'd intended.
We're aware the Valentine's Day tradition has many different historical origins, and has basically evolved - or devolved - into little more than a "Hallmark holiday" (which, we actually appreciate, for those people we know who work at Hallmark). Because of that, some guys just don't want to celebrate the holiday. They think it's crass commercialism, worse than Christmas in some ways.
Commercialism or not, we say if you're gonna be damned - as a guy - one way or another? It may as well be for something you actually DID do, instead of what you didn't do.
So do something nice and get your Significant Other a nice gift - whatever you think will show you really care.
After all, today is as good as any other day to show the person you love - or even just the people around you - that you care. Besides - no matter how good you did? Tomorrow, someone will have done better, and you'll hear about it later. Most probably will have done a whole lot worse, though.
Like those guys buying chocolates at the gas station on the way home from work tonight...
For many men in committed relationships, today is also known as "Guys Can't Win Day" - a day that Hallmark, Hersheys, florists, and jewelers everywhere count on for a boost to their annual bottom line. We say this with our collective tongues planted firmly in our collective cheeks. We're well aware that many women - including our staff member, Amy - don't expect nearly as much from their men on Valentine's day as modern American advertising leads us to believe.
No cars with massive bows needed. Just a small cup of her favorite Ben & Jerry's ice cream at home, or a simple night out without the kids, may be just the right display of affection that shows you care and also doesn't break the bank.
Of course, unless your partner is a great storyteller with that kind of gift, we don't recommend that simple course of action.
When she goes on Facebook, or Twitter, or Pinterest, or talks to her flock of friends, you naturally want her to brag about how awesome a gift-giver you are, and how thoughtful you can be. One of our staffers has a gay friend who took his partner to Vegas for Valentine's Day a few years ago - and all of the partner's female friends still remind their husbands of this every year.
Don't worry if you can't afford the lights, glamour, and big tiger shows of Vegas. The fact is, no matter how good a gift you give, no matter how big or how small, there's no real way for men to win on a day like today.
Even single men can get into trouble.
Among certain people we know, Valentine's Day is also known as "Singles Awareness Day" - and that's not necessarily meant in a good way. At one office we know, every year on this day people bring in all kinds of sugary sweet treats and foods, and all the single people eat too much - and then loudly complain in a completely unnecessary display of self-loathing. One guy at the office in question blew all his pocket change, and even a bit of bill money last year, so he could buy every woman in the place a single rose, like in "The Bachelor" television show.
Unfortunately, one of his co-workers was allergic to the roses placed all over the office, and another two read more into his gesture than he'd intended.
We're aware the Valentine's Day tradition has many different historical origins, and has basically evolved - or devolved - into little more than a "Hallmark holiday" (which, we actually appreciate, for those people we know who work at Hallmark). Because of that, some guys just don't want to celebrate the holiday. They think it's crass commercialism, worse than Christmas in some ways.
Commercialism or not, we say if you're gonna be damned - as a guy - one way or another? It may as well be for something you actually DID do, instead of what you didn't do.
So do something nice and get your Significant Other a nice gift - whatever you think will show you really care.
After all, today is as good as any other day to show the person you love - or even just the people around you - that you care. Besides - no matter how good you did? Tomorrow, someone will have done better, and you'll hear about it later. Most probably will have done a whole lot worse, though.
Like those guys buying chocolates at the gas station on the way home from work tonight...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)