I live in a very conservative part of the country which has elected a Republican to Congress all but once in the last 100 years. Some of my Republican friends have expressed a good bit of rage towards President Obama recently. He is leading our beloved country down the path toward socialism which will be the ruin of the nation. He is spending us into bankruptcy. Destroying our wonderful system of healthcare. He is the Great Satan, and probably a Muslim as well. And that is some of the nicer things they say.
There is no sense in arguing with such an irrational rant. Rational discussion is out of the question. My only response is: Now you know how I felt for the last eight years with George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and their merry band of thugs running the country. (I will leave it at that because when I start thinking about it, I soon descend into a serious rant.)
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Sotomayor’s Decision
President Obama recently appointed Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. Republicans have branded her a "racist" because of a statement she made several years ago that a Latina woman could make a better decision than a white male.
Beyond that one seemingly biased statement is a ruling by the Appellate Court in which it upheld a lower court’s decision in the Frank Ricci case. This was a situation where a white firefighter in New Haven Connecticut studied hard and got a high score on a promotions test, but the city threw out all the scores because no black person passed the test. Being a good American, Ricci sued, claiming discrimination. The lower court denied his claim, and Sotomayor voted to uphold the lower court’s decision. This is enough for some commentators to brand her as biased against all white men.
What seems to be missed in all this is that Judge Sotomayor did not decide on the facts of the case if there was or was not discrimination. She only ruled that the lower court had appropriately applied the law in arriving at its own decision. In this she strictly adhered to the traditional role of the appellate courts in applying the law while leaving it to the lower courts to determine the facts of the case. From my perspective, Sotomayor cannot be fairly charged with bias merely because she followed legal precedent in her vote on this case. Republicans will have to dig deeper if they want to make such a characterization stick.
Beyond that one seemingly biased statement is a ruling by the Appellate Court in which it upheld a lower court’s decision in the Frank Ricci case. This was a situation where a white firefighter in New Haven Connecticut studied hard and got a high score on a promotions test, but the city threw out all the scores because no black person passed the test. Being a good American, Ricci sued, claiming discrimination. The lower court denied his claim, and Sotomayor voted to uphold the lower court’s decision. This is enough for some commentators to brand her as biased against all white men.
What seems to be missed in all this is that Judge Sotomayor did not decide on the facts of the case if there was or was not discrimination. She only ruled that the lower court had appropriately applied the law in arriving at its own decision. In this she strictly adhered to the traditional role of the appellate courts in applying the law while leaving it to the lower courts to determine the facts of the case. From my perspective, Sotomayor cannot be fairly charged with bias merely because she followed legal precedent in her vote on this case. Republicans will have to dig deeper if they want to make such a characterization stick.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
General Motors
What a mess this country is in! General Motors, that great icon of American industry, has just filed for bankruptcy. For much of the twentieth century GM has provided the corporate standard around the world. How did such a business model come to the point of failure? Why did its highly compensated management team allow such a situation to develop?
Several factors are responsible for the collapse of the manufacturing titan, General Motors. The world-wide recession has taken its toll on all American businesses. An outdated contract with its labor force, which contains an unsustainably rich benefit package, played a part in its downfall. However, from my perspective, it is the structure of corporate management that is most at fault for hard times in corporate America.
The American management model gives an inordinate amount of authority to the top tier of managers with very little in the way of accountability. Even if they are fired for mismanagement, corporate CEO’s get large severance packages. There is little incentive for them to do well. Top management has an unhealthy influence on the corporate board and essentially sets their own compensation package. Further, incentives are based on short term successes rather than long term growth in the company. Thus deals that reap quick profits are preferred in place of performance over the long haul. All these, along with other factors, conspire to condemn American business to fail when economic hard times come.
Hopefully, the company that emerges from bankruptcy will have learned a lesson from the current experience. The future of manufacturing in America depends on it doing so.
Several factors are responsible for the collapse of the manufacturing titan, General Motors. The world-wide recession has taken its toll on all American businesses. An outdated contract with its labor force, which contains an unsustainably rich benefit package, played a part in its downfall. However, from my perspective, it is the structure of corporate management that is most at fault for hard times in corporate America.
The American management model gives an inordinate amount of authority to the top tier of managers with very little in the way of accountability. Even if they are fired for mismanagement, corporate CEO’s get large severance packages. There is little incentive for them to do well. Top management has an unhealthy influence on the corporate board and essentially sets their own compensation package. Further, incentives are based on short term successes rather than long term growth in the company. Thus deals that reap quick profits are preferred in place of performance over the long haul. All these, along with other factors, conspire to condemn American business to fail when economic hard times come.
Hopefully, the company that emerges from bankruptcy will have learned a lesson from the current experience. The future of manufacturing in America depends on it doing so.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Investigation
I have been interested in recent revelations of the federal government’s involvement in what is known as "enhanced interrogation." In conservative circles that is the politically correct term for torture. My conservative friends go to great lengths to explain to me that methods used under the previous administration were not torture. However, such things as waterboarding were considered torture when the communists used it so it should be considered torture when we use those techniques.
There have been calls from several quarters for an investigation not only of the methods of interrogation used but also of the previous administration’s legal gyrations to make operatives think that such methods were consistent with American law. Republicans are terrified that such an investigation will throw light on what took place during the past eight years.
I find this a bit hypocritical in view of the fact that Republicans insisted on spending $50 million of federal money to investigate Bill and Hillary Clinton’s failed investment in an Arkansas real estate deal. That certainly was no threat to the body politic. Government use of torture in an attempt to extract information from suspects we have captured is certainly a threat to the Republic and the rule of law for which it stands.
There have been calls from several quarters for an investigation not only of the methods of interrogation used but also of the previous administration’s legal gyrations to make operatives think that such methods were consistent with American law. Republicans are terrified that such an investigation will throw light on what took place during the past eight years.
I find this a bit hypocritical in view of the fact that Republicans insisted on spending $50 million of federal money to investigate Bill and Hillary Clinton’s failed investment in an Arkansas real estate deal. That certainly was no threat to the body politic. Government use of torture in an attempt to extract information from suspects we have captured is certainly a threat to the Republic and the rule of law for which it stands.
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Work Hard, Get Rich
A recent caller to C-Span’s Washington Journal commented on the plight of individuals in economic distress. He didn’t have much sympathy for them. His simple solution to the complex problem of personal poverty was the age-old formula, "work hard, spend wisely, and you’ll get rich." Certainly that has been the American dream that brought millions of immigrants from other countries to our part of the world. The promise is if you work real hard, you will make a lot of money. Also, if you’re wise in how you spend your money and save as much as you can, you will maintain your wealth. Oh, I wish it were that simple.
I believe in the value of work. Everyone who has the ability should be engaged in productive labor. I also believed in careful spending. In fact, my motto has been, "spend less money than you make." But, my observation on the facts of life in America is that hard work does result in wealth, but not always for the person who does the hard work. If that were so, the housekeeper who will clean my hotel room when I go to the convention next week, the cooks at the restaurant where I will eat, and the waiters who will serve me would be millionaires, while Paris Hilton would live in grinding poverty. However, the reverse seems to be true. Paris Hilton’s wealth does indeed come from hard work, but certainly not her own. Rather, she benefits by the hard work of others, who in turn live on the edge of poverty.
While some people do gain wealth by their own industrious lifestyle, most wealth is accumulated by benefitting from the labor of others. In today’s world it seems that manipulating the financial system is the sure road to riches. From my perspective, one should engage in productive labor because it is a satisfying life, not merely to get rich. The old saw still applies: the sleep of the laboring man is indeed sweet.
I believe in the value of work. Everyone who has the ability should be engaged in productive labor. I also believed in careful spending. In fact, my motto has been, "spend less money than you make." But, my observation on the facts of life in America is that hard work does result in wealth, but not always for the person who does the hard work. If that were so, the housekeeper who will clean my hotel room when I go to the convention next week, the cooks at the restaurant where I will eat, and the waiters who will serve me would be millionaires, while Paris Hilton would live in grinding poverty. However, the reverse seems to be true. Paris Hilton’s wealth does indeed come from hard work, but certainly not her own. Rather, she benefits by the hard work of others, who in turn live on the edge of poverty.
While some people do gain wealth by their own industrious lifestyle, most wealth is accumulated by benefitting from the labor of others. In today’s world it seems that manipulating the financial system is the sure road to riches. From my perspective, one should engage in productive labor because it is a satisfying life, not merely to get rich. The old saw still applies: the sleep of the laboring man is indeed sweet.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Class Warfare?
The AIG Corporation recently stunned the American public by handing out huge bonuses to its executives even though they have run the company into near bankruptcy. What angered the public so much is that the Corporation is the beneficiary of public funds to the tune of several billion dollars. Certainly beleaguered taxpayers don’t think they should have to pay to support the lifestyle of America’s rich and pampered business executives. It is one thing to save a corporation that’s too large to fail, but it is quite another thing to reward those who have guided it to the brink of failure.
From my perspective, the corporation’s actions in rewarding bonuses to the incompetent executives is just a matter of class warfare. Usually they are the ones that scream class warfare when a liberal politician suggests that the rich ought to be taxed to provide for the needs of the poor. However, in this situation the roles seem to be reversed with the rich corporate executives being demanding support from taxes on working class America. The privileged class seems to feel they are entitled to tax money just by virtue of their position in the upper levels of America’s economic column. Maybe it’s time they are disabused of this idea and are held accountable for their own actions. No bonuses if they mess up the business.
From my perspective, the corporation’s actions in rewarding bonuses to the incompetent executives is just a matter of class warfare. Usually they are the ones that scream class warfare when a liberal politician suggests that the rich ought to be taxed to provide for the needs of the poor. However, in this situation the roles seem to be reversed with the rich corporate executives being demanding support from taxes on working class America. The privileged class seems to feel they are entitled to tax money just by virtue of their position in the upper levels of America’s economic column. Maybe it’s time they are disabused of this idea and are held accountable for their own actions. No bonuses if they mess up the business.
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Stem Cell Research
Recently President Obama signed an executive order reversing the order of former President Bush restricting federal funds from being used by scientists who are studying embryonic stem cells. This was quite an issue eight years ago when Bush allowed scientists to use existing lines of embryonic stem cells, but forbade any new ones being used for research if federal money was involved. Now our new President has reversed that situation.
The reaction from conservatives has been quite interesting. They still maintain that a microscopic collection of stem cells is the same as human life and must therefore be protected. What they seem to ignore is that the embryos in question come from fertility clinics and if not used for research will simply be discarded. I find it worrisome that conservatives are much more concerned about protecting the life of an embryo than they are about protecting an actual human life. There was no conservative outcry, for example, when American mercenaries brutally murdered Iraqi civilians simply to clean out an intersection in Baghdad in preparation for American dignitaries to drive through in their limousines.
A second reaction has been the insistence by conservatives that embryonic stem cells are no longer needed or valuable for scientific use. They claim that the better science is using adult stem cells. From my perspective, they should let scientists decide what is the best resource for experimentation. This is not something a philosopher can determine. Thankfully, for those of us who are affected by certain neurological ailments, there is now some hope that eventually there will be a breakthrough and cures will be found. I realize it may not be in my lifetime, but I think our government should encourage scientists to move ahead at full speed.
The reaction from conservatives has been quite interesting. They still maintain that a microscopic collection of stem cells is the same as human life and must therefore be protected. What they seem to ignore is that the embryos in question come from fertility clinics and if not used for research will simply be discarded. I find it worrisome that conservatives are much more concerned about protecting the life of an embryo than they are about protecting an actual human life. There was no conservative outcry, for example, when American mercenaries brutally murdered Iraqi civilians simply to clean out an intersection in Baghdad in preparation for American dignitaries to drive through in their limousines.
A second reaction has been the insistence by conservatives that embryonic stem cells are no longer needed or valuable for scientific use. They claim that the better science is using adult stem cells. From my perspective, they should let scientists decide what is the best resource for experimentation. This is not something a philosopher can determine. Thankfully, for those of us who are affected by certain neurological ailments, there is now some hope that eventually there will be a breakthrough and cures will be found. I realize it may not be in my lifetime, but I think our government should encourage scientists to move ahead at full speed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
