Jerry Falwell The Moral Majority and Me

A short report about the death of Rev. Falwell.

One short comment, I am sickened by the vitriole that some of the left wing blogs are showing.  I mean you can disagree with a man, but the moment of their death isn’t the time to do so.  What should I expect though from pigs, but grunts.

I started college in 1979 and became interested in GOP politics shortly thereafter. My family had a split political history. My mother was a staunch pro-labor, Irish/Catholic Democrat. My grandfather had been one of the founders of the NYC Electrical Workers Union, and was called “The Great White Father” for pushing for minorities to be allowed into the union in the 1920′s. I am very proud of his work on the behalf of working people. My father was a staunch Republican and was Protestant. However, he had become a minister when I was about thirteen, and my mother had left the Roman Church beforehand. In 1976, they both backed Jimmy Carter, and it was odd not to hear the political debates, as they thought they had found a candidate they could agree upon. Boy, did they get hoodwinked on that one.

Early on I was not overly impressed with President Carter, and the Iran crisis sealed the deal. I had actually always been a bit more Conservative on military and foreign policy issues than my politically divided house, and I think Carter was the straw that broke the camel’s back with regard to supporting Democrats.

So when I received a newspaper from this organization called “The Moral Majority” I didn’t know what to think. I read the paper and found out that I agreed with many of the their positions. I was in favor of supporting Israel’s right to exist along with the concept that I trusted those guys more than Muslims and Arabs. I was concerned about the lack of respect that many in the country had towards our nation. I was a troubled about some of the content of the political process. I was – and still am – in favor of limiting abortion. I was fearful about some of the language in the ERA movement and mostly I was ticked about Iran and the hostages. I joined the organization at 17 in 1979. My wife rolled her eyes when I told her that one and had one word, pathetic, as a rejoinder. At 17 in my first year of college I should have been partying, getting drunk and laid, and not lining up with social conservatives. I guess you can tell she and I are a bit different in our political outlook – but she did wave a “W” placard and campaigned for President Bush in ’04. Her family still doesn’t talk to her!

I think what Rev. Falwell meant to me, at that age, was that there were people who were concerned not just about politics as usual, but who were concerned with cultural climate and its rapid change. Maybe they saw a connection between the dots – and that social outlook was related to economic policy and even a world view towards foreign policy.

I know that my views were a bit different from the Moral Majority, but there was enough agreement for me to join and to send my fees in cash – talk about naieve – in $10 increments, as I was indeed a struggling student in my first year of college. From that launching point, I became involved first in George Bush (41) campaign for the nomination, and later switched to Reagan when he won the nod. I guess that choosing of Bush over Reagan showed that I was a bit more centrist than dyed in the wool with the “MM”, but I knew that I was more comfortable with that crowd than the “rabble” I saw endorsing – and the rabble has gotten worse – Democrat candidates.

I with my still soft positions upon some social issues, such as abortion and rights for homosexuals (I support civil unions as policy), put me at odds with many of the antecedents of the Moral Majority, but I am understanding of their views, and I view our slight differences as a friendly disagreement within the family. I still feel that they are my people. So, for that, I am thankful for Rev. Falwell’s life. He profoundly shaped my growth as a person in the political realm, and though I still politely disagree with some of the social agenda of him and others of the harder Evangelical Right, and I do profess my own Evangelical foundation as a view of life, I recognize their value as a part of my family. Most importantly, I know that Rev. Falwell, despite some of our differences held a strong view upon the value of loving God. He also understood that the love of God requires action. Although in many ways I take that interpretation to promote egalitarianism, something that many of the Moral Majority/Christian Coalition/Focus on the Family crowd typically endorse, I find that we are using the same source, and in the end probably have similar intentions. This is how a person who is still, a good deal more Centrist – and still thinks that while Reagan was Great, and he was, that I like Bush 41 more for his intellect.

Let this be my final thought towards Rev. Falwell; May you wake to find you are resting on quiet shores.

Cuba: Michael Moore a Victim of Censorship

From the Seattle Times

HAVANA — Cuba characterized American filmmaker Michael Moore as a victim of censorship and the U.S. trade embargo as it reported Friday on a U.S. Treasury Department probe of his March visit here for his upcoming health-care documentary, “Sicko.”

Now that is an endorsement that only someone who is a bit out of the mainstream could take pride in. Ahh, Michael, Michael, Michael, one can only hope that this gets much more exposure. If Karl Rove were giving you advice this couldn’t have been planned better for the RNC.

“Any resemblance to McCarthyism is no coincidence,” the newspaper opined, referring to the political witch hunt that U.S. Sen. Joseph McCarthy carried out against suspected American communists in the 1950s.

The U.S. government’s targeting of Moore “confirms the imperial philosophy of censorship” by American officials, it added.

“I understand why the Bush administration is coming after me – I have tried to help the very people they refuse to help,” Moore wrote in the letter, which he posted on the liberal Web site Daily Kos. “But until George W. Bush outlaws helping your fellow man, I have broken no laws and I have nothing to hide.“

We shall see, hopefully there is a long trial so you and your friends of the fringe can get LOTS of press coverage, because I honestly feel the best chance for the GOP is for you, who represent the DNC base is to speak. Loudly, clearly, and frequently.

ABC Poll: Bush and Congress at 35%

From ABCNews

People think the Democratic-led Congress is doing just as dreary a job as President Bush, following four months of bitter political standoffs and little progress on Iraq and a host of domestic issues.

The survey found only 35 percent approve of how Congress is handling its job, down 5 percentage points in a month. That gives lawmakers the same bleak approval rating as Bush, who has been mired at about that level since last fall.

Maybe they’ll throw all the bums out. Might not be the worst thing that happened. Probably they will vote the same people back in and continue to moan and whine. Remember, in a Democratic Republic, you get the government you voted for, and deserve.

Rudy in Texas: “I support a woman’s right to choose”

From Newsday.com

HOUSTON — After a week of criticism over his ambiguous views on abortion, Republican presidential contender Rudolph Giuliani Friday directly addressed his views on abortion, gay rights and gun control, and forthrightly supported a woman’s right to choose an abortion.

Okay, are you all ready for the drum roll? Are any surprises about to come forth?

Giuliani, a New York Catholic who once considered becoming a priest, chose to make his stand before a conservative, anti-abortion audience at Houston Baptist University here, in an address that was arranged just last Wednesday.

Giuliani told the audience that the two most important issues in the presidential campaign were fighting terrorism and preserving the tax cuts, deregulation and privatization of the economy, and that the social issues were secondary.

Amen, though I guess my Evangelical upbringing is coming forth, as that is not typical interaction with Catholics, then again, he was speaking to Baptists, so perhaps I am covered.

He also downplayed his differences with conservatives on gay rights — saying marriage should be only between a man and a woman — and guns — saying the Constitution protects an individual’s right to having a gun.

But I want a bazooka! I NEED a gun capable of throwing 600 rds/minute downrange for “personal security”. Sheesh, I hope that this quiets up two of the nervous Nellies of the right of the GOP.

But he acknowledged many conservatives might disagree with his stand on abortion, which he described as supporting a woman’s right to have one, but also allows restrictions such as the late-term abortion ban upheld by the high court recently and restrictions on federal funding of abortions.

Don’t worry, because most Conservatives these days can’t even agree on what a Conservative is anymore. The
current ilk of Conservatives wouldn’t like Barry Goldwater’s (AKA the Founder of Modern Conservativism) views.

Seeking to clearly define his views on abortion after blurring them a week ago in a Republican debate, Giuliani described what he called “two pillars” of core belief.

“One, I believe abortion is wrong,” he said, adding he would counsel a pregnant woman to keep the child and put him or her up for adoption rather than abort.

And secondly, he said abortion supporters, especially women, are “equally moral, equally decent, and equally religious” and fervent in their beliefs as abortion foes, yet have come to a different conclusion.

“So therefore,” Giuliani said, “I would grant to women the right to make that choice.”

But he also stressed that he, like most thinking people, also had an evolving view of abortion, and proceeded to lay out a more nuanced position.

What heresy! You mean you dare to be conflicted about a moral issue and government’s involvement in a moral issue. Why, we “want” government snooping into ALL areas of our private life and choices, isn’t that what “Conservativism” is all about?!?! Furthermore, the heresy that YOUR beliefs shouldn’t always be translated into Federal law, why Mr. Giuliani, don’t you support the idea of ruling by caveat and the fiat of your will (to borrow a quote from John Calvin about – GOD). That people could actually see “shades of grey” in an ethical decision, why that’s just plain out too reasonable!

His belief in those two principles will guide his decision-making on abortion, he said.

“It means I am open to considering ways to limit abortion,” he said. “It means I’m open to seeking ways to reduce the number of abortions.

Afterward, some members of the audience conceded they admired his principled stand, even if they disagreed with it.

Robert Sloan, president of Houston Baptist University, afterward agreed that Giuliani’s appearance was a little bit like entering the lion’s den, both because he is Catholic and because of his views on social issues.

The last quote highlighted says it all, it’s called principaled LEADERSHIP. Now, I happen to share similar views to Mr. Giuliani, although they also have shifted, as once I was rabidly anti-abortion. While I still don’t like the practice, I realize that my likes and dislikes often are not best translated into national policy. I am more likely than ever to vote for Mr. Giuliani because of his reasonable position on a complex issue, and the guts he has to speak out about it.

That he is likely the only GOP contender who can win nationally, is just a bonus.

Nothing to Fear but Polls Themselves

From an article by Bill Kristol

The 1990s were a silly time. But that decade did produce, at its close, an impressive pair of vice presidential candidates–Dick Cheney and Joe Lieberman. Both spoke up last Thursday as the congressional debate over Iraq reached a new low.

Vice President Cheney was asked on Fox News about concerns that the Iraq war was hurting Republicans. “We didn’t get elected to be popular,” Cheney said. “We didn’t get elected to worry just about the fate of the Republican party.”

Well, that’s good, because you didn’t get popular, but the American public is fairly fickle. I remember this quote by Howard Fineman, now a regular Bush basher, “We had controversial wars that divided this country. This war united the country and brought the military back.” I don’t think he’s gonna requote that line with Chris Matthews anytime soon.

This was a just rebuke to the 11 Republican congressmen who had visited the White House the day before. They had two purposes in mind: to tell President Bush that the Iraq war was harming the GOP, and then to tell the media that they had visited the White House to convey that message. The media are primed to reward Republicans for defecting from the White House on the war. The on-the-record star of the meeting was Rep. Tom Davis of Virginia. “People are always saying President Bush is in a bubble,” Davis told the Post. “Well, this was our chance, and we took it.”

But what chance did they take? How did they help the president deal with a crucial foreign policy challenge? Davis “presented Bush dismal polling figures to dramatize just how perilous the [Republican] party’s position is, participants said.” Polling figures!

The chance they take is losing their seat, and this is regrettable, because it seems that the DNC Caucas is determined to basically take a much larger chance by pulling out of Iraq.

Do the Republicans who want Bush to cut and run really think they would benefit if Iraq were to blow up, with U.S. troops helplessly standing by watching the slaughter, the full spectacle of American defeat unfolding before the American people? Here is a fine posture for a Republican to assume in 2008: I voted for the war, and then I voted for the surrender. Who in their right mind would vote for such a person?

As for the Democrats, they are in a way less abject. Most of them simply believe the war is lost, or that it should be lost, and want to throw in the towel.

This won’t play with the American people, but it will do one thing. If you think that Vietnam cost the country credibility, pulling from Iraq will guarantee that America is a laughingstock in the Middle East. Bin Laden’s words of America is a “paper tiger” will be remembered. These people who are our adversaries are not living in the comfort of air conditioned homes where being overweight is a national health problem. They are patient and merciless, and they do have a goal of obliterating our culture. The Democratic Party needs to remember that, and the American public who have the backbone of overcooked spaghetti also need to be reminded of that also.

Only one Democrat–now an “independent Democrat”–called them on their vote: Joe Lieberman. As the members of his party voted for defeat, he took to the Senate floor to plead for full funding of our troops: “Only a couple of months ago, the Senate confirmed a new commander to implement a new strategy in Iraq, General David Petraeus. That new strategy is now being implemented, and it is achieving some encouraging, if early, signs of success. . . . Yet, now many in Congress would pull the plug on this new strategy and thwart the work of our troops before they are given a fair chance to succeed. I am aware that public opinion has turned against the war in Iraq. . . . But leadership requires sometimes that we defy public opinion if that is what is necessary to do what is right for our country. . . . Al Qaeda itself has declared Iraq to be the central front of their larger war against our way of life. . . . Our judgment can be guided by the polls and we can withdraw in defeat. [But] no matter what we say, our enemy will know that America’s will has been broken by the barbarity of their bloodlust–the very barbarity we declare we are fighting, but from which we would actually be running.”

I think Sen. Lieberman needs to be renamed, “Fighting Joe”. If anyone was a victim of the mealy mouthed, gutless milksop cry babies in our country, it is Joe Lieberman. However, if that is now the majority of what this nation is composed of, we may as well pull the troops back home, because this no longer a nation worth fighting or dying for.

Teacher Appreciation Week

This week was National Teacher Appreciation Week. I actually received a few gestures of thanks, that I wasn’t expecting but am thankful for (particularly the candy bars on Monday). However, I think that my cats must have been reading the letter that I brought home from the PTA because when I woke up today there were messages from them to me.

I was so impressed that I decided to share my cats attempts at haiku in honor of National Teacher Appreciation Week. However, I think they just were trying to rationalize their rancid behavior towards me. My dog, Liesel, sadly can’t write haiku, but she’d express similar sentiments if she could. I guess there is only so much a teacher can do!

Angie Sorry I am mean to you. It’s just that you smell like the dog. Sorry.	Dean Sorry I chewed your important note from the school. But it was fun.
Frankie Thank you for your school- bag. It’s a nice place to sit. Sorry for the fur.
Peter Sorry I peed on your agenda, old boy. I couldn’t help myself.	Sammy Sorry I puked on your tie. But you left it on the table. Fair game.

 

What do you Value?

As I’ve been mulling over resumes, and the course of my life, interspersed with reading about how an American icon, IBM, is on the fast track to screwing over their workers, most of whom happen to be my fellow citizens, I realize that my values may be out of sync with the rest of society.

I value my family.  I take great joy and a small sense of pride in knowing that my children are decent kids.  Yeah, they have problems, but they are overall doing well.  My eldest daughter is a tremendous source of pride.  She has taken a position as a Social Studies teacher, just like her Dad.  I can’t tell you the joy that brings me, that perhaps she saw maybe something in me, that maybe nudged her towards that.

That brings on another thing I value, community.  To me it was shown when I volunteered and enlisted in the 82nd Airborne, a decision I think was one of the best I have ever made.  In that action, I feel I made a slight downpayment in the debt that I owe those members of my family, and those who served, and often sacrificed more than I was called to do, in order that I may live in a world which they may only have dreamed of.  I am a lucky man indeed to have the knowledge that I was fortunate enough to serve my country.

I think that my desire to teach and be a leader in a public school is also a part of that value of community.  Don’t get me wrong, I don’t feel I am underpaid, and I don’t mind that either.  I also know that I put a great deal of effort into my students, and that I take a particular joy in seeing the progress they made.  Today, when I was reading their essays about how our government used ancient Rome as a model, I took a great sense of satisfaction in knowing that my love of history, and probably a deep love – although I guess it is true that “Love Hurts” – for my country has been shared with them.  I value their learning, and I value what they teach me daily.  I learn more from them than they would ever guess.  I am lucky for that.

I value community, and I think that extends from the home to the schools and churches that so many of us enjoy.  I value the happiness of my community, and hope that my neighbors feel the same way.  I value the aspect that God plays in my life. I am not so sure as what I believe as when I was a younger man, but I think that my understanding that I need for the grace that is offered to man, as a part of my life.  I like that, and admit that I am happy to say that most times, I truly understand that God calls me friend.  I value that.

I understand money, and of course it has a value.  I guess what I don’t get are those entities that value a buck more than the people that labored to make that dollar for the company.   I know things are hard, and a business has a right and the responsibility to make profits for the shareholders.  I guess it’s not in my values however, when that company still makes money, but outsource jobs from my neighbors, and yours, and sends them over to nations which are our economic rivals, who would never give something towards us to help out our economy.

I have a feeling that most who regularly read this blog would say that they value the same things.  If that’s the case, why aren’t things different?  After all there are more of them than there are of those other bastards.  I am thinking about Governor Al Smith, of the fifth ward, a son of immigrants, who rallied the day laborer and the common person of New York City in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and forged a movement that was founded on that idea, that there are more little people than big people.  Maybe we just have to remember that.

I guess its a question about what we value.

Breaking Out the Resume

Applying for jobs just plain out stinks.

I have a good job, and I happen to like it, so you wonder why am I trying to change careers at this point in my life.  After all, I am 45, have been a teacher for about 20 years, and am in a very good school district.  Yet, I want to change fields and break into administration and possibly throw my whole life into a frenzy.

I have been on a few interviews, and felt that I nailed that part of the process, only to find out that I hadn’t.  That gets a bit frustrating, and more than a bit discouraging.  I feel like Enzo Hernandez, a lifetime .199 hitter, I can get to the plate, but haven’t hit the ball, and when I do hit it solidly, it gets grabbed.

So, I took a few weeks off from applying, and then faced myself and asked again if I wanted to go into a new field, and said yes.   Hence, I am sending out about six more resumes tomorrow.  Maybe one will hook me into a job.

Applying for jobs, just sucks.

Bush’s Approval Ratings SKYROCKET – Developing Trend?

I bet I got you on that one!

Recently I posted about Newsweek’s poll and its 28% approval rating for President Bush.  I stated the internals of the poll and showed the reasons why the 28% was not correct, as it oversampled registered Democrats by 50%.  I guess Newsweek counts on people NOT reading the fine print, which is why they are little more than a rag which appeals to the least intelligent part of the nation.

Opinion Research and CNN recently conducted a poll, and whie it may not have the Bush Administration singing for joy, it showed, like Rasmussen, that the President’s approval level is at 38%, or more than 25% higher than Newsweek’s biased poll.  The reason is simple, CNN did not overpoll Democrats, although there was a slightly higher number of Democrats than Republicans 454 to 414, this represents a 10% overpolling of Dems, which is slightly higher than the national average of voter registration.

What does it all mean, is it that the President is Rebounding?  No, it means when you put in garbage, you get out garbage.  The 38% is much more accurate of a view of the President’s ratings.  Newsweek I am actually becoming convinced, simply put out BS skewed data to better serve their Master, NBC news, which is hands down the “most” biased of all the newscasts.  MSNBC using the equivalent of a “Democratic Shock Jock”, Kieth Olberman, to be an anchor makes it very clear to see they are truly operating from a bias that makes FOX’s Conservative bias look mild.

“Lean” – IBM’s Plan to Screw its US Workers

A fantastic post about the unethical business practices that an American Icon, IBM, is inflicting upon its employees, and the plan to fire over 100,000 employees and replace “some” of these employess with “workers” from Communist China and India. I guess they will work with Beijing to make sure that enough prisoners are available before this plan is put into operation.

IBM is about to go through the biggest restructuring in its operations since the Gerstner days, but this time for all the wrong reasons.

At least Lou Gerstner was trying to SAVE a dying company, while the current leadership seems to be planning another ENRON manuver.

The IBM project is called LEAN and the first manifestation of LEAN was this week’s 1,300 layoffs at Global Services, which generated almost no press. Thirteen hundred layoffs from a company with more than 350,000 workers is nothing, so the yawning press reaction is not unexpected. But this week’s “job action,” as they refer to it inside IBM management, was as much as anything a rehearsal for what I understand are another 100,000+ layoffs to follow, each dribbled out until some reporter (that would be me) notices the growing trend, then dumped en masse when the jig is up, but no later than the end of this year.

LEAN is about offshoring and outsourcing at a rate never seen before at IBM. For two years Big Blue has been ramping up its operations in India and China with what I have been told is the ultimate goal of laying off at least one American worker for every overseas hire. The BIG PLAN is to continue until at least half of Global Services, or about 150,000 workers, have been cut from the U.S. division. Last week’s LEAN meetings were quite specifically to find and identify common and repetitive work now being done that could be automated or moved offshore, and to find work Global Services is doing that it should not be doing at all. This latter part is with the idea that once extraneous work is eliminated, it will be easier to move the rest offshore.

India had been used, but the workers there were not predictable. I know this for a fact, that they were also having the unmitigated gall of demanding a salary of $3000 per year. Which would be a lucrative salary in that country. The instability, the riots over the death of a movie star or Richard Gere puckering up and laying a wet one on an Indian actress did nothing to make IBM feel like India was a new home. Enter Red China. Prisoners tend not to bitch about their salaries, and knowing about movie stars is not high on the priority. So good when IBM teams up with that model of enlightenment portrayed by Beijing.

All this is supposed to happen by the end of 2007, by the way, at which point IBM will also freeze its U.S. pension plan.

All of this is well under way. My wife is a “LEAN” manager, as well as filling the managerial shoes of six other positions, which have been eliminated. No longer are people being fired for incompetence and replaced, they are simply fired for made up reasons of incompetence, and not replaced. This has been IBM standard procedure for the last ten years, but the firings are wratching up.

The point of this has nothing to do with the work itself and everything to do with the price of IBM shares. Remove at least 100,000 heads, eliminate the long-term drag of a defined-benefit pension plan, and the price of IBM shares will soar. This is exactly the kind of story Wall Street loves to hear. Palmisano and his lieutenants will retire rich. And not long after that IBM’s business will crash for reasons I explain below.

This also seems to be part of the plan, to gut and strip the company while making the stock prices boom, and then bail out.

I am told there is a broad expectation at all levels of IBM familiar with the LEAN plan that it will cause huge problems for the company. Even the executives who support this campaign most strongly expect it to go down poorly with employees and customers, alike. But in the end they don’t care, which shows that only the reaction of Wall Street matters anymore.

So we can expect round after round of layoffs, muted a bit — as they were back in the Gerstner days — by some of those same people being hired back as consultants at 75 percent of their former pay (50 percent of their former cost to the company since they won’t be getting benefits). Throw in some overtime and it won’t look bad on paper for the people, but it is also very temporary.

I am married to a “manager” at IBM and can offer firsthand effects to the practices that “Big Blue” has been employing as the first step towards this “Lean and Mean” policy.

On her account she has sixteen agents, who cover a 24 hour period. When she started managing this account she had 22 agents for a project that required, and for which the client had been promised 32 full time agents. Needless to say the client has not been overly impressed with the performance of IBM in this account.

When my wife was an agent, she typically worked a regular 40 hour week, which on occassion would have some paid overtime sprinkled in. Of course when she went into management, there was an increase in her “desk” time as well as numerous occassions where she would have to go into the field to meet with the client, but typically she worked a 55 to 60 hour week for the few months. However, since IBM has started this “Lean and Mean” policy, her responsibilities are no longer to simply manage this account. She has also taken on five other administrative positions, which have been folded into this simple “Low level manager’s account”. Typically her work week is about 70 to 75 hours per week, and 90 hour work weeks are not at all uncommon, but come about once a month. She has not worked under 70 hours a week for the past year.
She has received for all of this extra work a raise of 4% as a PBC1 – which raised her total salary slightly over 42,000/yr, which is the highest rate available for an IBM low level manager. I have been alternately infuriated and dismayed as I have watched the shabby treatment that this once proud company dispenses upon its management, particularly those that they consider the most valued.
I have also candidly stated to her she should start looking elsewhere for employment, as this behavior by her company is nothing short of exploitation, and in reality is little more than white collar indentured servitude. Now that I learn the plans of IBM to do away with jobs, even though last year their corporation turned in profits that were rather significant, but did not meet the artificially inflated projection that had been set for them, I am torn between feelings of rage and impotence.

While I fully understand the purpose of a corporation is to make a profit for itself, and its shareholders, it is disheartening when a company of IBM’s stature and tradition treats its employees as vassals, while it plans upon making fewer employees do signficantly more as they shift American jobs to Communist China.

At some point one has to ask if the benefits that a company reaps from basing its business on the strength of the United States Economy, and the benefits it reaps from the infrastructure of these United States bestows upon it an inherent responsibility to act within ethical principals.

I am all for free markets. However the idea of these corporate entities sucking at the American tit of OUR tax dollars in tax breaks and other goodies, then giving the shaft to US workers, so they can outsource jobs to nations, which are our economic rivals, sort of sets me off. How about you?