The Tin Man

The Tin Man

by Michael Maynard
March 20, 2012


When a man's an empty kettle,
He should be on his mettle,
And yet I'm torn apart.
Just because I'm presumin'
That I could be kinda human
If I only had a heart.

The Tin Man from “The Wizard of Oz”

Only half of the Republican primaries are done, however, it seems like they have gone on forever, like Dorothy’s trying to return to Kansas, though in this case, the most of the candidates fled Kansas terrified of the outcome. There are a lot of similarities between the Republican primaries and the Wizard of Oz, mostly the characters. There is the Cowardly Lion, afraid of his own shadow when challenged - Newt Gingrich. There is the Scarecrow, who appeared he would fall apart when hit, but always kept himself together, Ron Paul. There is the Wicked Witch, Michele Bachmann, who threatens to have her minions (The Tea Party members) attack, but rides off at the first sign of trouble. The current Wizard is Rick Santorum, though the actors playing the Wizard have changed periodically and will again. Finally, there is the Tin Woodsman, Willard Mitt Romney, if he only had a heart, and ability to self-edit before making really dumb statements, would be the natural leader, but goes down his own Yellow Brick Road instead.

Cowardly Lion: Come on, get up and fight, ya shivering junkyard! Put your hands up, ya lopsided bag o' hay!
Scarecrow: Now that's getting personal, Lion!
Tin Woodsman: Yes. Get up and teach him a lesson.
Scarecrow: W-w-what's wrong with y-y-you teaching him?
Tin Woodsman: W-w-well, I hardly know him.

"I learned something from that last contest in South Carolina," Romney said. "I'm not going to sit back and get attacked ... without returning fire.

"I'm going to point out things that I think people need to know," he said.

"I'm not going to spend the evening trying to chase Mitt Romney's misinformation," Gingrich said. "This is the worst kind of trivial politics."

That scintillating verbal exchange was during the “debate” before the Florida primary. It was the first time in months that Romney went after Gingrich directly. By then, Romney had the characterization of being a very rich, completely out of touch with current events patrician, primarily through attacks by Gingrich.

But most of the damage to Romney’s campaign has been dome by Romney himself because he has a tin ear about what he says.

"Corporations are people, my friend… of course they are. Everything corporations earn ultimately goes to the people. Where do you think it goes? Whose pockets? Whose pockets? People's pockets. Human beings, my friend." —Mitt Romney to a heckler at the Iowa State Fair who suggested that taxes should be raised on corporations as part of balancing the budget (August 2011)

That statement did nothing to dispel the notion that Romney was the tool of big business.

"I'm not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there." —Mitt Romney (January 2012)

"I get speaker's fees from time to time, but not very much." —Mitt Romney, who earned $374,000 in speaking fees in one year according to according to his personal financial disclosure (January 2012)

 "I should tell my story. I'm also unemployed." —Mitt Romney, speaking in 2011 to unemployed people in Florida. Romney's net worth is over $200 million.

Mr. Sensitivo.

The worst of Romney’s statements was made before the Michigan primary. His father, George was the previously governor of Michigan and chairman and president of the American Motors Corporation, one of the companies who current existence depended upon the financial bailout created by the Obama administration. This was after Willard Mitt had stated that he would not have bailed out the auto industry, which directly and indirectly provides for 1 in 4 U.S. manufacturing jobs in the state that ranks 40th in post-bailout unemployment rate of 9.0%.

"[My wife] drives a couple of Cadillacs." –Mitt Romney, campaigning for president in Michigan (February 2012)

Patronizing and elitist to he max.

All of the above, and the incident of driving to Canada with his family’s dog strapped to the roof of his car has made great fodder for David Letterman and other comedians, but perpetuates the out-of-touch tin man with the tin ear image.

But the worst part of Romney’s campaign is that he has provided no ideas about why he is running for president, what he would do as president or why vote fo r him. His campaign gives the appearance of that he should be the Republican nominee because he should be the nominee based upon the widely promulgated notion that he would be “the best candidate” to beat President Barack Obama.  Romney is currently having difficulty beating former Senator Rick Santorum who has severe fund raising and campaign organization disadvantages compared to Romney.

Cowardly Lion: Courage! What makes a king out of a slave? Courage! What makes the flag on the mast to wave? Courage! What makes the elephant charge his tusk in the misty mist, or the dusky dusk? What makes the muskrat guard his musk? Courage! What makes the sphinx the seventh wonder? Courage! What makes the dawn come up like thunder? Courage! What makes the Hottentot so hot? What puts the "ape" in apricot? What have they got that I ain't got?

An apt sporting analogy is the prevent defense in professional football where the team that’s ahead at the end of the game provides little opposition to the other team’s offense in the hope of running out the clock. In short, the team that’s ahead stops doing what has put them ahead for the past 59 minutes. Too often this leads to the team that’s behind winning in the last seconds. While the prevent defense allegedly is safe and non-criticizable in theory, in practice it is not. It is the cowardly way out.

Willard Mitt Romney’s campaign lacks courage, the courage of any convictions of why he is running for president, other than he was born in a political family, he’s run for president, he’s rich and he can. The United States recently suffered and is still suffering the after effects from 8 years of a president like that.
His campaign has given the impression of using the prevent defense from the beginning. Does Romney have courage? Does he have a heart?

All that’s certain is that he won’t be in Kansas for the next few months.

Reason and Common Sense

Reason and Common Sense

This quote from the philosopher Georges Santayana is usually misstated. What Santayana wrote in “Reason and Common Sense” was: Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

 If you have followed the presidential primaries to date, it’s obvious that none of the Republican candidates are followers of Santayana. Thus far, the various candidates have called to:

 Impose of a 9% tax on all income and sales items,
or Reduce the federal income tax rate on income over $200,000

Abolish the Environmental Protection Agency

Eliminate various regulations on businesses

Allow young workers to drop out of the Social Security system and to use the money however they want

Stop involvement in any wars internationally and,
Reduce the US. defense to a small military force and the Anti-Ballistic Missile system

Ban the sale of birth control pills and devices and,

Prevent all abortions, even when the life of the expectant mother is in danger

End food stamps and other forms of assistance to the poor

Force children of illegal aliens to work at menial jobs or face deportation

And all candidates have stated their belief that nearly all federal government functions can be better performed in the private sector.

There are very good reasons to not do each of the above and none of the above. What’s forgotten were the reasons these agencies, programs and laws were created. Of the above, most of the Republican candidates have called for the abolishment of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Of those candidates, some have tried to hide the real reason for the abolition as disbelief in the science of climate change. Some others have not tried to hide the real reason to stop restrictions on their business benefactors on creating air pollution, despoiling the environment, causing earthquakes through using fracking in coal mining and dumping toxic wastes into rivers and streams. The EPA could be abolished or absorbed into another agency if big businesses would stop polluting. Don’t hold your breath waiting for that to happen..

One of the most egregious examples of corporate pollution was General Electric’s (GE) dumping 1.3 million pounds of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) into the Housatonic River from 1947 to 1977. (for a detailed explanation about PCB’s and the damage they cause, see http://www.state.nj.us/drbc/PCB.PDF). General Electric, stalled cleaning up the pollution, finally settling with the EPA and the Department of Justice in 1998 to pay $200 million for the river cleanup. And this was not the worst that GE did - in 1983, 64 inmates in a Walla Walla Washington prison had their scrotum and testes exposed to radiation to determine its effects on reproductive organs. The inmates were not advised about the risks of cancers. (Source: http://www.cleanupge.org/gemisdeeds.html).

General Electric is the primary or secondary cause of 78 Superfund cleanup sites. GE designed the nuclear reactors involved in the recent Fukushima meltdowns. GE was repeatedly advised, starting in 1975, that there were safety issues in design of these plants. General Electric doesn’t always bring good things to light.

The candidates’ continuous complaint how “government regulations”, especially the new Afforfable Care Act, are burdening U.S. businesses with extensive expenses and making businesses not competitive in international business is a canard. The McClatchy Newspaper Syndicate did an extensive survey of small businesses throughout the U.S. small businesses, defined by the Small Business Administration, a constant complainer about government regulation, as 500 to 1500 employees or less, represent 65% of all employment.

McClatchy’s survey found that small businesses do not consider government regulations burdensome and onerous, lack of business (aggregate economic demand) is the primary concern. Monthly surveys by the National Federation of Independent Business show that small business concerns about regulation are lower today than they were in the 1990s when the economy was booming.

The Obama administration is the cause of less than 5% of all current federal government regulations. It is large corporations, those now allowed to spend at will on political advertising, political action groups, and other direct and indirect forms of candidate support as a result of the ill-advised Citizens United Supreme Court ruling, who are the vociferous complainers about the costs of government regulation. Large corporations are also most in need to be restrained by government regulation for the protection of us all. Perhaps these corporations could better spend this money on buying new capital equipment, hiring back laid-off employees or implementing environmental protection safeguards.

What is sorely lacking and needed in the 2012 political campaigns is a reasoned and common sense discussion about the role of federal, state and local government in the conduct of everyday life. Before every discussion, saying Santayana’s maxim should be required. Let’s not repeat, or try to undo, the past, but use what was learned to discuss and decide how to best benefit the future. Reason and common sense are what we should look for first in choosing our next President.

Class Warfare

Class Warfare

By Michael Maynard
January 12, 2012

“I think it's about envy. I think it's about class warfare.” Mitt Romney on “The Today Show.” responding to Matt Lauer’s question the concerns of anyone about the increasingly inequal distribution of wealth in the U.S. "I think when you have a president encouraging the idea of dividing America based on 99 percent versus one percent... you've opened up a whole new wave of approach in this country which is entirely inconsistent with the concept of 'one nation under God.'" ... "I think it's fine to talk about those things in quiet rooms and discussions about tax policy and the like,"

Willard Mitt Romney has a problem being in touch with “the common man”. In his case, he is completely out of touch with the underlying reasons why the Occupy protest movement spread rapidly and about the growing anger and resentment about the increasing inequality of wealth in the United States. Since he is a member of the 1%, Romney should be defensive about how he developed his extensive fortune.

(According to a Pew Research study) “In 2009, 47 percent of respondents said there were "very strong" or "strong" conflicts between the rich and poor. In 2011, 66 percent saw the same, possibly signaling that the "We are the 99 percent" rhetoric of Occupy Wall Street has had an impact. The ongoing economic recession also may have magnified class differences as income inequality has risen, continuing a trend occurring in American society since at least the 1970s.” (Source - The Huffington Post “Class Conflict Awareness Rose Significantly From 2009 To 2011: Report”)

The Great Recession and its impact upon middle and lower class families should rightly be the primary topic of the 2012 Presidential campaign. Of course, how to reignite the economy needs to be discussed in public. The exchange of ideas about job creation and increased investment in the United States to create more permanent high-paying manufacturing and skilled jobs, not more lower paying service sector and temporary jobs, should be the central issue. Mitt Romney should be leading this discussion since he is stating that his business expertise and experience are why he should become President.

Are his self-professed expertise and experience really reasons to vote for him? . During his tenure as a venture capitalist, Bain Capital most of the investments made were in retail or service companies, such as Staples, The Sports Authority and Artisan Entertainment. No creating good jobs at higher wages there.

Bain Capital switched to high risk investments, leveraged buyouts, in which the “investment” is really debt, using the company’s assets as collateral. The only fundamental difference between leveraged buyouts and home mortgages are the number of zeroes and the interest percent involved. Often, massive layoffs occurred after the investment was made. Bain Capital claimed to have an 113% percent return on investment, but that high rate of return was made on only a few of its investments. Some of the highest were a 3400% return on Calumet Coach and a 1600% return on the Gartner Group. Both Calumet and Gartner are service companies. I strongly doubt that any of the Occupy movement protesters were investors in these companies.

Was Romney being defensive about his one term as Governor of Massachusetts from 2003 to 2007? He’s already backed away from his largest achievement ensuring health insurance coverage for all citizens. He did inherit a budget gap of $3 billion dollars, created during the terms of the three previous Republican Massachusetts governors: William Weld, Paul Celluci and Jane Swift. Job growth increased at a 1.3 percent rate during Romney's term in office, ranking Massachusetts 47th out of 50 states during that time.

The state of Massachusetts raised $501 million in new income in the first year of the fee increase program, more than any other state in the nation that year (New York was second with $367 million. Nine other states raised fees and fines by more than $100 million). There were increases in 88 different new or existing fees, including fees to get a marriage license, renew a driver's license, legally possess a gun, recording the sale of a house upon closing, and from Children's Medical Security Program co-pays and premiums, the program for low-income families.. Romney also approved $128 million in tax changes such as sales tax from purchases on the Internet, and raised another $181 million in additional business taxes in the next two years. The total of increased taxes on businesses was $308 million per year.

However, the primary reduction in Massachusetts debt was from capital gains tax revenue caused by a previously enacted capital gains tax increase, lowering the deficit by $1.3 billion. So the real debt reduction was from higher taxes on the 1%. A lot of pain was inflected on the wallets of the 99%, needlessly.

As a management consultant, venture capitalist and governor, Mitt Romney’s policies, investments and programs did not produce jobs, especially not good jobs at higher wages. Those policies and programs are very similar to the ones proposed by his other Republican primary competitors. We all know by now the definition of insanity. There are no sane reason to believe that those economic results would change if any of them became President.

The class warfare would continue on, unabated.

No wonder he’s so defensive.

Tebowing

Tebowing
by Michael Maynard
January 9, 2012


"When I saw him scoring, first of all, I just thought, 'Thank you, Lord.'"

Denver Broncos’ quarterback Tim Tebow upon seeing his wide receiver running for the winning touchdown in a first round playoff victory over the favored Pittsburgh Steelers.

Unless you’ve been living in a medically induced coma or have been fending off the advances of guys named Abdul in a Turkish prison for the past 4 months, you must be aware of the sports and cultural phenomenon named Tim Tebow and his ever present expression of his Christian beliefs. Adding to Tebow’s religious legend is that he has led his football team to six straight come from behind victories. Yesterday, his team was tied at the end of 4 quarters and scored in overtime to win. Tebowing has become part of the vernacular - “to get down on a knee and start praying, even if everyone else around you is doing something completely different.” (Source: Tebowing.com) However, if Tim Tebow looked the same, said similar things, acted the same, but was Muslim, would there be the same cultural interest? Of course not.

There is no question that Tebow is sincere in his beliefs. He has spent time and money doing good works, such as his planned building of a children’s hospital in the Philippines. He remains calm and unflustered by all criticism of his public displays of faith and frequent questioning about his beliefs. While his overall abilities to become a successful National Football League quarterback long-term remain questionable, his teammates like him, seem energized by his physical style of play and are not bothered by all the media attention he receives. He’s a throwback to the clean-cut image of professional athlete in an era of steroids, sex and illegal payoff scandals. Most people would love for him to be their son or marry their daughter.

Not me.

Being a Catholic from the Northeast, I am uncomfortable with the public displays and constant expressions of personal faith. Tebow, even though he is also a Christian, doesn’t represent me or my religious beliefs. I believe you show your being a follower of Christ by your actions and deeds, not by your verbal statements. I am even more uncomfortable with the insertion of religion in governmental affairs, especially being used as a criterion for selecting a presidential candidate. The last openly religious president was Jimmy Carter was not a success, even though most of the problems that occurred on his term in office were beyond his control. It wasn’t discussed during his time in office, but I’ve wondered how much of his problems in the Middle East were caused by mistrust of his Christian beliefs by the Islamic mullahs.

The current Republican primaries so far have been influenced less by the policy positions of the candidates and more by the religiosity of the candidates. Former governors Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman are considered suspect by the right-wing evangelicals because they are Mormons. Newt Gingrich has tried to reform his image as a ruthless self-promoter and craven womanizer by his conversion to Catholicism. And then there is radical Catholic former senator Rick Santorum.

“I’ve survived the challenges so far by the daily grace that comes from God. . . . I offer a public thanks to God.’’ Rick Santorum after his second place result in the Iowa caucuses.

Santorum, who was soundly defeated in his 2006 campaign to be reelected U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania, 58.6% to 41.3% by Democrat Bob Casey, and has not held public office since, has become the favorite of the conservative right wing because of his opposition to “libertarian” social values and programs, especially those regarding woman’s sexuality and reproductive rights. Santorum is against all forms of contraception and abortion, including the use of abortion to save the life of the woman during difficult births or pregnancy as a result of rape or incest, despite his wife’s near death during birth. His views to limit the scope of federal government are so extreme, other Senators called him “Senator Slash”.He also sought to modify the “No Child Left Behind” laws to require intelligent design to be taught in public schools as part of science classes.

It is his views on homosexuals that have caused the most controversy. He has argued that “the extended right to privacy ruled in Griswold v. Connecticut did not exist in the United States Constitution and that laws should exist against polygamy, adultery, sodomy, and other actions "antithetical to a healthy, stable, traditional family". Santorum said those actions were harmful to society, saying, "Every society in the history of man has upheld the institution of marriage as a bond between a man and a woman.... In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. That's not to pick on homosexuality. It's not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing. And when you destroy that you have a dramatic impact on the quality".Santorum later said that he did not intend to equate homosexuality with incest and pedophilia, but rather as a critique of the specific legal position that the right to privacy prevents the government from regulating consensual acts among adults (such as bigamy, incest, etc.). (Source - Wikipedia “Rick Santorum”).

Since Tebowing is part of the vernacular, so should Santorism - Expressing hateful and ignorant social and political views and beliefs infringing on the lives of others.

The Greater Divide

The Greater Divide
by Michael Maynard
January 4, 2012

The political and current affairs punditry has tried over time to convince us that there are two Americas:

Male Establishment vs. Females
White vs. Black
North vs. South
White vs. Black vs Brown (Hispanic)
Christians vs. Heathens
Hippies vs. Squares
Mods vs. The Establishment
Republicans vs. Democrats
Red States vs. Blue States
Conservatism vs. Liberalism
and most recently, The 1% vs. the 99%

All epic cultural divisions. All remain unresolved. But, the 2012 Presidential election process is showing that we’re becoming increasingly fragmented as a nation as a result of the non-resolution of these divisions. At the core, the question really is “What kind of nation are we?”.

Do we, like most other industrial nations, provide a social safety net? Or do we let the poor and the disfranchised fend for themselves?

Do we continue to act as the world’s “policeman”? Or do we become isolationist and let the rest of the world deal with their own issues, such as mass killings and starvation?

Do we insist that all social behavior must follow an unspecified Judeo-Christian ideal? Or do we recognize and embrace cultural, gender and religious diversity?

Do we turn to the federal government to resolve gross injustices and irreconcilable disputes? Or leave it up to the individuals to resolve, by any means necessary?

Do we continue to embrace the idea of “send us your tired, your poor, and your huddled masses” and we will provide them a home and opportunity? Or turn them away because we “can’t afford” them anymore?

Do only the rich rule or do we have a government representative of people from all walks of life - “of the people, by the people and for the people”?

Do we still embrace the idea of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? Or is this only available to those who can afford them?

The 2012 primary process and federal government election is about all of the above. The candidates involved represent both sides of the issues above.

I am a social progressive, a political liberal, and a member of the 99%. I truly resent being told how I should live my life by those whose live their lives no better, or in some cases, much worse.

I am a Christian, but I also embrace other religions. All paths lead to our creator.

I am the grandson of an Italian immigrant who left his life behind to come to the land of opportunity and freedom. I want others who want this opportunity to come to our country and be part of strength, our cultural melting pot. I am willing to contribute my time, effort and money to help those who cannot help themselves or trying to do so. And I’m proud to be part of the country that does this willingly.

But I am not part of the hatefulness that is creeping throughout our country. Shoot the Mexicans who are trying to enter the country illegally. Deport them because they are taking jobs away from "real Americans". Deny women the right to control their reproductive organs and go back to the days of the coat hanger wielder in the alley. Force women back to being barefoot and pregnant. Let the poor and the elderly fend for themselves. Keep a greater, but small, percentage of income to spend by eliminating Social Security - the social safety net so many depend upon.

No, I don’t belong to that country and I don’t want to. It’s my right to leave and I will, when I can no longer tolerate living in the moral dictatorship that we easily can become. The teachings of Christ, Buddha and Mohammed guide me on how to live my life, not bombastic, sanctimonious politicians.

There is a greater divide in this country than there ever has been before because of an epidemic of intolerance and greed. When you vote in November, it may well become a choice of which side you’re on.

Out of the Blue

Out of the Blue (But Not Into the Black, Yet).

by Michael Maynard

October 4, 2011

Dear Neil Young - it’s not better to burn out than it is to rust and you’re a prime example of that.

Yes, you and I were part of the first generation of rock’n’roll. At that time, we didn’t trust anyone over 40 and most of us thought we wouldn’t live past age 35, myself included. Who didn’t play in a rock band, however badly, but loudly, growing up?

If you told me when I was 18 whether I’d still be listening to the Beatles and the Rolling Stones when I’m nearing 60 years old, I would have told you that you’re crazy. If you told me then that Keith Richards would still be alive and a house husband raising daughters to boot, I would have thought you had been inhaling too many of the same substances that Richards once did. And if you told me that the Stones were still touring around the world, I knew that you’d had a bad LSD trip that fried your brain along the way. Yet, many of the rock legends are still performing, making great music and selling out concerts around the world.

I saw Sting (a/k/a Gordon Sumner) last night on the David Letterman show. Sting has come out with a box set retrospective of his 25 years of rock and popular music hits. Sting made a comment that took me by surprise. It’s public knowledge about his lifestyle choices: yoga, Tantric sex, vegetarianism, which many of us tried - if only because it was the “in thing” to do at the time. Sting has just celebrated his 60th birthday and says that he feelsbetter and is enjoying life now more than he ever did.

The once future of rock’n’roll, Bruce Springsteen, is 62 years old and is out on another worldwide tour. Springsteen was recently on the cover of AARP magazine. Yes, Springsteen was on the cover of the American Association for Retired People magazine.

Mick Jagger is 68 years old. He’s still the personification of cool - the band ,Maroon 5, has a hit song idolizing him, “Move Like Jagger”. He’s formed a super-band, “SuperHeavy”, featuring Joss Stone and Damian Marley, 40 and 35 years his junior. And the Stones constantly tour..

Paul McCartney is 69 YEARS OLD! And he’s getting married again, this time to a woman almost 20 years younger. No, he’s not living the life of “When I’m Sixty-Four”.

Neil Young is 66 and still an angry social activist. And he’s starting a new worldwide tour.

Sting said something on the Letterman Show that took me aback. He said he tries to enjoy his life more now that he has fewer days to be alive than he has lived previously. Thank you for stating the harsh reality, Mr. Summers.

Yes, me and my generation are rapidly becoming senior citizens, in age, but not in spirit. I still get up out of bed and think about getting ready for first period algebra class, until I hear my knees creak. But I’m comparatively much younger at this age than my parents, for which I owe them a huge debt of gratitude. My life has had its ups and downs, but whose life hasn’t when you are over 50 years old? On the whole, my life is good. Certainly, not perfect, but good.

Maybe it’s the spirit of rock’n’roll that has kept us all young and nations together. There was the recent revelation that the younger Soviet leaders listened to the Beatles and rock’n’roll in the Kremlin during the 60's. Who knew rock’n-roll may have had a greater impact on world peace than statesmanship? And it has spanned and brings together generations: the ageless wonder Tony Bennett has out an album of duets, one with Lady Gaga.

Hey, Hey. My, My. - Rock’n’roll will never die, even when Sting, Neil Young, and the rest of my generation does We will be out of the blue and into the black, but the music and the spirit that it has spawned will live on.

The Politicians of Paranoia

by Michael Maynard
October 11, 2010

American politics has often been an arena for angry minds. In recent years we have seen angry minds at work mainly among extreme right-wingers, who have now demonstrated in the Goldwater movement how much political leverage can be got out of the animosities and passions of a small minority. But behind this I believe there is a style of mind that is far from new and that is not necessarily right-wind. I call it the paranoid style simply because no other word adequately evokes the sense of heated exaggeration, suspiciousness, and conspiratorial fantasy that I have in mind.

Richard Hofstader, “The Paranoid Style in American Politics”, Harper’s Magazine, November 1964.

Change the word Goldwater (In our hearts, you know he’s right) to Tea Party and, as usual, this wonderfully insightful treatise by Hofstader describes the current political climate as accurately as it did 46 years ago. Whenever there is severe economic distress or social disorder, political rationality in a significant percentage of the U.S. populace is the first casualty.

The current President of the United States has been in office approximately 20 months. He inherited huge messes caused by the eight years of inept policies and lax government oversight of his predecessor, whose legitimacy of being in office was legitimately suspect. As a result, President Obama has had to intervene to stop the banking and investment industries from collapsing, end involvement in an unnecessary war, revive the failing economy, ensure access to increasing expensive health care to all citizens, and regain the trust and cooperation of our traditional allies. At the same time, he has had his citizenship and, his allegiance to the country he leads questioned, in addition to the fighting against the nonsense that now passes as political opposition and discourse.

This questioning is paradoxical - on the one hand, the President has assumed too much power and authority. On the other hand, he hasn’t been able to do enough because he’s too weak to “get things done”.

Those leading the questioning include a specious former governor from one of the most remote and least populated states, whose controversial term in office lasted only 18 months, a cable television talk show host - a long time drug and alcohol addict with no political experience, and an unofficial political party within a political party whose only agenda is to reduce taxes and “the size of government”, even though a large percentage of that government expense involves defense spending and Social Security. This opposition either wants Social Security ended, even though it’s the most effective government program in our nation’s modern history and benefits the poor and middle class, or the money held in trust invested in the capital markets, the same capital markets which the current president had to rescue from collapse at the start of his term. Increasing, not cutting, the bloated military expenditure, with its wasteful duplicate development programs and entrenched bureaucracy, is sacrosanct.

But they really aren’t unique. For years, the late Senator Jesse Helms of North Carolina wanted all foreign aid expenditures, including infrastructure development and food aid, which benefitted U.S. business and foreign policy interests, to be eliminated, even though foreign aid was one-tenth of one percent of federal expenditures. Helms also wanted agricultural subsidies ended, except for tobacco, which surprisingly, was a main source of income for his state and sold internationally. In his dotage, he almost became a kindly folk-hero, if he wasn’t so mean-spirited and paranoid to his core. Every generation has its share of political crazies.

The current crop of crazies include:

Ron Paul, senate candidate in Kentucky -““It's not supposed to be that 51 percent of the people can vote to remove the First Amendment or the Second Amendment or the Fourth Amendment,” Paul said. “These things are protected by the Constitution, and I don't want someone who believes that the Commerce Clause means anything. Since the ’30s and ’40s we have interpreted the Commerce Clause to allow the federal government to regulate everything, and I think that's a mistake.”

Excuse me, Mr. Paul, as I wrote previously, it was the Commerce Clause that ended slavery and, as I wrote previously, was used properly to defend the rights of gay Americans to wed in California. And 51% of the American people cannot remove any constitutional amendment. That would require 3/4 of the state legislatures to approve the amendment. Remember the proposed Equal Rights Amendment, where the majority of the populace would be granted the same legal rights as the minority other sex? The ERA was only ratified by 35 of the 50 states and has not become law because it takes a minimum of 38 states’ approval? That President Obama won with 51% of the vote? Your revered late President Ronald Reagan took office with only 50.75% of the vote against the ineffectual President Jimmy Carter in 1980.

Then there is Sharron Angle, senate candidate in Nevada, who rightly doesn’t want her or her staff to talk to the press. Ms. Angle believes Muslims (such as the Christian Barack Obama) are trying to take over the United States. Ms. Angle believes that Dearborn, Michigan and Frankford, Texas are under Muslim, not U.S. law. “We're talking about a militant terrorist situation, which I believe isn't a widespread thing, but it is enough that we need to address, and we have been addressing it. My thoughts are these. First of all, Dearborn, Michigan, and Frankford, Texas, are on American soil, and under Constitutional law. Not Sharia law. And I don't know how that happened in the United States.”

Excuse me, Ms. Angle - there is no Frankford, Texas and the same federal laws and programs applies to Dearborn, as it does to all other towns and cities. While the prophet Mohammad’s words have been misinterpreted since his death, his basic beliefs are similar to those of another radical figure of his time, Jesus Christ. Remember the one so radical he was nailed to a cross and left to die alone?

Pat Toomey - Senate Candidate in usually rational Pennsylvania. “My view is, I think the data is pretty clear. There has been an increase in the surface temperature of the planet over the course of the last 100 years or so. I think it's clear that that has happened. The extent to which that has been caused by human activity I think is not as clear. I think that is still very much disputed and has been debated. If we go down the road of legislation like this cap and trade bill...”

Excuse me, Mr. Toomey - There is documented evidence that the polar ice caps are melting, animal species are disappearing and the Earth’s climate is warming from greenhouse gas emissions. As the eminence grise, Casey Stengel used to say, “And you can look it up.” You might try watching the highly partisan National Geographic Channel one evening.

I would be having fun with this, if what these political candidates were espousing was part of a lunatic fringe. No, they could become three of the “greatest deliberative body”. How do you deliberate with someone who has delusional beliefs? What I find interesting and curious is that these politicians want to become part of the government institutions they claim to despise. If all three of the candidates above get elected, they represent 3 out of 100 senators. Very quickly, these government outsiders become insiders and they soon learn the limitations of being political novices in an institution where the rhetoric is for show, but cooperation and teamwork gets your constituents the dough.

Government service means serving the mundane needs of all of your constituents - including helping to obtain citizenship, resolving grievances with government agencies, introducing and getting legislation passed and promoting your state’s interests, such as getting defense contracts and earmarks awarded. And to get along, you have to go along - horse trading votes with other senators. The ability to focus on just one issue is gone when your time is allocated to the minute, in order to appear on the various committees you belong (not necessarily on the committees they wanted), the continuous process of fund raising and voting on the rare important and mostly not-so-important legislation. They become captive to their legislative aides, who do all the real work, behind–the scenes. The President, who they claim to hate, can make their lives difficult by refusing to sign any legislation that supports their and their followers specific interests, when those specific interests are not in the best interest of the whole country.

The talk about how they are going to change Washington D.C. becomes how daily life in Washington. D.C. has changed them. The idea that “government doesn’t create jobs. Industry creates jobs”, they learn is nonsense as the constant demands of big and small businesses for government assistance, becomes a drumbeat that pounds in their heads. Remember, it was extensive government intervention in creating jobs that rescued the country from the Great Depression, not private industry. The lack of previous federal government intervention in sub-prime homeowner loans has exacerbated the current depression. The refrain of “how government regulation has taken over business” is replaced by the reality that without government regulation, many large multinational businesses have no consciences and if they can dump toxic waste into the local water supply or cut back on environmental safeguards that reduce the likelihood of large oil spills, they will.

The disenfranchised , destitute, and unfortunate should be leading the roiling. But the leaders of this roiling are none of those these three. They are white, rich and privileged and becoming more rich and privileged at the expense of those who are not and those who are paranoid that they will become the disenfranchised, destitute and unfortunate despite their wealth.

Richard Hofstader knew this 54 years ago. In national politics, paranoia always runs deep.

Equal and No Longer Separate

Equal and No Longer Separate

Michael Maynard
August 9, 2010

On August 9th, U.S. Chief Judge Vaughn Walker ruled that California’s adoption of Proposition 8 was unconstitutional. Proposition 8 attempts to prohibit same-sex marriage in California and was voted in favor 52% to 48%. This was how Judge Walker determined the basis for his ruling.

“Proposition 8 cannot withstand any level of scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause Excluding same-sex couples from marriage is simply not rationally related to a legitimate state interest.”

What is the Equal Protection Clause? It was enacted in 1868, after the Civil War. The Thirteenth Amendment, enacted in 1865 abolished slavery. However, the defeated Confederate states, in an attempt to prevent blacks from gaining full citizen status, tried to restrict the rights of blacks to own property. The Equal Amendment Clause, the 14th Amendment, was enacted to prevent those and future attempted restriction of equal rights for all U.S. citizens.

Section 1 - 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution - The Equal Protection Clause

“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws”.

What was equally meaningful of the overturning of Proposition 8 was the coalition of the two of the most famous liberal and conservative lawyers, previous combatants, to have this proposed law overturned.

"It's not judicial activism, it is judicial responsibility in its classic sense," said Theodore Olson, prominent conservative lawyer, who argued the 2000 Supreme Court case that put George W. Bush in the White House.

"We do not put the Bill of Rights to a vote," Olson said. "We ask judges to make sure that when we vote for something we're not depriving minorities of their constitutional rights, and that's what the judge did."

Olson added that "41 states once prohibited interracial marriage, so that [until] the Supreme Court finally struck that prohibition down, the President's parents could not have been married."

Olson's co-counsel David Boies, who argued for the Democrats in the landmark Bush versus Gore showdown, ridiculed opponents of same-sex marriage for offering "junk science" and legal theories that were "just made up."

"A witness stand is a lonely place to lie," Boies told "Face the Nation" on CBS. "We put fear and prejudice on trial, and fear and prejudice lost."

Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council countered that "anybody with a half a brain can see" that policies like no-fault divorce have weakened traditional marriage "and, as a result, have impacted the well-being of children."

(Source: New York Daily News “Prop 8 attorneys Theodore Olson and David Boies say judge's ruling is 'constitutionally sound' - August 9, 2010)

The Family Research Council, not surprisingly, is presenting erroneous information.. One of this right-wing organization’s objection to overturning Proposition 8 was that it would “undermine the social foundation of marriage.” The same argument was made to attempt to prevent no-fault divorce. California that was the first state to adopt no-fault divorce in 1970. The national rate of divorce since universal no-fault divorce adoption has decreased from 23 per 1000 couples in 1970 to 17 per 1000 couples in 2005.

What Judge Walker’s ruling does is affirm the sanctity and specialness of marriage.

So what is the real issue being raised by th Family Research Council? I must assume that the members of this organization are well-intentioned and believe they have a legitimate complaint?

They represent a sector of this country who believe that the supremacy of Caucasian heterosexuals is under assault and from their limited perspective, they’re correct. Caucasians’ are no longer in the majority - they represent approximately 40% of the population. While they yearn for their “normalcy” of the Eisenhower presidency, there is an African-American president. The fight for the protection of unionism has been turned against them as their manufacturing jobs are being exported and replaced with lower paying, no-benefit jobs at Walmart. Undocumented immigrants are being used for low-wage, manual labor jobs. And now they have to see two men or two women holding hands as they walk in the lover’s lane of the park.

What they don’t get is that Judge Walker’s ruling doesn’t undermine the sanctity of marriage, the ruling enhances it. Judge Walker recognized that when two people fall love in want to have the state recognize their union legally, it means the two people respect the institution of marriage, not trying to tear it down.

The brilliance of Judge Walker’s ruling is he did not directly attack homophobia, but he legally shamed those who still embrace it. The best approach to overcome irrationality is still to provide an irrefutable rational judgement. What is sad is that some of those who oppose the ruling are attacking Judge Walker by questioning his sexuality. This is the equivalent of questioning Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas for any ruling he makes involving race.


Thank you,Judge Walker and Attorneys Boies and Olson, for applying common sense to combat right-wing fear mongering.

For that, every citizen, whether they agree with his ruling or not, owes Judge Walker a large debt of gratitude. That would be just constitutional.

The Celebrity Contract

The Celebrity Contract

by Michael Maynard
March 20, 2010

Recently I read the book, Arnie and Jack,which described the very different lives Arnold Palmer and Jack Nicklaus led from their births to ultimately become legends and the top two rivals in amateur and professional golf. The book skirts many issues about the relationship between the two, including the well-known Palmer’s strong dislike of some of Nicklaus’ shadier business dealings. While the book tries to portray them as friends today, while time heals most wounds, I doubt that they’ve become bosom buddies.

However, both conducted themselves graciously in public and have lived up to their image as sportsmen. I have had the honor of meeting Arnold Palmer twice and found his like of people to be very real. On one occasion, I was waiting in the lobby of a local hotel to have breakfast with a potential client. Mr. Palmer and his wife entered the lobby and all activity stopped in the presence of the great man. Palmer came over to me, introduced himself and shook my hand.
I didn’t wash that hand until sanitary reasons made it absolutely necessary.

Last year, I was waiting to have brunch with a friend at another local hotel. Palmer was having breakfast with men who I assumed were his business employees and he was not happy. As he was leaving, I went over to him and told him about the incident above. He broke into an ear-to-ear grin, patted me on the shoulder, shook my hand, and walked off in a much better mood. The legend, the image and the man appear to be one and the same, impeccable.

But he’s Arnold Palmer and he’s exceptional and the exception, not the rule. However, while there are no reports of any type of bad behavior on and off the course by Mr. Palmer, he established his celebrity under much different circumstances than today. He was one of the first television stars and without his magnetism and ability to create drama, professional golf would not be the huge international business that it is today.

No golfer since had achieved the total image of Arnold Palmer. It frustrated Nicklaus that he was not beloved when he was in his prime, it was his surprise Masters victory in 1986 that finally endeared him to the general public. There have been popular and winning golfers since then, including Tom Watson and Lee Trevino, but no current golfer had reached the legendary status of Palmer and Nicklaus until emergence of Tiger Woods in 1996. Woods had the likeability and dramatic presence of Palmer and the precision and skill of Nicklaus.

However, unlike the two long-time married and believed faithful husbands who were able to channel their energies into their off-the-course businesses, Tiger Woods has a personality flaw, an overwhelming sexual drive or longing for affection that led him to have affairs with multiple women. What I find curious is that he probably could have had his pick of beautiful women, while having a wife who was a former model at home, he chose decent looking but not dazzling looking women. He could have had his choice of gorgeous professional and other successful women who attend PGA events.. He developed relationships with a waitress and a pornographic movie performer, among others.

It has been rumored that he developed an addiction to pain killers, such as Vicodin, after having knee surgery, this only adds to the image of Woods as an addictive personality. What Woods has done is not greatly different than his fellow PGA golfer, John Daly, but Daly’s image as one step removed from the trailer park forgives many of his bad behaviors, where supposed pristine Tiger will not be forgiven. Maybe there are two Woods, Tiger, the perfect gifted athlete and celebrity and Eldrick, the man needing human contact .and comfort anywhere he could find it because he couldn’t handle the internal pressures of needing to be perfect.

The public wants our heroes to be squeaky clean, like Arnold Palmer. Tiger Woods, through his charitable foundations, has done more for others less fortunate than nearly all other professional athletes combined in my lifetime. That was the contract with Woods, be the world’s best on and off the golf course and he gets adoration and approval.

Was too much asked of Woods to honor in his part of the social contract? Should there be a renegotiation to forgive and support a wounded mortal man? He is just like the rest of us after all.

Being and Snookiness

Being and Snookiness
by
Michael Maynard
March 20, 2010

In my youthful desire to rule the world, (and rightfully so) I had a triple major in college: Business Administration, Psychology and Philosophy. All three have proved valuable in my career as a management consultant and journalist/columnist/writer. I can analyze your business operations, assess how effectively your employees work together, and tell you what and how you and your company add meaning and context to the spiritual world. Forget Tim Geithner and Hank Paulson, I can really straighten out these financially and morally bankrupt companies.

The summer before my senior year in college, I undertook a major extra-credit research project in order to graduate early. I wanted to have a head start of my fellow classmates in starting my path to the top. The top of what was unclear, but it had to be the top. My research project was to read the writings of the major German philosophers: Immanuel Kant, Georg Hegel and Martin Heidegger and write an analysis of their works and how they apply to modern life.

As a result of that summer’s tedious work, I can launch into a major dialectic on almost any subject and take either the for or against position, sometimes switching sides in mid-argument. I can discuss what we know, how we know, and what we know when we know it. I got so immersed in Heidegger’s analysis of our Dasein ( the question whether we really exist or all existence is illusional), Being and Time, to the point where my own existence that summer was in question.

In contrast, I’m sure none of the above has ever concerned Snooki and the Situation, whom my age, if they have ever analyzed their reason for being, have concluded that they are on VH1's television show, The Jersey Shore, therefore, they exist, they should exist and they will continue to exist, however unfortunately. I’ve watched episodes of this “reality” series and know firsthand the agony Heidegger must have gone through in trying to conclude why there is value in human life. If I had to co-exist with these people daily, the Atlantic Ocean would claim one more body to sink to the bottom. .I’m willing to bet that epistemology is not a concern for them and their friend, J-Woww. If Snooki and the Situation think about Dasein, it’s any place that isn’t hot until they show up.

How do these people lead so meaningless lives? What did they do for a living before the show? What could they do for a living, if they didn’t have the income from this show? How could a certified teacher allow them to pass the 3rd grade? But the biggest question is: Why are they on TV at all?

I haven’t become an old fogey and I’m not going to tell you that modern civilization is coming to an end, as my mother told me when the Rolling Stones first became popular in my early teenage years. It’s not that the Jersey Shore people are evil or wrongdoers, it’s just that they are chooches. (Translation:from the noted source, Urban Directory, A chooch is Italian slang for hardhead,, blockhead,, any of a number similar insults pertaining to one's stubborness or limited use of common sense.) If you stick your tongue down a different guy’s throat each week and “go home with them”, there is good reason to for others to think that you’re a slut. If you don’t recognize that this is slutty behavior, than you’re a chooch. If you go to bars, get drunk each time and pick fights with bigger guys, who can obviously knock the pasta faguli out of you, and you go home beat up often, you’re a punching bag and a chooch..

I accept that fact that we, as a nation, (myself included) first became TV voyeurs, when PBS showed the life of the Loud family. Yes, it is the same viewer funded, highbrow quality programming Public Broadcasting System, which brings you Sesame Street, Nova, Bill Moyers’ Journal and many hours of intelligent TV programming, who introduced the first “reality” show in 1973. We watched with fascination and horror, that what seemingly was the prototypical happy American family had to deal with their son “coming out of the closet” and the breakdown of the marriage, leading to separate residences and ultimately, divorce. I know as a teenager, when I watched the Loud’s, I thought I was watching different world than the one I knew. In retrospect, their world wasn’t that different, it’s just all of this behavior was kept behind closed doors in the world around me.

So how did we regress from the real suburban upper middle class Loud family to the mugging for the camera likes of Snooki, J-Woww and The Situation? Not only are the once closed doors open, it’s now a non-stop open fraternity house.

The economics of “reality television” versus professionally scripted and acted programing is inescapable. Reality TV costs 60% to 70% less to develop and produce. There are 200+ national television channels now versus 4 channels in my youth.. The term “narrowcasting” is predominant. VH1, where “The Jersey Shore”, is broadcast, competes against, CNN  and MS-NBC for news junkies, the Fine Living Channel for Martha Stewart wannabes, the Speed Channel for gear heads, G4 for teenage boys and tech heads, various Spanish speaking channels for Latino and heaving low-cut bosom watchers, and channels for virtually any subject which has some kind of group interest. There are more and more channels competing for less and less audience. Bruce Springsteen was correct - there are 200+ channels and there’s nothing on.

So maybe “The Jersey Shore” was really targeted for the chooch audience segment?

Who knows? Maybe there is 24 hour Jersey Shore channel in the works. Snooki and the Situation appear not to need any sleep now, despite the extensive amount of mattress time already they spend, they certainly wouldn’t sleep if they know a camera is always watching them.

So any programming that can generate ratings improvement, even marginal, and costs less to create is going to be broadcasted, no matter how unintelligent. There’s going to be some audience who will watch it. Maybe this is the fulfillment of Marshall McLuhan’s ominous warning “Everyone will have 15 minutes of fame.”

Even Snooki, J-Woww and The Situation. In their case, Heidegger may have been absolutely right and simultaneously wrong - they are illusional but not illusions until we turn off the TV or change the channel.

TRD101: Existential Angst

TRD101: Existential Angst

by Michael Maynard

July 7, 2006

After the role of God in human life and the detailed analysis of the leitmotifs used throughout the collected works of Britney Spears, the subject most discussed, debated and chronicled throughout time has been the questionnig of human existence.

How did the human species develop to populate this planet?

Are humans the only sentient life form on this planet? In the universe?

Does every life have a specific purpose, i.e. meaning, in its creation?

How do we know what our own specific purpose is?

If we do know what that specific purpose is, how do we know whether we fulfilled it?

Is there life after death and what criteria is used to judge what happens to us after our life ends?

Today, you may find yourself living in a shotgun shack. You may find yourself living in another part of the world. You may find your self listening to the Talking Heads instead listening to a talking head.

And you may be asking yourself the age-old question about your angst concerning all of the above, “Well, how did I get here?”

Yes, one of my majors in college was philosophy. My final philosophy class in my final semester concerned the works of the major German philosophers: Kant, Witgenstein, Hegel, Heidegger, etc. I spent 6 months reading Heidegger’s “Being and Time”, in the original German, as the final work of this class. If you ever need to start questioning why you exist, or would want to, spend 6 months reading any work of Heidegger. Heidegger makes rolling the rock back up the hill, only to see it roll back down again, a mirthful diversion.

One of the funniest lines I heard on this topic came from the senior aide to one of the most senior and powerful U.S. Senators. I had asked him about why Senators tend to be “long-winded” and cannot answer a simple question with a short direct answer. His response, “You have 99 people who believe they deserve to be members of the most exclusive and powerful club in the world and love to hear the sound of their own voice., and then you have Lincoln Chaffee who suffers from existential angst.”

Even though he’s a Republican, I immediately liked Lincoln Chaffee and was glad he was a Senator. Anyone who finds themself in the great deliberative political body, and actually deliberates about why and what is his purpose in being a Senator deserves to be there. Sure, Chaffee has to play the game in order to get some of his legislation passed and to be taken seriously by the senior senators, but he has frequently bucked the wrong-headed policies of the Bush Administration and the Republican Senate Leadership.

It is very unfortunate that his other 99 colleagues do not share his contemplative nature, because the Senate has increasingly become an irrelevant laughing stock. There is the foreign policy and financial sink hole that has become the Iraq war. The Bush Administration has broken laws in domestic spying and financial data gathering and analysis, and continue to act unchecked as if the Constitution and separation of powers do not matter.

The US economy is dramatically slowing. Interest rates are creeping higher and correspondingly, speculative real estate prices are dropping and credit-card fueled consumer spending is slowing. Gasoline prices remain at $3.00 per gallon and no program to reduce the dependence upon fossil fuels is in place.

Don’t go by the economic forecasts and pronouncements from this administration or as Lucy tells Charlie Brown, “Tell your statistics to shut up”. The unemployment rate is meaningless, since people who have exhausted their unemployment benefits stop being counted. Those who have taken lower-paying, often significantly lower paying jobs stop being counted, so there is no underemployment figures. Those who are working two and three jobs and are just getting by stop being counted so there are no economic hardship figures.

The real economic status figures to watch are the number of manufacturing jobs being created or lost and the inflation-adjusted real wage figures. Another 300,000+ manufacturing jobs were lost last year. Today’s news stated that service-sector employment, which had been growing at double digit rates, is also slowing. Construction spending had a major decline in May, so more decent paying jobs are going to be lost in the next few months.

So what issues are the Senators focusing upon? Passing flag-burning crime and banning gay marriage legislation that, if passed, would go through the process of becoming constitutional amendments.The national polls show the plurality of Americans against passing both pieces of legislation. The other major issue? Repealing the “death tax” - the taxes paid upon receipt of assets from someone else’s estate. This legislation affects only 300,000 of the already wealthy, who can afford high-priced estate attorneys and tax accountants who already devise new and unique ways to avoid the “death tax”. The country can’t afford to invest in industries to create new jobs or provide employment by repairing crumbling roads and building needed new interstate roads. But, according to the Senate, it can afford to let the wealthy become wealthier and still keep pouring more money into the sinkhole.

It’s time for the other 99 senators to have some existential angst, especially the senior Senator from Connecticut. Joe Lieberman announced today that if he’s defeated in the upcoming primary by his challenger, Ned Lamont, Lieberman will run for Senator as an independent party candidate. Lieberman is substantially behind Lamont in the latest polls. Given how little Lieberman has accomplished in the Senate, despite his seniority, and his continued, unblinking support for the Bush Administration’s actions in conducting the Iraq War, he should be feeling at least a little angst. Nor has Lieberman publically protested or challenged the latest round of right-wingnut legislative grandstanding. You’d think he’d understand why the voters from his state don’t support him.

But, no, that would mean he’d have to question why he’s been voted into office. After all, he’s a failed Vice Presidential candidate and then failed in the Democratic primaries to be nominated as the presidential candidate. Therefore, he belongs in the Senate because he’s one of the elite in the club.

Joe, go push your rock up a different hill. That’s where you belong.

TRD101 knows this: Once you start having a sense of entitlement to hold any position you have, especially a public position, you stop representing the interests of those you’re supposed to be serving, and just serving your own. Your existence is not a guaranteed lifetime contract.

And that is The Real Deal 101 for today, like it or not.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Send your comments and questions or to be added to or removed from TRD101's distribution list to: mikemaynard@mindspring.com

You can read TRD101's work and participate in a group discussion at: www.blogger.com and enter TRD101, where it asks for blog search. Please feel free to forward this column to your clear-thinking (as opposed to right-thinking) friends, relatives, and colleagues, as appropriate. Please have them contact me if they have comments or want to receive columns via e-mail in the future.

© Copyright Michael Maynard, TRD101, July 2006.

Management by Pathology

TRD101: Management by Pathology

by Michael Maynard

June 19, 2006



To be a successful management consultant and interim senior manager, you have to have a pretty high opinion of yourself and your capabilities. Over the course of 20 years, my partners and I developed a running joke. The good news about consulting is that you see a lot of companies. The bad news is that you see A LOT of companies. Approximately 10% of the time, you’re being hired because the company is doing well and management wants the company to keep doing well and to do better. Those consulting assignments are fun.

The other 90% of the time, you know that you’re being hired because of bad managerial decisions and you’re there to get the company out of trouble. To take on the troubled company’s assignment, you implicitly assume that you’re better than the existing management. And 99% of that 90% of the time, the assumption is accurate.

Of course, every company’s management has its typical proportional share of idiots, petty tyrants, arrogant SOB’s and fools. Really troubled corporations have more than their share of morons, psychopaths and mental defective in management because who else would work in this cuckoo’s nest. Scott Adams’ “Dilbert” comic strip has done a valuable service in accurately describing the inner workings of most corporations. While Murphy’s Law applies to the rest of bad managers, from my experience, I’ve noticed that the really bad ones fall into certain abnormal personality types.

Self-Promoter: The Self- Promoter loves to get his/her name in the media and the amount of publicity they get is in inverse proportion to their ability. One of my clients had a very good and stable mailing list business. The company’s mailing list business could be expanded by drawing upon their existing competency and provide this product for other niche markets. No, that wasn’t sexy enough for this Self-Promoter, who wanted to be known as the next high-tech managerial legend. He drained the money from the existing business, which started to slip, and used it to create a number of internal “start-up” companies that would expand the company so much and rapidly that he was already planning for the stock exchange listing. The parent company had no experience in any of these start-up areas and no managerial expertise in starting up new companies. At the same time, the SP kept giving talks to industry groups, colleges, trade shows, wherever the press would show up.

The press bought into the idea that he was one of the top high tech executives in the world. The company did go public and the stock valuation was high due to speculation and expectations. Two years later, none of the start up succeeded, the core business declined and the stock was being traded for pennies.


Schmoozer: The Schmoozer is great on the golf course with clients or in front of a group of financial analysts because he oozes insincere charm and flattery. .He’s made it along the way because everyone thinks he’s a great guy. He/she can hide his lack of detailed knowledge once he reaches mid-level management level because he doesn’t have to do anything or make any decisions, just shuffle papers. As long as The Schmoozer scripted or isn’t pressed for details on how his business is doing, he’s great. When it comes times to make a decision on an important operating issue, he’s off working on his putting stroke instead. In the Fortune 100, the Smoozers are usually well-connected politically.

I worked for a Schmoozer. I was one of the first hires for what was going to be the next Digital Equipment or Wang Laboratories. My role was “minister without portfolio” which meant I worked on marketing issues one day, manufacturing issues the next and accounting operations the next. I had great fun and it was this experience that led me to become a consultant. I had been in a number of meetings with the Schmoozer over 2 years about strategic issues and developing the company’s financing business plan. He stopped me in the hall after one of the financing business meetings and asked why I, who he thought worked for one of the company’s vendors, was in this meeting. His secretary had to intercede toe explain who I was and that he helped hire me 2 years prior, or else he was all set to fire me.

Sharpie: No, not the Terrell Owens type of Sharpie, but the type who is always looking for a shortcut or a way to get ahead, whether legally or illegally, and always at someone else’s expense.

A former multi-millionaire “friend” asked my company to do an analysis of a company he was trying to acquire through receipt of a US government backed loan. What he wanted was my partners and I to produce a glowing report to the agency as the final step to obtain the loan. What the agency got as a thorough analysis of a good little company with nice, hard working people in it, but even with a dramatic turnaround could not support repayment of the loan. At the agency’s suggestion, we then checked into his other financing that would back the loan, and found some curious transactions involving non-existent offshore banks.

When we delivered to the report to the agency, my so-called friend went linear, accusing me of stabbing him in the back. What he wanted was for us to do something illegal, which involved fines and jail time, for filing a knowingly inaccurate (a/k/a lying) report to a federal government agency for use in securing a loan.

There were other and legal alternatives to acquiring this company, which could have done pretty well, though would never be a spectacular success. These alternatives involved investing his own money and securing any loan with personal assets. No, he had a scam going and didn’t really didn’t need to have one.

Whackball: Not just your typical managerial moron, psychopath or mental defective, the whackball’s personality is erratic and toxic which makes life hell for his employees. I’ve worked for two whackballs.

The first was a really a salesman, and his demeanor or skills weren’t compatible for being a senior manager. Out of the blue, for no reason at all, he would scream at any of his reports for non-existent transgressions, like not giving him a monthly report he wanted. Explaining to him that it was only mid-month and the report wasn’t produced to the end of the month only made the screaming worse. Then twenty minutes later, he would come up to you in private, put his arm around you and tell you what a great job you were doing. I, like his other managers, tried to stay as far out of his way as possible. To fortify myself for another day of his craziness, I used to drink a six-pack of Tab and eat three large candy bars on my way to work. I was making myself so wired that anything this guy would do would just bounce off the buzz armor.

The second was a software engineer who had started a software development consulting company. He called for help because there was a pattern of half of his employees leaving every three months. For the uninitiated, software engineers are a mutant species. Three generations of software engineers absorbing radiation from hours on end programming right in front of computers have altered their genetic structure. The mutants have bulging eyes, pale complexions, long curved necks and fingers, ability to stay up for days on end, and devoid of social skills.

This software entrepreneur viewed himself as the second coming of Bill Gates and couldn’t understand why those who left didn’t want to be help him develop the new Microsoft. Bill Gates has billions of dollars, so people will tolerate him being completely narcissistic. If you don’t have billions of dollars, then having staff meetings at 3 AM, calling people at home at all hours about how miserable you are, and then ignoring them for days when together in person doesn't endear yourself to anyone. He tried the 3 AM telephone call with me once. I left the phone off the hook and he was still talking when I awoke 3 hours later.

What all five of these personality types have in common is that because of their pathology, they put their own needs ahead of those of the company they are encharged to lead and steward. Individually, these managerial types can cause damage, but the employees find ways to work around them. It’s when you get two or more of them together is when there is real trouble.

Various people have asked me how an Enron can happen. Enron had the combination of the Schmoozer President, Ken Lay, and the Sharpie, Jeff Skilling. They were a perversely symbiotic pair, Lay needed Skilling to run the company, and Skilling needed Lay to present the smooth public presence to provide cover for what Skilling was doing. There’s no way that Ken Lay could come up with Raptors subsidiaries or deevloping derivative markets for the weather and network bandwidth. The culture the two created facilitated middle-level managers to come up with schemes to reallocate electricity from California and then sell the electricity back to the state at much higher prices.

What Lay liked was all the attention his company was getting and his picture on the cover of Business Week and Fortune. Even the recent trial didn’t completely settle the question of how much he really knew. As President of Enron, he was supposed to know and should have known. As a Smchoozer, more interested in sleeping in the White House Lincoln Room, he attended the board meetings (which leaves the question of why the members of the Enron board were not tried for negligence and conspiracy) and as long as the company kept growing rapidly, he left Skilling to his own devices.

For Skilling, ex-large management consulting firm employee, Lay’s noninvolvement allowed him to really be running the company. Someone as driven as Skilling to prove that he could create the largest company in the world, any means that would facilitate that goal, was fine. He and the CEO, Andrew Fastow, probably had great fun cooking up all these innovative schemes, until they got caught, by someone who asked why the numbers on the financial statements didn’t add up, a question Lay should have asked many times before.

Put two pathological executives together and what happens is an outlaw company (Microsoft gets spared this time). Employees lose their jobs and pensions, and individual investors lose their life savings. All because one wanted to be famous and the other wanted to be an industry giant. A sad end for two very sad people and all those they defrauded.

TRD101 knows this: Failed companies just don’t happen, it takes a combination of pathological managers' efforts. Enron wasn’t the first example of this, but it may remain the largest and most pathological failure ever. Enron was breathtaking in how quickly and how extensively the pathologies of two men caused this company to rise and collapse, falling heavily down upon all innocents unlucky to have had any involvement with it.

And that is The Real Deal 101 for today, like it or not.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Send your comments and questions or to be added to or removed from TRD101's distribution list to: mikemaynard@mindspring.com

You can read TRD101's work and participate in a group discussion at: www.blogger.com and enter TRD101, where it asks for blog search. Please feel free to forward this column to your friends, romans and countrymen, as appropriate, and have them contact me if they have comments or want to receive columns via e-mail in the future.

© Copyright Michael Maynard, TRD101, June 2006.

Secrets and Lies

TRD101: Secrets and Lies

by Michael Maynard

June 9, 2006



I love those conservatives who insist that the United States Constitution should be interpreted strictly with the intent of the Founding Fathers, or that each amendment should be interpreted exactly word by word. Usually these types insist that the Second Amendment means being able to carrying a gun. It does, but there is the first clause, which they conveniently overlook, about having a gun in order to keep a well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state. Remember the time in which this was drafted, they had just won independence from the British, so the fear that the British or other countries might invade was very present in their minds. Reading the Federalist Papers is a wonderful experience because you get a real sense of how much Jefferson, Hamilton, and the others had thought about these issues, but also how they would work in a newly democratic society.

For you gun lovers out there, I’m sorry, you are not part of a well regulated militia, unless you consider yourself a one-man vigilante squad ( or an illegal vigilante squad operating on the Mexican border). Even if, I would concede to you that in certain circumstances, like living in an area of high crime, it is prudent to carry a gun in order to protect yourself, then please explain to me why you need to be able to carry a concealed weapon into a church, hospital or amusement park? I’d be concerned that post-traumatic syndrome of having a bad experience with a clown might trigger you to believe you need to defend yourself.

It was an agrarian economy then and the need for a rifle to scare away a wolf attacking the chickens or the cows is more like their intent. Like the Minutemen and the other colonial forces, they needed to assemble quickly to protect against the French invading from the north That’s not the same as needing to carry a snub-nose 38 in your belt in order to pray, unless you’re Muslim these days.

Then there is that darn pesky Fourth Amendment, the one that the “strict constructionists” use to state there is no guaranteed right to privacy.

You have the right to be secure in your person, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures. This shall not be violated and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath of Affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

I think it’s reasonable that the right to be secure in your person, house, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures could be interpreted as a right to protect your private business and affairs, i.e., a right to privacy, from unwarranted government action. Of course, the founding fathers could not project 200-plus years out and foresee the telephone, the wireless telephone, and the Internet. But aren’t your phone calls like having a face to face conversation, so you’re guaranteed the right to be secure in your person? Isn’t an e-mail message an electronic piece of paper or personal effect? I could also start quoting from the 14th Amendment, but you get the point. It was clear that the Founding Fathers were concerned that an imperial government, like the one they just fought against so long and valiantly, would trample all over the rights of individuals for the sake of protecting the government’s own interests to rule as the government so pleased.

The Bush Administration, with its view of the “Unitary Esecutive Theory”, in essence, that the President of the United States, especially in a time of war, can choose to follow or not follow the laws set by the other two branches of government. This theory, originally develop by Samuel Alito in the Reagan Administration’s Department of Justice, is that the President is the CEO of all departments under the executive branch and can run them as he sees fit. The President can overrule laws developed by Congress and signed by previous Presidents and the rulings of the judicial branch, including the Supreme Court. Bush uses this power in combination with “signing statements” on legislation awaiting his signature. These signing statements, in effect, state “I don’t care what your legislation says and what I just signed,, this is how I interpret the law as it affects the Executive Branch and this is what I’m going to do, even if it’s the opposite of what you passed and I signed.”

The Vice President had his right-hand man, David Addington, go through every line of legislation for perceived intrusion or infringement on the Bush White House’s perception of the powers of the Executive Branch. There is a very interesting profile on Dick Cheney in the June 2006 edition of Vanity Fair. Cheney developed a hatred for Congress and belief that it was stepping on the powers of the President while he was still a Congressman. He is a member of the Federal Government who hates how the Federal Government, as designed in the Constitution, is supposed to operate. It is increasingly clear that the Bush Administration came into office with a hidden agenda which included invading Iraq, outsourcing many functions of the government to contractors, and expanding the powers of the Executive Branch. While this is horrible to state, the Bush Administration has skillfully used 9-11-2001 to implement this hidden agenda.

The Boston Globe reported on April 30, that Bush had claimed the authority to disobey more than 750 laws. Who does he think he is? CEO of Enron? There are none of those 750 laws he claims to be able to disobey more important than the claim his Administration can listen in on phone calls and read e-mails of private citizens, without a warrant or probable cause. Often, Congress didn’t know that Bush had changed the laws he had just signed until after Congress tried to have them enforced. The claim that all this information is needed to be able to “analyze patterns of potential terrorist cell activity” is a lie. This “intelligence gathering” already been used to listen in on the cell phone conversations of TV and newspaper reporters that the Bush Administration suspects (meaning nearly all White House reporters) is receiving leaked information from government whistle-blowers. The White House has refused to turn over information regarding the scope of this NSA domestic spying program stating that to do so would compromise national security. If you think that the NSA was not listening in to the phone calls or reading the e-mails of private citizens, especially those of perceived enemies of this Administration, you’re naive.

We are close, very close, to having a totalitarian Executive Branch, supported by a capitulating Surpeme Court and Congress. Congressional oversight committees request for information are ignored or denied on national security grounds. The Supreme Court just ruled that a federal employee who discloses information about government wrong doing, i.e. a whistle blower, can be fired with impunity. We’ve gone though this widespread Executive Branch paranoia before, just not as widespread and in some respect, not as serious. Even the Nixon Administration didn’t view itself as the sole power of government.

The Bush Administration has set itself up to be unaccountable for any secretive law breaking, or lies told us, Congress, and the rest of the world. Without congressional oversight or challenge by the Supreme Court, we don’t know what we don’t know until later when we find out after some wrongdoing or disaster has been done.

Secrets and lies. Secrets and lies. All of the deliberation, forethought and work of Washington, Hamilton, Jefferson and the other drafters of the Constitution are being undone by the work of men who hate the government offices they have been chosen to serve and protect. They believe because of their position, they are above the laws.This is a far cry from the gentlemen-politician that our Founding Fathers believed would best serve the interests of the citizens of this country.

TRD101 knows this: Lies and secrets, secrets and lies are the work of those with something to hide. Lies and secrets, secrets and lies, are the defense of those who cannot laws abide.

And that is The Real Deal 101 for today, like it or not.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Send your comments and questions or to be added to or removed from TRD101's distribution list to: mikemaynard@mindspring.com

You can read TRD101's work and participate in a group discussion at: www.blogger.com and enter TRD101, where it asks for which blog you want. Please feel free to forward this column to your friends, romans and countrymen, as appropriate, and have them contact me if they have comments or want to receive columns via e-mail in the future.

© Copyright Michael Maynard, TRD101, June 2006.

In Memory

TRD101: In Memory

by Michael Maynard

May 24, 2006


I just received an advertisement e-mail from J.C. Penney with this heading: “Celebrate Memorial Day with Free Shipping”. This is almost as obscene as George Bush’s statement on how to give tribute to those who lost their lives on 9/11/2001: “Fly to the destination spots of this country”. Let’s honor the lives of those who lives were lost by a terrorist attack which could have been prevented, except for a series of blunders and inaction, by the various levels of those who receive a paycheck from the federal government, including the President and Vice President, by going to Disney World.

That’s what the United States has become: a big credit card. Let’s give respect to the birth of Jesus by promoting toys weeks before the day of his birth. Let's celebrate the founding of our country by buying foreign-made automobiles. Let’s honor those who have died in combat, serving to preserve and protect the honor and security of this country and our allies, by buying some furniture because it will be shipped free of charge to our homes. Let’s honor those who have died in combat to make sure their sons and daughters, grandsons and granddaughters, live in a free country, by selling them cheap imported goods, purchased in debt, that our sons and daughters, grandsons and granddaughters will have to pay through higher taxes or further reductions in government services.

My father is one of those who should be honored this weekend. His Army battalion was the first to reach the shore at Anzio, despite the heavy fire from Mussolini’s troops. He was a gentle man, who spent hours with me in his hopes that I could become a professional baseball player. My uncles delighted in telling the story about when he went hunting and stopped to pet one of my great-uncle's mangy dogs. As he bent down, a huge deer buck raced past him, nearly decapitating my father with his antlers. My father went hunting for the exercise and being out with the guys. He could no more shoot a deer than his son can today.

From his military service, my father lost some of hearing and had shrapnel embedded in his leg. He also suffered from what we now would call PTSD: Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. He suffered from debilitating headaches. He had dreams, flashbacks, where he relived Anzio and saw his Army buddies get shot around him and woke up screaming and in a sweat. A few times, when he was having one of his headaches, he would become angry and violent. He never received treatment for his PTSD, at the time, not only wasn’t this condition known, it was considered to be part of what happened to you when you returned from battle.

I was lucky. I didn’t want to serve in Vietnam and I just below the cutoff lottery number twice. But they were anxious years because I was on the potential call up list. While I was in college, Vietnam veterans returned to my school. Many were burned out cases with hollowed eyes, smoking joint after joint in the hope the buzz would help alleviate the pain from the memories of the horrors they had lived through. Those vets who were my friends told me stories of what happened to them. I understood what they were saying, but could never comprehend what they experienced. A recent study stated that 98% of those who fired weapons during the Vietnam War suffer from PTSD. Given the similarities in theatre environment between Vietnam and Iraq: the horrors of guerilla warfare, uncertainty to discern the enemy easily, hostile environmental conditions and overextended tours of duty, there is no reason to expect the percentage to be lower.

The US is now getting the first wave of soldiers who have served in Afghanistan and Iraq. Many suffer from PTSD, as well as other physical and mental maladies. The WWII soldiers came back as heroes and the US Government rewarded with them with free college tuition and low-interest loans. The Vietnam soldiers came back in the midst of a major societal change and were considered as heroes/anti-heroes, unfortunates caught up in the midst of geopolitical gamesmanship being done by proxy intervening in a foreign civil war. The Vietnam soldiers did come back to free college tuition and an improved Veterans Administration hospital system to care for them. The soldiers from Iraq and Afghanistan are coming back as heroes, but in a country that’s honoring them with a stripped to the bone Veteran Administration hospital system, greatly reduced government social services programs to help them in their reentry, and in some cases, having lost their jobs, though these jobs are supposed to be theirs upon return. The jobs that are available are usually minimum wage service industry jobs, since the combination of government disinvestment and outsourcing of manufacturing and high-tech jobs off-shore has made finding good jobs at good wages difficult, at best.

The Rumsfeld Department of Defense, to no surprise, has not budgeted for the number of Iraq/Afghanistan veterans requiring mental health services, the type of personnel needed to handle PTSD cases or the facilities it will need to build or reopen to handle the rapidly growing number of servicemen and servicewomen needing treatment. So it will be left to the municipalities and states to handle the medical overload, and the cases of suicide, homicide and domestic violence that will inevitably occur. Of course, those people who lose their lives as a result of this gross mis-planning by the DOD will not be added to the daily number of deaths reported by the DOD. They will be casualties of war as much as those who died on the battlefield.

I still have my father’s duffel bag and helmet. He resides in me, my heart and my memory forever. That he suffered from his service to his country was unfortunate, but his government cared about and planned for his return to civilian life. That the current servicepeople don’t have to suffer the way he did, but their government has turned their backs on them for “budgetary reasons”, is heartless and despicable.

TRD101 knows this: With all the advances in modern day psychopharmacology and psychotherapy, it is possible to proactively treat those returning for PTSD. However, despite all those advances, no one can change what is in the memory of those who served in combat nor those who loved ones died as result. We can do nothing for the dead but pay them honor, but we disrespect their service to our country by the way their modern brethren are being mistreated.

And that is The Real Deal 101 for today, like it or not.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Send your comments and questions or to be added to TRD101's distribution list to: mikemaynard@mindspring.com

You can read TRD101's work and participate in a group discussion at: www.blogger.com and enter TRD101, where it asks for which blog you want. Please feel free to forward this column to your friends, romans and countrymen, as appropriate, and have them contact me if they have comments or want to receive columns via e-mail in the future.

© Copyright Michael Maynard, TRD101, May 2006.

Immigrant Nation

TRD101: Immigration Nation

by Michael Maynard

May 18, 2006

My grandfather, Michael Anthony Urbano, for whom I am named, came to the United States from Sicily not knowing a word of English. He, like countless others, heard that the streets were paved with gold and that anyone could become successful if they worked hard enough and took advantage of the opportunities. He arrived in North Adams, Massachusetts, with a few dollars in his pocket, no job prospects, but a strong back and a willingness to work hard in the textile mills that abutted the Hoosac River. At the turn of the century, North Adams was the largest town in the US.

By the time I was born, my grandfather had opened a successful barber shop which doubled as a “men’s emporium”. He was successful enough to feed and support a large family, as was typical at that time. When my mother went back to work, my grandfather and his cronies took care of me during the day. I learned some valuable social skills at a very early age, such as shooting pool, rolling bocci and bowling balls and playing poker. My uncles and aunts have told me stories about how much money my grandfather won on that “toddler in the corner” beating some newcomer in pool, while I was standing on a wooden crate to reach the table. There were probably other activities going on there, but I was too young to know or understand them. I loved every minute I was there. I can still smell the stale cigars and strong after shave that permeated the place.

My grandfather was a member of the “Family”, but not the family of Mario Puzo fame. It was the Italian males bonding together to protect themselves from attack by the Irish, Poles and the Germans, who resented the newcomers coming in and “stealing their jobs”. Sure, they did book making and had a numbers racket, it was done more as a community bonding than an operation of crooks. Say what you will about my grandfather’s background, he led the effort to build the first Italian church in the Berkshires, which is still standing today, opposite the MassMOCA modern art museum. He went to church each Sunday, dressed in his finest, including his boater in summer, and sat in the front rows. I was told he was good friends with the parish priests, who came to his establishment for haircuts and “other activities” frequently.

As much as we kid or romanticize the activities of “the Family”, during my grandfather’s day, it was a necessity. The dark-skinned “guineas, dagos, wops, etc.” were easy prey for the lighter skinned ethnic groups already established, so they formed a group to protect themselves and their families. This type of race bashing has been the history of the United States. The newest ethnic group or groups become targets of prejudicial hostilities because they “are different” or “they’re taking our jobs” They speak a different language, they have different values and they smell different. We speak a different language, have different values and smell different to them, as well.
.
I remember stories about resentment of the Vietnamese immigrants by some people in Lowell, Massachusetts, even though Lowell was in the midst of the high tech boom Many of the Vietnamese were working 3 jobs and saving the money to open their own business. That is what America is supposedly about, taking advantage of the opportunities available to you.

From the beginning of this country, we have been a nation of immigrants, except for the Native Americans, whom we have brutalized, stole from and then ignored. This is also a pernicious tradition throughout the history of the US, xenophobia, both internal and external to our borders. Whether it’s Joe McCarthy’s Red baiting, Bull Connor’s attack dogs, to the post 9-11 terrorizing of Arab-Americans, a country that prides itself on tolerance and diversity, has often shown little of either. Of course, the Jews have always been and continue to be convenient targets for many. There is still a large number of Americans who still believe the Jews control the American economy through ownership of all the banks, financial institutions and large corporations.

Today’s xenophobia involves the ruination of modern society and morals by allowing gays to marry and the increase in immigration of Hispanics, especially those crossing the border from Mexico or risking their lives by sailing on ramshackle boats from Cuba and Haiti. The dreams and aspirations of these people is no different than those of my grandfather’s or your ancestors, to build a better life for themselves, their families and their future generations.

Leave it to the ham-handed and limited focused Bush Administration to come up with a horrible approach to dealing with these immigration issues. Sending 6,000 National Guardsman to patrol the border of Mexico to stop illegal immigration is as dumb as having 140,0000 troops patrol post-war Iraq to “keep the peace”. All that’s being done is putting these patriotic, heroic men and women in harms way who will have little or no effectiveness in their stated mission. What the Bush Administration is trying to do is combine two separate issues and provide a solution to neither: protecting homeland security by catching terrorists at the borders and reduce the flood of immigrants to the American Southwest and South. The Bush Administration is very good at taking every issue and saying that 9/11/2001 changed how the US should approach it and then provide policy approaches that benefit big business and do the opposite of what any form of rational policy for the issue should be.

Let’s get real, real fast. Many of the immigrants are doing jobs that most Americans don’t want to do, manual labor such as landscaping, construction, security and cleaning. Working at Starbucks and McDonalds is preferable to these forms of work for many young workers. The US economy benefits by the immigrant's services, because they do their jobs “more efficiently”, to use the asinine standards of the US Department of Labor in defining worker productivity. Since most of these workers are here illegally, they get paid under the table, so no employer share of Social Security is paid, and no other benefits are paid, so the productivity (worked performed divided by cost per hour) is greatly increased. These workers are not just hired by small businesses, either. Look at who is cleaning the floors at night in the buildings of large corporations. Latinos will soon become the largest ethnic group in the US and either the rest of us accept that and adjust or run the risk out being treated as a minority. Canada isn’t willing to import that many more Americans.

What makes sense is to declare a worker’s amnesty and issue guest workers cards to those who are working hard and just getting by. Let having a guest worker card allow them to apply for drivers licenses.They have to get to work in the suburbs, too. The bigger challenge will be to increase the number of teachers of Spanish and for corporations to provide Spanish speaking courses for their American workers and ESL classes for their immigrant guest workers. What also makes sense is to increase investment in Mexican industry under the Maquiladora program of NAFTA and increase foreign aid to Mexico and other South American countries to boost their economies. This serves a dual purpose: help them provide jobs so that their people don’t need or want to come to America and increases the market for US goods and services - sort of a South American Marshall Plan.

However, the long-standing paranoid strain in American politics, continued to be exploited by the Bush Leaguers, will prevent such a plan from being considered at this time, let alone being enacted into law and put into action. It would require sacrifice from the rich. It’s easier to force more sacrifice from our soldiers as the poor substitute.

TRD101 knows this: Each new generation of immigrants has enriched and strengthened the American economy, but also the American society by reminding us of what the real basic values this country was based. They are to be embraced and assimilated, not forced to work in fear and shame. It’s to all our benefit. Our forefathers and ancestors would expect no less from us. So would my grandfather, rascal that he was.

And that is The Real Deal 101 for today, like it or not.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Send your comments and questions or to be added to TRD101's distribution list to: mikemaynard@mindspring.com

You can read TRD101's work and participate in a group discussion at: www.blogger.com and enter TRD101, where it asks for which blog you want. Please feel free to forward this column to your friends, romans and countrymen, as appropriate.

© Copyright Michael Maynard, TRD101, May 2006.