I read David Brooks column in the New York Times this morning. The Times still gives me plenty of material to analyze and consider, even if it is only a vestige of its old 'get them the objective news and get it to them right now' self. David Brooks wrote a very fetching article about dignity and manners, and how we have, as a culture lost both of those things. He used the incidents of Governor Sanford's blatheringly stupid comments about his own infidelity, Micheal Jackson's conduct of a child-like life, and finally Sarah Palin's applied confusion about life itself, as his examples of a culture gone to the dogs. There is no dignity left, he asserts. There are no manners, public or private, which are consistently followed or applied. It is all out here right in front of us. Brooks rails against self-promotion, even to the extent of running for the office of President of the United States (that insults the dignity of the candidate). But then he turns, in typical, and very modern Republican form, to use Ronald Reagan as an example of a relatively current public figure who had dignity. A bigger self-promoter there never was, except maybe P.T. Barnum, but that is ignored by Brooks.
The entire neo-con rant by Brooks is about being wealthy. You can ignore everything if you are wealthy. You do not need help, or money, or even much in the way of relationship, if you have enough money. That is the man's basic forlorn tenant. He harkens back to a day, George Washington's, to be exact, when a man like our first President could exercise all of the well-mannered characteristics of not promoting himself or herself, speaking when spoken to, standing when spoken to, and, of course, not requesting or even accepting help from anyone. That George Washington was extremely wealthy is not mentioned at all.
You read an article like the one I am discussing and the material almost sounds rational. You almost pine for those old days when such great-seeming principals of conduct supposedly ruled all of social life. Until you begin to think about it. Washington's family had droves of slaves and tons of servants. I wonder how they conducted themselves with respect to the 'rules of dignity.' There were throngs of struggling new Americans trying to barely get by or survive on subsistence farming or in slave-like manufacturing jobs. We still had bond-servant versions of slavery all over the countryside. What a load of dignity they possessed, and displayed.
Today, we are all trying to make it. We are trying to feed our families, just like before. There is absolutely no dignity whatever in not paying your bills or being foreclosed on. None. Not one shred. Try it, if you think there is. I encourage anyone in dire financial straights to self-promote the hell out of him or herself. I absolutely encourage them to ask for assistance from their friends and family before putting their children in shelters or onto the mean streets of our downtown cities. Dignity be damned.
David Brooks is wealthy. Can you tell?
http://www.jamesstraussauthor.com
http://www.themastodons.com
http://www.from-the-chateau-dif.blogspot.com
For me it's coming down to what we are preserving- or attempting to preserve- I think the bad far outweighs the good here- and I believe that if Obama sidesteps this it will be his downfall.
President Obama will forever be linked to the Bush Torture Coverup and our great victory over the establishment will be torn down.
"It's a trap are you blind?" (Hamish) ~Braveheart
A JOURNEY FROM PAIN TO PASSION
My Passion is to make a significant contribution to Changing the Face of Dementia Care in our society and to be an advocate for all seniors with dementia in their quest to maintain their Basic Human Right to Dignity, Choice and Quality of Life until their death.
My own mother, Evelyn Holly, passed away 11 years ago and spent the last 7 years of her life being bounced from one nursing home or residential dementia facility to another and in and out of hospital geri-psych units, because of her so called "challenging and aggressive behavior". The last year of her life she spent, strapped in a chair and drugged to make her "compliant" in her environment. I imagine many of you have had similar experiences.
After many years of heartache and frustration struggling to find appropriate care for my own mother, and after being told repeatedly by others in the healthcare industry, that the kind of dignified care that I visualized, was impossible since it was TOO EXPENSIVE, I found I could not find any financial support for trying something different. I decided to use my own life savings to try to develop a model of specialized dementia care that would focus on the currently unmet emotional and spiritual needs of persons with dementia, who have become unable to communicate those needs, in addition to their physical needs.
I left my job as a Regional Sales Manager for a BBQ Rib company, and at 55 became the founder, owner and CEO of Lakeview Ranch Inc, a place where people with dementia, and their families, could call home and where they could live out their lives with the love, dignity and quality of life they deserve. Today we have 2 rural residential homes in MN, with 80 highly skilled staff that do very specialized dementia care that meets our resident's emotional and spiritual needs in addition to their physical needs. We focus on each resident's remaining abilities, allowing for the highest quality of life possible, while maintaining dignity and individual choice. It is truly amazing what can be accomplished when people with vision and passion work together!!! Read on to see the rest of the story!
WE CAN CHANGE THE HEALTHCARE DELIVERY SYSTEM FOR PERSONS WITH DEMENTIA! LETS SHOW THE NEW ADMINISTRATION HOW ITS DONE! SHARE YOUR STORY! Frustrations AND Successes.
Hello, I just want to mention some observations I'm making in this blogging space:
The tone changed considerably. Ok, the race is won and everyone is happy and not so urgent any more. What struck me, however, was the tone we all have towards the guy who set all this up:
"Dear Mr. President-Elect"; "The President should"; "Dear Mr. Obama, as you are not the president, ..."
Before it often was just like: "Hey, Barack, why don't you bash McCain more on healthcare"
Wow, what this office does to the way people see you, people talk to you. I wouldn't have immagined it after all the current president did to the office. I think that this was one reason the election went the way it did:
Firstly, people wanted, almost needed, someone in the white house who can speak not only coherently (which was not always the case in the last 8 years) but also with dignity and weight. Thus, the at times preaching tone of Barack Obama contributed to his popularity.
Also, the calm and focused seriousness we saw during the economic meltdown and in the debates: It dignified everything Obama did and said. Another aspect of a respect-able person in the white house, as well as a clue that this guy will think before he acts and try to make really good decisions.
Thirdly, Barack Obama looks good and does so in a modern way. McCain was partly too old fashioned. But this "overall bodily impression" of McCain was also drawn down by his aimless wanderings during the second debate. And although I do respect the wounds and scars of the old man, his obviously impaired way of walking and his handicap in his shoulder probably didn't do him good. Nobody in their right mind would have consciously based their judgement and vote on this - but I guess it does work with the unconscious part of the decision-making of all voters.
Lastly: Mr. Obama was sure not only to bring dignity back to the white house - which McCain would have done as well, only differently - Obama is the one who gives brings America back to the hearts of the peole in the world. Apart from some stupid russian politicians, I think every leader in the world is more likely to be friendly towards America now that America has this man as her president.
Good decision, America!
Greetings from Germany
It's very important that Obama08 conduct ourselves in the manner of Obama, with dignity and restraint. We've seing the lies, manipulations, almost Hitler style rhetoric coming out of the McCain camp, and we must hold McCain responsible for his camp's action. Let's not use derogatory descriptions that reflect negatively on women, most women find such phasing offensive, even if they are not directed at them personally. Let's take the high road.
Let's get on the bankdwagon with Senator Obama to become creative in developing jobs, health care reform, banking regulations and all things that will put America back into a Super Power position. Obama cannot do it by himself. I am looking forward to developing, or a resurge of my own business in order that I may employ at least 5 people. Obama supporters are no push over, but we will always show dignity and restraint.
We cannot expect Obama to solve the mess we're in, while we sit on the sidelines. Ask not what Obama can do for us, but what we can do for Obama to help build America.
Was it just me, or did John McCain seem dismissive when he called Barack Obama “that one”?
If I had to choose between John McCain and Barack Obama, I would choose THAT one. When it comes to Barack Obama:
Maybe John McCain is right. Barack Obama is the one. That’s the one for me.
OK I can't keep my mouth shut any longer... I will start with the most recent thoughts first.
This morning Ms. Palin said the following: "Tonight we will see the difference between a politician who puts his faith in government and a leader who puts his faith in you (the people)." People cheered when she said that. If I am not mistaken it is Barack who puts his faith in people. It is Barack who has said, right from the beginning, "I'm asking you to believe. Not just in my ability to bring about real change in Washington...I'm asking to believe in yours." I think that we should all talk about how Ms. Palin is supporting Barack...after all isn't that a natural conclusion from the above?
Many people today commented, on the 'inciting' language of Ms. Palin in her recent appearances. What I would like to understand is why, if she didn't denounce it, the Secret Service didn't step in and remove the person making the threats.
OK, and now let me go back to my reactions to the VP debate last week. Overall what is one of the fundamental differences between the us and them is that we assume the best about people and I do not believe that they do. We operate consistent with the belief that people are intelligent and caring beings. Is there a way for us to share these beliefs openly with their base and those that are undecided in a way that it makes a difference? Do people care that others believe them to be less intelligent? My suspicion and experience is that people perform to your level of expectation. When you raise your expectations - like for a student - and talk to them from that place people respond in the most positive of ways. Perhaps all we need to do is speak to their hearts and the minds and treat them with the respect and dignity and intelligence that the McCain/Palin campaign is not?
I watched the debates tonight. I, like so many other Obama supporters, was pleased with his performance. Post-debate debating is not my style. There are others who are much better at that than I am. Still, something formerly "un-crystalized" labeled itself for me tonight.
I have been trying to figure out why the man comedian Chris Rock defined as "the guy with one house" is so often tagged as an elitist and an unknown quantity. I don't know why his resume is so easily forgotten and his passion for people--his facility with candid, unrehearsed conversation--seems over the head of some people in the press. He has been on message from the start, and he is accused of flip flopping. He is mocked for being smart. He has worked with the poor, but his hands aren't dirty enough. He's too black for rural white folks, too white for urban black folks, too educated for "joe six-pack," too mean and arrogant, too nice and gentlemanly...
What are some people looking for that they have not seen? I see a real, confident, and consistent guy. I see a man who cares about people. I see a person who clearly respects women if his choice of a mate is any indication. I see a man of judgement and clear leadership capabilities. I see a man who is not afraid to tell the truth as he sees it. I see a man who looks you in the eye and weighs outcomes, is reasonable and intelligent.
What are people who mockingly call him "the professor" or "unconnected" and "out of touch" missing?
Then it hit me. It's not that they are missing something. It is that they are SEEING something that they don't recognize, so they have mislabeled it and mishandled the man in the process. In all fairness to them, they don't recognize it because they haven't seen it in a very long time. It has become a faint memory in American politics, and in too many day to day lives.
It is DIGNITY.
Barack Obama has refused to dumb himself down in the face of people who mock his Harvard education because it is a part of who he is as much as his upbringing with a single mother. He is not going to pander to lazy observers who are waiting for all the buzz words and pat answers. He's going to give fresh, well-thought out responses to their questions and make them think; something that is fast becoming an annoyance in our culture. He has said more on race--and on his race--than any candidate in history. But he has the wisdom not to let himself be defined as simply "the black guy running for president," or the president of black America, blue-state America, or pro-choice America.
He is not "proud." He is dignified. He manages to appreciate and express all that he is, not just what will impress others. He is a man with struggles and stories, and hardships. Dignity has taught him that they are too precious to be peddled for votes, but he has talked about them. I know about them.
If you don't know him, you haven't been looking at him, his family, his record, or taken him at his word. If you don't trust him, it might be because he is challenging your assumptions or your long-held beliefs. If you think he's weak, I am certain it is because you only know one way to fight and he is pushing back at your imagination.
He is not a pugilist, looking for a cut to exploit or willing to win by any means necessary. That is yesterday's game. That is yesterday's leader.
It was clear to me that Barack Obama was in a contest tonight. But his weapons were reason and rational thought. His emotion was firmly rooted in his convictions and understanding, and not in temperament and snarky disrespect.
Obama is not a bully. That fact alone speaks volumes. America's greatness was once imbedded in the power of her example. Today it has been reduced to brandishing examples of her power.
Patriotism should not always drive us to war. Passion is not always expressed in bluster. Politicians are not always leaders. And great leaders do not always carry a big stick. Ask Ghandi, Lincoln, Mother Teresa, MLK Jr., Bono, and Mattie Stepanek. Ask Barack Obama.
Barack Obama was the cooler head, the reasonable debater, the communicator, the resonant. He didn't sneer. He managed to prevail without personalizing the conflict or disrespecting his opponent.
I heard one commentator say, with some disdain it seemed, that Obama appeared "above it all." Is it possible that he was actually engaged in the right kind of "fight" finally?
Has anyone considered that for too many years, American politics has been "below it all"?
I'm mad as hell and I can't take it anymore!
The Republicans has got to be kidding, right? After eight years of a man who cannot pronounce "nuclear" and an invisible VP, they offer us McCain and Palin as a viable option? As a poster at the MSN site said yesterday, "I'd rather have four more years of the last 8 before I vote for them!" Amen!
If you take some time to review the information on this site, you too will realize that Barack Obama and Joe Biden offer us the only chance to return the United States of America to its former place on the world stage: as a leader on critical issues and technology development, a conscience on moral issues, and a force when asked to be a force, not when we choose to be one.
Intelligence. Dignity. Vision. Three things we have never been more in need of! Three things in ample supply in the ticket of Obama/Biden!
Make this November the gateway to a future that all Americans can be proud of!
Dr. J
I spent years representing this great country in international trampoline athletic events all over the world - in about 20 countries. I did my best to represent my country with dignity and grace. I did so by playing fair, impressing with my talent and hard work, accepting success with humility, earning World Titles and, finally, making friends with everyone I worked with the world over, regardless of where they were from.
I competed internationally from the early 70’s to early-eighties and after a 12 year hiatus, one last time in 1994. In the beginning, the US Team would always get the biggest cheers - roars! - from the international crowds during the Opening Ceremonies as we marched into the arenas. It made me so proud. That’s the kind of patriotism that only the lucky few get to experience. It overwhelmed me. I am truly blessed. It inspired me to train hard to be the best I could and to make the world proud of me, not just my country.
However, as the time went on, the applause faded. Then, in 1994, just after the first Bush era (1989-93), the cheers basically disappeared. It was disheartening. Today’s young trampolinists have never experienced the loud and exciting welcomes that I remember and as long aswe stay on this path, they never will. It’s sad.
However,there is hope that America will be loved again. Barack Obama is that answer. He understands what “Country First” really means. It means displaying respect world-wide, the way I know it. And NOT by fighting everyone that gets in his way. It’s about caring for others, not looking down on them. It’s about community, not individualism. It’s about sharing, not greed. We need that respect back.
www.leighhennessy.com/lagniappe/
I wrote what I think is a compelling post earlier, but I labeled it more than slightly intemperately. I used the "pimping out" phrase as a conscious homage to the mini - storm when an MSNBC host used it to describe Chelsea Clinton's campaigning. I'm not going to change the title - it is what I wanted to say then, and I do think that calling out a slepping infant for political points pretty much meets the connotation of pimping someone in the sense of shamelessly using them for your own gain. Anyways, it would be dishonest to retreat now. But I do want to take another look at Gov. Palin's assertion she would be an "advocate" for people with special needs - or at least some of them.
Initially, I'm not sure anyone is well served by high profile advocates whose only known qualification is the biological fact of having a child with special needs. I know that some parents are falling all over themselves at the idea of having "someone like them" in office. Personally, though, I have seen zero indication that Gov. Palin actually knows what the issues she will face as a parent of a DS child are, much less any grasp of the needs of people accross the special needs spectrum. Without that knowledge, power can often become a way of multiplying ignorance rather than enlightenment.
In fact, her own words show a pretty low level of knowledge about the people with special needs she claims to want to help:
"To the families of special-needs children all across this country, I have a message: For years, you sought to make America a more welcoming place for your sons and daughters. I pledge to you that if we are elected, you will have a friend and advocate in the White House."
There are at least three problems with that statement. First, many people with special needs object to the phrasing she uses. These aren't special-needs kids, or Down Syndrom kids, or autistic kids - they are kids with special needs, kids with Down Syndrome or kids with autism. That might seem like a little thing, but people centered language is one of the key issues to advocates in this area, as it grants people with developmental disabilities the same sort of basic dignity you would confer on any one else. They are, after all, kids first, and any condition they've been diagnosed with comes second.
Second, its technically the people with special needs, regardless of age, who need an advocate, not the parents. Parents are tremendous fighters for their kids, but they aren't looking for something for themselves. Rather, what they want is a better present and future for their kids. At the end of the day, it is the child or adult with special needs who should be the focus of any government attention, rather than making them supporting players in their own struggles. Again, putting the family over the child or adult suggests that they are somehow not people first.
Third, children with special needs do eventually become adults with special needs. They don't stop having needs or needing advocates, though. To the extent they can, they often advocate for themselves, but they need assistance at 22 (and 33, and 44) every bit as much as they do at 2. Arguably, even more so, since by that age many of them will no longer have parents around to help them in their struggles and the world tends to be far less generous to adults with behavioral or developmental problems than it is to children.
I really don't know what to think about the narrow nature of this statement. Is it a reflection of ignorance, or does she really think children are the only people at issue here? Maybe her speech writer Mike Scully just doesn't have a clue how to discuss the issue? No matter the reason, the implications of this cramped understanding of the issue bothers me.
Assuming for the moment that her whole focus is children with special needs, that doesn't suggest she'll be a good advocate for that community, either. I don't doubt her commitment as a mother. I'm sure she will fight for her kid tenaciously, as virtually all parents do, and parents of kids with special needs almost universally have to in order to get a fair shake in a world that still doesn't like to acknowledge that a person with special needs is a person first. I also don't doubt, given her willingness to be so open about his condition (unlike so many other issues she has been questioned on) she will raise the profile of Down Syndrome. However, I doubt the ability of anyone in a McCain administration to effectively advocate for the needs of special needs children, much less the special needs community as a whole. Doing so would require a wholesale reversal of fundamental tenets of the GOP, central policy goals of the McCain campaign and McCain's own words.
Initially, the GOP is known as the party of "small government" and "states rights." Ignoring the areas in which this isn't true (defense, social restrictions, etc.), a typical GOP approach will make advocacy for folks with special needs at a federal level pretty pointless. Right now, states are the primary aid deliverers for special needs people, not the Federal Government. The states get matching funds under Medicaid, but they have to commit to the initial funding levels. As a result, whether you get services at all, how quickly and at what level, is a local issue, not a national one. Some states can and do offer 40 hours a week of therapy for most kids with autism in their state, but may have nothing for kids with other developmental disabilities. Indiana has a 8+ year long waiting list for core services for children with autism, despite having dedicated funds for that category of person. Moreover, once people hit 18 ("age out" in the parlance of the system) the availability of the services they had as children is subjected to a different set of factors and calculations, oftentimes resulting in significant alterations in the level of care provided. Barring a complete reversal of the core Republican belief system, I can't see how a McCain adminsitration could ensure a level playing field for all people with special needs.
Owing to the lack of any universal provision of services, one of the things people in the special needs community, especially parents, are constantly fighting against are threats to their insurance coverage. Insurance companies consider most developmental disabilities "pre-existing conditions" and unless there's a state mandate in place, won't cover people with conditions like autism or Down syndrome at all. They are in business to get more from you in premiums than they pay out in care, after all, and that just doesn't happen when you are dealing with people with special needs. When companies do cover these conditions - typically because they are forced to by state law - the key therapies that help children and young people with these conditions often aren't covered, or only at a level that isn't effective according to prevailing research. The one way I know of right now to get decent coverage is if you are lucky enough to work for a company with good benefits, where the cost drain of your kid averages out with everyone else.
John McCain's central healthcare reform would make this harder, not easier. He wants to tax company insurance benefits to encourage people to seek individual plans. By comparison there is a tax credit if you give up your employer credit and buy your own, a blanket number that is about half the current cost for a "typical" person. The stated rationale for this plan is that it will eventually lower costs for people by increasing competition in the private market. If all people were equally attractive to insure, true competition might occur. However, there will be no incentive for companies to compete to cover people who are less than desirable to insurance companies as clients, at least not without charging them much more. While Elizabeth Edwards has pointed out the general problems with this model for people with pre-existing conditions, the problems for people with special needs are arguably more acute. I have yet to meet anyone from an insurance company that wants to cover, much less compete to cover, children or adults with special needs. There is no mandate in McCain's plan to force companies to cover everyone or some kind of Federal alternative. Instead, he wants states to create last gasp coverage plans like they have for high risk drivers. There doesn't seem to be any good model for these systems, or any one blueprint that states would be expected to follow. At best, a lot of people with special needs who don't get Medicaid funded services right now would wind up confronting a system just as crazy-quilted and inconsistent as the people who do have such services. At worst, people will die from inadequate care and lack of access to services. It really is that simple and horrifying.
McCain's educational policy is also troubling for people with special needs. While he does claim to support fully funding IDEA (the statute that is supposed to fund special ed in America) that hasn't happened in the entire time the law's been on the books. Republicans seem to always find a way to cut, rather than enhance, special ed funding at a Federal level. Because IDEA isn't fully funded, the services public schools legally have to provide for students with special needs often come out of general funds. Given this fact and the budgetary pressures schools are currently under, schools will push to limit special ed costs whenever to they can - which is just about any time a parent doesn't insist on the services legally required. Coupling that with his advocacy for vouchers and "school choice" creates a truly scary scenario. While he hasn't actually proposed to fund vouchers anywhere but in DC (because after all that would be "fiscally irresponsbile"), if such a plan were to become widespread it would likely mean that special education funding would be crippled further. That's because private schools typically won't take kids with behavioral problems or who need special assistance in accessing the curriculum - i.e., children with special needs. While there are schools geared towards these kids, most parents just can't afford them with or without vouchers. So in most cases there would be a higher concentration of kids with special needs in public schools with fewer funds to pay for them. Vouchers are an idealogical tenet of the GOP, and again I see no reason Gov. Palin would or could change that.
While John McCain just lambasted the failures of Washington, there's no indication the way No Child Left Behind treats kids with special needs is one of those failiures in his book. Because the system is geared towards rewarding school mandatory test scores and not looking at progress generally, schools are under pressure to boost their averages. Right now, they can and do try to excuse children with special needs from taking the tests, typically under a claim the child can't fully access the curriculum. However, if a child is thus excluded from a mandatory test, in many states the child cannot graduate from high school (they get a certificate of attendance, not a diploma), even if they otherwise have passed required subjects. That, in turn, bars the child from most higher education programs, including both college and vocational schools. Limiting the career options of people with special needs to protect a test average is hardly in keeping with the core belief underlying NCLB that we need to enhance educational opportunities. Again, though, the GOP has resisted calls to move away from the all or nothing test model, and I have no confidence in McCain to suddenly change the one thing Republicans have succeeded as selling to many people as a domestic success in the last decade.
Finally, there is one critical area of advocacy for people with special needs, primarily adults, where proposed Federal assistance would really help. Unfortunately, John McCain is personally and unequivocally on record as opposing that assistance. For a long time, getting state services with the highest level of care meant a person with special needs had to be placed in what are called State Operated Developmental Centers. For example, children would become wards of the state, taken from their families and placed in these centers where they would stay for the rest of their lives unless the family or the adult person with special needs chose to forego the care. I can only imagine the gut wrenching choice it had to be for parents to put minor children in these settings, and for adults to have to stay there.
SODCs were the state of the art in their time, based on prevailing understanding of the capacities of people with special needs. However, their time has generally passed, as our society has become much more aware of the potential of such people to be vibrant, full members of the communities they live in. SODCs are not the type of setting most people would ever want to live if they had another choice. Residents typically live in dormitory type settings, with severe restictions on their privacy and the personal goods they can have. Since Medicaid limits the income they can have, this only enhances the limitations on creature comforts. They eat in mess hall/cafeteria settings with limited input into their dietary intake. They have lockdown at night for security reasons and the grounds are typically fenced and patrolled. While family can certainly visit, they are not typically allowed to stay overnight. Residents also typically don't have individual caregivers, but rather are collectively assisted by a rotating staff. That, in turn, limits the ability of any person to individually go anywhere off grounds, because the institution can't spare staff to make sure they get back. Imagine, for example, being an adult who just wants to go across the street to a convenience store and buy a snack for yourself, and being told you can't because you can only run errands when a group goes on an outing. For that matter, imagine being someone with an average or above average intelligence, as many people with special needs are, and being told you can't walk to the end of your street, much less take a bus to a job or meet a friend for lunch. If this sounds a little like prison to you, imagine how it feels for the residents.
There is supposed to be a training element to SODCs, too, but it typically isn't focused on life skills that would help someone live in a community setting or have what most of us would consider a "real job." Rather, in many cases the institution will run what is known as a "sheltered workshop," where menial tasks are done day after day. These are things like stuffing envelopes for mass mailings, or putting together piecework under private contracts. While it is work, and something to do, it hardly expands the minds of the residents or challenges them. The residents do get paid, by the way - but not even the minimum wage. Again, not exactly what most people would choose. But the states argued for years that the residents had no choice - they either had to accept residential services or get nothing at all.
This practice of a one sized fits all model with no provision for choice by the individual was struck down by the Supreme Court in the Olmstead case several years ago. As a result, in theory states are supposed to have to place a person in a setting of their choice, so long as it costs the same or less than placing them in the facility would. Some states create a pool of money and let the person use it as they and their case manager feel best fits the person's needs. Others have contracted to provide enough group homes that they have managed to shut all their SODCs. Still others, though, are just beginning the process of creating transition plans and beginning to create a full spectrum of choices. Sadly, many states lacking the political will to do anything have had to be harried along by lawsuits to even make partial progress.
Just as sad has been the lack of assistance to states by the Federal government in carrying out this transition. While the ADA mandates that people with disabilities and special needs be given reasonable accomadations and treated in the manner that creates the least intrusive environment, there has been no funding to back this up and really give states a push in the right direction. Tom Harkin, the primary author of the ADA, has sought to rectify this. In a bill called the Community Choice Act, he, joined by Sens. Obama, Spector, and about 20 others, lay out provisions to enhance Medicaid funding for community based settings (to get for folks out of both SODCs and Medicaid funded nursing homes), create funding for state pilot programs and otherwise provide the foundation so that maybe, just maybe, the life a person with special needs can live and the basic dignity they can have won't be tied to their state of residence.
John McCain, who did help pass the ADA 18 years ago, is on record as opposing this bill. He was asked about it by a self advocate in one of his town halls and was less than pleasant in rejecting it. He offered no reason for his opposition at the time. On July 26 of this year, despite suggestions from staff that he had come around on this issue of basic dignity, he took the opportunity on the 18th anniversary of the ADA to again reject the bill.
The reason? Cost.
Never mind the savings in shutting down out of date institutions. Never mind the cost in lost productivity and wages people with special needs could help generate for our economy. Without any meaningful analysis of the full ramifications of the situation, he simply rejected the idea of federal money being spent in this manner as too costly.
This is an amazingly callous view, given McCain's oft repeated story of his own confinement. He has movingly described how the loss of his freedom drove him to the very brink of despair and thoughts of suicide. Yet he apparently has no compassion for the toll similar restrictions and confinements impose on people with special needs every day. It is said a society is judged by how it treats the least powerful of its members. In John McCain's view of America, the cost of treating people with special needs with basic dignity and respect costs too much. Given that view, and the fact that he has repeated his position in the face of fervant advocacy by people with special needs, I don't see how the mere fact that Gov. Palin is the parent of a child with special needs can make her or a McCain Administration the sort of advocate people with special needs deserve.
Our campaign announced the release of its second television advertisement for the general election today. This ad, entitled "Dignity," will begin airing in eighteen states across the country underscoring Senator Obama's commitment to being an advocate for workers and children.The ad highlights Senator Obama's decision to bypass big money jobs and help lift neighborhoods stung by job loss. It illustrates Senator Obama's record of working hard to move people from welfare to work, passing tax cuts for workers and providing healthcare for children.Watch the ad here…
Here is the script of the ad...
I'm Barack Obama, and I approve this message.Announcer: He worked his way through college and Harvard Law.Turned down big money offers, and helped lift neighborhoods stung by job loss. Fought for workers' rights.He passed a law to move people from welfare to work, slashed the rolls by eighty percent. Passed tax cuts for workers; health care for kids.As president, he'll end tax breaks for companies that export jobs, reward those that create jobs in America.And never forget the dignity that comes from work.
June 6th.
I just heard from CNN about the meeting between ms Hillary Rodham Clinton and mr Barack Obama. Personal and informal, I understood. Assessing the damage done.
This is wat americans call, I guess, "walking the extra mile". To meet as concerned and involved politicians and, before all, human beings. It reminds me of a song from another great american, Zimmerman, known as Bob Dylan: "have you seen dignity ?" Yes. This is seeing dignity.
And after shamefull years and despicable poilitical maneuvering, the USA has a reason, two reasons, so many reasons, to be proud again. Do you know the songs of Leonard Cohen ? He is visiting our country, The Netherlands, these days. And I hope he will sing for us that fabulous song: "democracy is coming to the USA".
Thanks for opening not only for the american people, but also for the people here in Europe, a perspective onto a changing political and more humane future.
God Bless.
Andrea The Netherlands
In a conversation I had today, someone I consider to be politically astute told me he was going to vote for Obama because he is articulate. After years of being embarassed by the president, I look forward to listening to speeches that are presidential. I don't know what David Letterman will do about his very funny spot highlighting Bush's bumbling speeches. I don't know if we'll miss laughing about a president. (a laugh is always good)
However, I look forward to having dignity restored to the White House.
I am BUMMED that I am not in Pennsylvania using my time to help Barack Obama's campaign.
Someone from Pennsylvania - who is not in Women for Obama - called me after it was too late for me to get to the Women for Obama event and told me that there was housing for volunteers that he knew of in that great state. I have tasks here in California that I would gladly have postponed in order to work for something more important than the blankety-blank 'stuff' of my life that can surely wait. Time is of the essence for Barack Obama and I'm still on the sidelines. It's really tough when you know you have much to offer but the path between where you are and the position where what you have to offer could be optimally used is strewn with impassable obstacles.
O WELL.
Recently I read an article about how HRC was fired for lying and other unethical behavior BACK WHEN she worked for the committee that ran the Watergate investigation; this information came from the person who fired her. I read another article that described other incidents in HER PAST that are indicative of someone with a character that is not what most Americans would expect in their leader.
I don't like watching debates and I didn't watch the most recent one. I'm glad I didn't. When I saw the L.A. Times front page the next day I was glad I hadn't watched the "debate"...ABOUT BARACK OBAMA'S PAST! I realize that Barack is too classy a gentleman to stoop to "debating" at the low level at which his opponent feels comfortable, and his campaign staff are likewise restraining themselves. I, however, would not mind if the voters who have not had the opportunity to read what I have read were made aware of the full scope of HRC's PAST so they could make truly a INFORMED choice between the two Democratic Senators.
As a matter of fact I would not mind bringing about that awareness - if I can get some help in finding the best way to disseminate JUST THE FACTS, MAM...'the truth, and nothing but the truth' - in order to at least achieve a balance, if certain people want to discuss someone's PAST.
Barack is committed to maintaining the dignity of his campaign and I admire that. But be advised Mrs. C: You've got my dander up. So it's the past you want discussed, huh? Because he has pledged to have his campaign staff and himself remain on the high road, the best qualified candidate in this contest won't sling mud as his Democratic opponent is doing. But by golly, I am not on his campaign staff - I'm just a regular American who doesn't like the continuing low-minded tactics of Mrs. C and her hubby in trying to get her nominated, so I can!
YES I CAN!
[What follows is an open letter to Barack and his team of Economic Advisers, that I will be taking with me to the Chapel Hill, North Carolina meeting of Barack's North Carolina Economic Forum.]
Dear Barack,Better than 'Bitter': "FOCUS '08"I will be attending the Chapel Hill meeting of your North Carolina Economic Forum on April 15, 2008.There, I will be urging you and your team of Economic Advisers to adopt into your campaign policy my proposition, FOCUS '08, a simple, yet powerful proposition that offers comfort to all working families who currently live in fear of losing their homes and jobs, or who feel they can't make ends meet because of rising food and gas prices (www.focusonpoverty.blogspot.com).FOCUS '08 declares that:'Every man, woman and child in the United States should have access to adequate food, clothing, housing and healthcare.'I am registered as an unaffiliated voter in North Carolina, and frankly, I consider myself to be undecided until the moment my pen hits the ballot paper. However, there is much about you and your camapign, Barack, that attracts me. Not least your obvious empathy with working people.
It is, therefore, as a friend of your efforts that I write this letter, and although painfully blunt (and something tells me you won't mind that!), it is offered solely in a spirit of helpfulness. So, to business:
It is a brave man, Barack, who advances an honest analysis of dire economic conditions, without immediately accompanying it with a concise summary of the uplifting policy that will address resolution - wrapped up in language that enrolls rather than offends.
This last point, in particular, should now be crystal clear in light of the temporary hiccup that has followed your 'bitter' speech last weekend.
Mind you, what you said was spot on - as an incisive checklist of the frustrations of working people in America. I should know. I am one of America's angry working poor.
It is only those who are truly elitist and out of touch who would suggest our anxieties do not exist, and who would deny that it is all too easy to find unhealthy ways to vent those anxieties - and that there are those who would feed on the latter fact.
Goodness knows it's nice to have a politician who has the guts to be honest and straightforward. But, to be equally honest, what was a little unfortunate, Barack, was your language, and the fact that you chose not to accompany the analysis with a simple breakdown of your recommended solutions.
Without wishing to appear too presumptuous, I hope you won't mind if I use the opportunity of the Forum meeting to help you out a tad, and offer a couple of ideas that might assist you in addressing both of these issues.
For some years now, America's working folk - whether in the cities or in the country - have watched helplessly as power-mongers and the elite in political and financial circles have caused the American economy wildly to ride the waves, and then to crash into the abyss.
Why helplessly? Because all this has meant for us is more jobs lost, more plants shut down, our homes under threat, prices rising, the bar continually raised and our lives constantly squeezed.
Democrats, to whom I have spoken, have openly wondered why, through all this, more and more of my working friends have found themselves turning to the likes of George Bush, and now John McCain.
I tell these Democrats that, at a time of seeming inability to cope, at a time when all seems so weak, it is easy to turn to the appearance of strength and experience - however false the promise of that strength and experience may be.
When you sense that your country has abandoned you, and there is little point in trying, it is too easy to find paths of escapism. One of the easiest is a political philosophy that says it's ok to take that anger and convert it into hatred and envy and revenge.
When we are told that the real problem lies overseas, it's all too easy to respond to a pseudo-call for patriotism and sense of duty, and to cheer on a war, even though we now know that war is both futile and dishonest - and, moreover, it is killing a disproportionate amount of the sons and daughters of our working familes.
And where have the Democrats been, to offer we working people an alternative? Why, trying their hardest to pack themselves into those same Republican clothes - but without packing any conviction.
The problem is, when you're a sheep in wolf's clothing, it's a bit difficult to look anything other than…well…sheepish.
Until you, Barack, came along.
I'd had a bad feeling about voting for some 20 years. You are the first American politician in that time who's making me look forward to voting in November.
Now. We've hit a glitch. It's not the end of the world. And this is what I suggest to you and your Economic Team going forward:
1) Adopt FOCUS '08. The working folk of this country deserve a rallying cry that offers them a safety net, while preserving their dignity.
This is true, not just for those of us who already struggle below the poverty line, but also for those who, through no fault of their own, feel that they may be next.
We did not create the housing and jobs crisis, or cause gas and food prices to rise.
2) Enroll these same good people, Barack, in the campaign to sell you, your policies and FOCUS '08.
Do not pity us. We are a proud people. Appeal to our better nature. Challenge us. Turn the tables on your opponents, and make an appeal to genuine patriotism and a real sense of moral duty.
Go so far as to put it in military terms, if necessary.
Offer us a deal - "A New Compact." Tell us boldly and bravely: 'You take care of your business at home, and we'll back you up, by taking care of our business in Washington.'
[I expand on this approach in a separate document of talking points, which can be found as the next post in this blog.]
Call on America's working men and women to support a "Citizen's Code": family, country and honor.
'We take care of our family first; then we help our neighbor; then the folk around us. Not because of a political slogan or a grand economic strategy, and not for personal gain or ambition, but because it's the honorable, the right thing to do.'
Meanwhile, holding up the other side of the compact, you, Barack, have to clean up Washington. Clear out the logjams, get the necessary bi-partisan support, prioritize action, and get us the help we need to support what we're doing on the home and family front.
FOCUS '08 can be a part of that. Take George Bush's slogan, and turn it against our opponents. Make that slogan ours - and make it apply to all Americans under a Barack Administration. 'We will leave no-one behind.'
I have my own political line for all of this: 'Taking Care of America's Family Values.'
So, Barack, come one, why not give it a try? Visit the web-site (http://focusonpoverty.blogspot.com), sign the Petition (www.thepetitionsite.com/petition/483881699), even buy the T-shirt (http://197491.spreadshirt.com).
But. Most important of all. Adopt FOCUS '08, and enroll America's working folk in its implementation.
[What follows are talking points for Barack in support of FOCUS '08. If you want a prettier hard-copy, please feel free to write to me at the e-mail addesss at the end.]
The proposition - FOCUS '08:
“Every man, woman and child in the United States should have access to adequate food, clothing, housing and healthcare."
The Rationale
No politician likes to be told upon whom they need to focus their attention, and how. It betrays weakness. I’m assuming you’re [Barack] as different as you say.
The demographic battleground in this election may well be the white working male – the ‘once upon a time’ Reagan Democrats. Reagan lured them with an appeal to their pride and patriotism. You need to appeal to the same pride, but to a different sense of duty.
Many are today scared of losing what they have. Of joining the millions of already working poor. They fear losing their jobs, their homes, but most of all their dignity. And there is the rub.
As much as they worry about rising food and gas prices, they are too proud to ask for help; to be considered part of any grand plan for the poor. So, you can’t openly offer them a helping hand.
Instead, you should ask of them that they be the ones to offer the helping hand to those of their neighbors who are already working poor. This gives them the opportunity to be selfless. Yet, see that there is a safety net for them too, if they should falter.
Whereas Bush takes their fear, and turns it into anger and envy and revenge, you allow them to be truly courageous, and change that fear into a determination to help themselves and their neighbors.
I call it A New FOCUS.
When you come to North Carolina, you are not going to be able to avoid the subject of poverty – not in John Edward’s backyard. FOCUS offers you a way of addressing the fears of working people, without telling them what they already know – they might be about to join the ranks of the working poor.
What follows is not so much a speech, as a series of possible talking points, to flesh out these preliminary thoughts.
“A New FOCUS”: Taking Care of America’s Family Values
1) A Safe and Strong America
I [that would be you, Barack] want a safe and strong America.
I don’t mean one like the Republicans want.
I want an America where every man, woman and child feels safe.
There are a lot of scared people in our country at the moment.
Scared of losing their job or their home. Scared of not being able to feed their children because of rising food prices. Or buy gas. Or put their clothes on their children’s backs, and pay to keep them healthy and strong.
There are millions of our friends and neighbors who already live in that nightmare. Working families who struggle every day with dignity and grace, but still fail to make ends meet.
You may be one of those brave folk. Or you may know of one. Or more. Indeed, and perhaps more to the point, you may be scared that you will be next.
This is not good enough. Our citizens. You. Your friends, your neighbors. Our servicemen fighting bravely abroad. Their families who remain at home. Our firefighters. Our teachers. Our friends who keep the lights on, the water running, and serve us at the gas station and the convenience store. All of us, we deserve better than this.
We all deserve the right to feel safe. To feel secure. To know that there is an adequate safety net if we should stumble for a moment.
And we politicians need to find the strength and willpower in ourselves to help you help yourselves and your friends and neighbors.
And it’s not just down to we politicians.
You know the hardest thing is to ask for help. To have the strength to ask for help. To have the inner courage to set aside false pride, and admit to oneself that one needs help. To have the courage to ask for it – so as to keep you and your family safe.
Now, I know a thing or two about asking for help. Some xxxxxxxx million of you have responded generously to my request for help with this peoples’ campaign of ours to make change a reality for all working Americans.
That takes almost as much strength – the willingness to respond. When you are facing difficulties of your own. To set those to one side. Recognize that there may be those of your friends or neighbors whose need for a helping hand is greater. That takes generosity of spirit, and true strength.
Helping them, without the need for them having to ask; without the need for a government program; or a political slogan. Just helping because it’s the decent thing to do. That takes real strength.
And here I don’t mean strength like some do. I don’t mean taking fear, and turning it into anger, and calling it patriotism. I don’t mean taking frustration, turning it into envy, and calling it duty. I mean real strength.
Real men don’t get angry. They get busy. They don’t find easy targets to attack. They do the truly difficult thing. The selfless thing. The less glamorous thing. They stay at home, and take care of business.
They take care of their families. And then they take care of their neighborhoods. And then they help to take care of the less fortunate around the country. That’s what real men do.
Now, our country can help. We politicians can help.
We can find the strength to speak the truth, to take bold action and to hold out a helping hand – not a handout; a helping hand. Offer all working folk, not a tax break – just a decent break.
The working people of America – ordinary folk, like you and me – we are proud.
We want to be able to look after our own.
We won’t beg. And we shouldn’t be made to.
I can’t promise to fix all the problems that are causing so much pain and fear today. Although I will address them if you give me the chance.
But I can pledge to you today that my Administration will live by the proposition that every man, woman and child in the United States should feel safe.
It’s central theme is that every man, woman and child in the United States of America will have access to adequate food, clothing, housing and healthcare.
2) What is Too Much to Ask?
Let me begin by telling you how I [that would be me, Geoff] came to FOCUS.
For two years, I lived with a working girl, let’s call her Toni, and her three children, who were 8, 5 and 2 years old.
We lived in Seneca, South Carolina, ironically the birthplace of John Edwards. Toni’s parents still live near Charlotte, North Carolina.
Toni lived every day in a cocktail of emotional and physical pain. Her husband of 10 years left her after promising that once he had finished college he would stay at home and look after the kids while she completed her degree in computing.
Never happened. Instead, two weeks after her third child was born, her husband upped and left her and the kids. He then spent 5 years trying to take the children away from her.
Toni went back to work, as the manager of a video department in her local supermarket. Her body had a chemical reaction to child-bearing that left her in so much pain that there would be days when I would find her hunched over on the floor of her department, labeling videos, the tears running down her face.
But Toni never, ever gave up.
She bore the pain. She fought for her kids. And won. She struggled at work. Against supervisors for whom disability and family commitment were one-line jokes, not rights guaranteed by American law.
I wondered so many times why she never gave up. If there would ever be a moment when she thought that this was all too much to ask.
And then, on a quiet Saturday evening, I’d peek in and see her singing gently to her 2-year old, as she washed him in the bathtub. I’d laugh as she yelled at the other two to stop fighting in the front room.
And I realized, with stunning clarity, that nothing would ever be too much to ask of this working parent. Everything was worth the struggle, if it meant that she had these few moments each week with her children.
So, what is too much to ask of each of us?
Toni is the strongest and bravest person I know. Braver than me. I didn’t have the strength to stay with her. That honor resides with her new husband, who works 2 to 3 jobs to try to help Toni make ends meet.
Toni is too brave, too proud to ask for her help. But I’ll ask for her. And for the millions of other working families who struggle with pride to make the world safe for their kids.
What is too much to ask? What is too much to ask to keep Toni and her husband and children, and every man, woman and child in America, safe and secure? Free from fear?
Of course, the naysayers will jump up and down and declaim that this will cost money.
Let’s be honest. Of course it will cost money.
If anyone out there knows of a way to guarantee that each of our citizens has the basic necessities of life without it costing money then I [Barack] will guarantee that person a job in my new Administration.
Ideological rants from talk show hosts won’t put clothes on backs, food in bellies, stop foreclosures or bring down the cost of gas.
Only money will do that.
And public money – your money. I will never forget that each and every dollar that government spends is a dollar that has come out of your pocket, the product of your daily sweat.
Your tax dollars have to lead the way.
Do you know that an increase in tax of 1% across the board – that is, 1% on every tax, from income tax, to corporation tax, to capital gains tax – 1% would raise some $200 billion a year.
$200 billion that we could use to begin the job of offering a helping hand to Toni, and all the working people like her, who currently live in fear in this, the richest country the world has ever known.
Is 1% really too much to ask to keep working families safe? Our friends’ families? Our neighbors’ families?
We can find the money to rebuild a country half a world away. Are we really saying that we can’t find the money to rebuild our own country?
Is this really too much to ask?
There are those who will claim that this is all 'their' fault. As if working families caused the housing crisis. As if working families caused jobs to move overseas. As if working families caused gas and food prices to rise. The Social Security fund to fall. The dollar to collapse.
C’mon. Government did this. And government has to lead the way in finding the answer. We can not and we will not pass the buck.
And anyway, enough of this finger-pointing and blame. I’m so tired of being told there’s only so much we can do – when ‘so much’ is so often just not enough; just too little.
We are a people of boundless generosity and unlimited vision and possibility. We overflow with optimism and hope. We have allowed ourselves for too long to be sold a bill of goods. We have for too long bought into the message of despair and pessimism.
I’m tired of a government that tells us it’s ok to have an economic policy based on greed; a social policy based on envy; and a foreign policy based on hatred and revenge.
Other politicians may tell you that we can be better. I say that we are better, right now [oops, back to being you, Barack, again!].
In my travels around America I have seen only warmth and generosity and hope towards all the people of this land.
I don’t think there is one caring American who would say that this is too much to ask.
3) What has Happened to Honor?
My [Geoff’s] Aunt in Grand Rapids, Michigan just died at the age of 84, after a 26-year battle with breast cancer.
Every day of her life, she was a practicing liberal, Democratic, Catholic. But ‘liberal’ in the old tradition. Before the Republicans made it a cuss word.
‘Liberal’ in the sense that she was brought up to believe that you cared and you gave back, without needing a political slogan or a government program to prod you. She gave because it was the decent thing to do.
What has happened to that sense of decency? That sense of duty and honor? When you do something because it is right; not because it brings you material reward or political kudos?
When we didn’t allow a bigot or a talking head to convince us that it’s all too much to ask, or that everything is doom and gloom?
We seem to have forgotten words like: honor, loyalty, responsibility.
We do terrible things, because we can, and because we can get away with them. Where is the self-control? Where is the little voice inside each of us saying, this is just plain wrong? There is a better way. It’s not too much to ask.
We do things to gain an advantage. For profit. For personal gain. For political gain.
So, we lie, we spin, we torture, we break our own rules. For that extra advantage. And we convince ourselves that’s it’s ok. Because of that extra advantage.
We do it for today. And we let tomorrow take care of itself. Without realizing that we have mortgaged all the financial 'tomorrows' of our kids and their kids. And we have held their consciences to ransom.
Yet, when that 'tomorrow' finally comes, we feel bad about ourselves. And we’ve been feeling bad about ourselves for a long time.
It’s time to start doing the right things. Just because they are the right things to do.
It’s time to start feeling good about ourselves. It’s time to cast away the doom merchants and say, it’s not too much to ask.
We see a friend or a neighbor in pain – someone like Toni – but we don’t help. We are still tempted to listen to the mean voice that says, ‘this is all pennies out of your pocket.’
It’s time to stop listening to that voice, and to start again to listen to the voice of our conscience – the voice of my Aunt – speaking, the voice that says, ‘it’s not too much to ask.’
To all those sensible voices that talk of ‘ the common good’ and ‘social responsibility.’
We have become a country of division and exclusion. When we are, in fact, a people that naturally includes.
That is the basis on which this great country was founded. That we welcome the poor and the huddled masses from other countries, and we include them in our society.
Let’s be no less inclusive of those who already live in our country.
No-one should be left behind. Not one man, woman or child. There should be a safe home for everyone in our country. We deserve no less.
It’s not a question of whether it’s too much to ask. The question is how much is too little to deliver.
It’s not so much that we need change, as we need a return to America’s true values.
Values based on social conscience and selfless good works.
Warmth and generosity that flow from the American heart, and the wisdom and intelligence of its working people.
Good deeds that are undertaken by good people – with a little helping hand from our tax dollars. Because it's not too much to ask.
4) Where are the Real Men?
[FOCUS arose out of a series of programs we did on our local community radio (WCOM 103.5FM Carrboro/Chapel Hill), following the catastrophe of Hurricane Katrina, in 2005. One of the questions posed to me was, how do you sell FOCUS to working stiffs who think it’s ok to vote Republican because George Bush is a ‘real man’ who straps on his boots and brings the oil home? This was my response. Like most of what I offer, it’s blunt.]
FOCUS: How to sell it
To whom are we selling “A New Reality” and FOCUS? First, to Merlot Democrats, who need to re-learn three things:
· The Democratic Party is supposed to represent the interest of ordinary Americans, who, more and more, are also America’s working poor.
· America’s working poor do not always want the same things that enlightened and educated 'Merlot' Democrats think they should want.
· The Democratic Party should, once again, become a Party of listeners.
Once that hurdle is negotiated, we need to focus our attention on winning back NASCAR Democrats, who are the working backbone of America – they keep the shop running.
My view is that you sell “A New Reality” and FOCUS both as tough love and as the ‘Real Deal.’
Bush Democrats think real men, real heroes go down to the VFW on a Friday night, down a few beers, and sing along with Toby Keith as he knocks the stuffing out of a few Arabs.
A ‘real’ Democrat would stand up and say that real men, real heroes stay home on a Friday night and take care of business.
They don’t steal their wife’s rent money, or skip out on child support. They take care of business. They buy the food. They help around the house. They give their hard-working wives a break.
They offer a helping hand to the guy down the street who’s fallen on hard times. They help the neighborhood, by looking after the environment. They take responsibility for their lives, their families, their neighborhood and their country.
The Marine motto is that no-one is ever left behind. Bush stole it for his education program. Democrats should take it back, and make it their war-cry for 2008 – in a Democratic America, no-one will be left behind. FOCUS should be the first shot in that battle.
It is being reported that 2005 will see the single largest leap in State revenues from tax since 1990 – some 7.2%. Already, Governors are talking tax cuts. This is nonsense.
1990 was the herald of the coming economic expansion. If we are about to undergo another economic growth period, then Democrats need to develop sufficient guts to say: enough of cuts; we will use that extra revenue to ‘invest’ in people in America.
That was the message that Tony Blair used in Great Britain to overturn 18 years of tax-cutting Conservatives. He had to promise that there would never be any tax increases, but that spending cuts and increasing tax revenues would be used to invest in people.
I think Democrats should take the Robert Kennedy approach, and go one further. They should say, irrespective of any increase in tax revenues, they would increase the rate of taxation, on both individuals and corporations, across the board, by 1% a year, for the four years of a Presidential administration.
America’s working poor, NASCAR Democrats do not want a tax break; they just want a decent break. They don’t want a hand-out; they merely ask for a helping hand. It’s not too much too ask.
We are the richest country the world has ever known. We have also regularly proven ourselves to be the most generous nation the world has ever known. If ever there was a time to rise, once again, to that challenge, it is now.
America’s people deserve more than an economic policy based on greed, a social policy based on hatred, and a foreign policy based on revenge.
It is time for the government to take care of its real business; for corporations to take care of real people; and for the people to take care of their real responsibilities.
That’s how you sell “A New Reality.” That’s how you sell FOCUS.
One final point: Rahm Emmanuel, the Chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, has predicted that it is highly unlikely that Democrats will regain control of Congress any time soon. There are simply not enough marginal Republican seats ups for grabs.
Change will come, therefore, only with a change in the White House. And Rudolph Giuliani and John McCain are looking more formidable than anything the Democrats have to offer – at least with their existing message.
[Oops. Remember, this was written in 2005. Mind you, I didn’t do too badly on the John McCain prediction!]
These ideas flow from my thoughts on FOCUS On Poverty 2008. But you can’t enroll working people into the concept by scaring them with the specter of their own possibly impending poverty. Instead, better to appeal to their sense of duty and honor. Hence, the morph into ‘A New FOCUS’.
You can find more at:
www.focusonpoverty.blogspot.com
www.thepetitionsite.com/petition/483881699 (to sign the Petition)
http://197491.spreadshirt.com (for the stylish T-shirts!)
And you can contact me at: 200 Barnes Street, Apt. B-18Carrboro, North Carolina 27510 (919)923-0096
geoffgilson@hotmail.com
