Category: Leaders & Decision-Making
A Thief is a Thief By Eric L. Wattree

By admin on Mar 30, 2010 | In Leaders & Decision-Making | Send feedback »
BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE
A Thief is a Thief - Even When it's the U.S. Postal Service
This article started out as a letter to Inspector General David C. Williams of the United States Postal Service. Then it occurred to me that the travesty of justice that's described below is much too serious to be dealt with as a single incident. This is a growing and systemic issue that is so blatant and egregious that I'm sure the OIG is well aware of it. It is also an issue that is such a looming threat to the American people that I decided it needed to be dragged into the light of day.
I recently found out that a friend of mine was the victim of repeated instances of forced labor and time fraud committed by her manager in the U.S. Postal Service. When I first became aware of it I was shocked, but not alarmed. I thought I could simply contact the OIG's office and have it, and the manager involved, taken care of. I was certain that the OIG would be anxious to investigate the matter and get the offending culprit out of their midst. But to my amazement it not only took two reports, but over a month before I was even contacted on the matter.
Then when I finally was contacted and explained to the OIG inspector, Special Agent Reid Robbins, that a postal manager, Marcie Luna, was forcing an employee to work between four and six hours a day without pay, and was committing fraud by falsifying a government document and changing the employee's official clock rings to reflect a three (3) hour lunch that the employee wasn't permitted to take, I was essentially met with a yawn.
"And who are you? How do you know this employee?" Then after we finally got past what felt like an interrogation to determine whether or not I had a right to NOT mind my own business, Agent Robbins went on to explain that the OIG's office generally doesn't investigate time issues - which was a blatant lie (they just don't investigate it when the government is doing the stealing).
Then after giving the matter further thought, I began to ask myself, "What kind of crime fighting organization doesn't fight crime?" It is my understanding that the Postal Inspection Service investigate external crimes against the postal service, and the Office of Inspector General investigate internal crimes within the postal service. So if the OIG doesn't investigate the intimidation and coercion necessary to force an employee to work six hours a day for free, or the falsification of documents necessary to steal an employee's wages, the OIG must not consider employee abuse a crime.
So I attempted to contact Agent Robbins at the number he provided, but he failed to return my calls, even after six attempts. So I decided to leave a message on his voice mail asking him the following questions: 1) Whose office would handle the matter if the situation was reversed, and the employee worked only eight hours and falsified her time to be paid for twelve? 2). Whose office would handle the falsification of government documents? And finally, is he going to investigate the matter, and will anyone be held accountable for the commission of this crime?
I have yet to receive a response.
But it doesn't stop there. The next day the employee involved called to advise me that Agent Robbins had contacted her. She went on to say that he seemed to be more interested in how she knew me than he was the crime that had been committed against her. She also said his tone was aggressive and intimidating, and he told her that when she accepted the job of acting supervisor, working overtime without pay came with the job - another blatant lie.
The National Association of Postal Supervisors advised me that a certified supervisor can be required to work a maximum of 30 minutes without pay (in emergencies), 204Bs (acting supervisors) who are covered under various craft employee contracts must be paid for every minute they work. We know this information to be accurate because if it wasn't, it wouldn't have been necessary for the manager to falsify government documents to achieve her objective, to rob the employee.
But even worse than giving the employee inaccurate information, and failing to investigate the complaint, Agent Robbins also revealed both the complaint, and the nature of the complaint to postal management, and that's supposed to be confidential information.
As a direct result, this highly productive employee who has held the same position for over twenty-one years - longer in the same position than any other supervisor, manager, or postmaster in the Los Angeles district - has been demoted by a manager who didn't even entered the postal service until six years after the employee was a productive supervisor. And even worse, while the manager, Ms. Marcie Luna, who had recently been demoted from area manager herself, was informing the employee of her demotion, she allegedly commented to the employee, "I just want you to see how it feels when the postal service doesn't appreciate all that you've done for them."
What!!? Is this manager actually saying that she wants the employee to suffer because she feels that she's suffered an injustice? How was the employee responsible for the manager's demotion?
In the interest of full disclosure, I became personally (but objectively) involved in this matter because I know it to be particularly egregious based on my personal knowledge of the employee involved. It also speaks directly to an issue that I've been addressing in many columns and is of particular interest to me - the negative impact of America's new business model on the middle class ( http://wattree .blogspot .com/2009/12/role-of-poor-minorities-and-middle.html). So while admittedly, I know the subject of this piece personally, the facts in this case alone clearly demonstrate the business community's full-throated assault on the America middle class.
The character of the manager and agencies mandated to protect the rights of the employee is revealed through the facts in this case, but what about the character of the employee?
Employee Background
I became involved in this case when the employee, Ms. Joann Snow, was acting unusually depressed. I became immediately concerned because I've known her for over twenty-five years, and what makes her most unique WAS her bubbly, Life's-a-bowl-of-cherries-type personality. Everybody loves her - especially in her workplace. Her superiors depended upon her because of her can-do, A type personality, and her subordinates would seek her out for council, knowing she could be depended upon to do the right thing (making sure they were properly paid, for example, or doing battle on their behalf with their immediate supervisors over injustices). In addition, she would donate her vacation leave every year to employees who became ill and ran out of sick leave, because she never found the time to take a vacation herself.
This woman was so highly depended upon by her superiors and dedicated to her job that for years she was working seven days a week just to cover their backs against any oversights. And since she had been in her current position for over twenty-one years - again, probably longer in one position than any other supervisor, manger or postmaster in the United States Postal Service's Los Angeles district - when the administrators needed any kind of information, or any issue addressed, in many cases they wouldn't bother with the station manager - those people would come and go - they'd wait until after 11:00 a.m. when Ms. Snow arrived so they could address the issue with her.
At this writing Ms Snow has voluntarily postponed a long needed vacation in order to train her own replacement so the postal service and the people they serve won't be negatively impacted by her departure. My response to that was to ask her if she was insane - but then, she lives by a different code of moral responsibility than I do.
So I think that answers the question of why our government, and particularly the postal service, is so dysfunctional. It's clear - because the wrong people are in positions of responsibility.
OIG Response
Agent Robbins handled this matter atrociously - both unprofessionally, and unethically. He also made a serious personal error. He made the mistake of thinking I was simply an employee reporting an injustice committed against a friend, which is partially true - I'm a former employee reporting an injustice committed against a friend. But I'm also a journalist.
I write a political column for several publications across the country, including the Los Angeles Sentinel and the Black Star News in New York, two of the most prestigious publications serving the Black community in the country. I'm also a staff writer for Veterans Today, a publication whose reach spans the globe. VT will be particularly interested in this case, because not only does government corruption and the assault on the middle class have a negative impact on returning veterans, but Ms. Snow's only son is a Master Sergeant in the United States Air Force. Thus, while he's off defending this nation, his very own government is both robbing and abusing his single mother who he's left behind at home.
So I intend to do my very best to put both the postal service, and the indifference of the OIG's office, on severe blast across this country. I also intend to move hell and Earth to see to it that this issue ends up on President Obama's desk, because this sort of institutional crime is not representative of America. Both of these United States government agencies are guilty of reckless and unconscionable behavior. They are both also guilty of failing to carrying out their respective mandates to protect the rights of the American people - especially our right not to be subjected to slave labor.
And let their be no doubt about it - this is not just an isolated attack against one postal employee. This is an institutional attack on the American middle class. It is in direct response to a new business model brought on by a global economy and the new world order. So if we fail to standup as a nation and fight back, it will eventially come knocking at all of our doors.
Part two of this series will address the negative impact that this criminal behavior is having on the postal service's ability to deliver the mail.
TO ALL POSTAL EMPLOYEES
If you are aware of any instances of time fraud being committed by the postal service, please contact me at Ewattree@Gmail.com. Giving in to fear and intimidation is not an option, because it's only going to get worse. It's time to bring this institutionalized crime against poor and middle class workers to an end. We must shine the light of day on this covert and increasingly routine business practice. As you know, it's been going on for years, and this is your chance to do something about it.
Eric L. Wattree
wattree .blogspot .com
Religious bigotry: It's not that I hate everyone who doesn't look, think, and act like me - it's just that God does.
President Jeopardizes What Lies Before Us By Eric L. Wattree

By admin on Mar 10, 2010 | In Leaders & Decision-Making | Send feedback »
BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE
Mr. President: By Refusing to Look Back, You're Jeopardizing What Lies Before Us
I undoubtedly have neither the information nor wisdom to question the vast majority of your presidential decisions. But it takes neither classified information, nor wisdom, to question your decision to "move forward and not look back" regarding the Bush administration's actions leading this nation into the Iraq War, and the alleged war crimes committed thereafter.
During your inauguration you swore that to the best of your ability you would act to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. Yet, your decision to circumvent the rule of law in response to the Bush administration's actions leading up to and during the War in Iraq does everything but that. Your position in this matter is diametrically opposed to one of the fundamental principles of this nation - that no one is above the law.
This is not a partisan issue, Mr. President. The concept of equal rights under the law (which also means equal consequences for the violating the law ) is both central to the United States Constitution, and a fundamental cornerstone of the American ideal. Without that concept - the concept that no man is above the law - America is no longer America. So by choosing to ignore that ideal, you're not only in violation of your oath of office, but you're striking a much more devastating blow against America than Al Qaeda could ever manage.
And I'm not speculating here. We've already seen the negative consequences of setting such a precedent. Hundreds of thousands of people have died just because we failed to hold Richard Nixon accountable for Watergate.
Had Richard Nixon been held accountable and sent to jail for Watergate, chances are Ronald Reagan wouldn't have embarked upon Iran/contra. And if Reagan had been impeached then imprisoned for his actions during the Iran/Contra episode - including flooding the inner cities of this nation with drugs (an action the Black community is still suffering from) - Bush and his cohorts would have been placed on notice that ANYONE who circumvents the laws of this land will face heavy consequences.
Thus, had Bush and Cheney known that America stood united and unequivocal in that stance, the War in Iraq probably never would have happened, which in turn would have saved the lives of thousands of American troops, and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi citizens.
One would think, Mr. President, that you would be particularly sensitive to the importance of adhering to the rule of law. While I'm in total agreement with your position that you were elected to be the president of ALL the people, there was no way you could avoid bringing the experience of the African American collective into the White House with you. That experience should inform you, in a very personal way, of the negative consequences of ignoring the rule of law.
Let me make it clear that I'm not one who subscribes to the belief that because you're a Black president that you owe Black people any more than you owe any other American. In fact, my article immediately prior to this one is in direct opposition to Tavis Smiley's position in that regard. I view Tavis Smiley's position as both self-serving and shortsighted, because the corollary of his position is that all of the White presidents who follow you owe a special alliance to White people, and as I see it, that is exactly the position that the civil rights movement was established to oppose.
But that doesn't mean that you shouldn't bring the knowledge and wisdom of the Black experience to bear as you carry out your job as chief executive. And part of that experience should be the wisdom to understand that this nation's failure to strictly adhere to the rule of law led directly to the lynching of Black people and the bombing of Black churches in the South. It also led to Jim Crow, rules that distorted the law of the land that were specifically designed to circumvent the law's intent.
So I sincerely hope that you will consider the historic symbolism of your position in this matter. After all of the hardships that Black people have gone through as a direct result of this nation's penchant to ignore the rule of law "for the better good," regardless to what you accomplish on behalf of this nation as president, future historians will look back upon the first Black President of the United States taking a position to ignore the law and "not look back" on the unjust murder of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people and thousands of American citizens, as grossly unconscionable, and a dark mark upon your presidency.
But even if you can live with that, current events clearly demonstrate that the slippery slope in which the nation has slid over the past thirty years is becoming even more steep as this column is being written. Who would have thought just a mere thirty years ago that the validity of war crimes, torture, and the blatant invasion of privacy of the American people would even be a subject for debate in this country? And who would have thought that a Vice President of the United States would be under a cloud for revealing the identity of a CIA agent, or that a corporation that he formerly headed would be guilty of providing American troops with contaminated water for profit?
And further, who would have thought a mere thirty years ago that American troops would be sent into an unnecessary war without the equipment necessary to sustain their lives, then when wounded, made to pay for the equipment that had to be cut from their body and left on the field of battle? And who would believe that this nation would then force those brave troops to pay for their own meals while lying in the hospital recuperating from their wounds in the nation's defense?
Yet, now you say let us, "not look back?" Oh no, I don't think so. I don't think that once the American people come out of the shock of the past ten years they're going to let that fly. They already sense that there's something terribly wrong with our government; they're just currently in shocked disbelief - but they'll be coming out of that shocked disbelief somewhere around the 2012 election.
In my opinion you're one of the best presidents that we've ever had in many ways, but there's only one chink in your armor - you seem to be unwilling to confront the GOP in an aggressive and forthright manner. Ordinarily that might be considered less than important, but in the current political environment it is just as serious a shortcoming as if you were reluctant to confront Al Qaeda.
The GOP leadership is a much more serious threat to the American way than Al Qaeda can ever be. While Al Qaeda is undoubtedly a physical threat to the American people, the GOP is attacking America's soul. They're attempting to alter what America is as a nation - and you're failure to address that issue is so counter- intuitive to your political base, who, after all, voted for change, that many are beginning to wonder if you're not part of the problem.
In short, Mr. President, we don't give a damn about the appearance of bipartisanship. In this case, to be bipartisan means, "Ok, let's comprise and just destroy America a little bit." You're political base - which includes Democrats, Independents, and Republicans - are not interested in that. We're looking to you to defend the American way of life, by any means necessary - period.
Eric L. Wattree
wattree.blogspot .com
Religious bigotry: It's not that I hate everyone who doesn't look, think, and act like me - it's just that God does.
Beneath the Spin By Eric L. Wattree
Eric L. Wattree is a writer, poet, and musician, born in Los Angeles (Watts). He’s a columnist for The Los Angeles Sentinel, The Black Star News, and a contributing writer to Your Black World, the Huffington Post, ePluribus Media, and several other online sites and publications. He's also the author of "A Message From the Hood."
Would Smiley's Black Agenda Help the Black Community? By Eric L. Wattree

By admin on Mar 4, 2010 | In Leaders & Decision-Making | Send feedback »
BENEATH THE SPIN
Would Tavis Smiley's 'Black Agenda' Help the Black Community, or Bring America to its Knees?
On Tuesday, February23, Tavis Smiley went on Tom Joyner's Morning Show and did a commentary indicating that Rev. Al Sharpton, Ben Jealous, Charles Ogletree, Valerie Jarrett, Marc Morial, and Dr. Dorothy Height said that President Obama doesn’t need a Black agenda. In doing so he not only grossly distorted Sharpton's comment that the president didn't need to "ballyhoo" a Black agenda, but he also left the impression that President Obama was ignoring the plight of the Black community - which is blatantly untrue.
So yes, I was quite angry - and one of the things that set me off was his disingenuous self-righteousness. He said:
"I choose to identify with the underprivileged. I choose to identify with the poor. I choose to give my life for the hungry. I choose to give my life for those who have been left out of the sunlight of opportunity. This is the way I’m going. If it means suffering a little bit, I’m going that way. If it means dying for them, I’m going that way. Because I heard a voice saying, ‘Do something for others."
For a man who loves to quote scripture, he seems to have missed King James 3:14 - "But if you have bitter envy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not be boastful and false to the truth." One would have to be blind to believe that Tavis is less than envious of President Obama, or that he doesn't have selfish ambition in his heart. And one would have to be a fool to believe that Tavis is willing to die for the hungry. Personally, I don't see that kind of selflessness in his character. And while he may indeed be genuine about hearing voices, whose voice he's hearing should be up for serious debate.
But I was angered even more by his hypocrisy. It was clear that he requested to go on the Tom Joyner show (after giving up his spot as a regular commentator on the show well over a year earlier) to create a controversy just to promote an event that he organized in Chicago for later this month. In his commentary he said the following:
"I know 'What’s going on.' I know “We shall overcome,' but I don’t know this new tune, the president doesn’t need a Black agenda. And I’ve been hearing from other members, Tom, of our Black chorale, all across America as well, who either, like me, don’t know these new lyrics or have heard the song but ain’t down with singing it. That said, it’s time for a choir rehearsal so that we’re all singing from the same page. And so, our choir rehearsal will be held Saturday, March 20, in Chicago at 8:00 am, at Chicago State University, with Dr. Wayne Watson. Now, for all of those who can’t attend the choir rehearsal in person, this rehearsal will be broadcast[ed] on national television."
Don't forget to Mark you're calendars, now. That's Saturday, March 20, at . . . He sounded like he was doing a used car commercial.
Tavis is also fixated on accountability, and how "he choose to identify with the underprivileged," yet, as I pointed out two years ago in my article, The 2008 State of The Black Union, while he may choose to identify with the underprivileged, he hangs out with the heads of corporations - and you're known by the company you keep:
". . . how accountable is it to produce a show called The State of the Black Union then sponsor it with companies that are largely responsible for the very conditions that you're complaining about? One of the sponsors was Allstate Insurance–a company that is alleged to have denied the claims of thousands of Hurricane Katrina victims. One victim, Michael Homan, alleges that Allstate denied his claim based on their position that Katrina wasn't windy enough. Another sponsor was Exxon/Mobile–a company that's raking in record profits while many Black people have to flip a coin to decide whether they're going to eat or put enough gas in their car to get to work. Wal-Mart was another sponsor–a company that's committed to blocking collective bargaining, providing their employees fair wages and healthcare, who destroy jobs by running other businesses out of the community and purchasing their merchandise from outside the United States, and who humiliate their customers by searching them before they leave the store."
Is that accountability? Does it sound like any of those companies are committed to a Black agenda? It sure doesn't sound like it to me, and I'm a mere heathen who's not willing to die for any cause. As a former Marine I was taught that we don't willingly die for anything - boot camp 101. "A Marine only dies, because he failed to duck.
I was also angry with Tavis because he's preaching to the Black community through ignorance. He's trying to lead Black people while he himself is obviously ignorant of history. He seems to be completely unaware of the fact that Richard Nixon also had a Black agenda. Nixon was the president who signed affirmative action into being, and when he did it, he had his tongue firmly implanted in his cheek.
Prior to AA we had a thriving civil rights movement. Not only Blacks, but thousands of whites were out marching with Martin Luther King, demanding equal opportunity for Blacks people.
Then President Nixon said, Ok, they want to fight for the rights of Black people, let's see how they feel when I allow Blacks to start taking their jobs and replacing their kids in the universities - and his scheme to undermine the Black movement worked like a charm.
While we were busy celebrating our shortsighted "victory," our victory led to USC v. Bakke, the emergence of Ronald Reagan, and White folks flooding into the Republican Party in droves. These people were far from racists, but it's human nature to protect one's own interest. Thus, Bakke's lawsuit against affirmative action brought White support for the civil rights movement to a screeching halt, and led directly to Ronald Reagan and the Republican era.
And what did we get in return? The only people in the Black community that benefitted were those who needed the help least. The cream of the crop was skimmed out of the community and went to work for large corporations. And with them, they took all of the talent, imagination, entrepreneurial skills, role models, and jobs. That, in turn, left young Black people with no one to look up to in the community but drug dealers.
Then thirty years later Barack Obama arrived on the scene, and the GOP was caught completely off guard. They were shocked. Where did he come from? But more importantly, where did all these people come from who're willing to vote for a Black man for president?
I'll tell you where they came from. Those were young Whites, and the closet moderates and progressives that fled the Democratic Party during the Affirmative Action era. They were so anxious for a change from the GOP that they got behind Obama even before Black people saw the light - that's why I'm so critical of Obama for failing to firmly initiate the change that he promised, an accommodation to the GOP that may, indeed, lead to his downfall.
But while I strongly disagree with his policy to be less than firm with the GOP, Obama is a very astute and intelligent man, so he's not about to listen to the rantings of Tavis Smiley. He understands history, and he's not about to make the same mistake twice.
Affirmative Action was a wonderful initiative, but as a result of it, the Black community was bamboozled into making the biggest political mistake in modern history - allowing AA to be based on race rather than need. Had it been based on need, it's roots would have reached down into the Black community to those who needed it most. It would have also included poor Whites, which would have prevented the GOP from using it as a weapon against us.
So as a direct result of the very kind of policy that Tavis Smiley is advocating, the GOP was able to turn AA into a liability for the Democratic Party that destroyed the most effective progressive coalition that this country has ever known. It was AA that allowed the GOP to turn the term "liberal" into a curse word in the political lexicon.
AA was also used to create Judases like Clarence Thomas, Michael Steele, and Alan Keyes - and they're not the only ones. Anyone who has ever worked in a major corporation or a government agency knows that these Judases are sprinkled throughout our workforce. As we speak, I'm investigating a piece on the Los Angeles District of the U.S. Postal Service where I have absolute proof that minorities (including veterans) are being forced under the threat of losing their job to work as much as a half day (daily) without pay.
Think about that - I have proof that Blacks and Hispanics who have risen to positions of authority due to Affirmative Action are now being used, and given huge bonuses, as overseers in a United States Government agency to enforce slave labor in the twenty first century! It's been going on for years (I have documented proof of that as well), and the unions and the Inspector General's Office know about it (also documented), and they're doing absolutely nothing about it.
So yes, I'm angry, because Tavis is a corporate tool and manipulator. While he's trying to keep the people focused on the last war in order to promote his own interests, the powers that be have moved on to a class war. They don't care any more about poor White folks than they do Black people - the healthcare debate should demonstrate that to anyone with any sense at all. Sen. Joe Lieberman just told the White folks of Connecticut to go to Hell.
So if the people would open their eyes they'd see that Tavis' self-serving nonsense is an unnecessary distraction. Blacks, and Whites, are now under the gun. So this is no time to be distracted by a self-serving wannabe. He's not one of us, the poor and middle class struggling to survive - he's made a few dollars. His chumminess with Walmart and those who oppress us clearly demonstrates that he's one of them. But don't take my word for it - ask the people of Inglewood, Ca. whose agenda he promoted during their battle with Walmart.
Obviously, the only thing that will satisfy Tavis and his cohorts is for President Obama to throw his fist in the air every time they play Hail to the Chief. While Tavis is demagogueing the issue to promote his own agenda, here's what the president is doing for ALL of the people, including the Black community:
Obama Initiatives
- Spur Job Creation: “In addition, to help those most affected by the recession, the Budget will extend emergency assistance to seniors and families with children, Unemployment Insurance benefits, COBRA tax credits, and relief to states and localities to prevent layoffs.”
- Reforming the Job Training System: “The Budget calls for reform of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA), which supports almost 3,000 One-Stop Career Centers nationwide and a range of other services. With $6 billion for WIA at DOL—and an additional $4 billion in the Department of Education—the Budget calls for reforms to improve WIA.” Strengthen Anti-Discrimination Enforcement: “To strengthen civil rights enforcement against racial, ethnic, sexual orientation, religious, and gender discrimination, the Budget includes an 11 percent increase in funding to the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division. This investment will help the Division handle implementation of a historic new hate crimes law. The Budget also provides an $18 million, or 5 percent increase, for the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission (EEOC), which is responsible for enforcing federal laws that make it illegal to discriminate against a job applicant or an employee. This increased investment will allow for more staff to reduce the backlog of private sector charges.”
- Support Historically Black Colleges and Universities: “The Budget proposes $642 million, an increase of $30 million over the 2010 level, to support Minority Serving Institutions (MSIs), including Historically Black Colleges and Universities. In addition to this discretionary funding increase for MSIs, the Administration supports legislation passed by the House of Representatives and pending in the Senate that would provide $2.55 billion in mandatory funding to MSIs over 10 years.”
- Help Families Struggling with Child Care Costs: “The Budget will nearly double the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit for middle-class families making under $85,000 a year by increasing their credit rate from 20 percent to 35 percent of child care expenses. Nearly all eligible families making under $115,000 a year would see a larger credit. The Budget also provides critical support for young children and their families by building on historic increases provided in ARRA. The Budget provides an additional $989 million for Head Start and Early Head Start to continue to serve 64,000 additional children and families funded in ARRA.”
- Reform Elementary and Secondary School Funding: “The Budget supports the Administration’s new vision for the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) … The Budget provides a $3 billion increase in funding for K-12 education programs authorized in the ESEA, including $900 million for School Turnaround Grants, and the Administration will request up to $1 billion in additional funding if Congress successfully completes ESEA reauthorization.”
- Increase Pell Grants: “The Recovery Act and 2009 appropriations bill increased the maximum Pell Grant by more than $600 for a total award of $5,350. The Budget proposes to make that increase permanent and put them on a path to grow faster than inflation every year, increasing the maximum grant by $1,000, expanding eligibility, and nearly doubling the total amount of Pell grants since the President took office.”
- Help Relieve Student Loan Debt: “To help graduates overburdened with student loan debt, the Administration will strengthen income-based repayment plans for student loans by reducing monthly payments and shortening the repayment period so that overburdened borrowers will pay only 10 percent of their discretionary income in loan repayments and can have their remaining debt forgiven after 20 years. Those in public service careers will have their debt forgiven after 10 years. The Budget also expands low-cost Perkins student loans.”
- Prevent Hunger and Improve Nutrition: “The President’s Budget provides $8.1 billion for discretionary nutrition program supports, which is a $400 million increase over the 2010 enacted level. Funding supports 10 million participants in the WIC program, which is critical to the health of pregnant women, new mothers, and their infants. The Budget also supports a strong Child Nutrition and WIC reauthorization package that will ensure that school children have access to healthy meals and to help fulfill the President’s pledge to end childhood hunger. The President continues to support the nutrition provisions incorporated in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA).”
- Revitalize Distressed Urban Neighborhoods: “The Budget includes $250 million for HUD’s Choice Neighborhoods program, which will target neighborhoods anchored by distressed public or assisted housing with physical and social revitalization grounded in promising, measurable, and evidence-based strategies.”
- Increase Funding for the Housing Choice Voucher Program: “The President’s Budget requests $19.6 billion for the Housing Choice Voucher program to help more than two million extremely low income families with rental assistance to live in decent housing in neighborhoods of their choice. The Budget continues funding for all existing mainstream vouchers and provides flexibility to support new vouchers that were leased and $85 million in special purpose vouchers for homeless families with children, families at risk of homelessness, and persons with disabilities.”
- Preserve 1.3 Million Affordable Rental Units through Project-Based Rental Assistance Program: “The President’s Budget provides $9.4 billion for the Project-Based Rental Assistance program to preserve approximately 1.3 million affordable rental units through increased funding for contracts with private owners of multifamily properties. This critical investment will help low-income households to obtain or retain decent, safe and sanitary housing. In addition, the Administration requests $350 million to fund the first phase of this multi-year initiative to regionalize the Housing Choice Voucher program and convert Public Housing to project-based vouchers.”
- Promote Affordable Homeownership and Protect Families from Mortgage Fraud: “The Budget requests $88 million for HUD to support homeownership and foreclosure prevention through Housing Counseling and $20 million to combat mortgage fraud. In addition, the Budget requests $250 million for the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation’s (NRC) grant and training programs. Of the $250 million, $113 million is requested for foreclosure prevention activities, a $48 million increase (74 percent) over 2010.”
- Fight Gang Violence and Violent Crime: “The Budget provides $112 million for place-based, evidence supported, initiatives to combat violence in local communities, including $25 million for the Community-Based Violence Prevention Initiatives that aim to reduce gun and other violence among youth gangs in cities and towns across the country, and $37 million for the Attorney General’s Children Exposed to Violence Initiative, which targets the youth most affected by violence and most susceptible to propagating it as they grow up.”
- Expand Prisoner Re-entry Programs: “The Budget provides $144 million for Department Justice prisoner re-entry programs, including an additional $100 million for the Office of Justice Programs to administer grant programs authorized by the Second Chance Act and $30 million for residential substance abuse treatment programs in State and local prisons and jails. In addition, the Budget provides $98 million for Department of Labor programs that provide employment-centered services to adult and youth ex-offenders and at-risk youth..”
- Fully Fund the Community Development Block Grant Program: “The Budget provides $4.4 billion for the Community Development Fund, including $3.99 billion for the Community Development Block Grant Formula Program (CDBG), and $150 million for the creation of a Catalytic Investment Competition Grants program. The new Catalytic Competition Grants program uses the authorities of CDBG, but will provide capital to bring innovative economic development projects to scale to make a measurable impact.”
Eric L. Wattree
wattree.blogspot .com
Religious bigotry: It's not that I hate everyone who doesn't look, think, and act like me - it's just that God does.
Beneath the Spin By Eric L. Wattree
Eric L. Wattree is a writer, poet, and musician, born in Los Angeles (Watts). He’s a columnist for The Los Angeles Sentinel, The Black Star News, and a contributing writer to Your Black World, the Huffington Post, ePluribus Media, and several other online sites and publications. He's also the author of "A Message From the Hood."
The Day America Outlawed Democracy By Eric L. Wattree
By admin on Mar 1, 2010 | In Leaders & Decision-Making | Send feedback »

The Day America Outlawed Democracy
The time is past due for America to start connecting the dots regarding our political establishment. It has become increasingly clear that we've reached a political crisis in this country, but contrary to what we're being led to believe, the major division in country is no longer between liberals and conservatives, but rather, the American people and those we've elected to represent us.
Due to our political indifference, we've allowed the political establishment in this country to lavish upon themselves so many rewards, prerogatives, and political perks that they can no longer identify with the people they're suppose to represent. They've become a class within themselves. Where they were once considered the trusted employees of the American people, they've now become a part of a new American aristocracy. Thus, they now identify much more closely with the rich and powerful - or those they're supposed to be protecting us from - than they do the constituency they're supposed to represent.
So liberals and conservatives alike need to open their eyes. We need to recognize that we're now facing a common foe that has morphed into something that has become a threat to us all. We must also realize that it is essential that we set our respective differences aside - at least temporarily - just long enough to address this common enemy to our way of life.
While liberals and conservatives may disagree on their respective philosophy of governance, we must never confuse that philosophical disagreement with the belief that liberals are any less loyal as Americans, or that conservatives are any less sincere in their desire to make America a better place for us all. As different as the two groups are, in the final analysis, both liberals and conservatives want the very same thing - what is in the best interest of the American people. But that can no longer be said of our political establishment. Their current behavior has clearly demonstrated that their top priority entails feathering their own nests by protecting their true constituents - big business.
They were better able to hide their alliance in the past, but the current geo-economic circumstance has forced them into the open. Thus, the political establishment is now forced to betray their true attitude toward the American people - an "ignorant worker class," with a moral obligation to sacrifice both our families (in war), and wealth (in bailouts), for the personal comfort of the upper class.
That accounts for why the Wall Street bailout sailed through congress like a hot knife through butter, with only perfunctory grumbling from congress for effect, while healthcare reform, the jobs bill, legislation to enhance veterans benefits, and any other legislation aimed at helping the average American has been met with fierce resistance.
It's no accident that the only Obama effort that's being supported by the GOP is his initiative to go to war. The "party of no" eagerly says yes to that, regardless to the cost of (lower and middle class) lives and treasure; nor is it an accident that they completely ignore the fact that even after the useless waste of life and treasure, a victory means that Al Qaeda will simply move on to a different location. They don't have a problem with any of that, because war enriches their constituency, the military/industrial complex.
Neither is it an accident that the rule of law is simply being ignored regarding Bush and Cheney's war crimes, in spite of the fact that it makes America less safe, or the fact that it led directly to the economic hardship currently being suffered by the America people. They don't have a problem with because the political establishment is a class within itself, and it protects its own. That's the one area of agreement that truly seems to be bipartisan.
The reason for that, as I've mentioned in earlier columns, is the new world order is not only geopolitical, but economic in nature. "When the United States had a thriving industrial economy one class complimented the other. Labor was well paid and given the security of knowing that they had a job for life, so they had the confidence to purchased goods that the corporations produced. That allowed the companies that sold the goods to prosper to the benefit of the investor class." But now that U.S. corporations have to compete globally with countries that are paying their workers pennies per day, the American middle class has become a prohibitively expensive liability to America's ability to compete around the world. So now the U.S. government - both Republicans and Democrats - is in the process of addressing that issue by downgrading the standard of living of the American middle class.
The idea of relegating the American people to second class status isn't a new strain of thinking in American politics; it's been around since this nation's founding. It's just that after being shot down during the constitutional convention in lieu of a more egalitarian form of government, previous adherents of this philosophy had the good sense to be more discreet in their efforts.
As I've pointed out before, Alexander Hamilton, one of the founding fathers of the fiscal conservative philosophy, said the following:
"All communities divide themselves into the few and the many. The first are the rich and wellborn, the other the mass of the people.... The people are turbulent and changing; they seldom judge or determine right. Give therefore to the first class a distinct, permanent share in government. They will check the unsteadiness of the second, and as they cannot receive any advantage by a change, they therefore will ever maintain good government." (Debates of the Federalist Convention May 14-September 17, 1787).
So the fact is, the reason that the political establishment is so willing to throw America under the bus is that the new world order has made it politically expedient to embrace Hamilton's philosophy that lower and middle class Americans shouldn't have a right to self-government in the first place. But since it would be problematic to try to formally take that right away through a constitutional amendment, it's being taken away through legislative procedure and rulings through the Supreme Court.
That's what has led to the current disaffection by both liberals and conservatives toward government. The American people can sense their rights slipping away, but they have yet to come to terms with what is actually going on. They have yet to realize that congressional gridlock is a convenient way of denying them their rights. They have also yet to recognize that the majority in the senate is allowing the minority to abuse of the filibuster procedure because both parties are in collusion. The Republican filibuster provides cover for the Democratic majority for failing to enact, or greatly watering down, legislation being demanded by the people, but neither party wants to enact.
Then on January 21, 2010, the Supreme Court delivered the final blow against the people. In order to insure against any repeat of the 2008 election where the people mounted a grassroots effort over the internet to usurp the power of corporations through campaign funding, the Supreme Court past what is essentially the modern version of Plessy v. Ferguson, taking away the rights of the people by saying that the American people and corporations are "separate but equal."
That ruling should serve as a red flag for both liberals and conservatives alike. In 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson was used to undermine the rights of Black people in this country. Now, the current ruling, Citizens United v. Federal Election Committee, is being used to undermine the rights of the middle class.
The ruling stands as a perfect metaphor for Jim Crow. But this time it ushers in an era of a diminished American middle class, and the jackboots of the new world order, as it formally arrives at our front door.
Eric L. Wattree
wattree.blogspot .com
Religious bigotry: It's not that I hate everyone who doesn't look, think, and act like me - it's just that God does.
Beneath the Spin By Eric L. Wattree
Eric L. Wattree is a writer, poet, and musician, born in Los Angeles (Watts). He’s a columnist for The Los Angeles Sentinel, The Black Star News, and a contributing writer to Your Black World, the Huffington Post, ePluribus Media, and several other online sites and publications. He's also the author of "A Message From the Hood."
War Crimes from Beneath the Spin • Eric L. Wattree

By admin on Feb 7, 2010 | In Leaders & Decision-Making | Send feedback »
War Crimes
It's been suggested more than once that the only reason I'm so passionate about having the Bush Administration charged with war crimes is because I'm a liberal, and therefore, harbor some sort of deep-seated hatred for George Bush. But that's not true. The fact is, I neither hate George Bush, nor any other conservative. I'm a progressive, not an ideologue, so I have no ideological motive to see any adversity brought into Bush's life, or anyone Else's. My passion stems from the fact that because I am progressive, I have a progressive's lust for justice.
As I've mentioned in previous articles, progressives have but one guiding philosophy, one that entails the primacy of humanity, justice for ALL, and the search for truth - wherever that truth may lead, and regardless to whose ox is gored as a result. It's just happens that in this case, the ox that must be gored is in our own backyard.
But in today's political environment, I can certainly understand how people might feel the way they do, especially conservatives. It is far from lost on me that many of those who claim to be progressives are actually quite partisan - they're ideologues. They view politics from the perspective of a sports fan - it's our team against theirs, and the more pain their team sustains, the better we like it.
But I want to assure you that's not the case here. I'm looking at this situation purely from the perspective of what is just, and what is just in this case, is for Bush, Cheney, and their cohorts be held strictly accountable for their criminal conduct in Iraq. And I sincerely hope that once I've laid out my case that even the most cynical of you will understand my point of view - even if you disagree with it.
Let us go back to what we were feeling during Nine-Eleven for a moment. Think about how much horror and pain we went through as we witnessed three thousand of our citizens being brutally murdered. It was such a traumatic experience that now, close to a decade later, we're still traumatized by it. It seems like it only happened yesterday.
But we've never once stopped to consider that if that one day could be so traumatizing to the American psyche, what it must be like for the Iraqis, who have been forced to watch hundreds of thousands of their people killed, and have had to face the horror of a Nine-Eleven every day of their lives for the past seven years. The horror that has been brought upon the Iraqi people goes far beyond what I can express here in words, and the injustice of their situation is brutally unconscionable - and the Iraqi people did absolutely nothing to us.
Yet, just think of the pure hell they've had to go through just to try to protect their children in a Nine-eleven-like environment everyday for seven years; never knowing when something - anything - might explode tearing to shreds the little bodies of the children that mean more than anything else in the world to them.
Imagine what it would be like to have some country come over here and kill hundreds of thousands of Americans (millions in order to have the impact we've had on Iraq). Then later, having that country say, "You know, now that we've thought about it, we shouldn't have done this. It was a mistake. But what the hell - what's done is done, so we need to look forward."
And even as they speak of "moving forward," you're thinking of the past - of happier times. You think of mother's smile, your father's laugh, the dreams of your beautiful young sister, and how goofy your silly little brother could be. But now, they're all now gone. You're the only one left, so far.
Would you be willing to accept a simple apology? I don't think so. Well, that's what the United states is trying to give the people of Iraq to replace justice - at least, President Obama. Dick Cheney's only regret seems to be that he didn't torture enough of them.
For the U.S. to think it can just casually walk away from committing that kind of atrocity to hundreds of thousands of families, then simply say, "We're sorry for what happened, but now's the time to look forward - forward, but without any accountability - speaks volumes about American arrogance, who we are as a people, and why people want to kill us.
President Obama spoke of "change." But what could he possibly thinking, if this represents change? What kind of change could he possibly be speaking of where politics is more important than the horror we've committed? Doesn't he realize that if we don't bring the people responsible for the atrocities in Iraq to justice, America will never be safe again? And beyond that, the U.S. will never be able to look the world in the eye and claim to be a nation that believes in justice, and the rule of law ever again.
And it's not only what we've done that's so horrible, the cynical, greedy, and corrupt motives behind our actions was almost as bad as the act itself - and that corruption of the American soul still walks among us. We haven't learned a thing. Dick Cheney claims that terrorist want to kill us because they're jealous of our freedom. That's complete bullshit. They want to kill us because we won't mind our own business, and we keep trying to steal their oil.
America has got to learn two things: First, if you keep slapping your neighbor and picking his flowers, eventually he's going to hit you back. We may think that we're "exceptional," but that doesn't give of the innate right to abuse others with impunity. And secondly, if you break into your neighbor's home and wipe out his family, then you get caught with a pocketful of his valuables, trying to plead self-defense won't fly. Any court in the world will convict you of being a murderer and a thief.
We've never executed one criminal in the history of America whose crimes even approached the seriousness of the crimes committed by Bush and Cheney - and many, against our own troops. The crimes committed by Dick Cheney makes Tookie Williams look like a choirboy. Yet, now we want to simply walk away and expect the world to believe that America stands for justice? I don't think so.
As long as we continue to think the rest of the world is beneath us, and the lives of others aren't as valuable as our own, we'll never be just, we'll never be safe, and we'll continue to move farther away from what it means to be Americans:
A MESSAGE TO BUSHLAND
It's scary how easily the American people can be manipulated to the point that they find the death of entire families a hoot; how we can sit in front of the tv set with chilli dogs and fries and cheer on the death of others like we're watching the Super Bowl. And it's a tribute to psychosis how America can unleash mass destruction in "an attempt to prevent mass destruction," in the name of God.
Can't you see that many of "those Towel-Heads" are children just like your own? You didn't really think the U.S. could unleash destruction like we saw and not kill children did you? Rumsfeld said, "Well, shit happens." But shit doesn't just happen--you allowed it to happen. You made it happen. You cheered it on! Consider that as the children bleed and you're admiring the beauty of "Shock and Awe."
Think about your own children as "collateral damage." Think about them screaming in horror while you're helplessly watching their limbs being blown off. Think about them desperately reaching out to you for comfort as life slowly drains from their tiny bodies. Think about foreign boots kicking down your front door, then strangers walking through your home systematically killing every man, woman and child. Picture the last sight that you ever see on this Earth is of your sweet little six year old daughter, with her brains spilling from her tiny little head. Think about that picture, America--then ask yourself, who's really the terrorist?
Where has America gone? Who's left to stand up for justice and humanity? You say, God Bless America? You'd have to be a fool to think God is gonna bless America after what we've done--for choosing Standard Oil over Justice, and Exxon over God himself. In God we trust? How dare you blame this atrocity on God! It is in Bush you trust:
You trust Bush that God has entrusted you to blow off Iraqi arms and wrap them around you to enable them to embrace your benevolence. And you trust Bush that you must lovingly pluck out Iraqi eyes to enable them to see the wisdom of viewing the world through your own. And you trust Bush that in the name of all that is good you must slaughter their children in a desperate attempt to provide them with a better future. You also trust Bush that you must rape their land and steal their wealth in order to allow them to choose the government of their choosing-- (so long as they choose the government that Bush chooses for them to choose). And you trust Bush that you do all this in the name of American charity.
You also trust Bush that God will bless America--but this Ain't America. America is the land of the free, and home of the brave, the land of just souls who freed their slaves. No, this is not America, this is Bushland-the land of small pox infected blankets; the land of public lynchings and church-place bombings; the land of imprisoned Japanese-Americans, and corporate murderers.
Yeah, God Bless Bushland!
The land of the free and home of the slave; the land of My Lai, and Calley's mass grave.
And you trust that God will bless Bushland?
Well trust this -You are blind, my friend.
Eric L. Wattree
wattree.blogspot .com
Religious bigotry: It's not that I hate everyone who doesn't look, think, and act like me - it's just that God does.
BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE
Eric L. Wattree is a writer, poet, and musician, born in Los Angeles (Watts). He’s a columnist for The Los Angeles Sentinel, The Black Star News, and a contributing writer to Your Black World, the Huffington Post, ePluribus Media, and several other online sites and publications. He's also the author of "A Message From the Hood."
The Conservative Corruption of Progressive Thought By Eric L. Wattree

By admin on Jan 19, 2010 | In Leaders & Decision-Making | 1 feedback »
BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE
The Conservative Corruption of Progressive Thought
As one who has always strove, with varying success, to be progressive in my thinking, I'd like to make a few personal observations on the contemporary progressive movement. I want to preface my remarks with the assurance that I have long since recognized that I corner the market on neither knowledge, wisdom, nor intellect, but I'd like to share my thoughts nevertheless - not as a condescending edict handed down by a self-appointed pundit, but in the hope that the thoughts of an average man, with common facility, are worthy of public discussion.
It is my firm belief that the appropriate attitude for a progressive to bring to every discussion is a firmness of thought, and an open mind to divergent ideas. A progressive, by definition, should have the intellectual capacity to recognize that one can neither scream, nor insult, one's way to a solution to any problem. And what should always set a progressive apart from all others, is an affinity for the people, independence of thought, and a fierce determination to remain a seeker of truth above all else, regardless to where that truth may lead.
But those value no longer seem to be the case among many who define themselves as progressives today. Many contemporary 'progressives' tend to possess the very same rigidity of thought, and meanspirited, knee-jerk adherence to ideology that the progressive movement was created to combat. The response that many of these people bring to even the slightest divergence from their rigid ideological beliefs, can only be described as one of radical reactionism.
That concerns me greatly, because while conservatives and today's so-called progressives remain completely divergent in their views toward governance, in terms of intellectual disposition, they've become different sides of the same coin. I've often heard it stated that the regimented intolerance of reactionary conservatism was reminiscent of Nazi Germany. That may, or may not be true. But if it is, it must also be acknowledged that the intolerant regimentation of many contemporary radical 'progressives' represent the USSR, at best.
Many modern progressives have allowed themselves to become infected with the exact same kind of intellectual rigidity that we previously associated with the radical conservative mindset. In fact, many who define themselves as progress today, could very accurately be called latter-day conservatives. They have a slightly updated set of values, but their rigidity and rabid defense of those values will surely morph into the closed-minded conservatism of tomorrow.
That's the primary reason that the conservatives' reckless campaign of rampant disinformation is winning the battle over reasoned and logical thought. So many contemporary progressives have taken on the conservative mindset of anger before contemplation, and reaction over reason, that there's no one left who's actually thinking. Everyone is simply reacting through anger, ignorance, and disinformation. That's an environment in which the Republican Party thrives, since as any thinking person would know, radical conservatism is reactionary by definition.
Progressives cannot out-scream the Republican Party, and we shouldn't try. The disinformation that's currently being disseminated by the GOP must be met with facts, a well thought-out plan of action, integrity, and character.
The American people are not stupid. They desperately want the these qualities in their governance, but the current progressive movement is not giving them a viable alternative. Regardless to what our intent, we're acting with just as much thoughtless anger and reckless abandon as the Republican Party.
The problem is, we have not coalesced into a solid front with a clear and viable agenda. We've divided ourselves into so many factions, with so many different agendas, that the people no longer know what we represent. And the reason for that is that too many of us really don't know what it means to be progressives ourselves.
Too many of us fail to understand that the primary goal of the progressive movement is to create a viable democracy that serve, respect, and honor ALL of the people. But due to the destruction of our educational system, the corrupting influence of Republican governance over the past twenty years, and an irresponsible media, our ideals and what we represent as a people is only a rumor up for debate for an entire generation of Americans.
But what's worse, and the subject of this contemplation, is the above is also true of young people of the left who consider themselves progressives. The fact is, while they know that their political orientation is liberal, what they don't know is there's a vast difference between being simply liberal, and being a progressive. As a result, many of these young people approach our democracy like it's a sporting event - our team against their team. Period.
What they fail to realize is that the progressive movement is much more than just a synonym for left-wing liberal. Progressives have also served as America's philosophers, intellectuals, and conscience. Thus, true progressives don't see conservatives as the enemy. They understand that both liberals, and conservatives, play an important role in our society. They recognize that both are necessary in order to maintain a balanced America. They clearly understand that while there's a burning need for a Martin Luther King to remind America of its humanity, there is also a need for a Gen. MacArthur to ensure our security.
Thus, the progressive movement is not so much a political ideology as it is a philosophical attitude towards human behavior. A true progressive, as oppose to an ideologue of any stripe, will always give truth, logical thought, and the interest of humanity priority over ideology. And regardless to how much he or she may admire any politician, he will always hold that politician accountable for truth, justice, and his fidelity to mankind.
I find it extremely disheartening to watch the denigration of the progressive movement. But what's even more disheartening is the impact that it's loss is having on America. With the demise of a vigorous and thriving progressive movement, America is becoming a place where power takes precedence over humanity, and that's a scenario than can only lead to our destruction.
Eric L. Wattree
wattree.blogspot .com
Religious bigotry: It's not that I hate everyone who doesn't look, think, and act like me - it's just that God does.
Eric L. Wattree is a writer, poet, and musician, born in Los Angeles (Watts). He’s a columnist for The Los Angeles Sentinel, The Black Star News, and a contributing writer to Your Black World, the Huffington Post, ePluribus Media, and several other online sites and publications. He's also the author of "A Message From the Hood."
Healthcare: There was a 3 a.m. Call to the White House, and No One Answered By Eric L. Wattree

By admin on Dec 23, 2009 | In Leaders & Decision-Making | Send feedback »
BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE
Healthcare: There was a 3 a.m. Call to the White House, and No One Answered
President Obama is in trouble. How do I know? Because as one of his biggest supporters, now, I'm even beginning to wonder if I allowed myself to get too caught up in the hype. While I'm still excited over the historic significance of his presidency, the gathering threat that he may be remembered as an ineffectual kiss-up to the Republican Party is beginning to tarnish its luster.
That should come as very bad news to the president, because if a supporter of my unfettered loyalty has begun to wonder about him, that means that tens of millions of others are thinking along the same lines. And based on his atrocious handling of both the Republican Party and the healthcare debate, he only has himself to blame.
In the real world, it's not enough to have good ideas and the eloquence to express them, one must also have the backbone to wield power in order to bring those ideas to fruition - that's the reason for seeking power in the first place. But the president doesn't seem to have the capacity to do that - wield power, that is. He seems to yearn for a utopia in America, where everybody is holding hands singing Kumbaya. We need a little realism here - make that, a lot of realism.
The president seems to harbor this burning desire to be loved by everyone. If that's all he wanted, he should have become an entertainer instead of a politician. In politics, the people are looking for a father figure who is fair, but also bad enough to protect them from harm, and President Obama is not demonstrating that capacity. In fact, from what he's shown so far, he seems to be more adept at taking the coward's way out. Everyone knows the type - the kind of guy that's always running up to the bullies trying to become their best friend so they won't get beat up.
No one wants a president like that, no matter how much they like them. The people want someone that makes them feel secure and protected. Sure, Obama is very intellectual and contemplative, but you can't think your way out of an ass wiping when a bully's determined to do it - I know that for a fact, because I've tried it with very little success.
The irony of Obama's presidency is that if he fails in his first term - and if he continues the way he is, he will - it's not going to be because he wasn't cultured enough, or intellectual enough, but because he's not ghetto enough. Just turn on your television and try to find a show without someone being busted in the head. You can't do it, because Americans respect people who are willing to fight for what they believe in.
If he had just a little more ghetto in him he would have thrown Lieberman to the wolves thirty seconds after he took the oath of office. If he'd done that, the other Liebercrats who are currently blocking healthcare reform would have had second thoughts about the consequences of bucking his initiatives. Americans don't want to be led by Jimmy Stewart; they want John Wayne, a benevolent bully.
The people want the kind of president who's willing to tell congress what he wants, draw a line in the sand, then make it clear to every legislator that they buck the will of the American people at their own peril - then setup a special public relations office on his staff dedicated to nothing but informing the people, with facts and figures, of the self-serving motives of the legislators trying to circumvent their will.
But instead, Obama's acting like that Black cop that we in the Black community know so well - the one who's so sensitive about being accused of coddling Black people that he goes out of his way to be more insensitive than his colleagues. That's exactly what Obama is doing to his base. He's so fixated on appeasing the Republican base that he seems to be totally ignoring his own. As a result, he's turning a blind eye to why he was voted into office in the first place.
But what's so unfathomable that is as intelligent as Barack Obama is, he seems to be forgetting that, unlike that Black cop, he has to come back to the community to be re-elected - and if he doesn't spend the next three years undoing the damage that he's done to his image, never mind the possibility of losing to a Republican, he may even lose the right to run again in the primaries.
The president seems to working under the assumption that being an aggressive advocate for the people is bad politics, so he's adopted a strategy of trying to win by not losing. That explains why he's pointedly avoided specifically identifying what he wants in a healthcare bill. He seems to feel that by drawing a line in the sand, every element of the bill that's shot down thereafter constitutes a personal lost to him.
The fact is, that's true, but that's what's called having the courage of your convictions. That's why you fight, and fight hard. But he seems to have adopted a strategy of if I don't fight, I won't have to bear the embarrassment of losing, which by definition, fails the people who elected him.
This is not the time to indulge in political vanity - save that for the next election season. This is where the rubber meets the road. Now's the time to put all the pretty rhetoric aside and fight for the people who believed in him, and gave him their vote in the belief that he would fight to protect their interest. But I'm very sorry to say, that failing to do that, to the sincere disappoint of millions. He promised "a change that we can believe in," but what we're getting is the same old status quo that we thought we voted out of fashion - politicians first, then the people . . . maybe.
Mr. President, I have never dreaded writing any article more than I have this one. All of my instincts are screaming for me to hang in there with you, but the facts won't allow it. Every time I go to write a sentence trying to justify what you're actions, I think about an email that received from a young lady regarding my column. She simply said, "I really hope you're researching the stuff you say in your column, because I don't know much about politics, so I rely on you for my information." So while I would love to give you the benefit of the doubt, Mr. President, my first loyalty must be to people like that young lady.
So, you need to man up, Mr. President, as we say in the 'hood. You're looking weak and indecisive: You're allowing people from your own party to thumb their noses at you, you're putting thirty thousand of our troops in harms way in order to chase one hundred Eastside Crips in Afghanistan, and you're fighting to pass a healthcare bill that forces the public to by in, but without a public option. That, in essence, constitutes paying a windfall ransom to the insurance industry in order to protect your image.
But you still have time to change your course of action. You have nothing to lose, and everything to gain. The Republicans are not going to like you regardless to what you do, but by deciding to go for broke in defense of the American people, you might still have time to salvage your image in the eyes of your base.
But your window of opportunity is very narrow indeed. At the rate your image has declined in this first year since you took office, if you don't do something fast - and I mean very fast - by this time next year you're gonna be typecasted as a weak and ineffectual president, both at home and abroad. At that point you'll be no more than a caretaker for the next two years until you can be voted out of office. Because believe me, none of your base, including myself, is going to support having a president kiss up to the Republicans for another four years.
Mr. President, I'm convinced that you're a good, intelligent, and well-meaning man, so I'm still pulling for you. But what I've related to you here is what many of us call, the actual factuals.
Eric L. Wattree
wattree.blogspot.com
Religious bigotry: It's not that I hate everyone who doesn't look, think, and act like me - it's just that God does.
Eric L. Wattree is a writer, poet, and musician, born in Los Angeles (Watts). He’s a columnist for The Los Angeles Sentinel, The Black Star News, and a contributing writer to Your Black World, the Huffington Post, ePluribus Media, and several other online sites and publications. He's also the author of "A Message From the Hood."
The Role of Poor, Minorities, and Middle Class in the New World Order By Eric L. Wattree

By admin on Dec 10, 2009 | In Leaders & Decision-Making | Send feedback »
BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE
The Role of Poor, Minorities, and Middle Class in the New World Order
The phrase "New World Order" says it all. But in our blind naivete' and the belief that "it can't happen here," the vast majority of American people believe the phrase refers to the reshuffling, in terms of importance, of the various nations around the world. We fail to understand that the change is much more profound than that. The new world order not only applies to a geo-political reshuffling among nations, but the reshuffling of the internal economic structure within individual nations as well.
That means that as the world moves from many separate national economies to one global economy the class structure of the various nations of the world must be adjusted to accommodate the new state of affairs. In turn, that means that the high standard of living enjoyed by the American middle class since WWII can no longer be sustained in an economy where many of America's competitors are paying their workers less per week, than many of us spend on lunch per day. That accounts for why American jobs are being outsourced to other countries, and Walmart, one of the largest retail corporations in the world, has based its business model on purchasing most of its merchandise from China in order to undercut the price demands of its competitors.
Walmart is a microcosm of the revised American business strategy under the new world order. One can look at Walmart's business model, and the socioeconomic profile of its employees, and see exactly what direction American business, and our society, is headed as a whole.
Walmart's business strategy is to hire easily replaceable and low skilled employees who are at, or very near, the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder. It then takes advantage of their precarious economic condition to squeezes every dime of profit out of the company's operation . They aggressively fight organized labor to hold down employee wages and benefits, and deny their employees anything approaching affordable health-care. That, essentially, is the American business model under the new world order.
Business is no longer a friend of the American people. Where business was once our partner in a symbiotic relationship, it is now a predator to consumers and employees alike. Our parents could pull into a gas station and a guy in a white shirt and bow tie would run out to check their oil and water, then put air in their tires as he pumped twenty-two cents a gallon gas into their tanks. I know - gas is no longer that cheap, but what happen to the service?
It was once considered unseemly for a woman to have to pump gas - I don't think my mother even knew how to operate a gas pump. But now it's become so routine in our culture that if you're a passenger it's no longer politically correct to even offer to pump the gas for a woman ("What, you think because I'm a woman I don't have sense enough to squeeze a nozzle?"). Now my mother would not only have to pump her own gas, check her own oil, and put air in her tires, but they'd make her pay extra for the air. Think about that. They charge us for air!
The reason for that is greed. When the United States had a thriving industrial economy one class complimented the other. Labor was well paid and given the security of knowing that they had a job for life, so they had the confidence to purchased goods that the corporations produced. That allowed the companies that sold the goods to prosper, to the benefit of the investor class.
But now, in a global market, in order to remain competitive with countries that pay their workers just above slave wages, corporations have to squeeze every penny, and every concession out of the labor class that they can get. And since the heads of these corporations must make huge profits to justify their unconscionably oversized bonuses, they prey on their workers by undercutting their benefits and outsource the very jobs that the economy is dependent upon to sustain the corporation, and the nation. But since these corporate heads live from bonus to bonus and only think about themselves, they never stop to consider the negative impact of their irresponsible behavior.
So when Wall Street or the Fed announces that the economy is thriving, they're not talking about the American economy as a whole - they're only talking about the monetary return of the investor class. A thriving economy means they're successfully squeezing the American worker to the limit, and gouging the consumer of every penny that he can afford to part with - and a few that he can't. It is that kind of greed and irresponsibility that led to last year's economic disaster, and nothing has changed.
In the global economy of the new world order, corporations no longer need the American worker to sustain their profits. Now that they can outsource their labor, and purchase and sell their goods overseas, the American worker is no longer a partner in the corporation's viability. the worker has now been relegated to the status of field hand. The only time they need us is when they want to tap the treasury for our tax dollars to pay off their gambling debts.
And this is the very same group that the Republicans and Liebercrats are trying to protect. This is also the group that the wingnuts are fighting so hard to keep between them and their doctors. There should be no doubt in anyone's mind that the Republicans are protecting the very same insurance industry that victimized us in Wall Street bailout. They took our money, now they're using it to block affordable healthcare for the American people.
They were paid billions of dollars by large corporations to cover corporate gambling debts. AIG accepted corporate funds, knowing that they didn't have the resources to cover the debts if the corporations got into trouble. Then when the corporations rolled snake eyes, AIG simply turned to the American people and said, you've got to cover these debts, or else. We and our clients are much too big to be allowed to fail.
An article in Wikipedia points out that "The AIG Financial Products division headed by Joseph Cassano, in London, had entered into credit default swaps to insure $441 billion worth of securities originally rated AAA. Of those securities, $57.8 billion were structured debt securities backed by subprime loans." So not only did the American taxpayer pay off this insurance company's debt, but we paid off a debt that originated in another country.
Now your money is being taken once again, but this time, they're taking YOUR money, to pay YOUR representative, to block an attempt by President Obama to stop them from cutting YOUR throat in a time of crisis, just like they did the corporations on Wall Street. But there's one very big difference - you and you're family are not too big to fail, so without the benefit of a robust healthcare reform, you're simply gonna bite the dust - and with the corrupt and able assistance of many of your very own representatives.
I'm sure that many are going to call me crazy socialist, and continue to tear up as Boehner, Lieberman, and the various other demagogues shuffle out and look into the camera with the solemnity of the pope. But just remember, when they tell you that they're fighting for truth, justice, and the American way, the truth is so glaring that sometimes it slips through in some of the most unlikely places. Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) said the following:
"So this may be an audacious suggestion, but I would suggest we put aside the health care debate until next year, the same way we put cap and trade and climate change and talk now about the essentials, the war and money."
So there you have it - "war and money." That just about sums up your place in the new world order.
--
Eric L. Wattree
wattree.blogspot.com
Religious bigotry: It's not that I hate everyone who doesn't look, think, and act like me - it's just that God does.
Eric L. Wattree is a writer, poet, and musician, born in Los Angeles (Watts). He’s a columnist for The Los Angeles Sentinel, The Black Star News, and a contributing writer to Your Black World, the Huffington Post, ePluribus Media, and several other online sites and publications. He's also the author of "A Message From the Hood."

