Archive for the ‘Opinion’ Category

Big Brother: Alive And Well In Beijing

Wednesday, November 18th, 2009

By Paul Brandus – Talk Radio News Service

Metal detectors. Visitors getting wanded. Backpacks and packages carefully screened. It’s awfully nice of the Chinese authorities to lay on all the extra security here at the Beijing Marriott while President Obama is in town.

They say it’s for our protection, we grizzled war correspondents who’ve survived Iraq, Afghanistan and other hellholes. I for one am scared to death here and appreciate the dainty young ladies with white gloves keeping the bad guys out of this plush oasis. Phew!

I sincerely doubt it’s for our benefit. More likely it’s to make it harder for us to conduct interviews with dissidents, rogue Chinese journalists and others who may have something to say that displeases the regime. We can certainly go out and meet these people in other locations, but the tight schedule we’re on makes it logistically very difficult to get away. Easier for them to come to us, hence the watchdogs downstairs. The authorities know how the game is played.

But Big Brother’s not just down in the lobby. He’s right here in room 9055. He’s blocked me from accessing Twitter and Facebook on my laptop (though they haven’t figured out how to keep me from tweeting on my BlackBerry). And even though this sparkling Marriott is high-tech from top to bottom, the phone on the desk makes some strange clicks whenever I make a call. Maybe it’s nothing, but it reminds me of trying to make phone calls when I worked in the Soviet Union during the bad old days of the KGB.

Indeed, China’s version of the KGB – which, by the way, I can’t seem to research on Google – has apparently been busy clamping down both before and during Obama’s visit. Agence France Presse reported earlier this week that authorities rounded up several dissidents and activists, fearing they could embarrass the leadership.

One person rounded up, says AFP, was a man named Zhao Lianhai, leader of an activist group of parents whose children were allegedly sickened by tainted milk. Zhao’s wife says he was “criminally detained for ‘provoking an incident’.” Another activist group, Human Rights in China, claims Zhao was handcuffed and taken away last week by police officers who also seized computers, a video camera and an address book.

Obama himself has made things easier for the authorities. He hasn’t met anyone who wasn’t prescreened. No free press advocates, no human rights groups, no political opposition. What about Tuesday’s “town hall” in Shanghai? Every student was carefully vetted for their reliability and prepped on how to behave.

Even worse, the White House advance team considered, but rejected a meeting with political activists, only to drop it from the schedule due to time constraints, reports the New York Times. Yet Obama found time yesterday to stroll through the Forbidden City and today visits the Great Wall of China.

It’s the first time an American President has tacitly agreed to be muzzled here. In 1998, President Clinton went on state-run TV and angered his Chinese hosts by discussing human rights, the Dalai Lama and the still-taboo bloody crackdown on Tiananmen Square. In 2002, President Bush talked about the importance of personal freedom and the rule of law. But for Obama’s visit, the White House didn’t insist on a national platform for the President, and the Chinese never offered him one.

Paul Brandus filed this report from Beijing

An Unsustainable American Lifestyle

Monday, November 9th, 2009

I have spent the last week traveling through two similar, yet very different countries. After leaving southern Sudan, I traveled to Bhutan and India. Bhutan is a kingdom that has just transitioned into a democracy. It is a small country of 750,000 people, about the size of Switzerland. India is the sub-continent that will most likely surpass China in population. Currently, about 1.3 billion people live in India. I travel to understand the world better and to get other cultures’ perspectives on the United States.

Bhutan was a closed community, and until fairly recently the only way to see it was by invitation. It is slowly joining the modern world. In 2000, its government began allowing television to be broadcast in the country. The fourth king of Bhutan abdicated in favor of his son so that the country could transition from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional monarchy. Bhutan is a member of the United Nations, but, in an attempt to keep from angering China, it has chosen not to have ambassadorial exchange with any of the permanent members of the U.N. Security Council.

My junior high school geography teacher was way ahead of the author of “Guns, Germs and Steel,” as he was a firm believer that geography was destiny. He was certainly right when it comes to India and Bhutan. As our guide led us to a beautiful view of exquisite mountains, he pointed out that the tallest of the mountains was what separated Bhutan from Tibet. Tibet was taken over by China in the late 1940s and the Dalai Lama escaped from Tibet in 1959. One glimpse of the beautiful mountains and it is clear that Bhutan could be overrun in a nanosecond.

Bhutan rests between China and India. It is to India’s advantage to protect Bhutan, which is why the Indian army patrols the border between China and Bhutan. America does a ton of business with China, but between its human rights record, its Taiwan issue and its refusal to let the Tibetan people rule their own country, the Chinese are not exactly the most popular people in Bhutan and India.

Most of the folks I spoke with in both countries have the same views as people in the United States. They watch American television on their satellite dishes, and they see the same news we see at the same time we see it. When news broke last week of the shootings at Fort Hood, the people in Bhutan and India got the news as people in the U.S. did. Even the Indian language stations were showing video instantaneously. Same view, same pictures, but very different views on what needs to happen for the world to improve.

Russia’s leader, Vladimir Putin, does not concern them. India trades with Russia and has a good relationship with them. China, on the other hand, is a different story. Most people who engaged in conversation with me had dire warnings for the United States, and they all said roughly the same thing:

1) Get your debt down. All were aware that the sizable debt that the United States has taken on has compromised our policy objectives. It is hard to take on China on Tibet or human rights when America is owned by China to the tune of at least $1 trillion. The Federal Reserve chairman’s advice for healing the U.S. economy is to make more consumers out of the Chinese. If that is the solution for solving our job crisis, then maybe I should teach economics. It is scary to me that this is what our leadership thinks will pull us out of the current mess. Moreover, it is not going to happen at a fast enough rate to change our balance of trade and reverse our economy.

2) Stop your consumption of oil. India gets hydropower from Bhutan and is looking to solar and other alternatives. Oil makes the U.S. dependent on Middle East countries, and the people I talked to view such dependency as fueling not just Americans’ cars, but terrorism in their region of the world. One Indian businessman I spoke with said our reliance on foreign oil was the reason for us getting involved in “silly wars that kill American young people.”

3) Conserve your resources. With the burgeoning world population needing food and water as well as energy, America is viewed as being wasteful. With manufacturing jobs leaving the United States for poorer countries, most people I talked with saw the U.S. as a nation of spendthrifts who will use up more than our fair share of the world’s resources, in the process going bankrupt.

4) Don’t rely on one country to do your manufacturing. China has the United States’ head in a vise, but if American companies spread manufacturing to 20 or more countries around the globe, China would not have the power to control currency and the economic future of the United States.

The bottom line, as one businessman said to me, is America is expecting to live the lifestyle we have grown accustomed to by writing IOUs. But, he added, such a lifestyle will prove to be unsustainable.

I couldn’t have said it better myself.

An Unsustainable American Lifestyle

Monday, November 9th, 2009

I have spent the last week traveling through two similar, yet very different countries. After leaving southern Sudan, I traveled to Bhutan and India. Bhutan is a kingdom that has just transitioned into a democracy. It is a small country of 750,000 people, about the size of Switzerland. India is the sub-continent that will most likely surpass China in population. Currently, about 1.3 billion people live in India. I travel to understand the world better and to get other cultures’ perspectives on the United States.

Bhutan was a closed community, and until fairly recently the only way to see it was by invitation. It is slowly joining the modern world. In 2000, its government began allowing television to be broadcast in the country. The fourth king of Bhutan abdicated in favor of his son so that the country could transition from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional monarchy. Bhutan is a member of the United Nations, but, in an attempt to keep from angering China, it has chosen not to have ambassadorial exchange with any of the permanent members of the U.N. Security Council.

My junior high school geography teacher was way ahead of the author of “Guns, Germs and Steel,” as he was a firm believer that geography was destiny. He was certainly right when it comes to India and Bhutan. As our guide led us to a beautiful view of exquisite mountains, he pointed out that the tallest of the mountains was what separated Bhutan from Tibet. Tibet was taken over by China in the late 1940s and the Dalai Lama escaped from Tibet in 1959. One glimpse of the beautiful mountains and it is clear that Bhutan could be overrun in a nanosecond.

Bhutan rests between China and India. It is to India’s advantage to protect Bhutan, which is why the Indian army patrols the border between China and Bhutan. America does a ton of business with China, but between its human rights record, its Taiwan issue and its refusal to let the Tibetan people rule their own country, the Chinese are not exactly the most popular people in Bhutan and India.

Most of the folks I spoke with in both countries have the same views as people in the United States. They watch American television on their satellite dishes, and they see the same news we see at the same time we see it. When news broke last week of the shootings at Fort Hood, the people in Bhutan and India got the news as people in the U.S. did. Even the Indian language stations were showing video instantaneously. Same view, same pictures, but very different views on what needs to happen for the world to improve.

Russia’s leader, Vladimir Putin, does not concern them. India trades with Russia and has a good relationship with them. China, on the other hand, is a different story. Most people who engaged in conversation with me had dire warnings for the United States, and they all said roughly the same thing:

-Get your debt down. All were aware that the sizable debt that the United States has taken on has compromised our policy objectives. It is hard to take on China on Tibet or human rights when America is owned by China to the tune of at least $1 trillion. The Federal Reserve chairman’s advice for healing the U.S. economy is to make more consumers out of the Chinese. If that is the solution for solving our job crisis, then maybe I should teach economics. It is scary to me that this is what our leadership thinks will pull us out of the current mess. Moreover, it is not going to happen at a fast enough rate to change our balance of trade and reverse our economy.

-Stop your consumption of oil. India gets hydropower from Bhutan and is looking to solar and other alternatives. Oil makes the U.S. dependent on Middle East countries, and the people I talked to view such dependency as fueling not just Americans’ cars, but terrorism in their region of the world. One Indian businessman I spoke with said our reliance on foreign oil was the reason for us getting involved in “silly wars that kill American young people.”

-Conserve your resources. With the burgeoning world population needing food and water as well as energy, America is viewed as being wasteful. With manufacturing jobs leaving the United States for poorer countries, most people I talked with saw the U.S. as a nation of spendthrifts who will use up more than our fair share of the world’s resources, in the process going bankrupt.

-Don’t rely on one country to do your manufacturing. China has the United States’ head in a vise, but if American companies spread manufacturing to 20 or more countries around the globe, China would not have the power to control currency and the economic future of the United States.

The bottom line, as one businessman said to me, is America is expecting to live the lifestyle we have grown accustomed to by writing IOUs. But, he added, such a lifestyle will prove to be unsustainable.

I couldn’t have said it better myself.

The GOP’s Lenient Definition Of ‘Egregious’

Friday, November 6th, 2009

By Justin Duckham-Talk Radio News Service

For what has been described in the Wall Street Journal as the “worst bill ever,” Congressional Republicans certainly seem to be padding their list of grievances over the House health care bill with things that are less scary and more, well … sensible.

The House Republican Conference has kindly given reporters a directory of provisions in the bill found to be “egregious, questionable, or potentially absurd.”

Included in this list is a reference to page 872-Section 1433, which, in the conference’s words, “requires the director of food services at nursing facilities participating in Medicare and Medicaid to hold ‘military, academic, or other qualifications’ as determined by federal bureaucrats.”

Sans the editorial liberty taken to invoke the specter of spooky federal bureaucrats, one is left to wonder what about this requirement is particularly egregious, questionable or potentially absurd. After all, this is a warning from the party that has portrayed seniors as sacred cows throughout the entire health care debate, from threats that Obamacare would pull the plug on grandma to suddenly realizing that Medicare isn’t as bad as it was forty years ago. Wouldn’t it make sense to have the staff that tends dear old granny’s meals be qualified? Especially through an academic or military institution?

When asked for clarification, a staffer for a high-ranking Republican representative simply responded that it is a sign of more government intrusion into the lives of Americans.

Of course, the American people whose lives are being intruded upon by this provision are seniors living in nursing homes funded by Medicare. So to summarize: Medicare is an untouchable institution, but requiring
a director that either directly or indirectly benefits from Medicare funds to be properly trained is an intrusion.

Fair enough, if you perform adequate mental gymnastics. That is, until you consider how closely this resembles a provision included in No Child Left Behind, an act proposed by a Republican President and passed through a GOP-controlled Congress.

According to Part A, Section 119, “Each local educational agency receiving assistance under this part shall ensure that all teachers hired after such day and teaching in a program supported with funds under this part are highly qualified.”

All one needs to do is add “by federal bureaucrats” to the end of this sentence and voila: government intrusion.

In the film Citizen Kane, the character Leland tells Charles Foster Kane “You don’t care about anything except you… you want love on your own terms. Something to be played your way, according to your rules.”

This seems to embody the Republican mentality post-2006. So-called dithering on Afghanistan, appointing high-profile czars or, in this case, requiring recipients of government funds to fit the right
profile is fine if you’re in the right party, but try it as a Democrat and suddenly it’s egregious, questionable, or potentially absurd. It’s a double standard.

Either that, or the Republican Conference is grasping at straws.

Don’t Award 2010 To The Republicans Just Yet

Wednesday, November 4th, 2009

By Bob Ney – Talk Radio News Service Special Correspondent

Political leaders tend to (as some pundits do) simplify the outcomes of elections. Hence, of yesterday, Republicans will say, ‘Obama is done, his agenda failed, Republicans will rule in 2010.’ Democrats will find a way to spin this in another direction by saying, ‘Corzine called his opponent fat, Deeds was an idiot and ran negative ads, etc,’ and the Republicans and Democrats will actually believe their own B.S.

The elections yesterday, at the end of the day, are not good for Obama. But, elections are like history. I used to ask my students at OU that I taught, a history question. What started World War 1? They answered, the assassination of The Archduke Franz Ferdinand. Well, a lot of other factors started WW1. People will tend to say, just like they simplify history, that Obama caused Democrats to lose in New Jersey and Virginia yesterday.

Obama’s lack of an agenda, not his agenda, hurt yesterday. People wanted change, and although I am not totally comfortable with some of Obama’s philosophy, I would argue that many are and were, and the majority voted for him knowing he was liberal, knowing what he said he would do and expected him to do it. Reagan did what he said he would do, and while some people complained about him, I clearly remember a vast majority of folks saying later, “Well, he did what he said he would do.” As a result, he was successful. It is irrelevant whether or not you liked him, the majority did.

Obama, on the other hand, has done what? Where are the bills that the Majority have passed? Where are his bold changes? How has he stood up to corporate interests as people are economically melting down? I’m not the one posing these questions; this is what I hear daily from folks in Ohio and West Virginia, REAL America, not Washington, D.C. Obama’s lack of action has successfully driven potential Democratic supporters into the unsure.

Conversely, the Republicans will waste no time in blowing an opportunity to be successful. Rush Limbaugh’s comments about the Dede Scozzafava’s of the world – “they are not guided by principle” – are correct. Dede has just delivered a teachable moment for those who lack a keen sense of the obvious. RINOs cannot be trusted. Republicans-in-name-only cannot be trusted. They aren’t principled. You vote ‘em into office and you’re going to get cap and tax, you’re going to get some version of Obamacare, you’re going to get tax increases, you’re going to get TARP bailouts and you’re gonna get amnesty.

In 2010 at least 12 Republicans (RINOs) will be challenged by true conservatives. This will be an internal bloodbath and the party will focus on purity vs. winning. (Newt Gingrich gets this, he is one of a few in the party that understands that you have to win, even with RINOs, to get the majority to be able to affect change). This attitude and viciousness will hurt the party. Some of the Republican leaders would rather have a pure majority of 100 than a “week squishy liberal” Republican majority of 218 in the House.

Next, look at the GOP leadership. John Boehner just released a health care bill that allows insurance companies to deny sick people coverage. The VAST majority of uninsured in this country are WORKING people, not welfare people. They are Boehner and his party’s potential constituency — believe me. Boehner is the second thing that hurts the party; A lack of direction, compassion, and the unwillingness to stand up for the average John and Susie Six Pack instead of the corporate “I want it all and bail me out” Americans.

Boehner is an addicted smoker, he tans, and he golfs, has money AND he has insurance, very cheap I may add. He just doesn’t get it that the rest of America does not function like he does. John does not appreciate his money and does not understand how to use his position to help others. He could do so much more for people, as many who have made it are. His attitude will hurt the Republicans.

So, yes, this is a setback for the Democrats – they need to realize that. But, there is a long way to 2010, and the Republican factors that I mentioned will make this all come out in the wash. There is a lot of time left, a lot of local politics to play out (all politics are local, Tip knew this) and unknown economics. Throw in the fact that Obama’s staff will probably bungle a few things, and 2010 is wide open!

The writer is a former Republican Congressman who represented Ohio’s 18th District. He currently hosts his own radio program on WVLY in Wheeling, W.Va.

Teaching The Bible For Progress In Sudan

Monday, November 2nd, 2009

Southern Sudan has endured two civil wars. The first took place from independence in 1956 to 1972 and was related to territory and leadership. The second began in 1983 and ended in 2005 with the “Comprehensive Peace Agreement.” That war began because the president of Sudan decided to declare Shariah law for the entire country.

Sudan is divided into three regions: Northern Sudan that holds the seat of the government and is Arab Muslim; Darfur is African Muslim; and Southern Sudan, which is Christian. The Southern Sudanese were not about to live under Shariah law and were not allowed to participate in their government because they were Christian. Civil war followed, and it was so horrific that 2 million people were killed and hundreds of thousands taken into slavery by the Arab North. The civil war was so damaging to the environment that animals such as elephants and lions left and went to Kenya and Uganda.

The Comprehensive Peace Agreement was signed in 2005. Although a peace agreement was signed, many slaves remain and only one organization, Christian Solidarity International, has taken up the task to liberate these slaves. I just spent a week with them during their slave liberation, learning about what is needed in Southern Sudan.

During my stay in Southern Sudan, I was able to review the textbooks developed by the government of Southern Sudan, which are taught in the schools. Southern Sudan is Christian and the government, which is made up of fighters who risked their lives to keep their country Christian, has found a way to teach progress. The way is via Bible teachings. This is not an easy task since Southern Sudan is both Christian and tribal with more than 100 local languages and dialects. All textbooks are in English.

The government of Southern Sudan has been ingenious in using biblical verses and stories to get their message across. For the sake of brevity, I will list some of the concepts below:

Water: The textbook teaches about the importance of water and water conservation by using the story of Elijah and famine in 1 Kings 17. It asks students to discuss what Jesus meant when he said he would “give you life-giving water.”

Roads: The government is trying to build infrastructure, and this sometimes necessitates people moving from their village huts so a road can be built. They support this by discussing roads used by traders, Genesis 37:12-28, and how John the Baptist discussed preparing a road for the Lord. The discussion items for students included questions such as, “Has your village ever been visited by an important person? What preparations were made for that visit?”

Promotion of Education: The government of Southern Sudan needs doctors and other educated people. One section of the text is devoted to thanking God for education that is available to the human race, quoting the parts of the Bible that relate to developing a skill set. It quotes Exodus 31:1 on the gift of artistic work that God gives to Bezalel. The lesson works from the Bible by suggesting “when God gives us knowledge he wants us to use it for helping others. That means when you become a medical doctor or a judge you should use that knowledge for serving other people and not only your own people.”

Refugees: Not only does Southern Sudan use the examples of war in its own county but also it uses the work of Jesus to help local children extend their hands and hearts to potential refugees from other countries. “During the civil war in Sudan many people have lost their property. Some people were forced to run from their area to other areas with nothing to eat or wear. The United Nations and some organizations including the church came up with assistance in form of relief to help the people of Sudan. The textbook refers to Jesus as the first refugee and quotes Luke 14: 13-14 as a model for giving when people are in need.

Persecution: Quoting Acts 5:17-52, the text encourages the Southern Sudanese to stay with the faith and not become Muslim for promises of food. The text quotes the apostles, saying, “We must obey God and not men.” The book says “there are many stories of torture during this civil war.” The government, which is an Islamic government, mainly forces conversion for food. Other Islamic organizations such as Daawa Islamia control the relief work in Sudan except the areas under SPLA (the government of Southern Sudan). When you take relief food, the person in charge will ask you whether you are a Muslim. If you are not a Muslim, then he will tell you that the food is for Muslims only, but it is open for those who want to convert to Islam. Then they will be given food. The book then asks the students to discuss how Christians living in Northern Sudan are being persecuted and to discuss the reactions of Christians worldwide.

The many levels of Christian religious education taught by the Southern Sudan government are unique in the way they build community and responsibility. Every value that is important, from crop rotation to respect for individual uniqueness and tribal communities, is taught in that context. It is a smart way of teaching the values of the country and local communities. It could never happen in the United States, but it is making a major difference in local villages in Sudan. It is knitting together diverse tribal cultures to make a united Southern Sudan, creatively with respect for the beliefs and realities of a country without much clean water and which functions mainly without electricity.

One would say that separation of church and state, as we do in America is the best path to take. In Southern Sudan, however, thinking outside the box and utilizing religion through the government has been an effective way to be able to find progress for devastated people who have no other hope and cannot be reached in any other way.

What I Learned From My 40th High-School Reunion

Monday, October 19th, 2009

I just attended my 40th high-school reunion in Shaker Heights, Ohio. It was a school that I never graduated from and, in fact, never attended. However, I attended the elementary and junior high school and maintained many relationships over the years. It was a great experience, and I learned quite a bit about life from the weekend.

We went to school in the middle of the 1960s race difficulties, and the community did not solve the race problem by bussing students. Instead, it made entire areas of the community open to housing for minorities which was then reflected in the overall population of the school system. This diversity has served our class and the entire community well over the years.

The reunion taught me several things, which I will share with you:

1. Age is the great leveler. By the time you get to be 58 or 59, it is no longer important to you or others your age what you do for a living. Classmates who had basic jobs talked to classmates who were elected officials, doctors and lawyers. People just want to connect to others.

2. Everyone thought they were alone in feeling outside and different. To paraphrase federal Judge Dan Polster, a classmate, most people thought they were on the outside and that they were experiencing that difference alone. Many people did not feel comfortable enough to share that pain with others, but they can now, years later.

3. Community is crucial. As classmates talked and shared their lives, it became apparent that the sense of community and shared values is important to not only a communities well being but also to an individuals progress and sense of self. Learning must happen in the context a shared responsibility to a community. Many classmates were disappointed with others who did not attend, as they felt that attending a reunion really adds and impacts to the greater whole of the community.

4. What is happening in the world has great impact. My cousin, Aaron, attended the reunion with his wife, a classmate. He was astounded as to how different this class was even though the class was only two years younger than his. It is the same school but an entirely different dynamic. The shooting of four Kent State students in 1970 as well as Woodstock changed individual lives as well as the entire group.

5. Teachers make a huge difference. As classmates spoke on panels and to some of the former teachers who attended this reunion, it was clear that even little phrases made great impact. These included how to get through math (think of each equation as money not numbers) to how a Ph.D. researcher became interested in science from his 7th-grade teacher.

6. High standards influence outcome. The school system I attended set high standards for its students. Many students did not come from bookish families, and currently the school system has a significant number of students on some form of public assistance. Forty years later, the school has approximately the same college attendance rate, which is extremely high.

7. Beginnings influence how community and individuals form. Anyone who has worked in a corporation knows that often the initial corporate culture can influence the life of the company. Shaker Heights began as a community of the Shaker Sect, which was a bit strange but had a highly moral code. The history of the community is taught in the early grades of the school system, making students aware of the foundations of the community.

8. Everyone can change, grow and be different. That observation was most impressive to many of us attending the reunion. One classmate was a nerd type who kept to himself and wound up hosting a part of the weekend; another was a bit uppity in the past and was one of the warmest and kindest people at the weekend events. Life experience changes people, and often for the better.

9. Going home is important. One person told me that this allowed them to be in the past, present and future. Some classmates hadn’t been back to their hometown in 30 years, and they said how much both their memories and their sense of self needed the visit. It helped them to understand the context of their lives.

10. People observe and remember things about you that you would never guess. It was quite amazing how many times someone would do a “I remember when you …” and the person being referred to had no idea that something they said or did was remembered. Those observations 40 to 50 years later can give you information about yourself that you would never guess.

11. Relationships formed in childhood are often the most simple and real. The people you grow up with see you as that person they played with. They don’t see the adult person. They know you before you were the working adult you are, and they just enjoyed you for the fun and conversation. They didn’t want much from you except to play jump rope or baseball. Those relationships are treasures that, if nurtured, can be a safe haven for life.

12. People like to have fun at any age. My class isn’t over the hill yet, but we are looking down from the other side of the mountain. Letting go and having a good time is important to people, and it is important that we don’t get so loaded down with responsibilities that we forget to smile and laugh.

I hope I never forget what I learned from my classmates and after all these years they still have much to teach me. It was definitely worth the effort.

GOP Must Take ‘Chill Pill’ On Obama Nobel

Tuesday, October 13th, 2009

The Republicans need to take a “chill pill” about their reaction to the president being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. They have gone overboard and are risking the “sour grapes” perception by the public at large. If there are any sour grapes, they should be found in the garden of former President Bill Clinton. I speculate that upon hearing the news Friday morning, President Clinton let out a few expletives that would have made Rahm Emanuel blush. President George Bush must have done the same.

The fact is that the Norwegian Nobel Committee decides who is the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize. Norway is a peaceful country with a long history of making surprising choices with the Nobel. Not only did they give it to Palestine Liberation Organization Chairman Yasser Arafat, but Henry Kissinger also won. Many people were shocked when both of these men were awarded the peace prize. The prize has been used as both an award and as a carrot to promote better action and leadership on specific issues. In my view, President Obama is getting the award for what some would call “representative leadership.” There were other people in addition to Mikhail Gorbachev and former President Ronald Reagan who were responsible for ending the communist era. However, both of the leaders were the individuals who represented the change. The same is true for President Obama. Many people have worked on climate change and non-proliferation, but he is the one who represents much of what is being done and the change that is taking place in the world.

The carping on the airwaves has included the fact that the nominations are made in February and that President Obama had only been president for a very short period of time. The fact is that the Norwegian Nobel Committee can decide at any point to change its mind and decide that candidate Obama had already reached across the ocean with his goals and dreams by the time he became president.

It is also something to be proud of as Americans. This year was an excellent year for Nobel Prizes won by Americans. Some of the medicine, chemistry and physics prizes went to Americans. I didn’t see any Russians on the list, and despite China’s huge population only one Chinese person was on the list. America should be proud. We may be having a difficult time economically, but we are still out in the forefront contributing to science and medicine.

There were some Republicans who were proud of the president and Fox News Channel’s Bill O’Reilly was one of them. He said as Americans we should be proud, but not so with the Republican Party and its Chairman Michael Steele. There are times to comment and times to let it be, and his timing was way off. He asked, “What has the president accomplished?” The Norwegian Nobel Committee was clear in what it stated about the award. It was due to President Obama’s “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between people.”

The award did not say that he created peace or that a treaty had been signed. The honor states that it is for “effort.” Like him or hate him, Barack Obama has put in the effort. He did it before he became president and has continued to do it since taking the highest office in the land.

The Republicans really went overboard with their fundraising letter that they produced and distributed just 30 hours after the prize was announced. They sent the letter to their vast e-mail list, and my guess is that it will go directly to their direct mail house.

In his fundraising appeal the Republican Chairman said: “It is unfortunate that the president’s star power has outshined tireless advocates who have made real achievements working toward peace and human rights.”

Steele goes on and lumps the Democrats in the same boat as people on the very far Left. He stated: “the Democrats and their international leftist allies want America made subservient to the agenda of global redistribution and control. And truly patriotic Americans like you and our Republican Party are the only thing standing in their way.”

He goes on with his pitch to say, “Help our party spread the word about the Obama Democrats’ dangerous naïveté and power grab. Please support GOP elected officials as they work to hold the Democrats accountable by making a contribution of $25, $50, $100, $500, or $1000 to the Republican National Committee today.”

It is shameful that the Republican Party is so desperate to raise cash that they would stoop to the lowest tactics possible and utilize the receipt of the Nobel Peace prize by the president to raise money and red bait by saying “leftist allies.” It is a complete outrage, and the Republican Party really should take its foot out of its mouth and substitute “a chill pill.”

Republicans would do themselves a favor if they put aside partisan differences and were proud of the Nobel committee’s recognition of our president instead of using the award as a divisive fundraising technique.

Note To Tea Partiers: Give Gays A Fair Shake

Monday, October 5th, 2009

The tea-party movement is alive and well, and has expanded from just protesting the stimulus and health-care bills before Congress to all forms of government intervention in the lives of Americans. Some of the tea party websites have various propositions that people can vote on, including getting rid of Medicare. Movement organizers have put out a manifesto in an attempt to leave their stamp on next year’s mid-term elections. More power to them. Grassroots movements are the American way. It is great that citizens feel so moved by their own concerns and the acts of their government that they want to get involved.

One of the main tea party websites says that their impetus for beginning the movement was government spending and taxation. They say that their core values are “fiscal responsibility, constitutionally limited government and free markets.” They support states rights for those areas not specifically mentioned in the Constitution. Their manifesto says they support individual liberty within the confines of the law.

This is all well and good except when it comes to a relatively unprotected class of American citizens – those folks who are gay and lesbian. It is amazing how many tea partiers I have spoken to who believe in opposing gay marriage as well as gay foster parents and families.

Their arguments are based on their religious views and their sense of “morality,” which is completely contrary to their views about limited government and taxation. It is true that states have traditionally managed the affairs of the family, from regulating marriage to deciding matters of adoption and foster care. However, when states defined marriage as being only between members of the same race it was clear that the states were carrying out a racist policy. In this century, it is hard to believe that those kinds of laws even existed.

It is the same situation with children in foster care. Some states keep children in group homes rather than letting them be cared for by gay people who have a desire and ability to care for them. I know two couples caring for foster children in states that allow gay foster parents. One set of gay parents has been caring for two boys since their mother had the children taken away from her almost 12 years ago. They have a shared care arrangement with the extended family so the boys have some contact with the healthier members of the family of origin. The other foster family I know cares for a 13-year-old girl whose father is in jail. After a trial back at the biological mother’s house, the girl is now back with them. The mother, a drug addict, left the 13-year-old girl at home alone for 24 hours while she went out with her current boyfriend.

The argument could be made that these are states’ decisions to make and that certain states may decide to have children grow up in group homes rather than have them live with a gay family. Two issues surface here: First, is it good for children to be brought up in group homes? Second, while some states may offer a way for two same-sex parents to recoup some of the expenses of raising children, the federal government does not.

In an investigative piece in Saturday’s New York Times entitled, “The costs of being a gay couple,” journalists Tara Siegel Bernard and Ron Lieber analyzed the numbers and found that over a lifetime the costs of being a gay couple varied from $41,196 to $467,562. Their study assumed that the couple would be raising two children.

Most heterosexual married couples do not realize that there are tons of federal benefits for couples that are married and have children. Yes there is a marriage penalty in certain tax brackets, but there is a marriage tax advantage in other tax brackets. These benefits range from the federal taxes that gay people pay on domestic partner health benefits to a lack of social security
benefits or the death benefit if one of the partners dies early. Certainly, any children of the partners are not entitled to the death benefit either. From taxes from a transfer of property, such as a home or apartment, to the spousal benefit of an IRA, gay people are paying taxes that heterosexual couples don’t. These are just some of the glaring examples of inequities.

If the tea party movement is really interested in limited government and fairness, it should list giving gay people a fair shake in their concerns over taxation. It would send a real message to the rest of America that these folks are concerned about taxation for all Americans, and not just themselves.

President Clinton’s Wonderful Example

Monday, September 28th, 2009

I’ve gone hot and cold with President Clinton. I loved him when he came into office, supported him throughout the Monica Lewinsky crisis and became upset with him when he left office for not pardoning my friend Webb Hubbell. Although I was disappointed with him for the Monica crisis, I am now amazed at the work he is doing for the world. Like most human beings, he is a mixed bag. Like many of us, his weakness is also his strength. This week, President Clinton’s weakness for women of all kinds showed up as his great strength. His Clinton Global Initiative, which took place in New York, focused on the needs of women and a commitment to empower girls around the world.

The best thing about his annual conference is that those attending must make a public commitment as to what they are willing to do for others. It is a commitment of time, money and resources. During the five years of his annual conferences, people and organizations that have attended have committed billions of dollars.

The facts that President Clinton presented are not pretty. “Women perform 66 percent of the world’s work and produce 50 percent of the food, yet earn only 10 percent of the income and own 1 percent property,” he said. It turns out that when women receive pay, she will reinvest 90 percent back into her family, compared to men who only reinvest 35 percent. This fact became crystal clear to me when I visited the slums of Kenya in 1994 and saw shacks with no running water and no electricity. One large shack, which functioned as the local bar ,was filled with all male drinkers in the middle of the day. The women were washing at the well, and the men were drinking.

For every year of education, residents of the third world increase their earning power by 10 percent. Paul Farmer, a doctor who has built clinics around the world, said that more than one billion people lack safe drinking water, two billion people lack basic sanitation and women represent two-thirds of the world’s illiterate.

These facts mean that just a little bit of empowerment can mean a huge difference in people’s lives, especially women. Amazing results have occurred with President Clinton’s Initiative through small programs which were created by people with an idea and mission. I met many individuals this week who were moved to do something and did not wait for a large organization to send a pitch letter. These people just saw a need and began a small organization to make something happen. The creativity and the business models presented were not charity as much as they were empowerment and sustainability.

All for Africa is a Non-Government Organization, or NGO, that I invested in because they have a business model for investing in the continent. Using a large donated track of land in Ghana, it plants palm trees. It take three years for the plants to produce palm oil, and after the initial investment by a non profit for the planting and care of the trees they produced the equivalent of that investment for the next 25 or 30 years. Their theory is that many mission-minded people can raise the money to build a school or orphanage but do not have the money to sustain it.

There are handicraft cooperatives that train women to make baskets and bead jewelry and then work with stores such as Macy’s to sell the work. This allows small groups of women to market and merchandise their work in a broader world market. Shoe4Africa began by sending shoes to Africa so women could begin to run. They organize races and have used their contact with women to promote AIDS education and awareness. Something simple such as Sustainable Health Enterprise provides access to eco-friendly sanitary pads. That reduces pelvic disease and increases school attendance, which increases economic growth. Other programs train nurses and increase the number of women attending college with a major in business. Every one of these programs gives the women a hand up not a hand out, as former President Clinton says. It is a far cry from the foreign aid that many of us grew up with.

The Clinton Initiative is making a huge difference in the lives of women and girls. It proves that our personal difficulties can turn into our greatest assets, and President Clinton is a wonderful example of how that can work. It is a testament to his life and work.