Daily Archives: January 25, 2009

“The only tired I was, was tired of was giving in.” Rosa Parks

One thing that bothered me about the pre-inauguration concert last weekend was Samuel L. Jackson's speech, and how he characterized Rosa Parks's refusal to give up her seat. It's a comforting myth: the unobtrusive, non-troublemaker who was just too tired to get up and move to the back of the bus on her way home from work.

Today, On the Media carried a story that clearly contradicts the accepted myth. In fact, Rosa Parks is what we raise our children to be, and what we expect of ourselves: a committed, active citizen, organized with her fellow citizens to change what was wrong.

I don't know about you, but the truth enhances, and doesn't not diminish her,  in my eyes.

“Bipartisanship” is not the Holy Grail

Harry Truman in a “bipartisan” moment with Lauren Bacall, a staunch liberal Democrat. This is about as “bipartisan as Harry got.”

Last week was exhilarating for Democrats and, judging by the international media, for people all over the planet who have suffered for nearly a decade from the misguided and often criminal policies of George Bush and his terribly inept administration.

The swearing in of Barack Obama and the departure of the Connecticut Cowboy from our public affairs was something long anticipated, and, after our long dark winter, as welcome as the return of springtime and birdsong, at least in these quarters.

The Republican smear machine however, wasted no time in cranking up to its full powers of bloviation. Their program of attacking nearly every move Obama made and every statement he uttered, began seconds after his swearing in and I’m sure will continue unabated in the immediate future. Here’s hoping that they are afforded every opportunity to quibble and obstruct, to grouse and whine, as a minority party for decades to come.

The moaning and squawking over the slightly bobbled recitation of the oath of office, a gaffe that was meaningless and easily ignored by people who have something other than chowder between their ears, was, in Republican circles, fanned into a twenty four hour cause celebre by the fulminating heads of Fox Noise and soon picked up on the other “open all night,” “all the news that fits,” networks.

The storm so roiled the calm in our national teapot that Obama’s advisers encouraged him to retake the oath, which he did in a private and sparsely attended ceremony in the White House a day later.

All seemed well with the republic until Glen Beck pointed out that Obama had not sworn the oath with his hand on a Bible,” I checked” Beck chirped, “We have never had a president sworn into office without a Bible,”

Beck’s research into the matter was apparently less than skin deep. Ali Frick at Think Progress quickly countered with this:

“Beck is simply wrong. As Slate recently reported, official records kept by the Architect of the Capitol show that Teddy Roosevelt did not use a Bible in 1901; and Lyndon Johnson is rumored to have used “a Catholic missal aboard Air Force One after Kennedy’s assassination.” According to his own letters, John Quincy Adams placed his hand on a constitutional law book rather than the Bible.”

Beck’s investigations didn’t include the “actual Constitution” which clearly states that no religious test for public office shall be required, thereby making the Bible, or any other religious text, token, amulet or magic charm unnecessary. It seems that the “Constitution” so often quoted in Beck’s parallel universe simply doesn’t contain an Article six.

The constitution and strict adherence to the rule of law seemed much on the minds of Republicans this past week, a surprising fact after eight years of their support of a President who famously referred to the document as “just a goddamn piece of paper” and spent much of his two sad terms trampling it underfoot with nearly unanimous republican complicity.

The party that hocked the future of our great grand children to the Chinese, set the world aflame and proved itself completely incapable of anything resembling competent governance during its twelve years of majority now seeks to instruct the new president, who hasn’t yet had time to sort out his new key ring, exactly how things ought to be run.

John Boehner in the House and his counterpart, Mitch McConnell, the replacement for Ted Stevens as the face of irascibility in the Senate, quickly assembled on deck a dozen or so other loose cannon to obstruct the disbursal of the next round of TARP funds and fight against Obama’s stimulus package. Forget the fact that they tripped all over themselves to approve the bailout of banks and brokers under the recent stewardship of jolly King George.

Following their obscene treatment of American automakers and labor they are now delaying the approval of Hilda Solis as Labor Secretary because of her support for American Labor and, worse, her support of the “Employee Free Choice Act,” which corporate America is spending vast fortunes to defeat and I assume  Republicans are opposed to out of something more tangible than conservative principle.

They are the same old Republican Party, prowling the mall like jackals or perched buzzard like on the fences waiting for any opportunity to transfer public wealth to the ruling class, any chance to create greater disadvantage for the working class.

The landscape that Republicans envision when they speak of “America” is one far different than that seen by the average Democrat. I for instance see no beauty in long lines of the unemployed waiting for a job at minimum wage or less. To a Republican that is an idyllic image, warming to the heart.

Harry Truman once said:

The Republicans believe that the power of government should be used first of all to help the rich and the privileged in the country. With them, property, wealth, comes first. The Democrats believe that the power of government should be used to give the common man more protection and a chance to make a living. With us the people come first.

In my opinion Obama would be wise to ride his mandate, to maintain the strong cyber link to the body politic and use it to pressure the Democratic majority in the direction it would travel naturally were it not for the corrupting influence of corporate money. I would urge our new President to lose some of his zeal for the grail of “bipartisanship” and simply take his case to the people, and, like an old fashioned Democrat, govern in their name.

Harry also said this:

“I don’t like bipartisans. Whenever a fellow tells me he’s bipartisan, I know that he’s going to vote against me.”

Bob Higgins

Worldwide Sawdust

Ratzinger: Holocaust Denier A-OK

 

VATICAN CITY (Reuters) – Pope Benedict Saturday rehabilitated a traditionalist bishop who denies the Holocaust, despite warnings from Jewish leaders that it would seriously harm Catholic-Jewish relations and foment anti-Semitism.

 Elan Steinberg, vice president of the American Gathering of Holocaust Survivors and their Descendants, told Reuters: “At a time when the Vatican should have sided with the victims it acted instead to desecrate their memory.

“This was an act of moral debasement unworthy of a moral institution. For this Vatican political expediency trumps ethical and human considerations,” he said.

 

Catamount Blue’s “screw you” policy

I’ve posted before about health care and problems with it.  Well, here’s a connected problem with the idea of privatized health care.

There’s a long complicated story I wrote earlier about the build up to this, but here’s the shorter version: I applied for Catamount in mid-November and it took six weeks to get final approval, with lots of redundant and unnecessary steps in the meantime.  But I got my forms into Catamount Blue by late December and when I contacted them about it, they told me I was all set provided all my paperwork was in by December 29th, which it was, and that I should get something from them by mid/late January but that I shouldn’t worry, that I was covered, etc.

In the meantime, I got hired for a new job, and I will have insurance through the new job soon, but thought I had a few weeks to decide which plan I wanted, review the information, etc.

Not so much so.  Catamount Blue, even though I was approved for care from the state of Vermont and have been paying a monthly premium to the state, rejected my application for care because I forgot to check off marital status on the application.  

Of course, they send me this notification on a Friday so I can’t call anyone to resolve it until next week, but in the meantime, I have medical appointments scheduled for Monday that I will probably have to cancel.

In the meantime, I’m concerned that this will cause my new insurance to view this period as a gap in coverage, giving them the option to reject treatment for prior conditions.

I am working under the belief that this will all get resolved, even if I have to hire a lawyer to intervene, but this is a major “you have got to be kidding me” situation.  It’s completely absurd to reject an application because of a minor and irrelevant clerical error.  I have resources and ways to handle this.

I can’t imagine what this is like for people without means.  This is insane and inhumane.