Category Archives: Essays

April 13, 2012 · 6:59 PM

In Defense of Hilary Rosen

The flurry of activity surrounding Hilary Rosen’s recent comment that Ann Romney “has actually never worked a day in her life” is dizzying.  Right-wing media hounds naturally jumped on Rosen, a Democratic strategist, and painted her and the entire Democratic Party as hostile to traditional family values.  Even President and Mrs. Obama weighed in on the issue, each emphasizing that motherhood is a difficult endeavor.  In typical conciliatory fashion, the Democrats have haphazardly begun trying to explain Rosen’s statement and declare their overwhelming support for the family unit.  Rosen finally back tracked on Thursday and apologized to Romney.  She should have stuck to her words.

Like millions of American women, Ann Romney chose marriage and motherhood as her career.  There was a time not too long ago, when that was really the only career choice women had.  But, it’s not so much an individual choice as it is a blessing.  Romney is fortunate to be married to a man who earns (actually, in his case, has) so much money that she doesn’t have to work.  But, any woman in the same situation doesn’t make that selection on her own; her husband is the other half of the plan.  Men have no choice but to work anyway, when they bring children into the world – unless he wants to be labeled a deadbeat dad and possibly imprisoned.  Yes, motherhood is a full-time job – so is fatherhood, in case anyone hasn’t figured that out.  But, it’s a different game being a parent and having a full-time job outside the home.  Millions of women – and men – don’t have the privilege of staying home with their kids; they have to go to work.

Historically, presidential candidates have been relatively affluent.  How else could they spend so much time campaigning?  But, Mitt Romney breaks the mold.  He’s the single richest presidential candidate we’ve ever had with an estimated net wealth between $150 million and $200 million.  No wonder his perfectly-coiffed wife doesn’t have to work!

I doubt if Ann Romney knows what it’s like to scramble out of the house at 6 or 7 on a rainy weekday morning, hoping to get her kids to day care or school on time, so she, in turn, can make it to work.  I can’t see that Romney has ever been tied to a time clock, worried that she might not get her 40 hours in for the week because someone with more seniority will temporarily take her place.  I’ve seen that happen.  Does Ann Romney know what it’s like to dread an annual review, hoping she gets at least a 5% raise?  Does she know the feeling of exhausting all her vacation days before year’s end when one of her kids suddenly gets sick?  Has she ever dragged her sick body out of bed to go to work because she fears losing her job and therefore, her benefits?  Has she ever been forced to work overtime: late nights and weekends?  Has Romney ever dealt with bully bosses and rude coworkers?

I worked with a woman whose daughter’s high school graduation was held on a Friday.  Our supervisor wouldn’t give her the day off because one other person was scheduled to be on vacation that same week.  My colleague addressed our department manager about the problem; the latter intervened and forced our supervisor to give her the day off.  But, my constituent later confided she was worried the move would cost her the job.  Around that same time, a male friend of mine experienced an identical dilemma with his son’s high school graduation.  But, his boss told him he would definitely lose his job if dared to take the day off.  So, he had to go into the office and miss out on a typical, but major milestone for his only son.

My mother went to work at age 19 and retired 51 years later.  One time, early in her career, a male supervisor reached under her skirt; in another instance, a man in her office sneaked up behind her and popped her bra strap.  In the 1980’s, she had a male boss who told younger women in the office to ignore her because she was “going through the change.”  Shortly afterwards, a female friend and coworker was promoted to supervisor – and turned on her and other women in the office, apparently relishing in her new authoritarian role.  At the age of 56, my mother quit that company to work for another in the same industry.  But, towards the end of her working years, she had another female boss who, for some reason, simply didn’t like her – and made it known with paltry salary increases and hostile comments in front of others.

My father started working at age 14 and, except for a brief stint in the Army during the Korean War (mandatory because he’s male), also labored for the better part of half a century.  At most, he got 2 weeks of vacation, dealt with a stingy boss and drug- and alcohol-addicted coworkers and stood on his feet most of his working life; his knees are now paying the price for it.  He was laid off in the early 1990’s and then brought back on as a contract worker.  When he got laid off again shortly thereafter, he didn’t qualify for unemployment insurance because he was considered a contract worker.

A close friend of mine is the sole breadwinner in his immediate family.  He and his wife made the decision, when they started a family that he would work and she would stay home.  But, it’s been rough.  A software programmer, my friend bounced from one contract job to another as the technology bubble burst at the turn of the century.  He had a brief bout with cancer, broke a small bone in his neck in a freak accident and drove a car without air conditioning.  If you’ve endured a summer in Texas, you know that’s almost a fate worse than death.  But, he persevered and continued working – he had no choice.  His wife actually knows what it’s like to labor outside the home and, more importantly, knows how blessed she is to have a considerate, hard-working husband.  Millions of other women in America aren’t so fortunate.

Can Ann Romney relate to any of these scenarios?  How about Mitt?  If they say yes, then I’ll give them more than a passing glance.  During his 1992 run for president, Bill Clinton told a woman during a debate with then-President George H.W. Bush that he “gets it,” referring to the economy.  And, he really did – as opposed to his rival who seemed oblivious to everything but his watch.  Ann Romney rebuked Hilary Rosen by claiming she’s had her own battles in life.  Well, everyone has a hard luck story somewhere in their background.  But, unless Romney’s “battles” have been catastrophic or life-threatening, she’s going to run into the brick wall of middle class reality where people can’t rely upon a trust fund, or don’t have an elevator for their cars.  People like my parents and my good friend are the ones Hilary Rosen was talking about.  They’re the ones who built this country and have kept it going.  They’re the ones who’ve been screwed by failed trickle-down economic policies that favor the largest corporations and wealthiest individuals; people like the Romneys who reside in the ivory tower of the top 1% of the top 1%.  The rest of us – with or without kids – go to work.  That’s the only choice we have.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Essays

Tagged as , ,

March 20, 2012 · 10:27 PM

Name Calling

Whenever I’ve completed an online job application in recent years, I’ve tended to leave the “race / ethnicity” category blank, or select “Choose not to disclose.”  This modern American society isn’t supposed to care about such matters anymore, as long as the applicant has the right qualifications and – most importantly – can end up doing the job.  So, I’m just sort of helping to see that utopian vision come to fruition.  As I state on my “About” page, I’m of Spanish, Mexican Indian and German descent – and tell people exactly that.  It often throws more than a few folks for a loop, especially when they want so badly to put me in a little ethnic box.  I love pissing people off like that!  Then, they get upset and start calling me names, but I still don’t care about their feelings.  I am what I am.

Increasingly, it seems, many of my fellow Americans are following suit.  The 2010 census produced some curious results in the race category.  More than 21.7 million people described themselves outside of the standard labels; using such terms as “Arab,” “Haitian,” “Mexican” and – my personal favorite – “multiracial.”

The government has 4 racial categories:

  • White,
  • Black,
  • Asian / Pacific Islander,
  • American Indian / Alaska Native.

Here’s where it gets confusing – and sometimes ugly.  If you’re ‘White,’ that means Caucasian, which generally means you trace your ancestry to Europe.  If you’re ‘Black,’ that means Negro, which generally means you trace your ancestry to Africa.  If you’re ‘Asian / Pacific Islander,’ that means you’re Asian Mongoloid, which means you trace your ancestry to Asia, the Orient and / or one or more of the thousands of Pacific islands.  If you’re ‘American Indian / Alaska Native,’ that means you’re American mongoloid and your people didn’t come over here on the Mayflower; they met the damn boat.

In recent years, some “Blacks” have referred to themselves as “African-American,” meaning they trace their ancestry to the African continent – which, according to the Human Genome Project, we all do anyway – but they’re also Americans.  Since I’m mostly “White” (Spanish and German), I guess I could classify myself as European-American – hopefully without sounding like a David Duke protégé.  But, if I do that, then I’d be neglecting the Mexican Indian part of me.  Since Mexican Indians are indigenous to what is now México and south Texas, that would also make them “American Indian,” so I guess I’m still very much an American – and not just by birth.  So, the “European-American” label would, in a sense, be all-encompassing, but still not clear enough.

Lately, though, I’ve seen these 2 categories: “White (non-Hispanic)” and “Hispanic (non-White).”  Damn!  If I select the “White (non-Hispanic)” group, that would indicate I have no Spanish or Indian blood, which simply isn’t true.  My Spanish and Indian ancestors would rise from their graves and haunt me until I repent and correct the form.  But, if I choose “Hispanic (non-White),” then that implies I’m strictly of Spanish and Mexican Indian extraction – which also isn’t true.  My Teutonic relatives up in Michigan (and the Bavarian heartland) would disown me, if they knew me that well.  I normally don’t care how others feel about me, but this is too important.

I don’t know when the U.S. government decided people from the Iberian Peninsula (Spain and Portugal) aren’t considered “White,” or why, but it upsets the natural balance of Caucasianism.  From what I understand, Portuguese folks don’t like to be called “Hispanic” because that puts them in the same category as Mexicans, Cubans and Puerto Ricans; and Spaniards don’t like to be grouped with people from Latin America because the latter often have too much Indian and Negro in them.  But apparently, that Indian and Negro blood is what generated the “Hispanic (non-White)” box in the first place!  And, that’s another thing – what if you have Negro blood in you, like a lot of people from the Caribbean islands and many parts of Brazil?  In that case, you’ll check every damn box on that application and really throw the computers out of whack!

Back in 2000, the subject of race came up at my work, as everyone discussed the ongoing census.  One woman said to me, “But, you’re Mexican!”  My manager (a Negro) laughed at the way she just blurted that out, as if she was trying to put me in my place; that properly-designated box.  But, I wasn’t smiling.  “Do you even know what that means?” I asked her.  She looked at me – this little woman who was part “White” and part “Cherokee” – and couldn’t answer.  The 2000 census allowed Americans to classify themselves as “multiracial” for the first time.  I’d like to hope the 2020 census will be the last time the race category is listed at all, but I guess I’m still trying to achieve that elusive utopia.  I stared hard at that one little mixed-race woman and said, “I’m not Mexican.  I’m American.”

That pretty much ended that particular conversation – and more than a decade into the 21st century, others are still having it.

1 Comment

Filed under Essays

Tagged as , , , ,

March 18, 2012 · 9:17 PM

Rick Perry Slinks Back to Texas

As the battle for the Republican Party’s presidential nomination drags on like a serial horror flick – with Mitt Romney trying to convince voters he’s “severely conservative;” Rick Santorum proclaiming how badly he hates queers and birth control; Newt Gingrich hoping there are enough angry old White men out there to put him in the Oval Office; and Ron Paul just sticking around – Rick Perry has returned to the Texas governor’s mansion and melts back into his previous life.  Governor “Good Hair” had hoped his Southern – or rather, uniquely Texas charm – would sway conservative voters across the nation like it did in the Lone Star state.  Since entering public office as a Democrat in 1984, Perry had never lost a political race; not even a primary – until now.  He earned a mere 10% in Iowa’s January 3 primary and skipped campaigning in New Hampshire to focus on South Carolina where I’m sure he thought he could win easily.  But, initial polls in one of the most scarlet of Republican states showed he was not the golden favorite.  So he bowed out before South Carolinians even headed to the polls and threw his support behind Gingrich.

Now, after the shock and awe of national politics, he’s back home.  I must have blinked and missed news of his return flight to Austin.  Regardless, Perry might have wished he’d never jumped into this year’s presidential race.  Politics at any level has become a blood sport in this nation.  Ever since the Watergate debacle, when Richard Nixon’s gross ambitions compelled him to flaunt the law and abuse his authority, the American people have come to expect the worst from their elected officials – and from those who aspire to join them.  But, like his predecessor, George W. Bush, Perry hoped he could turn his successful Texas governorship into an equally successful presidency.  Success, in this case, is relative.

Either way, it didn’t work, and now Perry struggles to recoup his tattered reputation even from fellow Texans.  An Associated Press poll shortly after he left the race showed that 42% of registered Texas voters approved of the job he’s doing as governor – a 10-point drop from just a year earlier – and 45% believed his failed presidential campaign hurt Texas’ image.  This latter fact is surprising, given Texans’ sense of independence.  We’re not prone to show concern for how others view us.  Californians and New Englanders often find this out the hard way.

Now, the Texas Democratic Party – which often looks like a Navajo family living amidst Nazis – is demanding more accountability from a governor who spent 6 months on the road trying to win the GOP nomination.  The state’s security tab for Perry’s run stood close to $800,000 at the end of January, but rose as invoices for things like airfare and rental cars came due.  It now stands in excess of $1 million, with many of those expenses for overtime pay for law enforcement personnel who protected Perry and his family while on the campaign trail.  Texas Democrats want Perry to reimburse the state.

“What a waste of money,” lamented Rep. Jessica Farrar (D-Houston), leader of the Texas House Democrats.  “Why can’t his private donors pay for it?”

But, Perry’s camp balks at the prospect, repeatedly claiming that the Texas Department of Public Safety is charged with protecting the governor and his family no matter the circumstances.

“Governor Perry is governor no matter where he goes, and DPS has a policy of providing security for governors and their families everywhere they travel — as they have back several administrations — just as many other states do, and as the federal government does for the president through the Secret Service,” Perry spokeswoman Lucy Nashed told the Texas Tribune last month.

Last year New Jersey Governor Chris Christie encountered a similar problem with personal security expenses, when he took a helicopter to travel to his son’s basketball game; a tab for which he reimbursed the state.  Granted, a kid’s sporting event doesn’t command quite the scrutiny as a presidential campaign race.  But, there’s a significant principal at stake.  Most Texans didn’t ask for Perry to run for president.  Even moderate Republicans were satisfied to see him remain as governor and deal with the state’s growing home foreclosure crisis, unemployment and border issues.

There’s another figure I find interesting.  In a poll the Dallas Morning News took of its readership last month, 53% of respondents stated Perry should not seek another term in office.  He’s already the longest-serving governor in the state’s history; having served since December 2000, when the U.S. Supreme Court decided to stop the Florida recount and declared Bush the winner.  Perry won overwhelmingly in 2002 against Democratic challenger Tony Sanchez, taking 58% of the vote.  That didn’t surprise anyone.  In the aftermath of the 09/11 terrorist attacks, the surge of national pride assured any Republican from the South an election victory.  But, Perry – with the sewage mentality that’s become part of political machinations – had maligned Sanchez with “suitcase ads;” alleging the latter had ties to a Texas savings and loan collapse in the late 1980’s (which, if anyone remembers correctly, was a Republican-inspired mess) and vicariously to Mexican drug dealers who had laundered money through the institution.  That Sanchez had no direct connection to that particular S&L and absolutely none to Mexican drug dealers was irrelevant to some Texas voters.  It seemed even a fair-skinned, blue-eyed, Texas-born, millionaire businessman who speaks perfect English couldn’t beat Perry because the former is surnamed Sanchez.

The 2006 governor’s race proved a bit more challenging for Perry.  The national GOP was on the defensive, following the government’s pathetic response to Hurricane Katrina and growing anger with the Iraq War.  Perry faced 4 rivals: Democrat Chris Bell, an attorney; Libertarian James Werner; independent Carole Keeton Strayhorn, the state Comptroller who billed herself as “one tough grandma;” and independent Richard “Kinky” Friedman who wanted to become Texas’ “first Jewish – cowboy – poet.”  I voted for Friedman because I was still angry with the Democratic Party’s pansy attempt to unseat Bush 2 years earlier, despite the mud-slinging and name-calling dished out by the GOP.  When I told some friends about my decision, they looked at me like I’d said I was joining the “Ronald Reagan Glee Club.”  Perry won, but with only 39% of the vote.  Bell garnered nearly 30% and Keeton Strayhorn and Friedman each got more than 10%; tallies that made the state’s Republican and Democratic parties take notice.

The 2010 Texas governor’s race turned out less dramatic and quirky.  It was a seemingly straight Republican – Democrat ticket, with former Houston mayor Bill White being Perry’s only real adversary.  It’s only highlight came when Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison tried to snatch the governorship from Perry.  But, Perry succeeded in painting Bailey Hutchison as a true Washington insider; a curious proclamation coming from one staunchly conservative Texas Republican against another.  Perry trounced Bailey Hutchison in the March primary and won with 55% of the vote; in part because White couldn’t seem to form a cohesive campaign, but also because of the growing influence of the “Tea Party.”  Perry seemed to be more self-assured, however, as he didn’t agree to debate White and the other 2 candidates.  Perry appeared to view his role as divinely-inspired; that he somehow had been ordained to be Texas governor – and would hold onto the job like a pope.  The day after his 2010 win, the Dallas Morning News declared that Perry was set for the “national stage,” which many of us feared.  But, Perry would have none of it and repeatedly claimed that he wouldn’t seek the presidency.  Then, he went back on his word and, in an August 13 speech to some 700 conservative activists in South Carolina, announced he would run for president.  Again, I’m sure he felt divinely-inspired – until all hell broke loose around him.  He ended up making an absolute fool of both himself and – to some extent – the entire state of Texas and can’t find anything good to salvage from it.

If there’s a ‘lessons learned’ type of scenario here, it’s rather simple – don’t get too full of yourself.  George W. Bush, for example, was accustomed to Texas Democrats in the Austin state house; people who were often just “DINO’s”: Democrats in Name Only.  The southern Democrats of yesteryear are the Republicans of today; remember, Ronald Reagan and Strom Thurmond had begun their political careers as Democrats.  But, when Bush got to Washington, he faced the Kennedy and Pelosi type of Democrats; the east and west coast liberals who didn’t take kindly to his southern-style patriotism.  Perry, in a way, experienced the same kind of sanguineous bathwater; there’s another world outside of Texas, and not everyone will love you!

Now, Perry sinks back into his duties as governor of the 2nd largest state in the union – perhaps trying to be as obscure as a public official can be – and faces a constituency that isn’t as adoring as before; a constituency that questions his motives and ambitions.  As a life-long Democrat who’s voted Republican only once (and still regrets it), I’m naturally not fond of Perry – but not just from a party affiliation standpoint.  Texans like their characters – especially in politics – and Perry certainly delivered.  But, he may have delivered too much of stereotypical Texas to the nation during his presidential jaunt.  After the dismal presidency of George W. Bush, I’m certain the American populace isn’t eager to see another Texas governor in the Oval Office – at least not for a while.  But, they definitely don’t want someone like Perry who couldn’t remember the legal voting age, the date of this year’s presidential elections and – gosh, there was something else.  Oops!  There’s an old country song with the refrain, “God bless Texas.”  After living through more than a decade of Perry’s leadership, I have to pleadingly paraphrase, “God, please bless Texas!”

Leave a comment

Filed under Essays

Tagged as , ,

March 8, 2012 · 10:22 PM

Bullied to Murder – Again

T.J. Lane in a photo from his Facebook page

 

When I was a sophomore in high school, a fellow student brought a switchblade to school one day and pulled it on an older kid.  The second guy had bullied the younger one since the start of the school year; in fact, he’d bullied a lot of other boys.  But, on this particular day, when he found himself staring at a switchblade in the hand of one of his targets – a tall, lanky kid who wore thick horn-rimmed glasses – he suddenly felt victimized.  The coward beneath the brawn and foul-mouthed exterior abruptly emerged and he reported the incident.  Guess who got in trouble?  Yes, the tall, lanky guy with glasses.  To resolve the matter, a P.E. instructor (who looked like a pint-sized bulldog) paired up the two boys in a boxing match.  “We don’t settle things with knives around here,” he supposedly told the knife-wielder.  The boxing match was an attempt to teach the lanky kid a lesson.  I wondered then – and now – what lesson the other guy had learned.  I imagine he learned it was perfectly okay to terrorize whoever he wanted.

That was over 30 years ago, and I still feel the same way about the incident.  I feel that same way whenever I recall the number of times I was bullied in school.  As a small, shy kid, I was an easy mark, too.  And, in my worst fantasies, I wished I could bring a knife, or even a gun, to school and put a stop to it.  But, I never did.  I had no access to a firearm during my school years and I just never developed the nerve to bring a knife.  But, I wondered…

On February 28, 17-year-old Thomas “T.J.” Lane brought a gun to his suburban Cleveland high school and shot 6 fellow students.  One boy died instantly; 2 others died the next day.  Lane was arrested near the school just hours after the shootings and has already been arraigned.  Because he’s 17 and killed 3 people, he’ll most likely be tried as an adult and sentenced to a maximum security prison.  But, as I watch the media coverage, two terms stick out in my mind: shy and bullied.  T.J. was shy, according to other students at the high school, and had been subjected to harassment.  That was me more than three decades ago – and it was the tall, lanky kid with thick horn-rimmed glasses.  I’m saddened by the deaths of those three young men in Ohio.  But, I empathize with T.J.

In the past 30 years, a lot has changed in the school system – for better or worst.  Schools now have metal detectors and hire their own security personnel.  Who could have imagined our children being treated like terror suspects?  But, since the 1999 Columbine massacre, that’s exactly what’s happened.  Kids with vengeance on their minds aren’t bringing switchblades to school anymore; they’re coming with AK47’s and Molotov cocktails.  But, one significant factor hasn’t changed: kids are still being bullied.  And, school officials are still reacting to the tragedy, instead of acting to stop it in the first place.

It reminds me of the nation’s response to the 09/11 terrorist attacks; only afterwards did someone think to arm airline pilots, fortify cockpit doors and pay closer attention to foreigners who overstayed their Visas.  To be fair, some schools have taken a more proactive approach with emphasis on both counseling and student outreach and not just discipline.  More importantly, the practice of bullying isn’t taken so lightly anymore.  In my youth, adults had a ‘kids-will-be-kids’ attitude; we were told to tough it out.  Now, school officials recognize that bullying can lead to poor academic performance for victims and a greater chance of criminal behavior later in life for the victimizers.

The numbers bear out their concerns.  A 2011 National Education Association (NEA) study found that:

  • 60% of middle school students say they were bullied;
  • 20% of high school students say they were bullied;
  • 20% of all children say they were bullied;
  • 20% of high school students say they have considered suicide because of being bullied;
  • roughly 160,000 students remain home every day for fear of bullying;
  • 30% of students who reported being bullied claim they had brought weapons to school;
  • a bully is 6 times more likely to be incarcerated by age 24;
  • 2/3 of students who are bullied become bullies themselves.

 

But, there still appears to be an alarming disconnect with school officials.  The same study found that:

  • only 16% of staff believe some students are bullied;
  • while 71% of teachers and staff say they intervened in bullying incidents, only 25% of students say teachers or staff intervened.

Even the Obama Administration has become involved; hosting a conference last year on how to recognize and stop bullying.  Thus, when a kid reports being bullied, many adults don’t just sit back and hope everything will work out for the better.  But, as with 09/11, it seems to be almost purely reactionary; we’ve seen an increase in both school shootings and threats of shootings or bombings made by angry students.  Indeed, if a kid sends a text message to a fellow student saying he or she wants to blow up the school, that second kid runs to the principal’s office.  But, how do we intervene before that text message is sent?  That is, what can be done to stop a youth from feeling so desperate?  T.J. Lane had a Facebook page where he spelled out his dark sentiments.  Did someone think to take that seriously prior to February 28?

I believe the crux of the problem lies with the family structure, which has been battered in recent decades.  Divorce rates hover near 50% in the  U.S., with more kids being raised in single-parent homes than ever before in the nation’s history.  The recent recession has placed extreme psychological and emotional burdens on families.  Poverty has always done that to people, but this time it’s more disastrous.  I come from a middle class background and had a stable home life.  I feel that’s what saved me from acting upon any revenge fantasies.  My parents were involved in my life; they didn’t come home after work and drop down in front of a computer, or head off to a racquetball court.  We had dinner together and talked about things.  When I finally told them that a neighborhood boy was leading a group of other kids from my school in bullying me, my father confronted that other boy’s father – and the bullying stopped.  But, T.J. Lane didn’t have that benefit; his father was a convicted criminal.  While it’s an extreme case of parental neglect, there are thousands of other kids who live in otherwise stable homes, surrounded by a wholesome environment – and they’re still bullying targets.  Who’s watching out for them?  Why are some parents too busy these days to take more than a casual interest in their children’s lives?  Why do they expect the schools to handle these matters?

I don’t have all the answers.  I’m not a parent and I don’t know what it takes to run a school.  But, I know how it feels to be bullied.  I know what it’s like to want revenge so badly I could taste the blood of my tormentors.  I’m glad, though, that schools aren’t dismissing such behavior as mere child’s play; the price of growing up and struggling through an awkward adolescence.  In the meantime, everyone at T.J. Lane’s school and everyone in that community will never look at the world the same way again.  But, how many more school shootings will we witness?  Who’s going to give a voice to those troubled youths?  Why can’t we stop kids from being bullied to death?

Visit the government’s “Stop Bullying” site to learn how we all can help.

 

3 Comments

Filed under Essays

Tagged as , , ,

February 29, 2012 · 4:43 PM

Why We Have the Need for February 29

As usual, you can blame the Romans for this mess, and since they were often aggravated with the Jews, you might as well blame them, too.  If Julius Caesar hadn’t decided to reform the old Roman calendar, we might still be adding a month to it every two or three years.  Like most ancient societies, the Romans used the sun and moon to guide their daily lives; when to plant crops, get married, make human sacrifices, etc.  Thus, the Roman calendar was based on a lunar month, which averages 29.5 days.  Around 46 B.C., Caesar – like most politicians – interfered with something that had functioned perfectly for years and declared, “Ist es ridiculum!” – whereupon he relegated the calendar to a solar-based system.

But, as you might expect, Caesar didn’t get it right.  The Julian calendar is based on a year that is 365 days and 6 hours.  Therefore, Caesar added a day to the month of February every 4 years to try to even out matters.  But, the equinoxes, as marked on that calendar, arrived earlier every year; which, in turn, messed up spring planting and spring weddings.  In the Northern Hemisphere, the spring equinox would arrive around March 25.  But, by the 16th century, it was arriving around March 10.  If this had continued, Easter eventually would have occurred in the dead of winter.  And, that of course, would have disrupted Easter egg hunts and lowered church attendance.  Again, political leaders just can’t seem to leave things alone.

Enter Pope Gregory XIII (1502 – 1585) who stemmed the growing tide of Protestantism in Europe and established a number of colleges and seminaries, including one in Germany called simply the “German College.”  But, Gregory is best known for redesigning the Julian calendar around 1578.  He lopped off 10 days from the month of October, but kept the “Leap Year” anomaly with some strict stipulations:

  1. A Leap Year has to be divisible by 4;
  2. If a year is not evenly divisible by 100, isn’t a Leap Year – unless;
  3. The year is also divisible by 400.

This latter factor explains why the year 2000 was a Leap Year, but the years 1700, 1800 and 1900 weren’t.

Italy, Poland, Portugal and Spain were the first countries to adopt the Gregorian calendar in 1582.  Sweden and Finland didn’t adopt it until 1712.  But, because they were so far behind in doing so, they had a “Double Leap Year” in 1712; meaning they actually had a February 30.  Great Britain and the United States didn’t embrace the Gregorian calendar until 1752, when they dropped 11 days from the old calendar.  I don’t know which 11 days and from what month, or if it was just done at random, but it got them synchronized with Europe.

Japan replaced its lunar – solar calendar in January 1873, but decided to use the numbered months it had originally used instead of the European names.  China finally acquired the Gregorian calendar in January 1912.  But, different warlords had different calendars, so no one really abided by it.  The government finally ordered a mass conversion to the Gregorian system in January 1929.

Presently, international time is determined by the vibrations of atoms in atomic clocks, which have a reputation for accuracy.  This adds a new term to the confusion: the “leap second.”  I know.  Just when you thought you understood the entire mess, along comes something new!

Keepers of atomic clocks periodically add or subtract one or two seconds every year to keep the clocks in line with a 24-hour day as measured by the Earth’s rotation – which is gradually slowing.  Scientists added the first leap seconds in June and December 1972.  The next leap second is due this June.  In a meeting in Geneva last month, these timekeepers proposed abolishing the leap second altogether.  A final decision on that bright idea is due in 2015.

By then, however, the Mayan calendar will have replaced all that crap, and the sun and moon can revolve in peace.  Thus, we won’t have to worry about leaping anywhere, except into a swimming pool – with chocolate and tequila nearby!

Leave a comment

Filed under Essays

Tagged as , , , ,

February 28, 2012 · 4:49 PM

Racing Oscar

Sunday night’s Oscar ceremonies provided the usual displays of celebrity fashion and idolatry.  When Angelina Jolie arrived to present the screenwriting awards and stood at the stage’s edge with her right leg prominently jutting through a severe slit in her designer gown, I realized no one in their right mind can take this stuff seriously.  Every year at this time, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences excretes these coveted statuettes amidst the tabloid revelry and calls it ceremonious.  But, like all other awards shows, the Oscars are nothing more than popularity contests; particularly in the acting and directing categories.  Henry Fonda once noted that it was ridiculous to nominate five actors for an award, but then select only one to receive it.  Katherine Hepburn, for example, is still considered one of America’s greatest actresses; the Academy bestowed four Best Actress Oscars upon her.  But, in my opinion, she has nothing on Meryl Streep who picked up her third Oscar Sunday night.  Hepburn never truly acted; she just sort of behaved.  She was too arrogant to let herself disappear into a character.  Streep, on the other hand, becomes almost indistinguishable whenever she takes on another persona.  Again, just my view.  If you want to see genuinely talented competition, watch a high school speech and debate contest.

This Wednesday, the 29th, will mark the 72nd anniversary of the 1940 Academy Awards where Hattie McDaniel won the Best Supporting Actress Oscar for her role as “Mammie” in Gone with the Wind.  McDaniel was the first African-American to be nominated for and to win an Oscar.  She was also the first African-American to attend an Oscar ceremony, although she had to sit at the back of the room in the Biltmore Hotel in Los Angeles.  Her win was bittersweet.  It marked a cinematic milestone for Black Americans.  But, Gone with the Wind arrived in theatres to face as many protests from the NAACP as it did accolades from fans of Margaret Mitchell’s book.  Civil rights activists denounced the film’s stereotypical portrayals of Blacks.  McDaniel even sat out the film’s premier in Atlanta, saying she had other obligations.  In reality, she wasn’t welcome.

It’s difficult to imagine such a scenario now, especially considering the leftist bent the American cinematic community seems to possess.  But, observing this year’s contenders, I noticed three new faces: Viola Davis, a Best Actress nominee for The Help; Octavia Spencer, a Best Supporting Actress nominee also for The Help; and Demián Bechir, a Best Actor nominee for A Better Life.  Spencer won in her field.  More importantly, though, I noticed the roles they played were as stereotypical as ‘Mammie,’ anomalies in 21st century American films.  Or maybe not.  The Help is a period piece about a young White woman who decides to write a controversial book from the point of view of Black maids amidst the civil rights struggles of early 1960’s Mississippi; instead of – say – one of the maids suddenly discovering her literary muse and writing her own story.  A Better Life is a contemporary tale about a Mexican immigrant father who chooses to stay in the United States to provide (as the title implies) a better life for his son, while working as a gardener in East L.A.  Regardless of their respective storylines and grandiose intentions, both films play into conventional roles often assigned to Blacks (housekeepers) and Hispanics (immigrant gardeners).  To be fair, I haven’t seen either film – and I don’t intend to see them.  I’ve watched plenty of formulaic characterizations of Blacks and Hispanics in films and on TV.

But, you’d think in the 72 years since Hattie McDaniel won her Oscar, things would have changed for both ethnic groups.  Obviously, Hollywood isn’t as liberal as the talking heads on FOX News claim it is.  Despite years of progress and social consciousness – with celebrities publicly calling for more AIDS research, support for animal rights, etc. – the American entertainment community often likes to stick with what’s popular, or at least with what it knows.  Much like corporate America, the biggest movie studios are run by old and middle-aged White men.  So, it’s easy to deduce that Hollywood’s country club elitists still can’t see Blacks and Hispanics occupying more mundane professions like accountants, doctors, architects and technical writers.  We’re still pushing mops and lawn mowers in their minds.

They may not be able to see beyond those typical characterizations, but I certainly can – because that’s pretty much all I’ve seen of Blacks and Hispanics.  We’re educated and hard-working just like…well, just like you’d expect the average American citizen to be.  One only has to watch an episode of The First 48 on A&E to see more Blacks and Hispanics wearing law enforcement uniforms than gang colors.  Blacks actually have fared pretty well in film and television in recent decades.  They’re no longer presented as the ‘happy Negro,’ content with merely singing delightful Walt Disney songs, or delivering coy punch lines.  Hispanics, it seems, have yet to arrive, despite some concerted efforts like Chico and the Man and, more recently, George Lopez.  And, Native Americans haven’t even made it to the gate.  Some years ago a friend of mine who was of Vietnamese extraction lamented the constant portrayals of Asians as “wacky scientists” or “goofy doctors.”

“At least you’re shown as doctors and scientists,” I told her.  My people are still shown as gang members and illegal aliens.”

Blacks certainly have come a long way since Hattie McDaniel floated across the silver screen in proper kerchief and apron.  Hispanics also have made considerable strides since Desi Arnaz became the first Hispanic on American television.  Native Americans haven’t migrated much from the Little Big Man days, although there was that blip called Dances with Wolves.  I guess Hollywood and Academy executives are still smarting from Marlon Brando’s stunt at the 1973 Oscars.  I don’t fault Viola Davis, Octavia Spencer and Demián Bechir for taking on their respective roles.  In a business where unemployment hovers around 100%, people have to grab what they can.  But for all the headway and enlightenment we’ve achieved, The Help and A Better Life insinuate that Blacks and Hispanics occasionally have to be reminded of our proverbial place in society and how we shouldn’t stray too far from that standard.  I sense “our people” have to placate the money-laden powers in Hollywood every once in a while, if they want to keep working.  For better or worse, though, here we are – and circumstances have improved.  Change is often slow, yet unstoppable.  As philosopher William James once said, “Human beings, by changing the inner attitude of their minds, can change the outer aspects of their lives.”

 

1 Comment

Filed under Essays

Tagged as ,

February 7, 2012 · 9:51 PM

Abramoff and Consultant Make Partial Reimbursement to Tigua Indians

Former Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff and a consultant, Michael Scanlon, have reimbursed the Tigua Indian community of El Paso, Texas $200,000 of the estimated $4 million the Tiguas paid to the men a decade ago. Abramoff had promised to lobby on the Tiguas’ behalf and prevent the state of Texas from shutting down their Speaking Rock Casino. The bid failed, as then-Texas Attorney General John Cornyn led the charge to close the casino in March of 2002. The entire fiasco played out against the aftermath of the 09/11 terrorist attacks, so it didn’t get much national press. But, it culminated in jail terms for Abramoff and Scanlon; sullied the reputation of a well-known Christian leader; exposed the entrenched corruption in Washington politics; spawned a curious link to a mysterious murder; and solidified the belief of many Native Americans that America really hasn’t changed much since the “Battle of Little Bighorn.”

It’s pure irony. The state of Texas essentially legalized gambling with the approval of the state lottery in 1992; a move that came after lengthy court battles and howls of protest from Christian conservatives that gambling is bad for the soul. The Tiguas, however, took it as a positive sign – a proverbial green light – and immediately expanded Speaking Rock from a quaint bingo parlor into a full-fledged casino. Proceeds from the casino eventually lifted many Tiguas out of the poverty that has traditionally strapped Native Americans into lives of perpetual servitude to the federal bureaucracy. They were able to pay for new infrastructure in and around El Paso and provide health care and establish college scholarships for several members. Much of the community transitioned into a more self-sustaining existence; one they’d never experienced.

That apparently wasn’t good enough for Cornyn who filed suit to close the casino in 1999; then-Governor George W. Bush approved it. Even local Roman Catholic officials beseeched Cornyn to leave the Tiguas alone. I supposed it doesn’t help that evangelical Christians seem to possess a pathological hatred for Roman Catholics, but all of the pleas fell on the deaf ears of Cornyn’s office. When Bush ascended to the U.S. presidency in December 2000, Perry became governor and proceeded with litigation against the Tiguas. Desperate to save their casino – and ultimately their livelihood – the Tiguas enlisted Abramoff’s help.

The case got more complicated in 2001 when the Alabama-Coushatta tribe opened a small casino near Houston. Abramoff and Scanlon viewed that as a major competitive threat to a casino operated by another one of their clients, the Coushatta tribe of Louisiana. Much of the Louisiana tribe’s customer base came from the Houston area, and the new Alabama-Coushatta casino was much closer to the state’s largest city and therefore, potentially more profitable. Strangely, Abramoff didn’t seem to care about the Tiguas’ casino in relation to the Alabama-Coushatta enterprise. As far as he was concerned at the time, the Tiguas had a legal right to operate their casino, but the Alabama-Coushatta didn’t. Abramoff was leery of the financial impact the Alabama-Coushatta casino could have on the Louisiana Coushatta.

Abramoff and Scanlon hatched their plan in 2002, when tried to buy influence with Ohio Republican Congressman Bob Ney, then-Chairman of the House Administration Committee. They hoped to place a Tigua-friendly amendment in a bill called the Help America Vote Act, which was designed to correct some of the voting problems exposed in the 2000 presidential election. The amendment would have legalized gaming at Speaking Rock, but it had nothing to do with elections or voting. By then, Abramoff and Scanlon had collected tens of millions of dollars in consulting fees representing the Tiguas and other American Indian tribes.

Then, in a move that speaks truly to their greed and arrogance, Abramoff and Scanlon involved Ralph Reed; one-time boy wonder to the conservative Christian right and former head of the Christian Coalition, to lead a campaign in Texas supporting Cornyn’s efforts to close Speaking Rock. They began funneling some of the Tigua money to Reed whose efforts included organizing Texas pastors to support closing all Indian casinos in the state.

In a January 7, 2002, email exchange, Reed told Abramoff that an important court ruling on the future of the Tigua casino was expected soon. Abramoff responded: “It’s not shuttered yet. Let’s get this thing closed and then we’ll see what we can do. As we type, they are gambling away.”

On February 5, 2002, Reed emailed Abramoff that he had spoken to a source close to Cornyn, and they expected a federal judge to rule in the next couple of days that the Tigua casino should be closed. Abramoff forwarded Reed’s email to Scanlon, saying, “Whining idiot. Close the fucking thing already.”

The next week, a federal court ruling ordered Speaking Rock closed. The Alabama-Coushatta casino was closed shortly afterwards.

On February 11, 2002, Reed emailed Abramoff an Associated Press story about the Speaking Rock closure. Abramoff replied: “Ultimately, the main target is the (Alabama Coushatta). I wish those moronic Tiguas were smarter in their political contributions. I’d love us to get our mitts on that moolah!! Oh well, stupid folks get wiped out.”

Abramoff apparently didn’t tell Reed that he already had planned to scam the Tiguas. He urged the tribe to hire Scanlon, former aide to House Republican leader Tom DeLay, for his public relations expertise. Abramoff promised the Tiguas that he wouldn’t take any money for himself while he worked to reopen the casino, but he made more than $1.8 million off them. Scanlon had agreed to split half of his profits with Abramoff. The two had struck similar deals – which are illegal – on contracts Scanlon had received from other Indian tribes. But, they never informed the Tiguas or any of their clients.

The scheme began to unravel in June of 2002 when Abramoff asked Marc Schwartz, a Tigua consultant, for $50,000 to pay for a Scotland golf trip for Ney and others. Abramoff told the Tiguas that Ney had requested the trip, but Ney denies that and said the trip was Abramoff’s idea. In July, Schwartz advised the Tigua Tribal Council to make a $50,000 payment for the trip. He also suggested asking the Alabama-Coushatta to contribute the same amount. Even though Abramoff had specifically asked Schwartz for the $50,000 contribution, Schwartz said in a memo to the Tribal Council: “Neither the Tiguas nor the Alabama-Coushattas has been solicited to underwrite this educational trip abroad, but I would strongly recommend that both tribes consider a donation towards this effort.”

The Alabama-Coushattas contributed $50,000, but the Tiguas never made a payment for the Scotland trip, according to an investigation by the Senate Indian Affairs Committee. Abramoff, Ney, Reed and others headed to Scotland in early August 2002. When they returned, Abramoff set up an August 14 meeting between Ney and tribal leaders for the Tiguas and the Alabama-Coushattas to discuss the possibility of re-opening their respective casinos. Ney had consulted with Sen. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut about inserting that aforementioned Tigua-friendly amendment into the Help America Vote Act and repeatedly mentioned Abramoff’s name. That caused Dodd to inquire further, which led the Senate Indian Affairs Committee to uncover all those emails and whereupon Abramoff’s and Scanlon’s plot disintegrated.

Scanlon pled guilty to corruption charges in November 2005, followed by Abramoff in January 2006. Ney also pled guilty in October 2006 to corruption charges and was released from prison in August 2008. Abramoff left prison in June 2010 and lived in a halfway house until December of that year. Scanlon is due to be released in September 2012. Schwartz is currently facing federal indictment on unrelated public corruption charges; accused of being part of a bribery scheme aimed at winning contracts from El Paso governments for another one of his clients.

I feel Abramoff’s greatest insult to the Tiguas is his claim that, as a Jew, he understood their plight of being an oppressed people. Never mind that Jews in the Western Hemisphere haven’t endured a fraction of the suffering as the region’s indigenous peoples; just the mere allusion to such horrors in the context of casino gambling is offensive to both groups. That an orthodox Jew would align himself with a bunch of evangelical Christians to defraud Native Americans is akin to Hitler conspiring with Stalin’s army to decimate the gypsies of Eastern Europe.

Reed was never charged in the Tigua scandal, but he got his proverbial “comeuppance” soon afterwards. In 2006, he lost his bid for the Republican nomination as Georgia’s Lieutenant Governor, losing to State Senator Casey Cagle by nearly 20 points in the primary. His association with Abramoff had come back to haunt him, costing him not only the nomination, but also support from his base. Perhaps, Georgia voters punished Reed for the same kind of duplicitous behavior he used to build campaigns against others. In other words, what goes around comes around!

There is one unresolved event related to this ordeal; an incident that – at best – has a tenuous connection to Abramoff, but is sinister nonetheless. On February 2, 2001, Konstantinos “Gus” Boulis, a Greek immigrant, was ambushed and killed near his Fort Lauderdale office, after an unknown vehicle ran his BMW off the road. Hit three times, Boulis, 51, drove a few blocks before crashing into a tree. He died an hour later at a hospital. Boulis was the founder and owner of the “Miami Subs” sandwich chain and founder of “SunCruz,” a cruise line venture, which boasted gambling casinos aboard its vessels. In September 2000, Boulis sold SunCruz for $147.5 million to 3 men: New York businessman Adam Kidan, a high profile Washington lobbyist; Ben Waldman, a 2-time congressional candidate and former aide to Ronald Reagan; and Jack Abramoff. Three months later things inexplicably soured between Boulis and Kidan; the latter even claimed Boulis tried to stab him with a pen. Two months after that, Boulis was dead. The case didn’t gain any traction until 2005, when Florida authorities convicted a man named Ralph Liotta for killing reputed mobster John Gurino in a Boca Raton deli in October 2003. Gurino owed Liotta money, but – more importantly – he allegedly had killed Boulis. After Liotta’s conviction, authorities arrested three men suspected in the Boulis murder: Anthony Moscatiello, Anthony Ferrari and James Fiorillo, all with reputed ties to John Gotti and the Gambino crime family. Records showed that cell phone calls were exchanged within 500 feet of the Boulis crime scene. Authorities traced the calls to Ferrari and Fiorillo. In August of 2006, a judge in Broward County, Florida granted bond to Moscatiello and Fiorillo, citing lack of evidence. In February 2007, a separate judge granted bond to Ferrari, but when his collateral failed, he returned to prison. By then, Adam Kidan had decided to cooperate with prosecutors and was sentenced to a five-year prison sentence in October 2006; he was released in May 2009. Boulis’ murder, however, remains unsolved.

And, the Tiguas remain poor and bitter. You really can’t make a living selling trinkets and pottery alongside the railroad tracks. Speaking Rock now offers what the tribe refers to as “sweepstakes machines,” which resemble slot machines and can pay out thousands of dollars in cash prizes. Tigua officials insist the machines are legal because they’re an electronic version of the popular Monopoly games offered by McDonald’s, but – not surprisingly – the state disagrees and is engaged in a continuing legal battle with the tribe.

Shortly after Speaking Rock was shut down, an acquaintance of mine said most Indian casinos actually are owned by people with “English, Italian and Russian surnames” and that the Indians act only as fronts for organized crime. When I asked him why the feds don’t go after the people with the English, Italian and Russian surnames instead of the Indians, he didn’t – or wouldn’t – answer. There must have been a bad connection, since he was in California, and I was in Dallas. I didn’t believe him and I don’t believe Abramoff was sincere when he apologized to the Tiguas recently. Tigua Lieutenant Governor Carlos Hisa, who worked with Abramoff, offered a blunt response, “I do not accept their apology. I do not find it sincere. The time to come back and apologize is when the investigation was going on.”

Leave a comment

Filed under Essays