Election Afterthoughts and the Walmart Correlation

     Since the election of Donald Trump as the 45^th President of the United States, citizens have surged into our streets to protest the “unfairness” of our Electoral College system.  Hillary Clinton won the popular vote but lost the election because the rules applicable to electoral delegations decided for the nation.  This has happened before.

     Frequent readers of this blog know this writer is not celebrating Trump’s election.  However, I am not among the protesters in Los Angeles because vocal (or violent) protest is seldom useful.  In my opinion, protesters are reinforcing the differences which became starkly evident during this election cycle at a time when we need to embrace our similarities.  For America to remain safe and strong we must pull ourselves together and not tear our nation asunder.

     On November 9, political pundits were stunned as they realized they had failed to accurately predict this election.  For months they focused on public sentiment, historical trends, and parsing the population; but, they failed to look at the impact of state economies.  Macro- and micro-economic models demonstrated long before the election that people who live in poverty have spread into new regions.  To many voters, a Clinton presidency looked too much like the previous administration and another four years of financial insecurity looked like a death sentence.  Through these eyes, poor people with children voted with their stomachs and their hearts.

     There is a distinct relationship between avoidance of economic facts and the pollster’s failure to anticipate Trump’s popularity.  This very unscientific link is what I call “The Walmart Correlation.”

According to a Wall St 24/7 report in March of this year, Walmart is the biggest single private sector employer in 19 states (AL, AZ, AR, FL GA, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO, MT, OH, OK, SC, TN, TX, VA, WV, WY).  This is a distressing fact because Walmart is synonymous with low wages and has historically destroyed family-owned small businesses in areas where it opened its stores.  Not surprisingly, in 17 of the 19 states where Walmart is the largest employer, voters gave Trump a victory.  According to the US CensusBureau, 16 of those states were home to more people in poverty than the national average.

     According to a CNNMoney report, in February Walmart increased its minimum wage from $9 per hour to $10, a change that reportedly affected “virtually all of its hourly workers, including some supervisors, which make up the majority of the company's 1.4 million U.S. workers.  The wage hike will boost a full-time worker's average hourly wage by 3% to $13.38. Part-timers will get an average hourly wage of $10.58, up 6%.”  To put it another way, a full-time Walmart worker earns $2,140 per month and part-timer working 30 hours per week earns $1,354 per month.

    This is a small improvement for workers who labor under the miserly fist of a company that was called a “welfare queen” by Bloomberg View reporter Barry Ritholtz in 2013.  Collectively, Walmart employees reportedly are the biggest consumer of public assistance programs such as Medicaid and WIC. According to Congressman Alan Grayson (D-FL), Walmart employees are the biggest group of food stamp recipients nationwide and receive $1,000 on average in public assistance.  Although Walmart is acting within the law, they apparently are not compelled to shoulder responsibility for their employees and shift the burden for living wages and healthcare to taxpayers.

     Many Americans are misinformed about the populations which use public assistance programs.  The average food stamp recipient is white (47%).  Women are twice as likely as men to seek food aid.  While Trump did nothing to disabuse voters of the notion that “illegals” are “syphoning money” from food stamp programs, SNAP applications state: "Documented immigrants can only receive SNAP benefits if they have resided within the United States for at least five years..."

     To qualify for food stamps, a three-person family must earn no more than $2,069 per month or $24,800 per year before taxes. Therefore, the full-time Walmart worker earns too much for food stamps while the part-time worker lives well below the poverty line.

     Daily Beast writer Daniel Gross stated Walmart’s allegiance to low wages has had a deleterious effect on local and regional economies including their own.  He said: “Walmart’s same-store sales are falling as the surrounding retail market surges. What’s the problem? By screwing its workers with low wages, the nation’s largest private-sector employer is preventing a huge chunk of the American workforce from shopping at its stores.”

     Trump spoke loudly and clearly to the fears of his supporters by promising to reduce competition for available jobs by removing immigrant workers from the employment pool.  He offered the possibility of employment with an infrastructure project that would build a wall at the borders of states with high levels of poverty.  He tacitly told voters he would secure public aid resources by removing immigrants who allegedly reduced these resources for Americans in need.  Yet, his promise to cut taxes and eliminate Obamacare would erase access to healthcare through Medicaid and resources for public aid for people on the financial edge. Alas, not all change is good.

     For those who are still upset about a Trump presidency, please put the bullhorn down and start listening. The “bigots” who voted for Trump are just like you in their fear and distress.  The truth about many of Trump’s supporters is this: They are disenfranchised Americans who spoke with their ballots because they had no other way to speak.  Look at these facts and do something constructive for Americans who, like you, were voiceless.

     Stop yelling about them and help them.

Think. Vote.

     It is the eve of the 2016 U.S. National Election.  At this point, most of us are sick of television ads, robo-calls and junk mail endorsing both sides of state and local propositions.  I stopped watching television newscasts two months ago because I could no longer stomach gleeful reports of presidential political fisticuffs and slap shots.  While this election cycle has lasted longer than a hockey season, this election is not a game.

     No United States presidential election is a game because the outcome affects the entire planet.

     Cable news and its histrionic, muckraker mentality has allowed Americans to become completely distracted by circus-like entertainment when we should have been concentrating on the fundamentals of national policies that will impact our lives.  While we were cheering the larger-than-life flamboyance of a ringmaster and the zany antics of clowns, we failed to analyze the costs associated with not only buying the ticket, but cleaning up the mess when the show left town.

     Countless voices have warned that American ignorance is dangerous.  World leaders such as Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, and Mexico’s Foreign Minister Claudia Ruiz Massieu are bracing for the possibility that Americans will flood across their borders based on the outcome of this election.  Syrian President Bashar Assad, Former South Korean Vice Foreign Minister Kim Sung-han, French President François Hollande, and German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier all addressed the need for stable and rational American leadership to protect world security through formal and informal alliances.

     On October 27 Russia’s Vladmir Putin correctly placed responsibility for America’s future on Americans by stating: “Hysteria has been whipped up in the United States about the influence of Russia over the U.S. presidential election ... It's much simpler to distract people with so-called Russian hackers, spies, and agents of influence. Does anyone really think that Russia could influence the American people's choice in any way?”

     Meanwhile, in March, Australian minister Christopher Pyne said “democracy should be robust, but it certainly shouldn't be violent” and described the behavior of Americans at presidential political rallies as “terrifying.”

     It is clear from this writer’s perspective that the mainstream media has fanned the fires of discontent by focusing on the entertainment value of politics rather than on political fundamentals.  We can surely thank the media and “ratings week” for making Donald Trump a presidential contender while ignoring the hard-won experience and credentials of Hillary Clinton.  Yet, on the eve of the election, here we are.

     I invite readers to leave the circus tent and the din of the crowd to ponder the enormous responsibility of casting a ballot for President of the United States of America.  Consider deeply whether the choice you make will be based on emotion or logic.  Base your decision only on fundamentals such as economic stability, national security, adherence to Constitutional law, and the safety of our streets from threats both foreign and domestic. Do not make a decision based on personalities, rhetoric, costumes worn by of the actors, second-hand information or what will satisfy your momentary happiness.  Think about your community, your city, your state, your region, your country, our neighbors, and the rest of the world.  Take these moments in the silence of this night to think.

     Please, please, think.

     Search yourself for patience, tolerance, peace, and love for family, friends, and country.  Sleep on these important matters one last time.

     And, please, cast your ballot for whatever truth and right and hope is within you.

Never, Trump

     On October 9 I was shocked when I opened the Los Angeles Times to page A-10 and read the f-word.  The expletive was part of a transcript of the 2005 conversation between Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump and former “Access Hollywood” host Billy Bush.  While Trump rightly assumed “Access” would cut most of the video footage down to a few sound bites, he could not ignore the fact that tape was rolling as he crowed about his conquests.

     “You know I’m automatically attracted to beautiful – I just start kissing them.  It’s like a magnet. I just kiss.  I don’t even wait.  And when you’re a star, they let you do it.  You can do anything,” said Trump. “Grab them by the….”

     Just read it.  I can’t type what he said.

     The fact that the Times tossed aside 99 years of decorum to publish these words demonstrates depth of commitment.  It is the duty of the Fourth Estate to accurately report current events for posterity.  Another duty of the Fourth Estate is to act independently of government and politicians to discern and articulate the truth.  The content of the 2005 Trump/Bush transcript surely made editors wince, but they quoted him precisely and without embellishment.

     Yet, in the second presidential debate, Trump tried to minimize the damage by calling his banter “locker room talk.”  Debate moderator Anderson Cooper asked Trump: “For the record, are you saying, what you said on the bus 11 years ago, that you did not kiss women without consent or grope women without consent?”  Cooper asked three times before Trump stopped tap dancing around his “respect” for women and replied, “No, I have not.”

     In her response, Democratic Presidential nominee Hillary Clinton could have excoriated Trump.  Instead, she said:

     “You know, with prior Republican nominees, for president, I disagreed with them. Politics, policies, principles. But I never questioned their fitness to serve. Donald Trump is different. I said starting back in June, that he was not fit to be president and commander in chief. And many Republicans and independents have said the same thing. What we all saw and heard on Friday was Donald talking about women. What he thinks about women. What he does to women. And he has said that the video doesn't represent who he is. But I think it's clear to anyone who heard it that it represents exactly what he is.”

    A debate is not a court room or a blog.  As moderator here I shall permit Trump’s debate request to “get on to much more important things” such as three legal actions that came as a result of actions Trump denied.

     In the 1991 divorce proceedings of Donald and first wife Ivana Trump, Ivana alleged a 1989 “rape” in a sworn deposition.  After attorneys claimed spousal rape was not a crime, her language was softened.  Regardless, the original deposition was included by author Harry Hurt III in his 1993 book Lost Tycoon: The Many Lives of Donald J. Trump.

     In 1997, Florida businesswoman Jill Harth filed a sexual harassment law suit against Trump after he pushed her against a wall at his estate, attempted to kiss her forcefully and fondled her.  Trump reportedly settled for over $100,000.

     As was previously discussed here, in June of this year, Katie Johnson filed a civil suit in New York federal court naming Trump as a co-defendant who allegedly held her as a sex slave and raped her at the New York home of level three sex offender Jeffrey Epstein in 1994 when she was 13 years old.  Trump denied the charges.

     Please follow the links above and don’t take my word for this record.  These stories are not mere musings of bitter ex’s, business partners or pretty girls who let Trump steal a kiss and a squeeze because he was “a star.”  These women were sexually abused and brought complaints to courts of law risking the costly tit-for-tat civil suits for which Trump is famous.  The incidents demonstrate Trump’s pattern of violence and predatory behavior.  As Secretary Clinton said, this is “exactly what he is.”

     He may apologize for words he said when he was bragging; but essentially, Trump was bragging because he was proud of what he did and what he was able to get away with.  In his own words, he exposed himself as a sociopath.  He exposed himself as a person who either does not know the difference between right and wrong or a person who just doesn’t care.  The general public might call him “crazy;” but, in a court of law, a person who cannot tell the difference between right and wrong can also be identified as “criminally insane.”

     Let that sink in.

     The Republican presidential nominee demonstrates the qualities of Antisocial Personality Disorder and may be insane.

     After making the decision to print the true, vulgar words of Donald Trump, the Los Angeles Times also ran an editorial entitled “The last Trump straw,”  which said:

     “For those of us who have long argued that Donald Trump is unfit for the White House. The ugly disclosures of the last couple of days are further proof of what already seemed obvious.  But if it takes this last straw to break the back of Republican denial, so be it.  Now those who profess to be shocked by this latest detail must act on their outrage and say the words: “Never Trump.”

     Never.  Never.  Never.  Not ever, Mr. Trump.

Sitting to Stand

     San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick is sitting through the playing of the national anthem before his games to claim his solidarity with people who are treated unequally and unjustly in America.  Kaepernick said:

“I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color. To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder.”

     It’s a gutsy, passive protest.  By beginning his protests during the preseason when the team could have cut him, he risked his career.  The NFL could have fined him for conduct that was deemed financially or critically damaging to the league.  He risked harm to his personal reputation and his personal safety.  But, Kaepernick embraced his Constitutional right to free speech and sat.

     The 49ers coach, Chip Kelly, stood by Kaepernick, telling reporters his quarterback’s action is “his right as a citizen” and “it's not my right to tell him not to do something.”  San Francisco 49ers teammate Eric Reid and the Seattle Seahawks’ Jeremy Lane supported Kaepernick and subsequently declined to stand for the national anthem as well.

     Readers might ask why I am bringing this up in a political blog.  I am highlighting this issue because it demonstrates one of the fundamental perceptual rifts in our society.

     On the one hand, people who never experienced systematic discrimination often react angrily to Black Lives Matter protesters.  They may blame the victims of police shootings and believe media excuses that victims had alleged gang affiliations, criminal backgrounds, or “reached for a gun” rather than a wallet.  They fail to note later media reports correcting initial false information, seldom ponder injustice, and simply go on with their grumpy day.

     On the other hand, there are people who have experienced injustice.  Women who know they are receiving a lower wage than their male coworkers know injustice.  People of color who were pulled over by police because they were driving at night know injustice.  Sick, working poor people who were denied Medicaid because they “earn too much” know injustice.  People in inner cities who live at the dead end of low-wage jobs due to inadequate elementary educations know injustice.  These people may live in resentful silence knowing discrimination is alive and well in America.

     These fast-moving, diametrically opposed perceptual undercurrents fuel voter decisions.  The choices people make about whether they will vote and for whom they will vote cannot be quantified by pollsters who want to predict how voters will express their emotional realities on Election Day.  We could predict a sports figure would take a public position on current events.  We could predict people would oppose and disagree with the sports’ figure’s position.  But, we still cannot imagine the impact.

     In closing, I will do something I have never done in this blog.  In my non-blogging time, I write poetry.  (http://chairthelyonkramer.tumblr.com/).  Here’s to you, Colin.  Fight the good fight.

Sitting to Stand

A half black man sits down on a bench

And stands for all people police have shot down

In fear and unbefitting no crime.

A man with grace and athletic elegance.

A man with a college degree and a fat paycheck.

A man who became what he is today,

He is a man with a right to sit and stay.

What is more American than this protest?

Risking health and reputation and career

He stands for his countrymen by sitting down.

You so-called fans have no right to stop him.

You, armchair critics who send a football player

This latter day gladiator

Out to the grids on a Sunday

To lay down his body for your entertainment.

You want him to stand because you say so

Like all of the American Negros in our nation?

“Stand up! Roll over! Play dead!”

You make his point with your condemnation.

Mr. Man, sit where you can

Sit down, sir, please, and make your stand.

A Word About the 24-Hour News Cycle

     As a long-time political junkie, I have, at times, rolled out of bed at five and started my day by flipping news channels.  CNN, MSNBC, FOX, ABC, NBC, CBS. Click, click, click.  Invariably, the national news lead stories were always the same with a slightly different spin.  If you've seen three in eight minutes, you've seen them all.

     For the past several weeks, I did a little experiment.  I tuned in to some of those cable news programs where a panel is assembled to discuss the political news of the day.  Honestly, I couldn't handle it. As readers can imagine from my blogger silence, the exercise rendered me speechless,

     For hours every evening, grown professional men and women barely control themselves, take sides like children in a divorce, and talk over one another to say... What, exactly?  More often than not, it seemed the "news" panel was reporting on itself.  I'm still not sure that I caught anything resembling reasoned journalistic commentary.

     Call me old school.  News is supposed to be informative.  We are supposed to receive the who, what where, when and how about local, national, and international events.  It is our responsibility to tease out the impact of these events on our lives and our communities. Having a bunch of panelists screeching simultaneously across the space of two desks is neither informative nor entertaining to this writer.  This kind of programming feels like very irresponsible journalism.

     Therefore, I am returning to the comparative solitude of reading my news.  If I wish to know what a candidate said in a speech I will use the power of the Internet to obtain a transcript.  I will read stories from a plethora of information sources with various interpretations of the same events and then decide for myself what impact (if any) a single event will have without the interruption of eight people screaming in the background.  I have returned to a state of political junkie bliss.

     I hope you all know how much I appreciate folks who read.  Thank you for taking the time to read me.

     Now, there is a big, fat, contentious presidential election at hand and it's high time that I got back to writing about the significance of local social and economic factors' impacts on who and how we select leaders.

 

A Redefining Moment

    No doubt, readers have noticed my conspicuous quietness regarding the Democratic candidates in this election cycle.  I am breaking my silence today.

As harshly critical as I have been of many Republicans in this blog, it may shock you that I am not and never have been a registered Democrat.  Philosophically, I am a centrist.  To me, extremism is dangerous territory.  Like the wilderness of geographical fringes, political fringes often are inhabited by people with wild ideas and few solutions.

     The folks who disturb me most are hypocrites who thumb their noses at the Constitution, rattle sabers, and use a twisted shield of “traditional values” to deflect “inconvenient” laws.  I also take umbrage to extremist leftists who burn and pillage in the name of “social justice.”  While I do not personally wear mink or support industries that negligently kill whales and cut down rain forests, assault or vandalism masquerading as protest is still a crime.  Without the courage to even show their faces, the fact that anarchists cannot organize a sentence let alone a political platform is a bonus.

     After reading a lot about moderates and centrists I realize that I fit the demographic precisely.  I am middle-aged, Caucasian, female, college educated, and socially tolerant.  I favor renewable energy and infrastructure investment, moderately conservative economic policies, and am politically engaged.

     Of all the candidates who ran in the GOP primary, I liked John Kasich best for his soft-spoken, moderate platform and his tenacity.  When it came to the Democratic primary, I had a harder time choosing a favorite.

     I admire Bernie Sanders, but with his “socialist history" I never anticipated that he would go as far as he did.  The announcement of his candidacy was completely unusual.  He stepped out of the Senate, told a throng of reporters he was running for President, looked at his watch, turned, and went back to work.  But, his legislative record is impressive.  His confrontation of former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan was epic.  His campaign message and crowd appeal was stunning.  For example, in my former home of Seattle, he packed the 17,000 seat Key Arena in early March. When 5,000 people had to be turned away, he returned two weeks later and filled the 47,000 seat Safeco Field.  His speeches and his platform were passionate, inclusive, progressive and incredibly appealing to a “No Party Preference” voters like me.

     Hillary Clinton’s candidacy, on the other hand, was a forgone conclusion.  If ever there was a time for her to make a successful bid for the Presidency it is now.  Her experiences as a Senator and Secretary of State make her the most qualified person who has ever run for the office of President, bar none.  I have absolute respect for her as a public servant.

     But, I worry about her political stock.  She continues to be the target for so much opposition, I have privately defined Clinton as “a s—t magnet.”  Opponents have tied her to the worst parts of her husband’s personal history.  She is smeared with gender bias, is said to “represent the status quo,” and is as despised by some as the terrorists who killed our diplomatic family in Benghazi.  Only Hillary Clinton could be targeted for a vindictive investigation regarding emails.  Meanwhile, adversaries deny her amazing tenacity, education, political acumen, and the broad international esteem she earned as Secretary of State.

     Clinton is respectable, but she is not viewed as likable.  She was part of the Obama administration, but she does not get to carry the same warm feelings of “hope and change.”  Not only is Clinton offering voters a thoughtful, moderate platform, she also presents a clearly defined path to accomplishing her goals.  With all that we know of Clinton, her record, her platform, and her tenacity, why is she still being treated as an unknown political quantity?

     Hillary Clinton is a woman.  Our basic human nature wants to put new concepts and items into “boxes” so we can compare new things to more familiar things.  There is no comparable, comforting box for a female United States President.

     As always, Hillary Clinton is defining herself.  American voters will either see or deny who she is and what she stands for.  Clinton likely will become America’s first female president.  A woman in the Oval Office most certainly will redefine for America and the world the strength and ability of women everywhere.

     Based solely on Clinton’s qualifications I support her bid for President.  As a woman, I look forward to the self-defining moment when the leader of my nation finally looks like me.

Part III: The Urgency of 1,826

This is the third in a three-part series written in response to three tragic events in America which began July 5, 2016.

“An attack on one of us is an attack on all of us.”

-- Governor John Bel Edwards, Louisiana

     The 24-hour news cycle shifted away from the deadly July 4^th week and even more recent police killings in Baton Rouge.  Not talking about deadly force and retaliation does not make the problem go away.  Between January, 2015 and July 15 of this year a total of 1,719 Americans were killed by law enforcement officers.  This year 107 law enforcement officers have died on the job.

     The British-based Guardian news agency and their open-ended report “The Counted” (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/series/counted-us-police-killings) not only tallies the number of deadly force incidents, but also analyzes the data to provide breakdowns by race, age, cause, the victims’ armed or unarmed status, and several other important factors.  Readers, PLEASE READ “THE COUNTED.”  This information is incredibly important because raw facts speak louder than American reporters, protests, Tweets, and knee-jerk responses by elected and appointed officials.

     This excellent journalism when compared to the FBI’s attempts to operate a database capable of similar functions prompted FBI Director James B. Comey to call the federal operation, “embarrassing and ridiculous.”  Rather than relying on public news reports and independent fact-checking as journalists do, the FBI relies upon the voluntary (not compulsory) reporting of America’s 18,000 policing agencies.  Clearly, if federal agencies cannot even look at facts there is no chance of proactive prevention or external oversight of the police departments with the highest per capita and/or total rates of deadly force.

     Here are some revelations from “The Counted”.  First, be aware the data for 2016 changes daily.  On December 31, 2015, The Guardian reported the total number of deaths by police use of deadly force in 2015 was 1,134.  The vast majority (89%) of fatal civilian injuries were gunshot wounds.  The remaining deaths involved Tasers (4%), physical altercations in custody (4%) and being hit by a police vehicle (3%).  Police most often responded with deadly force in cases involving domestic violence (21%), attempts to serve a warrant or apprehend a known fugitive (16%), traffic stops (14%), violent crimes (13%) and non-violent crimes (7%).  Only 18 of these incidents resulted in criminal charges against the officers. Another 255 incidents were ruled “justifiable” homicides.

     The raw total associated with the racial composition of deadly force victims was surprising in that more white people were killed by police than were other races.  But, African Americans are rightfully alarmed.  Blacks comprise approximately 12.9 percent of the total U.S. population and black men age 15-34 represent a mere two percent of the total U.S. population.  Therefore, it is shocking that young black males accounted for 17% of the victims of deadly force.  More dreadful is the fact that 25% of those black men were unarmed.

     These facts, when taken in context, point to a terrible dilemma for police.  Law enforcement personnel have a very dangerous job.  Police are now targets for armed retaliation.  On a daily basis they deal with people who have a history of violence and who present a danger to the public.  Police must act in the moment, using their training and professional judgement in a split second.  In most cases, police use proper procedure and protocol to protect innocent victims from harm.  They are heroes.

     Incidents that draw the most public protest and scrutiny are those which involve police who failed to follow training, directives, and protocol.  As was the case with Philando Castile, police draw weapons for no imaginable reason and later try to explain it away by saying the victim “matched the description of a person of interest.”  The public is further infuriated when an “internal investigation” performed by the officer’s coworkers concludes the officer did the right thing.  After all, how could the mirror lie?

     Because dash cams “fail” routinely and body cameras are (mis)used at the discretion of the errant officers, I applaud cellphone camera witnesses.  Police spokespeople have demonized these citizen photographers then leveled threats at the same witnesses who uploaded videos of police brutality to social media sites to protect themselves.  Witnesses must “lawyer up” to maintain control of their videos because they are afraid the truth will be buried.  Mayors, governors and Presidents need to have the same courage when it comes to the truth about police departments.

     We can talk all day about poverty, race, and gun control; but the missing element in halting police brutality is effective external oversight.  Cities, counties, states and the FBI all are embarrassed by their lack of information and inability to manage departments that are out of control.  Amidst the old standard of internal review, local and federal leaders are wrongly made to feel guilty for examining work environments that condone violence.  For victims and survivors of deadly force, leaders need to grab the reigns and grow a spine.  This isn’t about the 99 percent of great police officers who never draw their weapons.  This is about systems that allow one percent of bad cops to be bad.

     At a point in our history when British newspapers and cellphone cameras are documenting exactly what individual police officers are doing, it is clear that the age of the incident report and internal investigation is over.  The number of citizens and police who have died in America as a direct result or as a retaliation for deadly force will exceed 2,000 before the end of this year.  Citizen lives matter.  Law enforcement lives matter.  The loss of 1,826 lives is an emergency.

     We, as a nation, are hungry for change.  Change is not an event, but a process that begins with our willingness.  Let us build upon our common sense of urgency and have the courage to innovate and find solutions that begin with honest communication.  Let us find the will to build America’s future on a peaceful path rather than a bloody street.

Part II: In Silence

This is the second in a three-part series written in response to three tragic events in America which began July 5, 2016.

“The truth is that the police reflect America in all of its will and fear…”

 -- Ta-Nehisi Coates

Let me say unequivocally that I am horrified by the senseless murders of Dallas’s law enforcement officers.  I hold police and members of the military in the same high regard.  For most of us, even when we are angry about the actions of a few, we also know the majority of police personnel are good people with a dangerous job.  The shootings of Dallas law enforcement officers by a U.S. Army Reservist has agonized me.

The Black Lives Matter protest in Dallas on Thursday, July 7 was peaceful.  Approximately 800 citizens came to voice anger and sadness over the deaths of Alton Sterling and Philando Castile on Tuesday and Wednesday.  Marchers were chaperoned by 100 Dallas Police Department and Dallas Area Rapid Transit security officers who protected protesters from motorists, opportunistic anarchists, and people in opposition of their cause.  Officers were prepared for insults, prepared for someone throwing a rock, and trained for crowd containment.  A lone sniper was the last thing on anyone’s mind.

Micah Xavier Johnson, a 25-year-old former U.S. Army Reservist and an aide worker for mentally challenged children, began shooting from an “elevated platform” at 8:58 p.m.  Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings said Johnson fired from several floors of a building near the protest route.  Unsure of the origin of the shooting, many officers rushed into intersections and became targets.  The first police victim returned fire, took cover behind a pillar at an intersection, and was killed by multiple gunshots at point blank range.  In all, Johnson killed five officers and injured seven officers and two protesters.

Twelve officers reportedly returned fire, wounding Johnson.   Police followed Johnson’s blood trail to a parking garage where they negotiated with him for hours before detonating an explosive to kill him.  He reportedly said he was motivated by anger and revenge against white police who killed black men.  Johnson apparently had internalized the message of African American Defense League founder Mauricel-lei Millere who has repeatedly called for violence against police “across the land.”

Former classmates at John Horn High School in the Dallas suburb of Mesquite were “flabbergasted” by what they perceived to be a drastic change in Johnson’s personality.  He was remembered as an easy-going, smart, funny teenager who socialized effortlessly with white students in his high school.  He was involved with junior ROTC and joined the Army Reserve in March, 2009 prior to graduation.  He lived with his mother in their quiet neighborhood until he died.  He had no history of violence.  He had no criminal record.

Johnson’s troubles began to surface when he was serving an eight-month tour of duty in Afghanistan from November, 2013 to July, 2014.  He was a carpentry and masonry specialist who never saw combat.  He also reportedly was accused of sexual harassment by a female Army soldier.  According to his attorney, Bradford Glendening, Johnson’s behavior was so “egregious” the woman sought an order of protection which asked that Johnson “receive mental help.”

Glendening said the Army initiated proceedings to oust Johnson with a less-than-honorable discharge, a move he described as unusually harsh.  “They didn’t like him,” said Glendening.  “That was very clear from talking to his commander.”  Johnson returned to Texas where he continued as a reservist until April, 2015 when he was honorably discharged.

So, what was happening in his mind?  Several mental illnesses manifest in one’s late teens and early 20’s including schizophrenia, major depressive disorder, and bipolar disorder.  The onset of these illnesses may be sudden. More often, onset is gradual and defies diagnosis particularly in teens and young adults who already are emotionally erratic due to physical changes and the stresses of growing up.  Friends and family may have ignored the excitement of an early manic episode or explained away minor depression as “a case of the blues.”

Maybe Johnson did not have symptoms of mental illness.  Was Johnson suddenly tipped over the edge when he was away from home for the first time in a place where nearby mortar explosions created an environment of constant fear?  Did he become obsessed with a female soldier?  Was his ego crushed when she rebuffed inappropriate advances?  Did the Army that he joined as a high school senior break him by labeling him “less than honorable?”  In a combat zone, stress reactions are normal.  Military personnel practice using deadly force until the aggression feels normal.  Did the confluence of undiagnosed mental illness and military life break him or did he think that what he was feeling was normal?

The year 2014 marked a turning point for Johnson.  His Army accuser saw a person in need of mental healthcare.  An unnamed friend reportedly said Johnson began to watch film of the Rodney King beating in Los Angeles over, and over, after returning from Afghanistan.  Neighbors noticed he was practicing shoot-and-scoot maneuvers every day in his backyard.  How did this young man’s increasingly worrisome behavior escape intervention?

The answer lies in the stigmas associated with mental health care and the individual isolation linked with undiagnosed/untreated mental conditions.  Johnson had a job; but after work, he was alone.  Seeking mental health care particularly in military organizations is stigmatized as a weakness.  Coming from that environment, Johnson may have internalized this message.  His distress may have been compounded by an inability to realize his confusion and mood swings were not “normal” but symptoms of a treatable medical condition.  Expressing his troubling thoughts and feelings to friends or coworkers surely would have jeopardized his social life and his job.  Although Johnson had a Facebook presence, his “friends” likely knew nothing of the man’s inner struggle.  Essentially, Johnson was able to slip into a world of murderous rage because he was invisible.

Our mental healthcare systems failed Micah Johnson just as surely as they failed Dallas, Omar Mateen, Orlando, Tashfeen Maleek, and San Bernardino.  There is no question that bigotry and terrorism threaten public safety, but isn’t insanity the greatest risk?  These killers are no longer a threat, but what of the rest of the invisible souls who twist in feelings of rage and despair waiting to break and act and ultimately die at the hands of the brave police who protect us daily?

Part I: The Unwritten Laws of Being Black

This is the first in a three-part series written in response to

three tragic events in America which began July 5, 2016.

“There ain’t a white man in this room that would change places with me. None of you. None of you would change places with me, and I’m rich.”

-- Chris Rock, 1999

The first time I heard comedian Chris Rock utter the line above I did not laugh.  For this white woman raised in an upper middle-class home, the truth was like a kick to the head.  Not once in the history of African descendants in America has it ever been safe to be a black man.  This week’s shootings in Minnesota and Louisiana underlined that fact again.

The first shooting occurred Tuesday in Baton Rouge, LA.  Alton Sterling, 37, was selling CD’s outside the Triple S Food Mart when Officers Blane Salamoni and Howie Lake responded to an anonymous 911 call saying Sterling was making threats with a gun.  Cell phones began to record the tragedy as officers arrived.  Video shows Sterling being thrown against a police vehicle, being tasered, being thrown against a second vehicle, then being tackled and pinned to the ground.  Someone shouted, “Gun!” and Sterling was shot six times.  It was not until he lay dying on the ground that officers removed an object from his pants pocket.  Sterling’s hands were empty.  Though his probationary status temporarily prohibited from carrying a firearm under Louisiana’s open carry law, the victim apparently felt he needed protection.

On Wednesday in Falcon Heights, MN, a suburb of St. Paul, Philando Castile, 32, was pulled over by Saint Anthony Officer Jeronimo Yanez reportedly for “a busted tail light.”  Castile told the officer he had a weapon and a permit to carry it.  He then reportedly reached for his license and registration and the officer fired four bullets into his chest as he remained seated in his vehicle.  Castile’s girlfriend, Diamond Reynolds, used her cell phone to stream what followed live on Facebook.  Castile died before the eyes of the world as Reynolds calmly and respectfully assured the officer she would keep her hands right where they were.  The video shows Castile’s hands were empty.

In the aftermath of their deaths, false stories circulated that both Sterling and Castile had gang affiliations.  According to his police record, Sterling had to register as a Level 1 sex offender following an incident when he was 21.  He also was found guilty of a domestic assault and drug possession.  According to Minnesota court records, Castile was found guilty of 31 traffic-related misdemeanors including driving without proof of insurance, not wearing a seatbelt, and parking tickets.  If these men were white, no one would ever raise the specter of gang affiliation unless they had swastika tattoos on their skinheads. These African American men were not gang members.

These murder victims were imperfect humans, contributing members of society, and fathers of young children.  Sterling reportedly was living in a half-way house, getting his life back on track after serving his sentence for domestic assault.  Castile was a nutrition services supervisor at the J.J. Hill Montessori Magnet School where he served meals to 500 children with “patience and a friendly demeanor.”

Castile’s case is particularly troubling.  It is clear from his 31 traffic-related tickets that he was a victim of police harassment for a very long time.  Authorities stopped him repeatedly because he was “driving while black.”  This appears to have been the case on the day of his death as well.  While the officer cited the reason for the traffic stop as “a busted tail light,” the stop was made in broad daylight when the fully functioning tail light (photographed by witnesses) was not a safety factor.

How often are black men treated like this by police?  When a white man drives a newer model car in a lawful manner, no one notices.  When a black man does the same thing, officers decide the matter requires further investigation.

Why?

In America, black men are not supposed to succeed.  From the substandard elementary school classroom, to the poverty of a single-parent home, to the “loitering” charge leveled upon the teenager who goes to hang out with his friends until 10:01 on a school night, everything is stacked against African American males from birth.  The assumption of criminality is stamped on every black child who reaches puberty by police officers everywhere.  For many urban black boys, a marijuana conviction is practically a rite of passage.  If a youth is white, that first dime bag comes with a suspended sentence.  For a black kid, the precipitous fall into a life marked by economic insecurity accelerates when he has to serve 60 percent of a 30-day sentence.

Alton Sterling wasn’t brandishing a gun, he was selling CD’s while being black.  Philando Castile was not driving a broken car.  He was pulled over for having a car.  The unwritten laws of prejudice permit African American men to be systematically punished for the small successes in life that white people take for granted.  Both men were deemed “dangerous” by police because they exercised their legal right to carry a firearm.  Both men were sentenced to death for violating the greatest of the unwritten laws for being black:  In claiming the Constitutional right to bear arms, they were equal.

Chris Rock was right.  All the money in the world cannot make a white person wish for a lifetime in the deadly shadow of the unwritten laws of bigotry.

The Company He Keeps

In presidential voting years we choose a candidate, in part, by his or her alliances and by the kinds of people they attract.  For example, a socially conservative voter would often be offended by a candidate who attracts members of the LGBT community, protesters who burn flags, and extremist environmentalists.  Likewise, a left-leaning voter would not approve of a candidate who attracts people who condone racial injustice, the limiting of women’s health care options, or who deny global warming.

At various times candidate Donald Trump and his allies have criticized Democratic Party candidates for their stances on marriage equality and abortion.  Likewise, candidate Hillary Clinton has condemned Trump for his comments on Hispanics, Muslims, and women.  While the media has focused negative attention on the investigation into Clinton’s use of a private e-mail server, an equal amount of attention has been placed on the actions of skin heads around Trump rallies.

However, the media has been almost eerily quiet on Trump’s personal relationship with billionaire investor and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.  The 63-year old is a former Bear Stearns financier who formed his own investment firm, J. Epstein & Company, in 1982.

In March, 2005, a Florida woman contacted Palm Beach police to report Epstein paid her 14-year-old daughter $300 to go to his mansion, strip and massage him.  This allegation resulted in an 11-month investigation and a search of Epstein’s home in which authorities reportedly found photos of nude girls and a camera system allegedly set up to record the sex acts of prominent house guests for the purposes of blackmail.  The investigation resulted only in a single conviction of solicitation of a minor and an 18-month sentence.  Epstein served 13 months and was required to register as a Level 3 sex offender.

In 2008, a 19-year-old Jane Doe from Virginia filed a $50 million civil suit in federal court alleging that three years earlier Epstein solicited her for a massage at his home, had intercourse with her and paid her $200.  Many suits followed and most were dismissed; however, Epstein reportedly has made 17 out-of-court settlements in suits citing similar allegations involving women who were minors at the time of their interactions with Epstein.

One pro per law suit filed in California by a woman named Katie Johnson, was dismissed for technical errors in May 2016 and refiled (with counsel) in New York in June.  This law suit stands out because it does not only name Epstein as a codefendant who allegedly held the plaintiff as a sex slave and raped her at his New York home in 1994 when she was 13 years old.  The other defendant named in this case is Donald Trump.

Trump immediately denied the “perverted and depraved sex acts” alleged in the suit.  (Read it here https://www.scribd.com/doc/316341058/Donald-Trump-Jeffrey-Epstein-Rape-Lawsuit-and-Affidavits#fullscreen ).  He stated the charges were:

“…not only categorically false, but disgusting at the highest level and clearly framed to solicit media attention or, perhaps, are simply politically motivated…  There is absolutely no merit to these allegations. Period.”

Though the allegations are 22 years old and long past the 5-year statute of limitations for such complaints, the suit may be allowed due to the plaintiff’s fear and duress.  The suit states: “Both defendants let plaintiff know that … they had means to carry out their threats.”  Trump is alleged to have threatened that if she reported the incidents involving him “her family would be physically harmed if not killed.”  Interestingly, while the first of this plaintiff’s filings asked for $100 million, the second filing specifies no dollar amount.  It is not financially motivated.  Even more interestingly, this is not a matter of she said, they said.  This plaintiff’s lawsuit includes a corroborating eyewitness statement by “Tiffany Doe” who recruited adolescent females for Epstein’s parties and brought the plaintiff to the party with a promise of a modeling career.

Trump should have distanced himself from Epstein long, long ago when the criminal charges and law suits began to pile up.  Trump has been making political noises for almost a decade, now.  Rather than having the good sense to cut ties with a Level 3 sex offender, Trump verbally gave Epstein an atta boy.  A few years ago Trump reportedly said: “I’ve known Jeff for 15 years. Terrific guy. He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.  No doubt about it, Jeffrey enjoys his social life.”

Terrific guys.  Peas in a pod.  In the presidential vetting process we can learn lots of unsavory things about people.  This lengthy candidacy process is a tradition in America for this very reason.  After election, a sitting President can be impeached for the crimes of “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”  While impeachment procedures have begun, no sitting president has been impeached… yet.

My guess is that if Trump were elected, he could be the first.  Given the charges that have been revealed in his vetting process, Congress will have a selection of crimes to choose from.

Dear America: I Love You

Dear America,

Happy 240^th birthday.  I write about you often, but I haven’t written to you in a very long time.  Perhaps it just took me this long to build up the courage to tell you how much I love you.

America, I have never denied my infatuation for your physical beauty.  From the rocky beaches of your Massachusetts shoreline, to the stunning, snow-shrouded volcanic peaks of Washington and from the swaying grasses of your plains to the stark, breathtaking magnificence of a dawn’s early light setting flame to the red rocks of New Mexico’s finger mesas… you are glorious.  I have reveled in your ancient sequoias, laughed at the parrots in Florida’s trees, journeyed to find the serenity on your misty Pacific beaches, and held my breath when a bald eagle hung motionless in the wind a hundred feet above my head.

Just looking at you, even in photographs, it is not surprising that the world sees your beauty as I do.  I have been blessed throughout my 52 years to see you in real time, to soak you into my soul, to gaze upon you, sink my toes into your warm sands, and call you “Home.”

However, your beauty is sometimes skin deep, America; and, I have not been able to overlook some of your faults.  In many ways, you are like a young adult who grew up rich, but rough.  Like all of us, you were spawned by passion.  Your parents defiantly demanded freedom to think and do and believe what they could not deny within themselves.  They put their bodies and souls into you, lived and willingly died to bring the bright spark of your spirit into a universe that was starving for what you are.  You were born into a violent world, America.  The moments before your birth were terrible – so hazardous that your first breath and cry were a miracle.

But, that cry was a call to arms and you fought for every teetering baby step you took.  With a rock and a stick clenched in your young hands, you raged against anyone who threatened your existence.  Your historic histrionics, always indulgently encouraged by your family, were ugly and dangerous.  Dangerous, America, because you were and often still are, a big, stubborn baby.  While your stubbornness served you well in surviving your childhood, it is that intractability and violence that have caused me to throw up my hands in frustration and despair. 

Your youth and adolescence were a mix of prideful moments and crushing embarrassments to our family.  We were raised in the same house and taught fundamentals of equality, tolerance, and the kind of freedom that ends at the tip of my neighbor’s nose.  Yet, amidst the double-standards of your house, we have had to fight for every one of the rights to life, liberty and happiness.  America, you were the kind of parent who made us stand up for ourselves and maybe we should be grateful for the hard-working toughness that courses through our veins.

I also know my life lessons left me resentful and critical of you at times.  You are hypocritical, America.  The lessons of your parents were often lost upon you.  You swaggered around empirically, claiming “rights” that you had not earned.  As a big, brutish teenager you self-proclaimed privileges with brutal force, exploding into places you did not belong with criminal negligence.  You have terrorized and murdered innocent people in the name of a god they neither knew nor wanted.  You stole, burned and pillaged.  Oh, America!  Shame on you.  You shamed all of us.

And just as we think we can bear no more of this behavior, we see your sweet, vulnerable, gentle heart.  When nature rises, you come in charitable grace offering your steady, generous hands to a world in need.  Your tears of sorrow, your deep wells of kindness, your unshakable optimism, your belief that no task is impossible… At those times when we have been on our knees, America, you lifted us up with justice, and rightness, and compassion.  We found comfort in the sweet faces of our neighbors and the admiration of the world.  In the darkest of disasters you told the world: “We’re okay.”  To us, you were the voice of a loving mother to a crying child who softly and firmly said: “Get up.  You can do this.  Those people out there are waiting for you.  Be brave.  Stand up now.”  And we do stand, all of us, together.

America, with all of your faults and hypocrisy, I claim you.  Your stubborn courage is in me as surely as I am in you.  To stay angry at you would be a poison to my own soul; and I, like you, have no intention of dying today.  So, in a tribute to you on your birthday, I will stand up for rightness, equality, peace, and for the weakest members of our family just as you taught me to do in this place called “Home.”  I will stand with those who stand for you even when they are on their knees.  I will extend my hands and heart to our neighbors in the hours of their desperation.   I will open the doors of the home of the free to those brave enough to enter it peacefully.  I will be the embodiment of the beautiful lessons of your parents and mine.

America, beautiful America, I love you.  Happy birthday.

Catch 22: Treating Mental Illness in America

“He has to be crazy to keep flying combat missions after all the close calls he’s had.  Sure I can ground Orr.  But first he has to ask me to.”

- Joseph Heller, Catch 22

In the aftermath of the Orlando massacre, many are focusing more on a criminal investigation and less on the human condition that led up to this horrific act.  Other nations have experienced and mourned acts of violence with multiple victims, but America is remarkable for its level and frequency of mass murders.

Since 2009 there have been eight separate mass shootings which claimed over 200 lives and resulted in hundreds of injuries.  Reporters and politicians often focus on the availability of firearms as provocation for these incidents while overlooking the other common theme in each event: Mental illness.

An attorney friend likes to say: “Crazy is a medical term. Sanity is a legal term.”  This is true.  One’s “sanity” does not come into question until he or she has committed a crime.  Then, courts must determine whether the person 1) had the capacity to tell the difference between right and wrong at the time of the crime, and 2) can participate in their own defense.

Numerous studies indicate one-third of America’s homeless population suffers from mental illness.  We see these people in our surroundings talking to themselves and looking confused.  We rightly assume they must be on drugs.  Without medical support, people suffering with depression or anxiety often will self-medicate with street drugs to control symptoms that are compounded by frightening living conditions.  The homeless represent a small minority of America’s mentally ill.

How many people who are described as “crazy” by friends and family members maintain homes and jobs?  According to a report by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (2014), nearly one in every five people or 42.5 million Americans suffer enduring or chronic conditions such as depression, bipolar disorder(s) or schizophrenia.  The study also indicated 9.3 million Americans experienced mental illness so severe that the condition impeded their day-to-day activities.  To answer my own question, 33.2 million people are trying to hold their lives together while dealing with a mental health issue.

Although most of us have run into people who clearly have some “problem,” most of us are not directly impacted by their struggles.  We know them, talk to them, and develop opinions about whether they are people with whom we want to associate.  We describe them as “weird,” “irrational,” “unreliable,” “angry,” or “creepy.”  We brace ourselves for brief neighborhood and workplace encounters.  Sometimes we feel upset when the “crazy guy” attacks us verbally for something minor or nothing at all.  We seldom think that maybe he cannot control himself.  It isn’t until the same person threatens us that we consider reporting the incident to authorities.

It is at this point that our systems fall apart.  The police will ask if there has been an assault or property damage.  When there was none, we are told the police can’t do anything unless a person is a danger to himself or others.  Likewise, crisis hotlines will say that unless someone is willing to commit themselves to care, there is nothing they can do.  Families are left without support.  Friends can’t help.  Coworkers are hamstrung by company policy.  Even federal agents cannot intervene when the alarming bragging of a person who claims to have ties to terrorist organizations are found to be factually and legally meritless.  In the absence of a clear and present danger, people with mental illness escalate in the privacy of a personal hell.

This is the Catch 22.  Crazy is not a crime until thoughts are acted upon.  There is no safety net for the mentally ill or proactive safeguards for the American society upon which criminal insanity is eventually inflicted.

This incredibly complex problem is at the crux of every mass shooting and every murder-suicide in America.  Legislatively curbing the availability of firearms to prevent mass murder is akin to taking shoelaces away from a person who is suicidal.  People with intent to harm themselves or others will find a way to do so until we address the intent.

We need to remove barriers to mental healthcare and remove the stigmas associated with these medical conditions.  Mental health screenings should be performed routinely by pediatric specialists.  High schools and colleges should be able to fund mental health programs to help people at the time when disorders like schizophrenia begin.  We must do more to educate Americans to not only recognize mental illness symptoms but also to intervene on a sufferer’s behalf.  Rather than reacting in anger to someone who is politically incorrect in the throes of a manic episode or a paranoid delusion, we can compassionately approach that same person to ask: “Are you OK?  Can I help?”

After every violent incident, American communities unite to say that hatred is not who we are.  We promise we will not be broken by the evil that inspired such violence.  Yet, until we unite as a compassionate nation to overcome the causes of such violence, mental illness will continue to break our hearts.

I urge leaders to acknowledge our nation’s mental healthcare crisis and to treat its current state of devastation as an emergency.

Judge, Jury and Executioner

   Sunday morning arrived with horrible news from Orlando, Florida.  Fifty people in a city that also is home to the “Happiest Place on Earth” were killed and another 53 were wounded by a lone gunman in the deadliest mass shooting in our nation’s history.

   In America the word “terrorism” almost always arises when the name of the alleged perpetrator sounds Middle Eastern.  Investigations regarding ties to ISIS are almost automatic.   However, even the killer’s own claims to ISIS sympathy made in a 911 call shortly before the crime proves little about his real motive.

   Humans usually justify their beliefs by seeking agreement from others with similar beliefs.  What better place for a would-be mass murdered to find acceptance than in the philosophies of people who justify homicidal acts with a twisted interpretation of the doctrines of a peaceful faith?

   According to Meriam-Webster, “terrorism” is: “the use of violent acts to frighten the people in an area as a way of trying to achieve a political goal.”  Clearly, any crime of this magnitude is terrifying, but it was not, by definition, terrorism.

   Mateen’s father, Kir Saddique, gave us a window into the world of his son’s mind when he reportedly told investigators that Mateen recently became upset after seeing two men in Miami kissing.  Saddique also reportedly said that his New York-born son’s crime “had nothing to do with religion.”

   Taking away terrorism as a motive, observers are left with the picture of a man who was mentally unstable.  He was a security guard with a firearms license that allowed him to legally purchase an AR-15 assault rifle.  He was a man for which federal law enforcement agencies opened and shut investigations on at least two occasions because they had no legal merit.  He was a man so consumed with hatred of gay men kissing in public that he drove almost two hours to personally shut down the Pulse nightclub, a business that called itself “Orlando’s hottest gay bar…”

   This tragedy was not terrorism.  It was a hate crime.  By definition a “hate crime” is: “A crime, usually violent, motivated by prejudice or intolerance toward an individual’s natural origin, ethnicity, color, religion, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, or disability.”

   LGBT people are often the targets of hatred and violent crimes.  While Mateen is no longer a threat to them, other people with bias toward the LGBT community still inspire fear.  Bigotry is not a crime and yet its insidiousness perpetuates violence against countless innocent victims.

   We do not ask to be born into any nation, we just are.  We do not ask to be born Black, white, Latino, Asian, or into a lower caste.  We do not ask to be left-handed, short, tall or disabled.  We do not ask our parents for names that cause us to be bullied in schoolyards or placed on a government watch list.  We do not wake up one morning and “decide” who we will be physically attracted to.  If we had a choice in these matters, we surely would choose a path that kept us out of harm’s way.  Unfortunately, none of us can exercise such an option.

   Americans live in a nation in which we are able to love and hate equally.  We can feel sad, happy, fearful, bored, optimistic, pessimistic, or apathetic with complete immunity.  Generations before us fought and died so our government cannot deny us access to our emotions.  Personal rights come with great responsibility, however.  Though we have the freedom to feel a spectrum of emotions, we are bound by law to express those emotions responsibly.   My rights end at the tips of my fingers, and should never be at the business end of a gun.

   Sadly, the great tragedy in Orlando is one that will be repeated over and over on a small scale every day, everywhere.  One person claims his right to fear and irrational hatred.  The joy and love of another person is, therefore, so unconscionable that it must be stopped forever.  Insanity is not a crime until it acts on the person of another.

   Judge.

   Jury.

   Executioner.

Feeling the Afterburners

   June 8^th dawned with an echo of last night’s news.  Writ large and in color across the face of every major newspaper in America, Hillary Clinton is the Democratic party’s nominee.  Alas, the sidebar story is that Senator Bernie Sanders (D,Vermont) is not.  I knew Sanders had an outsider’s chance of winning the nomination, but I like his message and his moxie.  His platform encouraged hope even though I am not a Millennial.

   With regard to elections, the media feeds on statistics in an attempt to predict voter outcomes and to be the first to forecast winners.  Consequently, the media repeatedly has noted Sanders’ supporters are primarily “younger” voters.  Millennials are now old enough to work and vote.  Everyone should understand this generation’s priorities and how their ascent will impact our future because they will be at the helm of the world’s economic, political and social ships very soon.

   Millennials are 13 to 34 year-olds raised by Baby Boomers who prioritized health, the environment, gender equality, and a college education.  Boomers were told by their Silent Generation parents that if they worked hard and went to school they would have “a better life.”  As a result, most Millennials are latchkey kids raised by working parents who struggled to maintain work/life balances so they could manage the kids’ music lessons, sports and the math tutoring that could propel them through the gates of universities.

   Raised with cell phones and home computers, Gen Y made Google a verb.  “Play time” moved from the yard to the den.  “Friends” were on Facebook or invited in through the doorway of high speed Internet to “game.”  While adults did household chores in the second or third work shift of their day, teens and tweens shook hands electronically with peers around the globe.   American kids learned Korean from YouTube pop sensation Psy and clicked Japan’s Funky Monkey Baby into stardom.  Asian teens returned the favor by getting their sag on for American Hip Hop.   It is no wonder that Millennials everywhere embrace diversity in a world made small by connectivity.

   This generation also was uniquely impacted by human tragedy.  Terrorism in New York.  Wars in the Middle East.  Columbine.  Malala.  Trayvon.  Hate crimes.  Hunger.  Homelessness.  Sandy Hook.  Global warming was viewed through the eyes of children who cried for a polar bear clinging to a shrinking piece of ice.  These were not just search images for Generation Y.  World events made them compassionate humanists rather than national patriots.  Because they were raised in a mass-marketed world, early Millennial social movements were tied to t-shirt slogans offering “Free Hugs” in the hope that a friend could someday learn “To Write Love on Her Arms.”

   During the Great Recession, old promises fell over dead at dinner tables where parents apologized for Ramen noodle meals after months of unemployment.  College dreams were dashed.  Gen Y was orphaned by a corrupt corporate system gone terribly, terribly wrong.  Times demanded they become self-reliant, so Millennials studied Gates and Jobs, took their lap tops to the job market and “did better” for themselves with no help from the authority figures that disenfranchised them.

   Bernie Sanders spoke for them.  Unlike the 2010 Occupy Movement, Sanders offered solutions in the form of organizational skill and the legislative expertise to back his proposals with the power of law.  Although Sanders is not going to be the U.S. President this year, he has vowed to continue to fight for change.

   Because they are young and in some cases unable to vote, Millennials will look toward outside leadership for now.  But as they age and fully grasp the mantel of adulthood, they will need to look no further than the mirror for the leadership they now seek.  In the not-too-distant future, a generation adept at networking and passionate about raising the down-trodden will take power and speak for the world.  As Baby Boomers have aged and passed away, Millennials now are the statistical majority generation in our economy.  Their numbers are making up for their current lack of individual financial influence.  Maturity and increasing wealth will soon alter the balance of power.

   In my lifetime, Millennials will change the world.  There will be free college tuition.  There will be equity in an America where divisive terms like “race,” “preference” and “gender” no longer apply.  There will be inventions and meaningful interventions to protect the environment.  Americans will not be denied access to health care because their physical problem is somehow “morally objectionable” to someone who is not living in their skin.  Corporations will not crash under the weight of honest accountability but will learn to become responsive to the customers they serve or risk the economic fall-out of well-organized boycotts.  The neo Jim Crow laws that make unarmed people run from trigger happy police will be reversed.  The homeless and hungry will not be given a sandwich for the day, but will be lead to a life without needless suffering.

   Millennials, you may be sad about Bernie today but you need not be.  Military jets use afterburners to create thrust. Hit that button on your consoles.  Be the rush.  Be burners.

For Whom Does He Stand?

In the weeks leading up to the California primary election, much has been said about Donald Trump and his political agenda. According to the Positions page at www.donaldjtrump.com , his most important agenda item is building a wall at the U.S./Mexican border.  Trump also opposes the Affordable Care Act, wants to renegotiate U.S./China trade agreements, favors using tax reform to increase employment, wants to “fix” the Veterans Administration, strengthen the rights of Americans to bear firearms, and launch “real immigration reform.”

While Trump’s stump speeches provide an intriguing spin on each of these agenda items, the platform, itself, is just a regurgitation of previous conservative talking points.  There is nothing new or imaginative here.

My question of the Trump camp is not what the GOP presidential candidate stands for, but for whom he stands.

Immigrants

Trump plans to deport immigrants lacking legal status.  According to a 2013 report by the Department of Homeland Security, 11.4 million people currently fall into this category.  Like it or not, illegal immigrants represent three percent of the U.S. population.

Latinos

In his speech declaring his presidency, Trump shocked people here and abroad by declaring all Mexican immigrants to be “drug dealers” and “rapists.”  His bias is not limited to immigrants.  For approximately a week, Trump has leveled his sights on U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel citing the Mexican heritage of this Indiana-born magistrate as a reason to disqualify him from hearing the fraud case against the now-defunct Trump University.  According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 55 million Americans, or 17 percent of the U.S. population, is Hispanic.

African Americans

A Huffington Post article (March 11, 2016) provided eight reasons Trump would not be an ideal president for African Americans.  Trump reportedly was sued by the U.S. Justice Department in 1973 for racial discrimination.  In a 1991 tell-all book by John R. O’Donnell, Trump was quoted as saying, “Laziness is a trait in blacks.” Trump’s clearly stated antipathy toward Muslims tacitly includes black Americans who represent 23 percent of all U.S. Muslims.  There are 42 million African Americans in the United States comprising 13.2 percent of the total population.

Muslims

Trump has targeted all Muslims, regardless of their race or presence within or outside of our borders as “terrorists.”  He has called for a “total ban” on all persons of this religious faith from entering the United States.  This stance is unconstitutional and was particularly offensive to Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London.  There are 3.3 million Muslims in the U.S. representing one percent of the total population.

Women

Trump has been particularly insulting to women, using epithets like “pigs” and “fat” to describe them.  Trump also has promised to further reduce access to gynecological health care services.  According to the U.S. Census Bureau there are 168 million women in our nation comprising 50.8 percent of the total population.  If we reduce that number by women Trump admires (women like his wife who are European immigrant/supermodel/business owners), that population percentage does not change at all.

People Who Disagree With Trump

Trump predictably turns on critics and all who question his veracity.  Fellow GOP affiliates and elected officials who disagree with him like New Mexico’s Republican Governor Susana Martinez are told they are “not doing a good job” and Trump calls upon voters for their ouster.  (Not surprisingly, Martinez and other prominent GOP party members refused to be his running mate.)  Journalists recently were called “scum bags” and “sleazy” when they asked about the short-fall in promised donations to veterans’ organizations.  His list of detractors are labeled as “insane,” “stupid,” and “slobs.”  According to a recent survey in the Los Angeles Times, a whopping 71 percent of likely voters “disapprove” of Trump.  According to the latest tally, 146.3 million people are registered to vote in America.  Statistically speaking, Trump would be openly insulting toward 103.9 million voters.

And the Winner Is…

By simply adding up the numbers in five of the categories listed above, 85 percent of the U.S. population likely will be treated with great disdain by a Trump administration.

Certainly in the remaining 15 percent, Trump’s biggest supporters reportedly are conservative white males.  Alas, many prominent, conservative males have lodged vociferous opposition to Trump saying he would be bad for business, international relations, national security and GOP party unity.  While many Republican members of Congress now begrudgingly support Trump in the spirit of party cohesion, they will not support his agenda legislatively.  As they oppose him on legal and Constitutional grounds, he will turn on them, too.

Who will be left?  Many conservative, white male voters are still in Trump’s corner because he speaks to their fear that mobs of immigrants now rain the terrors of unemployment and escalating tax expense upon the land while liberals are taking away their guns.  As soon as these people live through predictable Trump policy repercussions such as joblessness spawned by international trade disputes, inflation, heightened public unrest due to racial and religious discrimination, and war, they will question Trump as well.

To Trump, all who question him or disagree with him are his enemies.

In the final analysis, only Trump will remain as a beloved party of one.

Political Circus

   This week CNN’s Anderson Cooper was joined by other political pundits who agreed Hillary Clinton should be more assertive in her presidential campaign and more accessible to the media.  Given Donald Trump’s indefatigable ability to single-handedly occupy the 24-hour news cycle with his histrionics, journalistic broadcast directors likely feel nervous about the “equal time” rule and an appearance of favoritism toward one candidate or another.

     I disagree.

   The television news media always has attracted audiences with bold headlines and stories that capture the attention of the part of human nature that cannot look away from a house fire.  Our innate fascination with disaster allows us to count ourselves fortunate to cling to life, limb and property.  So, when a political candidate does not look like a car wreck, isn’t that a good thing?

   In this writer’s opinion, Secretary Clinton’s tone and media accessibility have been pitch perfect for this situation.  While talking with a colleague on Wednesday, I said, “if I were her I would stand by and let The Donald slam his own foot in the door and then simply point at him.”

   Clinton did just that.  On a June 2^nd campaign stop in San Diego, California, she gave one of her best campaign speeches to date.  Using quotes from the presumptive GOP presidential nominee as evidence, Clinton made the case that Trump is “temperamentally unfit” to be president.

   “It is not hard to imagine Donald Trump leading us to war just because someone got under his very thin skin,” said Clinton.  She called Trump’s political plans “dangerously incoherent” and stated “This is not someone who should ever have the nuclear codes.”

   Try as they may, not even Trump’s advisors can control his message.  His fellow Republicans warn of the devastation a Trump presidency would have on our economy, (party) unity, diplomatic relations, religious freedom, and Constitutional rule.  Unabashed, Trump’s most fanatical supporters chant “Build The Wall! Build The Wall!” with all the charm of pitchfork-bearing movie extras, and defiantly cling to the hope that if their hero can simply lock out foreign invaders order and safety will be restored in a terrifying world.

   If news-hour political reports seem to be one-sided, the problem does not lie in any candidate's lack of accessibility to reporters.  The problem is in the definition of “news worthiness.”

   For conservative, moderate and liberal media outlets alike, Trump’s incendiary language is like a smoldering cigarette burning into the fabric of a comfortable, American-made armchair.  While Trump fans the flames of anger, fear and hysteria with one scathing, insult-laced speech after another, the media reports with a mix of dread and excitement when protesters’ tempers’ ignite another riot. The metaphorical smoldering cushions caught fire and sparked the curtains in America’s dream home.  It is breaking news.  So, we watch, unable to look away.

   The media has the power to adjust the message.  Currently selling tickets to a circus of their own making, reporting agencies can offer the public something they have not provided for years: Unbiased information.  Report on Trump without extrapolation.  Give equal time to Clinton, Sanders, and third-party candidates.  Allow reports on public protests to become a sidebar rather than play-by-play sports reports.  Stop being the ringmasters at a show that prides itself on displaying performances by scary clowns who work for free.

   This writer urges the news media to put the wild animals back into their cages and restore sanity to the political discussion.