Washington State Allows Gay Marriages

“Isn’t it time?” The Governor of Washington shouted the question to the gathered hopeful. “Welcome to the other side of the rainbow!”
by Charlie Leck

Governor of Washington, Christine Gregoire, signed legislation that provides same sex couples equal rights under the state’s marriage law. It is significant that Governor Gregoire is a catholic and she is under intense fire for her action even as she was when the bill arrived at her desk from the state’s legislative Assembly.

In a ceremony at the state’s capitol building in Olympia, the governor addressed a happy gathering and, with a huge smile, said: “Isn’t it time?” The crowd erupted with applause and cheers.

“My friends,” the Governor added, “welcome to the other side of the rainbow!”

The State of Washington joined five (5) other states that have such laws – Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York and Vermont. The District of Columbia also allows same-sex marriages.

However, here in Minnesota, some seek to pass a highly discriminatory constitutional amendment that would define marriage as only between a man and a woman. Of course, I and thousands of other activists are working diligently against the amendment. You can join us by signing up at Minnesotans United for All Families. Give funds to support the campaign against the amendment. Get involved in a number of ways: You can host a house party to talk with your neighbors about the amendment; you can volunteer to work phones or distribute signs; you can join one or more professional or nationality groups that have been organized (e.g., business, women, lawyers, Asian); or come up with you own ideas about what to do to defeat this amendment to our state constitution.

If an amendment were to pass in our state, it would be forever and a day before we would ever be able to take the kind of step that Washington has so proudly taken.

Opposition to the amendment is very bi-partisan and crosses easily over party lines. In last week’s caucus gatherings, resolutions opposing the amendment were passed in many Republican and Democratic gatherings.

Friends from other states are also invited to support Minnesotans United for All Families. Your contributions to our work would be greatly appreciated.

_________________________

Why not become a follower?
If you read my blog regularly, why not become a follower? All you have to do is click in the upper right hand corner and establish a simple means of communication. Then you'll be informed every time a new blog is posted here. If all that's confusing, here's Google's explanation of how to do it! If you don’t want to post comments on the blog, but would like to communicate with me about it, send me an email if you’d like.

To Tame the Savageness of Man

If unrestrained by established codes, man will try to accumulate unto himself all the comfort, satisfaction and wealth that he can through whatever means necessary That is an awful attitude to hold about humanity, but it is a defensible thesis.
by Charlie Leck

No pabulum in this blog! I write about regulation and why we do it – why we write laws for individuals and corporations and why they must be strictly enforced.

Left unattended, without regulation, audit and supervision, mankind, I think, would be a savage beast.

Why do I think that?
It comes, I guess, from years of observation. Mankind has a huge, nearly insatiable appetite. He will do what he may to satisfy his craving. Take it as an old man’s observation!

There are certainly enough human examples in this country and around the world and they needn’t be so celebrated as Genghis Khan. Bernie Madoff will do quite well, thank you very much. And here, locally, so will Tom Petters and Denny Hecker. (You national readers can insert names from your own regions.)

This is why societies try (and have always tried) to order themselves and establish standards of behavior through rules of law.

A long, gloomy and tiring dissertation could be at hand, I suppose, but I will not go there. To be brief, I will say it succinctly: I worry about the adored themes of political dissertation in these days that call for deregulation of industry and commerce – these camouflaged calls for more freedom to operation, compete and succeed. In my lifetime I have seen too many examples of deregulation’s failure and the chaos and pain that such failure can bring. Most recently, you need only look at the mortgage lending and banking industry’s performance over the last two decades.

I do not trust the Koch Brothers! Don’t ask me why? I would struggle with an answer. It is the same inner, common sense that made me so shake my head in disbelief when I heard mortgage companies advertising that they had hoards of money to lend even to people who could make no down-payment whatsoever and even to people who had serious past histories of poor credit. You want to know just how bad the Koch brothers are, well google exactly that sometime and then sit back for hours and hours and read about these bad asses.

I don’t trust Karl Rove. I don’t trust Dick Cheney. I don’t trust Mike George (the sole funder of Strong America Now that supports Newt Gingrich). I don’t trust Newt Gingrich and his voracious appetites. I don’t trust Peter Thiel, who funds the Super Pac called Liberty, and all the personal and corporate freedom that he calls for. I also tend not to trust John Peterman of Whiteco Industries even though he made a contribution of a couple of thousand to Barack Obama’s campaign. He gave a million bucks to the American Crossroads Super Pac. In 2007, John McCain, for some reason, returned all the money that John Peterman gave to him. McCain didn’t like money from John Peterman.

I don’t mean to single these gentlemen out. They are only a few of the very successful businessmen and lobbyists who are calling for more deregulation and greater freedom for companies to operate as they please. Businesses and businessmen free from audit and oversight and regulation are like the proverbial “kid in a candy store.” Sticky fingers are a problem!

Do I sound too pessimistic and negative? I was a student of social theories (how societies organize and comport themselves). It’s too bad, but societies need laws, regulation and organization to keep their people from becoming savages. Things like that haven’t changed. It is as old as the earliest civilizations. Businesses need serious regulation also.

To close, had the banking, lending and mortgage industry been more seriously regulated we probably would have avoided the tough last few years we’ve gone through.

“The aim of mankind should be to tame the savageness of man and make gentle the life of this world.” [Edith Hamilton]

The above quotation, used by Bobby Kennedy in his extemporaneous remarks on the occasion of Martin Luther King’s assassination, has often been attributed to Aeschylus, but that is likely not correct. The extraordinary expert of Greek mythology and history, Edith Hamilton, used it a number of times in her speeches and often in explaining the necessity to check the appetites of ancient societies. However, it was certainly a theme of many of the plays of the ancient Greek playwright.

_________________________

Why not become a follower?
If you read my blog regularly, why not become a follower? All you have to do is click in the upper right hand corner and establish a simple means of communication. Then you'll be informed every time a new blog is posted here. If all that's confusing, here's Google's explanation of how to do it! If you don’t want to post comments on the blog, but would like to communicate with me about it, send me an email if you’d like.

Changing Face of Conservatism in America

I think back to the election of 1964, when we young Turks thought the contest was a matter of truth against radical conservatism of the most dangerous sort.
by Charlie Leck

In 1964, at 23 years, I guess I was a mere lad. I certainly didn’t know much about politics and I was feeling my way along in this presidential voting business because I hadn’t done it before. In 1960, when JFK was elected to the office, I had been too young to vote. In debates around the campus during the campaign, I had indicated a leaning toward Richard M. Nixon. (As I admit that, something vile tasting sticks in my throat. I shudder and thank goodness that I was too young to know better.)

Vaguely, I remember that ’64 election. JFK had pulled me easily over to the Democratic side of the issues – and so had 4 years of college education. The attitude was universal (it seemed) in the graduate school I attended. We all shook our heads at Barry Goldwater and we watched the polls grow and grow against him as the weeks moved along toward Election Day. He was considered extremely conservative and the very large majority considered him a dangerous option for the highest office in the land.

In today’s political climate, Barry Goldwater would be considered a moderate. In a column in the Washington Post (Feb 10), Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson write,

“…Goldwater, the Arizona senator was an ideological outlier. The average Senate Republican then was roughly as conservative as Indiana’s Richard Lugar is today. Now, though, Lugar is one of the few remaining GOP moderates, which makes him a prominent target for the party’s emboldened conservative base. According to an analysis of roll-call votes, the GOP has moved dramatically away from the center on economic policy since the early 1970s, with the House making a greater shift than the Senate. And, yes, the ideological swing has been larger for Republicans than for Democrats.”

Back in those golden days of Barry Goldwater, one of his Republican rivals in the Party was George Romney (father of Mitt Romney), who was popular because he was generally seen as a moderate (especially in comparison to Goldwater). Hacker and Pierson’s column about the elder Romney is intriguing and interesting and paints a clear picture of how far to the extreme right conservative politics in America has swung. Woe to the nation!

In the ’64 primaries, the New York Governor, Nelson Rockefeller, often talked about Goldwater’s “extremism.” In the presidential campaign, Lyndon Johnson often referred to him with the same language.

Today, I yearn for such moderate conservatism. Back then I never dreamed I would get to such a place.

Goldwater died in 1998. I can remember being greatly saddened by the news. We didn’t have bad feelings for opposition politicians in those days. Republicans and Democrats were civil to each other and didn’t attack each other as evil doers. It was a different and far better time in politics.

It does me absolutely no good to yearn for the good old days; but as my parents did it in the days of my youth, now I find myself doing it in the days of my children’s and grandchildren’s youth. The politics of these days is burdensome and tiring to me; but maybe that’s merely because of my age.

Back in ’64, while we waited for the returns to come in on that November evening, there was no suspense. Everyone, including Goldwater, knew that Lyndon Baines Johnson would win. It’s difficult to believe now how intensely the Democrats had gone after Goldwater as a radical conservative who was the leader of a right-wing conservative movement that could possibly lead us all into a nuclear war and might destroy the greatest social welfare idea in history (the Social Security system).

Yet, when the 80s came along in America, there was Barry Goldwater refusing to buy the rhetoric of the new Right Wing of the Republican Party. He was afraid of their ideas about limiting the power of the Courts and how dangerous that might be to the concept of balanced powers. The new, more radical conservative movement had begun and Goldwater didn’t like it.

At the time of Goldwater’s death, the President of the United States, William Jefferson Clinton, said of him: “He was truly an American original. I never knew anyone quite like him.” Clinton went on to call Goldwater “a great patriot and a truly fine human being.”

Indeed, he was!

_________________________

Why not become a follower?
If you read my blog regularly, why not become a follower? All you have to do is click in the upper right hand corner and establish a simple means of communication. Then you'll be informed every time a new blog is posted here. If all that's confusing, here's Google's explanation of how to do it! If you don’t want to post comments on the blog, but would like to communicate with me about it, send me an email if you’d like.

Romney Wins in Maine

Mitt Romney carried the day in Maine; but it seems a weak victory!
by Charlie Leck

Report as of now: 6:00 p.m. (Central Standard Time)
Romney appears to have carried 39 percent of the vote in Maine. Nearly 60 percent of the ballots went to the other three candidates, with Ron Paul finishing second. No matter how you look at it, Romney continues to look weak – weak even as the tenuous leader of the Republican Party to this date.

Santorum, who won three states earlier this week, will carry on.

Paul finished second in Maine and, as I write this, I hear him speaking to his followers and promising them that he will carry on.

I haven’t heard anything from Gingrich yet; earlier in the week he promised to go on and on to the very end of this Republican campaign. Frankly, I think he’s shot himself in the foot (via his big mouth) too many times and he can’t heal and get back in this thing.

I don’t know what it all means for the general election in November. It’s way too early. A lot of settling needs to happen, to clear the muddy waters a bit; then we may be able to see the bottom of the stream somewhat better and understand more clearly how rough things will be for the President.

I’m more convinced than ever that the reelection of President Obama will be very difficult for us; yet, he’s a talented man and he may be able to pull it off. Get ready to give as much as you can to his campaign and do as much as you can to help in his reelection.

_________________________

Why not become a follower?
If you read my blog regularly, why not become a follower? All you have to do is click in the upper right hand corner and establish a simple means of communication. Then you'll be informed every time a new blog is posted here. If all that's confusing, here's Google's explanation of how to do it! If you don’t want to post comments on the blog, but would like to communicate with me about it, send me an email if you’d like.

Romney in Trouble

What do the last few primary/caucus results mean? Can Romney close this sale.
by Charlie Leck

I had a sales manager once, when I was very young, who contended the world was full of great salesmen. He didn’t care. He wanted people who could close the deal.

Tom Brokaw, when he was a young college student, was a wonderful salesman. He worked in a men’s clothing store in South Dakota. Brokaw could sell a suit of clothes like you couldn’t believe. I watched him work a number of times. Tom didn’t wait for a guy to make up his mind between two or three or four suits. If a guy was floundering, Tom would sense it and he'd point to the suits hanging before the guy, zeroing in on one, and say, “That’s the one!”

Two weeks ago – even a week ago – I thought the Republican primary chase was over. President Obama would take on Mitt Romney. Now, I’m not too sure. There’s something about Romney that voters in the Republican Party are resisting. The results in Minnesota, Colorado and Missouri were disastrous for the front-runner. Now, all over again, it’s a brand new race.

Combine the results of all the primary/caucus states to-date and you find two-thirds of Republican voters did not vote for Romney. A publication I read yesterday concluded that two-thirds were opposed to Romney. I think that’s too tough – because there are a large number of choices – even though it is statistically correct. Nevertheless, I’m no longer sure that Romney is a good enough salesman to close the deal with Republicans.

It’s amazing how many front-runners have led in this Republican race at one time or another – only to back-slide into trouble. There was Bachmann, Perry, Cain, Gingrich and then Romney; and now, perhaps, Santorum.

The Republican voters are struggling. They can’t find what they want. Is it possible the candidate is not out there? Or, is it possible there is yet another – a real closer – who needs to step up and seal the deal.

_________________________

Why not become a follower?
If you read my blog regularly, why not become a follower? All you have to do is click in the upper right hand corner and establish a simple means of communication. Then you'll be informed every time a new blog is posted here. If all that's confusing, here's Google's explanation of how to do it! If you don’t want to post comments on the blog, but would like to communicate with me about it, send me an email if you’d like.

Europe is a Vital Friend

(1978) I lived in a garret apartment at the top of this building.

To say that Europe not free and is socialistic, as some Republicans have, is utter stupidity! It should disqualify them from election!
by Charlie Leck

The Republican Party in America is pretty tough on Europe. They seem to think, if they can appeal to the people of this country with a theme that pleads that we don’t want to be like Europe, they will wrangle in plenty of voters with that anti-European stance. I’m not so sure. Americans are getting smarter about the world.

In Harold Myerson’s column in the Washington Post today, “The GOP scrambles for a bogeyman,” I found a lot to like about Europe and a lot not to like about the current Republican candidates for President.

Newt Gingrich, as Myerson points out, recently attacked the President for advocating European Socialism. Mitt Romney claimed Mr. Obama was for “a European-style welfare state.” Romney went on to say that he was for a “free land.”

Oh,my! No wonder both Gingrich and Romney are fading in popularity. When a nation becomes so prideful and conceited that it cannot learn from other lands and other peoples, it is going down a dangerous and lonely road.

Many of the European nations, fully democratic and free lands, are doing quite well, thank you very much.

Do these Republicans want to break ties with the European nations that they think are so socialistic? Do they think it is impossible that a nation like Britain developed a national health care system through its democratic system and not through socialism? Couldn’t Germany have developed its extraordinary business climate that provides workers the opportunity to have input into corporate decisions through the democratic process?

Viva la France!
I love France so much that it is like a second home to me. To really know France is to recognize that it is one of the most democratic, just and free nations on the globe. It’s also creative, innovative and progressive.

Have we a greater ally anywhere on earth than the European Union?

Does Mr. Gingrich and Mr. Romney really believe that Sweden, Norway and Denmark are socialistic nations – that they are not free lands?

We have better and more cooperative relations with the nations of Europe under President Obama than we have had in many decades. And hooray for that!

America does not need to be like Europe. It is a bogus claim to say that Obama or anyone wants to make us like Europe; however, it is wrong to say that Europe is a socialist place and not a free land. Gingrich and Romney should be ashamed of themselves for either being so stupid or so dishonest.

Someone should remind Mr. Gingrich and Mr. Romney that Europe is a dear, dear friend and has been for a long, long time. As Meyerson says…

“The answer, of course, is that Western Europe was our staunch ally in blocking the spread of Soviet communism and today joins us in such joint ventures as the overthrow of Libya’s Moammar Gaddafi. (Indeed, the Europeans flew the planes while we made the plans.) By any measure, these nations are home to democracies no less robust than ours. Yes, their governments tax more than ours and offer more benefits; they have universal health care that enables their citizens to live longer than ours; and their colleges are still largely free.”

Hooray to President Obama for improving our relationships with Europe. It was the right thing and the smart thing to do. Obama’s popularity in Europe remains very high and that’s important.

_________________________

Why not become a follower?
If you read my blog regularly, why not become a follower? All you have to do is click in the upper right hand corner and establish a simple means of communication. Then you'll be informed every time a new blog is posted here. If all that's confusing, here's Google's explanation of how to do it! If you don’t want to post comments on the blog, but would like to communicate with me about it, send me an email if you’d like.

My Giving to Susan G. Komen for the Cure

I’ll be watching you Susan G. Komen for the Cure and you’d better behave!
by Charlie Leck

Nancy Brinker took home $417,000 2010 in 2010. I’m sure she’s a nice lady and maybe she deserves the money; but lately I’m having my doubts. Should the CEO of a charitable organization committed to raising funds for cancer research be making that much money? I really don’t know! You decide!

Ms. Brinker is the sister of Susan G. Komen and she founded Susan G. Komen for the Cure. Since we have some girls who’ve been participating in some of the Komen walks and races, we’ve been writing out generous checks to the Komen organization lately. After the last couple of weeks I’ve been caused to wonder if I should continue doing that.

Ms. Binker also flies first-class when she travels. That’s probably not important, but add it into all the other stuff that’s going on and it causes me to wonder.

Last week, Ms. Binker directed her non-profit to cut off funds that it had been supplying to Planned Parenthood (PP). Oh, my! What a furor that caused! They changed directions when thousands of their donors threatened to stop being donors. So now, PP is eligible for grants again. That’s not saying they’ll get any. We’ll have to watch.

I’ve been a supporter of PP for years – long before there was a Susan G. Komen organization.

And, that’s only the beginning of the story. Yesterday, Karen Handel resigned from Susan G. Komen for the Cure. Ms. Handel, a Republican conservative, was a candidate for governor in Georgia and made the recommendation at Komen to cut off funds to PP. The rationale for parting with PP was that the organization was under investigation in Congress. PP is a lightning rod for conservatives because it, among its many services, provides legal abortions. Conservatives in Congress wanted to make sure public funds were not being used to support or sponsor abortions. It’s apparent that the Komen organization was not getting contributions among very conservative Catholics because of their ties to PP.

The decision about PP, however, caused great concern among moderates and liberals and they have been strong supporters of Komen in the past. The organization faced a great conundrum and that forced the decision to cut ties with the lady from Georgia.

A lot of this has bothered me, but it’s only the beginning of the troubles I see in the Komen organization. Ms. Binker’s salary and travel style is another problem I have. Before I give more money to the organization, I’ll need to see some streamlining of their organization and some changes in salary scales.

In fairness, a Washington Post article points out that the top executives at the Boy Scouts, the United Way, and Easter Seals all make more than Ms. Binker. Does that make it okay? Or, are these other organizations also paying way too much?

There are fifty executives at Komen making over 100,000 dollars each. Over? How much over?

Here’s Komen’s 2009 tax return. It shows several executives earning above 200,000 dollars and as high as 450,000 dollars. Maybe that’s okay. I don’t know. Just makes me shaky about giving the organization more money. It makes one wonder just how much actually goes to cancer research.

It’s worth it, I think, to take a close look at Susan G. Kommen – the non-profit!

In an article on AlterNet, Sarah Seltzer says: “Komen is not the true champion of women’s health many thought it was…”

To start with, Komen has a “strong connection to Republican politics.” I’m not sure what that means, but I plan to find out. Handel (now gone) is a strong tea party gal. However, the ties to Republican extremists does not stop there.

Komen has for years led strong lobbying efforts against common-sense health care bills. Wait a minute here! I’m advocating stronger health care bills like crazy and giving money to the Susan G. Komen Fund at the same time. This doesn’t make sense.

And, mind you, we are only now seeing the tip of the iceberg. Lots of nosey sons-of-a-guns are taking much closer looks at the Susan G. Komen organization. I’m very interested to see what they find.

It all makes me sad. I’ve been proud of the girls and their efforts to raise money for Komen in these runs and these three-day walks in which they’ve been involved.

_________________________

Why not become a follower?
If you read my blog regularly, why not become a follower? All you have to do is click in the upper right hand corner and establish a simple means of communication. Then you'll be informed every time a new blog is posted here. If all that's confusing, here's Google's explanation of how to do it! If you don’t want to post comments on the blog, but would like to communicate with me about it, send me an email if you’d like.