America: Multiracial but not Colorblind

The article in The Seattle Times on Thursday, March 21, 2013 by Staff Reporter Jerry Large on two books authored by UW professors Habiba Ibrahim and Ralina Joseph, got me to thinking about the first time the term “post racial” came into popular use in the public conversation. It seems that when the media or academia introduces something then it must be ‘lingua franca’ for the masses. Since Barack Obama suddenly appeared on the political scene, seemingly out of nowhere, to secure the nation’s highest elected office, his ascendancy has to some at least, been the poster child and crowning jewel in celebration of a color-blind America; nothing could be further from the truth, however. There are even those with the audacity to believe that America’s election of a person of color for president somehow fulfills Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s “Dream” of living in a country where a person will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character; and thus, the feet of those who marched behind the Drum Major for Justice will finally come to rest, and those who pounded on the drumbeats for freedom will no longer need to beat out a single note against injustice; and the long, twisted and winding road along the lonesome trail for Civil Rights laden with the sweat, tears, and blood of martyrs can be remembered no more. America, the idealists say, is a “meritocracy” where if you work hard and play by the rules then you can achieve success or be all that you want to be. Even President Obama uses that phrase but is it really, really true, for everybody?

While President Obama has been lauded with almost reverential praise he has also received some of the most mean-spirited, vicious, blatantly egregious and hateful mischaracterizations in recent memory, ranging from being like Hitler, the anti-Christ, Illuminati spawn of Satan, or the typical racial epithets voiced by the redneck NASCAR attendees or from far-right Tea Party members. Those who like to espouse ‘post racial’ are just trying to use the term as a psychological cover-up to assuage feelings of centuries-old “White Guilt” from the legal practice of ‘chattel slavery’ and racial bigotry practiced from the beginnings of this nation. Not only that, but this peculiar institution was codified into the very foundational document of our democratic Republic in Article 1, Section 2a (three-fifths clause), Article 1, Section 9 (the 1808 clause), and Article 4, Section 2b (fugitive slave clause), by the noble and enlightened signees who touted such lofty words in the Declaration of Independence as liberty, justice, freedom, and, “All Men are created equal. . .” Besides all of this, Barack Obama is not the only African-American with a White parent or direct bloodline, and whether you call it bi-racial, mixed race, transracial, multiethnic, or two or more races, what’s the big deal? Would ‘post racial’ still be used if Barack Obama had two Black parents, or heck, would he even be president?

What is paramount regarding this entire matter is that in America there still exists a sense of ‘ascriptive hierarchy’ (White privilege) and control over the factors of production as well as all the popular institutions are still overwhelmingly the ‘exclusive’ domain of the White Anglo Saxon Protestant (WASP) male; for the most part. This practice transcends mere ideology or what one sees or feels. Instead, it puts into practice mechanisms to perpetuate a particular hegemony and control in the formulation of laws, political philosophy, educational curriculum, economic policy, and to a surprising extent, religious practice and theology. What seems to go missing from the conversation is that ‘race’ is a social construct that is actuated within a cultural framework, according to sociologists, and really has nothing to do with skin color or physical features. So, ‘post-racial’ is an oxymoron, a contradiction in terms because any casual observation and experience in reality only serves to repudiate this term in convincing fashion. It is not what you see and feel, as it is what you do; whose interests you want to protect, and what are the incentives for wanting to do so by your participation? Far too often we respond to verbal cues and images from narrative stereotypes that serve as an emotional trigger where we are programmed to react in a certain way, without fully understanding the nature or meaning behind our reactions. America is not color blind or ignorant about race relations because she has had a nearly 250 year history lesson and the only blindness that exists is one that is self-induced.


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
March 21, 2013
robertrandle51@yahoo.com’

The gospel according to the Church of Oprah

Oprah Winfrey has certainly received praise from her millions of followers but she gets criticized also. Probably the latest and ongoing controversy is the issue regarding her religious, oops, I mean, spiritual perspective. Some detractors feel that because of her public statements she should lose support from fans and corporate sponsors alike; but is this fair? This is America and a person is free to believe or not believe whatever they want to. Before summarizing a few of Miss O’s views the usual response is to line up several passages from the Bible to refute everything Oprah says, but that might not be necessary. Oprah claims that Jesus didn’t come to die on the cross for our sins but rather, to teach us “Christ Consciousness.” This term is not new and has been around for a long time, centuries before its popularity in America by the New Age Movement or Western-style Eastern mysticism. Jesus is seen as just another spiritual teacher in a long procession of others, dating back from millennia, who appeared on the scene to teach humanity some vital truth about reality, our purpose, social relationships, life and death, and about the Creator. Jesus wants us to attain this awareness within ‘ourselves’ and as I try to explain it to the best of my understanding, it’s like falling in love-you can’t put the feeling into words but you know it when you feel it. As Oprah says, “It’s what you come to know for yourself;” in other words, it’s your truth that is real, personal, and you don’t have to explain or prove it to someone else.

Another point she brings out is that God, or rather, knowing God is a ‘feeling’ experience and not a ‘believing’ experience. This statement would make any Christian cringe because “belief” is the foundation of our faith and it is the center from where we project ourselves into this world and social order that we are a part of. She continues, “Religion is all about a ‘believing experience’ then it’s truly not of God.” Oprah, I think, is trying to make too fine a distinction between the two twin pillars of believing and feeling and separating either one of them seems like a Mission Impossible. She does have a point that in some Christian circles there is an overabundance of stressing the word, “BELIEVE” without delineating what the response, expectation, and responsibilities are that go along with this choice. Oprah challenges the notion, or exclusivist proclamation that there is only ‘one’ way or path to God, but to her there are ‘many’ paths to God. Now, before the community of faith condemns her too harshly let’s take an inward look at ourselves before we pass judgment. I mean, how many Christian denominations are there with their own distinct religious literature, theology, liturgy that range anywhere from Hebraic Christians, Mormons, Pentecostals, Jehovah Witnesses, Baptists, Lutherans, Methodist, Quakers, Seventh-day Adventists, Salvation Army, affiliated and non-affiliated, ad infinitim; yet all of us claim to be serving and worshipping the same God and will be joining each other in Heaven, although we separate ourselves and do not fellowship one another while here on earth.

Getting back to the point about “Christ consciousness” an audience member said that to her it is having a deeper, inner connection to the ‘purpose’ that Jesus came to reveal, which is how to be fully human, as opposed to Him coming to die on the cross for sin. If one were to take such a position then Jesus, in fact, need not to have come at all because he didn’t reveal anything new. There were teachers of wisdom long before he came on the scene and have distilled much deeper, exquisite, esoteric and more practical teaching and knowledge than preserved in the gospels. The virtues of Eastern mysticism and Greek Philosophy are more profound than anywhere in the New Testament; so the three and one half year of Jesus’ ministry that culminated in His death just to perform a few miracles and astound mostly uneducated, simple working-class Galilean laborers and other peasants, would seem a great sacrifice if that was all there was to it. The audience member went on to say that if you don’t follow your spiritual calling, then you are lesser of a human. This is almost verbatim from Buddhism which says that a person’s goal in life is to find out what their work (“tikkun”) is in life to fulfill their purpose.

It seems “sin” is a word that makes people feel uncomfortable and it is much easier to simply exclude it from discussion. There are substitutes which men like Dr. Wayne Dyer and Eckhart Tolle like to use instead, like behavior resulting from having negative thoughts or something like that; and even God is presented as impersonal cosmic power, consciousness, or intelligence referred to as the “Source.” Al Gore once said, “We aren’t human beings having a spiritual experience but spiritual beings having a human experience.” To some of the Gnostics or spiritualists, Jesus Christ is a divine principle, concept, or idea that was made known but not so much a personal being; and the same thinking is applied to God as being-ness and without anthropological characteristics such as hearing, feeling, seeing, and so on. While it is true that the ‘spark’ of divinity resides within the human body to animate our physical life, innate moral capacity and sentience (“conscious awareness”), still we are flawed, imperfect, and broken in a spiritual sense compared to the perfectness and holy nature of God, our Father and Creator.

As a last point, at least on the merit of it, the most salient point is: “Man has made God in his own image-the eternal, infinite, unnamable was reduced to a mental ‘’idol’ that you had to believe in as God.” Enough cannot be written to counter the damaging psychological effect of European Renaissance religious imagery, iconography and art in portraying supernatural beings graven as images from man’s imagination, regardless of how ‘inspired’ the claims are, or out of the most pious devotion, reverence, and act of worship. It was not without good reason the prohibition in Exodus 20 was given by God regarding making images and idols of anything in heaven. There are even those who worship the angels as heavenly intermediaries between themselves and God and represent these beings in paintings, sculptures, and the like.


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
March 10, 2013
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

Barack Obama’s State of the Union speech 2013

On Tuesday, February 12, 2013 President Obama was again fulfilling his obligation under the U.S. Constitution according to Article 2, Section 3 (a): “He [the president] shall from time to time give to Congress information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient. . .” The president’s address before the chamber of Congress had a little bit of something borrowed and something new. To begin with, president Obama borrowed a speech by John F. Kennedy: “51 years ago John F. Kennedy declared to this Chamber: ‘The Constitution makes us not rivals for power but partners for progress. It is my task to report on the State of the Union, to improve it, is the task of us all.’” While not wanting to deconstruct the entire speech there are a few things that need further scrutiny. Who are those members in Congress that have proposed sparing defense costs due to “sequestration” (the fiscal cliff) and instead support cutting education and job training, Medicare, and Social Security benefits? When president Obama said that the biggest cost of our rising deficit is associated with long-term care of an aging population- the need for “modest” reform in Medicare, otherwise our retirement program will crowd out what we need for our children when they are about to retire, the chamber got a lot quieter all of a sudden. Medicare and Social Security is the ‘holy grail’ of federally-funded Entitlements and the mere suggestion of tweaking a system where the recipients are the majority voting bloc is quite risky. Next, there was talk about the Affordable Health Care Act slowing down healthcare costs but they are still spiraling upward. It was interesting to hear about reducing taxpayer subsidies to prescription drug companies because those same industries were some of president Obama’s biggest corporate campaign donors and influential White House lobbyists.

 Then there was the chiding of Congress because they only passed parts of The American Jobs Act, which according to the president, economists predict would create 1.5M jobs. Of course, there was no mention of what was in the bill, and who are these economists who can substantiate these job figures? President Obama mentioned that he wants to lay out a plan tonight that is “fully paid for” and consistent with budget framework that both parties agreed to 18 months ago, and that won’t increase the deficit by a single dime, but the details were not forthcoming. The statement about developing new technologies and alternative forms of energy generated by the large wind turbines that dot the landscape in some areas, but have become an eyesore to environmental groups, not the mention the birds that are caught in the blades of these large fans, which animal rights advocates are upset about; despite the thousands of jobs that have been created. President Obama went on to talk about establishing a new goal for America: cut in half the energy wasted in our homes and businesses and to encourage this type of energy upgrade and retrofitting, tax incentives and credits are given for energy-efficient homes and buildings. This is certainly not a new idea for homeowners who have been using these deductions for years, and some businesses who plant gardens of their rooftops to lower their utility bills. The thing is, though, what about the federal government; how many government vehicles are hybrids or electric, or how many offices use energy-efficient light bulbs and how many buildings is energy compliant within the guidelines expected for everyone else?

 And then there was housing and mortgages: To put a bill before Congress that would give every responsible homeowner in America the chance to save $3,000 yearly by refinancing at today’s lower rates [assuming they are not already underwater or delinquent in their mortgage payments]. This is not a new idea because people used to do the very same thing in the 1970’s during the housing boom and the ARM’S (Adjustable Rate Mortgages). Also back then, the IRS tax code allowed for the profit from the sale of a house to not be taxed as ordinary income but rather at the lower rate for capital gains [if it was even taxed at all]. The biggest problem with refinancing today is the unwillingness of banks to renegotiate with homeowners and you have to jump through too many hoops to get it done. President Obama’s “Fix-it-First Program” sounds more like he’s channeling FDR’s “NEW DEAL” by having programs to deal with our aging infrastructure (deteriorating bridges, roads, sewer systems, etc.) through putting people to work on our most urgent repair programs (70,000 bridges across the country). He should have promised “A chicken in every pot and a car [hybrid] in every garage, too.” Continuing with populist themes like the fact that fewer than 3 out of 10 four year olds are enrolled in a high quality pre-K program. President Obama wants a proposal to make high quality pre-school education available to every child [at the states’ expense or 91% of it because the federal government only funds around 10% for public education pre-K through12]. NOTE: Whatever happened to the Head Start program?? Besides, this is not new either.

 He further adds: “Every $1 invested now will save $7 later on by boosting graduation rates [from H.S. but what about college??], reducing teenage pregnancy [and drug abuse, gangs, prison incarceration etc.], and violent crime. Funny though, there was no mention of alternatives to improve student learning outcomes such as Charter schools, Academies, private boarding schools, Magnet and Montessori schools. Speaking of the dollar costs, that makes a lot of sense because what the public is dubious woefully in denial of is the “pay me now or pay me later” principle- The prison population in America is around 2M and the incarceration cost of a bed and meals per inmate is, say, $25,000 a year (2,000,000 x 25,000=$50,000,000,000 annually); that is $50B and this doesn’t even include the costs of operating all the prisons in America, which when you consider all of that, it might be closer to $200B. A study of the inmate population at the Pennsylvania State Penitentiary showed that 68% of prisoners did not have a high school diploma. Besides, all this talk about placing such an emphasis on redesigning high schools to emphasize Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM), has some educators concerned that this would be at the risk of jeopardizing the liberal arts, which might get defunded or felt less important and thus receive little attention.

 If you want placate the concerns from supporters of the fastest-growing minority group in America who caused you to be reelected, and then you have to tell Hispanics what they want to hear, thus, President Obama, not missing a political opportunity, says, “I recommend Congress to pass ‘comprehensive’ Immigration reform legislation. Along with the proposal he wants to:
-Reinforce stronger border security south of the U.S. border. He mentioned that illegal crossings are at a forty year low (what about border agents killing illegal immigrants??)
-Provide a responsible pathway to earn citizenship (criminal background check, paying taxes and penalties, learning English [many students already enrolled in ESL classes, anyway], and go to the back of the line behind those who applied for legal citizenship.
-Fix the legal immigration system (reduce long waiting periods) and attract highly skilled entrepreneurs and engineers that will help create jobs and grow the economy. NOTE: Isn’t president Obama talking about the Dream Act or Amnesty and some countries just might not want to allow their most skilled and educated citizens to immigrate to America.

And what about the Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1 (a)? “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. Some who interpret the Constitution as “strict constructionists” say that this provision applies to African-Americans [slaves and their descendants] because this was part of the post-Civil War/Reconstruction Amendments of the late 1860’s -1870 (Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth) and anyone else would be subject to provisions of the 1790 Naturalization Law, superseded by the 1920 Immigration Origin Act, superseded by the 1952 Immigration Law, or superseded by the latest Immigration and Naturalization Law of 1965.

There was also the curious mention of: “I want to strengthen families by removing the financial deterrence for low income couples and encourage fatherhood (how??).” “What makes you a man is not the ability to conceive a child but having the courage to raise one” NOTE: This quote was essentially taken from the movie, “BOYZ N THE HOOD” and the words were spoken by actor Lawrence Fishburne, but he said it in more of the street vernacular. When President Obama said, “We will strengthen our own Missile Defense Systems”this brought back memories of Ronald Reagan’s “Star Wars Initiative” about erecting a missile defense shield around America and allied countries in Western Europe. Then there was the comments about The United States will partner with our allies to reduce extreme poverty in undeveloped countries within the next two decade by connecting people to the global economy; including empowering women [how??].Saving the world’s impoverished children from preventable deaths (AIDS-free generation). NOTE: Wasn’t the United States largest foreign aid package ever to Africa for the prevention and treatment of AIDS promoted by President George W. Bush?

 Near the conclusion of the speech president Obama made the case for a need to counter “Cyber-attacks” to prevent sabotage to our power grid, financial institutions, and air traffic control systems. He would be issuing a new Executive Order to strengthen cyber defenses by increasing information-sharing and developing standards to protect our national security, jobs, and privacy. Congress must pass legislation to give the federal government [Is this to give more authority to the Justice Department, Homeland Security, NSA, CIA, or to the Executive branch to invade our ‘privacy’??] to secure our computer networks and deter cyber-attacks. He talked about wanting to support military families, just like First lady Michelle Obama and Dr. Jill Biden, but exactly what have they been doing? Having a photo taken with a few military families at select times of the year is not the same as meeting with families of veterans, listening to their concerns, and being advocates in behalf of them before Congress and the VA, as well as asking their husbands to use their influence to help soldiers and their families struggling with a range of issues [mental, physical, and financial]; and somehow it seems that such activities have not been reported in the media, and if this is even an ongoing concern for these two women is anybody’s guess.

Then came the part regarding one of the most fundamental rights in a democracy, that is “the right to vote” and being denied that right because you can’t wait 5, 6, or 7 hours to cast a ballot is unacceptable. . .
President Obama wants the establishment of a non-partisan commission to improve the voting experience, to be headed by the top attorneys for the Obama and Romney campaigns [what about states’ rights because such activity is under their sovereign jurisdiction unless some electoral practices violates the U.S. Constitution??]. Saving the “best for last” was invoking the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting massacre as well as Hadiya Pendleton being shot to death in a Chicago Park, but her parents were invited guests in the Congressional Chamber, and there was the mention of former Arizona Congressman Gabrielle Giffords, along with other such incidents and their families to pressure members of Congress to just cast a vote, one way or the other, regarding legislation on changing existing laws on access to handguns, assault weapons, and the type of ammunition. A beginning remark might have been better saved for the last: “We must put the nation’s interest before that of either political party.”

 
Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
February 15, 2013
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

The Supreme Court and same-sex marriage

It is only a matter of time before the U.S. Supreme Court, finally upon Writ of Certiorari to hear oral arguments for the legalization of same-sex marriage throughout the United States. Despite passage of President Clinton’s Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) through the Congress which protects “traditional” marriage while recognizing civil unions for same sex partners, it is still less than having a real ‘marriage’ in the usual meaning of the word with all its social implications and legal rights. This is probably one of the most important decisions that the Justices will make in a generation and it will leave its mark upon the Court for years to come. Several states have already legalized same-sex marriage through the process of direct democracy where a majority of citizens through ballot initiatives or popular referendums voted in favor of it, regardless of how their state constitutions define marriage or what the legislatures previously passed into law, as far as banning legalizing same-sex marriages as well as performing marriage ceremonies that the state recognizes as valid. The first thing the Court will probably do is declare DOMA as “unconstitutional” based on whether Congress and the Executive branch of government can pass laws that distinguish between classes of people by disenfranchising the equal marital benefits of one group in preference over another.

Article 4, Section 1(a) says: “Full faith and Credit shall be given in each state to the public Acts, Records, and judicial proceedings of every other state.”
Article 4, Section 2 says: “The citizens of each state shall be entitled to the Privileges and Immunities of citizens in the several states.”
Ninth Amendment says: “The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”
Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1 (b) says: “No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the Privileges and Immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

 Since marriage is a contract with the state it is unlikely that in this day and time that there can still continue to exist discrimination like the pernicious ‘miscegenation laws’ which did not allow race-based relationships, particularly when it came to recognizing a marriage. It is not a matter for the Supreme Court to define or redefine “marriage” but rather to affirm and decree that each state must follow the Constitution and not deny a same-sex couple the right and privilege to marriage, and to enjoy all the same protections and rights “equally” (both state and federal jurisdictions) under the laws as any other couple. The thing the many court watchers want to know is how will each justice decide the matter? There are 3 Jewish Justices (Breyer, Kagan, and Ginsberg) and 6 Roman Catholics (Scalia, Thomas, Kennedy, Alito, Sotomayer, and Roberts).

Justice Thomas votes the same as Scalia, and Scalia is a strict constructionist, namely, if the Constitution doesn’t specifically state a thing then it isn’t constitutional. Not to mention there are 6 Justices appointed by Conservative presidents and 3 by Liberal ones. It is almost certain that the “nay” votes are Scalia, Thomas, and Alito. Kagan, Sotomayer, and Breyer are the “yea” votes, and although it would be almost a slam dunk to include Ginsberg as the fourth vote, but her age and failing health might affect her judicial perspective. Besides all that, she has her own independent philosophy and some public comments that she has made in the past has run counter to the expectations of some liberals. On the other side is Justice Kennedy who has been known as a possible “swing vote” based on his more moderate positions. The one thing, though, is that I am sure Justice Roberts doesn’t want to be the deciding vote as he was on ObamaCare.

Robert Randle

776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
February 8, 2013
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

Some plain talk about creating jobs and the employment data

The economy is probably one of the most significant issues in America today, especially with an estimated 15M citizens who are no longer in the job market. And yet, there is a sort of nostalgia for the supposed 'good old days' under former president Bill Clinton when we were awash with an abundance of good jobs,but is this credit given to him somewhat exaggerated? In researching the matter by information supplied from the Bureau of Labor Statistics it reveals that the overall job market during the term of Bill Clinton to G.W. Bush was not extraordinary or the exception but followed the national trend for the most part since 1970; as in the following details:

YEAR      EMPLOYED      JOBS CREATED       PRESIDENT

1970        78,687,000
1980        99,303,000        2,062,000 (avg.)
1990      118,793,000        1,949,000                    CLINTON
1995      124,900,000        1,221,000 (avg.)
1996      126,708,000        1,808,000
1997      129,558,000        2,850,000
1998      131,463,000        1,905,000
1999      133,488,000        2,025,000
2000      136,891,000        3,403,000                    G.W. BUSH
2001      136,933,000           420,000
2002      136,485,000          -448,000
2003      137,736,000        1,251,000
2004      139,252,000        1,516,000
2005      141,730,000        2,478,000
2006      144,427,000        2,697,000
2007      146,047,000        1,620,000
2008      145,362,000          -685,000                   OBAMA
2009      139,877,000          -549,000
2010      139,064,000          -813,000

STATISTICS: 5 NUMBER SUMMARY
Min=427,000
Q1=935,000
M=1,714,000
Q3=2,062,000
Max=3,403,000

IQR= Q3 - Q1= 2,062,000 – 935,000= 1,127,000
LL= 935,000 – (1.5 x 1,127,000) = -755,500
UL= 2,062,000 + (1.5 x 1,127,000) = 3,752,700

OBSERVATIONS:
The average job creation from 1970 to 1990 was a little over 1, 031,975 while for 40 years (1970-2010) it was 1,559,500 annually. The standard deviation from 1980 to 2010 was 1,021,840 jobs increase/decrease from the median value of 1,714,000 yearly. There were several job growth spurts above the nominal 1.7M (1996-1997, 1999-2000, and 2004-2005). The data suggests that the economy can absorb an extra 2M jobs or so but anything greater than that level tends to result in contraction as the economy was growing too fast and not sustainable at that rate. This was especially true in 2000 when the national job growth doubled from the nominal 1.7M jobs to 3.4M; which was also an increase of 68% from the previous year. Because this was probably some kind of artificially inflated number or due to some market forces that cannot be explained, even by the election of G.W. Bush or 9/11, there was significant retrenchment from 3.M jobs created in 2000 to a mere 420,000 in 2001. It gets worse because there was a negative job growth in 2002 of -448,000 jobs that were no longer in the economy. Afterwards, there was anemic job growth well below the national trend. There was significant recovery in 2005 and 2006 (2.5M and 2.7M jobs respectively) but this was more or less making up for the previous year’s losses. Again, when there is too much rapid expansion of job growth in the economy in a given year or two this results in a pullback and readjustment back to the level that is sustainable overall, such as: 3,403,000+420,000-448,000 [2000-2002]=3,375,000/3=1,125,000.

Now, continuing the mathematical or statistical inferences: 1,251,000+1,516,000+2,478,000+2,687,000+1,620,000=9,562,000/5=1,912,000 [2003-2007]. In 2008 and afterwards the numbers are unprecedented because there has never been negative job growth like this since 2002, which would seem, at a first glance to be precipitated by the events of September 11, 2001 and the economic policies of President G.W. Bush’s first year in office, but that might just be too simplistic because it is doubtful that all of this could affect the $11 Trillion macro economy of the United States in such a short span of time. When President Obama came into office there was a negative job growth that saw shrinkage from +1.62M to -685,000. The trend continued to -548,500 (2009) and -813,000 (2010) and so when President Obama talks about creating 1M new jobs that figure doesn’t make up for the prior years’ loss of 1.36M jobs.

Another surprising fact in the BLS (Bureau of Labor Statistics) data calls into question former president Bill Clinton’s touting all the jobs that were created during his administration, but this is not necessarily all the facts. It is true that there was a fairly consistent and sustainable job growth during 1990-2000, but this was consistent with the national averages since 1970. In fact, during his first term jobs slipped below the national average at around -36.8% (1.9M to 1.2M on average). There were a couple of extraordinarily good years, namely 1997 and 2000 when the economy added an extra 1.0M to 1.4M jobs above the preceding year, respectively. During the presidency of G.W. Bush the economy grew between 2006 and 2007, adding 5,1M jobs total, above the national average for 2 years. So in essence both Clinton and G.W. Bush’s economic policies created more jobs in their second term but there is not as significant a difference as one might think.


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
January 29, 2013
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

Officials missing the point on Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre

This is another dark day in America and probably one of the worst since 911 because among the bodies riddled with metal bullet fragments were those of 20 elementary school kids, ages ranging from five to ten years old that lay among the dead; including six adults. This was a gruesome scene that probably experienced first responders like EMT, fire, police or hardened combat war veterans would have been traumatized by what they came upon. In President Obama’s speech to the nation as well as in person to the victims’ families and loved ones in Newtown, CT it didn’t take long for this tragedy to turn political. There are protests against the NRA; legislation is being considered in Congress to reintroduce the law banning assault weapons or the “Brady Bill” sponsored by Senator Diane Feinstein of CA that just expired. Never to miss an opportunity to push forward some agenda was House Minority leader Nancy Pelosi and Senator harry Reid of NV, who has spoken about tightening gun control laws. The thing that seems to escape notice is that the school was the ‘secondary’ crime scene and Adam Lanza’s descent into madness started when he murdered his mother at their home (the ‘primary’ crime scene) while she was apparently sleeping. Actually, it is unfair and there is no credible reason to blame Adam’s egregious and deadly outburst on mental illness or Asperger's, which is a neurological disorder, nor is it a gun control or school safety issue. People suffering from some sort of mental disease or incapacity shouldn’t now suddenly become suspect as being a violent serial killer or capable of any such aggressive anti-social behavior that poses as a grave threat to others. It would be interesting to know about the home environment where a mom, who was an alleged gun enthusiast and single parent, had that kind of serious firepower, especially in a small, close-knit, middle class, community (“Whitetopia”) of 27,000 who basically all knew one another.

These guns are not for sport but are serious weapons that are meant for maximum killing power, so why did she have them in her possession? Also, what was the relationship between Adam and his mom or older brother, as well as his absent father? This profile seems to be a radical departure from other shooting sprees of this type because the perpetrator didn’t start his murderous rampage at some external place like a movie theatre, shopping mall, or school campus where he attended, or even at the workplace, but rather in this case it was internal, at the very place where he lived and was raised. What conditions persisted at home where a 20 year old man, living at home with his divorced mother would feel compelled to walk into her bedroom, or wherever she was sleeping, point a gun at her a pull the trigger? What caused Adam to snap on that day and where does the elementary school within walking distance come to be an object of his rage? When Adam smashed his computer was it because there was information contained in digital files, email, or other internet postings that would give some clue as to the reason he chose to do what he did or was it just a random and spontaneous outburst? Since Adam attended Sandy Hook Elementary was he acquainted with any of the staff and faculty that he murdered? Was the room that he entered and killed all those children previously his classroom at that age? There is a connection and perhaps Adam’s experience during his early formative years was not very pleasant and he harbored some painful childhood memories that he planned to avenge at the appropriate time in a premeditated murderous outburst, so is the date that this shooting happened important in some way also?

One thing for sure, we may never know the reason why someone will commit such a horrible and inexplicable act that brings such inconsolable grief to countless families; and there are so many victims, even those residing outside Newtown, CT because in some way this tragedy is our own. It is an indictment of a society and a nation that has as a pastime the glorification and celebration of violence in one form or another. It is about our values and willingness to step up to the plate and admit culpability in perpetuating violence as a means to resolve differences. It isn’t about politics, religion, race, ethnicity, education, social status, gender or any other distinguishing characteristic, but rather it is about character and who we choose to be as a people and how we treat one another. We use very lofty sounding words but fall short when it comes to putting it all into concrete action. Americans value freedom and independence more than any nation on earth but at the same time we blame each other and point fingers of blame when terrible incidents like this happens. It is time to be accountable and accept responsibility for this and all other mass shootings  because in some small way or another, we are all culpable to some degree.


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
December 18, 2012
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

Synopsis of the 2012 Vice-Presidential Debate

Martha Raddatz of ABC News moderated the only televised debate between Republican Congressman Paul Ryan and Democratic Vice President Joe Biden. The first question she asked was about Libya and the deaths of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans at the embassy in Benghazi. Ryan accused this of being an intelligence failure of the Obama administration and Biden accused Romney of politicizing the event before he knew all the facts.

Raddatz: Military strike against Iran? Ryan says that despite the administration saying that all options are on the table to prevent Iran getting a nuclear bomb, Iran disregards such a warning, and that sanctions are not working. Biden says that sanctions are having a devastating effect on Iran’s economy and accused Ryan of wanting to go to war.

Raddatz: Can you get unemployment under 6%? Biden says yes and attacks Romney over his comment about the 47% of people not willing to take responsibility for their lives and wanting to let Detroit go bankrupt.

Raddatz (to Biden): Why not very slowly raise the Medicare eligibility age by 2 years as Congressman suggests? Biden didn’t answer the question but accused Ryan of wanting to turn Medicare into a voucher system and privatizing Social Security. Ryan quoted a statement by Obama in 2008, “If you don’t have any fresh ideas use stale tactics to scare voters.”

Raddatz (to Ryan): You were one of the few lawmakers to stand with President Bush when he was seeking to partially privatize Social Security- Ryan agreed, and said it was for younger people. Let younger people have a voluntary choice to make their money work faster for them within the Social Security system. Ryan also does not want to increase benefits for wealthy people but slowly raise the retirement age over time. Biden said that all [??] studies show that if you are in your 40’s now you will get $2,600 less in social security, and if you are in your 20’s now you would get $4,700 less benefits under their plan.

Raddatz: If you are elected who will pay more taxes and who will pay less? Biden says that the middle class will pay less taxes and wants the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy to expire because $800,000B goes to people making $1M (120,000 families will get an additional $500B tax relief for the next 10 years). (1) Ryan said that there aren’t enough rich people and small business to tax to pay for spending under the present administration. The Canadians drop their tax rate to 15% and the avg. tax rate on business n the industrialized world is 25% but the president wants the top “effective” tax rate on successful small business to go above 40%. Ryan said further: 2/3 of our jobs come from small business, and this would affect 56% of small business income, costing 700,000 jobs that don’t even pay for 10% of deficit spending increases. Ryan ends with this point: what we are saying is to lower tax rates across the board [by 20%] and close [tax] loopholes on higher income people. There are 3 bottom lines:
1. Don’t raise the deficit.
2. Don’t raise taxes on the middle class.
3. Don’t lower the share of income that is borne by the high income earner [huh??].

Raddatz [to Ryan]: You have refused to offer ‘specifics’ on how you would pay for that 20% across the board tax cut? Do you actually have the specifics or are you still working on it and that’s why you won’t [can’t] tell voters? Do you have the specifics; do you know exactly what you are doing? Ryan talked about Ronald Reagan and Tip O’Neil working together on a compromise budget and lower tax rates 20% which would raise about $1.2T, and foregoing about $1.1T in loopholes and deductions. They [Romney/Ryan] would deny loopholes and deductions to higher income taxpayers so that (1) more of their income is taxed, which has a broader base of taxation, so we can lower tax rates across the board.

Raddatz [to Ryan]: Can you guarantee this math will add up? Ryan said absolutely! 6 studies have verified this math will add up [he doesn’t name not one of them, though]. Biden sad that Ronald Reagan gave specifics on what he was going to cut in terms of tax expenditures; 97% of small businesses in America make less than $250,000; small businesses like hedge funds that make $600m - $800M a year count as small businesses because of “pass-through” [??]. Mitt Romney paid 14% on $20M and someone making $50,000 paid more in taxes than he did. The biggest loophole is the “carried interest” loophole and capital gains loophole; will they tax that? That’s not enough-the reason why the AAI, the American Institute Enterprises study, and Tax Policy Center study say that the only way you can find $5T in loopholes is to cut the mortgage deduction for the middle class, cut healthcare deductions and take away the deduction for college tuitions.

Raddatz [to Ryan]: Is Biden wrong about that? Ryan said he was and mentioned that Jack Kennedy lowered taxes and increased growth rates [Biden had a golden opportunity to say, “Senator, you’re no Jack Kennedy”].

Raddatz: Civil War in Syria? Biden said the last thing we need is another war in the Middle East and are supporting the Free Syrian Army in conjunction with NATO and Arab allies among Jordanians, Turks and the Saudis. Ryan says that we outsource our policy through the UN and give Vladimir Putin veto power over our decisions in this matter.

Raddatz; What role does your religion play in your own personal views on abortion? Ryan says he is Pro-Life, not just because of his Catholic faith but because of reason and science and believe that ‘life’ begins at conception. The policy of a Romney Administration is to oppose abortion EXCEPT for rape, incest, or the life or the mother s at risk. ObamaCare infringes upon religious liberties for Catholic charities, churches and hospitals. In respect to the Democratic Party used to say they want abortion to be safe, legal and rare but now that support it without restriction and with taxpayer money.

The Vice-President went to China and sympathized with their 1 Child Policy of sterilization and forced abortions [Biden didn’t respond]. Biden believes that life begins at conception [like Ryan] and accepts the catholic Church’s judgment on abortion but refuse to impose it on equally devout Christians, Muslims and Jews. He won’t impose this view on others and don’t believe we have a right to tell a women how to control their bodies because that’s a decision between a woman and her doctor, and the Supreme Court. No religious institution, catholic or otherwise in Catholic social services, Georgetown Hospital or any hospital has to either refer for contraception; none has to pay for it; none has to be used as a vehicle to get contraception in any insurance policy they provide.

Raddatz: If the Romney/Ryan ticket is elected, those who believe that abortion should remain legal, do they have reason to be worried? Ryan said that we don’t believe that unelected judges should make this decision- that people through their elected representatives and consensus through the democratic process should make this determination. Biden says that the next president will get to make 1 or 2 Supreme Court nominations; that’s how close Roe v. Wade s to being overturned. Just ask yourself: “Would Robert Bork be Chief advisor to the court for Mr. Romney, do you think he would appoint someone like Justice Scalia of the Far Right who would outlaw abortion?” We pick people with an open mind and who do not come with an agenda [really??].

BROKEN PROMISES (by Paul Ryan):
President Obama said-
1. If you like your healthcare plan you can keep it [20M people projected to lose their health insurance under ObamaCare or 7.4M seniors who are going to lose coverage].
2. I guarantee if you make less than $250K your taxes won’t go up [of the 21 tax increases under ObamaCare, 12 of them hit the middle class].
3. Health insurance premiums will go down $2,500 per family [they have gone up by $3,000 and are expected to go up another $2,400].
4. I promise by the end of my first term I’ll cut the deficit in half in four years [we have had 4 budget proposals and the debt is $1T].

Ryan: That’s what we keep getting from this administration, speeches and not leadership. The president broke his biggest promise to bring people together to solve problems.

Biden: The Ryan budget will kick 19M people off Medicare and 200,000 children off Early Education; eliminate tuition tax credits and cuts in education by $450B; and increase tax cuts for the very wealthy.


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
October 12, 2012
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

Obama takes it on the chin in first debate against Mitt Romney

The first 2012 Presidential debate hosted by Jim Lehrer of PBS on Wednesday, October 3, was one of the most anticipated in recent years. It was a Charles Dickens classic of two distinct political philosophies. Although one cannot fault Barack Obama for the great love he has for wife Michelle, but mentioning their twenty year anniversary in the opening remarks at such a serious time was perhaps not the best venue for such devotion, and it may have set the tone for a lest than stellar performance by the president. Mitt Romney used the opportunity to reinforce that he cares about people as he opened with several stories about struggling families. One of the charges that Romney accuses the president of is “Trickle-Down Governomics” (bigger government, higher taxes, more spending on entitlements, and more regulation). For President Obama, it is basically the same things he has been talking about for months now and basically nothing new has been offered. Romney wants to take federal funding for training programs under the Department of Education and give it back to the states.

One of the things that wasn’t so clear in the former Governor’s message is when he wants to lower tax rates for corporations and individuals and at the same time lower deductions, credits, and exemptions but keep taking in the same money while maintaining growth; just how does that work? Romney wants to use government lands to increase oil and gas production, offshore Alaska, the Keystone Pipeline from Alaska and use “clean coal” so we can create more jobs. President Obama’s contention is that Governor Romney will increase military spending by two trillion dollars in addition to five trillion in tax cuts and middle class taxpayers will have to foot the bill. Romney’s plan to grow jobs is to tax small businesses at the corporate rate instead of at the individual rate that they now pay and these companies will be able to hire more workers. Romney says that President Obama wants to increase the tax rate on small businesses from 35% to 40% and according to the Federation of Independent Business this will result in a loss of over 700,000 jobs.

Governor Romney has a simple litmus-test when it comes to cutting federal funding programs-“Is the program so critical that we have to borrow money from China to pay for it; if not, I’ll get rid of it” Under this plan, PBS is on the chopping block. Certain government programs will be defunded at the federal level and run by the states and some government agencies and departments will be consolidated and employee cutbacks will be done by attrition, but Romney [just like Texas Governor Rick Perry] hasn’t mentioned which ones are targeted. The Obama record consists of eliminating 27 government programs, another 18 for education that were ineffective, $50 billion in medical fraud (Medicare/Medicaid), and savings of a trillion dollars from the ‘discretionary’ domestic budget [which covers what??]. There was an interesting exchange between President Obama and Governor Romney when he mentioned about American companies receive a tax break when they build a plant overseas and Governor Romney mentioned that he has been in business for over 25 years and he has never heard of such a thing. He had to also fact check the president when Obama mentioned about the Big Oil companies like Exxon/Mobil getting 4 billion dollars in corporate welfare tax breaks. Romney cited a Department of Energy study the amount is more around 2 billion dollars with most of the money going to drilling operators and other contractors. Romney reminded the president with all the government subsidies that went into Green Energy companies that went bankrupt like Solyndra and Tesla Motors.

The most spirited part of the debate centered around entitlements (social security and Medicare that President Obama says is structurally sound and his administration has saved 716 billion dollars by not overpaying insurance claims and lowering prescription costs for seniors by $600 annually. Romney doesn’t want to make changes in the program for current and near-current retirees but has proposals to make structural changes [unspecified] for younger people that are fifty years old and younger. He accuse President Obama of making a 716 billion dollar cut to the program for current recipients as an offset for lower prescription costs while limiting other services and benefits. Romney supports having the option to choose the current Medicare/Medicaid system or a private plan (voucher program) for future retirees at no additional cost to beneficiaries. President Obama feels that the private plans will pass on the administrative costs to seniors enrolled under their plans and coverage would vary from state to state. Governor Romney mentions a study by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) that under ObamaCare 20% of people will lose medical benefits as well as a report by McKinsey & Company of American Business that 30% of insurers under the plan anticipate dropping people from coverage [because of all the government regulations].

When asked about the role of government, President Obama said it is to keep people safe and as a vehicle to ladders of opportunity. Mitt Romney mentioned the Constitution and Bill of Rights and government’s role is to provide the principles of those documents for life, liberty, a strong military to protect our freedoms, to maintain a commitment to religious freedom and tolerance, and the right to pursue happiness (including taking care of those who are less fortunate), and maintain for individuals the right to pursue their dreams without the government making choices for people. To the question of should the federal government have a role in education, Romney mentioned that states or school districts receiving federal grant aid such as IDEA or Title I (lower income or disability [autistic, ADHD, etc]) the money should go to the family so the parent and child can use it to pay for education and other services at the school of their choice. President Obama accuses Romney of wanting the cut the funding to schools [K12] by 20%, which Governor Romney denies and vows not to cut education funding. Romney did bring up the fact that Obama had talked so passionately about supporting education and wanting to hire extra 100,000 teachers in Math and Science, but put 90 billion dollars into Green Jobs where instead, that money could have been used to hire 2 million more teachers.

It just seems that Mitt Romney was more persuasive overall than the present as having a better command of the facts as presented in their first televised debate. Romney seemed sharper, engaged, focused, and looked more presidential. On the other hand, President Obama seemed a little rusty, less energized, and his body language suggested discomfort or lack of attention or having trouble focusing or his vaunted oratory was a little flat. While Romney did lack some of the specifics and more detail would have been better, sometimes too many facts can be a negative. The one thing that has to be acknowledged is that things aren’t as bad now as they were four years ago and some of the credit has to go the president’s leadership and other reversals or leveling of a downward trend happened in-spite of his policies. But as Governor has said, Barack Obama has been in office for 4 years and we still have 23 million people unemployed (over 8%) or have given up looking for work; 47 million people receiving food stamps; economic growth slower than it has been in several years; gasoline prices around $4.00/gal; government debt that approaches or in excess of our GDP, and students graduating from college who cannot find work or employers who have job openings but applicants don’t have the technical skills or training to do the work.

Do Americans want to give President Obama “Four More Years” or do we want CHANGE, coincidentally, the same campaign slogan that presidential candidate Obama ran on in 2008. Barack Obama looked into the camera and told his wife, “A year from now we won’t be celebrating in front of 40 million people” and that statement just might turn out to come prophetically true because he might be fired from his job by then. Perhaps its time because Barack might not have the fire in the belly anymore and is all out of fresh ideas, and like a boxer who hasn’t trained and disciplined himself before a title bout, the ring rust shows as he receives jabs to the body and head from his opponent without an effective counter-punch or defensive maneuvers. Barack seems to be looking for Mitt to lower his guarding or drop his left after making a punch, leaving an opening so he can get the knockout because on the scorecard it is still too close to call.

The president accuses Romney of being a different person now than during the Republican debates but the same can be said for Barack Obama. Even after becoming President he said “The buck stops with me” and so it is fitting that he takes the blame for the economy. Even cabinet appointees, like the remarkably talented Hillary Rodham Clinton as Secretary of State has not accomplished anything significant in Foreign Affairs. Mitt Romney is right when he says it’s all about leadership and you don’t lead from behind. America’s problems are serious and require bold, innovative, and never-been-tried before solutions inspired by out-of-the box thinking and risk-taking. President Obama echoes the words of George Bush wanting Americans to just “stay the course” mentality which seems to be looking at life from a half empty perspective. Things were worse four years ago but they should be better in the future but this approach lacks the optimism of living life with the glass half full and things are going to be better. Barack famously decried the final term of George W. Bush as “Eight is enough” but I say to him: “4 and No More.”


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
October 5, 2012
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

Reflection on the 2012 Democratic National Convention

The one thing that can be said about the DNC held at Charlotte, NC is that the Democrats made a better case to get votes than the Republicans did at their convention. It was unfair in a way because no one in the sphere of American politics can speak like former president Bill Clinton and President Barack Obama. Not to be ignored is the influence and popularity of First Lady Michelle Obama, especially among an important voting block, namely White, college-educated women. Her speech at the convention reintroduced Barack Obama as the love of her life and the man she trusts, so America should trust him again, too. It was almost like a rewind to the 2008 campaign with the biographical narrative and the deep commitment Michelle has as Mom-in-Chief toward her daughters Sasha and Malia. In fact, a consistent theme throughout the convention was a page borrowed from the Republicans, which included family values, patriotism and faith. There was also a risk in championing a social agenda of gay rights and women’s health choices and it will be interesting to see if it registered with potential undecided voters. Bill Clinton essentially gave the speech that President Obama needed to give, namely on policy, in a point-by-point manner which dismantled the claims by Mitt Romney and the Republicans that President Obama has run out of ideas, his policies are failing and he is leading the country in the wrong direction.

President Obama’s speech before convention delegates was a little anemic and it indicates the reality of where he and the country are now since 2008. It’s a little difficult to be inspirational with a huge and unsustainable national debt which exceeds the GDP and unemployment at over 8% [the “real” jobless rate probably exceeds 12% or higher nationally]. Even the 29 months of employment growth and 4½ million jobs are mostly low paying, part-time retail and service sector jobs with little or no benefits. As far as manufacturing jobs, probably the only that have been filled are the thousands of blue collar ones at GM and Chrysler that received the government bailout money. It was good for those employees and their parts supplier workers but I don’t know about anybody else who benefited from the Fed’s [or rather the 99% taxpayers] generosity. Additionally, the August jobs report from the Bureau of labor Statistics (BLS) on the day after the DNC ended the economy only added 96,000 jobs instead of several prominent economists prediction of 136,000 and the manufacturing sector is at its lowest level in two years with a loss of 15,000 jobs in the month of August. It is now believed that there are 23 million Americans that are unemployed and/or have given up looking for work of any kind.

The one curious thing that has dominated the Obama campaign as well as the DNC Convention, and which has been difficult for Mitt Romney to shake off, is the allegation that he was a corporate raider while the CEO of venture capitalist BAIN Investments. Mitt and BAIN raked in millions of dollars while gutting some of the companies in their portfolio as these firms had lain off workers and went out of business. Be that as it may, Romney didn’t help his case when he was quoted as saying he likes to fire people, or by making a $10,000 bet to Texas Governor Rick Perry during one of the debates, opposing the government of GM and Chrysler or failing to release more than one year of his income taxes as well as having assets in offshore accounts in the Cayman Islands or in Switzerland. A memorable slogan that came out of the RNC was spoken by Ann Romney when she said that “Mitt will not fail” and from Michelle Obama at the DNC when she urged Americans to “trust” her husband. President Obama used words reminiscent of former Republican Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush during the Iraq War, namely, “Stay the course” and things will get better. This seems more like “Mission Impossible” and change usually leads to things getting better rather than worse. While it is true that the country is not hemorrhaging job losses by the tens of thousands like when Barack Obama first became president but its like the old saying, “When everybody else is out of work it is a recession, and when you are out of work it is a depression.” Perhaps to President Obama it is like that old Heinz ketchup commercial that says, “Anticipation is making me wait” but the country can’t afford to wait 4 MORE YEARS and we need “change” NOW!!


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
September 7, 2012
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

Reflections on the 2012 Republican National Convention

The political pundits of print and broadcast media as well as historians will doubtless have exhaustive commentary and analysis on the RNC which concluded on Thursday, August 30, 2012 in Tampa, FL. This was the first time that a number of prominent Hispanic officials were on the stage in front of the podium to address fellow Republican delegates at this grand political event. There were also riveting personal testimonies regarding the compassion and goodness of Mitt Romney that had not been revealed to the general public. One of the main points that echoed as a recurring theme is the “immigrant-rags-to-riches” story, which though inspirational and compelling, these words should fall on deaf ears among the majority of Americans who did not grow up in a family where one or both parents was a small business owner or an entrepreneur.

Even more interesting is the fact that there was no mention at all by Mitt Romney or anyone else regarding the passage of a comprehensive immigration policy; which would certainly be of interest to Spanish-speaking Americans. There was no mention of the military who are still serving in Afghanistan or commitment to help military families and veterans who have served in Iraq and are suffering from PTSD. The one thing that team Romney and Ryan hit it right on, which is President Obama’s economic record. Although part of the blame can be placed on the previous administration, still the president hasn’t been able to lead in such a way that brought both political parties together to get legislation passed that would help the country; and it seems that Barack Obama is running on fumes and is out of fresh ideas and he is just about out of time.

Also, there were quite a few quotes from the Christian Bible and references to that ‘faith’ and God. While it is certainly commendable to believe in a Supreme Being and Creator but in Article VI of the U.S. Constitution: The Senators and Representatives, members of the several State legislatures, all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the United States and the several states . . . no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States. It is puzzling that this seemingly religious alliance among Rick Santorum’s Catholics, Mike Huckabee’s Evangelicals and Mitt Romney’s Mormons in a united front was on display of at the convention when the larger Ecumenical Christian community hasn’t totally embraced Mitt Romney, partly because of his religion and concern that he still may not be a “true” Right-wing GOP Conservative. As a final point, it is the political and social evolution in America which is affected to a great extent by Christianity such that it is almost seen as a religious “requirement” or litmus-test. It is doubtful that few candidates could ever get elected to any civic or political office if that person were Muslim, Buddhist, Atheist, Wiccan, and Scientology, Agnostic or any religion or faith system other than Christian.


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
August 31, 2012
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

A promising newcomer in the dietary supplement marketplace

According to an article on obesity found at Wikipedia, the United States has the highest rate of all industrialized countries. In 2010, the CDC reported 35.7% of American adults as obese, and 17% of American children. In 2008 a study in The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), found the obesity rate among adult Americans was estimated at 32.2% for men and 35.5% for women. Looking at the long-term consequences, overweight adolescents have a 70 percent chance of becoming overweight or obese adults, which increases to 80 percent if one or more parent is overweight or obese.

Obesity has been cited as a contributing factor to approximately 100,000–400,000 deaths in the United States per year and has increased health care use and expenditures, costing society an estimated $117 billion in direct (preventive, diagnostic, and treatment services related to weight) and indirect (absenteeism, loss of future earnings due to premature death) costs. This exceeds health-care costs associated with smoking or problem drinking and accounts for 6% to 12% of national health care expenditures in the United States. Obesity increases the prevalence of complications during pregnancy and childbirth. Babies born to obese women are almost three times as likely to die within one month of birth and almost twice as likely to be stillborn than babies born to women of normal weight.

These trends in healthcare costs associated with pediatric obesity and its co-morbidities are staggering, urging the Surgeon General to predict that preventable morbidity and mortality associated with obesity may surpass those associated with cigarette smoking. Furthermore, the probability of childhood obesity persisting into adulthood is estimated to increase from approximately twenty percent at four years of age to approximately eighty percent by adolescence, and it is likely that these obesity co-morbidities will persist into adulthood. Researchers for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimate that in 2003, obesity-attributable medical expenditures reached $75 billion. Historically, obesity primarily afflicted adults, but this has changed in the last 2 decades. 15-25 percent of American children and adolescents are now obese. Children and adolescents who are obese are likely to be obese in adulthood and to develop obesity-related health problems.

All of this information makes the matter of weight management all the more urgent. Needless to say there are hundreds if not thousands of dietary and nutritional supplements on the market today, either found in Health Food Stores, infomercials or over the Internet. The ingredients in some of these formulations have unpleasant as well as dangerous side-effects, resulting in significant medical complications and supplements containing Ephedra have caused death in extreme cases, and it has been banned by the FDA and is not used in any product sold in the United States. However, one bright spot among those wanting to lose weight in a safe and effective way, Nouveau Life Pharmaceuticals has a dietary supplement consisting of Raspberry Ketone extract, Apple Cider Vinegar (powder), Grapefruit (powder), Acai Fruit (powder), Green Tea, Kelp, African Mango and Resveratrol that looks quite promising. Dr. Mehmet Oz (Oprah Winfrey friend) has touted the health benefits of Raspberry Ketones, African Mango and Resveratrol on his show as far as contributing to weight loss.

The link to their product line of nutraceuticals can be found at http://nlpnaturals.com/products/?ap_id-9154359


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
August 31, 2012
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

Thoughts on the Batman character and shooting deaths at the Aurora Theatre

Almost everyone who has ever picked up a comic book is familiar with the origin of “Batman.” The story of the ‘Caped Crusader’ is one of the most compelling in all the history of superhero stories, starting back around 1946 in Detective Comics [later “DC comics”] where a young boy of around the age of eight years old watches both his parents get robbed and murdered before his very eyes. The criminal named “Jack” who pulls the trigger sets in motion a series of events after sparing the life of the youthful eyewitness to the crime sets both of them on a collision course later in life. Jack become head of a crime syndicate as the “Joker” and Bruce Wayne dedicated the rest of his life to fighting crime. Batman was driven by a sense of justice, moral integrity or fairness, and a real hero, not someone seeking revenge or retribution; although his feelings about the Joker may be the exception to the rule.

Several actors have played the character of Batman on the big screen, including Michael Keaton, George Clooney, Val Kilmer, and Christian Bale and Adam West starred in the late 1960’s television series, still, none of them quite captured the essence of the man Bruce Wayne or his alter ego. Batman did not have super powers like his friend from the planet Krypton named Kal-El (Superman) or the Amazonian goddess Wonder Woman but his leadership served as a role model for others and was the ultimate team player. The noble ‘Caped Crusader’ of the past has morphed over the decades into The Dark Knight. It is as though Bruce Wayne suffers from a Dr. Jekyl/Mr. Hyde multiple personality disorder, schizophrenia, and he is a brooding loner trying to exorcise his inner demons, keeping people at a distance, and someone who doesn’t always explains his actions or feel the need to do so. This Batman doesn’t trust anyone, even those closest friends who he has known the longest. Sometimes it is hard to tell if this Batman is one of the ‘good buys’ because more often than not, he blurs the line between protecting the public good and outright criminality. Batman seems to operate just ‘outside’ the law and in some ways he is no better than the character known as “The Punisher,” who is solely driven by revenge for the mob killing of his family and he makes no apology about it.

DC Comics have created a “batty” man instead of portraying the original Batman and Hollywood has taken it to the next level with the visual and sound effects that can only be reproduced on the big screen with unmatched quality and effectiveness. The thing though, is that such graphical imagery stimulate a part of the brain, perhaps the lower reptilian one or causes the secretion of brain chemicals such that it can serve as a trigger for someone who my already have a disconnect with reality or is at a borderline threshold between sane and insane, who is enticed into the latter and commits acts that to his mind is a blur between what is real on one hand and imaginary on the other. And while the movie industry or comic book illustrators or their publishers are not liable for the behavior of some disturbed individual yet thoughtful consideration must be given to whatever is presented to the public has to be done in such a way that it does not explicitly or implicitly influence anyone to act out a role that leads to hurtful or deadly outcomes. Such was the case with James Holmes who planned and carried out one of the most horrific crimes of domestic terrorism in recent years when he shot and killed about a dozen and wounded nearly fifty others at a movie theatre in Aurora, Colorado last week. Ironically, it was thirteen years ago that the massacre happened at Columbine High School that shocked the nation, which is about fifteen miles away.


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
July 25, 2012
Robertrandle51@yahoo.com

Dr. Drew’s Life Changers segment on “Spanking”

Dear Dr. Drew:
I watched the segment on "Spanking" yesterday (July 24, 2012) and found it one of the more honest and sometime spirited discussions on television. I will get right to the point and state that all your guests were right and it is unfortunately that none of them appeared to see it. There are instances in which a 'spanking' is disciplinary and at other times it is abuse. There are children who will learn without receiving a spanking and others that no amount of spankings will do any good, except for the negatives that you and your other professional colleagues cited based upon years of clinical research. For those parents who spank their children this form of discipline is almost always used as the first resort instead of the last, with very few other options or alternatives. It is usually administered when one is angry, frustrated, irritated, tired, upset and is more punishment than corrective. It is usually accompanied by yelling, screaming or fussing and meted out in a wrathful fury.

Glozell and pastor Michael Pearl talked about the Biblical statement of "spare the rod" but it also says, "Train up a child in the way he/she should go" and this is NOT the same training one does with animals. If the Bible were written today the statements about a child might very well include putting the child on a "time out" as well as "negative reinforcement" (withdrawing privileges). What must be taken into account and you hit the nail right on the head Dr. Drew is when you mentioned about the environment in which the Bible was written came out of a warfare culture and people were disciplined in order to fit within the society that they were a part of. Also, the African-American professor's comments I found to be the 'least' credible because he, like so many others in the Black community and White apologists keep blaming everything on slavery to account for problems within Black families, especially with disciplining Black males. For one thing, slavery hasn't been practice in the U. S. for nearly 235 years and is too remote to be used as an excuse today.

I believe it is true that inflicting physical pain in the form of discipline does affect the chemistry of the brain along with physical/mental development and social skills and a child might start lying as well as terrorize others more vulnerable in the form of bullying, teasing, pranks, fighting or others forms of aggressive behavior including inflicting pain or harming [torturing] animals and insects. A child needs to hear more positives than the negatives such as don’t, can’t, etc, and the data suggests that while growing up the ratio of negatives to positives are astoundingly high [thousands to one]. A parent has to let their child know they are wanted and to feel safe and loved as well as hugged on occasion. Sadly, for many children the only time there is physical touching is when they are grabbed by the hand or arm for doing something wrong or breaking the rules.

As a final point, I found it most amusing at first, then later I was offended at Glozell because she was the most vocal person, rude, impatient, discourteous, disrespectful and the most animated when it comes to raising and disciplining children- that she doesn’t have any herself. My message to her is this: “How can you tell someone else how to raise a child or be a parent if you are not one?” Oh, by the way, I am a parent and know from which I speak [or write in this case].


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
July 25, 2012
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

A pill that will cure racism?

Dr. Sylvia Terbeck and her colleagues at Oxford University conducted a clinical study, which was recently published in the Journal of Psychopharmacology that “Propranolol,” which works to combat high blood pressure, anxiety, migraines, and a number of heart ailments, affects the same part of the central nervous system that regulates subconscious attitudes on race. Needless to say, these findings have created a lot of buzz on the internet as well as some activity among those in the medical community. There is concern among ethical issues raised by the use of medication to modulate or control human behavior; but wait, don’t we have doctors writing out prescriptions for drugs that our local pharmacist gladly fills that does the same thing anyway? Dr. Chris Chambers of Cardiff University School of Psychology postulates whether the drug influenced racial attitudes only or alters implicit brain systems more generally; especially reducing the heart rate.

Some have questioned the validity of the test because all the participants were White males. Experimental psychologist Sylvia Terbeck and her team gave two groups of 18 volunteers either a placebo or a dose of propranolol, then put them through a battery of tests designed to gauge racism, such as matching "positive and negative words and pictures of black and white individuals on a computer screen." More than a third of the propranolol takers scored negative, meaning they showed little subconscious racial bias; none of the placebo-takers [White??] scored negative. It seems that when one experiences anxiety and panic, the heart rate increases, stimulating a region in the brain called the amygdala; which processes emotions, including fear. The Oxford team posits that racism is tied to fear, so inhibiting the amygdala suppresses racist urges. However, Terbeck cautions that the drug had no measurable effect on "explicit racial bias." This seems to mean that although propranolol can alleviate or lessen the symptoms of stress and anxiety bylowerng blood pressure and heart rate, makng a person feel calmer, less intense and more subdued, it does not however, change overt racist attitudes or behavior.

According to one of the online posts, “This medication is a common Beta blocker. It has been in use for quite a while. It has shown excellent results to settle the effects of Traumatic stress. It is used to help individuals with PTSD be able to talk about what previously caused too much anxiety. Since racism is a conception based on stereotypes and generalizations which has with it an implicit anxiety, it is not surprising that it helps people with their subtle fears and phobias as they are related to [matters of] race.” Also, there was an interesting online comment that mentioned about the high numbers of African Americans who suffer from the symptoms of high blood pressure than any other ethnic group, so are they subconscious ‘racists’? Looking at the matter realistically, in all due respects to Dr. Terbeck and her esteemed Oxford research team, the test subjects could have been given a battery of tests where a strong emotional response other than racial bias could have been the end result; thereby stimulating the “amygdala.” Be that as it may, since race seems to get so much attention, I agree with the person who posited, “Do you have a pill to make people [us] forget all about race”?


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
March 9, 2012
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

K-Mart Manager shot in robbery attempt

A lone gunman entered the Aurora Avenue North K-Mart store (Seattle, WA) on Saturday, February 25, 2012, near closing time, found a place to hide and waited until the store was nearly empty before he went to the office at the back of the store, and after brandishing a handgun, demanded money from the safe. According to the police report, the store manager, assistant manager and a clerk were the only remaining persons in the office. This happened around 9: 07 PM, which was only minutes after the store closed at 9: 00PM. Afterwards, it seems that the store manager and robber wrestled with one another and the manager got shot in the chest. The struggle continued between the two and moved to the front of the store where the manager, though critically wounded, was able to knock the gun out of the robber’s hand. In the meantime, the clerk dialed 911 the assistant manager was able to retrieve the firearm and ran outside, awaiting the arrival of police officers. The store manager was taken to Harborview Medical Center where he underwent surgery to remove his spleen and is scheduled for another surgery, but he is in stable condition as of Sunday morning, according to the police.

This is a relatively positive outcome from what could have been a much worse scenario, but some serious questions need to be asked, namely, what is the corporate policy regarding what is the responsible behavior or guidelines recommended when confronted with someone who robs the store and carries a firearm; is the employee to resist or not? Did the manager give the robber money from the safe as he requested, and then have reason to fear, by way of direct threat, implication or body language that the gunman was going to shoot him and his subordinates anyway? If such was the case then his struggle with the robber might have been justified, if not to protect himself, then at the very least to preoccupy the robber so that the others could perhaps get to safety and call the police.

It is curious that this incident happened within such a short time window (seven minutes) because there are usually customers in most retail stores after closing time as well as hourly workers and department managers who still have work to do. When the store closes managers make a final inspection of their departments and throughout the store and check for any thing out of the ordinary, so the robber must have found a really good hiding place. This is in addition to all the hidden cameras strategically placed in the store which are monitored by Asset Protection (store security), which is usually staffed by more than one person so it would be interesting to know what surveillance footage found; or more importantly, how the person was able to evade a system that costs the store thousands of dollars (including personnel) on a monthly basis; which apparently failed in this case. No doubt there will be an internal investigation, as there should be, and some kind of changes will be made at this store to prevent a future recurrence of this type of unfortunate incident from happening again.


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
February 28, 2012
Robertrandle51@yahoo.com

Bill and Monica: The President and the Intern

The recent PBS documentary on former President Bill Clinton brought back memories of Special Prosecutor Kenneth Starr, Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, Linda Tripp and who can forget a starry-eyed twenty-one year old White House intern named Monica Lewinsky. The ensuing political intrigue, controversy, sex-lies and blue dress [will it be sold on eBay or donated to “The Smithsonian Museum” after being dry-cleaned?], as well as cast of characters is a Hollywood director’s and screenwriters dream-come-true. For First Lady Hillary Rodham-Clinton and Daughter Chelsea it was the painful public humiliation and betrayal of trust. Looking back on that time, it seems everyone came out of it relatively unscathed; that is, except poor “femme fatale” Monica Lewinsky, who had to leave America and take up residency in England. President Clinton has a private global Foundation in his honor which he runs; Hillary Clinton became a Senator from New York, and is currently Secretary of State in the Obama Administration; and Chelsea Clinton practically gets anything she wants.

Loyalty has its rewards except when it comes to former “Valley Girl” Monica Lewinsky, who could have profited financially by writing a tell-all book about her ‘tryst’ with President Bill “Slick Willie” Clinton. However, one should not feel too sorry for Ms. Lewinsky because she was a former spokesperson for "Jenny Craig" and obtained a Masters degree in Social Psychology, and was an entrepreneur for awhile by launching a line of stylish handbags, but interest in them dried up and she went out of business. Nowadays, Monica manages to find available employment and lives in London in various condominiums owned by family friends and doubtless has an active social life. As a final thought, former President Clinton apologized to the country in 1998 after his impeachment hearing and took some degree of responsibility for his inappropriate actions but hopefully he also apologized to Ms. Lewinsky, who, at the time was an impressionable young woman, who noticed a man occupying the world’s most powerful elected office checking her out, and the temptation was just too great to say no to; even if she knew better.


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
February 22, 2012
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

Is the anger over expensive gasoline prices somewhat one-sided?

The anger and frustration that car owners feel over the price of gas when they fill up at the pump doesn’t really tell the whole story. An internet search reveals some interesting facts about whether or not OPEC (specifically, Saudi Arabia) and the big oil companies have the consumer, “over a barrel” (pardon the pun,). The top fifteen countries that primarily feed nearly half of America’s 18.7 mbbl a day oil addiction (2011) are listed below in the following:

1. CANADA 2,157,000 bbl/daily
2. SAUDI ARABIA 1,180,000 bbl/daily
3. MEXICO 1,113,000 bbl/daily
4. VENEZUELA 893,000 bbl/daily
5. NIGERIA 826,000 bbl/daily
6. IRAQ 473,000 bbl/daily
7. COLOMBIA 364,000 bbl/daily
8. ANGOLA 323,000 bbl/daily
9. RUSSIA 246,000 bbl/daily
10. BRAZIL 225,000 bbl/daily
11. ECUADOR 203,000 bbl/daily
12. KUWAIT 164,000 bbl/daily
13. ALGERIA 204,000 bbl/daily
14. CHAD 54,000 bbl/daily
15. OMAN 39,000 bbl/daily
TOTAL 8,464,000 bbl/daily

Also, add to the fact that a typical 42 gallon barrel of oil only yields approximately 19.4 gallons of oil. The first 4 gallons are from straight-refining and the remainder is from a process called “cracking” which breaks the long hydrocarbon molecular chains into shorter and lighter ones of which the remaining extra 15 gallons can then be extracted. The price for a barrel of oil is set on the international markets by spot traders, commodities brokers and futures contracts who inflate the “real” cost on a barrel of crude oil by roughly fifty percent. Let’s say the cost at the pump is $3.50/gallon X 19.4 gallons=$67.90, and subtracting that amount from $100.00 (est. ppb crude oil) =$32.10; with the remaining 22.6 gallons to be refined into thousands of consumer products and goods, many of which we use every day. The thing that is not known is how much does it cost to refine each barrel of oil into gasoline and other petroleum by-products and how is the price at the pump determined, and by what organization or regulatory agency?

So, while all the outrage is over how much it costs at the gas station but what about the high prices at the grocery, hardware, department and sporting goods stores? Americans consume petroleum products at a rate of three-and-a-half gallons of oil day each and some of the 6,000 products derived from crude oil are: Ballpoint Pens, Soap, Perfumes, Shower Curtains, Telephones, Detergents, Toothbrushes, Crayons, Shampoo, CD's & DVD's, Hand Lotion, Aspirin, Paint, Shoes, Panty Hose, Deodorant, Antihistamines, Clothing, Rubbing Alcohol, Umbrellas, Mops, Food Preservatives, Tool Boxes, Insecticides, Lipstick, Toilet Seats, Trash Bags, Electric Blankets, Shower Curtains, Luggage, Shag Rugs, Motorcycle/Football Helmets, Tennis Racket, Football, Basketball, ad infinitim.

Ironically, domestic oil production in the United States for 2010 was between 5.5 mbbl/daily and 9.688 mbbl/daily (est.), with exports to Mexico, Latin America and an OPEC country (Ecuador) of 1.92 mbbl/daily as of 2009.


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
February 21, 2012
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

Response to Dr. Claire Brindis' sugar tax suggestion

Dear Dr. Brindis (UCSF):

I was listening to TALK Radio station KOMO NEWS, 1000AM in Tacoma, WA on Friday, February 3, 2012, and the moderator John Carlson was discussing with you and then later on with other listeners about the merit of taxing sugar. I did not call in to the show but I want to share with you my thoughts on the matter. First of all, the harmful effects [toxicity, addiction, etc.] from refined sugar and artificial sweeteners have been debated for the last twenty or thirty years; maybe longer. I do agree with the scientists and researchers who are alarmed about the over-consumption of sugar by Americans, roughly three times more annually per person than it was a generation ago. I am a sugar-holic who consumes more sugar than I should, and my maternal Aunt died from diabetes while undergoing dialysis treatments. I use sweets for self-medication due to boredom and depression since I am unemployed, and drawing an early pension before I qualify for SSI in a couple of years. I have one of those free blood glucose test kits and used it a few months ago and my results do not indicate I am a diabetic but high enough to be concerned about becoming hypoglycemic. Anyway, I must admit that I am addicted to sweets, especially cookies with HFCS, which causes me to crave them such that I can devour a three roll package in 3 days or less; and don't get me started on anything containing honey because I can give the bees a run for their money (smile).

I could go on and on but I digress from the main point, namely, that taxing sugar products is not the answer. Such legislation would not benefit consumers [addicts, yes addicts] like me because we would still buy these items at the higher price. I wonder if you and your colleagues have considered the extent to what products contain refined sugar or artificial sweetener. It all starts in infancy when our mothers put us on a diet of sugar-containing [artificial sweetener] baby products from decades ago, like SIMILAC, ENFAMIL, Gerber, Heinz, etc. Just think of all the breakfast cereal, desserts, fruit drinks, liquid medicines, confectioneries, breads, crackers, vegetables, meats, condiments [ketchup, salad dressing, etc.] and other items found on grocery shelves that contain some kind of artificial sweetener, including high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), which has been suspected as affecting the adrenal glands just like sugar. So, "what is the answer, you may ask?" Well, perhaps the best place to start is requiring those companies who have products which contain sugar or artificial sweetener to lower the concentration or amount they put in, or eliminate the use altogether. Not everything has to contain sugar to taste good. Also, as it is with some breakfast cereals, why does a manufactures include sugar, brown sugar, honey, high fructose corn syrup, raisin paste, maple syrup, and molasses at the same time? Those companies, who offer alternative, natural sweeteners like fruit juice or evaporated cane juice (??), prune juice or raisin paste should receive some form of tax credit from the federal government.

Anyway, I thought I would contact you and encourage you and your colleagues to be the voice for those of us who are struggling with this problem, and things have gotten to the point now where the slightest morsel which contains sugar gives me a pretty significant headache. I wish you success in persuading members of the various State Legislatures and Congress to ignore the lobbyists and funding from the powerful sugar refiners, manufacturers and their PAC's for favorable subsidies and price controls, and instead, pass into Law a Bill that would help us overcome being victims of a lifestyle obsessed with consuming empty calories, which invariably lead to obesity, cancer or diabetes.


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
February 3, 2012
robertrandle51@yahoo.com