The intent of this blog is to promote human equality, human progress, human peace and justice, and optimism. To accomplish this, to encourage the discussion of ideas after identifying and discovering problems, and then creating positive solutions for "we the people," in order to provide for the "general welfare" and "domestic tranquility" of America now and its "posterity" into the future. To encourage an emphasis on separation of religion and state for all, no matter if this is for those "of faith" in a Maker / Creator (Deists, God-loving people, Christians, various people of spirituality) and atheists or agnostics.

Observations About Politics in America Today

November 4, 2012

Recently, I ran into a woman heavily involved in the Romney campaign.  And I mean HEAVILY involved in it.

My friends and I were having a private conversation about our support of President Obama.  This woman chirped in – unsolicited – about how she hates ObamaCare because she is a small business person.  Nothing said of substance, just hatred and emotions.  When we attempted to bring up some important points about the issue, we were shut down.  In fact, at that point, the woman became flustered – apparently she never had anyone attempt to speak some rational thoughts about ObamaCare to her – she resorted to the use of the “N…..” word for black people and President Obama.

Later, I am sitting in a restaurant with stupid televisions blaring and hear a negative Allen West advertisement (also unsolicited for those of us who go to a restaurant to eat, not end up with the indigestion of political crap and television) .  West’s wife is complaining about the racism against her husband.  Funny, all the times I have heard true racist derogatory remarks about Barack Obama and I have NEVER seen Michelle on television crying about how people treat her husband!

Further than that is the fact I have NEVER HEARD RACIST REMARKS SPOKEN AGAINST ALLEN WEST.  Yet, I hear plenty of such remarks spoken against Barack Obama.  Hmmmm….  Michelle prefers not to stir up the mud of racism, even though it is prevalent and she MUST know about it.  But Ms. West, the Republican in a party with plenty of racist supporters of Romney, chooses to stir up the mud.

The ones most uncomfortable with themselves are the ones who lash out.  Most of the remarks about Allen West have not been about his race, but about him being a wacko.  And, Ms. West, I live among the people, not among those in ivory towers who spend money for vicious and deceptive advertisements.  Silly me.

Category:

Commentary, New Comments

Leave a comment

Tagged with:

Observations about Allen West and his Nasty Campaign

Allen West has aired some really nasty advertisements, never truly discussing his record.  For he is opposed to Social Security and other measures which make sense for “we the people,” but don’t make sense for the wealthy.

West rakes Patrick Murphy through the coals for an event in which Murphy was acquitted.  Is Allen West so clean or is there something in HIS past in which justice was never done?  Perhaps he never even came to trial – was given a break – and never had a trial to determine a conviction OR an acquittal.  He forgets that his finger pointing is one finger at Patrick Murphy, while there are three pointing back at Allen West, as well as a thumb belligerently pointing at God.  God is a loving GOD who does not condone violence.

Another observation.  West’s wife proclaims “victimhood” of her husband, claiming racism against him.  She is aloof and does not realize what is really going on.  I have heard more people using the “N…..” word against the president of the USA, than I have against Allen West.  People simply think of Allen West as a “nut job.”  There are no aspersions being cast about the color of his skin.  So WHO IS REALLY BRINGING UP THE RACIST ARGUMENT HERE?  West and his wife are living in an ivory tower, away from the true people.  And THIS is the reason NOT to vote for Allen West.

Yet another observation.  In traveling through this new Congressional District 18, I have noticed huge signs for Allen West.  In general, there are no signs with Allen West’s picture.  But when I enter African-American areas, this is what I see:  (1) signs with Allen West’s photo and (2) signs accusing Patrick Murphy of being a racist.   Again, I ask:  WHO IS STIRRING UP THE MUD WITH REGARD TO RACISM?  Allen West or Patrick Murphy?

One more observation.  I work the phone banks for Patrick Murphy.  First of all, the people we call are either Democrats, Independents, or “no party affiliation.”  When we encounter a person who supports Allen West, we are polite (even if we hear crazy people ranting and raving like violent beasts) and say, “Thank you for your time.  Goodbye.”  We don’t have registered Republicans on our lists (yet, based on Colin Powell’s recent comments about how that party, to which Powell still belongs, no longer has moderate people, perhaps we SHOULD be calling moderate Republicans).  I have Democratic Party friends who have been called by the Republican Party.  Apparently, the Republicans don’t care and use the Democratic Party lists!  When my friends explain they are Democrats and support Patrick Murphy, there is no polite response.  No, the Republicans hang up on them.

People on Facebook and other social media groups need to know this because the Media remains silent.  What kind of last-minute vicious and deceptive ads and phone calling should voters expect in the next few days?  Beware of the violent wolf and ask yourself, “is Allen West and Republicans – nasty people – really the ones we want representing us in Tallahassee and Washington?”  Think about that.  The Allen West billboard on the Florida Turnpike is one depicting a wolf in sheep’s clothing.  He is a nasty, vicious person, and we don’t need such a person in Congress.  And those who think we do, go form your own Hitler-type fascist nation – the fourth reich – elsewhere, but not here in America.

To Allen West and others:  violence begets violence.  If you don’t know what that means, then you are stubbornly ignorant and have not learned a thing from your experiences during your life.

Up to this point, I have been negative about a negative person.  Perhaps I hope two negatives will produce a positive?  That positive is Patrick Murphy.

Patrick Murphy has a positive plan with positive solutions.  Being a small business person, he is more in tune with those who own small businesses, than with the wealthy corporate conglomerates who feed money into Allen West’s campaign.  Patrick Murphy intends to protect Social Security and Medicare.  Patrick Murphy has a positive plan for America.

Category:

Commentary, New Comments

Leave a comment

Tagged with:

Political Commentary on Friday’s Jobs and Unemployment Figures

As with a sound byte which the conservative Media prefers we accept because it can obscure the facts, I missed the television news statistics quickly flashed across the screen.  I recall a jobs growth with numbers in the 100-thousands, but don’t remember the exact figures.  So I looked it up on the web. I found the following:  “Since January 2012 an average of 157,000 jobs have been added each month…”  (PR Newswire story published in The Sacramento Bee newspaper).

One would expect Romney to ignore these figures because they stab at his campaign like a knife going through butter.  Instead, Romney’s focus is about the tenth of a percent increase in unemployment numbers.  What Romney does not say is this:  there are still too many of his cronies fighting against the will of the people and attempts to HOLD ONTO jobs.  Ironically, perhaps the increase in unemployment might be due to those who work in corporations which intend to fire employees who vote in favor of Barack Obama.  Perhaps the higher numbers might be government workers losing their jobs, due to Republicans.

The most important aspect of the issue is what Romney wishes people would not remember.  Romney has said he believes the “norm” for unemployment is 9%.  The figures under Obama are some I DO remember.  In October, the figures rose from 7.8% to 7.9%.  A twisted man like Romney and his crony Republicans may be playing a role in increasing these numbers, but condemns Obama to the unsuspecting and undecided voter.  After all, if he wishes the “norm” of unemployment to be 9%, then there are probably already strategies in place in overpaid corporate board rooms to do exactly that.

Besides these facts, voters should not fall into “Romnesia” and forget the 8 years of negative job growth under George W. Bush.  People can look at this with fear and intimidation for the tremendous power of those like Romney with tremendous amounts of money or look at it from the perspective of protecting and implementing the first few words of the U.S. Constitution:  “We the people…”  You can either protect the pocketbooks of the grossly high wealthy or protecting your own pocketbook – and those of your descendants, for years to come.  Do you wish to condemn your children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren, etc. to the lot of Roman-type slaves and brutal warriors, or would you prefer something better for America?

Category:

Commentary, New Comments

Leave a comment

Tagged with:

Today’s Protestants and Roman Catholics

November 1, 2012

There are some Protestants who worship the Bible.  Many Roman Catholics worship the pope and the dogmatic doctrines created by past popes – men, not God.  When Moses came down from the mountain and discovered the people were worshiping a human-created golden calf, he reminded the people about the idolatry of such a practice.

I was raised in a Protestant faith which has transformed itself from one involved in 17th-century puritanical witch hunts in New England to a denomination which recognizes the love of God and the original blessings given to us all as a gift from God.  This religion does not advocate a hateful god which encourages worship of the Bible, proof-texting, self-righteous human judgments, and the importance of doctrines of men which negate the love of God, our Creator.  Today, the Puritans are right-wing Protestants, Mormons, Roman Catholics, Jews, and Muslims.  They prioritize hate before love.

Category:

Commentary, New Comments

Leave a comment

Tagged with:

IndependentLens: Discussion about Bishop Gene Robinson

October 30, 2012

Jesus spoke of love for one another. The Old Testament focus in Leviticus was about a lack of children in society. Homosexuals did not perpetuate the birth of children, so were going against the grain of the society. Thus stringent measures were taken, which are not necessary in today’s society. Our world is different today, requiring all kinds of forms of loving families, even alternative families with same-sex parents, to lovingly care for children of unwanted pregnancies and from broken homes in an over-populated world.

Jesus Christ never endorsed traditionalism. Yet, in this program about Bishop Gene Robinson, there were those who talked about “2000 years of tradition.” So what? If the traditionalism is not the solution, then why do we stand by it? Jesus did not believe in idolatry. Yet, the man in this IndependentLens program… the man from California who repeatedly used the words, “Bible-believing,” sounded as if he worshiped the Bible, not God. That is idolatry and blasphemous and would NOT have been favorable to Jesus Christ.

In another portion of this program, a man speaking against the pro-same-sex measures of the Episcopal Church said, “The needs of the many outweighs the needs of the few.” Jesus Christ said, “the road to hell is large and spacious and many would be on that road; whereas the road to everlasting life, few would find it.”  The words this man spoke before the Episcopal gathering were words abrasive to those of Jesus Christ. This recognition is the reason why our American justice system finally abolished Jim Crow measures against a minority. The larger numbers who persecuted the minority were/are evil in God’s eyes. Besides the fact… Jesus Christ said, “do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” “Love God; love your neighbor as yourself.”

The same book of the Old Testament speaking against homosexuality due to the need for more children also endorsed the stoning of rebellious children and forbade eating a number of foods, including shell fish. Why would we pick some and not the other? Because of men who don’t feel comfortable with themselves and who have endorsed continuing “traditions” which don’t mean a rat’s tail.

And at Genesis 19, there was only a threat of homosexual rape, but nothing actually took place. Yet, to hear the word, “sodomy,” one would believe there were explicit sexual acts at Sodom and Gomorrah. There were none. God disliked the violent rape, not the sexual acts.

Furthermore, the “traditions” at Sodom and Gomorrah were about deliverate violent homosexual rape acts with strangers visiting the area in order to discourage strangers from visiting. God had said those people should accept strangers in their midst, but they disobeyed God by promoting rape with strangers.

Glen Beck’s point about accepting civil unions, but not marriage, is not acceptable.  Even when same-sex marriage is accepted, there is no church which can be forced to perform such acts, as long as the separation of church and state remains. No person should be forced or coerced into a same-sex union of any kind. Yet, millions upon millions of GLBT are coerced by tremendous societal / religious peer pressure and intimidation (how many times did we hear, “why are you not dating some girl?”) to marry someone of the opposite sex.

Jesus is about love and acceptance. He never turned anyone away, whether he/she might be a GLBT lay person, a pastor or priest, or a bishop. “There can be no peace without justice.”

Category:

Commentary, New Comments

6 Comments

Tagged with:

Failure or Success? Perspective Matters

October 28, 2012

Dr. Joseph R. Fischer wrote the 1997 book titled, A Well-executed Failure:  The Sullivan Campaign Against the Iroquois, July-September 1779 (published by U. of South Carolina Press).  Irritated as I was in learning the title of this book – due to my ancestor, Ensign John Barr, who was a soldier in that campaign – I obtained the book by Interlibrary Loan and read it.  In fact, Dr. Fischer, a military historian, commended General Sullivan for a “tactical victory.”  He rated General George Washington as leader of a “strategic failure.”

Why did Dr. Fischer, at first blush, seemingly condemn General Sullivan and his troops in the sub-title of the book?  Was it a deliberate statement?  Further research might be necessary, particularly to once again obtain the 1984 History doctoral dissertation at SUNY Buffalo describing the Sullivan massacres as an answer to the British and their Native allies (Mohawks and Senecas – ?) massacre of colonist villages.  This Paul Stevens dissertation (not referenced in Dr. Fischer’s book) describes General Sullivan’s disgust at the time he resigned his commission in person before General Washington*.

Another conclusion to be drawn might be recognition of a diplomatic victory on the part of General Washington, without jeopardizing a soldier’s (Dr. Fischer) compulsion to support a military victory.  I am no expert at all on military events.  As a lay person, I would say the only means of a strategic military victory in 1779 would have meant genocide.  Perhaps General Washington recognized this and worked to a diplomatic victory when the treaty was signed?  A diplomatic victory is NOT a failure, but perhaps a military man had a need to put it this way?  I speak gingerly regarding this issue as I acknowledge speculation on my part.

References

Fischer, J.R.  (1997).  A Well-executed failure:  The Sullivan Campaign against the Iroquois, July-September 1779.  Columbia, SC:  U. of South Carolina Press.

Stevens, P. L. (1984).  His Majesty’s “savage'” allies:  British policy and the northern Indians during the Revolutionary War–The Carleton Years, 1774-1778.  [Ph.D. Dissertation].  Buffalo, NY:  State University of New York at Buffalo.

Category:

Book Reviews, New Comments

Leave a comment

Tagged with:

Hypothesis for “Where Have All the Leaders Gone?”

Mr. Iacocca, perhaps I am not wealthy enough to be allowed to make conclusions.  Perhaps I have not made it to the top of the heap, as others have done, so I am simply a stupid intellectual to be ignored.

Nevertheless, my recent reading of essays about the wealthiest persons in the world, Andrew Carnegie, I may have stumbled across the answer to the question you posed in your 2007 book, Where Have all the Leaders Gone?

Andrew Carnegie believed CEOs of corporations had to learn what work ethic is and that those who inherited wealth don’t know what true work ethic is.  Therefore, these people should not lead.  They become false models for those who work for them.   The problem of work ethics lies not in the workers, but in the leaders.

In order to fix this idea of “work ethic,” the late Kenneth Lay and other living  stupid leaders force the Ayn Rand “ethics” or “virtues” of selfishness and greed – espoused by Greenspan and Paul Ryan – upon employees like a communist leader or the pope, elders of Mormonism, and the late Jerry Falwell of the Southern Baptists (and other leaders)  claim there is “utopia” if people only follow one way of thinking.

There is no objection to the role greed and selfishness played in the rise of the poor son of Scottish Presbyterian immigrants, wealthy tycoon, Andrew Carnegie, to the accumulation of massive amounts of wealth (when considered for the days he lived).  There is no denying statements by 18th-century economist, Adam Smith, in the claim capitalism should be free of interference.  But to embrace ONLY these statements to validate Ayn Rand’s irrational thoughts about “virtues” or Barry Goldwater’s irrational statements about greed –  there is a virtue in NOT “compromise” – is absurd.

Mitt Romney admires Goldwater’s nonsense “virtues” and Paul Ryan admires Rand’s nonsense “virtues.”  Both fly in the face of one of the wealthiest men in the world.  Andrew Carnegie also believed the wealthy have a duty to society.

Mr. Carnegie lived at a time when unions had not been established, so he agreed with the others in his management cronies.  They were all against unions.  But his reasoning was based on the fact that HE insisted he never had any assistance (or so he claimed – and he is wrong) to earn his wealth.   A teacher had assistance from my mother, became wealthy and departed from the teaching profession, and then spurned my mother.  How many wealthy ones like him disavow the assistance they received from peons along the way?  Thus, it is right for unions to provide assistance to those who don’t have it.  The problem, as you point out in your book, Mr. Iacocca, is when unions become as unreasonable as the wealthy CEOs have also become.

Romney received help from Daddy.  Paul Ryan had an attorney as a father who likely made more money than teachers.  George W. Bush had assistance from his daddy and made a LOUSY leader (as pointed out in your book, Mr. Iacocca).  These are all lousy leaders who have inherited wealth.

Barack Obama worked his way up.  Joe Biden worked low-paying blue collar jobs as he worked his way to the top.  By Andrew Carnegie’s standards, the choice is clear.  Obama and Biden.

Perhaps there are some detected levels of imperfections in these two guys.  Perhaps the same can be said about Andrew Carnegie, too.  When these two guys “step on toes” of others – as Romney / Ryan do all the time – the roar of Fox Noise is deafening.  My bet is that Andrew Carnegie never had that kind of sabotage, but even if he did, his extreme wealth could shut it down immediately.

The problem lies in racism, too.  After all, who are the guys who have likely inherited the wealth today?  Stupid white men who carry a hidden objection to African Americans or Hispanics working their way to the top.  Deceptive men (and women?) who live in denial of their hidden racist attitudes.  And yes, there might be disappointed good white Anglos who are passed over, due to affirmative action.  But why do these idiots continue to vote for stupid white men like Bush, Romney, and Ryan, rather than work together with those who recognize the value of diversity?  Actually, I have heard African Americans, perhaps familiar with Andrew Carnegie’s success, who have spoken out against affirmative action, too.

Where have all the leaders gone, Mr. Iacocca?  Perhaps this blog provides some answers.  But who the hell am I?  Nothing but horse shit, don’t you know?

Category:

Commentary, New Comments

Leave a comment

Tagged with:

Letter to Jeff Jacoby, The Boston Globe

Dear Mr. Jacoby,

I came across your May 6, 2012, op-ed on the web:  “Thanks, Obama, but wealth is not theft.”
First of all, “those who peddle class resentment” are today’s wealthy 1%.  They pay less taxes than the wealthy did in the 1950s when the economy hummed along quite nicely.  American CEOs are the highest paid in the world and the gap between CEO and the lowest paid worker has increased astronomically.  Yet, when I was working in a corporation and executives respected management guru, Peter Drucker and CEO, Lee Iacocca, more than Ayn Rand, the Drucker idea about the gap between the highest paid CEO and the lowest paid worker was advocated.  It’s a much smaller gap than what we see today.  Business worked quite well under these circumstances and more people owned a piece of the American pie.  I refute your negativity towards working people and the 99% of America.
Philosophers might argue about what “piece of the pie” means.  The argument might be:  my statement presumes there is a limit to wealth.  I choose to think in terms of an infinite “pie.”  So nah nah nah nah nah nah… to all the detractors who wish to make an issue out of something and miss the point:  the small business merchant class has been destroyed in America, the same as what happened in Ancient China as that economy imploded due to austere measures.
Descendants of American individuals who once owned their own retail outlets and small farms are now forced to work for the big conglomerates with CEOs making 200 to 300 times what the lowest-paid worker makes.  What I am saying here is not an advocacy for socialism or communism, but a revelation of the facts that small farms which once provided enough finances for individual families have been destroyed by big agri-business with a few people at the top controlling the wealth and paying the descendants of small farmers peanuts while expenses within the economy – the things that block family “profits” or discretionary income – have risen astronomically when considering more than just the “government breadbasket” statistics which are out of whack.
Secondly.  Funny, but Romney and Ryan have created a platform in the Republican Party rife with fascist definitions of the family, but refuse to acknowledge the facts about family profits.  The pot is stirred up regarding envy and jealousy of those who make better five-figure salaries, while never recognizing the number of people who make six-, seven-, eight-, nine-, ten- or more figure salaries.  There is a definition that de-values work from teachers, but places great value on techies, accountants, and lawyers who make far more money doing things like – ambulance chasing, figuring tax deductions and how the wealthy can escape paying their fair share.  Teachers can loose their jobs while these others are a valued part of the economy?  Lawyers and tax accountants are sacred cows?  While the average family is told by the Republicans how morality is supposed to work and “if you make too much of a five-figure income” and just beginning to turn a profit, after many years of living paycheck to paycheck , you ain’t worth shit.
 
Mr. Jacoby, perhaps you need to consider there are gray areas, not just black and white.  For if you work from the premise there is only black and white – socialist or capitalist – then you can come to the conclusions you drew in May of this year.  BUt I challenge you to stop being stubbornly ignorant and consider the gray areas.  Consider the role President Obama plays in stimulating free-market capitalism which flies in the face of the McDonald’s, Wal-Marts, and Chick-fil-a’s, whose focus is about destroying competition (and those they disagree) than to compete with them on a level playing field.  McDonald’s vision years ago was to destroy the “mom and pop” restaurants.  The same is true today with Wal-Mart.  But in either case, you probably will not see such “vision” written down on paper. just deceptively implemented.  
 
Something I recently read about wealth and wealthy tycoon, Andrew Carnegie:  Andrew Carnegie condemned wealthy leaders who inherited their wealth.  Examples of Romney, Ryan, and the Bush family come to mind.  Apparently, he believed that those who inherited the wealth had no idea what it meant to WORK in order to EARN their wealth, so were not worthy of being “captains of industry.”  He believed those who worked hard, earned their money after many years of hard work, made better leaders because they know what it is like to EARN, rather than destroy competition and take from others.  Carnegie believed in being a giving person.    Those modeled after Carnegie’s ideas would be Barack Obama and Joe Biden.  Barack Obama was chastised in 2008 for “lack of experience.”  But such criticism, by Carnegie’s standards, was unwarranted.  And what do the Republicans do to those who have gained this wisdom after many years of experience and working their way up from little or nothing?  These hapless SOBs wish to put most of us “out to pasture” with little means of supporting ourselves.  Just when we “begin to turn a profit,” the rug is pulled out from beneath us by wealthy people claiming “there is not enough of the American pie to go around.”  As I said, it’s an infinite pie which the 1% wish to claim is finite.  
 
There are numerous statements from some wealthy people who preceded the jackass wealthy of the 21st Century which berate the attitude of the Ayn Rand followers.  What is unbelievable is that those who embrace the Ayn Rand attitude act like communists who took power in Europe in the 20th Century.  They believe utopia is found when everyone believes the same thing as these wealthy ones believe (this is called fascism) and wish to rip apart everything from the past, as if it was always a failure – except some perceived idea of perfect morality which existed in the past (a fantasy).  America became a great nation, due to attitudes from Adam Smith, Andrew Carnegie, and “trust buster,” Teddy Roosevelt (conservationist, too).   These attitudes  conflict with those of Ayn Rand and others.  
 
America became a great nation due to religious leaders like Dr. Norman Vincent Peale and the “power of positive thinking” which would have negated the focus and generation of extremist attitudes towards minor negative aspects of ObamaCare.  This negativity generated by big business ignores many of the positives about ObamaCare.    
 
Dr. Peale’s “positive thinking” flies in the face of conservative religious dogma generated by the pope, elders in Salt Lake City, Liberty U. (and the Southern Baptists) in Virginia (and Dixie), and Billy and Franklin Graham, among other televangelists.  Original blessings is really what Jesus Christ endorsed, not the concept of original sin.  Original sin is a doctrine from a church of men.  The pope and others do not like this Dr. Peale positive attitude, so, as conservative Republicans wish, the pope and others wish to destroy those who endorse original blessings.  The pope has already done so by excommunicating a priest who endorses original blessings.  To the pope, elders, and deacons of narrow-focused dogmatic churches, I say:  “Seek wisdom, not certainty.”  
 
Mr. Jacoby, there ARE gray areas, not just the black and white defined by narrow-focused religions and their goons in business leadership.  

Category:

Commentary, New Comments

Leave a comment

Tagged with:

Humble Pie or Truth be Hiding – by Deceptive People?

Humility is tough when eating crow.  But do I eat crow and acknowledge a mistake?  Or is there another answer?

Andrew Carnegie.  In my brief look at Andrew Carnegie’s life, I am impressed.  His Scottish-Presbyterian background places him in a better position than the Koch brothers or other super-wealthy today because, at the very least, he believed in Christian principles.  Yes, he was against unions during the time of the robber barons and formation of trade unions in the USA.  But did he actually state his opposition to unions or go along with “management ID” and “management groupthink” of his day?  Unions were perhaps untested in his day, so did this influence Carnegie’s thinking.

The problem with the web today – and I am just as guilty – is the Vannevar Bush syndrome of “hypertext.”  When I read something on the web, I place it in my brain and often forget to document it.  This is a problem for which perhaps causes me to eat humble pie.  Or does it?

I recall reading a quote attributed to Andrew Carnegie.  It went in one of two ways:  “Wealth is created by society, not individuals.”  The other way:  “Wealth is not created by individuals, but by society.”  This quote was either in an op-ed in a newspaper like The Palm Beach Post or it was on the Internet.  It was most likely in the newspaper.  Nevertheless, the Internet has become so pervasive that one can typically find the quote again later.

What has happened is this.  I have quoted this from the piece of paper where I wrote the UNDOCUMENTED quote down.  In other words, I wrote the quote attributed to Andrew Carnegie, but not the source of the quote.  I have quoted this piece of information several times on my blog.  Now I attempt to locate this quote as associated with Andrew Carnegie and the only place this is to be found on Google is the three times I have included it in my blog.

What gives here?

In doing research of this question, I have reviewed numerous writings by Andrew Carnegie himself (http://www.swarthmore.edu/SocSci/rbannis1/AIH19th/Carnegie.html, June 1889) and others:  (1) well-referenced article by Nicole Notario (http://learningtogive.org/papers/paper80.html) for a graduate research paper; (2) a Fordham U. essay (http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1889carnegie.asp); and various others.  One might conclude from this material (and others) that Carnegie might have made such a statement.  But an actual attribution would take further research.

I am puzzled who wrote this quote and claimed attribution to Andrew Carnegie.  I did not dream this up on my own.  I did not just write this down out of thin air because, at the time, I barely knew diddley squat about this man, except to recall a library at my alma mater, Syracuse University, named after Carnegie and an entire university in Pittsburgh bearing his name.  QUite frankly, having a library named after this man placed him in high regard.  So when I read a supposed quote attributed to him, I took it very seriously.

I am not an idealogue, so I would have had no presumptions or biases.  I found it fascinating that a wealthy tycoon of the late 1800s would make such a statement.

I have also read (and again, perhaps I need to document this) that Carnegie sold his steel companies to a ruthless man named J.P. Morgan in order to devote his time to philanthropic measures.  It was J.P. Morgan (now part of the name of one of the largest banks – one which has screwed consumers with regard to mortgage loans) who gave Franklin D. Roosevelt a hard time, as the Koch Brothers do today to Barack Obama.  It was J.P. Morgan who purportedly (unproven, just word of mouth to me) had his servants cut out pictures and stories of FDR from the morning newspaper each day – before Morgan sat down to read it.  Sounds like the fans of Fox Noise – “don’t tell me anything else but what Fox Noise says.”

Nevertheless, perhaps it was Morgan who was more anti-union than Carnegie?   A hypothetical question.

Ayn Rand has ruined this nation by creating a strong groupthink of selfishness and greed via a fantasy tale.  The visual Media, in particular, has grabbed this extreme fascination with greed and selfishness which causes materialism among the people.  Madison Avenue is a shameful group of hyenas who lack any human qualities whatsoever, as they endorse the principles of greed and selfishness, clouding the picture of what true capitalism, as defined by men like Adam Smith, Andrew Carnegie, Teddy Roosevelt, and others had to say about it.  Jeff Jacoby’s op-ed this past May in the Boston Globe is a tribute to the stupidity of people who view the world only in black and white.  These people say, “either President Obama is a socialist or capitalist, but never can anyone be in the gray areas between and call themselves problem-solvers.”  Like narrow-focused religions – Roman Catholic and Mormons, for instance, there can be no consideration of “gray” areas.

Nevertheless, if I am wrong in attributing this quote about individuals, society, and wealth, then I stand corrected.  However, my admission that I am wrong is more than what egomaniacs in the wealthy class would be willing to do as they hide their money overseas and refuse to divulge their tax information.

BTW.  My scathing remarks about specific religious denominations should not be taken personally, except perhaps those who are hypocrites within those churches.  Perhaps they feel guilty, so therefore take it personally.  But then, imagine the berating my own denomination took in 2008, at the brief glimpse of statements made by ONE of the myriad pastors and clerics within my church.  Double standards in America which remove my liberty and freedom – and the separation of church and state.  Are we afraid to speak about the Christian beliefs of Adam Smith and Andrew Carnegie because such Presbyterian beliefs go against the grain of the dogma and doctrines of huge hierarchically-based churches with strong dictatorial leadership?

Is it humble pie for me or the truth being hidden – by deceptive people … no… deceptive egomaniacs – who seek power and control first,  before reasoning and rationality?  I would like to know.

Category:

Commentary, New Comments

Leave a comment

Tagged with:

Self-righteous Right Wing Fascists in America Today

October 27, 2012

From the Guideposts daily thoughts:

“If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land. 2 Chronicles 7:14”

Learning takes place when people are humble.  Self-righteous people who believe there is only one way to solve a problem are not humble.  This passage does not advocate legislating morality, yet that is what fascist right wing people advocate, proclaiming somehow their “rights” are being trampled should they not be allowed to tell everyone how to live their lives.

Ayn Rand was a wicked person.  She advocates for individual greed and selfishness.  A person cannot be humble when they are greedy and selfish, seeking only what is best for his / her self.  Such people lacking humility remain stubbornly ignorant, never listening to the other side and making an attempt to learn something different from the “traditionalist” stuff which often has been proven NOT to work.  Diana Butler Bass said, “seek traditions, not traditionalism.”

Yet, Libertarians and a man named Paul Ryan worship Ayn Rand and nixes ideas about seeking solutions which would be good for society.  Allen West, lacking humility and remaining stubbornly ignorant, attacks those who don’t agree with him as being “communists.”  Yet Ryan and West attempt to call themselves “Christians” and attract a whole bunch of people who wish to legislate morality – in supposed “Christian” churches.  Dale Carnegie:

“Carnegie held that societal progress relied on individuals meeting their moral obligations to themselves and to society.[63] Thus, he believed real charity supplied the means for those who wish to help themselves, achieve their goals.[64] Moreover, Carnegie urged other wealthy people to contributed to society in the form of parks, works of art, libraries and other endeavors that improved the community, and contributed to the “lasting good”[65] Carnegie also held a strong opinion against inherited wealth. Carnegie believed that the sons of prosperous businesspersons were rarely as talented as their fathers.[66] By leaving large sums of money to their children, wealthy business leaders were wasting resources that could be used to benefit society. Most notably, Carnegie believed that the future leaders of society would rise from the ranks the poor.[67] Carnegie strongly believed in this because he had risen from the bottom. He believed the poor possessed an advantage over the wealthy due to their receiving more attention from their parents, and were taught better work ethics.”[68]

This is quoted from Wikipedia and links to the particular references are included.  Did Romney and Ryan come up from the bottom?  Neither one of them knew what it was like to be blue collar and actually labor for a living.  They have no idea.  They are both elitist snots.  Barack Obama and Joe Biden did work their way up from the bottom.

I recall Anne Richards’s speech at the 1992 Democratic Party convention which nominated Bill Clinton for president.  The words ring true with one of the most wealthy this nation has ever seen:  “Poor George, born with a silver spoon in his mouth.”  Shrub, with the silver spoon and fake way, did not know how to lead.

Taxing the wealthiest portion of America when that part of America refuses to invest in its own nation and puts money and jobs overseas is NOT a wrong thing to do, according to Carnegie’s standards.

When there is something these elitist right wing fascists don’t like, they take the minor parts of such ideas and blow these parts up out of proportion to what is good about such issues.  Take ObamaCare.  I have seen reports which equally discuss the good, bad, and ugly with regard to the plan.  But to listen to the mainstream Media, particularly Fox, all discussions focus on the parts which some people might find offensive, but do not truly have the knowledge (and thus the wisdom) to really understand.  Crony capitalism makes judgments based solely on their wealth, not on the good of society.  Diana Butler Bass:  “Seek wisdom, not certainty.”

Right wing fascists expect perfection, especially from those who don’t agree with them.  Yet, they are not humble enough to realize that the hand with the finger they point in judgment at another person also has three pointing back at themselves and the thumb is thumbing God.  “Judge not lest you be judged.”  Diana Butler Bass:  “Seek to practice, not purity.”

References

Andrew Carnegie (2012).  Wikipedia.  Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Carnegie [63], [64], [65], [66], [67], [68].

Bass, Diana Butler.  (2006).  Christianity for the rest of us : how the neighborhood church is revitalizing the faith.  San Francisco:  Harper.

Daily scripture & reflection newsletter.   (2012, Oct. 27).   OurPrayer daily newsletter (Guideposts) [Email distribution].  ourprayer@email.ourprayer.org

Category:

Commentary, New Comments

Leave a comment

Tagged with: