Rambling With a Point

Below are some thoughts that may seem unrelated, but I will try to tie them together in a coherent manner later on.

When we first moved back home again in 1979, after a few years I became sort of bored.  Our daughters had all “flown the nest”, so life for me was pretty dull.  I read the usual yearly request for citizens who might be interested to apply for the County Grand Jury, so I applied, and was accepted.  During the year we were given a potential criminal case to review.  The issue was a shooting in Reservoir Canyon, north of the City of San Luis Obispo where three homeless men were camping.  Three or four young men from SLO went up the Canyon one night and began firing their weapons near the homeless camp.  One bullet ricocheted off a rock and struck one of the homeless men in the head, and he died.  We were given the case to determine whether it was Murder One, Two, or Voluntary or Involuntary Manslaughter.  We were given a whoop-de-do lecture about how this was a secret procedure, we were not to discuss it with anyone including our spouses (yeah, like that wouldn’t happen), and we were sworn to secrecy even that we had been given the case.  I drove home a little later than usual that night, walking in our house to the KSBY 6:00 PM News and a picture of the room to the Grand Jury on the screen, and the news that the Reservoir Canyon shooting had been given to the Grand Jury!!  After much testimony, but not being allowed to visit the site where the shooting occurred, we came to the decision of Murder Two.  What shocked me was the shock on the face of everyone from the judge on down.  They had not expected that decision, and actually we had to wait while the powers that be had to have new papers drawn up with a new verdict.  We were never told what verdict they thought we had come up with!!  Later, my law enforcement daughter and I visited the site, and we could see why we weren’t allowed.  It was obvious that the decision we had come to was closer to a correct one than what someone in the government center wanted.

One of the things that really intrigue me, as a former elected official who was actually a pretty lousy politician, is how people will comment in my hearing how all politicians are corrupt.  It actually happens more frequently than one imagines.  It never seems to occur to the speaker that he or she has just called me, by definition a politician, corrupt.  I used to take these comments personally, but overtime I have come to realize that it says more about the speaker than it does me.  I also recognize that a whole lot of politicians are corrupt, but that it is no more just to paint all elected officials with the same brush than any other group.

On another matter, while I was in office I carpooled with my Legislative Assistant, Richard Macedo, because he lived in Cambria and it seemed pretty stupid to me to drive almost right past his front door and not car pool.  For us it worked out well because we could spend the 45 minutes or so it took to drive from his front door to the Government Center gearing up for the day, and on the way home, discussing what went right, and what we could have done better.  It also gave me the opportunity to explain to him why I had made, or would be making, policy decisions that he either didn’t understand completely or actually disagreed with.  When not discussing those things, however, Richard would frequently go over what he had learned in a safe driving course (or courses) he had taken in his past.  Even though at the time I would become a tad exasperated, which I never let on to him because he was driving, his words stuck in my brain, and recently when my husband and I were not injured in an accident on Highway One, Richards’s words echoing in my brain caused me to make decisions that very likely saved our lives.

All of this ties into what has occurred in Ferguson, MO, and its aftermath.  I know from my experience that not all District Attorneys are people of integrity, but that most of them are.  I know from my experience that some politicians are corrupt, but that most of them are not.  And I really know because of my family and friends in law enforcement that not all people in law enforcement are “racist jack-booted thugs”, as my daughter the ex-law enforcement officer was called after an incident in San Francisco where she was a police officer.  The San Francisco Chronicle had her name and that of 7 other officers involved in the incident all over the front pages, but when the officers, including my daughter were cleared of any wrong-doing, there was a tiny 3 inch article on a back page announcing that.  I also know some officers are “racist jack-booted thugs”.  I know from experience that a well-run department which requires qualified personnel results in well-trained officers and have a lot fewer complaints and down-right trouble than a sloppy department, and that the “thugs” are not tolerated.  Look at the professionalism of a department when making a determination about the conduct of an officer.

The point of all of this rambling is stop blaming every police officer you see for what some rogue officer from a lousy department someplace else did.  What the Federal Attorney General wants to do is the correct course.  Investigate what law enforcement does that is correct, and if a department is not complying, straighten them out.  Further, make available to all officers body cameras and audio recording devices, if necessary.  I know from experience that patrol car cameras have been very effective in providing accurate records of what actually occurred between the officer and public, and in some instances have cleared the officers.  There is data indicating that body cameras are a very good addition to the gear the officers carries.

We also need to make sure that cities and counties across this nation have the tax dollars to train, train, and train again officers in what to do in the few seconds in which a violent incident can occur.  There is no time to think, only respond with what is in your brain in those split second decisions.  To cut funding to law enforcement for training at the local level is beyond stupid, in my opinion. 

Because of my experience with people making blanket statements about politicians, I know a shadow of what people in law enforcement must feel.  I must add, however, that I have never had PTSD problems from my years in politics, nor have I ever had nightmares from what I have personally experienced, as so many people in law enforcement have had.  My plea is, please recognize that the officer on the street, by and large, does have your best interests at heart, and vote for elected officials who recognize the importance of enough funding for their training.  I, for one, salute them.

 

 

 

 

An Other Irrelevant Matter

While everyone else is getting ready for Thanksgiving, I smile because we have already had ours!  It turned out that so many of our family could not be here for the real Thanksgiving, but could be here over Veterans Day weekend, we had Thanksgiving then.  One snag was finding a turkey, but one was found in Atascadero, although several pounds larger than I had suggested.  We started the day figuring on having 8 people, but ended up with 12.  Which, of course, turned out OK since the turkey was several pounds larger than expected.  We have one great grand-daughter who loves, yes, loves, to peel potatoes!!  She is five years old, and put her on a stool, wrap an apron around her little self, give her peeler, and she is non-stop on a five pound bag.  What a gem of a kid our Alyssa is.  Since we are still a tad water short, I had all paper stuff so one of the younger ones just walked around the table with a garbage bag, and voila, the dishes were done, almost.

But the most exciting thing that has happened in the past week was my driver’s license renewal.  Bill had not made an appointment earlier this year, and had to watch people walk in who had appointments, and walk out while he sat there for an hour.  So, he convinced me to make an appointment.  Which was a snap on the internet.  Once I found out how to locate the DMV, that is.  I found a time that was convenient for me and sent off the form.  I received a nice printable confirmation back, which I did print and put with my renewal notice.  About two days before the dreaded day, I also received a robo call from the DMV reminding me of the appointment, and asking if I wanted to cancel please press some key.  If I wanted to keep the appointment, I was to just hang up, which I did.  That was easy.

For a couple of weeks ahead of time I had been scanning the on-line drivers handbook, and had been taking the sample on-line written tests, which was really helpful, it turned out.  Had I taken the time to read the renewal notice carefully, I would have noted that I only needed to take the written test, not the driving one.  I always dread that one because I have never learned to parallel park.  This always concerns the DMV drive-along person for some reason.  Once one of them got really upset and asked what in the world I did if I needed to park.  Whereupon I told him I drove around until I found a parking place I could use, then got out of my vehicle and walked to where I wanted to go.  I reminded him about walking – that it involved putting one foot in front of the other in the desired direction.  He didn’t get the humor.

When I got to the DMV location in Paso Robles and opened the door, there was a red carpet leading to the window that was for people with appointments.  How nice!  The lady there took my printed confirmation form and renewal notice, put it together with another form and sent me off to Window 5.  Another lady took my check, printed off some other forms, put them together along with the dreaded written test, and sent me off to the tables behind Window 8 up against the wall.  So there I was, looking at the first question, and I didn’t have a clue as to what answer of the three they wanted!  Not an auspicious beginning, to say the least.  So, I finally calmed down, thought about what I do all of the time, and checked that answer box.  Most of the questions were pretty straight forward, like crossing over a yellow double line or parking when the curb is painted red.

Then I came to one that really stopped me.  The questions was if you see a driver texting while driving would you: 1, leave as much room as possible between you and that driver, 2, alert the police, or 3, signal the other driver to stop texting.  That last one was a no-brainer since if the driver was texting, the driver wouldn’t see you signaling, and to signal, you had to stop watching the road ahead of you.  Definitely not that answer.  In my mind, considering where I live, the first answer was the only reasonable one – keep as much distance between yourself and the texting driver as possible.  But then I thought that probably this test was written by someone who lives in the city (Sacramento), has blue tooth in the car with a voice activated smart phone which would make it simple to alert the police.  But, hey, when you live where I do, with cell phone usage iffy at best, and generally sheriff response some 20 minutes away minimum (not their fault since they have to cover a very large geographical area), this is not the optimum answer.  Since there was no way anyone could know these little nuances to the test, I answered to alert the police.  There were other answers that I just guessed at.

With trepidation I took the test back to Window 8 where a gentleman took the test, then told me I had gotten 100%!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  I guess all of that looking at the handbook and taking those sample tests had really helped.  And thank all of the saints in heaven that I didn’t have to explain that I have never learned to parallel park, and have never found it to be a problem.  I just walk.

 

 

Words, Words, Words.

Yes, I know.  I have an obsession with the appropriate definition of words and phrases.  Words, after all, are the very foundation of any interaction between two people or among millions of people and their governments.   

When I first became involved in politics in SLO County, phrases such as, “We support agriculture” bothered me a lot.  Either the speakers were Herculean in their physical abilities in order to “support” all of agriculture on their shoulders, or it was an incomplete sentence.  They supported agriculture to do what?  Stay in the business of providing food and fiber for the general population, or for the owners of the agricultural land to sell their properties into ever smaller economically non-viable parcels, or to sell the whole parcel to real estate developers.  These last options were based on the proviso that the land owner had certain inalienable property rights.  Which they do have to a certain extent, but the citizenry as a whole also has the right not to have their properties, or lives, impacted in such an adverse manner that they could no longer live on their properties in a safe and healthful manner.  Thus, government has the right under the police powers of the state to restrict the use of land for the general good.  That is, a land owner cannot begin operations of some noxious business next to an elementary school, nor can an elementary school be permitted next to a noxious business.  Noxious in the sense of contaminating the general physical environment.  This explanation is very simple.  It requires land use lawyers to completely understand the whole process, and applies in my experience to California only. 

When speakers of any stripe, but particularly politicians who use such trite phrases, the populace ought to stop and ask for definitions.  When I hear politicians such as Mitch McConnell say that he wants the President to work with him, what does he mean by that?  Does he mean that he wants to sit down with the President and work out some solutions to some of the major problems this country is suffering from, or does he want the President to sit down with him, listen to what McConnell has to say, and then do what McConnell wants?  There is a big difference here.  I strongly suspect the latter action is what McConnell intends.   

Speaking of Mitch McConnell, I nearly screamed at the TV the other night when I heard McConnell say that he keeps telling the President what the President should do, and if he doesn’t do it, the President will be sorry.  McConnell is telling the President what to do?  Frankly, I interpreted those words to mean, and I could be wrong, “Listen, boy, you do what we tell you to do, or else down the river with you.   And to prove our point we’ll file articles of impeachement against you and shut down the government.  It must be what you want to happen because if you didn’t want it, you would do what we tell you to do.”  Talk about the classic abuse syndrome!!

Further, all of this yammering by the radical right about impeaching the President if he takes a stand on immigration reform and issues an executive order is absurd.  An impeachable offense, they say.  I don’t remember anyone wanting to impeach W. over his Executive Order #43944, 2007.  That was the one that stated if anyone, citizen or otherwise, was determined by the Secretary of State and Secretary of the Treasury to be undermining the sovereignty of Lebanon could have their property confiscated.  No trial.  No nothing other than that determination.  There were some vague criteria on which such a determination could be made.  Could writing an article for a national publication which the two entities determined to be undermining the sovereignty of Lebanon result in the loss of any private property owned by the author?  You doubt this?  Google George W. Bush Executive Order #43944.   

One of the things that disturbs me the most about this last election is the fact that there are more Republicans in the House and Senate than any time since 1920.  My God!!  Remember what happened then?

To Whom Are They Speaking? Not Me!

All during this past election season, and before, the rhetoric coming from the Republicans, radical right or more centrist, was the same.  Marvelous populist rhetoric that extolled the virtue of job creation and working for good wages along with the need to get government out of the way of businesses in order for the economy to grow so people could have jobs.  It all sounded very populist and wonderful.

My suggestion to the electorate is to imagine that the speaker is not talking to you, but to a wealthy white man, preferably one with a White Anglo-Saxon Protestant (WASP) last name, and preferably one whose income is in the millions of dollars.  The whole rhetorical direction takes on new meaning.  That is because it is not directed at those of us who live in the middle or lower economic classes. 

As an example, I heard many Republicans say that the minimum wage is irrelevant (Paul Ryan), or that $7.25 is fine for a starting wage for a high school student.  They didn’t discuss if the high school student is in school trying to get an education to get a job that pays more than minimum wage, who then was working at the mythical student’s job.  Many commented that it was up to the business to set the wage they are willing to pay.  What hog wash!!  The minimum wage was set in the first place in 1938 because corporations and businesses were not willing to pay a living wage.  No more so then, than they are now.  When the minimum wage was on state ballots in this past election, it won overwhelmingly.

One statistic that has been bandied about is that about 2/3^rds of minimum wage workers are women.  Everyone knows that these women should be home taking care of their children, and their husbands will provide for them.  Another bunch of hog wash.  If their husbands, or significant others were doing just that, the women would be home.  But the men are not stepping up to the plate and taking responsibility for their own actions.  Or, the men might not be able to find jobs that pay them more than minimum wage, and like the old cliché, two wrongs do not make a right, or two minimum wage jobs don’t make a living wage.

Our country has come a long way in opening some doors for minorities.  This is obvious when all one has to do is watch the news on MSNBC, for example.  But for the vast majority of minority men and women, the jobs they can find are definitely not those that provide a living wage.  These are the people who are destined by the oligarchy to do the scut work required in any society.  Someone has to clean the toilets in restaurants and malls, scrub the kitchens and floors, and collect the garbage, to name just a few of the jobs to be done by “those people”. 

If the Republicans can get women out of the workplace, at whatever level, that will open up more jobs for white men, who have a divine right to have them, as they claim is in Scripture.  Men won’t have to compete with women who may be much better at the job than they would be.  It reminds me of the old statement at the beginning of the feminist movement, “For a woman to get ahead in the workplace, she has to be twice as smart and work twice as hard as a man.  Fortunately, that is not difficult”.  Also, by denying women access to birth control or family health services whether that is abortion or not, women return to being restricted in their employment capabilities.  It is difficult to have a high-powered job with no birth control assuring the woman that she will not become pregnant at the most inopportune time possible.  Further, by restricting funding for child care services, women will be obligated to either attempt to receive some sort of government subsidy in order to care for the child, or try some other method of providing for herself and her child or children.

Try connecting the dots on this false populist rhetoric yourself.  You will probably come up with even more disturbing rhetorical pictures.  Force politicians to actually, in detail, define their terminology and/or rhetoric.  What emerges is truly, at times, amazing.  Not rational, but amazing.

So VOTE, Damn It!!!

In my opinion, it is absolutely vital that all American citizens vote on Tuesday if they haven’t voted already.  Of course, in my opinion, it is absolutely vital that all Democrats and Independents vote. 

Why?  Look at the record of what has happened in states that have Republican legislatures and governors.  Michigan is probably one of the worst with Gov. Rick Snyder having the state legislatures give him the power to arbitrarily set aside duly elected Boards of cities for reasons known only to him.  Needless to say, this did not sit well with me – a former elected official.  To outsiders, however, it appeared that the cities where he got rid of duly elected representatives were predominately cities where minorities were in the majority of those duly elected representatives, and where the cities had assets that could be sold off for profits. 

There are the other states where voter suppression is rampant, poor women’s health clinics are closed for spurious reasons, laws are passed to take away women’s freedom of pregnancy decisions, laws are not passed to guarantee equal pay for equal work for women.  Probably the worst of these pending laws regarding women’s reproductive choices is the so-called “personhood laws”.  These laws would deem that the moment the sperm and egg meet, that zygote has all of the protections of a fully formed and viable outside the womb human.  Forget the fact that ¼ - 1/3 of all pregnancies end in a spontaneous abortion, and thus women may be criminalized because of the terminated pregnancy even though they may have ardently wanted to become pregnant.

The rights of workers to organize and bargain for decent pay and working hours is being eroded by so called “right to work” laws, which are nothing more than the right to work without benefits for the workers, but great benefit for the employers.  In May, 1891, (yes, 1891) Pope Leo XIII issued an encyclical, Rerum Novarum, in which occurs a paragraph which could easily be written today:

3. In any case we clearly see, and on this there is general agreement, that some opportune remedy must be found quickly for the misery and wretchedness pressing so unjustly on the majority of the working class: for the ancient workingmen's guilds were abolished in the last century, and no other protective organization took their place. Public institutions and the laws set aside the ancient religion. Hence, by degrees it has come to pass that working men have been surrendered, isolated and helpless, to the hardheartedness of employers and the greed of unchecked competition. The mischief has been increased by rapacious usury, which, although more than once condemned by the Church, is nevertheless, under a different guise, but with like injustice, still practiced by covetous and grasping men. To this must be added that the hiring of labor and the conduct of trade are concentrated in the hands of comparatively few; so that a small number of very rich men have been able to lay upon the teeming masses of the laboring poor a yoke little better than that of slavery itself. 

It appears that this is what the Koch brothers, et al, would like to have this country go back to.

So VOTE, damn it!!!   (Unless of course, you already have.)