Tapsearch Com EditorTell me how to deal with an article like this
October 18th 2011 19:26
By Ray Tapajna Tapart News Editor and Artist
I am a Conservative Populist and advocate for workers dignity. How can I deal with an article like the one below by an assistant editorial editor at the only major newspaper in my city. How can I respond in only 200 words they allow me in a letter to the editor. Doesn't this point to a real problem of our time? Is it Communications by rank or worst yet do workers really have any voice in the process of free trade and globalization?
I did get a letter published and you can read it after reading the article by Kevin O"Brien about the Occupy Wall Street protesters .......
Revolution in October
The ones who cart their horses and cannons off to Civil War battlefields a couple of times a year, don blue or gray and charge one another amid the rattle of musket fire do so to develop a deeper appreciation of a momentous period in this nation's history.
Participants and spectators alike know that it's not the 1860s and that a sprained ankle is about the gravest wound anyone is likely to suffer, but the re-enactors remind us of history worth remembering.
We've got another re-enactment going on right now, in the streets of cities all across the United States.
For weeks now, a handful of Americans has been re-enacting the late 1960s -- beating drums, waving placards, chanting slogans and otherwise making minor nuisances of themselves in U.S. cities. Their claim is that people who have money aren't forking it over fast enough to people who don't.
They want things like health care and college degrees for free, and they say "the rich" -- "the 1 percent" -- should be forced to provide them.
But freebies for me via taxes for thee isn't really the point, just as ending the war in Vietnam wasn't really the ultimate goal in the 1960s. Those are just tools employed to recruit enough sign-carrying dupes to garner media coverage.
(If you wonder what is meant by the well-worn term "useful idiots," Google "YouTube, Occupy Atlanta, John Lewis" to see them in hilariously ironic action.)
The real goal of Occupy Wall Street, etc., is the destruction of constitutional government and capitalism. Where we'd go from there varies according to whichever true believer is on camera or holding the bullhorn. Pure democracy? Anarchy? Socialism? Communism? They're all on the menu.
In New York, where it began, Mayor Michael Bloomberg has proclaimed that Wall Street's occupiers can stay as long as they like, providing they beat, wave and chant within the law. He knows the first cold wind to whistle through Manhattan's concrete valleys will blow away his troubles.
But the protests will continue in warmer climes and it will be a surprise if they don't turn violent -- a perfectly natural course for a movement that springs from a destructive impulse.
Until that happens, the rest of us should keep score, taking careful note of which politicians support these people who despise our Constitution and preach revolution. Democratic Reps. Dennis Kucinich, Marcy Kaptur, Tim Ryan and Betty Sutton have all disqualified themselves from a return to Congress on that score. They should be judged by the company they keep.
Whatever complaints Americans have about Wall Street -- and there are legitimate complaints -- should be based on cold, hard logic, not dewy-eyed emotion.
The problem isn't "unbridled capitalism." This country has never had any such thing. The problem is government's perversion of capitalism.
The problem isn't that Congress is in Wall Street's pocket. The problem is that Wall Street is tucked away in a fortress called Congress, which works overtime writing laws to protect the favored from competition and that discourage innovation and entrepreneurship. From bailed-out banks to "green energy" pipe dreamers, they all ought to rise or fall on their merits.
The problem isn't that "the rich" are sitting on their money out of some weird malice toward 99 percent of the country. No one knows better than a person with money that active money grows, while idle money shrinks. The problem is a presidential administration with an insatiable appetite for confiscation and redistribution.
And if we have a greed problem, it's more than counterbalanced by an envy problem embodied by the people occupying this, that and the other thing, and claiming a right to the fruits of someone else's labor.
Encouraging that attitude has long been a pillar of Democratic Party politics, but Democrats who care about this country must repudiate this pernicious movement while it's still just an irritating re-enactment of the 1960s. Because the radical trade unionists, socialists and communists pulling the strings want to replay something even more evil.
It happened 94 years ago this month, in Russia.
By Kevin O'Brien, Assistant Editorial Editor, Cleveland Plain Dealer
----------------------------- ----------------------
Here is my letter the Cleveland Plain Dealer published responding to O'Brien's editorial article :
NEW GENERATION OF ACTIVISTS
*NEW GENERATION OF ACTIVISTS [ THE BOTTOM UP GENERATION ]
Kevin O'Brien should know the Occupy Wall Street protest has a new generation, which some call the "bottom up" generation. They use the Internet and all kinds of electronic devices for their news channels. They want to make all decisions from the bottom to the top. This is what Pope
Benedict suggests when he talks about "subsidiarity" in his economic encylical.
I am part of the protest, following what the pope suggests and what Lech
Walesa says. Walesa led the Solidarity movement in Poland and played a major role in the fall of the Soviet empire. He says, " I do not know that much about business or economics, but I do know that something is very wrong when 10 percent of the population controls 100 percent of the wealth." He recently said, "America has lost its way."
I am part of the protest, and I vote for the Constitution Party candidates who want to confirm the Constitution in our daily lifes.
Ray Tapajna
Cleveland
Here is what they edited out.
* The editors took out the word - possible. My original letter said ...
the Bottom Up generation want to make all decisions at the lowest
possible level.....as Pope Benedict describes the process of "Subsidiarity." .
They also left out the example I give. ---If the free trade agreements
had to be ratified by a popular vote, how many workers would vote for the trade agreements that put them out of their jobs?
This is a perfect example how workers do not have a voice in the matter and need to have a Bottom Up choice in the matter.
They also cut out my comment about Rep Marcy Kaptur who O'Brien calls a far left progressive person. This shows O'Brien does not understand who I and people like me are all about. We are Conservative Populists who hold someone like Rep Marcy Kaptur as an expert in the field of globalization and free trade even though she is a Liberal Populist .... Ross Perot asked Rep.
Marcy Kaptur to be his running mate when he ran for president. Perot certainly not a far left Progressive. ....
And this is how it goes in the Bewildered New World as coined by Manuel Castells who wrote several books about free trade and globalization - where workers have no voice in the process. Castells says if you are not part of any network, you do not exist Search under : tapsearch Bewildered New World.
I am a Conservative Populist and advocate for workers dignity. How can I deal with an article like the one below by an assistant editorial editor at the only major newspaper in my city. How can I respond in only 200 words they allow me in a letter to the editor. Doesn't this point to a real problem of our time? Is it Communications by rank or worst yet do workers really have any voice in the process of free trade and globalization?
I did get a letter published and you can read it after reading the article by Kevin O"Brien about the Occupy Wall Street protesters .......
Revolution in October
The ones who cart their horses and cannons off to Civil War battlefields a couple of times a year, don blue or gray and charge one another amid the rattle of musket fire do so to develop a deeper appreciation of a momentous period in this nation's history.
Participants and spectators alike know that it's not the 1860s and that a sprained ankle is about the gravest wound anyone is likely to suffer, but the re-enactors remind us of history worth remembering.
We've got another re-enactment going on right now, in the streets of cities all across the United States.
For weeks now, a handful of Americans has been re-enacting the late 1960s -- beating drums, waving placards, chanting slogans and otherwise making minor nuisances of themselves in U.S. cities. Their claim is that people who have money aren't forking it over fast enough to people who don't.
They want things like health care and college degrees for free, and they say "the rich" -- "the 1 percent" -- should be forced to provide them.
But freebies for me via taxes for thee isn't really the point, just as ending the war in Vietnam wasn't really the ultimate goal in the 1960s. Those are just tools employed to recruit enough sign-carrying dupes to garner media coverage.
(If you wonder what is meant by the well-worn term "useful idiots," Google "YouTube, Occupy Atlanta, John Lewis" to see them in hilariously ironic action.)
The real goal of Occupy Wall Street, etc., is the destruction of constitutional government and capitalism. Where we'd go from there varies according to whichever true believer is on camera or holding the bullhorn. Pure democracy? Anarchy? Socialism? Communism? They're all on the menu.
In New York, where it began, Mayor Michael Bloomberg has proclaimed that Wall Street's occupiers can stay as long as they like, providing they beat, wave and chant within the law. He knows the first cold wind to whistle through Manhattan's concrete valleys will blow away his troubles.
But the protests will continue in warmer climes and it will be a surprise if they don't turn violent -- a perfectly natural course for a movement that springs from a destructive impulse.
Until that happens, the rest of us should keep score, taking careful note of which politicians support these people who despise our Constitution and preach revolution. Democratic Reps. Dennis Kucinich, Marcy Kaptur, Tim Ryan and Betty Sutton have all disqualified themselves from a return to Congress on that score. They should be judged by the company they keep.
Whatever complaints Americans have about Wall Street -- and there are legitimate complaints -- should be based on cold, hard logic, not dewy-eyed emotion.
The problem isn't "unbridled capitalism." This country has never had any such thing. The problem is government's perversion of capitalism.
The problem isn't that Congress is in Wall Street's pocket. The problem is that Wall Street is tucked away in a fortress called Congress, which works overtime writing laws to protect the favored from competition and that discourage innovation and entrepreneurship. From bailed-out banks to "green energy" pipe dreamers, they all ought to rise or fall on their merits.
The problem isn't that "the rich" are sitting on their money out of some weird malice toward 99 percent of the country. No one knows better than a person with money that active money grows, while idle money shrinks. The problem is a presidential administration with an insatiable appetite for confiscation and redistribution.
And if we have a greed problem, it's more than counterbalanced by an envy problem embodied by the people occupying this, that and the other thing, and claiming a right to the fruits of someone else's labor.
Encouraging that attitude has long been a pillar of Democratic Party politics, but Democrats who care about this country must repudiate this pernicious movement while it's still just an irritating re-enactment of the 1960s. Because the radical trade unionists, socialists and communists pulling the strings want to replay something even more evil.
It happened 94 years ago this month, in Russia.
By Kevin O'Brien, Assistant Editorial Editor, Cleveland Plain Dealer
----------------------------- ----------------------
Here is my letter the Cleveland Plain Dealer published responding to O'Brien's editorial article :
NEW GENERATION OF ACTIVISTS
*NEW GENERATION OF ACTIVISTS [ THE BOTTOM UP GENERATION ]
Kevin O'Brien should know the Occupy Wall Street protest has a new generation, which some call the "bottom up" generation. They use the Internet and all kinds of electronic devices for their news channels. They want to make all decisions from the bottom to the top. This is what Pope
Benedict suggests when he talks about "subsidiarity" in his economic encylical.
I am part of the protest, following what the pope suggests and what Lech
Walesa says. Walesa led the Solidarity movement in Poland and played a major role in the fall of the Soviet empire. He says, " I do not know that much about business or economics, but I do know that something is very wrong when 10 percent of the population controls 100 percent of the wealth." He recently said, "America has lost its way."
I am part of the protest, and I vote for the Constitution Party candidates who want to confirm the Constitution in our daily lifes.
Ray Tapajna
Cleveland
Here is what they edited out.
* The editors took out the word - possible. My original letter said ...
the Bottom Up generation want to make all decisions at the lowest
possible level.....as Pope Benedict describes the process of "Subsidiarity." .
They also left out the example I give. ---If the free trade agreements
had to be ratified by a popular vote, how many workers would vote for the trade agreements that put them out of their jobs?
This is a perfect example how workers do not have a voice in the matter and need to have a Bottom Up choice in the matter.
They also cut out my comment about Rep Marcy Kaptur who O'Brien calls a far left progressive person. This shows O'Brien does not understand who I and people like me are all about. We are Conservative Populists who hold someone like Rep Marcy Kaptur as an expert in the field of globalization and free trade even though she is a Liberal Populist .... Ross Perot asked Rep.
Marcy Kaptur to be his running mate when he ran for president. Perot certainly not a far left Progressive. ....
And this is how it goes in the Bewildered New World as coined by Manuel Castells who wrote several books about free trade and globalization - where workers have no voice in the process. Castells says if you are not part of any network, you do not exist Search under : tapsearch Bewildered New World.
| 30 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
subscribe to this blog
