Many Americans watched in awe over the last two-weeks as the Egyptian people took to the streets to peacefully protest the removal of a dictator who starved and murdered his citizenry, while he pillaged an estimated $70,000,000,000 from the country he claimed to love.
I'm tired of hearing members of the Tea/Republican Party always chanting "revolution" in America. They're always threatening to take their muskets and shoot other Americans because they say President Obama raised their taxes--which are false, and that "Obamacare" will kill their grandparents--which it won't. Additionally, the Tea/Republican Party members like to use references about "taking back America," but where do they want to take it?
I like to issue a challenge to these people:
If we, the citizens, leave our muskets at home and protest the homeless crisis in the nation which includes in some reports of 14%, 20% and 25% respectively of the population that has served in the U.S. military--would you be ready to take it to the streets peacefully?
Are you ready to peacefully protest the reduction of Pell Grant opportunities for deserving and under-privileged college students and the diminishing social services desperately needed in cash strapped American cities?
If we peacefully assembled in large numbers as concerned citizens because we want solutions, not excuses from parents, school, and elected officials about our decaying public school system that is no longer even graduating functioning illiterates--are you ready to take it peacefully to the streets?
If we, the people, marched on Capitol Hill as a nation of one, not based upon ethnicity, sexual orientation, religious or political affiliation, but in fact, our concerns about the widening gap between the wealthy, the middle class, and the working poor, the increase in racial inequality, and the dissipation of a woman's fundamental rights that is destroying the Republic--would you be ready to take it peacefully to the streets?
If you're truly ready to start a "Real Revolution," let it be a revolution about aiding all Americans and restoring the Republic back to its greatness. Just a reminder, my dissatisfied brethren of the Tea/Republican Party--a nation divided will cease to exist.
"Progressives will bring balance to the Republic."
Anthony P. Johnson
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
Thursday, February 10, 2011
“Brilliantly Poor”
Mr. Nutter has taken Philadelphia in the wrong direction for more than 3 years, and I believe he will continue this odyssey if he is re-elected. To be blunt, Mayor Nutter does not possess the attributes consisting of effectiveness, nor is he innovative enough to reverse our city’s decrepit and financially bankrupt infrastructure.
I will not spend much effort addressing an unlimited list of failures by Mr. Nutter during his tenure, but I will say this--its crystal clear that rebuilding and restoring Philadelphia to its greatness is simply too big of a job for Mr. Nutter to handle.
So, where do we go from here? Currently, there is an incumbent mayor running for reelection that has done so “brilliantly poor” in serving the will of Philadelphians, and yet, there are no viable Democratic challengers.
“Progressives will bring balance to the Republic.”
Anthony P. Johnson
I will not spend much effort addressing an unlimited list of failures by Mr. Nutter during his tenure, but I will say this--its crystal clear that rebuilding and restoring Philadelphia to its greatness is simply too big of a job for Mr. Nutter to handle.
So, where do we go from here? Currently, there is an incumbent mayor running for reelection that has done so “brilliantly poor” in serving the will of Philadelphians, and yet, there are no viable Democratic challengers.
“Progressives will bring balance to the Republic.”
Anthony P. Johnson
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
“Greatest American Hero…Not!”
I find it comical how the GOP and conservative talk radio attempt to package former President Ronald Reagan as a poor man’s version of the “Greatest American Hero” when it was clear early on in his Presidency that he resembled more of an “American Nightmare.” Ronald Reagan played the fear monger card to millions of Americans and convinced them that the true threat to America’s prosperity was African-American welfare queens, Central American leftists, and the U.S Federal Government.
In fact, in his First Inaugural Address in 1981, Reagan declared that, "Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem." Yet, during his tenure as the Commander and Chief, he increased the size of the federal government that would have made President Franklin Roosevelt say, “Damn.” Three years after he left the White House, Ronald Reagan was anything but America’s greatest action hero. As a recession enveloped the country, Americans came to see the Reagan years which featured a massive defense buildup, soaring deficits, and even a stock market crash in 1987--as the source of their economic woes. Reagan presided over the worst recession at that time--since World War II and under his guidance from 1982-1983 the unemployment rate exceeded 10% for 10 consecutive months?
Ronald Reagan was also the Pied Piper of tax breaks for the wealthy, and since his Presidency ended more than 20 years ago--the richest Americans have received more than 400% in tax breaks while the middle class, working poor, and the poor citizens have not received any benefits in the form of improving the nation’s medieval infrastructure or job creation as a result of those tax cuts.
So to all my neo-conservative friends, stop attempting to cast Ronald Reagan as a President deserving to be mentioned with the likes of great U.S. Presidents such as Lincoln, FDR, T.R., Washington, Jefferson and Clinton. Yes Clinton! Reagan was not a great president, pure and simple, and no matter how you attempt to distort history with myths of his accomplishments--they fall flat like Carl Lewis' rendition of the “Stars Spangled Banner.”
It was President Reagan that deemed mental health obsolete when he made massive cuts in order to build up the military which led to the closing of thousands of behavioral health facilities. It was President Reagan who participated in the illegal transaction of arms-for- hostages, and it was Reagan who didn’t mention the word “AIDS” until 1987--and after between 20,000-30,000 citizens had perished. Perhaps in the country of "Bizzaro" Reagan would be an exceptional President but in the United States, he was far from it.
“Progressives will bring balance to the Republic.”
Anthony P. Johnson
In fact, in his First Inaugural Address in 1981, Reagan declared that, "Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem." Yet, during his tenure as the Commander and Chief, he increased the size of the federal government that would have made President Franklin Roosevelt say, “Damn.” Three years after he left the White House, Ronald Reagan was anything but America’s greatest action hero. As a recession enveloped the country, Americans came to see the Reagan years which featured a massive defense buildup, soaring deficits, and even a stock market crash in 1987--as the source of their economic woes. Reagan presided over the worst recession at that time--since World War II and under his guidance from 1982-1983 the unemployment rate exceeded 10% for 10 consecutive months?
Ronald Reagan was also the Pied Piper of tax breaks for the wealthy, and since his Presidency ended more than 20 years ago--the richest Americans have received more than 400% in tax breaks while the middle class, working poor, and the poor citizens have not received any benefits in the form of improving the nation’s medieval infrastructure or job creation as a result of those tax cuts.
So to all my neo-conservative friends, stop attempting to cast Ronald Reagan as a President deserving to be mentioned with the likes of great U.S. Presidents such as Lincoln, FDR, T.R., Washington, Jefferson and Clinton. Yes Clinton! Reagan was not a great president, pure and simple, and no matter how you attempt to distort history with myths of his accomplishments--they fall flat like Carl Lewis' rendition of the “Stars Spangled Banner.”
It was President Reagan that deemed mental health obsolete when he made massive cuts in order to build up the military which led to the closing of thousands of behavioral health facilities. It was President Reagan who participated in the illegal transaction of arms-for- hostages, and it was Reagan who didn’t mention the word “AIDS” until 1987--and after between 20,000-30,000 citizens had perished. Perhaps in the country of "Bizzaro" Reagan would be an exceptional President but in the United States, he was far from it.
“Progressives will bring balance to the Republic.”
Anthony P. Johnson
Thursday, February 3, 2011
"Rise of the Educated Poor in the Republic"
If nearly 3 in10 adults that have completed post-secondary education are living below the poverty line, does this mean the protective benefits of education are diminishing? The rise of the educated and impoverished in America should be cause for great concern for every man, woman, and child, but is it?
Why do adults with post-secondary education make up such a large and growing proportion of the poor population? Well, in part, because the educational composition of the overall population is changing: In essence, a more highly educated poor population reflects the trend towards a more highly educated population in general. From 1981 to 1992, there was a rapid increase in the total number of working-age adults with PSE rising from 3.6 million to 6.8 million. As a result, 40% of the working-age population achieved some form of post-secondary qualification. Even without an increase in the poverty rate, the number of educated poor would have increased substantially because of this changing composition. Additionally, part of the increase in the number of poor working-age adults with post-secondary credentials is the result of an increasing poverty rate among this highly educated group, which climbed from 7% in 1981 to 21% in 2009.
It is surprising that more than 800,000 working-age adults with post-secondary education are--in fact--poor. It challenges our common fundamental belief system about the benefits of higher education. Indeed, we are left to inquire, how could anyone with a post-secondary education be impoverished?
In 2000 for example, 22% of poor working-age adults had obtained a post secondary degree. There was a debate about whether these students were "in fact, poor." Critics argued that students were "not really poor" because their poverty is "temporary"; they often receive some parental support, and many share living expenses with other students. True, some students fit this criterion; many, however, do not. Among those with a post-secondary education who were "impoverished students," 1 in 4 (25%) was between the ages of 35 and 64, and 1 in 5 (22%) had dependent children.
Among poor educated adults who were employed between 2000-2009, the most common occupations were in personal services, food and beverage preparation and other services (17%); clerical occupations (14%); and sales (11%)--this employment sector is beset by high levels of part-time employment, temporary work, and minimum wage. This is also true at the doctoral level--where there are more than 5,000 janitors in the U.S. with Ph.D.’s.
Conversely, contrary to popular belief, it is becoming increasingly clear that earning a Bachelor’s Degree, Master’s Degree or a Ph.D. does not guarantee a job, let alone one with good pay. As elected officials continue to focus their attention on tax breaks for the wealthy, repealing health care and fear mongering, they have moved further away from ending unemployment and poverty in the Republic, and it would do them well to consider the following question which a growing number of citizens both adult and youth are beginning to ask: “What is the use of further training and higher education if there are too few good paying employment opportunities available?”
“Progressives will bring balance to the Republic.”
Anthony P. Johnson
Why do adults with post-secondary education make up such a large and growing proportion of the poor population? Well, in part, because the educational composition of the overall population is changing: In essence, a more highly educated poor population reflects the trend towards a more highly educated population in general. From 1981 to 1992, there was a rapid increase in the total number of working-age adults with PSE rising from 3.6 million to 6.8 million. As a result, 40% of the working-age population achieved some form of post-secondary qualification. Even without an increase in the poverty rate, the number of educated poor would have increased substantially because of this changing composition. Additionally, part of the increase in the number of poor working-age adults with post-secondary credentials is the result of an increasing poverty rate among this highly educated group, which climbed from 7% in 1981 to 21% in 2009.
It is surprising that more than 800,000 working-age adults with post-secondary education are--in fact--poor. It challenges our common fundamental belief system about the benefits of higher education. Indeed, we are left to inquire, how could anyone with a post-secondary education be impoverished?
In 2000 for example, 22% of poor working-age adults had obtained a post secondary degree. There was a debate about whether these students were "in fact, poor." Critics argued that students were "not really poor" because their poverty is "temporary"; they often receive some parental support, and many share living expenses with other students. True, some students fit this criterion; many, however, do not. Among those with a post-secondary education who were "impoverished students," 1 in 4 (25%) was between the ages of 35 and 64, and 1 in 5 (22%) had dependent children.
Among poor educated adults who were employed between 2000-2009, the most common occupations were in personal services, food and beverage preparation and other services (17%); clerical occupations (14%); and sales (11%)--this employment sector is beset by high levels of part-time employment, temporary work, and minimum wage. This is also true at the doctoral level--where there are more than 5,000 janitors in the U.S. with Ph.D.’s.
Conversely, contrary to popular belief, it is becoming increasingly clear that earning a Bachelor’s Degree, Master’s Degree or a Ph.D. does not guarantee a job, let alone one with good pay. As elected officials continue to focus their attention on tax breaks for the wealthy, repealing health care and fear mongering, they have moved further away from ending unemployment and poverty in the Republic, and it would do them well to consider the following question which a growing number of citizens both adult and youth are beginning to ask: “What is the use of further training and higher education if there are too few good paying employment opportunities available?”
“Progressives will bring balance to the Republic.”
Anthony P. Johnson
Sunday, January 30, 2011
"Murderer’s Row" of Fear Mongers
I'll give the Tea/Republican Party this--they sure know how to attempt to scare Americans. Isaac Asimov once said violence is the last refuge of the incompetent, and we witnessed that in Tucson. I like to add--"Invoking fear in a society is the last ditch effort of the buffoon."
On the night of January 25, 2011, citizens witnessed a "Murderer’s Row" of fear mongers, as Paul Ryan and Michelle Bachmann took their rhetoric to new heights. And not to be outdone, Sara "WTF" Palin provided her pointless assessment to the fold.
I keep waiting for a Republican elected official to step forward and be an effective leader in the Republic. I keep waiting to hear them say that “I am a Republican, but I do not support this behavior of many of my colleagues.” But alas, none have come forward. They all continue to drink from the cup of "I don't have an effective plan to repair America so I'll instill "McCarthyism" upon the nation."
There are some Democrats and Progressives that gleefully say that Bachmann and Palin should seek the White House in 2012. This would provide comedians and news outlets with endless material which to poke fun at due to their overwhelming lack of basic American History and domestic policy.
I, on the other hand, hope they do not seek the Presidency.
Like Limbaugh and Beck, every time we parade Bachmann and Palin, these mindless, fact less group of people on stage brings international shame and embarrassment to the Republic. And to think these individuals believe that the Framers of the Constitution would support their belief system is misguided--horribly misguided. Jefferson, Hancock, Washington, Franklin, and Patterson just to name a few would not support their view. In fact, the Framers would probably say in reference to Ms. Bachmann, Ms. Palin, Beck and Limbaugh, and a host of uniformed elected officials who know little or no history of America, “This is why you shouldn’t drink your own urine.”
As for the supporters of Palin, Bachmann, Beck and Limbaugh, they are finding it difficult to accept the fact that despite their fame, fortune, and status, they must be removed from the headlines for the good of the Republic.
Unfortunately, as long as television and radio executives continue to move increasingly away from creating effective and thought-provoking programs addressing the social chaos in our society and finding solutions instead green lighting more shows focused on keeping the citizenry entertained 24 hours a day, we're stuck with their shtick for an undetermined amount time.
All the while, America's status continues to dissipate in the world as an intelligent and visionary nation.
"Progressives will bring balance to the Republic."
Anthony P. Johnson
On the night of January 25, 2011, citizens witnessed a "Murderer’s Row" of fear mongers, as Paul Ryan and Michelle Bachmann took their rhetoric to new heights. And not to be outdone, Sara "WTF" Palin provided her pointless assessment to the fold.
I keep waiting for a Republican elected official to step forward and be an effective leader in the Republic. I keep waiting to hear them say that “I am a Republican, but I do not support this behavior of many of my colleagues.” But alas, none have come forward. They all continue to drink from the cup of "I don't have an effective plan to repair America so I'll instill "McCarthyism" upon the nation."
There are some Democrats and Progressives that gleefully say that Bachmann and Palin should seek the White House in 2012. This would provide comedians and news outlets with endless material which to poke fun at due to their overwhelming lack of basic American History and domestic policy.
I, on the other hand, hope they do not seek the Presidency.
Like Limbaugh and Beck, every time we parade Bachmann and Palin, these mindless, fact less group of people on stage brings international shame and embarrassment to the Republic. And to think these individuals believe that the Framers of the Constitution would support their belief system is misguided--horribly misguided. Jefferson, Hancock, Washington, Franklin, and Patterson just to name a few would not support their view. In fact, the Framers would probably say in reference to Ms. Bachmann, Ms. Palin, Beck and Limbaugh, and a host of uniformed elected officials who know little or no history of America, “This is why you shouldn’t drink your own urine.”
As for the supporters of Palin, Bachmann, Beck and Limbaugh, they are finding it difficult to accept the fact that despite their fame, fortune, and status, they must be removed from the headlines for the good of the Republic.
Unfortunately, as long as television and radio executives continue to move increasingly away from creating effective and thought-provoking programs addressing the social chaos in our society and finding solutions instead green lighting more shows focused on keeping the citizenry entertained 24 hours a day, we're stuck with their shtick for an undetermined amount time.
All the while, America's status continues to dissipate in the world as an intelligent and visionary nation.
"Progressives will bring balance to the Republic."
Anthony P. Johnson
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
"Like Comparing Alexander the Great to Sponge Bob Square Pants."
Comparing Representative Paul Ryan's rebuttal to President Obama's State of the Union Address would be like comparing Alexander the Great to Sponge Bob Square Pants.
So let's not.
Representative Ryan bellowed that future generations will have to pay the nation's current deficit, while he and the Tea/Republican Party are responsible for our "fiscal inferno." What does Mr. Ryan offer to address this issue? A re-packaged version of tax cuts for the wealthy and of course--smaller government. The so-called "Principles" of the Tea/Republican Party is nothing more than empty, baseless rhetoric punctuated by doom, gloom, and fear to frighten the citizens in the Republic. Haven't we heard this song before?
Mr. Ryan didn't present one--not one "concrete solution" to lowering the deficit so that his three children will not inherit it, a way to provide health care for millions of uninsured Americans, and solutions for creating jobs for the millions of people that are out of work. Representative Ryan is touted as fiscally brilliant, but what I witnessed was an individual who is "fiscally incompetent" and more hype than substance.
Representative Ryan's response was nothing more than a cheap, flat, and flimsy infomercial that should have been presented at 3:00 a.m.--when most Americans are asleep.
"Progressives will bring balance to the Republic."
Anthony P. Johnson
So let's not.
Representative Ryan bellowed that future generations will have to pay the nation's current deficit, while he and the Tea/Republican Party are responsible for our "fiscal inferno." What does Mr. Ryan offer to address this issue? A re-packaged version of tax cuts for the wealthy and of course--smaller government. The so-called "Principles" of the Tea/Republican Party is nothing more than empty, baseless rhetoric punctuated by doom, gloom, and fear to frighten the citizens in the Republic. Haven't we heard this song before?
Mr. Ryan didn't present one--not one "concrete solution" to lowering the deficit so that his three children will not inherit it, a way to provide health care for millions of uninsured Americans, and solutions for creating jobs for the millions of people that are out of work. Representative Ryan is touted as fiscally brilliant, but what I witnessed was an individual who is "fiscally incompetent" and more hype than substance.
Representative Ryan's response was nothing more than a cheap, flat, and flimsy infomercial that should have been presented at 3:00 a.m.--when most Americans are asleep.
"Progressives will bring balance to the Republic."
Anthony P. Johnson
Monday, January 24, 2011
“Woefully Pathetic”
I see that there are some citizens that could care less about others. For the record, I am not naïve to think that they were not always among us in America, but they used to have a standard. They used to direct their discontent and apathy towards adults only, but now, not even the children are spared.
We reside in a society where some believe providing a quality education for all youth is not an important issue as we witness entire school districts placed on probation and threatened with losing accreditation. To add insult to the proverbial “down for the count,” school breakfast and lunch programs for students--the "only" meal many of them receive--is getting the axe.
So much for the "charitable spirit."
As layoffs of law enforcement, fire fighters, teachers, and the de-funding of social service programs continue to mount, and IOU’s are replaced with more IOU’s many of our elected officials at the city, state, and federal levels stand pat and complain that the "Foreigner from Kenya occupying the White House is the sole cause."
When did America become a nation of "pass the buck"?
We continue to wail about the rise of the wayward youth and the violent behaviors that appear to have enveloped them like a warm place in the sun, all the while treating them like a 2nd class population by revoking every opportunity that would allow them to flourish. Have you ever met an illiterate, hungry, and angry youth at midnight?
The fact of the matter is we could eradicate child poverty and illiteracy if we wanted to. America is capable of dismantling the cradle-to-prison pipeline, including full funding of Head Start Programs, making sure that children can read by the fourth grade, and eradicating child poverty by 2015. However, all of this boils down to a lack of commitment by our society. Let's hypothesize for a moment. Had the tax cuts for the top 1% richest Americans been repealed, it would have yielded a $57 billion surplus. To put it in perspective, the wars in Afghanistan/Iraq has cost over $450 billion through 2007, which amounts to about $100 billion a year. There is plenty of money for wars, but America lacks the compassion and the will to assists its most vulnerable poor--its children.
Conversely, 500 years from now our Republic will be judged by the way we effectively and most importantly, humanely address the needs of our children. Sadly, as of 2011, America’s treatment of children is woefully pathetic. Today is our opportunity to finally create an environment that will provide every youth with an equal chance to succeed.
"Progressives will bring balance to the Republic."
Anthony P. Johnson
We reside in a society where some believe providing a quality education for all youth is not an important issue as we witness entire school districts placed on probation and threatened with losing accreditation. To add insult to the proverbial “down for the count,” school breakfast and lunch programs for students--the "only" meal many of them receive--is getting the axe.
So much for the "charitable spirit."
As layoffs of law enforcement, fire fighters, teachers, and the de-funding of social service programs continue to mount, and IOU’s are replaced with more IOU’s many of our elected officials at the city, state, and federal levels stand pat and complain that the "Foreigner from Kenya occupying the White House is the sole cause."
When did America become a nation of "pass the buck"?
We continue to wail about the rise of the wayward youth and the violent behaviors that appear to have enveloped them like a warm place in the sun, all the while treating them like a 2nd class population by revoking every opportunity that would allow them to flourish. Have you ever met an illiterate, hungry, and angry youth at midnight?
The fact of the matter is we could eradicate child poverty and illiteracy if we wanted to. America is capable of dismantling the cradle-to-prison pipeline, including full funding of Head Start Programs, making sure that children can read by the fourth grade, and eradicating child poverty by 2015. However, all of this boils down to a lack of commitment by our society. Let's hypothesize for a moment. Had the tax cuts for the top 1% richest Americans been repealed, it would have yielded a $57 billion surplus. To put it in perspective, the wars in Afghanistan/Iraq has cost over $450 billion through 2007, which amounts to about $100 billion a year. There is plenty of money for wars, but America lacks the compassion and the will to assists its most vulnerable poor--its children.
Conversely, 500 years from now our Republic will be judged by the way we effectively and most importantly, humanely address the needs of our children. Sadly, as of 2011, America’s treatment of children is woefully pathetic. Today is our opportunity to finally create an environment that will provide every youth with an equal chance to succeed.
"Progressives will bring balance to the Republic."
Anthony P. Johnson
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
