A Simple Question: Would God Condone Torture?

BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE A Simple Question: Would God Condone Torture? Maybe I'm missing something, but I find it uniquely ironic that some the same people who clamor for prayer in school, claim that same-sex marriage is an abomination under God, who insist that America is a Christian nation, and fight for the Biblical version of creationism over science, are also the very same people who demand the right to be armed to the teeth with some of the most destructive private weapons on Earth, the right to slaughter and bring the most excruciating kinds of death upon God's other creatures for nothing more than their own entertainment, and now, condone the torture of other human beings as a legitimate tool of government. Is it just me, or does anyone else see this as the very height of hypocrisy? It seems to me that the mere fact that we're even debating the merits of torture is a clear indication that we've gone much too far towards allowing America to become a decadent nation. It has become clear that due to our all consuming preoccupation with personal titillation and hedonistic materialism to the exclusion of intellectual, moral, and ethical development, we're rapidly transforming this nation from that shining light on the hill, to a decadent hellhole in the valley of iniquity. Hypocrisy, self-delusion, deceit is no longer the exception, it has become the rule. And this is no accident. I've been watching this nation gradually sink into the abyss for the past thirty years. The late Sen. Claiborne Pell of Rhode Island, and sponsor of the Pell Grant said, "The strength of the United States is not the gold at Fort Knox or the weapons of mass destruction that we have, but the sum total of the education and the character of our people." No truer words were ever spoken, and they directly address the source of many, if not all of the problems that we face today. We've allowed ourselves to be manipulated, robbed, and cheated, as a direct result of becoming morally and intellectually bankrupt. We've become so preoccupied with big houses, big cars, and the pursuit of pleasure that we've completely lost perspective regarding what is real, and what is important in life. A prime example of that is a guy who was in the news earlier this week - I forgot his name, and it's not even worth researching, but in any case - after catching a football and running a few yards, he thought he was so important that he could thumb his nose at the President of the United States. This guy is so caught up in the superficial, and has become so completely overwhelmed with his own delusion of importance that the meaning of graciousness and simple courtesy has been completely lost on him. He was quoted as saying the only reason the president invited us to the White House was because we won the super bowl. Well, of course that's the reason! He failed to realize that an invitation from the president represents the people of the United States congratulating him and his teammates for a job well done. But obviously, he misunderstands the relative importance between the president of the United States, and a guy who caught a football. This guy is apparently under the impression that he's become so important that by rejecting the invitation to the White House he was depriving the president of the honor of meeting him. He fails to realize that playing football represents the toy department of life - just like too many more of us. Thus, I must admit it was partially the president's fault for inviting him in the first place. The president should have invited all of the young people across this country who graduated as the top scholars in their respective classes. By doing so, it not only would have placed what's important to the nation in perspective, but they would have also had the intellect to recognize the honor that had been bestowed upon them. Education is the key to a viable society, and the lack thereof is the key to our destruction. We often discuss, for example, how badly we need campaign reform, and how unrestricted lobbying prevents the government from functioning as it should. While that is undoubtedly true in our current circumstance, if we had a better educated electorate it wouldn't matter how much money poured into a politician's campaign coffers, he still couldn't be elected without being responsive to the needs of the people. After all, the only thing campaign funds are good for is brainwashing the ignorant. An educated electorate wouldn't be as prone to respond to the ten second sound bite, or the logical inconsistencies that demagogues present as patriotism. And they'd understand enough about America's traditions to recognize that torture is the perfect anthesis of not only Christianity, but the very foundation that this nation was built upon. They'd also recognize that promoting the interests of the people wasn't some sort of evil, socialist plot, and they'd see the inconsistency of attacking Iraq, while the people who attacked the United States were in Afghanistan. They'd also ask pertinent questions like"Why aren't the children of the rich, and political class, dying in this war like our love ones?" An educated electorate would have demanded to know what Cheney discussed with the business leaders he gathered together when the Bush administration first entered office - and they wouldn't have accepted "it's none of your business" as an answer. And a red flag would have immediately gone up when the corporation that Cheney headed received a lucrative no-bid contract as a result of invading an oil-rich nation. A thoughtful electorate would have asked early on why would an administration who claim to love and honor our troops send them into harms way without the wherewithal to protect their lives. And why would a patriotic administration throw billions of dollars at their cronies without any accountability, yet make the troops that they so honor have to pay for equipment lost on the field of battle, and are even forced to pay for their own meals while lying in the hospital after being wounded? After all, even prisoners of war don't have to pay for their own meals. Finally a thinking electorate would ask themselveswhy did the Bush/Cheney administration forced our troops to endure multiple deployments, and even held them hostage after their enlistment was up, when virtually every member of the administration moved hell and Earth to avoid military service when it was their time to serve the nation? Then, and even more curious, why did they do everything that they could to block an enhanced GI Bill to assist these same troops that they so honored, upon their return to civilian life. And now Cheney comes before us once again - at this point, filthy rich - to convince a grossly undereducated, naive, and self-absorbed public that he did it all for America. And you know what, he went up 10 points in the polls. God help America.    Eric L. Wattree wattree.blogspot.com A moderate is one who embraces truth over ideology, and reason over conflict.

Sphere: Related Content

Republicans: Stuck in Own Muck

BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE Republicans: Stuck in Own Muck With the Grand Old Party experiencing its most precipitous decline in modern times, the very last thing it needs is a rusty old anchor pulling it down even farther. But that’s exactly what it’s got as it finds itself helplessly attached to a discredited and unrepentant Dick Cheney. Ironically, previously elusive and camera-shy, now that the former vice president is out of office, no one in the Republican Party seems to be able to shut him up. Like a drowning man, he’s flailing about and willing, it seems, to take anyone down with him in order to save his own hide. He’s become a loose cannon, far removed from the ethic of team player that he insisted upon by all while he was in office. He’s a defense attorney’s worse nightmare. And his unabashed tendency for self-service over loyalty was clearly evident in a recent interview on CBS’ Face the Nation when he pointed the finger at former President Bush as being responsible for signing off on waterboarding. Undoubtedly Cheney feels the gathering storm of accountability coming down upon him for what he calls "enhanced interrogation techniques" but the rest of the world is calling torture. His method of operation remains the same, however. Just as he did in his attempt to justify the invasion of Iraq, he’s using the shotgun approach in his attempt to justify the administration’s campaign of torture. But unfortunately for the GOP, in doing so, he’s giving the nation, and the world, a front row seat in observing the complete lack of character of one of the most reviled politicians in the history of this nation, and like it or not, the GOP feels forced to stand by him. First, in an attempt to use Department of Justice lawyers as human shields, he claimed that DOJ attorneys advised the administration that waterboarding wasn’t torture. Thereafter, he tried to give the impression that he was selflessly trying to defend "the little guy" by insisting that the attorneys in question shouldn’t be held culpable for giving their best legal advice. But actually, he wasn’t defending "the little guy" at all–he was actually fortifying a bunker to protect Dick Cheney. The only way that Cheney can keep DOJ attorneys on the reservation, and not have them reveal the genesis of their "legal opinions" in order to save their own necks, he must provide them with a cover for those opinions–a sort of, quid pro quo, like the one Scooter Libby thought he had. It is a must that he pull that off in order to hide behind the contention that he was simply following their advice as his cover. If he failed to protect the DOJ attorneys first, at some point in the future we’d undoubtedly hear Judge Bybee, former Attorney General Gonzales and others testifying that they wrote the memos because the vice president relayed a direct order to them from the commander and chief to do so during a time of war." That defense might not fly, but neither did their memos. So just in case that tact doesn't work, Cheney is also trying to justify the use of torture (why deal in euphemisms?) by claiming that it was, and is, necessary in order to protect America. He contends that the Bush administration has kept us safe from attack for over seven years. But what evidence does he have of that? Both our Mexican and Canadian borders are like sieves. If Jose Gonzales can simply walk across the border, what prevents Osama Bin Laden from doing the same? What evidence does he have that Osama didn’t simply say, why waste perfectly good terrorist when Cheney and Bush are destroying America from within? The terrorists have done their part--they've created a situation that ignited the greed, corruption, and opportunism of the Bush/Cheney administration. Now all they have to do is sit back and watch America collapse from within. That's why we haven't been attacked. Experts of every stripe dispute the claim that torture is an effective tool against terrorism, but even if it were partially effective, torture is against international law, and in direct contradiction of everything American stands for. The United States was not only a party to, but was a leader in hunting down, trying, and executing war criminals for indulging in that very same practice. But even if we accepted Cheney’s position in this matter, how far should we go? If it’s all right to torture a detainee to protect America, would we be just as justified in waterboarding the detainee’s seven year-old daughter to get the detainee to talk–or what about placing her head in a vice? If not, why not--wouldn’t that also be justified in the name of protecting America? The reason we don't do such things is because such a practice would spell the total destruction of America as we know it. Once we go down that slippery slop, there’s no end to it. There are many who would say that American citizens who smoke weed are a threat to America. Should we torture them as well? The problem with the Dick Cheneys of the world is that they fail to recognize that America is much more than a place on the map–it’s also an ideal. If the people of this nation picked up and moved to the North Pole, the North Pole would become America, because our American values would come right along with us. Conversely, if we desert those ideals, regardless to where we happen to be located, we’re no longer Americans. The ideals that Cheney espouse would feel much more at home in Nazi Germany, or Stalinist Russia. The day that America embraces them, will be the day the terrorists can declare victory over the United States. America has begun to realize that fact. As a result, the nation is in the midst of a new awakening that has left Cheney, Limbaugh, and much of the GOP leadership with their proverbial pants down. That’s why the GOP is in such a flux, and all we hear from them is one resounding no–to everything. That’s all they can say, because due to the GOP’s heavy reliance on wingnuts, social bigots, and various other extremists, they’re now completely locked in with the Cheneys and Limbaughs of the world. That’s their only means of support. At this point, the closest parallel to the GOP position with respect to Cheney and Limbaugh would be having to stand as a character reference for Charles Manson because your family was being held hostage. But it couldn’t have happened to a more deserving group of people. It’s next to impossible to feel sorry for the GOP because they’re getting exactly what hypocrites, demagogues, and social manipulators deserve. They've slipped in their own feces. Now, after basing their entire political careers on false patriotism, it’s going be pure hell trying to explain to their constituents why they supported two draft dodgers--Rush Limbaugh (a racist gasbag who avoided his military obligation by declaring a boil on his butt), and Dick Cheney (who had five deferments and indicated that "I had other priorities" when asked why he avoided the service)-- over Colin Powell (a decorated war hero, a Four Star General, former Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff, and Sec. of State). Neither of these two draft dodgers think Gen. Colin Powell deserves to be called a Republican. Well, I guess you can find an area of agreement with anyone, because at this point, neither do I. Eric L. Wattree wattree.blogspot.com A moderate is one who embraces truth over ideology, and reason over conflict.

Sphere: Related Content

Carrie Prejean: Are Progressives Becoming as Intolerant as Conservatives?

BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE Carrie Prejean: Are Progressives Becoming as Intolerant as Conservatives? I've always been proud to consider myself a progressive, because being a progressive meant that I was open-minded, willing to assess every issue on its own merit, and I'm tolerant of varying points of view. But it seems that many of today's "progressives" have corrupted the term. Though many of these people call themselves progressives, they are not progressive thinkers–they are progressive in name only. Over the years they seem to have somehow lost their way, and as a result, have managed to redefined the term "progressive" to simply mean, not conservative. A case in point is the unconscionable way in which the so-called progressive community has demonized Carrie Prejean after she indicated, almost apologetically during the Miss America Pageant, that she thought marriage should be between a man and a woman. Why in the world did she say that?!! Thereafter, she was called a bitch, seminude photos of her have been posted on the Internet, and she's been generally, dragged through the mud. It is unbelievable that people who call themselves progressive could do that to that young woman. While I 'm in total disagreement with her views on same-sex marriage, those are her views, and she has every right to them. She didn't try to shove her point of view down America's throat; she was specifically asked whether SHE thought same-sex marriage should be legalized. And she and she responded– quite honestly, diplomatically, and in my opinion, quite courageously, that she didn't. Then the judge, Perez, I think his name was, taped a video on Youtube calling her "a dumb bitch." So I ask you, what kind of progressive thinker can take the position that a person doesn't have a right to their own views? Perez even went so far as to dictate how Ms. Prejean SHOULD have answered the question. Who the Hell is he to tell a person what they should think? People like, Perez, is more damaging to their cause than they are helpful, because in many cases, it's not the issue that people are against, they just don't like the people who represent the issue. I agree with Perez on this issue, but I don't like him. So if I was on the fence regarding same-sex marriage, I'd vote against it–not against the issue, but against him, and I'm certain that many progressive issues are being voted down for that very reason. The American Heritage Dictionary defines a progressive as "A person who actively favors or strives for progress toward better conditions, as in society or government." Granted, Ms. Prejean's attitude toward same-sex marriage is far less than progressive, but she never claimed to be a progressive. She said she was a Christian, so there's nothing unusual for her to adhere to a belief system that she's been taught all of her life. On the other hand, however, for so-called progressives to denigrate this young lady as though she doesn't have a right to her private opinion, nor religious beliefs, is far more destructive to society and backward thinking, than anything that she's ever publicly uttered, at least to my knowledge--and such a position is certainly not a progressive point of view. Many of the people who call themselves progressives today seem to have been infected by what old-school progressives considered their most ardent foe and the most pernicious bane on society--intolerance. It's no longer good enough to say that gays and lesbians should be afforded equal rights and be allowed to marry like anyone else in our society, now it is required that everyone must enthusiastically embrace that position–in spite of their religious beliefs, and even in their private thoughts. And it's no longer good enough to say that women deserve equal rights in the workplace, now, any woman who chooses to be a full-time mother and homemaker is considered a turncoat to the feminist movement, and "unenlightened." And please don't let a woman use her femininity in the workplace to get ahead–just as men use their masculinity on a daily basis–she's immediately demonized. In fact, I'm virtually certain that Ms. Prejean's feminine beauty is playing a large part in her demonization. And the irony is, such demonization is often led by other women. Due to our leftist indoctrination, they fail to realize that's the very worst kind of sexual discrimination. They've allowed themselves to be convinced that the only way a woman can truly validate herself as being a worthy individual is to prove that she can be just like a man. A similar mindset is reflected in the Black community. Many Blacks feel like the only way that they can validate themselves is by proving how "White" they can be. Both assumptions are silly, premised on backward thinking, and are highly derogatory to what it means to be a woman, and/or, a Black person. Both President and First Lady Obama are excellent examples of the fact that you have to abandon neither your heritage nor your femininity to embrace excellence. Thus, in this progressive's opinion, such thinking is the very height of ignorance. In fact, it's laying the groundwork for a new kind of latter-day conservatism. After all, it is not so much what Rush Limbaugh and the GOP leadership think that is so insidious, it's their belief that no one should be allowed to disagree with them. And any so-called progressives who share that mindset not only validate Limbaugh's point of view, but are in fact, conservatives themselves. The only difference between them and Limbaugh is that they're conservative regarding a different set of issues. They even share the conservative trait of hypocrisy. A true progressive recognizes that the most important characteristic of any free and viable society is tolerance. They clearly understand that the only difference between the old U.S.S.R. and Nazi Germany was one was led by lift-wing radicals and the other by right-wing reactionaries. But in spite of that, they had more in common than they had that set them apart–they were both dictatorships, they were both oppressive, and like every dictatorship, they were both intolerant of individual beliefs. The very same dynamic is at work, though to a much lesser degree, in this country. Thus, progressives must always remain cognizant of the fact that we corner the market on neither wisdom, intellect, nor morality. Therefore, once we begin to give priority to dogma over independent thought, we cease being progressives, and become just another group of fanatical wingnuts--like Perez Hilton.  Eric L. Wattree wattree.blogspot.com A moderate is one who embraces truth over ideology, and reason over conflict.

Sphere: Related Content

Accountability: America’s Moral Responsibility to Humanity

BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE Accountability: America's Moral Responsibility to Humanity Eight years of Republican "leadership" has left America both economically devastated, and globally humiliated. Yet, far from apologizing for the damage that they've done to the stability and image of this great nation, instead, they've circled their wagons and gone into damage control mode–not to control the damage that they've done to the nation, but in an attempt to rewrite history in order to control the damage that they've done to themselves. So now, as President Obama goes about the business of desperately trying to return America to its former position of economic stability at home, and respect, admiration, and moral authority abroad, the GOP leadership seems to be completely oblivious to the nation's desperate and immediate need for a concerted effort in that regard. They're like clueless children who find it impossible to see the big picture. Thus, at this point it has become abundantly clear that their primary concern is not with restoring America to a sound footing in the world, but rather, simply restoring themselves to power at any cost. This situation points out the wisdom of always seeking to draw something of value from every adversity, and in this case, we should seek enlightenment. In spite of the fact that virtually everyone in the Bush administration managed to avoid serving this nation in uniform (Bush went AWOL, and Cheney obtained five (5) deferments), the GOP has somehow managed to pre-empt and wrap themselves in the glorious vestments of patriotism. But this current situation should teach us a valuable lesson in that regard–never go by what people say; always go by what they do. And what are they doing--while the American people are experiencing the kind of suffering that this country hasn't seen since the Great Depression, and the United States has become the "Dick Cheney" of the world, the GOP's one and only concern is how they can regain power. Is that patriotism? I don't think so. There's only one word to describe this current batch of Republican wingnuts--and you have to go outside the English language to find it--hutzpah. They've left this nation's global standing at its lowest ebb ever, and they've also left us much less safe. But in spite of that, Sean Hannity and FOX news have seen fit to trot out Dick Cheney to lecture President Obama on national governance and world affairs. What Makes these people think that anyone is interested in listening to anything this guy has to say? The vice president of the Crips has a higher approval rating than Dick Cheney, so they can have but one motive--to create division and disseminate propaganda. But Hannity's time would have been better spent holding a seance, then conjuring up the spirit of John Wayne Gacy to give us a lecture on child rearing. It couldn't have been any less productive, but at least there would have been an entertainment factor involved. Then you have Karl Rove trying to imply that President Obama is turning America into a banana republic. When I first heard him, the word "stupid" immediately came to mind. Either Rove is stupid, or he thinks the American people are complete fools. Now, think about it. Wasn't Karl Rove a major part of the very administration that lied us into war, illegally invaded a sovereign state, sent our troops off to war without the proper equipment to keep themselves alive, then made them pay for their own meals while lying wounded in the hospital, then looted the nation's treasury and resources, setup no-bid contracts to enrich their cronies, spied on their own citizens, and as we speak, are now trying to convince America that torture and all of the things listed above are ok, so that Bush, Cheney–and their entire crowd-- won't be prosecuted for war crimes, defrauding the American people, and the senseless waste of human life for personal gain? If I'm not mistaken, I think Karl Rove was indeed a major part of all that. So who looks, sounds, and behaves more like tinhorn dictators? Thus, before Rove starts pointing his finger at President Obama, he needs to smell it first. As a direct result of the greed, poor judgment, and self-service of these people, instead of focusing our efforts on the Pakistan/Afghanistan border where Osama Bin Laden and the others who planned and executed the Nine-Eleven attack on America were in hiding, they went to Iraq and began to tortured innocent detainees–not to protect America, but in an attempt to justify the lies they were telling the American people in order to steal Iraqi oil, enrich themselves, and loot this nation of the necessary resources to fund the New Deal programs that they couldn't attack legislatively. Now, as a direct result of that flawed judgment, we have the Taliban a mere sixty miles away from a nuclear armed Pakistan. So I don't know about the rest of America, but to me, Dick Cheney and Karl Rove's claim of keeping us safe is sounding pretty ridiculous about now. Thus, to even consider "moving on" without prosecuting these people is out of the question. If we simply turned the page on this matter, we become accessories to their war crimes. In addition, we cannot allow them to just walk away from placing the survival of this nation–and indeed, the world--in serious jeopardy. And further, if we are fortunate enough to survive this unmitigated episode of irresponsibility, we need to send an unmistakably graphic message to the next group of budding demagogues, who they've undoubtedly planted throughout the government. If Nixon had gone to prison for Watergate, and Reagan had become his cellmate for selling arms to Iran, we wouldn't be going through what we're going through right now. And finally, we have a moral responsibility to the world. A nation cannot just turn the page after its leaders have committed war crimes and are responsible for the slaughter and/or displacement of a million people. That page won't turn without the offending nation engaging in aggressive corrective action. If it were any other nation, the United States would demand accountability, so we can demand nothing less of ourselves. I know--they're simply wingnut Republiclowns, but their behavior in office was much more than a meaningless prank. Just because we put up with them, doesn't mean that the world should have to. After all, we even carry a pooper scooper for our pets. Trying to walk away from the atrocities of the past seven years would be like defecating and then trying to walk away without cleaning ourselves. We'd have to walk wide-legged and very uncomfortably, throughout the rest of history. Eric L. Wattree wattree.blogspot.com A moderate is one who embraces truth over ideology, and reason over conflict.

Sphere: Related Content

Meet Caesar: The New, Greatest Singer in the World

BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE Meet Caesar: The New, Greatest Singer in the World It was about 3 a.m. In the morning, and I found myself, as I am prone to do at that secluded hour, strollin' down the laid back and funky avenues of The Jazz Network. I love that place. It's the kind of place where if you're a jazz lover, you'll immediately feel like you're among family and friends. It's a virtual city, and it's only reason for being is as a monument to jazz. One minute you're accompanied down its soulful avenues by Buster Williams, with his slow, swaggerin' bass lines struttin' along beside you, then you turn the corner, and there's Buddy Rich and his big band tryin' to blow all the windows out the joint–it's a true oasis of jazz in this vast wasteland of contemporary mediocrity. As I strolled awash in musical bliss through its various nooks and crannies, I suddenly began to hear the first few bars of "I Wish You Love." I immediately stopped in my tracks, because even in this rarified musical environment, the beautiful melody of that hauntingly gorgeous tune was being caressed by a voice that literally took my breath away. While I hate to use such an unhip and overworked adjective, breathtaking is the only word appropriate to describe my reaction to its mellow, yet velvet tones. It was a finely tune instrument in perfect pitch, with the beauty, phrasing and diction of Nat King Cole. Yet, it was also reminiscent of Jesse Belvin, Johnny Mathis, and Sam Fletcher, and with the slightly muffled, airy sound of Luther Vandross, that made the heart say, "hush"–and it all came together to create a sound that was uniquely, and beautifully, its very own. So I immediately knew that I was dealing with immortality in the making, so naturally I stopped to investigate. The voice belonged to a confident, yet unassuming young man known simply, but appropriately, as Caesar. Appropriate, because just like his namesake, he was clearly sent to Earth as a conqueror. I've been a jazz fan every since I slipped out of the womb, so I'm intimately familiar with all of the material output of the great, and the near great–and in my humble, but highly informed opinion, Caesar is beyond great. This young man is one of those talents that come around maybe once or twice in a hundred years–and only then, if we're extremely lucky. Even at this point, so early in his career, I wouldn't hesitate to put him in the company of Nat King Cole, Jesse Belvin, Ella Fitzgerald, and Sarah Vaughan. While I realize that's a mighty tall order for him to live up to, true greatness doesn't require a runway–Picasso was born Picasso, he didn't require a learning curve, and so it is with this young man. Caesar, like Nat, Ella, and Sarah Vaughan, is one of those rare people that's clearly dripping with greatness from the moment they, in many cases, stumble upon their calling (Ella wanted to be a dancer). From the very moment they're born, the writing is on the wall–it's all about greatness, just waiting to happen. While I'm quite hesitant to insert myself into this piece, as a writer I recognize that there's an obvious question just screaming to be addressed–who am I to make all of these grandiose assertions? What credentials do I have to take it upon myself to single-handedly bestow greatness upon anyone? My answer to that is short and sweet–I was born with legendary ears. When I was twelve years old and my friends were still singing nursery rhymes, I was listening to Charlie Parker, Thelonious Monk, and Dexter Gordon. My mother was quite concerned, because she was afraid that I was following in my father's footsteps–and I thank God every day that she was right. He's was also what she called "a jazz fanatic," and she was convinced that was what led to many of the problems in his life, which we won't get into here. By the time I was fourteen, my father used to take great pride in buying new jazz albums and impressing his friends by calling me into the room and having me listen, then tell his friends who the musicians were that was playing on the various tunes. He used to win money that way, until his friends got hip to me. It was a piece of cake–I could tell them who was playing before the record got to the bridge of the first tune. His friends would be amazed, while I'd walk away wondering how they could call themselves jazz fans and not be able to recognize the piano of Bud Powell when they heard him. So I'll put my ears up against anybody who ever lived, and I'm telling you, my ears tell me that Caesar is not only great, but he's destined to become among the greatest of the greats. And there's another thing that struck me about this young man--he's not just all music. He's multi-dimensional and highly intelligent. Born Irvin R. Caesar in Chicago, Il in 1965. He attended Percy L. Julian High School, where he played guitar in the jazz band. At the same time, he played football, basketball, and baseball. The football team won three Chicago city championships, and he was captain of the team his senior year. After graduation, he went on to play Outside Linebacker for Southern University in Baton Rouge, La., where he also received a degree in Business Management. Inheriting a sense of purpose from his father, also name Irvin Caesar--who was a political activist during the sixties, and worked closely with Vice President Hubert H. Humphry--after obtaining his degree, young Caesar went on to work first, as a Procurement Officer and then Operations Manager for American Manufactures in Houston, Texas. They provided humanitarian assistance to over 40 countries around the world. Then he went to Islamabad, Pakistan as a contractor for the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). He worked to provided humanitarian assistance to Afghan rebels, who were then at war with the Soviet Union. To our benefit, this young man's intelligence, background, and depth of experience didn't go to waste. You can hear every drop of his intellect, compassion, and commitment to humanity literally dripping from every note he sings. You don't simply hear this young man, you experience him. Ironically, Caesar was born the very same year that Nat King Cole died. So while I've never been one to wax metaphysical, I dedicate this piece to a new old friend. Because as I listen to this young man's velvet tones, I can't help but wonder if perhaps, Nat decided, that he wasn't quite done yet. Eric L. Wattree wattree.blogspot.com April 17, 2009 Pain is the mother of enlightenment--and she's married to adversity.

Sphere: Related Content

GOP Underestimates Conservative America

BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE GOP Underestimates Conservative America While President Obama is going about his valiant and statesman-like attempt to rescue America and restore our image at home and abroad, the GOP's politics as usual, diehard operatives are acting like spoiled brats determined to undermine the president's–and America's–effort. But in their blind attempt to regain power they seem to have forgotten one important fact–the vast majority of true conservatives are fiercely loyal Americans, and don't share their view of power at any cost. While conservatives have a vastly different view from liberals regarding the policies that make America great, the two groups have one very important thing in common–both groups understand that even as we indulge in our sibling rivalry, we are all Americans. America is a family, which means the viability of our nation and proud American traditions must come first. But many of the wingnuts on both the right and the left have long since lost sight of that very fundamental principle. They've allowed what was once a healthy sibling rivalry to escalate into a hatred within the American family that supercedes the viability of America itself. That is unacceptable, and it is exactly that mindset that has led directly to the crises that the nation faces today. In their wisdom, however, the American people decided to put an end to it. That's why we have radicals on the left, calling President Obama a sellout, and reactionaries on the right, calling him a socialist. But the fact is, President Obama is a true mainstream American that the American people have sent to Washington to put an end to this childish bickering. President Obama is neither liberal nor is he a conservative, he's a progressive--and while the terms liberal and progressive are often used interchangeably, there's a big difference. Both liberals and conservatives are people who have, by definition, surrendered their independent thought to the exigencies of political ideology. On the other hand, a progressive is an independent thinker who recognizes that truth and wisdom, more often not, is neither black nor white–it generally resides in the grey. A clear example of that is the liberal tendency to promote the idea that a "progressive tax" is a system where people who make less money should pay a lesser percentage of their income in taxes than people who make more. That's complete nonsense, unjust, and therefore not progressive thinking. A true progressive supports public policies that are fair to all, and recognizes that justice is blind, therefore, caters to neither race, creed, sex, nor social or economic status. True progressives understand that it is just as unjust to discriminate against the privileged as it is the poor. Egalitarian principles dictate that everyone pay the exact same percentage of their income in taxes--that, is progressive taxation. The argument that it won't work because it won't bring in enough revenue, is a meaningless argument to a true progressive, because progressive thinking dictates that convenience has nothing to do with what is just. On the other hand, fiscal conservatives argue that the national doctrine of freedom of expression dictates that corporations should be allowed to send lobbyist to Washington with pockets full of money to lobby and influence congressional legislation. That's also ridiculous. Corporations are not citizens, so a citizen's right to petition government is not an inalienable right required to be extended to corporations. When citizens incorporate a business they are relieved of much of their personal liabilities, therefore, when acting as a corporate entity, they must sacrifice many of the rights that they enjoy as private citizens. Thus, if the nation wouldadhered to common sense in addressing national issues rather than allowing public policy to be dictated by radical wingnuts and special interests, the gains that we would acquire as a direct result would allow everyone to prosper and be treated fairly. If tax payers didn't have to foot the bill every time some corporate big wig took his girlfriend to a power lunch or bought a Mercedes and wrote it off as a business expense, we'd have enough revenue to treat every American taxpayer equally. It would also take a wedge issue off the table that political demagogues use to divide us–after all, many fiscally conservative Republicans are socially progressive, so an evenhanded taxation policy would make them much less apt to align themselves with social bigots. Contrary to what some would have us believe, all conservatives are not self-serving bigots. The election of President Obama makes it clear that many registered Republicans understood that in spite of party and personal interest, President Obama was uniquely qualified to lead this nation at this moment in our history. They didn't see his Black skin as a deficit. On the contrary, they saw Barack Obama's diverse background as an asset, so they set their personal interest and idology aside, put America first. They should be honored for that, instead of dragged through the mud with GOP demagogues. These people understood that Obama's Black skin allowed him to understand what it meant to be Black and poor in America. They also understood that being the product of an immigrant father, he fully understood the challenges and hardships of millions of immigrants across this land. It was clear to these conservatives that after having lived all over the world, and even enjoying the benefits of differing cultures within his own family, that Barack Obama had a unique understanding of the mindset and views held towards America by other people and cultures throughout the world. They also recognized that after being raised and loved by White Americans in the very heartland of this nation, that he also understood the needs, fears, and aspirations of middle American. And finally, they recognized that he's a brilliant intellectual and constitutional scholar, whose knowledge of America and American traditions would dwarf nearly any president in the history of this nation. So in spite of all of the divisive rhetoric served up by the GOP hatemongers, these conservatives said, while I don't entirely agree with his philosophy of governance, I going to support him, because he's right for America at this point in our history. They deserve recognition for that, because unlike the Limbaugh wingnuts, and liberals of every stripe, it was the ideological sacrifice of those conservatives that led directly to the election of Barack Obama as President of the United States. Therefore, as progressives, let us not make the mistake of gloating in the face of these people, because while liberals and progressives turned out in larger numbers, no group in America has made a greater sacrifice to ensure that Barack Obama is sitting in the White House today. Progressives should also learn from President Obama, and not confuse all conservatives with GOP wingnuts. Listen to the words of Charles, a true conservative, at the link below, and begin to understand that it is not conservatism that is the enemy. Limbaugh told this conservative caller that he was not a Republican, he was one of the stupid people that allowed President Obama to be elected. Limbaugh was right in one respect, the man is not a Republican, at least, as Limbaugh defines Republicanism, but neither is he stupid--he's a loyal, conservative American. I take great pride in coming to the defense of this man. He said that he was a former Marine, and so am I, so it comes naturally. Limbaugh told him that he didn't know diddley squat, but unlike Limbaugh and his kind, Charles does know what it means to come to the defense of America. As a former Marine, I've known such men. He's of the very same breed that left their families and marched off to die, to defeat slavery.    Eric L. Wattree wattree.blogspot.com A moderate is one who embraces truth over ideology, and reason over conflict.

Sphere: Related Content

Bishop Joe Simon Sings the Blues Over Rappers and Ministry

BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE

Bishop Joe Simon Sings the Blues Over Rappers and Ministry.
I call this column "Beneath the Spin" because it's dedicated to an honest search for truth, an attempt to stimulate thought, and an earnest effort to clear up the trough of pure bullshit served up to us on a daily basis. I generally deal with political demagogues in this context, but due to our current economic crisis I'm going to expand my attention to anything that doesn't smell quite right–and the fumes emanating from my current focus, seriously suggests that demagoguery is far from exclusive to Washington D.C.

While I'm normally not one to defend the rap industry, I have several problems with a claim being levied against it by former rhythm and blues singer, and now ordained bishop, Joe Simon. Bishop Simon is complaining that rappers are destroying his ministry by sampling his material.

In the article, "Bishop Joe Simon Says Rappers Damaging Ministry," in Frost Illustrated, Simon alleged that as a result of rappers sampling his music without his permission, "he started noticing that certain once seemingly open churches were starting to baulk at inviting him to bring his crusade to their pulpits. Some even rescinded speaking invitations they earlier had issued to the bishop." Simon went on to say, "Many churches want no part of preachers whom they feel are straddling the fence between secular and sacred worlds." That seems somewhat disingenuous since one would think that any misunderstanding within the church could easily be cleared up with a simple memo or statement.

The article also points out that "Since near the beginning of the year, Simon said he has sent the record company a series of letters asking that someone talk to him and to work out an agreement." What kind of agreement? You can't un-cook an egg. What kind of 'agreement,' could he come to with the record companies that would un-release music that's already on the market? The only agreement that he can possibly come to is a financial one–and how would a financial agreement help his standing in the church any more than a simple memo or statement that his previous material was being used without his permission?

This is not about his ministry–what needs to be addressed is whether or not this is actually his material. If Simon has legal ownership of the material, why is he trying to chase down record executives instead of hiring an attorney? The obvious conclusion is, he's trying to use God to be compensated for something that he has no legal right to.

The article goes on to point out that "In the wake of more and more folks hearing his voice on rap records, Bishop Simon said some folks seem to be shying away from supporting the ministry financially." Yet, Dr. Mark H. Sandilands, the presiding Bishop of the Mission Consortium of Churches International indicated that "When Bishop Simon was ordained as a part of this organization, he was placed right next to me. If something were to happened to me, he becomes presiding bishop overnight."

Oh really? I find it quite curious that a religious organization that is so disdainful of "worldly music" that it would withdraw support and speaking engagements, would place a "worldly musician" who is newly ordained into the organization into the second to the top slot in the organization's hierarchy. Thus, the church must find something of value in worldly music.

I can fully understand Bishop Simon being frustrated by people making millions of dollars while using his material and then thumbing their nose at him. But if that's the case, he should just say so, and stop trying to use his collar to drag God into what is essentially a personal and legal matter. The congregation of his church looks up to him and have vested in him a solemn trust, so he shouldn't be abusing that trust by trying to make the very God that they worship his private lap dog, utilized to address his personal issues. That's the kind of thinking that led to hundreds of thousands of people dying in Iraq, and what the facts seem to suggests, to a much lesser degree, but just as insidiously, is happening in this case.

That's the primary reason this issue is even worth our attention. It provides us with a bite size example of the mindset and kind of rhetoric in which people of faith should always remain vigilant. It clearly demonstrates how some so-called "men of God" often use the Lord's name to promote their own interests. It also shows why the many selfless men and women of God who are out struggling everyday to uphold God's name, are gradually beginning to lose credibility with the public.

In addition, Bishop Simon's actions in this matter are in direct contradiction to everything a man of God, and a Christian, is supposed to believe. Instead of trying to chase down record executives, why doesn't he do what they always tell their flock do about their problems–"take it to the Lord in prayer?"

Even though in many of the churches throughout America there are children sitting in the pews next to their parents with their stomachs growling, many of these professed men of God will unhesitatingly take the very funds needed to feed those children away from the family in the collection plate. Then, when it comes to the family's needs, they tell the family to have faith, and pray to God for help to feed their children. What has always perplexed me, however, is when the preacher needs money to pay the church's light bill, or for airfare and hotel expenses to fly across the country to go preach in another state, or "spread the word"–in states that are already literally overflowing with preachers–they don't pray for God to provide the airfare, or pay the light bill, they pass the collection plate.

Well, Bishop Simon, you're a man of God. Maybe it's about time to test your faith. Instead of wasting your time trying to chase down Jay-Z with your problems, maybe you should look to Jay-C, and pray on it.

As Rev. E. V. Hill used to say when I was a kid–"If you have the faith, God has the power"–but you also have to be right.

Eric L. Wattree
wattree.blogspot.com
A moderate is one who embraces truth over ideology, and reason over conflict.

Sphere: Related Content

The Building of a Jazz Man

Beneath the Spin * Eric L. Wattree

The Building of a Jazz Man 
. 

There are two things in this world that allow me to remain sane–writing and music. I’d be in absolute agony if I ever had to choose one over the other, because they are one–one is an extension of the other. Each in its own way allow me to express a part of my being. There are some concepts that I can only express in words, in which case, I sit down and begin to write; but there are other things that spring from a place so deep within my soul--the pain of loss, deception, or of being disappointed by a friend or loved one, for example--that it can only be expressed through raw emotion, which means my horn--it's cathartic. So I’d be completely remiss if I didn’t mention such an important part of my life in the context of this written interview.
.
The saxophone keeps me connected to my roots, and who I am fundamentally, so it contributes to my writing in that way as well. Sometimes when I get on my high horse and begin to speak the superficial language of the Washington pundits or the mainstream media, I simply have to glance at my horn to remember why I started writing in the first place–to present the views of those who are too often overlooked. In fact, it reminds me that I’m much more of a translator than I am a writer.  I seek to translate the emotional truths that Bird, Miles,Trane, and others set forth in their harmonic and melodic constructions into readable prose. As I mentioned above, that’s not always possible, but my horn keeps me in touch with my mission, and it reminds me to remain focused on doing the best I can in that respect.
.

My father put that horn in my hands when I was a kid. While he had many flaws (one of my first memories in life was of the police coming to my house in the middle of the night, shooting my dog, and dragging him off to the penitentiary), but at his core, he was a good man, a loving father, and a jazz fanatic. For him, the Sun only rose in the morning so it could keep Charlie Parker's reeds warm. So he wasn’t able to give me much, but what he did give me turned out to be one of the most potent and enduring forces in my life.
.
I’ll never forget the day he gave me that horn. It was on a Sunday morning. He opened the case, and there it was, smiling at me for the very first time, with its pearly-white keypads and glistening gold body gleaming in the sunlight against the deep blue felt lining of its case. Even now, I can remember my excitement as the newness of it’s smell filled my young nostrils.
.
But to my surprise, he also brought Jimmy home with him - for what, I didn’t know. Jimmy was the neighborhood’s quintessential dope fiend and general substance abuser. Thus, to my even greater surprise, it turned out that he had brought Jimmy home to teach me to play the saxophone. I was very doubtful that Jimmy could teach anyone to do anything but shoot dope, toss back a pint or two and nod, but I wasn’t worried about that at the time - I just couldn’t wait for him to put that horn together.
.
It seemed like it took him forever to extract the pad-saver and adjust the reed on the mouthpiece. Then they finally put the strap around my neck. Jimmy showed me where to place my fingers, and then I blew my first official note on the saxophone, and I got one of the most horrifically agonizing sounds out of that horn that ANYONE has ever heard. It made my mother jump up out of bed and run into the living room yelling, "What is going on in here!"
.
I became immediately frustrated, because I just couldn’t figure out how something that was so beautiful could produce such a horrible sound. Then my father said, "Wait a minute, son. Jimmy, show him how this thing is supposed to sound."
.
Jimmy, as I mentioned before, was not only a dope fiend, but over the years he had degenerated into an extremely unkempt drunk as well. He had become the kind of person who was completely dismissed by even the most down-on-their-luck adults, and the kids used to like to play practical jokes on him when we found him nodded-out somewhere in the neighborhood. And I'm now ashamed to say that I was one of the most prolific and abusive of the bunch. But when Jimmy put that horn into his mouth and began to play "Round Midnight," he became a different person. Now he was in his element - Jimmy was in command. All of the disappointments and humiliations in life slipped under his fingers and out the bell of that horn as some of the most beautiful licks that I’d ever heard before or since.
.
Even as a kid I could see the confidence, the focus, and knowledge reflected in his eyes. I could see the young Jimmy. I could see all of his hopes and dreams that seems to have gone astray. And to this day, I have never heard ANYBODY play "Round Midnight" with such passion and ease of facility, and I’ve heard it played by some of the greatest saxophone players who has ever lived, but not one of them has been able to touch me in the spot that Jimmy reached that Sunday morning of my youth. And this was playing cold, on a brand new saxophone, and he probably hadn’t touched a horn in years - and not to mention he was loaded (one of the last times I ever saw him in that condition, by the way).
.
When Jimmy was done, my father told me, in his typically graphic and offhand way, "Now, I want you to hang on to this horn like it’s your momma’s tiddy, and you’ll never be broke or alone." Then he looked over at Jimmy and added, "unless you start shootin’ that shit." I followed my father’s advice, and his words have turned out to be prophetic. But actually, after watching the transformation in Jimmy when he picked up that horn, my father didn’t have to say another word.
.
So even as I respond to this interview, and speak of my love for the written word, a lifelong friend sits in its stand with that same beautiful smile that first greeted me as a child. The beauty of its song is a constant reminder that the written word is only one part of my life. Unlike a corporeal being, its only reason for existence is to carry out the blessing of a long departed father upon his son. But much like a sensuously flawless and indulgent woman, it waits patiently, still gleaming in the sunlight with its glistening keys and curvaceous body, as though longing for my loving and passionate embrace.
.

So thank you, Jimmy, for pulling your life together long enough to give me one. This one's for you, my man:

.

.

A SWINGIN’ AFFAIR

I 
was told as a child 
Blacks had no worth,
Not a nickel’s worth of dimes.
I believed that myth 
‘Til Dex rode in
With his ax 
In double time.

His 
horn was soarin’,
The changes flyin’,
His rhythm right on time;
My heart 
Beat with the pleasure 
Of new found pride, 
Knowing,
His blood 
Flowed through mine.

Dex 
Took the chords 
The keyboard played,
And danced around each note;
Then shuffled ‘em 
Like a deck of cards,
And didn’t miss a stroke.

B minor 7 with flatted 5th,
a half diminished chord,
He substituted a lick in D,
Then really began to soar.

He tipped his hat 
To Charlie Parker,
and quoted 
Trane with Miles,
Then paid his homage to 
Thelonious Monk,
In Charlie Rouse’s style.

He took 
a Scrapple From The Apple,
Then went to Billie’s Bounce,
The rhythm section, now on fire,
But he didn’t budge an ounce.

He just
dug right in 
to shuffle again,
This time
A Royal Flush,
Then lingered a bit 
Behind the beat,
Still smokin’
But in no rush.

Then he
doubled the time
just like this rhyme,
in fluid 16th notes,
tellin’
Charlie and Lester,
“your baby boy, Dexter’s,
on top of the 
bebop you wrote.”

Wailin’ 
like a banshee,
this prince of saxophone,
His ballads dripped of honey, 
His Arpeggios were strong.

Callin’ on his idles,
Ghost of Pres’ 
within in the isles,
smiling at his protege, 
At the peak of this new style.

His tenor
Drenched of Blackness,
And all the things we are–
Of pain, and pleasure, 
And creative greatness
Until his final bar.

 

Eric L. Wattree

Http://wattree.blogspot.com

Ewattree@Gmail.com

Citizens Against Reckless Middle-Class Abuse (CARMA)

Religious bigotry: It's not that I hate everyone who doesn't look, think, and act like me - it's just that God does.

Sphere: Related Content

U.S. Postal Service: We Deliver? Please!

November 1, 2007
Mr. Bill Almaraz, Manager, Los Angeles District
Mr. James Smith, Postmaster, Los Angeles District
.

Gentlemen:

.

As I’m sure you know, I’ve work as a Consumer Advocate for over eight years now. During that time I have had occasion to contact you both on serious matters of customer neglect. Mr. Smith, you have generally returned polite responses and assured me that you were going to handle the matter. Mr. Almaraz, I’ve never received any response from you–not even an acknowledgment of receipt.
.

Over the years I’ve become increasingly disturbed over some of the hardships that our customer’s have been forced to endure–Cancer patients whose medication has been lost in the mail; elderly people who can’t eat because their Social Security checks are not being received; tenants who have had eviction proceedings initiated against them because their landlords didn’t receive their rent checks; and court documents being delayed or lost due to the improper handling of Certified mail, etc.
.

I’ve repeatedly brought these matters to the attention of you or various managers lower in the chain of command, but instead of putting your energies into addressing the problems with the mail, the agency seems to view me as the problem for bring them up.
Mr. Smith, on Wednesday October 31, 2007 I wrote you the following memo:
.

Mr. Smith,

.

Some of your supervisors don’t recognize the importance of good customer service, or following up on complaints. It’s not only making us look bad, but it’s going to generate congressional complaints. [Name withheld] and I watched one of them standing around talking while she was repeatedly being paged to the window to speak with a customer. She ignored the pages for 15 minutes, until the customer got tired of waiting and left. There’s very little I can do about that kind of irresponsibility, but I would like your permission to put the following notation on issues not being followed up on:
.

HOT SHEET

.

I have followed up on this matter by adding this complaint to the Postmaster’s Hot Sheet (on red paper to make the complaint immediately conspicuous). A copy has been attached to the carrier case, and I have either given a copy of this complaint directly to the unit supervisor or left a copy on the supervisor’s desk. A copy has also been emailed to the unit supervisor. In addition, I have requested that the customer contact me immediately if the problem should recur, in which case, the matter will be referred to the postmaster for further corrective action.
.

Thereafter, if the problem continues, I’d like to refer the matter to Beverly Young to act in your name, if she doesn’t mind. If we don’t do something, Waxman’s going to close this place down.

.

Wattree
.

Thereafter, all hell broke loose. I didn’t have a problem with that in itself, because as you know, I’ve never had a problem with speaking truth to power, but it did confirm my suspicion that the problems that we’re having with the mail goes much deeper than simple incompetence. It has become abundantly clear that the district is purposely allowing our customers to suffer in order to save money–and I’m not going to allow that to happen.

.

As I mentioned to you before, week after week I rant and rave in my column about how congress is sitting on its hands and allowing our country to go down the drain. Now, if I don’t take some kind of action about what this agency is doing to our customers, I’ll be doing the same thing–and I can’t be that kind of hypocrite. So I am respectfully requesting that you take the following actions to improve our customer service:
.

1) First of all, Supervisor [name withheld] disregard for our customers has been grossly unconscionable, and I’ve spoken to you about her before. In addition to the latest incident where she ignored the customer in the lobby, she consistently leaves between 12 and 17 routes vacant per day to be thrown up by hook or crook instead of putting them up for opt or calling in additional carriers to cover them. Some routes, along with their business mail, don’t leave the station until after 4:00 pm. This results in routes not being delivered, mis-deliveries, mail not being forwarded, and mail not being held, or delivered when the customer’s return from vacation. She’s been doing this for years, and it constitutes gross negligence and a severe hardship on our customers. This supervisor should be either put up for removal, or at the very least, demoted.

.

2). All routes that are open for over 5 business days should be put up for opt, or fully assigned to an employee. And no unit should have over four routes unassigned on any given day. That will ensure the proper processing of the mail.

.
3). All accountable mail (including Certified) should be listed and signed for individually. That will ensure proper handling and prevent the loss of important mail.
.

4) .All Certified mail should be listed and distributed on a daily basis, to prevent Certified mail from sitting around the station for two to three weeks.

.
5). All routes should have a list of all forwards and vacation holds attached to the case, and the lists should be reviewed, and the mail processed, before the route is pulled down for delivery on a daily basis.

.
6). No parcel or mail item should be left unprotect in the lobby of any apartment building. If the item can’t be delivered to the recipient or a responsible party (manager or security), a notice should be left, and the item returned to the station.
.

7). Every unit should hold a standup (with a signed roster) on the sanctity of the mail at least once a week.

.
8). The mishandling or negligent loss of mail should be a zero tolerance matter.
.

9). All unit supervisors should be available to address customer complaints for at least 2 hours per day in the afternoon.

.
10). There will be absolutely no reprisals against me for addressing these issues, and I will be made fully whole for the time I’ve lost as a result of the reprisals that have already taken place.
.

If we can agree on all of these issues, we can resolve this matter within the district. If not, I will continue up the chain of command, and if need be, to Congressman Waxman’s Committee on Government Reform. I’ve brought each one of these items to management’s attention previously, but to no avail.

.
Gentlemen, we owe our customers much more than we’re giving them, and it has become beyond embarrassing. I’m very sorry it had to come to this, but this seems to be the only way to get anyone’s attention.

------------------------------------ ------------------------
Bill Almaraz Date
District Manager


------------------------------------ -------------------------
James Smith Date
.

STATEMENT

December 19, 2007

.
On December 19, 2007, between 10:40 and 11:10 a.m., a customer called and said she hadn’t received any mail in two days. She said this was very unusual, and wanted to know if her mail was being held at the post office for some reason. She said she was willing to come pick it up. The customer lived in the 90036 zip code so I transferred the call to [Name withheld], the supervisor for that zip code, to answer the customer’s inquiry as to whether or not her mail was being held, and if so, the reason why. Then just a matter of seconds after I transferred the call, Ms. [withheld] paged me over the intercom. She had placed the customer on hold, and told me that the customer was looking for her mail, so she should not have been given the call. She said I should have gone over to the carrier’s route and searched for the customer’s mail.
.

I totally disagree with Ms. [Withheld]. If the customer’s mail was not being delivered, it might have been due to a problem at the delivery point–construction, a problem with gaining access to the mailbox, a stray dog, or some other hazard on the route. There could have also been some sort of regulatory problem that prevented the mail from being delivered, or something as simple as a substitute carrier bringing the mail back to the station because he was ordered not to work any overtime, or it got too dark for him to deliver the mail. And in some cases, when they’re short on personnel, they simply don’t send the mail out. Only the carrier, or the carrier’s supervisor can answer those kinds questions. And further, when the mail is not being delivered, it is the supervisor’s responsibility to know where it is located.

.
But unfortunately, the three latter reasons are exactly why Ms. [Withheld] avoided speaking with this particular customer, and she makes it a point not to speak with any other customer. She knows that the mail is being mis-managed under her supervision, and therefore, goes to great length to avoid speaking with the customer where she will have to take responsibility for her actions, or lack thereof.
.

Everyone, including all of the window clerks are familiar with this situation, and it has been reported to upper management on several occasions, to no avail. So, while I have no problem with serving our customers, I am both tired, and completely stressed out by constantly having to face their wrath due to Ms. [Withheld] disregard and irresponsibility.

.
Willie Wilson
Customer Advocate
.

October 24, 2008
Postmaster Anderson:
.

I wrote you on Monday, October 20, 2008, to advise you of a very serious matter that needed your immediate attention. My action was taken in what I considered to be the very best interest of the Postal Service. But as I write this memo, four days later, you have yet to acknowledge receipt.

.
I’ve considered the fact that you may not have responded because you consider me both arrogant and presumptuous for writing you in such a brutally candid manner regarding Manager Connie Brown. If that’s the case, I assure you that I can fully understand your rationale. But I hope you’ll understand that this situation is so long-standing and unconscionable in it’s impact on our customers that corporate decorum was the very last thing on my mind.
.

I first broached this matter with your predecessor, James Smith, on October 31st of last year, and while numerous auditors have been roaming the station with clipboards, absolutely nothing has changed. So my intent in contacting you was to try to convey the immediate need to address an agency-threatening matter, and a situation that is causing our customers to sustain needless hardships, in an aggressive and forthright manner.

.
I’ve monitored this situation closely over the past year, and instead of addressing the issue, I’ve watched it be carefully managed to subordinate the needs of our customers, and the postal service, to accommodate the bureaucratic sensibilities of various personalities within the agency. At first I thought the problem was inadvertent, but over the past year it’s become increasingly apparent that we’ve developed a corporate culture that’s giving careers and the personal needs of individuals priority over what’s in the best interest of the agency. The tail is wagging the dog. It seems that moving the mail is no longer our primary concern. It’s gotten to the point where moving the mail is looked upon as an unfortunate nuisance that’s interfering with management’s quality of life.
.

But when you came to the district, it was rumored that you were of a different breed, so I hoped that the situation would finally be addressed. Like many other employees who have become concerned over the postal service’s image, I was hoping that you would bring some integrity and a sense of mission-first back into the district, and it was with that thought in mind that I wrote you.

.
With respect to my attitude towards Connie Brown, I want to assure you that I have every respect for the effort that goes into obtaining a position of responsibility in this agency, but at the same time, I must also recognize that while the agency can confer titles and areas of responsibility, it cannot confer character, insight, integrity, or sense of mission. While there are those who take the position that one should respect the title and never bad-mouth one’s manager (generally held by managers), I don’t subscribe to that philosophy. I respect excellence, not titles, symbols, or any other accoutrement of authority. When an individual commands authority, they don’t need symbols to prove it. On the other hand, if an individual is irresponsible, all of the titles and symbols that man can confer won’t make them so. Our president is a prime example of that.
.

In closing, I’d like to request, once again, some kind of response from you. My request is not a matter of vanity, but an honest attempt to mitigate this matter at its lowest level.
.
Eric L. Wattree

.

Statement

My name is Eric L. Wattree. I’m an African American male, and I’ve worked for the postal service for 27 years. For eight of those years I worked as a customer advocate at both Palms and Bicentennial Stations, and also as a Consumer Affairs Specialist at the District office.

.

I worked with Ms. Lily Pamanian while a Customer Advocate at Bicentennial Station for one year, and at Palms Station for approximately two years, and during that time I have always considered her to be one of the most professional, efficient, and customer oriented supervisors with whom I have ever worked. What’s most immediately striking about Ms. Pamanian is her character. She lives by a very strong and unwavering moral code. Unfortunately, however, I’m virtually certain that it is that very quality that has led to her having to stand before you.
.

When I first became aware of the blatantly disparate action taken against Ms. Pamanian, I was literally astonished, and both embarrassed and angered at the level of disparity that’s being meted out upon her. I am personally privy to facts that will show that she’s being treated differently than either African American or Hispanic personnel under either similar, and far worse conditions.

.
As a customer advocate I have personal and direct knowledge of the postal service’s irresponsibly lackadaisical and laissez faire attitude towards what can only be considered the criminal malfeasance of at lest one African American manager, Ms. Connie Brown, and an Hispanic Area Manager, Ms. Marcie Luna. In fact, I have waged an ongoing battle against the postal service in that regard–and since I am also a journalist who has always been dedicated to the cause of government accountability, I just happen to have documentation of their customer abuse, which I’ve been compiling for a book.
.

Ms. Pamanian has been under the gun for years for no reason other than the fact that she’s culturally predisposed to going by the book and doing things properly, as opposed to hiding deliverable mail, underpaying employees who are gainfully employed, and "cooking the books" in order to enhance, or protect, the careers of her superiors. Unfortunately, those activities are an insidious and throughly pervasive part of the post office culture–they are expected as part of the job description of all managers and supervisors. As a direct result, instead of rewarding Ms. Pamanian for her integrity and the conscientious manner in which she carries out her assignment, she’s looked upon as different-- "uppity", and something less than a "team player."

.
In 2007 Bicentennial Station, under Manager Connie Brown (African American female), and Area Manager Marcie Luna (Hispanic female) was trying to save money by attempting to run the station with a skeleton crew. By trying to run the station with less than a full complement of clerks to process and distribute the mail, they failed to cover vacant routes when the regular carriers were either out sick, on their rotating day off, or on annual leave. This often led to up to seventeen (17) routes being unmanned in just one unit (the station has two units).
.

As a result of their failing to ensure a full complement of clerks, Certified mail wasn’t being individually listed and accounted for, leading to the loss of our customer’s valuable accountable mail (legal documents, rent payments, medical documents, etc.). In addition, accountable mail was also being delayed, customer box mail was being hidden instead of delivered to the customers’ p.o. boxes, and mail was being distributed to the carriers in an untimely manner, leading to many customers, including businesses, not receiving deliveries on a daily basis.

.
As a result of failing to cover delivery routes, routes were being thrown up in a haphazard manner and carried by personnel who were unfamiliar with the routes. That in turn, led to mail being both mis-cased and mis-delivered, and mail that should have been forwarded would be delivered to the old address, which were often vacant apartment buildings. That meant that the customer who had moved would never see that mail, because the mail would languish in boxes stuffed with mis-delivered mail for up to a year or more. Of course, part of the carriers’ job was to check those boxes and return that mail to the station, but management would have them so much under the gun to get back and save time, that it was rarely, if ever done.
.

But when carriers were forced to bring back mail because it was return directly to them by customers as mis-delivered or forwardable, it was never redirected to the proper address or forwarded on. It was simply thrown in a tub and set in the back of the station to be returned to sender as "Addressee Unknown"–and that mail was left in the station to languish, sometimes for up to a year (see attached pictures). I’ve seen, and took pictures, of medical x-rays for Cedar Sinai Hospital marked as "Address Unknown" to be returned to sender (How can they not find Cedar Sinai Hospital?!).

.
Of course, the customers were in an uproar over this, but when they would call or come to the station, the supervisors would refuse to come to the phone or go to the window, because they didn’t want the customers to have their name when they filed a formal complaint or wrote their congressman, so they’d send an employee to speak to the customer and take the brunt of the customers’ wrath.
.

Eventually the employees got tired of that, so at the beginning of 2008 one or two employees reported the situation to both Congressman Waxman’s office, and the Inspector General. Then on the morning of February 1, 2008, a team of postal officials arrived at the station at 4:00 a.m. in the morning. They found the mail, including about 14 feet of Certified mail that had been delayed up to six(6) weeks. They then did an audit of the station and Connie Brown got 16% out of a possible 100, and she failed several audits thereafter. She should have been fired, forthwith. But they still didn’t mete out the disciplinary action that they’ve taken against Ms. Pamanian.

.
And finally, Ms. Pamanian was awarded a bid to another area on December 23, 2006, so she shouldn’t have even been in this area when they took this unwarranted action against her. So it is clearly apparent that they deprived her of her right to assume a lawful bid for no other reason than to take this grossly unwarranted and discriminatory action against her.

.
Eric L. Wattree
Bicentennial Station
.
[President Supervisor's Union]
From the Presidents Desk
Damon Leopold

Los Angeles Has No Integrity

This has been the buzz around the Pacific Area since the new Pacific Area Vice President came aboard. Webster’s dictionary defines integrity as "possession of firm principles: the quality of possessing and steadfastly adhering to high moral principles or professional standards, honesty." Wow, if you are like me, you take this personally. All of the hard working EAS employees in Los Angeles are all dishonest and have no moral principles. Even David Stowe and his good ole boy network had the audacity to write in their Pacific Area reviews (audits) that the employees in Los Angeles would rather lie and cheat than to tell the truth. Where are they getting these outrageous claims? I thought long and hard to find an answer.
.
The answer to that question took me back to the early 1990’s. When I was a PTF carrier still on probation. I returned from the route after my ten hours was up and was informed by the clerk supervisor that I could not hit the clock because I was in penalty overtime and that the supervisor would take care of my time. Not knowing what penalty overtime was (and still on probation) I did not hit the clock. There was the defining moment on how Los Angeles operates. The leadership of the cluster had us all so brain washed that penalty overtime is wrong and if you use it, you will be disciplined. Isn’t penalty overtime part of the contract? Coming up through the ranks, I quickly learned that penalty overtime was a taboo. In Los Angeles, the carriers and the union were trained that we did not pay penalty overtime. After they had reached 56 hours in a week, they knew the supervisor would come up with an ingenious plan to pay you another day. This was just the culture in Los Angeles, that is, until the Long Beach consolidation.
.
When Long Beach merged with Los Angeles, came the tale of two cultures. We would daily sit on a tele-con for hours and listen while the Associate Offices had 1000’s of hours of penalty overtime and the city had zero. Were we that much better than the AO’s or was it something else to this picture? Later on we found that it was the latter of the two. The leadership in Los Angeles had breaded a culture of lying and deceit that would not come to light until after the Long Beach consolidation.
.
After some offices were investigated by the Office of the Inspector General for alleged clock ring manipulation, the penalty overtime in the city went up astronomically. Was this a mere coincidence or part of that lack of integrity on the part of the employee’s in Los Angeles? After countless EAS employee’s in the district were put up for removal for manipulating clock rings did our fearless leaders step up and draw the line in the sand. Do not mess with employee’s clock rings. Well my question is why is it a problem now? The leadership created this monster, but when the OIG comes in they claim no knowledge of what has been going on. How many times have you heard on a tele-con "I don’t want any penalty overtime this week." This is a clear violation of the contract, but where is the union at? It all boils down to my theory that the Union is aware and part of that culture that the leadership created. Think long and hard, when was the last time (prior to consolidation) did you have a grievance for penalty overtime? They were pretty much unheard of in the old Los Angeles.
.
In the beginning of this article I wrote that Los Angeles lost their integrity in the early 90’s, well that was some 15 plus years ago. It is going to take that long for us to regain that back. We have veteran mangers and supervisors that feel like PTF’s all over again. We are learning to do things the right and legal way. Who would have thought just a few years ago when we were the best in the country that one day our integrity would be questioned? Who knew that it was okay to pay an employee penalty overtime if in fact they had worked it? The only way we will regain our integrity is if the membership steps up and do the right things. The next time you are given an instruction from the leadership that is a clear violation of the contract, ELM, MOU etc. I urge each and every one of you to follow the instruction but insist that it is in writing. That one little piece of paper may just be the thing that will save your job when the overzealous OIG agent wants to investigate you about something illegal you did, following the instruction of the leadership. Always remember that once you lose your integrity to this organization, you have sold your soul to the devil.
.
In closing, I would like to thank each of you for allowing me to serve as your president for a second term. During my term as president, I have increased the membership of the branch and doubled the number of members that attend the branch meetings. But, we are still a long ways away from where we need to be as a branch. I urge all of you to attend the branch meetings and become active in the organization. There is strength in numbers. United we stand and divided we fall.
.
Solidarity,
Damon Leopold
.
Well, that’s your United States Postal Service, folks–an organization that makes the Bush administration look like a sterling example of efficiency, integrity, and concern.

Eric L. Wattree
wattree.blogspot.com

A moderate is one who embraces truth over ideology, and reason over conflict.

Sphere: Related Content