Why Democrats won’t call the B.S.? A view of how Republicans do much better messaging than Democrats.

This week several high-profile supporters of the President and some self-proclaimed surrogates condemned President Obama for his attack on Gov. Mitt Romney’s history at Bain Capital.  The President’s re-election team released videos of people that had been affected by lay-offs and down-sizing of local companies purchased by the venture-capital company that was headed by the presidential hopeful Mitt Romney. The firestorm started when Cory Booker, mayor of Newark, NJ-and a bright star in the Democrat Party-voiced his opinion about the President’s campaign ads. Booker said that the negative attacks were “nauseating”; soon after Booker retracted his statements in a walk-back YouTube video. Booker was among the first of a few prominent Democrats to run to the defense of venture-capitalists.  There should not be a problem with individuals running their own script.  Political parties are made up of people from all backgrounds and simply because one identifies with a political party does not mean that every single issue a party supports as a platform is an issue that each member of the party supports.   Although when Gov. Romney uses his work history as the general premise for why he is more qualified to be president than the current president, Gov. Romney opened the door to rebuttal. If the bases of an argument, in this case, is ‘I should be president because I have business experience’ then the question must be asked ‘What does that experience entail?’.  Mr. Obama made it clear that this is not an attack on private equity groups, venture-capitalist or capitalism, this is a look at whether Gov. Romney actually created jobs (an economic growth indicator) while at the head of Bain Capital. The truth is, Bain is not a job creating company---that’s okay, that’s fair—every company is not meant to create jobs. It is fairly believable that the invention of the calculator put a hurt on the abacus business (in truth the abacus was never used to do computing in the manner calculators are used but this type of fallacy is key to the core of this article). Nonetheless, Gov. Romney makes the link between his business experience and his ability to fix the country’s economy; making that assertion allows for questioning how well the Governor had done in the area of job creating-turns out, not so well.

The real point here is probably not Bain Capital, it is not Gov. Romney’s experience at Bain Capital nor is it whether President Obama has the right question the aforementioned.  The real point is how many Democrats voiced their opposition to the attacks.  And maybe that is not the point to this either. The most direct point is why these or many other Democrats have not taken a stand against the outright lies that have been stated about President Obama. Instead of using the open-mics for an opportunity to grow their own political funds or offer the appearance that they are being moderate, why don't Democrats do what Republicans for done forever and stick to the jabs. 

The Republican machine is superb at planting seeds and growing flowers of untruths.  Here are a few things that Democrats could speak out about the next time they feel the need to get nauseated at particular attacks:

• ·        The Republicans claim President Obama has raised taxes since he has been in office

o   FALSE- President Obama has NOT raised taxes, he lowered taxes through payroll tax cuts and tax breaks that were given directly to small businesses. Others would argue that taxes on tobacco and indoor tanning salons count for a rise in taxes but most Americans are not feeling these tax increases and those increase offset growing cost in other areas that would directly affect Americans.  

• ·        Republicans claim President Obama has spent more than any other President

o   FALSE- According to reports by Market Watch and supported by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) under the Obama Administration “federal spending is rising at the slowest pace since Dwight Eisenhower brought the Korean War to an end in the 1950s”.

• ·        Republicans-specifically Mitt Romney and Sean Hannity- claim that President Obama is apologizing for America and that is causing us to lose creditably in the world.

o   AGAIN FALSE-According to polls by Pew and BBC World Service the US continues to inspire more confidence than any other world leaders. Gov. Romney likes to say the President is “appeasing” other countries. No one can respond better to that accusation than the President himself. In a December 2011 press conference after being asked about Republican Candidates for president saying he engages in appeasement the President said, “Ask Osama Bin Laden and the 22 out of 30 top Al Qaida operatives who have been taken off the field whether I engage in appeasement…or whoever’s left out there, ask them about that”.

• ·        Republicans claim that President Obama promised unemployment would not top 8% if the stimulus package was passed by Congress.

o   FALSE- President-elect Obama and his economic team made projections (with caveats) -not promises- that the unemployment rate should not raise pass 8% and shortly after the projections were made the report writers acknowledge that their projections were wrong.  Even the non-partisan groups that make projections did not and probably could not have predicted the spike that occurred.

• ·        Paul Ryan—the Medicare-as-we-know-it destroyer and Chair of the Republican Majority House Budget Committee claims that the President has doubled the size of government

o   IF YOU THINK FALSE, YOU MIGHT BE A MIND-READER-Again, Republicans are brilliant when it comes to planting seeds that grow into tall trees of untruths. Ryan made this statement on his website using bad numbers for a baseline (2008 numbers—the numbers were not bad but President Obama did not have full control over a budget until next fiscal year budget). Ryan also took a big stretch when he used the 2021 Fiscal Year (FY ’21) as the comparison point for doubling. To that line of comparison one most say, really?! Congressman Ryan compared the budget in 2008 to the budget in 2021 and uses the comparison to say the President HAS doubled the size of government. And that is why they are good at what they do!!

So to all of my Republican friends, I salute you.  You stick together, you hold to the talking points—even when they are not true.  Not many Republicans will stand-up to publicly say ‘Obamacare is Romneycare’, or highlight that the Romney budget blueprint is the same one that President G.W. Bush used; ultimately ushering the country into the Great Recession. Nope, not many Republicans will stand against Romney because Republicans understand that a unified front (whether it makes sense or not, whether it is true or not) is much more attractive than a system of inconsistency.  If voters turn on their televisions or radios, pull up their favorite websites or blogs and hear the same consistent message then it might be true---who has time to fact check. But if voters turn on their television and hear one message then turn on their radio and hear another message, an opposing message---from people who are claiming to be on the same team, then the waters are muddy and the effort to excite the voter behind one cause or one mission is deflated.

The Republican message works so well because they stick to it. Who cares if Mayor Booker gets political support from venture-capitalist or Harold Ford, Jr. works for Merrill Lynch---come on guys you are not only trained analytical thinkers (as both have backgrounds in the legal field) but you both have long histories in politics. Any issue that aligns you away from the greatest good (i.e. in this case the re-election of a Democrat President) is an issue you should circumvent. Stick to the talking points----there are plenty and if you cannot do that, just go with the five myths to dispel about your guy, I just gave them to you and unlike the other nonsense this stuff is worthy of reminding voters.

Kenny Rodgers

Got a meeting in the ladies room...with the fellas and the ladies

I may be showing my age but when I was little, there was a group out named Klymaxx. They had a song out titled "Meeting In The Ladies Room". The song was simply about a girl who brought her good looking boyfriend to the club and all the women wanted him. In order for her to make sure she was looking her best-looking fly, she needed to go to the ladies room to ''powder {her} nose".

"Meeting In The Ladies Room" came to mind when I heard Morning DJs Jay and Amanda of Hot Kiss 106.3 (down here in the Rio Grande Valley) discussing the Maine Human Rights Commission's (MHRC) draft report regarding transgender rights.

The two radio host mentioned components of the draft report that would require schools in Maine (public and private) to accommodate transgender students in restrooms and locker-rooms. The host offered their opinions regarding their stance on allowing what they perceived as boys in the same restrooms and showers as girls and vice versa.

COMMISSION--what gives them the right?

First an announcement-- on yesterday the Maine Human Rights Commission (MHRC) opted to table any action on the report regarding how to deal with transgender children in the schools. That being said, it should be clear that the draft report was compiled by MHRC staff after meeting with various school district officials and other stakeholders that would be affected by this issue. The draft, if accepted and approved by the Commission, would have only been guidance for school systems. The draft could not become law unless the Maine State Legislature ruled some or all of the recommendation into law--which would have still required it to be drafted into a bill, put into various committees for discussion, and ultimately brought to the floor of the Maine Houses of Representatives to become law (if approved and signed by the Governor).

Each state has various commissions that help to shape regulations based on day-to-day citizen interactions. The various commissions range from Housing to Insurance and Agriculture to Health. While most of these commissions have specific laws from which to reference, many of the commissions are charged with tweaking or enhancing the verbiage in the laws to make them more functional. The commissions are also required to hear cases where the laws may have been violated. In most situations such commissions can levy funds or judgements against individuals or bodies that violate specific laws, or rights-based only within the realm of the commissions authority. One could not submit a discrimination complaint to the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission (EEOC) against a Housing Authority or realtor for housing discrimination. The point is, there are various commissions charged to deal with various issues and the commissions render rulings based on the respective laws which they are charged with monitoring. Such is the case with this Human Rights Commission of Maine.

HERE IS WHAT WE KNOW AS FACTS....

A complaint was filed with the Maine Human Rights Commission (MHRC) against the Oron School Department, in Maine. The MHRC ruled that under Maine's Human Rights Act, the school system had discriminated against a transgender male student when the system denied him access to the girls restroom; this occurred in June of 2009. MHRC then drafted guidance that would be used to assist school systems with transgender students. Had the guidance been approved by the five voting Commissioners, school systems would possibly be faced with creating environments that allow transgender students to use any public facilities (e.g. restrooms, showers) without regard to the students biological make up. The recommendation would also have potentially affected segregated sports (i.e. girls basketball, boys basketball).

MY ISSUE....

Human rights. I have to say this first, these are my opinions and as with any matter, my opinions can change depending on the information I am exposed to in the future.

If, in fact, the rights of a student are violated in any way, FIX IT!

I do not know how many folk can remember their first experience in a restroom of the opposite sex. I was thrown for a loop when, in the 3rd grade, I was sent in the girls restroom to get tissue and to my surprise, they only had stalls. I was like, what the hell is this? Do girls only have to do number 2? I ultimately learned that the guys were the lucky ones and did not have to get undressed to use the restroom...nobody told my buddy Townsend this. Even when we were in the 5th Grade he would drop his pants to the ground in front of the urinal. Dude you don't have to get undressed for this; I digress.

The uproar comes on two fronts. One, most people think girls and boys in the same restroom is just a mess. Two, there is a potential breakdown of segregated sports. I'll talk more about the restrooms than the sports stuff.

My wife and I had a brief discussion about the DJs comments this morning. She frowns at the thought of a boy being in the same restroom in which she is occupying. She said that ''when you are using the restroom, you are vulnerable". I understood that, I mean, how many times are you sitting with your legs confined and the most private of private goods are exposed. This is your space, your moment. I understand.

Here is where I think some common ground must be met. Whether you agree with a person thinking that they are something other than what they are born as, does not matter. The number one thing that matters is how do we allow fair access, maintain a safe environment, and give everyone the same privacy and amenities. In the discussion with my wife, she mentioned how much she dislikes any restroom where you can glance to the other side of the door through the henge of the door--y'all know what I'm talking about. I agree with her, I think all restrooms should be stalls...I do not have to stand next to my best buddy to talk to him while I drain the day's liquid consumption. I do not have to make it obvious that I have to take a number 2 because I went to the stall instead of the urinal. Those are just the issues that the guys deal with, whether we as guys realize it or not. I think that the stall doors should be all the way to the floor so that my privacy is assured and so we do not have the, former Idaho Senator, Larry Craig issue....nope, no tapping my foot for some other type of tapping. I think restrooms should be an open galley of just stalls and hand sinks. You walk into this massive set of stalls and you pick one. What you do on the other side of the door is up to you. Who is on the other side of the door has nothing to do with you.

THE ARGUMENTS....

I already know the beef with this. Someone is thinking, 'I do not want to be in the same room as the opposite sex when I am doing my thing'. I say, why not? It could not be just the opposite sex thing....really? Is it because you want to leave some impression on them? Is it because you do not want them to flirt with you while you are on the thrown? Whatever the the reason, the same thing you would do while a member of the same sex is in the room, is the same thing you will be doing with a member of the opposite sex. Either way, no one but you is in your space, so no one but you matters. Do males get a special pass to go in the stall with me because I am a guy? No. I do not want anyone sharing that time with me so whom ever is in the room does not matter. You go, he, she, it goes and get on out.

Now, much of what I see as the resolve to the restroom and even the shower issue would be just enclosed private space. A public area for individual needs. One big massive room with dozens of individual spaces. Anyone can use it. Anyone can be there.

An even easier method would be to just make some of the guy-girl restrooms transgender restrooms. If you are born a boy and you identify with being a girl, so you want to go to the girls restroom or vice versa, would it be wrong to offer such restrooms? I could see how that could be considered discriminatory in a way--as the guys that identify with being guys would not be able to go into those restrooms. Or better yet, the guys that identify with being guys would want to go in the restroom with girls that identify with being guys. Similar to what some people call reverse-discrimination (although, if it is reverse, is it discrimination? Is not discrimination just that, no matter who or what it comes from---just an aside).

In some situations you can offer equity but it won't always be equality. Sometimes fairness and impartiality (equity) doesn't mean that we get the same amount or get it the same way (the quality of being equal). Some folk would argue that my GLTB friends are asking for too much. The cost to build private stalls in public restrooms cost too much. I would disagree. We are conformable with our girls in girl restrooms with little privacy because we do not see any threat of girls taking advantage of other girls, the same applies to our boys. We take into account that bad people can go into these public restrooms to prey on the our kids. But we feel fairly safe. We fail to take into account that bad people can find your kids anywhere...there is a news story for every safe place you name, from churches to schools and sometimes in your very own homes. I believe that if we start in pre-school with all the children going into their individual stalls, no one will care to know the difference. We can desensitize children early on by offering them equal options. "Why do the boys have those long toilets," will never be an issue because we all go at the same time, I go in my place and he, she, or it goes in theirs.

I did not tackle the sports thing because I do not know what to think about it. I can imagine that a biological boy identifying as a girl and that same boy that identifies as a girl decides to play basketball. Such a decision may be a disadvantage to a competing team. I can imagine that if my team had a 7' tall girl it too may be a disadvantage to a competing team...no one would be able to complain barring she met all of the criteria to play. To use the words of my college buddy Van "June Bug" Alexander, ''get you one''. All I can say is that if you have one school with one transgender child playing ball for them, may be you can be the second school with one and remain as competitive.

THE MEETING IN THE LADIES ROOM....

For years we've seen girls go to the restrooms in groups...just like Noah they'll be going two by two. No one denies that girls go to have discussions, powder their noses (if anyone does that anymore), and sometimes just to provide a sense of security for her female sidekick. I have seen some clubs where the lobby to the ladies restroom was like a lounge...couches, sofas, televisions...mirrors for days. All the bells and whistles because ladies and girls often use restrooms as a meeting point. I will renege on my stance that we should be equitable by supporting the superficial notion that there is something cool about the ladies having that rendezvous point. I am a dude's dude, so when Lori and her girls go to the ladies room, I am at the bar with the guys getting that third round of shots that had been denied when the ladies were present. The ladies taking a break gives the fellas a chance to do some window shopping...we ain't buying nothing, just looking at the pur-tee dresses. I guess such a spot could still be available but it would need to include transgender boys...but that shouldn't be a problem, right?

So ladies, continue with your meetings in the ladies room, just know that it may be called the Ladies and Those That Identify as Ladies Room.