The corn pickin’ caper

"Well, Dad did it first," proclaimed my brother.


Caught up in Halloween Eve pranks at our farm with our parents gone, we two brothers were vulnerable to a neighbor boy's focus on the first word of "trick or treat" against our own family that windy, cold October 31 night. We agreed, with our neighbor boy a year my senior, to replicate our Dad's prank of disassembling a Model T and assembling it on top of a barn. 


The old corn pickin' wagon was too much temptation. We opened the gate to the cornfield where it was abandoned, a victim of farm mechanization. We pulled it by hand up to the east side of our barn.


A pliers from my pocket easily slipped the cotter pins loose, the washers fell off, and the wooden wheels literally fell of the wagon as the catcher side boards flopped loose. With the single-row Case cornpicker behind our John Deere A just a week before, we knew we would never repeat last October's collective thuds of corn ears flung against those side boards as Dad controlled Babe and Dummy, the beloved faithful farm team, with voice commands. The husking hook Dad gave me on a crisp frosty morning the previous October, now was an obscure memory.


The stiff northeast breeze rose a bit as we threw a rock fastened with binder twine over the corn crib. We tied it to the heavy hay rope used to pull hay loads up into the barn, and pulled on the twine to get the rope up over the top. Then deciding on the heaviest item first, we tied the chassis of that old wagon to the rope caught and hitched our old mule to the rope on the other side of that two-story high corn crib. 


Then came the first problem. The mule wouldn't move hitched up. Dad was not there, and even my older brother could not pull hard enough on his halter to make the commands work. We tried a whip, and the mule simply crunched up and mumbled complaints. 


Then our neighbor boy picked up a two by four. He had barely raised it when the mule took off. There was a crash, a sound of falling debris, and we ran around the barn as the unseen mule, its tethers trailing, ran through the gate we left open into the un-picked corn field. We rounded the corner to see part of one sideboard that had broken off, jammed against the eave of the corncrib roof, and tumbled back down to the ground. The rest of the broken chassis lay askew on the ground. 


We stared long enough at the scene to feel the east wind blowing snowflakes against our noses and into our eyes, but were not ready to give up. We used the rope on opposite sides of the crib to help each other and the first wheel up onto the roof. But the increasing snow wetting the cedar shake barn was turning to ice. We tried, but it was getting late. Our parents would soon be home.


We gave up. The neighbor boy left for home, and we went to bed where we knew we should be on Halloween Eve when our parents arrived home. 


Next morning Dad came in to wake us up for chores. He had already been out, finding our milk cows in the corn, the crib barn roof wrecked, and the corn wagon broken in pieces. He wanted an explanation.


My memory is vague of the punishment I earned for this foolishness over a half century ago. I do remember the chagrin of feeling the guilt of Halloween tricks against my own family. I also remember the embarrassment of letting a little peer pressure set aside my good sense. I don't know if it was spoken, but I remember being sure my father regretted telling me his story. But most, I remember his chastising us for thinking we could get the wagon up on the roof without the wheels on to help it roll up past the roof edge, and over the top ridge.

The following paragraphs written in consultation with my editor, Shelly Sutherland, were deleted in the paper edition of my BHC News column this week:

Every generation wonders how the next will survive to adulthood.  We elders ponder where they come up with so many dumb, and often dangerous ideas, about ways to pass their time during adolescence.  Well, guess what?  It's usually passed down from us. Of course we got many of these same "original" ideas from one of our progenitors.  The details of these pranks vary, but there are some classics. This one from my childhood.

I don't know if it was spoken, but I remember being sure my father regretted telling me the story of his prankster triumph.  I also hope my grandchildren aren't reading this story about my own misadventures.  I don't want seeds sown that could lead to future chaos in Big Horn County.

Also, Hallowe'en history is fascinating regarding the syncretism between Christian and pagan religious observances.  For the ancient Celtic religious observance of Sanheim, the origin of most of our Hallowe'en traditions, see:  http://allsaintsbrookline.org/celtic/samhain.html

Here is the most honest essay I found that recounts the most important Christian history associated with the "All Saints Day" and the day before, known as Hallowe'en:

www.stjohnbchurch.org/HalloweenNotHollow.pdf

--
David Graber
Hardin, MT  59034
www.greenwoodfarmmt.org

graberdb@gmail.com

Obomney for President?

Both political parties issue surveys where one can rank issues in order of importance. Last week I got another one. Frustrated with the misleading agenda-driven wording designed around the myth that there's a big difference between the two candidates and parties, I changed wording and added a few issues.  But there is little use.

 

The most important national issues are absent in the debates. Obama and Romney agree on so many issues they are essentially one and the same candidate.

 

http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/11991-social-security-president-obamas-biggest-failure-in-last-weeks-debate

 

"Obomney" will win the presidency, and our nation will lose again. The independent and third party candidates are bringing up the most pressing issues affecting our national security and economy. But they are shut out of the debate. The Commission on Presidential Debates, set up after the League of Women Voters withdrew citing fraud on the American People, now sets the rules and controls the audience. So the national debates we should have, the issues that most affect us in Big Horn County and families around the world, will not happen.

 

http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/11991-social-security-president-obamas-biggest-failure-in-last-weeks-debate

 

http://sojo.net/blogs/2012/10/04/who-didn%E2%80%99t-win-presidential-debate

 

They argue with each other over which plan bodes the worst for a contrived crisis in social security, Medicare and Medicaid. We have, in Big Horn County, come to believe these benefits (not entitlements) we've paid for over almost a century are ending. Neither candidate nor party discusses a simple solution: make these payroll deductions a flat tax and keep the same benefit max for social security. Income levels above the current cap of $106,800, rare in Big Horn County, would then be taxed at the same rate. Keeping the benefit max, doing away with that cap and flattening the tax would simplify payroll taxes for employers.  It would also, solve the funding problem of these programs forever, and allow lowering, not raising, the overall payroll deduction rate or age of starting benefits.  This option is off the presidential debate table.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/21/opinion/krugman-disdain-for-workers.html?_r=0&src=ISMR_AP_LO_MST_FB

 

option-eliminate-the-payroll-tax-cap-AARP-ppi-econ-sec.pdf

 

Eliminating the Social Security Payroll Cap: A Bad Idea | NCPA

 

The great Obamacare debate has run its course, with a successful censorship of the public option by both parties. Now Romney, in his latest waffling in the Denver debates, has made clearer his plan to replace Obamacare with Obomneycare.  Neither plan brings us anywhere near par with other first world nations' health care expenditures because it ignores the public option employed virtually universally outside our borders.

 

The two parties want us to argue over the middle class instead of seeing the many families who were middle class, and now have fallen below the line. They mislead us into thinking it is simple joblessness. They ignore the huge growth of jobs that do not pay a living wage. So we continue the myth that the poor simply lack initiative, and refuse reform of our currently unjust economy, hostile to millions of American families. Check out the new documentary http://thelinemovie.com/

 

Other sources on American poverty:

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/21/opinion/krugman-disdain-for-workers.html?_r=0&src=ISMR_AP_LO_MST_FB

 

They opt for the least viable option in addressing Iran's potential for a nuclear weapon, because they think we the people feel safe with them shaking our big stick. The better option is to convene a broad nuclear conference over Iran's possible nuclear threat including those two Middle East nations already having deliverable nukes trigger ready: Israel and Pakistan. These two should submit to the same UNSCOM inspections and truth-telling Iran has been allowing—yes, allowing, and that truth is not spoken to the American people. Such a strategy would guarantee an end to Iran's potential nuke preparations, motivated by the current reality of no nuclear parity with Israel. Like with Saddam, will we successfully negotiate away viable defensive weapons and then, God forbid, bomb and invade another nation.

 

http://consortiumnews.com/2012/09/25/iran-reaffirms-offer-on-nukes/

 

http://www.amazon.com/Disarming-Iraq-Hans-Blix/dp/B000BTH5LC/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1349734224&sr=8-1&keywords=Hans+Blix

 

We Big Horn County family elders, concerned with our children and grandchildren serving in harm's way, don't want to give our government an automatic approval for another unwarranted war.

 

I'm reminded of when the Baghdad bombing began. Hundreds of our English students were gathered at a XiHua University auditorium in China for a public debate contest. Our department head, considered a friend of mine at the time, spoke these words: "America can't be trusted. China will never give up its nuclear weapons. Iraq did. Now look what's happening." I was shocked. 

 

We are bombarded here in this election season with hyped up controversies between the two political parties exemplified both in Rehberg's Government Madness blog and the many Democratic talking points. As a result, our candidates both proclaim this election is about something much bigger than who is president. Then they stand together across the centerline of their road choice and beckon us into their sideshow political fights. As Noam Chomsky says, "…so there are differences between the parties: about how enthusiastically the lemmings should march toward the cliff." So yes, this election is about something bigger than  Obomney for president. But they have agreed to ignore us here, and our media mostly rubberstamps censorship of the most important issues our nation now faces.

 

(Here ends the column in the Big Horn County News)

This problem is profoundly irrational, and unlike anything in our history, in our current broad distrust of science.  Shawn Otto is author of a book worth reading to get a grip on how far we have strayed as a nation from responsible research:

Good Science Always Has Political Ramifications. Why? Because a scientifically testable claim can be shown to be either most probably true or false, whether the claim is made by a king or a president, a Pope, a Congressperson, or a common citizen. [Book Excerpt]

 

Fool Me Twice: Fighting the Assault on Science in America

Author, filmmaker, science advocate Shawn Otto

Shawn Otto, an acclaimed author, filmmaker and noted science advocate, whose book "Fool Me Twice: Fighting the Assault on Science in America" (Rodale Books, 2011) is the winner of the 2012 Minnesota Book Award for general nonfiction

 

He is featured writer in The Scientific American

 

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=a-platform-to-crowdfund-the-truth-2012-09

 

Can Democracy Still Work in the Age of Science?– Shawn Otto

"Jefferson's central idea of democracy is that "whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government." Jefferson thought it required "no very high degree" of education for people to be well-enough informed. But what happens in a world dominated by complex science? Are the people still well-enough informed to be trusted with their own government? Why or why not? Today, science is under political attack like never before. At the same time, science impacts almost every aspect of modern life, and is poised to create more knowledge in the next 40 years than in all of recorded history. Can we expect attacks to increase or lessen? Why is this happening? Why is it so much worse in the United States than the UK or EU? Why are people the world over protesting against both autocratic and democratic governments? Can democracy survive the rush of science? We'll compare strategies scientists and journalists can use online and off to manage these emerging science challenges – together with a world of unsolved legacy environmental science challenges – for science and better public policy."

 

http://www.alternet.org/election-2012/noam-chomsky-fate-humanity-stake-why-are-romney-and-obama-too-cowardly-talk-about-what

 

http://people.howstuffworks.com/debate3.htm

 

http://www.montanademocrats.org/node/409

 

https://rehbergforms.house.gov/govmadness

 

The two parties want us talking about who is to blame instead of what to do about climate change. Of course, the consensus in the scientific community regarding the human role in climate change may be questionable (I doubt it is). But the dramatic loss of Arctic sea ice is not questionable, happening decades sooner than forecasts of 2011.  Now, without a national debate, plans are afoot to harvest the vast newly available energy resources in that fragile environment. No attention is paid to the science on the meaning of this symptom of global warming.

 

Recent attention paid to the increase in sea ice off Antarctica avoids the larger affect of global warming as a cause of the marked increase in westerly winds around the continent. It's the increased air flow off the 2-mile-high mountain of ice over the continent, a circular wind current that, though warmer than the air in winter usually is, results in significantly more sea ice. I remember my daughter's experience in the 1990's researching ice of -50 degree temperatures in tunnels deep below the South Pole Station while record high temperatures in summer there were -20 F.

 

Our international relations have become firmly under control of powerful people who reverse Jesus' Golden Rule: "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Instead we have adopted pre-emptive war, "do in others before they do you in." This has been our misdirected response to the world tragedy of terrorism since 9-11. Of course we want carnage and deadly civil strife of terrorism removed outside our borders instead of having it happen here. But, by invading other countries and establishing military bases all around the world we have discarded the most powerful tool to stamp out terrorism: collaboration with friendly citizens of nations where there is an anti-American element. The neighbors of these radicals have the power to squelch them. Instead we drone them. Or bomb them. or break in the doors of their homes. We capture, disappear and torture their parents, brothers and sons. Of course some of these are committed to fighting against us. But we haven't really sought to stay there and listen to them. So we wonder why they hate us.

 

http://www.alternet.org/speakeasy/robert-greenwald/its-long-past-time-admit-military-solution-afghanistan-has-failed-0

 

The Drones now giving President Obama the exclusive power to exterminate a human being of his choice almost anywhere in the world presents a variety of legal issues. Can the US government legitimately attack and kill citizens in a foreign country with which we are at peace?  Even with their tacit consent? 

U of VA author Ashley Deeks justifies this as self defense.  Because the US is targeting groups in Pakistan that are associated with the 9-11 attacks, it has the right of self defense by attacking.

 

The drone legal controversy is thus brought to focus, but not in the debates.  We are not supposed to see or think about the families with children and old people hearing drones in the sky from inside their homes, trapped by poverty and geography in a brutal reality that drones could target their house any night. The psychological wounds from our drone war against the people of Northern Pakistan will come back to haunt us in spreading hatred of America. Instead President Obomney—either Romney or Obama— will continue droning us to peaceful sleep at night with assurances his drones will keep us safe another four years.

 

http://sojo.net/blogs/2012/10/05/can-any-good-come-drones

 

http://sojo.net/blogs/2012/09/25/drone-watch-living-under-drones

 

But road not taken by either party is about choosing to examine honestly and clearly the options we have as a nation on two crucial fronts worldwide: escalating warfare, and escalating climate change. 

 

Both issues affect us right here in Big Horn county. We have one of the highest per capita rate of soldiers serving in combat.

 

On the big science issues and the environment, Scientific American's Shawn Oono says science lies at the center of our biggest policy controversies.  Yet our scientists are not consulted, and our leaders and pundits diminish the importance.

 

On climate, Obama talks about regulating green house gases and increasing fuel efficiency. Romney has backed off from saying we don't know what causes climate change. He now agrees humans have affected our climate crisis. Yet he still says there is no consensus.  His mutually contradictory statements have implications. 

 

On food quality, Romney is about deregulation. He says industry will self-regulate adequately.   Obama says we need government.

 

Water safety.  Overconsumption is threatening the standard of a minimal amount of water for everyone.  Obama talks about a clean water act he tried to push through.  Obama has no specific steps.  He says the real problem with water quality is over-regulation.  Which triggers regulation. He would relax regulations because they are costly and ineffective.

 

Energy.  Obama doesn't talk about the future, he just cites his past policy.

Romney talks about energy independence, but really means north America.  He thinks we could be.  But this is unreal, since the global market determines price and access. 

 

Obama's answers intersect a bit more with what scientists are saying than Romney.

They both ignore our incarceration system. "Perhaps most frighteningly--both to the public and to many of the inmates themselves--is that 2,000 of these men in solitary confinement are released directly from extreme isolation onto the streets of New York every single year.

 

http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/unbelievable-inhumanity-solitary-confinement-and-punishment-little-reading-book

 

The often invisible experience of those living in extreme isolation in the state's prison system is revealed in a new study by the New York Civil Liberties Union . The report paints a damning picture of a cruel and expensive practice that is being phased out in other states even as it expands across New York State."

 

They both ignore the poor.

 

http://sojo.net/blogs/2012/10/04/who-didn%E2%80%99t-win-presidential-debate

 

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/10-most-shameless-romney-debate-lies-debunked?page=0%2C1&akid=9486.144927.RsY4PF&rd=1&src=newsletter721717&t=3

 

 

The Mexican gun & drugs war made is in America.  Mexican people blame the American government and gun business for the horrific death and destruction over the border. 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0H33u1e80WY&feature=relmfu

 

http://factcheck.org/2012/09/romneys-stump-speech/

 

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/04/1139793/-Mitt-Romney-Lying-to-victory?detail=email

 

http://www.nationofchange.org/hedge-fund-hype-wall-street-horoscopes-and-drop-top-jets-magical-minds-radical-rich-1348753394

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yMOzvmgVhc&feature=youtu.be

 

A seven minute video.  Choose who to believe, our government, or the people who went to Pakistan to investigate? Here are some quotes from people who live in the area:  "We don't know why there are drone attacks in our area. But it's Americans doing this, to end the lives of Muslims.  Do American people know the drone strikes here are killing civilians?

 

http://www.nationofchange.org/romney-passes-torch-taxpayers-1349356703

 

Romney's Salt Lake City Olympics, researched by Hightower, the Texas congressman.

 

http://www.nationofchange.org/what-hell-happened-1349363594

"Mr. President, if you can't explain why you are the Commander-in-Chief in this class war against the billionaire bandits attempting to seize our government, then get off the horse and let someone in the saddle who can ride." --Greg Palast

 

http://www.nationofchange.org/last-night-s-debate-romney-told-27-myths-38-minutes-1349364077

 

Four years later Mondale and Reagan vetoed 80 of the moderators league of women voters proposed because they did not want difficult questions.  Remember the public outcry? The next debate included League of Women Voters recommended moderators.

 

In four more years Dukakis and Bush drafted the first ever 12 page-secret debate contract.  League refused, and published the contract, accusing both candidates of trying to subvert the democratic process. The commission got the backing of Republican and Democratic leaders and created a commission to implement the same 12 page contract. Frank Farencoff is still cochair, and he is also director of the American Gaming Commission.  Other cochair is Mike McCurry.  Lobbiest for  media interests.  

 

What are corporations doing sponsoring debates?  Anheiser Bush is biggest.  It can simultaneously demonstrate support for both parties and get great exposure to politicians.  SW airlines, international bottled water, howard buffet, kennedy library, two law firms are other current sponsors. Candidates cannot actually ask each other questions.  No third party or independent candidates are admitted.  The 2004 secret contract written by the join commission of Republican and Democrat leaders was 32 pages long.

 

http://www.democracynow.org/2012/10/3/ahead_of_first_obama_romney_debate?autostart=true&get_clicky_key=suggested_most_popular_story

 

 

--
David Graber
RR 1 Box 1211D
631 Woodley Ln
Hardin, MT  59034

406 665-3373
www.greenwoodfarmmt.org
Bonnie's email graberbj@gmail.com

The World’s Most Effective Educators

 

—have been sabotaged, sidelined and demeaned.

 

Education is the most effective remedy for poverty. Research increasingly proves this, highlighting that early success in learning most correlates with later success in society.

 

Lesser known is the power of parent as teacher. The key to rebuilding education in America is restoring the priority of parent and child as a learning pair, especially with very young children. The erosion of this vital relationship over the decades goes a long way in explaining our dysfunctional society with our rampant incarceration rates, poverty, greed, loss of the American dream, and life stress. 

 

That learning relationship was stronger in the 1940's when my siblings and I were young. My parents and grandparents had been raised under their parents' and grandparents' tutelage. In this way, they learned who they were. The songs, games, stories and religious values of our heritage were internalized, not as head knowledge, but as heart knowledge. They were safe, and they belonged —two things so rare for young children today. When my parents imparted that knowledge to me, I was learning trust and courage through family bonding.

 

Learning was not yet separated out from real human bonding and placed behind a video screen.  No one could have imagined back then how pervasive screen media would be in the life of today's children. 

 

I remember as a boy, when my siblings and I first heard the new word "television." One of our friends told us about this magical invention that his family had obtained.  That night, without parent permission, we sneaked over the crest of the hill after dark toward a flickering blue light coming from their window. We crept up to the window. We could barely make out the neighbor family with their backs to the window, gazing intently at a small flickering screen. On the screen were obvious faces moving and talking. We couldn't understand what they were saying, but the shock was etched in my memory. It was clear that somehow people had been transformed and stuck in a box. How could any child resist this powerful form of hypnotism! We shivered in the cool night and ran home to tell our parents we wanted one of those boxes. 

 

It didn't happen. My father called it a work saver. My grandfather called it the devil's playground. Our church met and decided this worldly device could not be in any church members' homes. If allowed in, it would corrupt our lives and destroy our Salvation. I didn't understand then the importance of human feedback response to learn trust, respect of self and others, and the bond of family. I didn't know then the importance of learning to live with others for life success, and how that that learning starts at a very young age and its importance peaks at around 2 years old when a child is most easily attracted to the artificial pseudo-human feedback the screen media gives.

 

Since then, TV and other screen media have damaged the learning pair relationship of parent and child. It didn't happen because of poor programming. The very best Sesame Street can't stop the damage. It happened because the attraction of moving faces and bodies, gesturing for attention of toddlers, displaces the most crucial learning unit of education in America and around the world: parent with child—especially before age 3.

 

Enter into the Harlem Children's Zone. The New York City hotbed of crime and poverty in the 70's is now a national success story of poverty transformation. Crime is down. Streets are now dramatically safer for children. Alcohol and drug abuse are reduced. Children do not grow up to be incarcerated as before. It happened in Harlem because of an amazing story of parents and their young children pairing for learning for life. Parents were entrusted with their young children, not simply criticized for failing to parent and losing their child to the courts. Parent classes were not penalties for failure to parent properly.  TV is set aside in favor of "Baby College," where children before age 3 learn to function in real human feedback paired with a parent.

 

Across the nation we need to turn back to the naturally occurring parent-child learning pair lost in the last century with the rise of industrialization, the screen media, and an economy that, for survival, daily separates parents from their young. More funding for social services, head start and home visiting educators cannot in itself be compensation for the loss of the world's most effective educators at each child's most powerful learning age. The most effective programs pay a parent to come to a specially designed weekly class paired with their pre-3 child. It's probably the most cost effective wages paid to teachers anywhere.

 

Education administrators and government officials in Big Horn County know the real tax dollar savings potentially available if parents could do better as their children's first teachers. Here we need one of those proven program that focuses on restoring the natural learning connections between our youngest children and their home caregivers, usually Mom.  It's only through acknowledging and restoring parents as a child's first teacher that we can re-establish those early learning experiences vital for educational success in our world today. It's by far the biggest gap in our education system in Big Horn County, and goes a long way toward explaining our schooling difficulties. And we can do something about it.

 

Since the time of my first encounter with TV, this and other screen media have damaged the learning pair relationship of parent and child. It didn't happen because of poor programming. The very best Sesame Street can't stop the damage. It happened because the attraction of moving faces and bodies, gesturing for attention of toddlers, displaces the most crucial learning unit of education in America and around the world: parent with child—especially before age 3.

 

Enter into the Harlem Children's Zone. The New York City hotbed of crime and poverty in the 70's is now a national success story of poverty transformation. Crime is down. Streets are now dramatically safer for children. Alcohol and drug abuse are reduced. Children do not grow up to be incarcerated as before. It happened in Harlem because of an amazing story of parents and their young children pairing for learning for life. Parents were entrusted with their young children, not simply criticized for failing to parent and losing their child to the courts. Parent classes were not penalties for failure to parent properly.  TV is set aside in favor of "Baby College," where children learn to function in real human feedback paired with a parent.

 

Other such programs with this priority have begun across the nation.  A Waldorf School has begun just this year in Lakota country in South Dakota. Missouri in 1970 started a "Parents as Teachers" program that has spread westward, with some content in Montana. Oregon has a growing and well run poverty-alleviation program focusing on the learning pair of parent and young child. Even here in Big Horn County we have the "Family Support Network" pioneering parent involvement with children in school activities. Education administrators and city and county government officials have discovered real tax dollar savings by investing in paying parents to bring children to weekly classes facilitated by professionals in early child education and family dynamics, experienced in proven models expecting commitment to specific curricular content and family change.  

 

There's room for much more here in Big Horn County. We need to examine successful programs such as in Oregon, New York, and South Dakota. We need to hire more professionals experienced in facilitating the learning pair of parent and young child.  And we need learning materials to match the content pre-3's need.

 

Across the nation we need to turn back to the naturally occurring parent-child learning pair lost in the last century with the rise of industrialization, the screen media, and an economy that, for survival, daily separates parents from their young. More funding for social services, head start and home visiting educators cannot in itself be compensation for the loss of the world's most effective educators at each child's most powerful learning age. The most effective programs pay a parent to come to a specially designed weekly class paired with their pre-3 child. It's probably the most cost effective wages paid to teachers anywhere.

 

http://seattletimes.com/html/jerrylarge/2019178227_jdl17.htmlA healthy life may require a good start

Early-life stress and trauma can harm American lives. Columnist Jerry Large says a new book convinced him that the country has to do more to help people when they are young, because stresses and traumas manifest in mental and physical ways later on.

 

Compassionate and based on the latest research, Scared Sick Childhood Trauma unveils a major public health crisis. Highlighting case studies and cutting-edge scientific findings, Karr- Morse shows how our innate fight-or-flight system can injure us if overworked in the early stages of life. Persistent stress can trigger diabetes, heart disease, obesity, depression, and addiction later on.

 

http://www.amazon.com/Scared-Sick-Childhood-Trauma-Disease/

It's written by Robin Karr-Morse and Meredith Wiley. In our youngest children, society sows the seeds of problems that it spends much time and money dealing with as people age. We know that now, and we can do something about it

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/16/opinion/sunday/can-great-teaching-overcome-the-effects-of-poverty.html?_r=2

"Are We Asking Too Much From Our Teachers?"  By ALEX KOTLOWITZ     Published: September 14, 2012

"It's been too easy to see this dispute (The Chicago teachers' strike) as one between two hotheaded personalities — Mr. Emanuel and Ms. Lewis, or as a play for respect. Rather, as I spoke with teachers on the picket lines last week, it became clear that it was about something much more fundamental, and something worth our attention: top-notch teaching can't by itself become our nation's answer to a poverty rate that, as we learned the other day, remains stubbornly high: one of every five children in America live below the poverty level."

 

Paul Tough, How Children Succeed  (Houghton Mifflin, Sept. 2012)

Why do some children succeed while others fail?

The following is adapted from Amazon's description:

The story we usually tell about childhood and success is the one about intelligence: success comes to those who score highest on tests, from preschool admissions to SATs.

But in How Children Succeed, Paul Tough argues that the qualities that matter most have more to do with character: skills like perseverance, curiosity, conscientiousness, optimism, and self-control.

How Children Succeed introduces us to a new generation of researchers and educators who, for the first time, are using the tools of science to peel back the mysteries of character. Through their stories—and the stories of the children they are trying to help—Tough traces the links between childhood stress and life success. He uncovers the surprising ways in which parents do—and do not—prepare their children for adulthood. And he provides us with new insights into how to help children growing up in poverty. The role of economics necessitating both parents finding work away from their children is not explored in this book. How would children benefit from the simple economic reform of a living wage law? This book implicitly points in this direction. Too bad it does not 

 

The Death and Life of the Great American School System, by Diane Ravitch (Perseus Books, 2010)

Loads of information with documented official proceedings surrounding changes in education policy.  Actual events with details in sequence paint a reliable picture that damns and exonerates both sides in the public school controversy continuing to rage the nation. As such, this is a valuable contribution to anyone who would deal with issues such as school choice, testing, merit pay, class size, segregation, the role of the arts, student health, violence and bullying, nutrition, curriculum, teacher education and internships, religious concerns, and probably all the major facets of education controversy that continue to this day. I recommend this as a realistic, honest analysis, relayed without political bias. This book can be borrowed at Greenwood Farm.

 

A list of web sites and other sources focusing on parents and their children learning together:

 

http://hcz.org/images/stories/pdfs/ali_summerfall2002.pdf

 

http://mnwaldorf.org/parent-tot-classes/

 

http://www.childrensfarm.org/parent_child.html

 

http://www.quickenloans.com/blog/parentchild-classes-rock

 

http://ici.umn.edu/products/impact/152/prof4.html

 

http://www.cde.state.co.us/cdeadult/download/pdf/FamLitProgModelAdapted.pdf

 

http://www.linnbenton.edu/index.cfm?objectId=64979B60-ED41-11E1-A279001B21BA1DA1

 

http://www.thelittlegym.com/Pages/parent-child.aspx

 

http://www.pacthawaii.org/early_head_start-oahu.html

 

http://www.columbusschoolforgirls.org/program-for-young-children/parents-and-children-together-pact/index.aspx

 

http://www.nova.edu/humandevelopment/earlylearning/pplace/parentchild.html

 

http://www.musictogether.com/MTPCWorld

 

http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/downloads/file/6249/pre-birth_to_three_parents_leaflet

 

http://www.fcnetwork.org/programs/pact.html

 

http://www.wccf.org/pdf/parentsaspartners_ece-series.pdf

 

http://www.kidsource.com/parenting/parents.part.html

 

http://www.ldaminnesota.org/programs-and-services/community-programs/parents-as-partners

 

http://hcz.org/programs/early-childhood

 

http://www.parentsasteachers.org/

 

www.avance.org

 

www.naeyc.org/files/naeyc/file/.../EDF_Literature%20Review.pdf

 

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/147410/0038822.pdf

 

http://www.amazon.com/From-Parents-Partners-Family-Centered-Childhood/dp/1929610882

 

 

--
David Graber

Hardin, MT  59034

www.greenwoodfarmmt.org

graberdb@gmail.com

 

The Bible’s Bias and Billionaires

I grew up as an Iowa farm boy in the late 40's and 50's.  I was raised in what we considered to be a very conservative family.  Things were different back then.  Conservative meant responsibility for family, community and nation, and for following the Bible.  Good Christians were those who worked hard and shared their often meager resources with neighbors and also strangers in need.   "Gay" meant happy and none of us kids knew what an "abortion" was.   People seemed much less interested in the sex lives of others.  Maybe we were all so busy on the farm that there wasn't much time for speculation.  It could also be that we had a different standard about what was just none of our business. 

It seems like more recent conservative preoccupation with these personal issues has led us off track.  When you read the New Testament it's easy to see that a bulk of admonitions and guidance are related to social justice and care for vulnerable families, not reproductive issues.  It concerns me that we allow the modern conservative movement to claim that the biblical prohibitions against homosexuality and abortion are to be government enforced by public law when they comprise so few verses.  Then the same groups claim that the extensive Biblical exhortations for a fair economy, to treat the poor with compassion and justice, are none of the government's business but to be performed by private charities. 

 

The American Bible Society has recently published "The Poverty and Justice Bible" as a companion to its new translation, "Contemporary English Version." A total of more than 2000 verses are highlighted, condemning cheating the poor, unjust wages, and greedily depriving the earth, animals and workers of their God-given right to Sabbath rest. These highlighted scriptures promote God's way of doing economics and government, calling humankind to repent and work out God's salvation. The Bible's agenda of poverty and injustice thus competes with the modern Christian agenda based on microscopically fewer words. Human survival, as well as that of our families and nation, depends more on obeying God's dominant moral teachings, as written. That's been my opinion for decades. I know this opinion runs against that of most conservatives today, many I consider good friends. So I was astounded to read a NewsMax article last week shaking my perception that modern conservatives have abandoned the Bible's dominant agenda.  

 

Conservative media sources, led by "NewsMax," have discovered that Wall Street has conned both political parties into legislating a deregulation regime, creating an unprecedented wealth gap in our economy, and bringing our nation to the brink of economic disaster.  Check out this enlightening article: "Nobel Economist Steiglitz: Wealth Gap Causes All of America's Woes. " I was surprised at the apparent abandonment of their pet trickle-down economics.  It seems that modern conservatives are starting to accept that accumulation of wealth among a few is not what creates a common good strong enough to meet needs of our poorest citizens. 

 

Steiglitz makes a powerful point that inequality has always been justified based on the concept that people with the most money actually create wealth for others.  The recent financial crisis has clearly illustrated this to be a myth.  Those who brought the economy to ruin are the same people who have walked away with billions of dollars. Welfare corruption at the bottom end of the national wealth spectrum doesn't hold a candle to the taxpayer paid excess going to the top end. Here in Big Horn County, we'll be paying the bill to recover from their greed for generations.  I doubt those with the money will be doing anything to stimulate our economy.   Is there hope for change this election year? My guess is our burden will continue of working hard to pay both our own living expenses and simultaneously that of America's richest corporate class's excesses. Maybe it will be eased slightly if the Democrats win this November.  I only wish the Republicans would seize the moment and make this a big difference with the Democrats. It's a simple matter of siding with the 99% of us, which would scare the Democrats spitless. It would be an impossibly huge policy change, wouldn't it?

 

Let's hope realists in the conservative camp, like those exploring these issues cited in the Steiglitz column, don't get debunked, branded liberal class warfare extremists, and silenced by the big money media censor mill. From my own conservative roots, I claim their findings as squarely in the center of the conservative philosophy into which I was born in a farmhouse in Iowa in 1942.

 Here's Steiglitz, featured in NewsMax, from his new book, "The Price of Inequality," referring to the major 2008 meltdown, and inadvertently reflecting the Bible's prominent agenda in America today: 

"It may have been a prosperous two decades. But it wasn't like we all shared in this prosperity.

"The financial crisis really made this easy to understand. Inequality has always been justified on the grounds that those at the top contributed more to the economy — 'the job creators.'

"Then came 2008 and 2009, and you saw these guys who brought the economy to the brink of ruin walking off with hundreds of millions of dollars. And you couldn't justify that in terms of contribution to society.

"The myth had been sold to people, and all of a sudden it was apparent to everybody that it was a lie.

"Mitt Romney has called concerns about inequality the 'politics of envy.' Well, that's wrong. Envy would be saying, 'He's doing so much better than me. I'm jealous.' This is: 'Why is he getting so much money, and he brought us to the brink of ruin?' And those who worked hard are the ones ruined. It's a question of fairness."

As quoted in the newsmax link: Nobel Economist Stiglitz: Wealth Gap Causes All of America's Woe

Or try this link: http://www.moneynews.com/StreetTalk/Stiglitz-wealth-gap-inequality/2012/08/09/id/448084?s=al&promo_code=FB98-1

These new (to conservatives) ideas are the focus of a video by Newt Gingrich, Lou Dobbs and others marketing a new investment strategy to maintain personal wealth in this ruinous economic environment. So one can watch the video with either the goal of protecting ones' six figure investments, or with the goal of understanding and remedying the growing citizen suffering for these errors (sins?) in our national governance, both by the elected government and the governing business sectors.

The video presenters have chosen the first goal. But Steiglitz and these conservative leaders are now at least acknowledging the foolish and immoral errors causing our American problem of poverty and injustice. That's the focus of the Bible too, but with healing and hope instead of protection of personal wealth. Read the Bible for the one side, and watch the video for the other.  Either way, it's time the truth gets out on what's wrong with our economy today.  http://www.alternet.org/hot-news-views/dr-krugman-schools-flabbergasted-rand-paul-govt-employment-going-down-under-obama?akid=9369.144927.vOoj86&rd=1&src=newsletter707734&t=3

On the same lines, here is Jeremiah Goulka. He writes about American politics and culture.  His most recent work has been published in the American Prospect and Salon.  He was formerly an analyst at the RAND Corporation, a recovery worker in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina, and an attorney at the U.S. Department of Justice. He has recently switched from committed centrist Republican to the Democratic party. Read this link and wonder: Could the above information bring him back to the Republican Party fold?  http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/political-awakening-republican-i-had-viewed-whole-swaths-country-and-world-second?paging=off

David Graber

Hardin, MT  59034

graberdb@gmail.com

www.greenwoodfarmmt.org

Why?

Why are times so hard?

 

Why do times seem tough for so many people across the country and right here in Big Horn County?   We keep hearing about more and more young families who are unable to earn enough money to support themselves and their children.   It seems like even small financial setbacks are bankrupting more of us, who consider ourselves middle class.  We're losing the equity in our homes and our retirement funds are drying up.   That's before we start factoring in the devastation of medical costs (even for those of us with high quality health insurance coverage). 

 

Listening to the news of the day, you'd think all of this economic turmoil was being caused by people in our society who choose not to work hard.   These are the folks who receive public subsidies or "entitlements" in the form of TANF, Medicaid, or Medicare.  The theory is that these moochers keep our tax rates too high, which keeps us from being able to save and invest in our own futures.   Yet, I can't help noticing that a lot of mooching seems to be going on at the other end of the wealth spectrum. 

 

They are the ones who sold us on the idea that our problem is excessive government spending, not their revenue withholding. Here's a link to research sources proving a simple observation: ending tax evasion and tax havens for the moochers would be enough to bury our trillion-dollar deficit: http://www.nationofchange.org/add-it-taxes-avoided-rich-could-pay-deficit-1346074084

This source includes several logical ways to approach this one big elephant-in-the-Republican-room problem no politicians seems to want to talk about.

 

It reminds me of a situation we had out on the farm not too long ago.  We were troubled with varmints stealing into our chicken coop and dining on our chickens here on the Back 40.  I fastened chicken wire over, under and around every square inch of that coop to stop our chicken meat disappearing.   One morning, a few weeks after the chicken wire intervention, one of the chickens didn't exit the coop when it was opened.  My granddaughter noticed it struggling to stand up on one leg and sitting right back down. I crawled in, picked the bird up and found it only had one leg, and was still bleeding from the cavity of the missing leg. It took a while to find the blood stained chicken wire hole through which that leg was yanked and gnawed off. 

 

My simple solution had looked so perfect. I trusted chicken wire. It was obvious no varmint could slip through those holes.   While I was busy shoring up the chicken wire, those smart thieves were just waiting for a chicken leg to emerge from my carefully constructed security system.  They had all night to watch and wait, while I was busy taking care of farm business.  It makes me think of those wealthy varmints in our country.  These are the people who are increasing their own entitlement income while conspiring to replace Medicare and Obamacare with something to raise our own health care costs and their profits.  They only need to get one big bite out of each of us to make their fortunes.  We're left disabled, while they walk away with full bellies.  They're busy out in Washington D.C.  setting up a budget that will require raising taxes on all but the richest citizens, in order to fund special interests and continue corporate welfare.  In the meantime, we're worried about keeping those indigent people out of our chicken coops. 

 

The problem is that we lose to the moochers, regardless of whether they have more or fewer resources than us.  We become easy targets for those who exploit us by raising prices, sending jobs overseas, or lowering wages for higher short-term profits.  After getting their payout, CEOs have little compunction about bankrupting the companies they run, thereby devaluing our mutual fund portfolios (a.k.a. retirement accounts). 

 

Most of us simply don't discuss the divided economics and politics of why any more. It has become too contentious to speak of these things in public.  Our voice from Big Horn County may not represent many of the moochers at the top, whose voice is heard all over the media loudly denying the charges of, say, the Occupy Wall Street crowd. More of us are near the bottom of our economic ladder, dropped from the significant middle class of the 80's.  We resent being even remotely associated with living off the labors of others.  This may keep us from really thinking about what's happening to the middle class and how we are going to protect our own self-sufficiency in the coming decades. 

 

The national adversarial conversation promoted by the media victimizes us to blindness to any but one side of the answer: ours. News is no longer "The News," representing a variety of points of view rather than just one, like decades ago with David Brinkley or Chet Huntley. Now "News" on TV, radio, on line or cable is tailored to conform to a particular bias. It gives us ready answers, conservative or liberal answers decided by its perception of our point of view, with plenty of counterpunch ideas on why the other point of view is wrong, dangerous, unpatriotic, or totally stupid. Even in our families, we seldom listen to each other on issues that divide us, each with a different "totally right" answer to why the current state of the world, our nation, and Big Horn County is so dismal.

 

In my previous column I asserted that big government and big business have so mixed themselves up with each other we the people can't any longer tell them apart.  The corrupt conflicts of interest have made our arguments over blaming one or the other irrelevant. This week I am unveiling two kinds of moochers in our economy. The one at the bottom is featured in the media and highlighted by Ayn Rand and the Republicans, especially the Tea Party. The other is denied and justified, but its control of our national conversation over our economy are the reasons why we the people have given up even talking about the economic stress our families know today. This highlights the need to restore the legal structure of a fair economy built after our Great Depression and dismantled over the last half century. If we don't, the class warfare between the two grand moochers of our economy will spill out of our prison system into our streets, and racial conflict and revolution will attack our nation.

 

Some examples

Why in New York City are there more empty homes than homeless people? Is it only because these homes were foreclosed and are now owned by banks?

 

Last week, the Justice Department announced it wasn't going to prosecute Goldman Sachs or its employees for its shady activities during the mortgage crisis. The same day, Goldman disclosed in a regulatory filing that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) had dropped an investigation into a troubled $1.3 billion residential mortgage-backed securities deal launched in 2006.

For more on this and other info on Banks: http://www.alternet.org/economy/uncle-sam-needs-you-bailout-6-reasons-another-big-banking-crisis-coming-our-way

 

Why does Jamie Diamond lose $9billion placing bad bets with money borrowed from his Chase Morgan bank, and get bailed out? Is in only because he regulates his own bank as a powerful member of the Federal Security and Exchange Commission, which gives him the power to grab taxpayer moneys to cover his losses? Who regulates such regulators? Why don't they do their job?

 

Why did Obama bail out mortgage banks to the tune of $700billion and not bail out the individual citizens losing their homes through mortgage default? More important, why did the subsequent $7trillion bailout subsidy of the financial sector get passed by congress with barely a whimper?

http://themoderatevoice.com/130732/secret-federal-reserve-loans-of-7-8-trillion-yield-13-billion-to-banks/

 

Why is BP in charge of the cleanup of the Gulf oil spill, and doing the job of the government program responsible for monitoring potential environmental disasters from our national fossil fuel appetite? http://www.nola.com/opinions/index.ssf/2012/03/bps_oil_spill_cleanup_isnt_don.html

 

 

Why has our government abdicated its responsibility to us and turned over regulation to the interests needing the regulation? Doe self-regulation work? Can children nurture and raise themselves into responsible adulthood? Can foxes monitor the safety of hens in the hen house? Can chickens be safe from chicken moochers when the chicken wire doesn't work right?

http://dumpdimon.com/

http://gadfly.igc.org/progressive/corp-reg.htm

 

 

--
David Graber

Hardin, MT  59034

www.greenwoodfarmmt.org
graberdb@gmail.com

The Biggest Lie of 2012

Republicans believe government must be smaller, that it feeds off the public, and that it reduces the self-sufficiency of families.   They believe government steals our money through taxes, and its touted hostility toward businesses sends those jobs overseas and previously middle class families suffer deprivation.

Democrats believe government has grown too weak to regulate the biggest business sectors like banks, energy and health.  They believe capitalism has gone cutthroat and lost Adam Smith's bottom line—the common good.  They believe the middle and working classes have lost jobs, homes, and lives due to corporate greed.   They also feel that millions of American families suffer deprivation as a result of high prices.

The leadership of both parties—read Romney and Obama—have left unchallenged the false notion that business and government are separate and in competition, like they used to be when our free enterprise system functioned. They aren’t separate anymore; the assumption they are separate is the biggest lie. Big business is now in bed with government more than ever before. Government is governed by big money more than ever before. Republican and Democratic leadership are the same flock of turkeys, noisily competing with each other over taxpayer morsels by the $billions. That flock has infiltrated the private and public sector so extensively that politicians/business execs easily and quickly exchange identities and claim exaggerated loyalty to us the people where there is none. So the real story, yet untold, involves politicians from both camps competing over billions of dollars in spoils from the dying middle class.  Could the weekly political crises, promoted for media outlet profit and fueled by people’s frustration, actually be contrived to divert people from this issue?

I was reminded of our current dilemma yesterday, as my family's flock of turkeys followed me around the fields.  My granddaughter, Hannah, taught our seven baby turkeys how to scratch and peck last spring.  Now this August, they are perfectly capable of fending for themselves, as they range the farm.  However, they much prefer that I catch insects for them.  I gave in to their begging yesterday, mostly because they're so darn cute, and offered up a large grasshopper for their consumption.  I was quickly overwhelmed with the demand for more, as turkeys began pecking at my buttons and eyeglasses.  At that moment, those little creatures seemed to really believe that their existence depended on me, even though they had the skills to feed themselves.  Of course, they really do need me to help them out of a jam, like when they get caught on the wrong side of the fence and lose their freedom to range where they want. 

I wonder how we can get back to a philosophy of working together to help each other in times of genuine need, without creating systems of dependency.  Is there a way to back out of our current all or nothing thinking regarding the evils of government or the evils of the corporate take-over of America?  I wonder whether we all find ourselves believing the same big lie, that government and industry are easily distinguishable enemies. 

Those hating "Big Business" want to keep their social security payments and medicare benefits as a safety net for retirement.  Those distrusting government programs want the business sector to guarantee retirement benefits and health care insurance.  Either way, we fall prey to the lie that the two have not become one.   They have.  In the meantime, we have a big mess with our economy, class warfare is threatening, and basic freedoms are falling by the wayside.  Families who have gone broke or suffered human losses from inadequate health care have little hope since Obamacare and Romneycare, and whatever either winner might regurgitate after November 11, will be caught in the same confusion. 

Witness the turkey gathering around Medicare, Medicaid and social security, the big cash cows congress and investment banks have conspired to peck into for a century. Says Romney on CBS, "There's only one president that I know of in history that robbed Medicare, $716 billion…" Yet that's precisely the Congressional Budget Office estimate of the savings to this country under Obamacare. Further, the GOP plan keeps that Obamacare savings plan intact. Yes, Romney and Ryan are reasonable enough to know Obamacare is right for America, so their plan duplicates the savings of $716 billion.  

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57494197/romneys-$716b-medicare-cut-attack-is-dubious/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2012/aug/15/checking-facts-700-billion-medicare-cut/

So why do these turkeys so badly misrepresent reality? Why are Republican leaders sold on Obamacare's central plans to slow the growth of Medicare over the next decade, eliminate overpayments to private insurers, reform provider payments for greater efficiency, tie reimbursements to improvements in economic productivity, and set up programs to reduce fraud and abuse? Because it puts a useful band-aid over the bleeding of America, while keeping in place the confused network of myriad conflicts of interest between government and the private sector, involving trillions of our American dollars to be gobbled up. Some turkeys.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2012/aug/15/checking-facts-700-billion-medicare-cut/

Perhaps we could start by restoring the clear separation of government and business so that we, the people, can again clearly monitor what's going on between them.  That's what our founding fathers believed. It's what President Eisenhower warned us about. It's what the Glass Steagall act was designed in the '30's to remedy. It's what the Roosevelt trust busting program was about. And it's what Republicans and Democrats conspired together to mix up and confuse in the last half-century.

--
David Graber
Hardin, MT  59034

graberdb@gmail.com

How we got gun un-control

Gun control is such a taboo subject among my friends and family in Big Horn County it's hard to find the correct language for a rational discussion.

I learned to handle a gun and to hunt almost by the time I could walk to school. We needed to hunt to put food on the table back then. I remember carrying my new .22 single shot to school and hiding it behind coats in the cloakroom so we could hunt on the way home. But the teacher found it, and Dad put a stop to this. He was a lifetime member of the National Rifle Association and sympathetic, but he also believed in teaching us how to safely and responsibly handle firearms. By the time my two brothers and I graduated from a Benjamin BB gun pump air rifle to a single shot .22, Dad paid the dues for us to join the NRA. As junior members, well before it was required to get a hunting license, we took a county NRA gun safety course for teenagers. The NRA supported government regulation of guns then. From their course I learned responsibility to society and to the American government. That was before it was taken over by gun marketers/politicians.

I remember, as a young teenager, trying to buy ammo at the local hardware store. I was turned down because I wasn't old enough. I also remember helping a neighbor grind off the small nib in the action of his .22 automatic rifle to make it fully automatic. Then we went rabbit hunting, and held the trigger down for a dozen very fast shots—emptying the tubular magazine and scorching the barrel—while tracking the running rabbit with the open sights and ruining the meat with multiple shots. That was great fun until Dad informed us we were violating the law. It was against federal gun regulations to have in possession a fully automatic weapon. He told us the police could come take that gun away. We tried but succeeded only in making the action jamb every time for the second shot. I felt bad about helping ruin that gun.

Things changed rapidly after the assassination of JFK, in 1963. During the following months and years, political assassinations escalated. That's when the NRA changed its focus from supporting hunters and promoting family hunting into political action. Their attempts to remove government regulation of gun ownership have been astonishingly effective. It's amazing when you consider that the American people have maintained their power to regulate automobiles, fireworks, dynamite, and pesticides. All of these can and do become lethal, and can even turn into lethal weapons. Yet, the NRA has succeeded in propagandizing America citizens to accept placing firearms out of reach of the oversight and safety rules of our elected government representatives. Children, criminals and psychopaths can now bypass government regulations via private citizen dealers at gun shows or the internet and purchase firearms making huge profits for gun manufacturers and marketers.

It didn't take long to convince people that any regulation of destructive weaponry was a violation of their Constitutional rights. The NRA became an association of gun marketers and manufacturers, who promoted a lucrative political conspiracy theory that the government is going to confiscate our guns. Money continues to pour from gun business NRA affiliates to media and political coffers to help support this propaganda. When you follow the money trail, it's easy to see who benefits the most from the last decades of removing more and more government control of guns.

 
My Dad was troubled by the NRA's change in focus. He didn't want to lose the right to own his double barrel ten-gauge, but also couldn't understand unrestricted access to weapons of mass destruction. I think many of us struggle with this all or nothing interpretation of our Constitution. Guns with huge magazines and capacity for rapid firing, built in the US and sold around the world, are now being designed and marketed to kill and maim human beings en masse. Features making little sense to hunters, but appealing to a criminal mind, such as easy concealment, stealth, silencing technology, and long range sniping ability have become NRA-promoted selling points.

I still have my guns, plus a few more. I continue to laugh at my brother, who claims I am naïve in thinking the United States government has never and will never confiscate my guns. My two brothers bought the propaganda, have become part of the NRA marketing clientele. The many non-hunting weapons proliferated here and around the world, purchased by law-abiding citizens such as my family members, could do massive carnage if the Armageddon predicted by a sector of Christians here and nationwide were to become a real civil war. I question whether those who happen to own the most weapons should have the power to overthrow our elected government. If our government has gone wrong, we have a more effective and legitimate means to overthrow it: the ballot box.

The Bible says we should love our neighbors, but I'd feel better if mine didn't have weapon stockpiles in their backyards or machine guns at the movies. How about you?

Follow the links below, also available on Alternet.org, to significant gun-un-control measures where a majority of citizen NRA members oppose the NRA leadership:

 

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/dec/16/opinion/la-ed-guns16-2009dec16

http://articles.latimes.com/keyword/editorials

Gun control's NRA supporters

 

1. Editorial from LaTimes

A poll finds surprising support among NRA members for some aspects of gun control.

December 16, 2009

Gun control is one of those culture-wars issues on which liberals and conservatives often don't even seem to be speaking the same language, let alone coming to consensus. Gun owners -- especially the hard-core enthusiasts who belong to the National Rifle Assn. -- are often thought to oppose any restriction on their 2nd Amendment right to bear arms. Except that, according to a recent poll, they don't.

The gun-control debate is replete with suspect polls and fishy statistical analyses, so when Mayors Against Illegal Guns set out to survey gun owners, it knew it would be accused of putting a liberal slant on the questions. That's why the group, a coalition of 500 mayors started in 2006 by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino, hired a conservative pollster to do the job: Frank Luntz, an occasional commentator on the Fox News Channel. Luntz surveyed 401 NRA members and 431 gun owners who don't belong to the group, and came up with some surprising results.

 

2.  Controls on gun purchase and ownership.

If you are put on the U.S. terror watch list you cannot board an airplane. You can, however, still purchase guns and explosives. According to the Government Accountability Office, "From February 2004 through February 2010, 1,228 individuals on the watch list underwent background checks to purchase firearms or explosives; 1,119, or 91 percent, of these transactions were approved."

NRA members understand this even if their leadership stubbornly tries to protect the gun-ownership rights of terrorists (but they're patriots, I tell you!). Eighty-two percent of NRA members think this gap should be closed.

 

 

3. Tiahrt Amendments

Named in honor of all-around clod, former Kansas Republican Congressman Todd Tiahrt, this is part of the NRA's constant effort to hamper, harass and harangue any government effort to get to the bottom of how guns came to be used in a crime. These amendments, attached to federal spending bills, do their best to severely limit law enforcement's ability to access, use and share data that helps them enforce federal, state and local gun laws.

Not surprisingly, while these are a big hit at NRA HQ and among those members of Congress so graced with their campaign contributions, 69% of their own members have come to the logical conclusion that this is a pretty bad idea, as have 74% of non-NRA gun owners who think there should be no barriers to information-sharing between federal agencies and police when it comes to gun crimes.

 

 

4. Reporting Lost and Stolen Guns

Supporting provisions requiring this would seem to be only common sense. But there is not much of that present among the NRA's leadership. For example, the NRA has not only fought all efforts to make reporting lost or stolen guns to the police a requirement, but in Pennsylvania, where scores of cities and townships have picked up the slack by passing these measures themselves, the fine Americans and conservative-lawsuit-abuse haters at the NRA have actually threatened to sue to overturn these laws. Yes, you read that correctly, our friends who love state and local rights when it comes to allowing a kid to stay on their parent's healthcare policy until they are 26, don't feel so much the same way about guns.

NRA members would seem to disagree: 78% of them think this provision would be a good idea, as do 88% of non-NRA gun owners.

 

 

5. Sharing Records With National Instant Background Check System (NICS)

The Fix Gun Checks Act, modeled on ideas developed by Mayors Against Illegal Guns, was introduced in the wake of the carnage at Tucson by, among others, Senator Chuck Schumer in March 2011. Besides closing the gun-show loophole (see #1), it also sought to fix a huge problem in the current federal background check system--a lax attitude by many states and some federal institutions in sharing records of those ineligible to buy firearms due to criminal record or mental health defects.

For example, Seung-Hui Cho, the mass murderer at Virginia Tech, had been declared mentally unfit by a judge in Virginia, and Jared Loughner had been rejected by the military for admitted drug use. Both of these men never should have been able to get anywhere near buying a gun legally. But these records were never shared.

The Fix Gun Checks Act would provide both incentives and penalties to states so that all these records are shared in as timely a manner as possible. But NRA leadership has gone to war with this bill, as with all other efforts to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally unfit. Yet, a poll of swing-state voters taken around the time the bill was introduced showed overwhelming support for this concept among gun owners. In Indiana, Ohio, Virginia, Arizona and (most ironically, and sadly) Colorado, more than 82% of gun owners believed states should be fully funded in their efforts to share these records, while 91% supported requiring federal agencies to share information on potentially dangerous persons such as Loughner.

 

--
David Graber

Hardin, MT  59034

www.greenwoodfarmmt.org

graberdb@gmail.com