The Bastardization of "To Serve and Protect"

To "Serve and Protect" is the motto that most police cars have painted on their side. In light of the deadly behaviors of police in the United States, one must ask the question "Serve and Protect whom?"

During the 1960's and 70's, much depended on where you lived as to every day interaction with the Police. Even during anti-Vietnam protests there were police who were sympathetic to the cause and would stop their more "aggressive" brothers from violence against unarmed people. As we cruised into the 80's and 90's, the idea of "neighborhood policing" was popular and actually worked in many areas. The concept was that a beat cop would do just that, 'walk their beat' thereby getting to know the community they served. Things appeared to get better in the short term, for many situations. However, the more the "War on Drugs" escalated, the more militant police became. On one hand, given the extreme violence and militancy off cartels and the like, being ready to combat them was a logical idea. Cops who had been carrying revolvers switched to semi-auto, high capacity magazines and assault type weapons. Heck, they were fighting people armed with AK’s, Uzi's and explosives...it made some sense.

Now however, one must wonder if the pre-employment psych exams of yesteryear have been thrown out the window. Police have forgotten that they "serve the people" even though it is stenciled on their cars. The fact of the matter is that the majority of police have lost sight of this mission. Many receive overtime pay from corporations working on their "off" hours, which creates not only a huge conflict of interest for the public but changes the loyalty of the police towards the entities that allow them to support their families.

Cuts in pay, staffing and training have produced a group of unregulated, loyal only to each other criminals of whom we are all afraid. They roam high and low with high powered rifles, little if any oversight, and we the people do not know if those hired in this time of lessening pay (and thereby standards of those hired to BE police) have the proper temperament, motivation or even capability of become the "Peace Officers" they were meant to be.

We cannot survive as a nation without those whose duty is to "Serve and Protect". After all, bad guys do exist but, without official protection from those who perpetrate violence and crime, the NRA and the "Open Carry" behaviors we are currently witnessing will pale in comparison to those who would sprout in the absence of a true and viable police force.

There are a handful of police "Chiefs" or superintendents in this country, who possess a particular philosophy concerning "police work". This group of men (not a woman among them that I can see) go from employment with one major urban city to the next, spreading their M.O.'s and methods of the modern police, which increasingly becomes more gestapo-like than the "beat cop" pattern would dictate.

Another factor, which I believe contributes to the breakdown of the police lies in the matter of funding. Many cities have been accepting funds from major corporations in order to keep adequate numbers of cops on duty. The question must be asked how this practice has affected the mission, loyalty and honesty of these police.

During the initial occupation by "Occupation New York", I had expected to see at least a few of the police joining with the crowds, at least in sentiment. That they did not shows just how much more loyal standard police procedure is to the wants and needs of corporations, big business and property values than they are committed to the preservation of life. If this group cannot or will not change shortly, then I have to agree with the concept of radical change, removing those at the top, attempting to retrain the rest from the bottom up.

Lack of funding (cutting police and public unions, salaries, removal of benefits and seniority, everything a person works for) by those Right Wing influences which have moved our government so far to the right, creates a force which  does little more than serve as "Corporate Militias".

These deviations from the original concept of the modern "Peace Officer" can only be controlled and/or done away with by constant vigilance on a grass roots level, the removal of those in government who view the police as personal bodyguards of the rich, and an overhaul of the premise of "Policing" across the board. Otherwise, nobody is safe.

What are the differences between the GOPTP and the Dems?

Here is the main difference between the GOPTP and the Dems. Facts. I know, right? A one-word response can define something so many have balked at understanding. I maintain my conviction that it is facts, and/or the lack thereof, which differentiates the two main parties in American politics.

Of course, a one-word response is never adequate so allow me to flesh out my theory.

The GOPTP claims that the deficit the U.S. budget is currently worse under President Obama.

They also claim that the President’s policies are the reason for those thousands upon thousands of children arriving at our Southern border.

Another fun claim is that our economy is being trashed by President Obama’s policies.

More fun is to be had by those who claim that the President somehow botched an illegitimate war, started by his predecessor.

Let’s leave it at four different rants most commonly used to scare their base into submission. Along with that, let us also ask those who keep on perpetuating these fallacies, “Where, oh where, are your facts?”

I am aware that facts are the antithesis of the GOPTP platform. Or, more accurately, what passes as a platform, nevertheless…in a true debate they are required.

Here are a few facts to repudiate the contentions of the Conservatives in the United States.

Let us take the deficit conundrum. How did we come to be in the red? When President Clinton left office, he also left a surplus of money in the government coffers. Then along came Bush II. Does even one of the GOPTP base remember what “W” said at the beginning of the war with Iraq? Something to the effect of NOT putting the costs of the war into the budget because otherwise he the funding may not be there. Hence, he actually said aloud (how am I the only person who heard this?) he was essentially running a second set of books to document the funding of the war.

Let’s add to this equation this fact: Hundreds of thousands of dollars were sent in cardboard boxes on military transport planes, to Iraq, in order to bribe or otherwise facilitate officials in their duties. Most of remains unaccounted. And, just as officials started to look into this, the American economy (and most of the worlds) started to crash. I still remember the day that, as I was commuting home from work, I heard Shawn Hannity claim that the economy was solid. He said that since the average price for a starter home in the U.S. was $250,000, it meant the economy was strong! Huh? Of course, the next day is when everything hit the fan. Every news outlet, other than Fox, was broadcasting the complete disruption of finance, which the greed of Wall Street engineered. Of course, nobody was exactly sure what the reason was. Outside of Bush’s appointees, but we all knew something very bad was coming. Oh, wait. NOT Shawn Hannity as he kept up his rosy analysis of the American Dream, while it was crumbling in front of our eyes.

Moving on, let us go for the immigration “problem”. Several years ago, “W” signed a bill into law in which those who come to our nation because of the threat of bodily harm from their own nation would stay long enough to be processed and allowed the due process of law. This was done because this tidal wave of humanity was just beginning. Given the fact that the countries that these children are braving the journey they have undertaken, are listed as some of the most dangerous to live in by the United Nations and Amnesty International, it made sense. Apparently, the former administration had already seen analysis that this was going to become a real problem. Sooner rather than later, as it were and they were correct.

What amazes most Americans is how this crisis has suddenly been dumped into the lap of President Obama. Anyone who is paying attention to what is really happening must ask themselves some hard questions. Questions like, “I wonder if any of the shenanigans perpetrated by Pres. Reagan has anything to do with the instability in these countries?”  However, how many GOPTP types ever ask themselves searching, morally important questions?

Let us move on. Examining the contention by the GOPTP that President Obama’s policies are tanking our country’s economy. Do those who believe this lie ever read the business page? I remember when President Clinton was in office, and the stock market was approaching 13,000. My GOP friends told me that it was not sustainable and that the U.S. would never, ever reach those numbers legitimately.

Well, here we are in 2014 with the stock market bumping heads with 16,000. Once again, is this a number the U.S. stock market could never, ever accomplish? Given the inordinate amount of wealth being distributed among the 1%, one would have to say…yes. The U.S. stock market can do better than 13,000. The facts show that our economy does so much better under Democratic presidents than GOPTP Presidents. IN fact, most of the GOPTP Presidents have left us with a deficit. Oh, just look it up for yourselves for once. Don’t you know how?

The last of the misinformation tidbits I listed above, “How President Obama has messed up a war he did not start nor agree with” complaint. It is much too ridiculous of a complaint to address. Beyond silly.

Okay, the time has come. If you disagree, write a rebuttal, give up some numbers, anything other than the constant whining, hate mongering and guns. Yes, guns. Which seem to be brought out by the RW whenever they feel threatened.

If anybody from the conservative movement, or the Republican or Tea Party could actually read the above, truly consider the truth, we may be closer to unity than we have been for a generation.

I wonder to myself why it is that so many intelligent people allow themselves to be manipulated. Used by the exact entities they propose to be anti-American. My conclusion is that people like to stick with what they know. Change is not only scary but a true hassle. However, given the choice between change and destruction…I opt for change every time.

The Embarrassment of Murrieta, CA: How Could That Have Happened Here?

Today's display of hate in Murrietta, CA was nothing short of disgusting. I am a native Californian, born here in 1955. While I was growing up in California I cannot remember a time when Mexican-Americans were not a part of every day life. Not just as  landscapers or gardeners as some may think. No, the Hispanic people I remember were school teachers, store owners, policemen, dentists, priests and nuns.It has always been understood that California was at one time, Mexico. Through the study of history, who does not realize that through political maneuvering and, I am sure, military force this part of Mexico became California? So, to watch other Californians act in such an ignorant and unfeeling manner got me angry and, wondering why? How is it that those "protesters"  were able to stand up to armed police? And on what grounds? Who facilitated this coordinated effort? Here is what I came up with.

One of the consequences of the consistent slashing of Federal, State and Municipal budgets is that one of the first departments of every agency, who's staffing is cut, is the regulatory department. I have always thought that this was the real intent of the budget slashing, and the sequester, as the GOPTP has made clear that deficit reduction is a part-time romance for them. Yet, getting rid of the "police" of those agencies one doesn't like seems like a win-win...if one does not care for the future of their country, that is.

However, everything that is wrong with our systems cannot be blamed on this alone. Excuse me if I digress; during the too few trials which resulted from the 2008 monetary shenanigans of the banks, one important factor came to light. At one point an employee of one of the main players in what is now called "The Great Recession", was asked something to the effect of (I am paraphrasing here), "What do you consider your job to be?". When this question was asked I admit I was watching C-Span and treating this "investigation" as my own, private Jeopardy episode. So, when this question was asked my shouted at the TV response was, "To practice your fiduciary duty while increasing the bottom line for your company!" Beeep! Wrong! The response from the person being questioned was, "To sell stock!"

The man who was handling this Q & A went so far as to try to coach this man towards the answer I had given. No dice, it was as if this stockbroker had never heard the word "fiduciary" in his natural lifetime. To me, this spoke volumes. First, a definition of fiduciary from dictionary.com: "the legal duty of a fiduciary to act in the best interests of the beneficiary." This was the first principle taught when I was studying for and eventually earned, my insurance agency license. It was also one of the first principles taught in Real Estate school as I was working my way towards my Real Estate license. Yet, there was a stockbroker who is considered much further up the employment and prestige food-chain than an Insurance Salesperson or a Realtor and this guy, after prompting, couldn't come up with the word or the concept during a Congressional hearing.

What this tells me is that looking out for the welfare of their clients is the last thing considered by brokers, bankers and the like when money is on the table. From the time that 'Gordon Gekko' came to the golden screen in the movie Wall Street, with the tagline "Greed is good", it has been next to impossible to counter the increasingly held opinion that this tagline is the way to live one's life. 

Prior to 1987 (when the movie was released) Americans would never have admitted to being greedy. In fact, whether or not one held religious beliefs, the majority of Americans considered greed to be sinful. And, why wouldn't they think that? During WWI, the first 'Great Depression' and WWII the motto of the day was sacrifice. From rationing of almost everything that we take for granted now (butter, gasoline, meat, milk, you name it) to the potential loss of several members of one family, the generations before us all lived through periods of deprivation.

Then, along came we boomers. The post-war economy of the U.S.A. had previously been unimaginable. In fact, for those of you have not been taught this in school, WWII is what brought the U.S. out of the 1st Great Depression and launched an, up until then, unheard of period of prosperity. But of course, that kind of teamwork, love of one's fellow American and daily dose of hard work could not last. No, with the amount of money changing hands, the industries with the sweetheart Federal contracts and the boondoggles those companies were getting away with, Gordon Gekko could not have been far behind.

Sadly, certain strata of the American people took to Gekko like WWE wrestlers take to drama. Suddenly it became hip to be as greedy as possible, and it was ugly to watch. Greed that is born from a lifetime of deprivation is one thing, greed which is nurtured and fatted by those who have never wanted for anything of note is not only disgusting but perplexing.

Greed was actually the lesser of the two traits that were unleashed in the 1980's in the United States. The parasitic, evil twin of greed...cruelty, soon came snapping at the heels of the greedy and was eagerly given a place at their table. It was no longer enough to just take money from those who did not have enough to share, to be truly cool or hip one had to make the victim suffer. It did not matter so much what additional suffering was inflicted on those who were the victims of these greedy professionals who were supposed to "look out" for their clients interests, it just had to be useable for 'bragging rights'. It could be physical pain, or humiliation, or the victim could be left holding the bag for what their "fiduciary" did, as long as it was something bad.

So here we are, our society which used to pride itself on being honest and good but now, screw that. Only suckers look out for the other guy, only an "idiot" would sit back and leave money, even if it wasn't their money, on the table. Right?

Back to the original premise, what good does it do to go to court when those in the court are as dishonest as those who originally stole from you?

I do not know. This is where we are as I see the evolution. Those who have been ripped off and scammed are not as fault, it is those called the 'scammers' who created these circumstances. But, by accepting even a little bit, the 'greed is good' philosophy which has been on display for the last 30 years, we have each contributed. 

Which leads me to believe that it will take each of us to fix this problem. How? By NOT allowing those who embrace greed and malfeasance as a lifestyle to sidestep the responsibility of repairing what they have broken. We must, whenever possible, demand prosecutions, deny the idea of "too big to fail", vote out of office those who embrace this same philosophy. You will know who is of the same ilk by certain coded messages. Messages which divide us as a people, cast those who have less than you do as lazy or evil while trying to make those at the top sound like they are angels in comparison.

Somehow, oh who am I kidding? Through propaganda and fear mongering those who's agenda and immigration reform do not jive, people have been convinced that this is not only the way to behave but, that they are somehow justified in their actions. Does one always have to remind the citizenry that at least ONE of  their ancestors (unless of course they are Native Americans) was not born here? That each of us has an ancestor who traveled long and ardous routes to come to this country for a reason? And once again, do you always have to be reminded that your ancestor who came here was escaping

from something? Just like those kids and moms on those buses which, in such a macho manner, y'all sent back. You stopped nothing but you embarrassed the hell out of the rest of California.

Ever wonder where the opinion pieces you read (and shout "right on" to) come from, who wrote them and why? Are those who could act in this manner be capable of thinking back to; how that relatiive who braved unknown dangers to come to the United States for the betterment of his/herself and their family would have felt if confronted by...well, you, acting like a rabid dog? Don't be chicken, try to imagine this scenario.

Ask yourself when confronted by a rich person who is spending an inordinate amount of time trying to ensure that poor people do not get ahead, "Why?" Really, why would a very rich person spend more money to fight policies that would benefit the poor than would be spent doing so? Don't you ever wonder about that? Well, you should. Whenever you hear about a billionaire who is spending millions and millions of dollars to defeat a policy which is intended to do nothing more than help someone who has so much less than even YOU do, you should be asking yourself "why"? Why is the idea of a poor person getting health insurance or food or an education is so nauseating and anger inducing to those who have more money than several countries combined. Please, we should all think about these things.