Free What?


Free What?

If questions still linger about our free press,  they have all been answered through this slanderous media lynching of Herman Cain.  Whether one is Democrat or Republican, liberal or conservative, America must finally recognize that along with education, our news and informational sources are now in the governmental tank!

War used to be truth’s most feared adversary.  Senator Hiram Johnson, way back in 1917 said, “The first casualty when war comes is truth.”  This became the subject for Phillip Knightley’s extensive essay entitled The First Casualty.  I mention this solely for the need to prioritize the need for truth’s essential worth in reporting the news.

During the days since my last presentation, where I tried to make light of an anonymous question of  “gesturing,” news reports have upped the ante for Presidential campaigning.  Now, we have a face and a name, along with unpleasant charges from supposedly a quid pro quo offering by candidate Cain.  While reports center upon this unsubstantiated charge, many questions remain ignored by our army of investigative reporters.

As a curious bystander intent upon maintaining election integrity, bells and whistles chimed for me with the accuser’s hometown of Chi-town.  What a coincidence!  Also, it seems that Ms. Bialek imitates our federal government’s spending habits as she seems to live at a level not commensurate with her income.  This, along with her fickle work record and her 1991 personal bankruptcy action, should arouse curiosity as to her current living quarters being in the same building as Mr. Axelrod, of the Obama Administration.

After failing to ignite a public condemnation from charges of improper or harassing “gesturing,” our media sleuths have now located Ms. Bialek, after fourteen years, who now feels the need to set the record straight and be desirous of a confessing Mr. Cain.  Ms. Bailek’s ability to quell her nagging conscience for those fourteen years is remarkable in itself.  I remain curious as to just what caused her sudden reformation?

Ms. Bialek asks America to believe that based upon some previous and inconsequential meeting, she flew to Washington and reserved accommodations in the hopes of contacting Mr. Cain for possible employment?  This, on the surface, seems to be an expensive long shot.

Her description of what took place combines fantasy and romanticism into a well rehearsed presentation which just doesn’t quite jive with reality.  Her version relates that Mr. Cain “upgraded” her room to that of a suite and that they enjoyed drinks prior to going to another location for dinner.  Excuse me but if all this were true, and given that Ms. Bialek is not some naive school girl, either she is a fabricator or she is an extreme fabricator.  Who in their right mind would go to dinner with the expectation that the evening would end after desert?

Given Ms. Bialek’s background, from both a financial and personal perspective, possibilities abound that notoriety and some future payday may play heavily into her sudden need for Mr. Cain’s accounting.  Despite all these circumstances and inconsistencies, how is it that not one media pundit hesitated with their anti-Cain venom?  It now seems that the pedestal reserved for Ms. Bialek is all for the ruination of America’s first black conservative presidential candidate, pure and simple.

Our nation’s media sources and individual talking heads have shown their intentions and exhibited a vendetta styled assault upon what many view as Obama’s most serious threat.  Obviously, this comes from Mr. Cain’s equal racial footing and subsequent appeal to the black voter.

While this type of journalism may well define the demise of what was a “free press,”  it is the typical American reader and  audience viewer who needs to recognize this for what it is.  If not, then we have truly lost our desire and need for seeking truth.  All without having a war to fight.

Jim Bowman, Author of

This Roar of Ours

Euro Debt Crisis? Not Greek To Me

Euro Debt Crisis? Not Greek To Me

 

Greece. What a country!

From being the cradle of democracy to leadership in modern security (allowing stray dogs to sleep atop airport x-ray machines – no joke), from novel solutions to reduce speeding (traffic lights are routinely ignored, resulting in a seven miles-per-hour average speed in Athens) to having a good old-fashioned rivalry (hating the Turks), there’s something for everyone in Greece.

Topping it all, the legendary Greek work
ethic (clock in, coffee, siesta, set up construction cones, break,
coffee, siesta, lunch, siesta, ouzo, siesta, afternoon break, double
shot ouzo, siesta, remove construction cones, baklava (with ouzo),
siesta, clock out) has resulted in Greece being the catalyst for the
coming Dark Age. Far be it for anyone to suggest increasing retirement
age to something beyond what seems like 37.

Pay no attention that those asking for commonsense reforms are the ones footing the bill for that lavish lifestyle.

Because
of runaway spending and immense entitlements bestowed upon Greek civil
service workers, the government had a problem. The Piper finally came,
but there was no more money.

So the European Union (EU)
braintrust decided to bail out Greece, a combination of increasing the
money supply (contributing to inflation) and using OPM (Other People’s
Money).

And in return for the sacrifice others made for the
“greater good” (such as the request to forgive 50 percent of Greece’s
debt), what was asked of that nation? Reforms that would, in theory, get
Greece back on solid financial footing, if that is possible for a
nation whose debt exceeds an unfathomable 180 percent of its GDP.

The bailout was made, with self-congratulating, albeit clueless, Euro-technocrats preaching that all would be well.

And
things were great, at least in Greece, as the message of austerity was
received loud and clear, with a wink. Translation: “we’ll just continue
with Business As Usual.”

However, as any fifth grader could have
deduced, the Greeks ran out of money –  again and again and again. Not
willing to cut their losses, the EU did exactly what Greece knew it
would – open up its coffers, again and again and again.

We are on the sixth installment of the bailout, still predicated on austerity measures that simply aren’t happening.

And are the Greek politicians enacting unpopular but necessary reforms to avoid default?

Uhhh…put
it this way. Predicting Kim Kardashian would be divorced after only two
months was a better bet than thinking the Greeks would do the right
thing.

The latest development, mistakenly called a “bombshell”
but an obvious next step to all but the Euro-Geniuses, was the decision
to pass the buck by calling for a referendum on austerity measures.

So
the Greeks, who have been rioting because they don’t want the party to
end, are now being asked to voluntarily turn off the free-money spigot.
Sure they will.

To be fair, the vote won’t be unanimous. There are probably 30 Turkish expats who will vote Yes just for spite.

Oh to be Greek!

The
European Financial Stability Facility (a great oxymoron) and Central
Bank continue their insane polices of bailouts and bond-buying
initiatives. Portugal and Ireland have also received bailouts that
haven’t worked, so more money will be heading their way.

The big boys of Italy and Spain are next, and their financial needs are exponentially greater than the other nations combined.

The
most significant, yet least discussed, issue in this debacle is that no
one is offering solutions. Instead, they are merely buying time so that
the can is kicked down the road again, praying the implosion occurs on
someone else’s watch. Throw more imaginary money at the problem, say the
right things to keep sheep-like investors duped, and don’t get caught
holding the bag.

 

That has worked for decades, but too many
fundamental economic principles have been violated to keep the Piper at
bay much longer. The Ponzi scheme of socialist-leaning Western economies
is quickly approaching implosion status, and when it blows, the Great
Depression will look like a walk in the park. That’s what happens when
socialism and laziness trump free markets and personal initiative.

The
referendum is being labeled a high-stakes gamble, with Prime Minister
George Papandreou betting the Europeans are in so deep that even if
austerity is rejected, bailouts will continue. Default, we are told, is
far worse.

But the truth, which no one seems willing to admit, is
what transpires in Greece doesn’t matter. Given the complete lack of
will in America and Europe (and the absence of an even basic
understanding of economic principles), an unprecedented crash and
massive social unrest is inevitable.

That is the reality grounded in cold, hard facts.

Ultimately, even Bernie Madoff was forced to confess to a Ponzi scheme. When will reality force our leaders to do the same?

 

 

Euro Debt Crisis? Not Greek To Me

Sensitized Education


The Roar

The media’s investigative hound dogs are into a suspicion which they believe could end a black conservative’s Presidential quest.  Ironically, this mad dash to commit journalistic assassination completely ignores the fact that this entire fiasco is based on a whimsical allegation which, even those at Politico are not quite sure of just what it entails.  It’s the old “see if it sticks” reporting.

Recently, syndicated journalist Kathleen Parker provided just what a clear thinking analysis could achieve when political vendettas are left outside the mix.  In today’s column, Ms. Parker writes, “To Cain’s generation (age 65), a casual remark about someone’s appearance is often viewed as a gesture of friendliness.  To someone younger, who has been versed in the catechism of sexual harassment, it could be viewed as hostile or at least inappropriate.”

I think Ms. Parker has summed up this entire “grabbing at straws” attempt to derail what may very well become the first successful black conservative Presidential candidate.  And once again, it comes down to our old but reliable nemesis of “education.”  Think about it folks.  Just what  has become grounds for “sexual” harassment in our own environs?

I’ll be perfectly frank in that I am a member of Mr. Cain’s generation.  I now reminisce for the days when whistles resulted in a wave, even accompanied with a smile?  Not in every instance but certainly in many and without any thought to being harassed.  One could actually compliment a young lady as to her great looking legs (prior to this unisex pant suit fad) without fear of rebuke.  Has society become so minutely sensitized that casual compliments are now taboo?

Ultimately, this entire harassment charade, and Mr. Cain is just its latest target, is a wee bit hypocritical when given the allurements of summertime bikini briefs.  Instead of attempting this “high tech hanging” (Justice Clarence Thomas’ words), maybe our astute and truth seeking journalists should determine just who it doing the harassing when the office outfits are shelved for a week-end at the beach!

Jim Bowman
Author of,
This Roar of Ours

Insults from on High

                                                                         The Roar

I am a patient man with what I consider to be a modicum of intelligence.  As such, our current President seems to have an unusual but consistent manner which infuriates, embarrasses and insults.  When lumped together with his second in command, these impressions become magnified greatly.  I’ll graciously give Biden a pass since his jobs requirements and subsequent laughable performance is thankfully a non factor.

Not so for the “can’t wait for Congress” President.  Nearing his three year mark and after receiving the public’s trust and expectation for addressing policy ills, his track record is abysmal.  He has infuriated as his promises for exiting the Middle East was put on hold.  Now, with next year’s election looming and his poll numbers in the tank, he deems abandoning Iraq, at a most inopportune moment, an appropriate and viable decision.

His actions and mannerisms leave much to be desired if Presidential decorum is still a worthy trait.  His gait is one to be found in a youthful jive setting.  His lack of self control uncovered another level to his unique Presidential style when kicking a closed door open after leaving what seemed to be a  briefing of some sorts.  And need one harken back to the embarrassing photo of the First couple saluting with their hands over their heart?  Can any Obama supporter explain why our commander in chief is clueless to a rudimentary grade school function?

Remember our embarrassment when President Obama felt the need to knell when confronting foreign heads of state?  This, aside from committing a grave injustice to the office, was not the actions of a leader.  This was so out of sorts to proper and established American protocol that it presented an air of being intentional.

Lastly, Obama has obviously kicked off his own campaign season, by preaching at his favorite niche for support, the college campuses.  Once again this gifted community organizer reverts back to his tactics of creating unrest as he instinctively “talks down” to his youthful supporters.  He  even seems to roll up his sleeves in an attempt to “get down.”  The only glitch is that his “get down” presentation is to the excessively educated who themselves tend to “look down.”

Those of us who have worked for a living while raising families and who have eventually severed the mortgage strings are aghast at such a performance.  This man has indeed transformed America but in doing so, he has also awakened both sides of the political aisle.  His record of instituting purely socialistic policies, along with his rude and arrogant style of conduct and iron fist, “can’t wait for Congress” approach, has become a unifier in opposition to the love, trust and adoration which brought Obama to our White House.

Similar to his record, there is little to defend as his current campaign mode is to amass votes in whatever manner available.  His ploy for buying votes with student loan relief substantiates this reckless “the end justifies the means” philosophy.  These are tactics learned early and carried throughout his life.  As such, he may well be too entrenched at playing the organizer than to act Presidential.

Jim Bowman
Author of,
This Roar of Ours

Missing the Mark

                                                                             The Roar

And here I thought we were supposed to select the best Republican alternative for a showdown with Obama in November, 2012.  First, it seems that the political world, coupled with the mighty news networks, have taken a page out of the sport’s play-off system as republican “debates” have now become  an endless, boring, and unproductive bit of chatter.

“Debates” may also center upon a single issue, such as the economy or the immigration travesty. In addition, the moderators often attempt to instigate, through their style of questioning, a feisty yelling match, which we just all so recently experienced between Perry and Romney.  Eventually, the notion begins to form that bickering and accusations are not the grist for choosing a Presidential candidate.

What is usually given a pass, by both the manner of questioning and the ensuing mudslinging, is the disastrous record that Obama has amassed.  More often than not, these forums are conducted by members of the press who are uniformly pro-Obama.  As a rule, the queries are directed to one candidate’s opinion verses another leaving Obama no where in sight or thought.

As mentioned, these are the months leading up to our selection of a presidential candidate.  The obvious shifting away from scrutinizing the present administration’s policies verses what each candidate has to offer for a solution is both disingenuous and misleading.  And all the candidates, with the possible exception of Newt Gingrich, are only too eager to degrade or attack their fellow Republicans.

The future voter in 2012 should be repelled by such antics.  During the debate intervals, whoever is deemed the most recent winner or leader in the polls becomes the subject for ridicule and even personal attacks by our nation’s media.  It’s a sort of political version of the old time “king of the mountain” game.  Whoever holds the high ground become the target for throwing down the hill.  It was fun when young but it has no relevance within discussions leading to possible leadership

We all agree that this coming election will not only be crucial but already is quite different in that the consensus is, whoever wins the Republican nomination will probably win the White House.  This is reason why so many entered and still remain.  But, how admirable are these candidates when they eagerly respond to such back ally tactics?

Moments of leadership and coolness under fire have briefly flashed yet this instinctive quality remains generally under wraps.  What has been presented is a mantra of me, me, and more me.  This display is part and parcel of what is ailing our general society.

Above all, these self preservative attitudes and styles are missing the point.  The calling of a President should first answer our Country’s call and that is to tend to the betterment of our Nation.  Lord knows this is now of crucial importance.  First and always come our United States.  This is paramount to the White House, to all lesser held offices and all the way down the the soldier in the foxhole.  And it’s that soldier, mired in mud, that is often the most loyal to his sworn oath of duty.  Could it be that our search and selection process for leadership is in the wrong arena?

Jim Bowman
Author of
This Roar of Ours

A Quiet Push To Reform Pa.’s Prevailing Wage Law

Pennsylvania’s prevailing wage law passed in 1961 requires all local governments and state agencies to pay workers a rate  determined by the state’s Secretary of Labor for any “construction, reconstruction, demolition, alteration and/or repair work.”

This law has been shown to hike labor costs for school additions and such by as much as 44 percent.

Seven bills, some which would radically reform how prevailing wage is handled in Pennsylvania, were voted out of the Labor and Industry Committee of the State House chaired by Rep. Ron Miller (R- 93) on Oct. 3.

The most significant would be HB 1191 sponsored by Rep. Ron Marsico (R-105) which exempts local governments (school districts, municipalities and counties) from prevailing wage requirements — unless they really, really want them.

That raises the question as to what local government could possible want them. Go to Upper Darby, stand on the west bank of Cobbs Creek and look east. See that big, steaming pit of greed, corruption and incompetence? That one.

Also voted out of committee were:

HB 709 sponsored by Warren Kampf (R-157) which simply exempts school districts from the requirements.

HB 1271 sponsored by Rep. Marsico which would clarify, and expand, the maintenance exemptions for road work from prevailing wage requirements.

HB 1329 sponsored by Fred Keller (R-85) which would raise  to $185,000 the point at which which projects become subject to prevailing wage requirements. The mark is now  set at $25,000 as it has been since 1961. That amount in 1961 dollars roughly equals $185,000 today. Keller’s bill would require the limit to be adjusted annually for inflation or deflation.

HB 1367 sponsored by Rep. Miller which would require the Secretary of Labor to use data from the Labor Department’s Center for Workforce and Analysis in determining the prevailing wage.

HB 1541 sponsored by Scott Perry (R-92) which would require a project to be at least 51-percent publicly funded to be subject to prevailing wage restrictions.

HB 1685  sponsored by John Bear (R-97) which would standardize and require the public listings of worker classifications.

All the bills would help the taxpayer. With HB 1191, however, the taxpayer might actually notice it.

They Are here!

                                                                              The Roar

If any questions remained, they were all finally answered by recent events.  There is not one remaining iota of doubt that America, along with its institutions of freedom,individual liberty and opportunity are squarely in the cross hairs of our Cold war nemesis, communism.

Consider its recent strides.  Since their scare from McCarthy, they regrouped mainly in academia, but also with a fair sprinkling in other influential fields.  However, their invasion into the educational field, with particular emphasis at the higher level, provided both insulation against a replay of inquiries while at the same time enjoying an air of respect from their lofty positions of tutelage.  And the plums to be planted and harvested were the young and impressionable minds which fed off their instruction.

This cadre of subversives had their first taste of success through the Vietnam protests during the sixties.  What appeared as a simultaneous uproar no doubt required a coordinated effort.  Each college campus reacted in almost a knee jerk reaction once the affair commenced.  This large scale effort was the product of a national network, and with many of its cohorts at the classroom controls, the only organized anti-American element capable was the CPUSA, the Communist Party USA.

Now, zoom forward forty plus years to this fervent anti-American,  anti-capitalist venom.  The demographics from this orgy of unrestrained youthful idealism  leaves little to the imagination as to where this unrest originated since overwhelming numbers appear to be of collegiate age.

As if this disorder and mayhem is not enough, what is more alarming are the elected leaders in our government who are themselves sensing that  the time is right to aid and identify with this rabble.  Sadly, this has been evident at every level of authority, including our President.

Politicians being what they are, extreme opportunists, democrats and Obama may view a chance to raise sagging poll numbers through alignment with this youthful rebellion.  While this may be the most acceptable of reasons, it remains reckless and irresponsible since the emotions they are stoking may erupt from the slightest provocation.

Americans of every stripe must decide whether our country should resemble a tattered South American banana republic as political tactics hasten after the rise or fall of poll numbers?  And, if this Obama ploy is successful, will this anarchy become embedded within our political process every four years?

Or is there more to this than political gamesmanship?  If we remember back to those protests from the sixties, what ever became of all those college hooligans?  Many matriculated into current positions of authority and prestige within our government.  Bill and Hillary attest to how youthful idealism fades with age.  Or does it?

Through these intervening years, the American voter unknowingly may very well have sponsored the same anti-American radicals who rampaged our society during the Vietnam era.  The question is, did their indoctrination fade or has their own venom been waiting for just such an occasion.  Certainly, with a number of leading politicians voicing their own anti-American utterances, the seriousness of this consideration cannot be ignored.

Consider the reaction of a former Speaker of the House when learning of a Portland, Oregon demonstration  singing a song’s lyrics of, F “the United States.”  Rep. Pelosi’s comment was, “Well, God bless them.”  And she is just one example.  They are here and they are not just in the streets but also in our government legislating.

Jim Bowman
Author of,
This Roar of Ours

Romney Must Address His Mormonism Now

Romney Must Address His Mormonism Now

He is Republican, pro-defense and hawkish on the War. He is also an unabashed Christian, although his particular sect is viewed with suspicion and prejudice. Oh, and he’s running for president. Based on the recent firestorm that erupted when a pastor called a presidential candidate’s religion a “cult,” it seems clear that we’re talking about Mitt Romney and his Mormon faith. But we’re not. The above description referred to none other than Dwight D. Eisenhower–a Jehovah’s Witness for most of his life.

Eight years later, it was John F. Kennedy defending his Catholicism.

Now, it’s Romney’s turn. But he is taking a “leap of faith” by deliberately avoiding discussion about how his Mormonism influences his values, and how he views the relationship between religion and government.

During the last presidential campaign, Romney made a strategic mistake on the religion issue. It wasn’t that he didn’t address his Mormonism, because he did. The problem was his timing. And he seems about to make the same mistake.

*****

In the run up to the 2008 primaries, there was an intense battle inside Romney’s camp over whether Mitt should address the Mormon issue head-on. That the debate even took place demonstrated political naivete on Romney’s part, as well as a lack of historical knowledge.

Romney and some of his advisers actually thought they could avoid discussing his Mormonism. Since he was the frontrunner, how could they have believed that the “Mormon issue” would disappear?

Romney finally made his Mormon speech, but it was too late. Had it been delivered three months earlier, he would have been ahead of the curve, proactively talking about Mormonism on his terms. But that didn’t happen.

Instead, it looked like an act of desperation.

Romney, who had been leading in the early states (in both money and polls) suddenly found himself trailing the surging Mike Huckabee in Iowa, who was also breathing down his neck in New Hampshire and South Carolina. It was only after losing momentum that Mitt decided to address the questions that had long been swirling about his faith. The result was that he looked desperate and disorganized.

Apparently, Romney’s staff thought they could put the issue to rest by emulating Kennedy’s famous Texas speech to Protestant ministers, where he adamantly stated that he would not be taking orders from the Pope. That was a miscalculation on several counts. First, common perception is that Kennedy ended concerns about his Catholicism after that speech. Wrong. JFK felt obliged to address the issue on several other occasions.

More importantly, Catholicism was the largest single religion in the nation, and Catholics made up a substantial and powerful voting bloc in many key states. Conversely, Mormons make up just a fraction of the electorate, and a significant number of voters, especially evangelical Christians, view Mormonism as a non-Christian “cult.”

Romney’s unexpected slip in the polls four years ago was his first major crisis, and how he reacted–some say over-reacted–led to questions about the candidate. Were people put off by a potential commander-in-chief who seemed to panic at the first sign of trouble? Could America afford a president who was seen as indecisive? And just how much of Mitt Romney’s “strong faith” was believable, since his former positions on abortion and gay rights stood in contradiction to the tenets of his religion?

As we know, Romney failed to win the nomination that many experts said was his to lose. Now he’s back in the same frontrunner position, yet is again choosing to remain silent on the Mormon issue.

He sidestepped Rev. Robert Jeffress’s cult remark made at the Values Voter Summit, and failed to directly address another evangelical leader who questioned whether Mormonism was even a Christian faith. A Romney spokesman said he would not address the Mormon issue because he did so four years ago.

Given that the memory span of the average voter is about three months, that’s ridiculous. Failure to act quickly on this matter will undoubtedly cause history to repeat itself.

Like all religions, Mormonism has some tenets that seem quirky to non-adherents. As the primaries draw near, expect those aspects to become front and center on the national stage, both directly and indirectly. With all of Romney’s crisis-management experience in business, he ought to know that it’s always better to take the bull by the horns to define a difficult issue–and being the first to do so. If you allow the issue–or your opponents–to define you, you’re always playing catch-up.

By refusing to address an issue that clearly isn’t going away, Romney is playing with fire. No one remembers his speech from four years ago, but even if they did, he should innately understand that addressing an issue–any issue–just once is meaningless. In the same way that he hammers home his economic plan time and again, so too should he proudly discuss both Mormonism and his personal thoughts on how it affects his life. Not doing so only raises more questions and, by default, gives credence to unsubstantiated hearsay about “strange” Mormon beliefs.

Interestingly, but not unpredictably, several of Romney’s GOP competitors had the opportunity to state that Mormonism was a Christian religion. They took a pass. Why? Because they believe they’ll lose part of their evangelical base, some of whom view Mormonism with animosity.

That’s proof-positive that this issue isn’t going away. All the more reason for Romney to address it, and turn the tables on his competition.

Romney would be wise to study how Kennedy handled the religion issue. By consistently hammering away, JFK made it seem that voting against a Catholic was bigotry, plain and simple. Kennedy smashed a religious barrier that many said would never be broken, not by remaining silent and taking the high road, but with a take-no-prisoners approach in his quest to become America’s leader.

As both Eisenhower and Kennedy proved, it’s the man, not the religion, who will carry the day. But that distinction doesn’t come from rolling over. It is earned. Time will soon tell whether Romney understands that lesson.

 

Romney Must Address His Mormonism Now

Nutter Nuts About Philly Murder Rate

By Chris Freind


If the CEO of a Wall Street firm announced that revenues were up 22
percent, he would be lauded for his leadership and undoubtedly receive a
hefty raise.

By contrast, if it was revealed that the CEO was
playing games with the books and basing his figures not on a
year-to-date comparison from the prior year, but from four years ago, he
would probably be shown the door.

But that’s precisely the
situation with Philadelphia Police Commissioner Charles Ramsey, the
city’s highest-paid employee. The argument can be made that
Commissioner Ramsey is deliberately misleading the public on the city’s
murder rate.

A visit to the Philadelphia Police website Crime Stats page (http://phillypolice.com/about/crime-statistics)
verifies what we already know: shootings, violence and murder are out
of control throughout the city. As of this writing, there have been 259
murders since January 1, as one can plainly see from the highlighted
2011 figure on the webpage. Beside that is a number with a down arrow.
Currently, it’s 18 percent, but last week it stood at 22. It purports
to represent the percentage that murders have decreased.

And therein lies the problem. A big one.

Murders
aren’t down 18 or 22 percent. As a matter of fact, they’re up.
Comparing year-to-date statistics, they’ve increased ten from last year,
a whopping 24 from 2009 (a ten percent jump), and eight from 2008.

But
Chief Ramsey has decided to hide these numbers and instead compare
today’s murder rate with that of 2007, the high-water mark for killings.
That’s like the Phillies claiming a playoff victory because they beat
the Cardinals half a decade ago.

It’s interesting to note that
Ramsey was hired at the end of 2007, which perhaps explains why he is
using that blood-soaked year as his benchmark— all the easier to pass
the buck and make himself look better.

Maybe the Chief, and Mayor
Nutter, who hired him and remains his boss, missed their callings. They
seem better suited for Wall Street firms that rely on misleading
investors (in this case, the citizens) for their own personal gain
(re-election, job security and bloated pensions).

So residents
get the screws two ways: they walk away with a false sense of security,
mistakenly believing that murders are down. And when they realize the
truth — that their leaders are deliberately misleading them — they
feel betrayed.

Unlike the Wall Street CEO, Nutter and Ramsey get
away scott-free. And like some robber baron execs, they each make a
pile of money, courtesy of a duped public, with little accountability
and oversight.

In fact, Chief Ramsey is rolling in it, to the tune of $255,000/year.

You
may recall that earlier this year, the Commissioner was actively
courted for the top police job in his hometown of Chicago. Despite
pleas that he stay, it was almost a done deal, but for one small
sticking point: his $400,000 per year total compensation asking price,
according to press reports. You know it’s greedy when even a liberal
Democrat like Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel balks at such an obscene
amount, which, by the way, is the salary of the President of the United
States.

Ramsey’s reason for ultimately staying in Philadelphia?
“…the support I got here at home from the business community — and the
media, even — and, of course, Mayor Nutter, made the difference.”

Well,
that, and the $60,000 pay raise he was promised from the Mayor as a
reward for not leaving the city, courtesy of the taxpayers. That
increase makes the Commissioner the highest — repeat, highest — paid
city employee. Even more than the Mayor himself.

Ramsey was
right about one thing. He did get quite a bit of support, from city
councilmen (“we won the big prize” by retaining Ramsey) to the gushing,
sycophant media. Notably, neither entity bothered asking the right
questions before, or after, the lavish pay hike was doled out to the
Chief.

Questions such as:

1) How can the city afford to
shell out a $60,000/year salary increase to anyone when it can’t even
pay its current bills, has an insolvent pension, and continues to see
its tax base — what’s left of it — flee? In fact, it was just
reported that there is yet another tax revenue shortfall, adding to the
budget deficit. What a surprise.

And for the record, there are
plenty of qualified people who would have gladly accepted the
Commissioner’s previous salary of $195,000 had he chosen to leave.

2)
When will Philadelphia realize that paying exorbitant salaries to
government officials is not just financially foolhardy, but doesn’t
guarantee results? Just look at Arlene Ackerman, the now former School
Superintendent who made $325,000/year (with incentives allowing for a
half-million dollar payday) to preside over an ever-worsening school
district. For the privilege of leaving her post, she banked $905,000,
all footed by the public.

And don’t forget scandal-plagued former
Housing Authority chief Carl Greene, who, with his bonus, was making
$350,000. In addition, residents are still paying sky-high legal bills
related to the mess he left behind.

3) Was any quantitative, or
better yet, common sense analysis done to see if Ramsey merited such a
large salary bump? Murders are increasing, out-of-control flash mobs
have led to curfews, police corruption is rampant, and there is growing
fear on the streets, leading many suburbanites to stay away.

According
to the Chief’s 2008 “Crime Fighting Strategy,” the big goal that year
was to “reduce homicides by twenty-five percent,” yet the Department was
way short, overseeing only a 15 percent drop from 2007 to 2008. And
what of the stated overall plan of reducing homicides by 30 to 50
percent, as outlined in a public letter from Ramsey to Nutter? Not even
in the ballpark. As noted above, homicides have been rising, not
falling.

While certainly not all these things can be attributable
to the Chief, the buck stops with him. He is responsible. Just like a
CEO often receives no bonus when numbers are down, the Chief of Police
should have pay raises tied to performance. But since the Mayor deals
in Other People’s Money, that isn’t the case.

Is the city is
safer? You can play with statistics to bolster any desired conclusion.
Yet ask those in Philadelphia whether they truly feel secure, and most
would simply laugh. And that’s the only statistic that matters.

Is
the Chief doing a good job? In some respects, yes. But so stellar that
he commands a raise three times more than the city’s per capita income?
Not even close. The fact that the city can’t afford the money is just
salt in the wound.

OK, fine. Ramsey got his money. It is what it is, and he isn’t relinquishing it. But that bolsters the point all the more.

The leader of the Police Department should epitomize transparency and honesty.

Instead,
in what can only be assumed to be a deliberate attempt to deceive
Philadelphians, games are being played with the city’s increasing murder
rate. And there is no excuse for that. None.

The culture of any
organization is established by the conduct of its top leaders. In the
Philadelphia Police Department’s case, its culture of honor, values and
integrity has taken a hit. And when the rank and file — the guys on
the street chasing down the murderers — see their top brass skirting
the truth for political gain, perhaps they too cut a corner where they
shouldn’t be. They take on the persona of their leadership.

It’s
time for the Mayor and Chief to do the right thing by telling the
truth, no matter how difficult that may be. Let’s see more honesty in
the most trusted institution in Philadelphia — its police department.

Only when the city’s leaders regain the trust of the people will Philadelphia begin its journey back to respectability.

 

Nutter Nuts About Philly Murder Rate

Irresponsible Leadership

                                                                                  The Roar

For too long, America has been under the leadership of a President who, for all intent and purposes, consistently opts for the wrong course of action.  This fact alone validates why our fuel prices have almost doubled, our unemployment hovers at or above nine percent and our housing market remains in tatters.  And, it is this consistency which raises eyebrows.

In a curious sidestep, it has recently become the fashion to center our ire against those Wall Street profit seekers.  The original gatherings of protest have since leap-frogged from the Big Apple to any and practically all metropolitan areas.  Again, the President’s choice of action regarding this development becomes highly questionable if the betterment of our Nation remains paramount.

It probably seems slightly redundant to echo the inescapable fact that from Obama’s earliest Presidential campaign overtures, our media has been overly accepting of any and all of Obama’s shortcomings.  This policy continues today as a local headline misleads, “Obama ups heat on GOP to pass jobs bill.”

While this jobs bill gains the reader’s initial attention, a more accurate headline may have read, “Obama once again shows impatience and Presidential irresponsibility.”  His frustrations were evident from the first sentence as he stated his desire for Congress to pass his jobs bill or  be “‘run out of town’ by angry voters.”  Actually, Ben Feller of AP left the key word of “run” out of the quote which once again softened Obama’s threat.

Now I ask you, is this any way to be Presidential?  Vote for what I want or you will be chased “out of town” by essentially a mob, which I condone?  And talking about mobs, we return to Wall Street where there might be career openings for organizing and training the mob mentality.

Once again, Obama’s actions are irresponsible as he not only supports but seems to encourage this mob sentiment against our Nation’s financial center.  While hyping his jobs bill, which is essentially just another stimulus package cut in half, he reflects the anticipated positions of both Republican Congressional leaders by a return to his former organizing skills.  They may be the heart and soul of community organizing but as a National leader, the overall betterment of the country should be first and foremost when being President of “all” the United States.  Not so with his embarrassing comment; “And, you know, all I can do is make the best arguments and mobilize the American people so that they’re responsive.”

Since the House became the purview of Republicans, the Obama Presidency has traveled rocky roads.  The American voter is now witnessing the sudden change from his first two years of grinning to his current  nine month state of perplexity.  And his frustrations are without pretense, as his recent remarks suggests.

One last observance offers credence to his uncertainties.  Supposedly, Obama’s unseen resume contains a reference to his professorship of Constitutional Law.  So, it might just be the heat of the moment for him to misstate, as Commander-in-Chief,” We have a democracy…”  Or, I wonder how many of his students got that question wrong in his tests?  Again, his baffling consistency.

Jim Bowman
Author of
This Roar of Ours