Wetzel’s Innocence

Published on September 16, 2010 in Criminal Justice and Politics. 0 Comments

I am not in any way personally connected to Frank Wetzel, but having learned of his case, have become increasingly outraged and wish to reverse this 52-year old miscarriage of justice.

The evidence on his side is overwhelming and compelling.

Eighty-eight year-old Frank Wetzel, a New Yorker who has been wrongfully incarcerated in North Carolina since 1958, was found guilty in two separate trials of killing two State Troopers who were shot nearly 50 miles apart – and within 20 minutes of each other. The evidence presented in the trials should have exonerated him of both murders, not convicted him. The police engaged in a clumsy and transparent attempt to frame the only suspect rounded up after the murders.

The sole “eyewitness” recanted his testimony in 1986. He said he had implicated Frank Wetzel because, as a black man in North Carolina police custody in the 1950’s, he had feared for his life while a police officer stood over him with a blackjack until he identified Mr. Wetzel as the murderer.

Frank Wetzel was not represented by counsel in his first hearings in those pre-Miranda days. His court-appointed attorney was an ex-FBI agent who provided ineffective assistance of counsel.

  • He had not challenged glaringly conflicting and inconsistent testimony.
  • The sole “eyewitness” described the killer as dark-complexioned and Hispanic, with a foreign accent—whereas Frank Wetzel is fair-skinned, was born in the U.S., and has no foreign accent.
  • The car was described as two-toned; Mr. Wetzel’s car was black.
  • A page in a hotel log that would have proved Frank Wetzel was far from the scene of the crimes was found to be missing, having been clumsily torn out of the book.
  • Finally, saying the case was “too hot” at the time, Mr. Wetzel’s court-appointed attorney advised him not to appeal the convictions.
  • Having not appealed within the legal time frame, Mr. Wetzel was denied recourse to later legal rulings protecting his rights as the accused.

In sum, Mr. Wetzel’s counsel made serious errors which prejudiced the defense – errors so serious that he was not functioning as the ‘counsel’ guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment. When Mr. Wetzel did not receive the death sentence for these heinous murders, the jurors said that seemed only fair: After all, they said, there was “reasonable doubt” as to his guilt. Reasonable doubt was an understatement, since counsel entirely failed to subject the prosecution’s case to any meaningful adversarial testing.

As if all this were not enough, Mr. Wetzel has been eligible for parole since 1978, yet, among the longest-serving U.S. prisoners, he still remains behind bars. His regular requests for a review of his case have been denied. No justification is required.

Because of the length of incarceration and Mr. Wetzel’s advanced age; because the evidence points to his innocence, not guilt, in these crimes; and because he was wrongfully convicted and denied his constitutionally-guaranteed rights, with the help and support of Mr. Wetzel’s family and a foundation they are starting, I am launching an appeal to North Carolina Governor Perdue to grant Frank Wetzel immediate clemency.

To sign the petition please go to:
http://helenfogarassy.com/petition-to-free-frank-wetzel/

or click on the “Wetzel Petition” link in the menu at the top of the page.

If you wish to read more, including citations from original news articles from 1957 through the present, please read my earlier blog posts below. There is also additional information at freefrankwetzel.com.

Thank you,

Helen Fogarassy

Post to Twitter

How the Media Locked Up Frank Wetzel and Threw Away the Key

Published on August 31, 2010 in Criminal Justice and Politics. 0 Comments

Based on a wrongful conviction, an innocent man, 88-year old Frank Wetzel has been incarcerated for 52 years.

Why is Frank Wetzel in prison? There are compelling reasons to believe he is innocent of the charges – and to believe the conviction violates U.S. law:

  • In 1958, Frank Wetzel was not represented by legal counsel during his first hearings.
  • His court-appointed attorney (an ex-FBI agent) for the trials rendered ineffective counsel.
    • He did not question conflicting testimony, including glaring discrepancies in the color of the car involved (two-toned tan and brown vs. black)  and the physical description of the killer (dark-complexioned  vs. very fair).
    • He excluded exculpatory evidence:  He did not bring out the fact that there was a missing page in a hotel log that would have proved Frank Wetzel had been far from the site of both killings.  This was highly suspicious, and seemed to indicate Mr. Wetzel was being framed.
    • He advised Frank Wetzel not to appeal his convictions within the timeframe that would have given him recourse to later legal rulings protecting his rights as the accused.
  • The only “eyewitness” later recanted, saying he had feared for his life and felt forced by police, while in custody,  to name Frank Wetzel as the killer
  • Frank Wetzel was nowhere near the scene of either murder, but a Bible and gloves belonging to the sole eyewitness (who later recanted), were found between the two murder sites. No physical evidence linking Frank Wetzel to either murder was ever discovered.
  • The press of the 1950′s was notorious for convicting suspects as soon as their names were made known.  This is what happened to Frank Wetzel.
  • Why was he not given a life sentence?  … because members of the jury, when questioned, said they had “reasonable doubts” as to his guilt.

Quote from eyewitness, who later recanted his testimony:

“I was under a lot of pressure and felt as if I was being tried for my life. A Captain Welch pulled his blackjack on me…to make me accept the police’s version of the story.” (Recantation reported in the Roanoke Rapids Daily Herald, May13, 1987.)

In the news:

In perspective:  At the age of 37 in 1957, New Yorker Frank Wetzel was an ideal candidate to be framed for the murder of two North Carolina state troopers on November 5. His continued incarceration 52 two years after his conviction is a glaring testament to lapses in the American criminal justice system nationwide.

As a three-time felon in New York, Wetzel was facing a mandatory life-sentence after he maneuvered his way into a mental facility in a plan to escape and free his brother on death row in Mississippi. That brother was executed four days after the end of Wetzel’s second trial. He was posthumously exonerated a year later.

In New York, Wetzel would have been eligible for parole after serving the minimum years of his sentence. In North Carolina, he never had that chance, not because of the law but because of personal elements projected through the media.

The two troopers were shot within a twenty-minute span at a distance of 40 miles apart. If one person killed both, the driving speed would have been 120 miles an hour non-stop. Yet a Bible and gloves left in the first car by the sole eye-witness were found neatly arranged between the two locations.

A book by the late sportswriter Bill Currie entitled “Guilty with Reasonable Doubt” details allegations about in-fighting between local members of the North Carolina State Troopers at the time. Yet media license to sensationalize brought about the capture, conviction and permanent incarceration of Frank Wetzel.

Frank Wetzel was identified as the killer of both troopers by the Federal Bureau of Investigation on November 14 based on his New York history. His fingerprints were also found in a car he had stolen and abandoned in Chattanooga, Tennessee.

The media ignored the fact that the black car did not match the two-tone car color described by the witness in the first incident. Other discrepancies were also ignored.

The killer was said to be dark-complexioned, perhaps Hispanic, while Wetzel was a blond of German descent. The killer’s height, weight and age were also at odds with Wetzel’s physical description.

Reporters did not investigate. Instead, they played up the drama of Wetzel’s capture and his two separate trials just three months apart.

North Carolina officials travelled to California to bring Wetzel back (Richmond County Journal, November 22, 1957). The story of his tame capture received wide local publicity (ibid).

The drama of the trials included the dismissal of a motion by a ruling judge to declare a mistrial based on the illegal taping of the courtroom by the local media (The Charlotte News, January 10, 1958). The article reporting on the decision identified Wetzel as a “four-time loser.”

On January 16, The Rockingham Post-Dispatch called Wetzel a “bad egg” while reporting on the hunt for a bullet in the second shooting – a bullet which was never found (Rockingham Post-Dispatch, January 16, 1958.   Among those searching were State Troopers and a boy scout troop.

Despite the lack of evidence linking the two killings, the image of a “four-time” loser and a “bad egg” no doubt played on the minds of jurors. For example, in the first trial they were chosen from a pool of 150 in an overtime session (Richmond County Journal, January 8, 1958).

Also undoubtedly influencing the decision to convict was the presentation of Wetzel’s defense. His court-appointed attorney was an ex-FBI agent who did not object to inconsistent testimony. He also advised Wetzel to not testify in his own defense and to not appeal the convictions within the legal time-frame that would have allowed him recourse to later legal rulings protecting the rights of the accused.

The 1963 Miranda law requiring defendants to be advised of their rights was one of those rulings. The Gideon vs. Wainright ruling of the same year was another.  That guaranteed defendants the right to be represented by counsel.  In 1958, Wetzel made his plea of not guilty without benefit of counsel (The Charlotte Observer, January 7, 1958).

The grounds for the court-appointed attorney’s advice to delay submitting an appeal were that the atmosphere was too hot  (The Charlotte News, January 13, 1958). Heeding that advice has kept Frank Wetzel incarcerated for 52 years.

Wetzel has repeatedly been denied the possibility of parole. The decision has been based on the parole board’s decision that he needs further rehabilitation (Daily Herald, May 1, 1986). A review of his case and original trials through a writ of certeriori petition has been repeatedly denied. No justification for that decision is required.

Given the fact that by contemporary standards Frank Wetzel obviously did not receive a fair trial 52 years ago, the repeated denial is a travesty of the principle that the rule of law evolves. Solely on the basis of improving American jurisprudence, Wetzel’s case and trials deserve review.

Yet as recently as 2009, Wetzel was again denied the right to have his case reconsidered. Families of the slain troopers were among those petitioning the denial of that right.

Media coverage from the perspective of those families no doubt played a role in the decision. That projected personal element washed away the fact that Wetzel had not had a fair trial 52 years ago.

The American judicial system calls for a higher standard of justice than personal sentiment, however.  Given the length of time that Frank Wetzel’s rights have been denied, he has earned the right to an immediate exercise of the privilege of Executive Clemency by North Carolina Governor Beverly Purdue.

Post to Twitter

Does 88-year-old Frank Wetzel Deserve to Remain in a North Carolina Prison after 50-odd Years?

Published on June 24, 2010 in Criminal Justice and Politics. 14 Comments Tags: , .

Quote: laws grind the poor, and rich men rule the law (Oliver Goldsmith)

In the news:

Man’s Name Is Frank Wetzel: Search For Him Is Intensified Over Nation (Rockingham Post Dispatch, November 14, 1957)

Patrolman’s killer named by FBI: man escaped from mental hospital (Richmond County Journal, November 15, 1957)

Jury would have convicted Wetzel had the evidence been conclusive (Rockingham Post-Dispatch, January 16, 1958)

Court of Appeals Renders Opinion (Justia, U.S. Court of Appeals Cases and Opinions, argued June 4, 1980; decided Oct. 27, 1980)

Pardon sought for Wetzel in 28-year-old slaying: star witness says ID “prompted by pressure” (Roanoke Rapids News, March 14, 1986)

1957 Murders Leave Lingering Mystery Despite a Conviction (Los Angeles Times, February 05, 1995)

What is Frank Wetzel doing in prison after 37 years? (Herald Journal, February 12, 1995

Definitions (Oxford Concise English Dictionary):

frame-up: a conspiracy, especially to make an innocent person appear guilty

conspiracy: a secret plan to commit a crime or do harm, often for political ends

in perspective:

Frank Wetzel was 37 when he was convicted of killing two North Carolina state troopers in two separate incidents at the end of 1957, nine years before the 1966 Miranda Rule protecting the rights of the accused came into effect. The two trials regarding the killings took place after Wetzel was hunted down by the FBI in an all-states alert based on his history.

News headlines at the time were allowed to identify Wetzel as the killer rather than as a suspect. Stories cited his criminal record and that he was an escapee from a mental institution. His institutionalization and escape, however, were part of a plan to free a brother on Death Row in Tennessee, who was executed the year Wetzel was sentenced and then was exonerated the next year.

Born in the Depression era of 1921, Frank Wetzel and his brother Bill had been encouraged to contribute to the family income by any means possible. From an early age, both brothers served time for theivery but not for violence.

Armed with munitions to break his brother out of Death Row, Frank was headed south from New York when he was caught in the North Carolina jam. Two state troopers were shot in one night in two towns forty-five miles apart. A states-wide bulletin was issued by the FBI the next day. Wetzel was captured in California a week later and was returned to North Carolina by local law-enforcement officers traveling by train to take him into custody.

Three months later, Wetzel was convicted of both killings based on the identification of a hitchhicker who had witnessed the first killing, despite the fact that the witness’ initial description did not apply to Wetzel. The witness had described a dark-complexioned driver, for example, while Wetzel was a blond German. The driver’s described height was also at odds with Wetzel’s, as was the car color and the subjects talked about during the drive prior to the killing.

Nevertheless, Wetzel was convicted in the first trial on the basis of that testimony and on circumstantial evidence that at the time required no safeguards of fingerprinting or comparison of tire tread-marks to ensure the same vehicle was involved in both incidents. Discrepancies went largely unchallenged by Wetzel’s court appointed attorney, who was a fomer FBI agent.

Based on that first verdict, Wetzel was convicted in the second trial. Based on his attorney’s advice to postpone filing an automatic appeal because the case was “too hot” at the time, Wetzel lost his legal window of opportunity and has been a prisoner of the North Carolina legal system ever since.

The testimony that served as the basis for Wetzel’s conviction was recanted 30 years later by the “Negro” sole eye-witness, as reported in the Roanoke Rapids Daily Herald on March 14, 1986. In the recantation, he said he was “under great pressure by the police” to identify Wetzel as the killer.

The recantation came about as a result of investigative work by reporter Bianca Brown, who also succeeded in obtaining the death certificates of the two officers. Those indicated that the shootings had occurred within 15 minutes of each other and not an hour as had been testified in the trials.

Bianca Brown was drawn into Wetzel’s situation on reading a news article that Wetzel had been denied a requested transfer when a prison guard overheard him discussing escape plans with another inmate. Seeing no sense in such self-sabotage, Brown met with Wetzel and presumed she would easily secure his release through her well-positioned connections.

Over 20 years later, Wetzel’s continued incarceration raises serious questions. They concern not only the legal and penal systems in North Carolina and the country beyond the state, but also the political.

Convicted by legal standards no longer allowed by modern law, Frank Wetzel at the age of 88 remains at the vagary of humanly implemented law. Appearing at his first hearing without benefit of legal counsel, he obviously did not receive a fair trial in 1957. Despite that obvious injustice and false testimony about the timing of the killings, Wetzel is routinely denied his writ of certeriori petition for a review of the trials.

The February 1995 Herald-Journal article quotes inmate advocate Jim Lewis as saying “No governor wants to touch this. If Frank Wetzel gets out on their watch — oh my.”

At present, as Frank Wetzel’s next parole hearing nears in September, a former governor of North Carolina is under investigation for corruption. That seems to indicate that perhaps Frank Wetzel’s case needs to be taken beyond the state.

One final point about the question of Frank Wetzel’s guilt or innocence seems of paramount relevance. If he did not commit the two murders on the November night of 1957, then a “cop-killer” is still on the loose somewhere in North Carolina 50 years later.

Post to Twitter

The United Nations Window on Racial Diversity for 2010 America

Published on May 10, 2010 in Global Communication, Global Politics, racial diversity and United Nations. 0 Comments

quote: variety’s the very spice of life (William Cowper)

in the news: in (American) political message wars, “race card” has become a salvo fired by all sides (Washington Post, May 6, 2010); (American) tea party groups battling perceptions of racism (ibid, May 5, 2010)

in perspective: Since the inauguration of the western industrialized world’s first non-white leader in January 2009, the conservative mantra in America has been a call to “take our country back.” The vagueness of the term speaks volumes about deep-seated human emotions yet to be understood let alone measured. However, for those wanting to “take the country back” to a pre-non-white American presidential time, the United Nations perspective can serve as a reassuring window onto the future.

The modern world of 200 countries is wholly interdependent at all levels, from economic and social to environmental. Those countries are peopled by an overwhelmingly non-white racial majority. As represented at the United Nations, the mix is a panoply of human potential and splendor, as well as a wild bazaar of the mindboggling challenges to be negotiated across the mix of developmental levels, cultural differences and national priorities.

Since the 2008 election, little attention in the American mainstream media has been devoted to the most basic change in the country. For the first time ever, non-white faces represent the country in newspapers and on television screens.

The sheer novelty demands address. That’s because Michelle Obama may be lauded as a fashion trendsetter, but America is used to Hillary Clinton’s demure pantsuits and the prim attire of Laura Bush.

The American self-perception is guaged through its leaders. The change that came to America through its leader was a radical one that called for acclimation, or simply getting used to a novel development. The United Nations model is the vehicle to fast-track the necessary perceptual change America needs to make.

In essence with the 2008 election, America overthrew the expected paradigm of a white-male President backed by his complementary woman-behind-the-throne. Sixty-plus years after its establishment, the United Nations has long erased such presumptions about power-wielders in the minds of its ranks and staff.

Whatever its handicaps as a bureaucracy, the United Nations has one giant redeeming value. The forum allows for a refreshing level of exchange that enables minority views to impact on the jaded approaches to problem solving that the world’s superpowers bring to the table.

The effect is far from miraculous. The mighty United States still rules at the United Nations, along with the other permanent members of the Security Council, including the European powers of France and Great Britain along with China and Russia.

Nevertheless, the little Solomon Islands manages to sway minds and hearts with its imagistic pleas for environmental control to ease concerns about rising sea levels and increasingly fierce climactic disasters. Little Cuba with its enormous United Nations staff and restricted travel allowance still manages to nettle its powerful northern neighbor.

And complain as it might against bias, perhaps with good reason, Israel makes a good case at the United Nations for why it has to take severe measures against Palestinians in the midst of neighbors still denying the country’s very right to exist. African countries, meanwhile, pursue with utmost confidence the continent’s renaissance through cooperative arrangements with global giants such as China.

In short, the United Nations is a window onto a bustling world. The maverick America that managed to break the racial glass ceiling on power could benefit from its mainstream media making more use of the United Nations web site.

Post to Twitter

Metaphors for Racism in 2010 America

Published on March 25, 2010 in Global Communication, Global Politics and Politics. 0 Comments Tags: , , , , , , , .

quote to tickle thought: the metaphor is probably the most fertile power possessed by man (Jorge Ortega y Gasset)

in the news: Walmart announcer tells black people to leave store; Racial slurs hurled at lawmakers during health reform protests

definitions from Oxford concise dictionary: metaphor, a symbol of an abstraction; racist, one who believes in the superiority of a particular race; bigot, one who has an obstinate and intolerant belief in an idea

in perspective: America broke the global racial barrier on power with its 2008 election. Its new half-black president has wisely chosen to focus on the national crises that got him elected when white strategies no longer worked. A year into the new administration, however, racism screamed to be addressed.

No doubt the shock of the racial breakthrough combined with the sensitivity of the issue prevented direct address. A possible solution would be for the media to approach the subject through the indirectness of the metaphor.

The first step would be to break down the vast block of those opposed to the policies mandated by the election for the creation of a more global and compassionate America. That would be the conservative half of the population having unabashedly declared its commitment to saying no to any progressive proposal.

Breaking down that domestic block to progress calls for differentiating the categories making up the conservative element in 2010 America as represented by the Tea Party movement. That includes true conservatives clinging to past values and ideals, elitists holding to pyramidal models of societetal entitlements, racists seeing the present reality of non-white American leadership as an anomaly rather than progress, and downright bigots deserving of no more notice than to be ignored since they’re not open to reasoning.

Once identified, the concerns and needs of each group could be targeted directly. To true conservatives still of the view that the United States can unilaterally impose its will on other countries, the global nature of the modern world and economy could be pointed out. Elitists would be reminded of the shooting-star nature of celebrity and wealth today while racists of every stripe would be bombarded with facts about how blockages to freedom, opportunity and merit are challenged everywhere. Finally, bigots would be left to die out in the discourse about true conservative concerns.

Bolstering those messages with the aid of metaphor would be the second step in garnering support for the agenda America mandated with its 2008 election. The metaphors would concretize today’s reality of just how backward was conservativism in a global world.

For true conservatives holding onto old ways, metaphors would focus on the futility of renewing the worn-out old. Pouring money into a dilapidated house, patching threadbare clothes or resoling outworn shoes would serve as starting images.

Elitists may be swayed by metaphors about the evanescence of status in the media-driven age of Sarah Palins, movie stars and “celebutards,” as the New York Post coins it. By contrast, the lasting influence of those committed to global progress could be stressed, particularly activisists of notable visility such as Bono and Sean Penn.

For racists, metaphors would center on the evidence of history and how bizarre old attitudes about human differences appear in a modern context. Rudyard Kipling’s “White Man’s Burden” about United States involvement in the Philippines during 1899 could serve as a template for an image today of a “Non-white’s Challenge” in a world where China holds the purse strings of the United States.

On the question of racial superiority, the image behind the metaphors would be the Biblical reversal of the first becoming last and the last becoming first in the absence of an attitude shift. Inversely, agreement on equality could turn the global scenario into an endless series of championship play-offs where everyone has a serial shot at coming out the winner.

History bears witness to the futility of movements centered on obstreperousness, elitism and racism. It exposes the glaring reality. Bigots are primitive dinosaurs in the human journey towards progress.

American media has an opportunity to impact on a rapidly changing world in 2010 as the Tea Party movement gets nasty and violent. The challenge calls for innovation and for an update of old journalistic rubrics.

Coverage of hard news today calls for creativity. It also calls for the violation of the sacred American taboo against intellectualism.

A literary device such as the metaphor can make the bitter pill of transition more palatable to the American common man exemplified by the political football who came to light in the 2008 election. “Joe the Plumber” may not like the rest of the world or see any use for it. But without that broader context, he’s nothing more than a laboratory rat caught in a maze.

Post to Twitter

Just Say "Yes" to Conservative "No" in 2010 America

Published on March 10, 2010 in Global Communication, Global Politics and Politics. 0 Comments Tags: , , , , .

quote to tickle thought: Stronger than all the armies is an idea whose time has come (Victor Hugo)

in the news: (American conservative) Rush Limbaugh will move to Costa Rica if health reform passes (in US); (US NY representative) Massa flirts with the right, but (conservative talk show host) Beck isn’t tickled

in perspective: America voted for radical change in the 2008 election. The new president has come under fire for being overly conciliatory with the conservative establishment.

Media reports indicated that independent voters in particular were disillusioned with the new President Obama over his inability to bring about more robust change. But perhaps that inability was less the president’s fault than that of the American public, which has allowed itself since the election to be diluted in its “yes, we can” rallying cry as the conservatives gathered steam with their “no” on the agenda for change.

The pendulum swing was predictable enough. After a historic step forward, the country as a whole took a half step back as the conservative element knocked the country off its victorious feet.

Columnist Frank Rich on Sunday March 7, 2010 was among those questioning President Obama’s ability to lead. The internet that week buzzed with gossip about White House power struggles.

Yet the half-white man who’d won America’s faith in 2008, and with that skill led the country to overturn global history, was not likely to be slow on the draw. That was true regardless of how resoundingly and unprecedently behind the eight-ball he was.

Health care reform was the signature legislative priority of the new administration, no doubt because no other issue cut as sharply into questions about economic, social and racial divides in America. The resolution of no other issue could so decisively determine whether America would go with the agenda chosen in the 2008 election or let the conservative “no” take over and return the country to the simplistic mentality that had led to the global economic crisis that left the country no choice but to vote for radical change.

However watered down and imperfect, passage of the health care plan would be a signal for the new President Obama to continue implementing the 2008 mandate for a more humane United States in a global world where it was reeling. Enemies such as terrorists and how to deal with them remained on the forefront. But of equal concern for the country and its economic future were competitors such as the European Union, Russia and China.

Dissatisfied as President Obama’s constituents may have been in 2010, there was no mistaking the change in the country’s tenor since the last days of the previous conservative administration. Through actions such as stabilizing the global economy and instituting its own financial reforms, creating jobs and changing policy on issues such as climate and energy, the new America in 2010 had become a world-friendly participant in a global world instead of a pariah.

That big step forward was accomplished in just one short year and acheiving it was crucial for the country regardless of conservative clamor for continuing to harp on the rubric of America’s greatness devoid of acknowleging global neighbors. As economists and diplomats well know regardless of the American public being slow to be informed by its mainstream media, the growth of the American economy in the 2010 global world depended on the behavior of 200 other countries.

If all that could be accomplished by America’s new President Obama despite the heels-dug-in position of “no” to change among America’s conservatives, progressives could take heart. The bigger picture showed that they needed only to send up a resoundingly united “yes” to change so as to prove out the wisdom of their 2008 choice and enable the new President Obama to be the intermediary between the old and new America in the role for which America had elected him to be.

Post to Twitter

The Battle for an American Identity in a 2010 Global World

Published on March 2, 2010 in Global Communication, Global Politics and Politics. 0 Comments

quote to tickle thought: divide and rule (ancient political maxim cited by Machiavelli)

in the headlines: energized conservatives pound on Democrats at CPAC; lawyers cleared over 9/11 memos (condoning torture); majority say Obama hasn’t accomplished much in first year; anti-government groups show surge, watchdog warns

in perspective: Coverage of the annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC)in Washington ended on February 20 with the message that the conservative spirit in America had rallied. A contrast was drawn between this year’s optimism and the demoralization of last year a month after the inauguration of the western industrialized world’s first non-white leader. The 800 pound gorilla in 2010 America that nobody seemed able to address was a realistic sense of the forces driving the conservatism.

A year into the new administration, tea partiers bickered among themselves and fought for a rebel identity separate from mainstream Republicans. Meanwhile, the Southern Poverty Law Center on March 2 said it counted 512 militia-related groups in the country in 2009, up from 149 the previous year. The common element between all these groups was the word “no” to the 2008 election mandate, with the “divide and rule” tactic reenforcing it.

Seemingly forgotten was the mandate itself. That mandate was to bring radical change into a great country that had brought on a global economic crisis with eight years of a greed-driven, unregulated conservative policy. Licence for indulging a strategy of denial about that mandate was a product of the “divide and conquer” tactic practiced by conservatives upon the country’s progressives.

A year into the new administration, conservative euphoria over expected gains in 2010 midterm elections was fueled by falling support for the new President’s policies. Public opinion polls indicated that blame for failure to achieve the promised electoral campaign change was leveled at the new president for his inability to break an increasingly fierce Washington gridlock between conservatives and progressives.

Independents were said to be most disillusioned with the new president’s performance, perhaps in a demonstration of just how impatient were the country’s progressives to get the country onto the global highway where cooperation was the operative word rather than the flexing of muscle to achieve aims. In the 2010 global world of 200 countries all interconnected through travel, communication and trade, alliances created the basis for power, not the single factor of military or economic primacy.

The 2008 election showed that America’s progressives were well aware of the global shift in which emerging countries from South America to Africa and from China to India were intent on gaining an equal say in how the world was run. America’s conservatives, on the other hand, held onto old rubrics about the value of America remaining the world’s schoolyard bully.

Personal experience can serve to show that change is a complex and frightening process before a breakthrough occurs. That personal experience can be extrapolated to the local, national and global levels.

By contrast, the harping of a single note to hold onto old virtues based on past successes is a message that is simple, loud and clear. In 2010 America, a year into its new progressive administration, that conservative message was dividing and conquering the progressive agenda mandated by the 2008 election.

The cure for the tyranny of the conservative stranglehold of “no” to American progress in the 2010 global world was for progressives to take the advice of Benjamin Franklin. At the signing of the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776, that great forefather said, “We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately.”

Independents may be disappointed by the performance of America’s new leader as he negotiates the slippery slope of instituting change by relying on those adept at working the system to help him in that task. But with America’s identity in a global world at stake, progressives of every bent would best serve their country by resisting the conservative tactic of allowing themselves to be divided and ruled.

Imperialists and colonialists throughout the world’s history had practiced and perfected the tactic of divide and rule. As the beacon of democracy for the 2010 global world, America was eminently positioned to overthrow that policy, not only for the global good but also for its own.

Post to Twitter

Smiles and Snarls for 2010 America in a Global World

Published on February 14, 2010 in Politics. 0 Comments

quote to tickle thought: Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond all measure (Marianne Williamson, erroneously attributed to Nelson Mandela)

in the news on 2010 Valentine’s Day: Cheney attacks Obama on national security; games changer: luger’s death casts pall over opening ceremony (of 2010 Olympics in Canada); luger officials alter track while asserting it was safe; Wall Street helped to mask debts shaking Europe; same-sex couple stir fears in Malawi of a “gay agenda” promoted by the west; what your heart and brain are doing when you’re in love

in perspective: Former vice-president Dick Cheney chose Valentine’s Day to go on the Sunday airwaves to promote his “Chicken Little” message of the doom worse than 9/11 awaiting America at any moment. In the same interview on ABC’s This Week, the father of a lesbian daughter said society had changed enough to allow repeal of the “don’t ask, don’t tell policy” relating to gays in the American military.

A New York Times article that same day reported on African countries where homosexuality was so little understood that it was punishable by imprisonment and even death. At the same time, the paper reported on the role of Wall Street in the financial crisis afflicting Greece to the point where the European Union contemplated expelling the country from the relatively recent organization formed to address the needs of member states in a global world to maximize national strengths on behalf of regional interests.

Meanwhile, the media focus at the 2010 winter Olympics in Canada showcased the national pride of the world’s 200 countries at the personal level, regardless of how small a showing there was at present on the part of developing and emerging southern countries in those western elite sports. A review of previous defeats and triumph fueled audience enthusiasm for individual athletes, as did a focus on attending family members who had made athletic excellence possible in an individual through recognition of a gift in one person.

Numerous studies accessible through search engines attest to an obvious fact. Positive experience releases hormones and triggers physiological processes more constructive for problem-solving and attainment of goals than negative ones.

Ignorance, poverty and bigotry are not about to disappear overnight in any corner of a global world. But the two possible responses are the same in every corner.

One response is to act on fear and continue to send outmoded alarms. The other approach is to broaden thinking and direct the energies of personal interests into the wider global world.

Whether at the level of economics, sports or in any area of human rights from those of gays to those of refugees or children, the generosity of America’s privileged attention cannot be a waste of effort. In fact, it could lead to a renewal of America’s faith in its own strengths, which in turn could lead to global revolutions as well as economic betterment both in America and beyond it to areas worldwide.

A focus on gay rights in antipathic societies, for example, could lead American gays to make strides at home. An opening of opportunity for athletes into sports arenas not in their native conception at present, as another example, just could lead to the discovery of a skating star in an African or Caribbean country who had previously eyed only track events. And the successful tackling of such new frontiers could just lead to greater successes in taming old social, political and personal hostilities.

In a nutshell on Valentine’s Day 2010, hostilities continued to erupt in India and Pakistan while athletes competed in the 2010 Olympics in Canada. A comparison of the two situations proved the classic Beatles rock group right in a round-about way.

All you really do need is love. The trick is to keep that message in the forefront against the doomsday retrogressives.

Post to Twitter

Black David Up Against White Goliath in 2010 America

Published on January 29, 2010 in Global Communication and Global Politics. 0 Comments Tags: , .

quote to tickle thought: Genius does what it must and talent does what it can (Owen Meredith)

in the news: Obama’s State of the Union a moment of truth; US economy grows at fastest pace since 2003; Senate republicans have one word for democrats: no; squabbles erupt over national Tea Party event

in perspective: A year into his first term, America’s new non-white President gave his first State of the Union address just as the United Kingdom conducted the Chilcot inquiry into the country’s role in the Iraq invasion. From the start, the new President has repeatedly stated that he wants to move forward rather than look back at the country’s actions during the previous eight-year conservative administration. However noble the attitude and however desirable the ideal, the reality of the Main Street fight against a Wall Street monopoly demands an accounting on a period that led to America being reviled in the world to the point that it sparked a global economic crisis.

America broke the racial glass ceiling on power to elect the man who could lead it in the humane and world-friendly direction a global world demanded. He has done the job he was mandated to carry out and yet has received little acknowledgement for gargantuan efforts in reversing the global economic, moral and security declines resulting from previous policies.

One benefit to derive from the opportunity to meet new challenges is that of learning. To have achieved his place in history, America’s new President is undoubtedly at the “genius” level as defined by “an infinite capacity for patience,” according to a number of sources in Bartlett’s Quotations.

On the other hand, however admirable their skills, the President’s colleagues in Congress and beyond are at the “talent” level of doing what they can to stay in power or make a profit. The historical thrust of both that power and profit is white, moneyed and privileged.

America elected a black “David” against a white “Goliath” in 2008. The new black David just may need to readjust his thinking during his second year in office to get across the mandate the American people entrusted to him. He just may need to put the power of the past behind the stones he flings at white Goliath with his slingshot.

Post to Twitter

Does 2010 America Expect a Miracle-Worker in Obama?

Published on January 17, 2010 in Global Communication. 0 Comments Tags: , , , , , .

quote to tickle thought: …the miracle is nowhere but circulating in the veins of man (poet George Seferis, 1900-1971)

in the news: missing girl’s dad pleads for Obama’s help in Haiti; Syracuse schoolchildren upset over White House response to letter; majority say Obama hasn’t accomplished much in first year

in perspective: America elected the western industrialized world’s first non-white leader to address a global economic crisis created by the last “pale male” American administration that had alienated the world with its military, political and economic policies. At the first year anniversary of the new people- and world-friendly administration, yet another poll showed Americans disappointed with the new President’s performance.

At the same time, distraught American parents called on the President to help find their missing daughter in earthquake ravaged Haiti. Also, Syracuse schoolchildren found an outlet to voice unhappiness with a form letter in response to their invitation for the President to help them build a snowman.

The election of a non-white leader for America could be viewed as a miracle in itself, as judged by voluminous news sources prior to the election predicting that America simply wasn’t ready for the step. In wake of the historic inauguration in January 2009, complete with world jubilance, the President’s approval rating has been shown as steadily declining, even aside from the expected conservative backlash against progress by tea-partyers.

The perception seems particularly odd in view of the fact that the new President has addressed and stemmed the global economic crisis, has restored America’s standing in the world, has brought financial institution managers to the edge of accountability and has given individual Americans the sense that a “compassionate” President was at the country’s helm. Those mere handful of the new administration’s accomplishments in its first year could be attributable factors to an ineffable sense that despite continued challenges such as unemployment and discord, a glumness in outlook for the future had lifted in America over the single year before.

Compared to other world cultures, 300-plus-year-old America is young. It is short on attention span and long on satisfying ambitions, whether personal, national or international. In the 2010 globalizing world, perhaps the biggest miracle America performed with its 2008 election was to choose the man who would lead by weathering the country’s growing pains as manifested in juvenile retaliatory tantrums.

Post to Twitter