I was watching The Ed Show yesterday and Ed Shultz was talking about the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) that President Obama has been pressing Congress to support.  Mr. Shultz said that 85% of the Democrats in Congress are against the TPP and so are all of the labor unions.

The odd thing is that Congressional Republicans, Wall Street and the Chamber of Commerce are praising and strongly supporting the President while Democrats like Senator Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders are not.  Even some Republicans on the far right and extreme right are supporting him.  These are the same folks who worked so hard to prevent him from getting elected in the first place.

I’m talking about Republicans like Representative Paul Ryan, Senator Marco Rubio and Senator Ted Cruise.  That’s scary!  The Republicans in Congress have been trying to bring down President Obama and ruin his legacy since he was first elected President.  They have even voted against legislation that they have always supported or that they themselves introduced once they found that he was in support of it.

Why this sudden drastic change?  Under these circumstances it would not be unreasonable for anyone to assume that there is a skunk in the woodpile.  In other words, something stinks; something is wrong.  It just doesn’t feel right!  At this point very few details on the agreement have been made available to Congress and the public and the White House is being quite coy when they are pressed for details.

In order to gain the support of Washington Democrats and the Party base, President Obama is touting his resume of initiatives put forward in support of middleclass Americans and the accomplishments that he has accumulated thus far in an effort to help reestablish them.  He says that he has always worked on behalf of the middle class and that he would not support the TPP if he did not believe that it is the right thing to do: he is saying ‘trust me.’

Obviously there are a lot of those who are staunch supporters of President Obama but in this case they are balking at giving him their support on this one.  It is just too important of an issue for them to go down the ‘trust me’ path.

It would be hard enough to do it if organizations like the Chamber of Commerce, Wall Street and virtually every Republican that loathes him wasn’t suddenly praising him and giving him their full support.  With them supporting the TPP, it will be next to impossible to gain the level of support from Democrats that he is seeking without providing full details on the agreement.  Even then there would probably still be a substantial amount of resistance.

There are those who believe that the TPP would give too much power to corporations and give foreign governments an extraordinary amount of control over America’s business affairs.  They also believe that it would put downward pressure on American wages while still bringing about the loss of jobs.

Most Americans do not know much about the technical aspects of the TPP or any of the other trade agreements that America has entered into.  But we do have those that we have elected to represent us and it is at times like these that they should do the job that we elected them to do.  It is up to them to get informed and make sure that America’s best interest and our overall best interest are served.  To do this they will need to be able to have details of the agreement so that they can review them and understand them before they throw their support behind the President.

Although I am an avid supporter of President Obama, I believe that there should be reasonable discourse and debate on the TPP especially if Senators like Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders believe that it is giving large corporations even more power while stifling the voice of middleclass Americans and further stripping them of what little power that they have left.  Since he was elected, President Obama has done a lot in an effort to bring back the middle class.  And as he mentioned, he has always worked on their behalf.  He might be right about the TPP; but so might Senators Warren and Sanders.  That’s why there needs to be discourse and debate.

Eulus Dennis

Republicans at all levels of government are suspect of public assistance programs like Medicaid, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANIF), Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP; a.k.a., food stamps) and even the earned-income tax credit.  Some Republican-led legislatures around the country are currently trying to pass laws that will delineate items that recipients of food stamps cannot purchase with those food stamps, which includes tickets to movie theaters and lingerie but – ironically – the list of excluded items does not include guns and ammunition.

Some lawmakers in these legislatures believe that food stamp recipients are using food stamps to purchase foods like expensive fish, crab, lobster and other expensive seafood so they are working to portray them as virtual welfare kings and queens, which – by the way, would serve to bolster Republican talking points whenever they spar with Democrats during the approaching 2016 elections.

Even if this is happening these occurrences are likely rare and they are more than offset by, if we use the same premise, what could be referred to as corporate welfare kings and queens.  However, these kings and queens seemingly go unnoticed and actually operate without even a hint of scrutiny by these concerned public servants.

Both those on public assistance programs and many large corporations are subsidized by taxpayers.  There are many hardworking Americans who work long, hard hours every day, some of whom work two jobs, to support their family and they still must receive public assistance to make ends meet.  These people are taxpayers and so have put something into the pool of funds from which they are benefiting because they have fallen on hard times.

It is likely that these hardworking Americans would not need to be on public assistance if they were paid a livable wage.  Yet and still most of these same lawmakers who are leery of safety net programs are against an increase in the minimum wage.  Most of them are also against equal work for equal pay.  They say that to implement either or both of these things would be ‘job killers’.

Those lawmakers who are pushing to establish laws that would dictate to food stamp recipients what foods that they cannot buy with their food stamps are not unaware that many of those corporations that are paying these low wages are making unparalleled profits.  They are not unaware that many of those multi-billion dollar corporations many times pay less tax annually than many average Americans pay.

So when taxpayers subsidize those needy Americans who are on public assistance programs because they do not earn enough to make ends meet they are in essence subsidizing those corporations that are paying unlivable wages.  And when taxpayers do this, many times these corporations are not among the contributors to this taxpayer pool of cash that the government is dipping into because many times many of them pay zero taxes.

How can Republicans even pretend to stand in support of the middle class when they allow corporations to get away with shenanigans like this and yet cry foul when hardworking Americans reach out for assistance from safety net programs that were specifically put in place to assist them in their times of need?  How can Republicans in good conscience work to destroy these programs while working to lower corporate tax rates?

I invite anyone – whether they are a Democrat, Republican or Independent, who disagrees with me to step up and speak up.  Tell me in your comment on this website why you believe that I am either misinformed and/or in error in what I have stated in this article.

In the meantime, in the event that any reader of this article is interested reading an article that addresses this same subject in more detail; following is a link to an article in The New York Times by Patricia Cohen.  The title of the article is ‘Working, but Needing Public Assistance Anyway’.

Eulus Dennis

For those of you out there who are not billionaires, millionaires, or at the very least a One Percenter, it is high time that you pay attention and wise up.  Big money has recently been the benefactor and subsequently the beneficiary of a major Supreme Court decision (i.e. Citizens United) and is systematically working to eliminate its competition, which is organized labor.

Unions have slowly but surely been losing members and ground under the relentless attack of corporations and other big money interest.  Although big banks and other corporations have come back strong and thrived since The Great Recession, wages have remained virtually stagnant and in some cases even fallen.

With the Citizens United ruling allowing for unparalleled amounts of dark money to be pumped into elections the only major players capable of operating in that arena have been big money and the labor unions.  Now, a major effort to wipe out unions is underway in many states around the country.  This effort is being led by lawmakers and most of the states involved in this effort are red states.  The majority of the legislatures in these states are either heavily controlled by Republicans or completely controlled by them.

The Republican agenda and that of big money are the same and they are working together to totally eliminate the middle class – whether by accident, as a result of collateral damage, or on purpose just as long as they can assure an increase in the bottom line for corporate interest.  It matters not whether you are a Democrat, Republican or Independent; if you are not among the rich, this agenda will have a negative impact on you.

It is not a coincidence that lawmakers, at the behest of big money, are working so hard to get rid of unions.  Unions have long been the major check and balance against all large corporations and other forms of big money.  We have become accustom to having a livable wage, worthwhile worker benefits and weekends off but we have forgotten why we have all of those things.  It is because of the unions.  Large companies certainly did not grant workers these things out of the goodness of their hearts!

Large corporations and other big money interest are for the greatest part supported by the Republican Party.  After the 2010 midterm elections Republicans said that they would build a larger and more inclusive tent.  So far, that effort has failed.  So instead of focusing on a continuation to build that larger and more inclusive tent, they decided to focus on making it harder for eligible voters to vote.  The obvious assumption is that by reducing the number of those voting they would reduce the ability of those who are opposed to their agenda to have an impact on it.

Republicans and Independent voters who fall into the middle class need to step back and take a serious look at what Republicans in Washington and in many of the red states around the country are doing.  No matter how staunch a Republican or Independent you might be you would likely agree that the middle class is the backbone of America and must not be destroyed.  You would probably also agree that if the middle class is allowed to be destroyed that although there might not be an immediate impact on America the impact will come; and it will be negative.

Even if irreparable damage is not done and the middle class is able to be restored, restoration will likely be a long and hard road to travel and our country will be worse for having allowed this tragedy to occur.  Boilerplate statements like the one RNC spokesman Michael Short made recently about 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton are meaningless when it comes to standing up for the middle class.

Based on an article in the Associated Press by Julie Pace – entitled ‘AP sources: Middle-class economics a focus of Clinton’s bid’, Mr. Short said “All Hillary Clinton is offering is a continuation of the same big government ideas that have grown Washington instead of the middle class.  That’s why voters want fresh leadership and a new direction, not four more years of Obama failed policies.”

Apparently the only support that Republican Senators and Representatives in Washington are willing to offer middle-class Americans is worn-out talking points and lip service.  And one can only hope that the fresh leadership that RNC spokesman Michael Short alluded to is not the kind that these leaders have exemplified since they became the majority governing Party in congress and that the new direction is not that which they are currently flaunting to the world based on how we are handling the Israel, Iran and Cuba situation.

Under the circumstances, responsible middle class Democrats, Republicans and Independents must band together and step up to defeat this irresponsible act by corporations and big money and any of those who stand with them.  What our Republican leaders in Washington are doing right now in openly fostering partisan bickering in congress by purposely attacking the integrity of the Obama administration and trying to destroy this President is doing much more to hurt America than it is to help her.

While it is not understandable to me that they are so eager and willing to take this approach, if it is something that they feel that they must do to save this country from a President whom they obviously deem unworthy to hold the office, then they must find a way or at least make a reasonable effort to do it without tarnishing the Office and the country.  I believe that there are many One Percenters and many in congress who agree with me.  If that is indeed the case then they should use their influence in an effort to help stop this sideshow that we are presenting and the world is currently witnessing.

Eulus Dennis

Once again an unarmed Black man has died at the hands of a White police officer.  This time the shooting took place in North Charleston, South Carolina after a routine traffic stop.  The unfortunate victim was 50-year-old Walter Scott and the policeman who shot him was 33-year-old Officer Michael Thomas Slager.

Officer Slager fired eight bullets at Mr. Scott as he fled hitting him in the back and killing him.  To make matters worse, Officer Slager – after handcuffing Mr. Scott as he lay dying on the ground, jogged back to the spot where Mr. Scott first broke free of him and picked up an item which he then took and dropped beside Mr. Scott’s body.

At the time, Officer Slager told Dispatch that Mr. Scott grabbed his taser and he shot him.  He later reported that he feared for his life and that is why he shot Mr. Scott.  Those in authority accepted Officer Slager’s version of what occurred as the truth and dealt with the community and press accordingly.  What Officer Slager did not realize was that someone had videotaped the entire incident as it occurred after he chased and caught up with Mr. Scott.

When the video surfaced and revealed that Officer Slager had not told the truth about this encounter, to their credit, the Mayor and Chief of Police withdrew their support of Officer Slager, fired him, charged him with murder and he was arrested.  If convicted he could be sentenced to 30 years – life in prison.  This was a tragedy that left at least two families deeply hurt and grieving for a loved one.

Although for the greatest part African-American males have been the victims of this overly aggressive policing, for the purpose that this article is seeking to accomplish, I encourage the readers not to take sides or get involved in a debate as to which family is hurting the most or make our main focus the fact that it was a White police officer that killed an unarmed Black man.  Those things are obvious.

What we need to do, and can do, without marginalizing the fact that a life was lost and that that lost life – Mr. Walter Scott, was not faceless and nameless and that it left behind a grieving mother along with other family members, is focus on equal justice under the law for all people.

The point of this article is to encourage all of us to do all that we can to begin to restore the trust between the police and the communities that they serve and protect across this entire country.  The police have a lot to do in order to restore that trust but as members of our various communities, so do we.  Clean cops must stop protecting dirty cops due to misguided loyalty or the fear of being left without backup by their fellow officers when they need it because they have been labeled as unworthy because they have violated the ‘blue code’.

This is a tough choice but it is one that the police must make if they are to regain the communities’ trust.  There are many more clean cops than dirty cops and that ‘many’ must determine that they will not continue to be bullied by the few.

As for those of us who live in these communities that police officers risk their lives each day to serve and protect, we must allow them room to use whatever amount of force is truly required to serve and protect us.  We must also realize and accept the fact that the amount of force required to subdue a subject may sometimes involve injury to that person or even death.

This does not preclude the fact that we must always be vigilant and when necessary, scrutinize and question the circumstances surrounding any situation where police attempt to arrest someone and that attempt involves injury or death.  Such scrutiny should not need to be motivated by color but by the desire to assure that there is equal justice under the law for all.  If community members allow police officers the previously mentioned room to exercise their professional judgment and scrutinize and question only those encounters that truly warrant it, this should begin to restore police officers’ trust in communities.

Finally, as a result of what just happened in North Charleston, South Carolina, many have reflected on other situations involving excessive force by police officers throughout the country and asked in the North Charleston situation; what if there was no video?  As I reflect on the many questionable occurrences where a police officer’s version of what happened has outweighed that of the alleged perpetrator along with that of witnesses, it gives me pause.

Police officers have a tremendous amount of power over our lives and can instantly determine whether we live or die.  Yet their word is readily taken almost without question when they make a decision that requires injuring someone or killing them.  This is difficult enough to accept even if police officers throughout America had a stellar record when it comes to truthfulness, which they do not.

Usually when those who are either criminals or have been accused of a crime are judged in a court of law, their past record is taken into consideration in an effort to determine their truthfulness, guilt or innocence and, possibly, even the amount of time they must serve if they are found guilty.  If they have a past criminal record and have been proven to be liars in the past, this would have a major impact on a judge and jury’s decision.  Why shouldn’t this same standard apply to policemen and police departments?

Since too often some police officers have been found to either distort the truth or completely lie and some police departments are subject to look the other way in order to protect the department’s reputation, isn’t it past time to stop automatically giving a police officer’s version of a situation an extraordinary amount of weight versus that of others who either witnessed it or were involved in it?

And isn’t it past time to stop allowing police departments to police themselves in light of the vested interest that they have in protecting the police department?  At least until police departments and their police officers can come to grips with the ‘blue code’ and how to effectively deal with it, our society needs to find a way to better verify and substantiate statements given by police officers involved in arrests; especially those that involve injury or death.

Eulus Dennis

There is a lot of hoopla going on right now about the potential nuclear agreement deal that President Barack Obama has negotiated with Iran via Secretary of State John Kerry.  Congressional Republicans are pretending to be concerned about the details of the agreement and the need to review them before they can decide whether or not to endorse it.

What a joke.  It is obvious that they have already made up their minds.  Have these Republicans no shame?  Flashback; Republicans tried to torpedo the negotiations before they were even completed!  Remember House Speaker John Boehner’s invitation to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to speak to a joint session of Congress without notifying congressional Democrats or the White House?  Remember the open letter that was sent to the Iranian leaders – which was signed by 47 Senators including Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, in an effort to undermine President Obama’s efforts to negotiate a nuclear deal with Iran?

How can Republicans now pretend with a straight face that they want to review the details of the deal with Iran to determine whether or not they can support it?  They can’t!  Based on what they did, with the support of House Speaker Boehner, in bypassing congressional Democrats and the White House in inviting Prime Minister Netanyahu to speak to a joint session of congress and what they did, with the support of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell in sending an open letter to Iranian leaders in an effort to undermine their own President, any effort at pretention has already been unmasked and, therefore, rendered ineffective.

To add insult to injury, both Speaker John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell have traveled to Israel and stood beside Prime Minister Netanyahu and in essence stood with him in denouncing President Obama’s foreign policy initiatives.  According to Israel’s Arutz Sheva, Senator McConnell told Prime Minister Netanyahu that “We’re by Israel’s side.”  There is nothing wrong with this statement except that, under the circumstances, it implies that Senator McConnell and those that he is speaking for are by Israel’s side and against President Obama.

Democrats are not totally without blame.  There are some of them that must be held to account as well.  They can claim that they are simply representing their constituents but the majority of the American people do not want another war.  Though many politicians may be without a heart they are not without a brain.  We did not elect our politicians to function just as robots, instead, we expect them to use all of the information available to them – some of which we may not be privy to – to make their decisions.

It is not hard to understand Prime Minister Netanyahu’s position because, not only is he the Prime Minister of Israel but he is also a politician.  Without a doubt he is working to gain support for his position of the majority of Israeli citizens.  What is hard to understand is why Speaker John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell – who obviously are Americans, would look to Prime Minister Netanyahu as if he were their leader and openly support him instead of their own President?  At the very least they could support the Prime Minister without purposely seeking out a way to embarrass the President of the United States of America!

There is no excuse for what Speaker Boehner and Senate Majority Leader McConnell have done.  There are those who advocate for Speaker Boehner and say that despite what he has done he still believes that there is only one person who sets foreign policy for the United States of America.  If that is true, he must believe that that one person is himself.  If Speaker Boehner wants to be that person then he should run for President of the United States of America.  With a record like his as Speaker of the House, I am sure that there are an untold number of Americans who would like to see him as President.  After all, he has proven to be such a strong and forceful leader in his position as Speaker of the House when compared to all of those who have gone before him.

My point is that when we look at the things that Republican led legislatures are doing in places like Indiana and Arkansas and consider the things that they have done with respect to their support to gut the Voting Rights Act, their efforts to make voting harder for eligible voters rather than easier and their lack of effort to make their Party inclusive rather than exclusive, it should give us pause.  The leadership of the Republican Party is so focused on bringing down President Obama that they have forgotten about everything else.

Congressional Republicans are so focused on depriving President Obama of a meaningful legacy that they literally cannot see anything beyond that.  Even if the deal with Iran is an unprecedented deal, which future administrations would find to be a daunting task to even aspire to, Republicans are so blinded that they will be unable to comprehend its relevance and place in history.

Republicans will either have to stop pretending to be interested in the details of the potential nuclear deal with Iran and consider it on its true merit or continue to pretend that they are interested and never really comprehend its true potential value.  I suggest that they stop playing politics and consider its true merit because the only other realistic alternative would be war.

I think that too often those who are rich and powerful are too quick and too eager to go to war.  In most cases, it is not their children who are sent off to foreign lands to fight and die for America’s way of life simply by virtue of the fact that they are rich and powerful and can shield their loved ones from this cruel and heartbreaking consequence.  Diplomacy should and must be given a chance for the sake of those who are not rich and powerful.

None of us who have never been there can even begin to imagine what war is truly like; alone in some foreign land: cold and lonely in the darkness in some jungle or in some village not knowing who is friend and who is foe.  So to the rich and powerful who decide on war and peace I say, just imagine if it were your child who was being sent off to fight and possible die in a foreign land.  Would you still be so quick to shun peace and espouse war?  Think about it… Really think about it.

Eulus Dennis