Open letter to California RN’s, Friends and Family
Let me begin by saying that every election is important, and for a person for whom this Country is her adopted homeland I can’t imagine how anyone can make the choice not to exercise this precious privilege and right. That being said, I want to take this opportunity to say a few things about the shenanigans occurring in our Governor’s race.
Meg Whitman has spent millions on her campaign for the California Governor’s office. True, but so what – it’s her money after all! The last time I checked this was a free country, n’est pas? However some groups seem to feel that this is unseeingly, again so what, it’s her money. These same groups are spending their members’ money to oppose her candidacy, in some cases throwing millions into the effort to get her opponent elected; no one seems to question if all the dues paying members of these groups are copasetic with that state of affairs. But just in case, let’s say you inherit a boat load of money and you decide that instead of buying that $15,000 car you decided you’re going to buy yourself a fully loaded one for $50,000; are you not going to buy it just because your neighbors think you shouldn’t spend so much on a car – right it’s your money and you can chose how to spend it. Also, let’s not forget that Meg’s money has done a lot to stimulate the radio and television markets and those who work in those fields should be very happy to earn some extra cash during this economic down time.
Now let me address a few of what I believe are mischaracterizations and lies that have been spread by the leadership of the California Nurses Association. The C.N.A.’s have been going around town pretending that they are the voice of the California nurse, which they are not. As an association or membership organization they can only speak for their members, which in California hover somewhere between 65,000 to 80,000 depending on the source; there are over 400,000 actively licensed RNs in California – so do the math. The C.N.A. does not speak for California Nurses. So when they wave their signs that state Nurses say no to Whitman they are being both unethical and lying, they can say that C.N.A. nurses say no to Whitman but they have no right to say nurses until they represent a majority of California RNs.
The C.N.A. likes to play the victim in their campaign against Whitman claiming that she declared war on nurses (again with the lies). The truth is the C.N.A. leadership probably took a good look at the political tea leaves and realized that Whitman could probably hold her own against Brown and could win so during the primary they put their resources into influencing the Republican primary hoping that Poizner would be victorious. If this were to happen then there would be a strong likelihood that Poizner would loose to Brown and put the candidate of their choice into the Governor’s mansion. However defending yourself against those who malign, harass, descend on your private residence, and so forth is not declaring war it’s defending yourself.
However the biggest piece of irony in all this to me is the C.N.A.’s defense of Jerry Brown, because he’s the same governor that tried to destroy the nursing profession when he was our governor the last time around. Perhaps, the C.N.A. leadership and many of its members have forgotten Project Iatrogensis and the bill it spawned SB 666? Perhaps they forgot how California nurses from the bedside, from management and from the halls of education across this country came together to fight and ultimately defeat this ill though out brainchild of our then Governor Brown. Project Iatrogensis was Brown’s brainchild to address our state’s nursing shortage and called for an additional/alternate pathway through the various levels of nursing. So in short a nurse’s assistant need only show enough bedside experience, pass a special test and receive her/his LVN license; a LVN need only show enough bedside experience, pass a special test and receive his/her RN license; and finally a RN need only show enough bedside experience, pass a special test and violà become a physician. Is our “intuitional nursing” memory so short? I would hope not. Defeating SB 666 was no easy task it took the concerted effort of nurses not just in California but across this Country and we finally defeated it in committee, thanks to Dr. Green who at that time chaired the committee that was SB 666’s final stop. Ironically, it was the “old” incarnation of the C.N.A. that fought and bedeviled Brown over SB 666, but I guess that time heals all wounds and so what if their preferred candidate came within moments of turning California’s nurses and physicians into the laughing stock of the nation.
Do I think Whitman is the perfect candidate not in the least because there’s no such thing as a perfect candidate? Do I think she’s the better choice, yes! I hope all my fellow nurses will consider the C.N.A.’s anti-Whitman propaganda, and that during this election it has been them that cast the first stone and it has been them that has spread the false message that all California nurses oppose Whitman and finally it was them that descended en mass on Whitman’s neighborhood and home to picket and protest even when they knew she wouldn’t be there; and in society there should be some boundaries of respect and decency and if the C.N.A. membership could violate her privacy who else’s privacy would they be willing to violate to serve their purposes when it is convenient or necessary to promote their agenda?
In closing, remember Meg Whitman never concocted Project Iatrogensis and SB 666, but Jerry Brown did, so with that in mind -- please do not forget to vote on Tuesday, November 2nd.
Congresswoman Solis’s confirmation is held up – it breaks my heart.
Oh the gnashing of teeth and the wringing of hands that must be taking place right now in the ivory towers of the union bigwigs, and the White House at the news that the confirmation of Congresswoman Hilda Solis for Secretary of Labor has been held up. Whether or not she is qualified for the position of Secretary of Labor isn’t so much an issue for as her obfuscation when she was asked about her support of the Employee Free Choice Act. Instead of laying it out for the committee she chose to word parse and pretend that she had formulated no opinion, since the Administration (i.e. President Obama) hadn’t “taken a stance”.
She wanted to act as though she was not one of the co-sponsors of record for the Employee Free Choice Act, and that the other co-sponsor was of course then-Senator Obama; and let’s not forget his campaign promise to sign the Employee Free Choice Act into law if it came to his desk. So with all this knowledge, Solis wanted her questioners to somehow believe she had no opinion. Oh and did I mention that she is on the Board of Directors and Treasurer of a group known as American Rights at Work, a group devoted to the passage of the Employee Free Choice Act.
As I use to tell my children when it was obvious they were attempting to pull the wool over my eyes – does Congresswoman Solis think that we’re stupid? An honest, and of course a completely uncharacteristic trait of most Washington insiders, would have been to make a clear distinction between what she as a Congresswoman and a representative of a group of constituents believed in and what she as a potential Secretary of Labor who must work with both business and labor leaders might be expected to believe in and how that might impact how the Secretary would do her work. But no, this was not to be, instead she sat there and said she had no opinion. Would such a lame excuse have been tolerated from let’s say fervent pro-business, anti-labor Congressperson been accepted – of course not. But then again I think that those individuals in Obamaland expect everyone else to simply buy their rhetoric without questions and we all know what road that can take people down.
If Solis wanted us to see her as an upstanding and ethical person she would have been brutally honest with the committee and explain how she would be able to put those earnest feelings into a context where they could be integrated into whatever policies the Administration championed and what ever laws Congress passed. Too bad she had to play the politician card, and too bad the Obama Administration showed the American people that the ”Hope and Change” President Obama promised to bring to America didn’t begin when he took the oath of office and apparently has yet to be implemented.
When a public education forum is really an indoctrination session
This week my daughter and I attended a meeting that was all about clean money campaigns and how “evil” corporate interests have conspired to rule and ruin our healthcare. At this informative meeting we were invited to view a movie entitled “Blood Money” and meet a panel of 6 experts invited to illuminate us by the League of Women Voters.
The meeting was scheduled to start at 7:00 PM, but by 7:20 PM barely 25 people had arrived and the meeting was called to order. While I waited for the meeting to start I watched as one of the panelists ran through her slides and found one slide of particular interest. The slide she had selected was a short movie that was labeled “undercover video” at a special interest fundraiser; and I waited for her to show a similar short movie showing the unions having their fundraisers and hob knobbing meet and greets which of course was never offered. Silly me I thought that one of the themes of this meeting was exposing all special interests that use their money and power to peddle their influence.
My concern about AB 583 (it is now a 2-year bill) and the Clean Money Campaign propaganda is that they use the selling point that it will level the political playing field. But, I’m not so sure that it does. In Arizona, the Clean Money poster child, the unions clearly did not have to play by the same rules as their competitors, business. Also, as a taxpayer do I want to see my tax dollars go to support a candidate whose philosophy is anathema to my own, such as a supporter of extreme beliefs like white supremacist, NAZI, or other hate group. I read the bill now sitting in our state legislature and it doesn’t appear to address the issue of a real-life extremist accessing these funds. At least in our flawed system of today you donate directly to the person you chose. Of course in the Progressive Democrat/Socialist’s way of thinking it makes sense that the taxpayer fund campaigns since the taxpayer is far too naïve to exercise good judgment on their own.
So here we were sitting in the Pasadena Community College Community Education Center attending a forum organized by the League of Women Voters (total nationwide membership of 140,000 including members, supporters and activists as per their 2006 annual report; that’s just about .5% of US residents) waiting for the meeting to start. A member of the League and a panelist introduces herself, and then the president of the Pasadena-League of Women Voters unit. She, of course, announces how the League is all about getting people involved and active in politics, and of course how they are non-partisan – which makes me wonder why they were hosting this event without providing a counterpoint. But the final straw was when they asked us all to stand and honor our Nation’s flag, the real shock came when only small handful of attendees including me and my daughter could bring themselves to utter the words “under God”. Most of the attendees, including most of the panelist refused to utter the entire Pledge of Allegiance. I’m not one that believes we need to say the pledge at every gathering, nor even display the flag; but if you are going to ask us to honor our Nation’s flag don’t make a mockery by modifying the Pledge. Now I know that there has been some ongoing challenge as to whether or not “under God” is allowable, as per our Constitution, but I think that until there is a final verdict by our Supreme Court we need to say the pledge as it is written.
And as the saying goes, I could stand no more … so I left. So beware the next time you are invited to a so-called educational forum, no matter who the organizer. If the panel is comprised of members who all espouse the same or similar point of view, such as the Oct. 17th meeting than you are probably attending an indoctrination or propaganda event and should not expect to hear a real debate of the facts. It’s very sad that a once venerable organization such as the League of Women Voters would stoop to such a low method, but then what can you expect of a group that represents less then one percent of US residents and has to pad its membership to include supporters and activists just to be able to say they had a base of 140,000.