Progress and The Power of a Plan

copyright © 2012 Betsy L. Angert.  Empathy And Education; BeThink or  BeThink.org

Inherent within each of us is conflict.  Generally speaking, we think growth is good.  Progress is a sign of achievement.  As George Bernard Shaw so aptly articulated, “Progress is impossible without change, and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything.” Indeed, politically, at one time or another, persons within each Party have embraced the label, “Progressives.”  Even the most entrepreneurial embolden the idea of Progress. Goldman-Sachs boldly bolsters, Progress is everyone’s business.”  However, while we glorify growth, we disdain it.  Most of us look back and think, “Those were the days.”

The good ole days are commonly defined as “when we were young.” It might have been the 1930s, 1940s; the fifties were fine!  In earlier eras, schools were vehicles for success.  Now, these same institutions are seen and scored as failures.  Teachers were principled. Today, throughout the news we read, educators are perverse.  Our children come home and tell tales that affirm what adults have come to believe is true; teachers are bad! Public education is worse.  Students and parents surmise, home schools or private learning centers would better serve their needs. Cyber classes too must be an option.  Online learning tailors a lesson, much more so than a unionized teacher would. The people want Choice!

There is one consensus; tests are good. Accountability is the gold standard.  Current conventional wisdom counters what was thought to be exceptional, in the nineteen sixties.  Decades ago, those under thirty and even their elders changed the world for the “greater good.”  The baby boomers were beautiful or were they bad…bad for the country and worse for businesses?  

Whatever the point of view, it is clear the revolutionaries transformed the conversation in ways that irrevocably challenged conventions.  Even our nation’s President, in those years pursued policies that reeked of progress. “The Great Society” brought with it the Elementary and Secondary Act.  There was a War on Poverty” underway.  However, some at the top thought such a battle might topple Free Enterprise.

Big Businesses did not necessarily embrace the evolution.  People in power particularly, took note.  Tycoons and their corporate attorneys saw the “60s revolution” as a threat.  One brave company soldier devised a plan to take the country back.  His name? Lewis F. Powell. His resolve, Infiltrate America’s campuses.  

The man soon to be appointed to the Supreme Court saw the dichotomy that exists within us all.  Change?  Is growth good or bad? Is “Progress everyone’s business” or is advancement only favorable when it serves the few?  Do we characterize change in innocuous ways, and simply say, “The times they are a changin'” or do we take action?  Lewis F. Powell put pen to paper; he presented what he envisioned as a better plan, and perhaps it was.  If better is defined by policy and principles that endure and become deeply ingrained in the fabric of society, then The Powell Memo is phenomenal. Justice Powell found the keys that open all hearts, “freedom and choice.”

As Lewis Powell observed, few among us could argue against the right to choose. Prominent Democrats, disconnected from the damage done to public education, advocate for Charter schools. Vociferous Republicans vote for vouchers.  Independents invest in home schools.  Parents persuaded by corporate campaigns frequently succumb.  Moms and Dads pull the parent-trigger.  Only belatedly do people learn that Charters, which pass for public schools, are not.  Vouchers validate separate, but equal. While several do, some home-schools may not satisfy a child’s need for socialization.  Most significantly, regardless of which of these paths we choose, there is a chance that democratization will be lost.  

The question we each must ask ourselves is which is more important to us, personal freedom or the freedom we share as a nation?  When we think only of our own offspring what do we reap and what will society sow? Thomas Jefferson offered his assessment…

“Educate and inform the whole mass of the people… They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty.”

Might freedom and choice present another conundrum, an inner conflict of sorts?  America’s foundation is found in freedom.  The three most significant documents in our history are often referred to as the “Freedom Documents -the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution, and the Bill of Rights.  The question is what freedoms we choose, or how we choose to “establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.” Is our personal freedom more important to us than the freedoms we share as a nation?  

Not surprisingly, in the 1960s, President Lyndon B. Johnson thought it best to provide freedoms for the common good, the commonweal, and common citizens, rich and poor.  With his entrance into the Oval Office the vision of “The Great Society” was born. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act, as part of the “War on Poverty” brought together what can be a conflict within us, our love for the past and desire to progress. As President Johnson reflected as he signed the Bill into law, “I felt a very strong desire to go back to the beginnings of my own education-to be reminded and to remind others of that magic time when the world of learning began to open before our eyes.

The assertion was an affirmation. Growth is good.  We can progress and still preserve what we loved in the past.  Problem arises when powerful people, Philanthropists, people with the ear of politicians, policymakers, and pundits disagree with this declaration.

That is what occurred in 1971.  Industrialist and Attorney,Powell was outraged.  He thought the laws and the logic as liberal poppycock. More so, the Barrister saw the changes as an attack, an affront. An assault on Free enterprise. Lewis Powell communicated his concerns and composed his clarion call, a blueprint for marketers.  He titled it, A Confidential Memorandum, Attack on Free Enterprise System.  Powell purported…

Dimensions of Attack

“…what now concerns us is quite new in the history of America. We are not dealing with sporadic or isolated attacks from a relatively few extremists or even from the minority socialist cadre. Rather, the assault on the enterprise system is broadly based and consistently pursued. It is gaining momentum and converts.

Sources of the Attack


The sources are varied and diffused. They include, not unexpectedly, the Communists, New Leftists and other revolutionaries who would destroy the entire system, both political and economic. These extremists of the left are far more numerous, better financed, and increasingly are more welcomed and encouraged by other elements of society, than ever before in our history. But they remain a small minority, and are not yet the principal cause for concern.

The most disquieting voices joining the chorus of criticism come from perfectly respectable elements of society: from the college campus, the pulpit, the media, the intellectual and literary journals, the arts and sciences, and from politicians.”

Chief Executive Officers, and the esteemed fellows within the United States Chamber of Commerce, all agreed.  Each Entrepreneur saw the source of our evolutionary evils as respectable, but wrong.  

Academics teach. Clergy preach.  Intellectuals invoke.  Artists, Journalists, and Scientist evoke.  The Media is the Message. These influential individuals whom, according to the then corporate Attorney, Powell changed the conversation for the worse, needed to be stopped.  To convert the perceived Attack on Free Enterprise; images needed to be changed.

An honorable profession, teaching, needed to be seen as subversive, if the marketers were to be successful.  To convert the conversation, Conservatives had to be seen as intellectuals. Traditional theories need to be floated and substantiated.  Research would be done in the College of Right Thought.  The clergy and cultural elite too must see the light.  Conservative dictums must dominate.  After all, Powell proclaimed.

“…Those who eschew the mainstream of the system often remain in key positions of influence where they mold public opinion and often shape governmental action. In many instances, these “intellectuals” end up in regulatory agencies or governmental departments with large authority over the business system they do not believe in…

‘We, the US Chamber of Commerce, companies and corporations  must make believers out of detractors, convert our critics, win over naysayers and we will’  Tycoons had the power to move masses. Powell only told them that they needed to use what was at their disposal.  US Steel, GE, GM, Phillips Petroleum, 3M, Amway, American Broadcasting Company (ABC) and Columbia Broadcasting Services (CBS) had easily access to the people.  Moms, Dads, and the young ones invited these industries in daily..indeed, in every minute of the day.

We turn on  “Televisions.” Tune into the radio. Read periodicals. “The Scholarly Journals.” “Books, Paperbacks and Pamphlets.” “Paid Advertisements.” Lewis Powell explained, these are our tools.  Our techniques need only be honed.  Professional public relations firms were already employed by the agencies.  Change emphasis within a message and audiences will be moved.

Repeat the results of partisan reseacrh often enough and the pubic too will recite the claims.  Teachers are bad. Public schools are failures.  Intellectusls comprise a “socialist cadre.” “Communists, New Leftists and other revolutionaries…would destroy the entire system, both political and economic. These extremists of the left are far more numerous, better financed.”  Revolutionaries are educated in public schools.

Thus it is so.  For four plus decades now, the American people see no conflict.  We, the people were changed as was the way in which we speak.  Growth for  Free Enterprise is good.  Public Education and Educators are perverse. Progress is a sign of achievement. Businesses and Lewis F. Powell proved this.  If we have a plan and plod away patiently, we can realize a success that lasts longer than a decade.  Perhaps, we, the people can revive The Great Society, Rebuild the American Dream, Restore the principles within the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.  Today, the question is, do we, each one of us feel the strong desire Lyndon B. Johnson did…“to go back to the beginnings of [our]  own education-to be reminded and to remind others of that magic time when the world of learning began to open before our eyes.”

Please let us Save Our Schools!  Let us be On the March to preserve and Transform Public Education.

Then, The Great Society. Now, The Suburbanization of Poverty



Lyndon B Johnson – The Great Society

copyright © 2010 Betsy L. Angert.  BeThink.org

Then, in 1965, there was a vision.  President Lyndon Johnson addressed the tragedy that existed in America, poverty.  He had hoped to give birth to a Great Society.  Mister Johnson dreamed of the day when the truth of America reflected the richness that is often said to define this country.  Yet, his aspiration was deferred.  In a desire to create a Great Society, or two, one at home and one overseas, Lyndon Johnson lost his bearing. Ultimately, he destroyed most of what he hoped to build.  As President Obama begins his walk down a similar path, people ponder; what might President Obama plan and unintentionally promote.

For President Johnson, a single war, not the one on poverty, but instead the fight on foreign soil stood in the way of his, and America’s, true success.  The fiscal burden was a heavy weight on the nation’s budget.  Nevertheless, President Johnson insisted that the Administration ardently pursue American involvement in Vietnam while spending billions of dollars on domestic problems.  Much like our present President, Mister Obama, who eagerly escalates the war in Afghanistan, Lyndon Johnson believed he could attach inequities on the home front and still secure a win on distant shores.

Each Commander-In-Chief seemed to understand the excessive strain on the economy; yet, Johnson and Obama remained stalwart; they could do it all.  President Johnson, in time, relented.  He resigned himself to defeat.  He had not succeeded in his fight against poverty; nor did he triumph in Vietnam. Lyndon Johnson exited the Executive Office without the legacy he had hoped to leave. Mister Obama, some say will realize the same fate.  Others observe that he has a luxury that President Johnson did not have.  Obama, just as his immediate predecessor had, learned from history.

In the mid-1960s, the Great Society was born and brushed aside.  The futility of the battles and American blood shed was a load too large for average citizens to bear.  Ordinary people protested.  The emphasis President Johnson had hoped to place on poverty was lost.  Thus, the desire to eliminate dearth in the world’s wealthiest country went by the wayside.  The thought to offer equal opportunities to the economically oppressed was forfeited.  Combat was far more visible then the poor.  This truth taught all President’s since Johnson that if you want the people to support your agenda, hide what you do not want the people to see.

Today, photographs of struggles do not fill the airwaves.  Earlier Administration made certain of this and the American people accepted the bliss of ignorance.  People in the States prefer to believe that they support the soldiers, even though American policies lead these young men and women to slaughter.

Radio Broadcasters barely, rarely, or never mention the body counts abroad.  Homeless persons, huddled together for warmth on the streets of the world’s wealthiest nation do not cause a stir.  Journalists just walk right past the indigents.  The fortunate few impecunious, those who can afford a room are easy to avoid, especially since they had dispersed.  The Suburbanization of Poverty helped to further isolate individuals who, most Americans, wish to keep invisible.

In the year 2010, there is no need to mention a misery out of sight, not the war in the Middle East or the economic conflict between the classes.  Announcers would rather rant, rage, and argue about Party politics, report on ploys, or discuss the latest and greatest scandal.

Then and now, the underprivileged are, time and again, avoided, ignored, or intentionally hidden. Embarrassed by their plight, the destitute do not speak up.  On occasion, these individuals are overwhelmed with what they must to do just to survive.  This serves Administrations well.  Issues, silently secured away from the masses, and the media, also work well for our Congressmen and women.  

Without awareness for the fallen, soldiers family’s, and the unfortunate thousands who do more than flirt with financial failures, Americans never think to address these costly concerns, poverty and warfare.  Legislators in our nation’s Capitol like that.

Therefore, those who lack a more powerful political presence require someone in Washington to talk for them.  Lyndon Johnson hoped to articulate what the all too frequently concealed could not.

Today, the disadvantaged have gone the way of the past President.  Frequently, they are the objects of scorn. People perceive the wars Johnson waged were lost.  Neither Vietnam, the conflict that the Johnson presidency is oft remembered for, nor the Great Society ended the way Mister Johnson envisioned.  In truth, no  Chief Executive of this country can move the mountains of policies that establish and maintain poverty.  That is a task only the people can accomplish.  We, the people, if change is to come, must never forget that we are the voice of the downtrodden, or could be.

However, in the many decades that have passed, the public has chosen not to take up the call.  Communities separate and on their own have not cared to become Great Societies. Instead, individually, and as neighbors, we have weakened the structure that could have supported those without the dollars to purchase the bootstraps the impoverished are told to use to pull themselves up.

As a nation, we do not provide adequate education for the poor.  Thus, success, or jobs that provide a sufficient salary are lost.  As a society, we relegate the less skilled to service positions.  They may live closer to the more stable and secure citizens, indeed, they may need to in order to survive. Yet, the penniless are no better off. They are barely able to adopt the label of Suburbanites.  This poverty-stricken population has boomed; yet, even in the ‘burbs the underprivileged are no better off, just better concealed

Please ponder the plight that currently permeates our Nation.  Text and statistics are presented below in The Suburbanization of Poverty: Trends in Metropolitan America, 2000 to 2008.


The Suburbanization of Poverty: Trends in Metropolitan America, 2000 to 2008


Elizabeth Kneebone, Senior Research Analyst and Emily Garr, Senior Research Assistant

The Brookings Institution

January 20, 2010

An analysis of the location of poverty in America, particularly in the nation’s 95 largest metro areas in 2000, 2007, and 2008 reveals that:

  • By 2008, suburbs were home to the largest and fastest-growing poor population in the country. Between 2000 and 2008, suburbs in the country’s largest metro areas saw their poor population grow by 25 percent-almost five times faster than primary cities and well ahead of the growth seen in smaller metro areas and non-metropolitan communities. As a result, by 2008 large suburbs were home to 1.5 million more poor than their primary cities and housed almost one-third of the nation’s poor overall.
  • Midwestern cities and suburbs experienced by far the largest poverty rate increases over the decade. Led by increasing poverty in auto manufacturing metro areas-like Grand Rapids and Youngstown-Midwestern city and suburban poverty rates climbed 3.0 and 2.2 percentage points, respectively. At the same time, Northeastern metros-led by New York and Worcester- actually saw poverty rates in their primary cities decline, while collectively their suburbs experienced a slight increase.
  • In 2008, 91.6 million people-more than 30 percent of the nation’s population-fell below 200 percent of the federal poverty level. More individuals lived in families with incomes between 100 and 200 percent of poverty line (52.5 million) than below the poverty line (39.1 million) in 2008. Between 2000 and 2008, large suburbs saw the fastest growing low-income populations across community types and the greatest uptick in the share of the population living under 200 percent of poverty.
  • Western cities and Florida suburbs were among the first to see the effects of the “Great Recession” translate into significant increases in poverty between 2007 and 2008. Sun Belt metro areas hit hardest by the collapse of the housing market saw significant gains in poverty between 2007 and 2008, with suburban increases clustered in Florida metro areas-like Miami, Tampa, and Palm Bay-and city poverty increases most prevalent in Western metro areas- like Los Angeles, Riverside, and Phoenix. Based on increases in unemployment over the past year, Sun Belt metro areas are also likely to experience the largest increases in poverty in 2009.
  • If common citizens are as committed to change as they said they were during the 2008 election cycle, let us look back so that we might move forward.  Consider the United States Constitution.  This divine document states, that average Americans, can petition our Representatives of what matters, society as a whole.  After all, it is we, the people, who place men and women into Congressional offices.  Our Senators, and those in the House, know who has the truest influence. Corporations cannot employ our Representatives without our permission. You, I, and even the registered impoverished voter, can, and must, create the Great Society that Lyndon Baines Johnson did not.  I think such a provision is our right and responsibility, For as Author John Donne recited . . .

    “All mankind is of one author, and is one volume; when one man dies, one chapter is not torn out of the book, but translated into a better language; and every chapter must be so translated…

    As therefore the bell that rings to a sermon, calls not upon the preacher only, but upon the congregation to come: so this bell calls us all: but how much more me, who am brought so near the door by this sickness….

    No man is an island, entire of itself…any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.”


    ~ John Donne

    References for A Great Society Lost To War . . .

    As Greenspan Goes, The Great Society Part II ©

    Alan Greenspan is considered the master of money; his words can and do cause the stock market to move.  Greenspan is thought to be an economic guru.  His forecasts shape the future of America, and the future of the world.  Many consider it noteworthy that Greenspan served under several presidents, Republicans and Democrats alike.  He was a Federal Reserve Board member under Nixon, Ford, and Reagan and in 1987, President Ronald Reagan appointed him as chair.  All presidents have done the same ever since.  Some believe Greenspan is independent and bipartisan, however, the Federal Reserve Chairman has his loyalties.  “Economic well being for all” is not among these.

    Alan Greenspan is a man of principles; principally he is a follower of “rational hedonism.”  While Mr. Greenspan has long been a civil servant, his most significant service may have taken place during his formative years. It may be argued that his earlier employ was not the most important, nonetheless, few can dispute that it was the most influential.

    Alan Greenspan was an associate and disciple for author and philosopher Ayn Rand.  Ms. Rand advocates and writes of “The Virtue of Selfishness.”  She actively promotes individualism.  Rand rejects the notion of government.  Essayist Rand rebuffs the basics of democracy.  She unabashedly rebukes the idea of the Great Society; it is contrary to all that she believes.  She supports “Objectivism.”  She states that her “philosophy is, in essence, the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life.”  Encouraging independence is the Rand mission.

    Ayn Rand denounces religion.  She speaks out against compulsory charity.  She expresses strident disapproval for government regulations.  In her book, “Capitalism, The Unknown Ideal” she suggests that “altruist” are the embodiment of “evil.”  She thinks restrictions inhibit businesses and businesses are the foundation for a flourishing society.  Rand considers inflation iniquitous; she explains that government is its source.

    Inflation is not caused by the actions of private citizens, but by the government: by an artificial expansion of the money supply required to support deficit spending.  No private embezzlers or bank robbers in history have ever plundered people’s savings on a scale comparable to the plunder perpetrated by the fiscal policies of statist governments.

    Ayn Rand, “Who Will Protect Us From Our Protectors?” The Objectivist Newsletter, May 1952

    Ayn Rand declares, “Government has no obligation to the less fortunate.”  This last statement endears her to elitists, extremists, ultra-conservatives, neo-conservatives, and those such as Alan Greenspan.

    Mr. Greenspan’s involvement with Ayn Rand was not superficial; nor was it from afar.  In 1950, after completing his Master of Arts degree, Alan Greenspan joined the Ayn Rand Institute.  For more than twenty years, Mr. Greenspan penned the Rand newsletter.  Greenspan also authored a chapter in one of Ms. Rand’s books!  In other words, Greenspan wrote and spoke prolifically for “Social Darwinism”!

    Greenspan was able to capture the theories of Rand and avidly spread these.  It was easy for him; he did it effortlessly, for these viewpoints were his own.  Rand and Greenspan discuss “survival of the fittest.”  They each believe that the strongest endure; they regret that the remainder might not live on; however, they consider this necessary.

    As an enthusiast for the supremacy of entrepreneurship, Alan Greenspan went on to work for only the finest corporations.  Mr. Greenspan served on the Board of Directors for many; he worked with Mobil Oil, Morgan Guaranty and Trust, and JP Morgan and Company.  Think tanks asked him to advise.  Over the years, Mr. Greenspan received numerous tributes and trophies.  He experienced many triumphs, interestingly, many of these as a civil servant.  He was and is a man working within the “government,” an organization that he longed claimed to disdain.

    As Federal Reserve Chairman, during the Clinton years, Alan Greenspan was anointed the “Great Economic Guru.”  He is credited with reducing the federal deficit.  This acknowledgement helped to secure his current reign.  Initially there was doubt, “Would George W. Bush choose to work with the Clinton maharishi?”  Ultimately, he chose to do so.

    It seems the two are a pair.  In 2005, Greenspan often speaks in support of presidential proposals; he has since the president took office in 2001.  Early on, this surprised many; however, upon reflection, there is no reason for skepticism.  George W. Bush and Alan Greenspan each, share a strong belief in rational hedonism.

    Mr. Bush has long been a follower; from the first, his lifestyle has defined his conviction.  Now, under the auspices of the George W. Bush Whitehouse, Mr. Greenspan has allowed himself to be who he is.  In 2001, Alan Greenspan supported the President’s proposed tax cut; he knew that this action would benefit the wealthy and the already strong.  However, that is consistent with his faith in “Social Darwinism.”  Yes, Greenspan acknowledged, a reduction in taxes would likely create a budget deficit, but no matter, the fittest will survive.

    In 2005, Alan Greenspan voices his desire for privatizing the Social Security system.  He admits the plan will not increase national savings; he accepts that individual accounts will not bring solvency to a struggling structure.  Nevertheless, it will enrich the investors that he favors.  Unexpectedly, he does confess to a difference with the junior Bush; Greenspan does not condone the necessary borrowing of trillions to implement the plan.  Still, he offers his support.

    At present, in May 2005, we experience another Greenspan delight.  Acting on his and the President’s desire to privatize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Mr. Greenspan knowingly withheld information that might question and calm stated concerns for the health of the systems.  He would not wish the poor to secure home loans; that might better their positions.  You may recall, in the world of Greenspan, “Government has no obligation to the less fortunate.”

    For Mr. Greenspan, Mr. Bush, and all the other elitists and extremist that sponsor, “The Virtue of Selfishness”; might does make right.  Greenspan and persons of his ilk are not republicans; nor are they libertarians.  They are not independents; they are the true “Greens.”  Look at their [green] back$ and their “forward thinking statements,” all green!

    My thanks MaxSpeak for the inspiring this reflection! WHY ALAN GREENSPAN IS UNFIT FOR PUBLIC OFFICE

    The Great Society ©

    “What we have before us are some breathtaking opportunities disguised as insoluble problems.”   John Gardner [Architect of the “Great Society”]

    In 1965, President Lyndon Banes Johnson spoke of the Great Society.  He proposed a world of abundance and liberty for all.  He spoke of an end to poverty.  President Johnson envisioned the Great Society as “a place where the city of man serves not only the needs of the body and the demands of commerce but the desire for beauty and the hunger for community.  It is a place where man can renew contact with nature.  It is a place where men are more concerned with the quality of their goals than the quantity of their goods.”

    However, instead of building a Great Society, we built a Garage Society.  We enter them, we exit them, we fill them, and they fulfill us, they are a “must-have.”  For, if we own a garage, we own a home, and that is the American Dream.  In this culture of garages, people no longer sit out on their porches; they no longer know, let alone see their neighbors.  Neighbors are not heard; there is no sense of community.  We are transient, transfixed by technology, and have little time or concern for the plight of others.  However, there are those without garages.  They live in low cost condominiums, apartments, hotels, or on the streets.

    Today few can afford a house or a town-home; even apartment living is expensive.  Prices continue to rise.  The lack of affordable housing affects many.  30 million Americans experience housing burdens; cost is the greatest among these.  More than 13 million households devote more than half of their income to housing expenses.

    Many, about 6.1 million live in homes where the number of people cohabitating is greater than the number of rooms.

    For every seven poor families, one lives in a home that is has no electricity or hot water.  Many families do not have bathing facilities or toilets.  In a country of opulence, these people go unnoticed.

    We do not see the poor, the struggling, or even those under financial pressure as we leave our garages.  We travel the freeways, and we overlook what we do not wish to ponder.  With thanks to these constructions we need not be reminded of what is for others.  There is no reason to consider what, in a time of crisis, could become of us.  We put it out of sight, and out of mind.  We are not a great society; we are a civilization of lost dreams.

    On May 25, 2005, MaxSpeak spoke of Fannie, Freddie, and of course Alan Greenspan.  Each of these helps to explain why our Greater Society is one of Garages and people living with less.  Please read and reflect upon,  WHY ALAN GREENSPAN IS UNFIT FOR PUBLIC OFFICE.

    The Left Coaster is also expressing concern Housing market is a bit frothy

    Brad DeLong speaks of the Fed Watch: The Fed and the Housing Bubble.  Again, the cost of homes can hinder a Great Society.

    This is a piece worth reading.  Please ponder the words of Mark Thoma, Economist View.  He writes JFK Gives Advice to Washington

    Time passes and people continue to reflect on The American Dream.  Please read the thoughts offered by others http://www.pacificvi… >Living the American Dream Pacific Views