This page was last updated on February 23, 2010.
To me, mural is a good sign; Gino Piroli; Beaver County Times; February 21, 2010.
Note, as published on the Times website, the column was a single run-on paragraph. The breaks below are my own to make the critique easier to follow.
If you’re familiar with Mr. Piroli’s political-writing body of work, you know him to be a lefty partisan who doesn’t let facts get in his way. This column is no different and manages to include tired old lefty talking points. The column leads off with building up FDR and his leftist policies and programs and concludes with building up President Obama and his leftist policies and programs.
Below is a detailed critique of the subject column.
“How invigorating it was to read Bob Bauder’s article in The Times about Norman Harvey, the man from Philadelphia now living in Aliquippa who reproduced Neil Spencer’s Works Progress Administration mural. The painting was displayed in the lobby of the new Aliquippa post office in 1936. I’ve previously commented on this mural that I remember so well. I was the postmaster in 1966 when it was taken down and damaged during the remodeling of the office. Harvey sent me a photo of his work, and it captures the true message of the mural, which centered on the steel mills that once dominated the area. The damaged mural was taken by the then-custodian of the post office, the General Service Administration, and is now somewhere in the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C. The mention of the WPA brought to mind a 555-page novel that my son Edward gave me. It chronicles the efforts of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt to create jobs in the midst of the Great Depression. The book, ‘American-Made: The Enduring Legacy of the WPA: When FDR Put the Nation to Work,’ by Nick Taylor tells ‘how in 1935 when unemployment and desperation ruled the land, this controversial nationwide jobs program forever changed the social policies of our country.’ Those of us alive at that time know the success of the programs that saw our citizens regain their pride and dignity. The book tells how our nation, with more than 35 million people affected by the Depression, was revived by government initiatives. The WPA programs lasted eight years, spent $11 billion, employed 8.5 million men and women and, when it ended, returned $105 million to the federal treasury, along with $25 million in supplies and materials. Its accomplishments included building 650,000 miles of road, 78,000 bridges and 125,000 civilian and military buildings, as well as building or enlarging 800 airports. It served almost 900 million hot lunches to schoolchildren, presented 225,000 concerts, performed plays, vaudeville acts and circuses, and produced almost 475,000 pieces of art. The project was not without controversy, and critics called its supporters communists. It didn’t totally end the Depression, which continued until war threatened the world and workers turned to the defense industry.”
[RWC] Mr. Piroli may remember the WPA, but I bet he doesn’t (or chooses not to) remember what Henry Morgenthau, FDR’s Treasury Secretary during the Great Depression, said about FDR’s “government initiatives.” Testifying before the House Ways and Means Committee in May 1939, Sec. Morgenthau said, “We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. And I have just one interest, and if I am wrong … somebody else can have my job. I want to see this country prosperous. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises … I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started … And an enormous debt to boot.” Mr. Piroli and Sec. Morganthau appear to disagree about “the success of the programs that saw our citizens regain their pride and dignity.”
Though he inaccurately sang the praises of the WPA and other “government initiatives,” at least Mr. Piroli conceded FDR and his policies and programs didn’t end the Great Depression. As a reminder, after eight years of FDR, unemployment was still in the 14-15% range (It was about 16% when FDR took office and peaked at about 25%.) and dropped only to 9.9% immediately before World War II.
“I bring up the book because we are facing a similar situation and elected a new president by an 8-million-vote majority with the hope that the government would again provide the leadership to solve the problems. However, FDR didn’t have to face the multiple problems that President Barack Obama inherited, including a government where a minority of elected officials always votes ‘no’ and huge industry lobbying that can derail any programs that are introduced. The debate is a reminder of the past.”
[RWC] Mr. Piroli asserts Mr. Obama has problems because “a minority of elected officials [meaning Republicans] always votes ‘no’,” but fails to mention Democrats have large majorities in both houses of Congress and for a time even had a filibuster-proof majority (60 seats) in the Senate. If Mr. Piroli wants to blame someone for not passing Mr. Obama’s agenda, he needs to look at his own party.
As for “huge industry lobbying that can derail any programs that are introduced,” Mr. Piroli knows Mr. Obama and Democrats in Congress cut deals with various industry groups. Note Mr. Piroli apparently isn’t concerned about labor union management “lobbying that can derail any programs that are introduced.”
“Herbert Hoover in 1929 said ‘the cure for unemployment is more jobs.’ It was answered with ‘how can I work, when there’s no work to do?’”
[RWC] Mr. Piroli’s quote of Mr. Hoover (though a Republican, a progressive like FDR) is suspect. First, quick Google and Yahoo searches got no hits except for this column. Second, in 1929 when Mr. Hoover allegedly made this statement, unemployment was only about 3.1%. Remember, the stock market crash didn’t happen until October 1929.
“The strategy to demean any new ideas is to call the sponsors socialists, and it’s almost a joke to hear those who created the problems complain about the cost. This is the same group who saddled this administration with a more than $1 trillion deficit and repeatedly question how anything proposed will be paid for, yet somehow came up with the money to sponsor a questionable war.”
[RWC] Mr. Piroli asserts Republicans “saddled this administration with a more than $1 trillion deficit” but fails to note Democrats held the majority in both houses of Congress for the two years preceding Mr. Obama taking office and Congress controls spending. Prior to that, I don’t recall Democrats filibustering spending bills when they were in the minority. Indeed, the Democrat position tended to be that we weren’t spending enough. Also, how many spending bills did Mr. Obama vote against during his four years in the Senate? To imply Democrats — including Mr. Obama himself — had no role in out-of-control spending is absurd.
“I’ve hesitated to get involved in these political games knowing that I won’t be here to see the culmination of any action.”
[RWC] This is a hoot. Since April 2004, Mr. Piroli has written at least 30 politically-oriented columns, and that includes a two-and-a-half-year hiatus from 2007 to 2009 during which he didn’t write any columns. If Mr. Piroli had not “hesitated to get involved in these political games,” how many more of these columns would he have written?
“I expect and accept criticism for my beliefs. My only wish is that those who disagree address the issues, not just the messenger. When I wrote about health care, I was told that I was washed up and should have stayed retired. They might be right, but I’ve never strayed from the strength of my convictions and don’t intend to do it now.”
[RWC] Mr. Piroli has been whining about people who disagree with “the messenger” since at least 2004. Here’s what I wrote in a critique of a Piroli column from January 2005: “His ‘columns’ include public personal attacks, yet Mr. Piroli appears to be upset when people do the same to him in private e-mail notes. As a note, review Mr. Piroli’s columns and you’ll routinely find complaints about personal attack e-mail.
“I find it predictable for someone who relies on personal attacks to be offended when on the receiving end. Check Mr. Piroli’s columns over the past couple of years and you will find his columns have referred to President Bush and his administration as court appointed, dishonorable, dumb, incompetent, “geniuses” in a derisive context, liars, obsessive, and so on. Not once did the columns cite credible and verifiable evidence to support the name-calling.”
Here’s my critique when Mr. Piroli “wrote about health care” last year.
© 2004-2010 Robert W. Cox, all rights reserved.