IT'S BEEN FIVE YEARS SINCE KATRINA, YET THE WOUNDS REMAIN

Five years ago, on August 29, 2005, one of the biggest tragedies in terms of total devastation ever to hit the United States took place in New Orleans and along the Gulf Coast of Mississippi.

This tragedy in New Orleans wasn’t by any means unexpected. Many warnings of just such a possibility had been discussed and published for years. But to millions of casual observers, as well as government officials, the hurricane and subsequent flooding appeared to come as a complete surprise. Despite warnings and official reports, local community, state, and national officials, and the city’s residents, were unprepared.

There had long been warnings that a hurricane that zeroed in on New Orleans could cause tremendous damage, loss of lives and homes, and disruption of public services, including law and order. This flood wouldn’t be the first to hit New Orleans, since major flooding had occurred on several previous occasions, including during and following hurricanes. The city sits in a giant basin, and water will always run to the bottom. In this case, thousands of people and their pets happened to live in that basin.

In 2002, The Times Picayune, New Orleans, published a 5-part series of articles, June 23-27, outlining the problems that a hurricane and flooding could bring to the area.

The articles reported on the probabilities of a major flood, and stated that many people would not be able to evacuate because of age, sickness, poverty, and lack of transportation to leave town. As for getting help from the outside following a flood, approaches by road would likely be impossible since roadways would wash out. According to the articles, thousands would become stranded, and most of them would be left homeless. Still, people were stunned as they watched the sickening aftermath on television.

As these Times-Picayune articles were being written in 2002, FEMA was studying evacuation procedures in case of a major storm, and rescue strategies to follow the expected storm. At the time the articles appeared, FEMA expected a preliminary report to be finished within months. At the time, FEMA director Joe Allbaugh stated to the Times Picayune, "Catastrophic disasters are best defined in that they totally outstrip local and state resources, which is why the federal government needs to play a role.” Yet the federal government failed to respond immediately.

We could all watch the drama and horror of the days following August 29, 2005, play out on our television sets. It took seeing it with our own eyes for most Americans to believe that such a catastrophe could happen in our own country.

Yet, in the aftermath, I heard complaints that the people there should have done more for themselves. For the ones left behind, those who lacked a home, money, food or water, utilities, and a roof to shelter them from scorching heat while they waited for help because there was no way to travel, what, exactly, could be expected?

The wounds still persist in New Orleans. Neighborhoods still remain devastated. Homes remain damaged and destroyed. Lives are still in limbo. Many of New Orleans’s former residents have not returned because there is nothing to return home to.

In my book, Looking Back, two essays appear that were written by Katrina survivors. Neither of them lived in New Orleans. One lived in Ocean Springs, Mississippi, which received flooding from the storm surge. Air Force Major Risa Riepma and her family had relocated to Mississippi from Arizona just six months earlier. She (expecting her third child) and her husband and two children were required to seek shelter at Keesler Medical Center, while her parents, who had followed her to Mississippi, fled to Florida to find a place to stay until it was safe to return.

They were lucky in that they only lost things: their homes and all their belongings. The Riepmas also lost their vehicles, one of which was parked in the parking lot of the hospital. Yet they were still alive, had income, and were left with hope and an appreciation for what really mattered.

Maria Russell and her husband, Dave, who lived in Bay St. Louis, Mississippi, also evacuated their neighborhood. They returned home five days later to find their entire neighborhood wiped out. All that remained of their two-year-old home were the footings of the foundation. They lost everything except what they evacuated with. Again, they were left with what really mattered, themselves.

You can read their stories, along with 22 other poignant stories about major historic events that have impacted the authors’ lives, in Looking Back: Boomers Remember History.

ILLEGAL ALIENS OR TERRORISTS? WITH SHRINKING RESOURCES, JUST WHO SHOULD WE TARGET?

It gets harder for me to understand government policies as I grow older. Is this a government by the people and for the people, or is it a government for those who hold the power and have the most money? I sometimes think it is only for the latter. And most of the time, it just doesn’t make sense.

I live in a state where the state's budget shortfall would scare any concerned citizen, where unemployment is rampant, where the housing market went bust, and where foreclosures on home loans continue to spiral upward. Instead of passing a budget and making hard choices to cut spending realistically or raise taxes, the state's leaders have chosen to try and pass an additional sales tax that will only hurt the already poor of the state who can barely afford to pay for necessities.

If the tax fails, supporters claim that teachers, firefighters and lawmen will be cut. Meanwhile, even while threatening to cut police protection, the state has passed a law that illegals are illegal, (really?) and people can be asked to provide proof of citizenship on the street, at home, or while driving. They probably won't be stopping people who are obviously white, even though any one of them might be an illegal immigrant from European background, plus any one of them might be a terrorist hell bent on destroying this country.

My concern is that with the budget cuts in law enforcement, less attention may be paid to preventing terrorists from entering this state and the country, but instead will focus on stopping those of Mexican descent to question them about their legality. Yes, illegal crossings into this country need to be stopped, but they need to be halted at the border by fences and law enforcement. Money needs to be allotted there, and then laws should be passed concerning what to do with those illegals already living in this country.

Most "illegals" who come here from Mexico are only seeking work so they can provide a living for their families. They're not interested in doing anything harmful to the place they seek refuge in. Most aren’t criminals intent on committing violent crimes, or drug runners. I do not condone anyone crossing our borders illegally, but a solution to the problem of what to do about them once they're here should be decided by the federal government--not at a state level by a state that claims to lack the necessary resources to enforce laws that protect the general public and prevent violent crimes.

We are all descended from immigrants to this country (except for Native Americans); many of our ancestors came illegally and later found ways to get legal status. Any number of our ancestors did exactly what illegal immigrants from Mexico are doing today--slipped into the country to seek the American dream and a better life. They managed to blend into society until they could manage to get legal citizenship. Most became contributors to society and upstanding citizens.

Intolerance towards one group of illegals only breeds suspicion, contempt and hatred on the parts of both them and us. Must we condone racial profiling in order to make sure that we get rid of illegal aliens from Mexico and Central America, or shouldn't we worry more about stopping the people who are entering this country legally and illegally each day and intend to do us all harm. Terrorists are our biggest threat, or has something changed recently that I don’t know?

I for one don't mind paying taxes in order to provide protection for our country and its freedoms, but I do resent seeing my tax dollars used in a discriminatory way to get rid of those who probably mean us no harm and may, some day, become upstanding citizens--teachers, doctors, lawyers, firemen, and police officers--if given half a chance. And yes, some of them survive with government aid, but shouldn’t studies be done to see just how much impact they actually have on limited government resources? Is it really as large as one terrorist who might kill and maim thousands, or at minimum, cause law enforcement to spend thousands to prevent their hideous acts while causing immeasurable fear among citizens?

So how will this latest uproar in this state play out in history? Several federal government and citizens' groups plan to sue the state to prevent this new law from becoming effective. Meanwhile, the governor is threatening to spend what little money she can commandeer from other budget sources to fight these lawsuits. So what will be cut next to pay for lawsuits?

Has society become too extreme to think clearly? Have personal prejudices blinded us to the real threats to our well-being? It's terrorists we need to target, then we can afford to worry about illegal families and what to do about them. We need to erect barriers that will prevent terrorists from entering the country. When those are in place, illegal entry should automatically cease. What has happened to common sense?

Book Review: Waiting for Snow in Havana

I recently finished a book by a Cuban who as a child who was airlifted out of Cuba following the Revolution. Those of you who have read my book, “Looking Back” probably remember the story by Celeste Cañizares Dieppa, who was on one of the last airlifts from Havana to the United States at the age of fourteen in 1966. This book, “Waiting for Snow in Havana” by Carlos Eire, is about growing up the son of a judge, then having to evacuate Cuba at age eleven in 1962 with his older brother. He left behind both his parents to start a new life of freedom in the States, first in foster homes, then in the home of an uncle in Illinois until his mother could join them more than three years later.

This is a very warm, touching, detailed story of paradise lost followed by the tale of a marginal life in Chicago, and of never seeing his father alive again. I recommend it to those who enjoy reading about different cultures with a slant on history that is little understood today in this country. In the late fifties Cuba was almost like an extension of the United States because of its tourism and American business interests there, but possessing a unique culture of its own when Castro took over on January 1, 1959. He soon declared individually owned homes, land, and everything valuable to be “owned by the people” in what was to become a communist country in the midst of the Cold War, sending chills down the collective spine of the United States. After all, this country was within 90 miles of the United States, striking distance for communist missiles!

"Waiting for Snow in Havana" is a rich and very personal insider's story about what it is like to lose paradise and move to a very different climate and culture in search for the one thing that was deemed more important than both of those: to regain freedom.

History Is Not Only About the Past

Have any of you noticed how history keeps happening every day? This was the premise of my book, Looking Back: Boomers Remember History, which noted many of the historical moments that have happened during the timespan from the 40s to the present. Of course, it couldn't cover every historical moment, but it does cover the important history-making events that 19 writers and I remember most vividly. We lived through it, we remember it, and we think it's important that those who weren't alive then understand the effect it had on our lives and theirs.

The most important point is that this book covers history as seen through the eyes of those who lived through it.

Lately, it seems that the most reported news emphasizes celebrities dying over true, important historical facts. Of course, the death of any person is important, but is it really newsworthy or will it make history?

We recently celebrated the anniversary of the Berlin Wall falling, when families in East and West Germany were finally reunited after being separated by a wall that the Communists built after World War II to keep their people from escaping to freedom. Lesson from history: if a country has to construct a wall to keep its people in, or to keep news from the outside world from filtering in, then something is terribly wrong. This was one wrong in our lifetime that was finally righted in our lifetime.

There are many lessons to be learned from history, but first we must all know what our history is. We can't ignorantly and blindly exist without concern for what has gone on before and what is happening now. It all matters!

If you haven't picked up a good historical non-fiction book lately, there's no time like the present to do it. I recommend my own book, of course, if you want to know the emotional toll some events in history have taken on the writers who penned their stories so eloquently. Or if you like a history book that is strictly facts full of dates, names and places, there are many such books in your local library.

And yes, I know how boring history lessons in school were to most of us. At the time we hadn't lived through much history, and all those dates and names just cluttered our brains with what we thought were useless facts at the time. However, history doesn't have to be boring! Most of us had teachers who were there to do a job, which was fill us with facts that we were somehow sure we would never need again. A little inspiration might have helped them do their jobs better, or accountability to the school board to make their lessons more challenging and compelling.

Try to find history books that tell the story of the past from the viewpoint of those who witnessed it. It's anything but boring when told more like a story than a book of dates and names. There are many books on politics that are written by people who were on the inside looking out, and they enlighten us with their view of what was happening at the time. Even books written about the distant past come alive when told by someone who writes about the people and events within the context of the times -- i.e.: through solid research into how people lived then, what their daily concerns were, what they ate and even how they raised their own livestock and food, and their housing and transportation.

History is not boring if it's told from a personal perspective. Characters should come to life. Scenes from the past should be filled with the sights and sounds of settings in which historical moments took place. Teachers should be able to bring history to life, and so should history writers.

Make a date soon with a good history book, and then watch to see how events portrayed there and then reflect on current issues. You'll be surprised at how much more interesting today's news events become to you as you come to better understand the past. And you'll be amazed at how much more you retain that you did as a student in history class!

Two Leaders, Two Centuries Apart

I just finished the book, John Adams by David McCullough, and on the same day I found out we had lost another of America’s most significant politicians. Somehow, the fact that both happened on the same day compelled me to compare their two lives. Although one was a President and one a Senator, both were from the State of Massachusetts, both made an indelible mark on history, and both served the nation unselfishly throughout important but troubled times.

What surprised me most about the book, John Adams were the similarities with today’s political climate in the United States. Even then, members of the Continental Congress disagreed vehemently about some issues, even whether to declare independence. John Adam emerged as a leading founder of our country and a great man who sometimes disappointed American citizens, but remained steadfast in his determination to forge a new nation, independent and free.

Unlike Adams, Senator Edward Kennedy followed the legacy of his older brothers, and had been expected to follow in their footsteps and run for president. The shock of their deaths by assassins surely produced inner turmoil and ambiguous feelings that frightened him beyond the average person’s capacity to understand. He never asked for the role as head of a large, extended family, and he must have been horribly frightened at the prospect of living up to his family’s and the Democratic party’s political expectations. So while being pushed to embrace his brothers’ legacy, he rebelled by making terrible lifestyle choices and exhibiting immature, unacceptable behavior that ruined his chances of someday successfully running for president.

He had a family duty to serve as a role model to his own children and all of his fatherless nieces and nephews, yet he was obviously conflicted about the role at a time when his own emotional life was in turmoil. He had suffered great loss at the deaths of his older siblings, and now he was expected to be strong and lead his family. Maybe it wasn’t intentional that he destroyed his future as the leader of the United States, but possibly on some subconscious level he feared becoming another Kennedy caught in the crosshairs of an assassin. Whatever his motives for making huge mistakes in his political career, he still managed to become one of the nation’s longest serving Senators, as well as an effective spokesman for civil rights for minorities, as well as rights for the elderly, the poor and hopeless, and for everyday, ordinary working men and women. His last cause was for healthcare reform that would give all Americans, no matter how poor or sick, the same level of care as anyone else. To him, healthcare was a right, a human right, rather than a privilege only for the well-off and gainfully employed.

Ted Kennedy could have turned his back on public service after the devastating losses he and his family endured, and as a man of wealth, he could have ignored those poorer than he. He could have easily, and without guilt said, “Enough! This family has sacrificed enough for our country.” Yet he continued to serve, standing up for, and fighting sometimes hopeless battles for those who couldn’t fight for themselves, and for those who lacked a voice at all. He continued the legacy of his brothers to fight poverty, only his stage was to be as a Senator for almost half a century.

And two centuries before, John Adams continuously sacrificed for his country. Underpaid, and often without a word of thanks, he forfeited precious time with his beloved wife, Abigail, and his children to try and forge a nation from the wilds that were America during the last half of the eighteenth century. So much has changed since John Adams served in the Continental Congress, and then represented the newly formed United States in a quest for recognition and for funds to ensure its continuation, and finally served as its second President. One has to wonder what John Adams would think about our country today?

Two leaders, two centuries apart, yet these two New Englanders both spent most of their lives fighting for justice and freedom for the United States of America.

Pete Seeger Turns 90

On May 3rd, 2009, Pete Seeger, legendary folksinger, songwriter, folklorist, environmentalist, antiwar activist, and civil rights champion celebrated his 90th birthday. To those who lived through the turbulent 60s, Pete Seeger was either a folk hero or a left-wing troublemaker, depending on your age and political beliefs at the time. To most of the young, though, he was a charismatic entertainer who could inspire large crowds to sing along on sea chanteys, protest songs, and traditional tunes like Clementine, She’ll Be Comin’ Around the Mountain, and I’ve Been Working on the Railroad.

A huge birthday party in Madison Square Garden was celebrated on May 3rd as a sold-out crowd of 18,000 snapped up tickets to attend the benefit affair to honor Pete and raise money for the environmental group Hudson River Sloop Clearwater, Inc.

Pete followed Woody Guthrie into the folk music world to champion laborers and try to bring publicity to the inequalities rampant in America. He served a stint in the army during World War II. Then he became one of the many Americans in the entertainment industry who were dragged before Senator McCarthy’s witch hunt for communists during the House Un-American Activities Committee hearings in the mid-50s. As a result of refusing to name names, he was banned from appearing on radio and television for several years.

That didn’t stop him from turning up at college campuses, and at antiwar and civil rights rallies across the country during the Vietnam War to lend his voice to the cry for an end to America’s involvement in the fighting, and for equal rights for blacks and minorities. The rebirth of American folk music during the late 50s and early 60s was due in part to his performances at colleges throughout his blacklisting period on radio and TV. By 1994, he won the nation’s highest artistic honor, the Presidential Medal of the Arts. In 2000, the Library of Congress named him one of America’s Living Legends.

His first appearance on national network television occurred in 1967 on the Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour when he chose to sing Waist Deep in the Big Muddy. The establishment saw the song as a dig at our President for having ramped up the Vietnam War. Actually, the song had been written about a 1942 military maneuver by a Captain who foolishly led his troops across a deep muddy river until he finally disappeared from sight and only his helmet was left floating. Although the song was not about the Vietnam War, the words, “and the big fool says to push on,” was thought by many to be written specifically for President Lyndon Johnson, who had sold himself as a presidential candidate interested in bringing peace to Vietnam, but then following his election in 1964, expanded the war, committing more and more young draftees to fight and die in the war that grew less and less winnable.

Seeger’s performance was cut from that program by CBS, and later was permitted to air. Then executives began to prescreen the program’s shows to censor them, which led to the Smothers’ brothers crying foul. The issue of censorship of entertainment programs became a rallying point for citizens concerned about the loss of freedom of speech.

Some of the songs Pete made famous by singing and/or writing them became anthems of the civil rights movement, such as Turn, Turn, Turn, If I Had a Hammer, and his rewritten words to the song We Will Overcome, which became We Shall Overcome. Among the many songs made popular by Seeger, either written and/or performed by him, are Guantanamera, This Land is Your Land, and Where Have All the Flowers Gone.

Later Pete Seeger was largely in the forefront of efforts to save the Hudson River from the pollution that was destroying it. At 90, he is revered by millions for his contributions to music as well as for using his melodic voice as a powerful tool to speak out against injustice. He continues to speak out and sing for freedom, equality, and environmental activism. In addition, he remains a huge influence on young musicians who follow his lead as singers/songwriters with a message. He has truly played a strong lead in the history of the baby boomer era.

What Defines the Boomer Generation?

Looking back at the Boomers’ history of our nation, it is easy to categorize it as a time of selfishness by young people who rebelled against their parents and the establishment. A lot of them experimented with drugs, many ran away from home to “experience” life, others marched in defiance of the draft and against a war that seemed both futile and unjustified.

But to believe that rebelliousness defined the Boomer era is to ignore the fact that many of their parents enabled their behavior. Why? Simply because it was time for change in our Country. Everyone knew it deep in their hearts. Even those who bemoaned the obvious had to admit that times were changing, and there was little anyone could do to stop it. Very few Americans escaped the impact.

In 1976, the nation celebrated 200 years of freedom. For those 200 years, our Constitution framed our legal system while our ancestors’ religious beliefs and lifestyles defined how we, too, should conduct our lives. But for a generation born following World War II, what did freedom mean if not the freedom to "pursue happiness" in their own way?

Prior to World War II, we were a mostly rural nation made up of immigrants from across the continent, and difficult times kept our ancestors’ focus on surviving. By the time World War II had ended, technology exploded, changing our collective lives in more ways than could have possibly been foreseen.

Suddenly, superhighways began to crisscross our country, drawing more citizens into the big cities, then to the suburbs sprouting outside them. Cars changed the focus of our lives from home and hearth and simply surviving to new shopping centers, theaters, resorts, restaurants, and other fun and interesting activities. New technology-based jobs lured rural residents to the center of all that activity. Technology even changed the lives of those who remained on farms and ranches as they learned new ways to grow crops faster, and raise bigger and more profitable cattle, all of which freed up time for more leisure activities.

But even those changes failed to have the impact of “the pill”! Not too many years ago, business owners hesitated to hire women because they knew their female employees would probably get married, become pregnant and leave. Certainly it was difficult for any woman to plan her career and move up the corporate ladder. Suddenly with the “pill,” women could plan their pregnancies to fit their career and family needs. There was still the problem of balancing work and family, but women worked the problems out in their own way. Some opted out of motherhood while others found creative ways to juggle their two chosen commitments.

Television speeds change and rebellion

Since this country was founded, there have always been people who rebelled against the establishment. In the early days, some moved West in hopes of finding a more open society where they could found their own communities with like-minded people. Others set up their own version of communes or religious sects where they were free to practice their choice of lifestyles. The Mormons are just one such religious society which founded its own home in Utah. There were and still are many, many less well-known groups scattered across the country.

Following World War II, national and local laws restricted what many perceived as their freedom to live, worship, enjoy life, so the time was ripe for certain groups to challenge the status quo. That the Boomer generation was so large made its reputation for rebelliousness appear much larger than life. Television, a new technology that spread news and images immediately around the world, only magnified and accelerated the sense of urgency among the young to change the world.

The Boomer generation grew up amid a sense of doom as their parents failed to address the problems that faced the world. The Cold War was foremost in the minds of those youngsters who sought to change the world, and the Vietnam War was a reality that killed and maimed thousands of their generation.

Read the stories of survivors of the Boomer era in the book, Looking Back: Boomers Remember History from the ‘40s to the Present. There you’ll find personal, touching stories written by people who served and fought in Vietnam, to those who lost their homes to Hurricane Katrina. You’ll also learn how the forces of change, such as integration of schools in the South, affected students who were there. And you’ll see why the assassination of a President, and soon after, the assassination of two leading civil rights figures terrified our nation’s citizens.

Twenty-four emotional stories told by people who were there, who witnessed history as it happened, make Looking Back a living testament to the strength and integrity of both the Boomer and their parents’ generation.