Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts

Saturday, November 27, 2010

Forget 911...

5 comments
 
...the media is a bloody joke.

Yesterday, checking up on my Twitter feed (which is basically an endless 'wire' of news and information set up a la the good ol' Telex days), I ran across this wonderful juxtaposition of headlines tweeted back to back by CNN: "North Korea Warns Region is on Brink of War" / "Shoppers Crowd Malls All Night Long."

This absurd pairing of news came rat-tat-tat-ing on my Tweetdeck literally within two seconds, and it efficiently introduced my coffee to my keyboard, via my nose. The latter piece of information was then basically regurgitated and repeated throughout the entire day and evening and into this morning by virtually every American news outlet I can think of, accompanied by the usual B-roll of herds of people pressed against glass doors, waiting for someone to open the malls, so they can trample one another for the iPad or the newest generation iPhone.

I worked in "the media" for nearly 7 years, from 1993 to 2000 (television), and before that for almost two years, just out of college from 1991-1993-ish (USIA-radio/Voice of America). My experience in the television field was quite interesting. I was a freelancer working for a brand new cable network run by the insufferable Roger Ailes (now president of Fox) named "America's Talking." Soon after my position there, the network folded and its airways were taken over by Bill Gates and Microsoft, who created MSNBC. I stayed on, and within a short period of time became one of the directors of Chris Matthews' show, which went through several incarnations before settling on "Hardball." Ailes went on to helm the newly-created Fox News for Murdoch. We all know how that has turned out.

But being there, at the inception of the 24-hr news cycle networks (aside from CNN and Bloomberg, this was a revolutionary concept, and at the very least it provided competition for CNN; Bloomberg was and is an all-business TV outlet) was savage and weird. Gone were the standards of journalism I had learned and practised while working in the VOA newsroom. People no longer needed to check sources, they just ran with whatever stories surfaced--whether inaccurate or not.

Being on for 24 hours meant there was a huge need for content. Any kind of content. Controversial content. Ridiculously mundane content. Even made up content.

I remember being called in to direct a live shot out of Washington during the "breaking news" that president Clinton's plane (Air Force One) was temporarily stuck in the mud at the airport in Memphis. We had aviation experts and chattering talking heads go on for literally two hours, speculating what might have gone wrong, what could be done right, and whether or not this was some sort of conspiracy by the Right Wing (imagine the off-air jokes containing right/left wings and airplanes--this was happening during Clinton's impeachment process).

"Producers" of these types of shows were literally 21-year-olds, straight out of university with poli-sci degrees, not seasoned veterans of journalism with ethics and standards. These kids were busting into our studios looking to put on the air anything that might carry some controversy. They had taken their cue from the daytime Jerry Springer shows and were implementing the strategy into this sacred field of journalism, which was systematically being eviscerated and fucked proper by their doing.

Chris Matthews took to literally muttering at all times off air: "...numbers, we need numbers tonight, anything to get the numbers..." (referring to the ratings of his show).

Anything to get the numbers. This was in 1995! I quit the business five years later, but scanning the airwaves just this morning, the same gang of usual suspects is making the rounds on these insufferable all-day and night outlets.

You name the talking head, I've worked with him/her. I remember hanging out on K-Street and 18th, just outside the entrance to the MS/CNBC studios, smoking stogeys with the fellows on the crew, when a then unknown Ann Coulter joined us, clad in a puffy Chinchilla coat, talking all kinds of nonsense about how much better clubs in New York City are than in Washington. We smiled and nodded politely at the emaciated Valley Girl holding court on a subject neither of us had any interest in. We all know what's become of her now.

I lost an acquaintance and a professional friend in the attacks of 9/11. Barbara Olson was the wife of the then-Solicitor General Ted Olson. She was a frequent contributor and guest, and a lovely person-despite her GOP leanings and ideas. She had concise, cerebral arguments that counter-balanced the madness and screaming among the other guests. She and I often went on to digest these issues in the Green Room, after the segment or show. She was a good person.

I got into conversation several times with Chris Hitchens--another frequent guest--who would usually show up in the late afternoons dis-shevelled and somewhat inebriated, yet lucid and sharp as hell. Most of the time, the issues he discussed with me went above and beyond my head, and I was always intimidated, but he took an interest in me and in the fact that my mother had been a translator in Romania for Henry Kissinger and Richard Nixon, when they visited in the '70s. We all know the scathing books Hitch has written on Kissinger and Nixon.

There were a handful of good people that walked the guest beat, but even they were prodded and pushed (off air) to say something ridiculous, to create some sort of fight within the segment.


"Numbers, we need numbers tonight...anything to get the numbers."

And so, now almost 11 years removed from an ever-rotting field, I make sure I perform my due diligence when it comes to digesting news and information. I literally don't trust any one single outlet. Even Wikileaks has come under my scrutiny. Stories in which I have interest get cross-checked and cross-referenced at least five times, from different angles.

The truth always lives somewhere in between the barriers and distractors and smoke and fog and mirrors and layers of information. If it exists at all.

Friday, November 19, 2010

On Pride and Prejudice

2 comments
 
The greatest thing about not having any ambition to seeking political office is freedom to talk. Or even better, write. Or even mo' better: think. Over the past two years, this medium has given me ample opportunity to spill vitriol...or talk sense, depending on your political affiliation and/or religious beliefs. I am forever indebted to the founders of this site, who have respectfully asked me to "come back to the fold" to plagiarize from The Beige One in his column below. So here we go: 2012 is looming. We're back in business baby!

Checking through my news sources this morning I see the elephant dung beetle that is Sarah Palin has launched a barrage of usual horse shite against Michelle Obama--questioning her patriotism and pride in a racially-charged passage from Palin's new book (link and book name purposefully not included).

Audacity and obtuse racial and religious sentiment in this country has me raising my leery eyebrows. Just a few days ago Roger Ailes, Fox News channel president, called NPR a bunch of Nazis. This term has been thrown around loosely by the GOP now for over two years, and alarmingly seems to be accepted.

The cycle, as I see it, goes like this: outlets like Fox and its cronies start circulating ideas about Communist/Fascist influx into this country's government. Other news organizations give that 24-hour play because it's controversial...and controversy = ratings = advertising dollars. The Archie Bunkers plopped on their recliners watching tee-vee believe this is the word of God. Which in turn fuels their inner, dormant racism, and gives them the balls to actually put Hitler mustaches on Obama posters, carry firearms to protests against gays/lesbians/atheists/Muslims/insert anything you want here that doesn't jive with their values or lifestyles, and vote the aberration that makes up the Tea Party into our legislature.

It's a pretty simple cycle if most of your audience likes to not think for itself. Not to sound like an elitist, but if you don't have the curiosity to cross check ideas and sources (coming from either Left or Right or Middle or wherever), then I have no mercy for you and will assume you are a glib sheep who whistles Dixie on the way to your systematic slaughter.

It may very well be that we will get what we deserve. Or that we have already gotten it. After all, we are a democracy and we choose the evil that we choose--not necessarily wisely--but nevertheless consistently.

I can honestly say that my pride for this country, especially in the last two years, has dwindled down to nothing. And the level of frustration as I read or listen to these simpletons spew their fearful, racist, religious, and most importantly uninformed vitriol before news cameras, has over-spilled the mental vessel.

Strangely enough, I still have hope. But it's of the skewed kind. That is to say, upon seeing the stalemate that is now all but assured in Congress for the next two years, the same Einsteins who voted these incompetents into our government, will turn around and "punish" them by voting them out. And so it will go into my twilight, our economy slated to follow in Japan's footsteps.

To be perpetually continued, and made into a Hollywood movie starring Sisyphus and his buddy: one large, pesky rock.

Monday, June 28, 2010

Wishing You The Best

1 comments
 
I will try to keep this short and concise--unlike my other rants (which I've been told, at times aggressively, that they ramble for too long).

As Obama's poll numbers begin to plummet, as the "public" seems to lose confidence in this administration and its watered-down legislation like healthcare or financial reform, I hope and wish the American people realize the massive, inexorable corporate juggernaut under which we are all living, and its reach into our political system.

Until special interests are at the very least relegated to the political sidelines (the hope would be for lobbyists to be eliminated altogether--but dream on dreamer), there isn't much any administration will be able to do that will bring about urgent change. Couple with that, the media's adulation for the Right vs. Left partisanship rift, and we're basically at a stalemate, and will be for the rest of my life, I foresee.

Change is needed urgently. And while I realize that most everything in this country is implemented in baby steps, we have run out of time. Congress on both sides is dragging its feet, members incessantly protecting their jobs instead of trailblazing or implementing visionary legislation. When the mission of a politician is job security, we are doomed. That has flowed as the standard for many decades, but our time is up. As you can deduce, I am very much in favor of short term limits for everyone in government.

The Right vs. Left construct (being exploited and exacerbated by all media) is at the same time artificial as detrimental to progress. My wish is for disillusioned voters (like me) to realize that a perpetually-revolving door of administrations will not solve environmental or social issues. It will not "fix the economy." It will not create jobs. My wish is for all voters to realize that fundamental flaws and obstacles begin with Congress. In a way, we are aware of that: how else can the constant approval rate of Congress be so low? Yet the same characters show up for work decade after decade.

I write this on the heels of Robert Byrd's death earlier this morning. Byrd was the longest serving Senator in the United States Congress. He had been a stalwart in our government since January 3, 1959! Term limits and special interests reform must be addressed first, before anything of substance can be achieved in America.

Here's wishing us all the best; things ain't looking too rosy at the moment.

Monday, June 7, 2010

Helen Thomas Must Die

8 comments


Author's Note: I originally intended to write this piece as a criticism of the older generation's perceived entitlement to spew out racist or sexist language (my parents often like to loudly express their obtuse, horrifying opinions to the public at large). Upon re-reading this, I realise that it unfairly slams one of the last, great journalists left out there. During my brief stint as a newswriter for the U.S. Info. Agency/VOA in the early 90s, I got a chance to be in the White House Press room for a handful of Q&A sessions, with Helen leading them off. As a newbie to the field of journalism, I stood literally in the last row, just inside the door, behind all the rag tag camera guys--themselves relegated to the back of the rack. I often was quite jealous of Helen's front row seat, literally three feet or so away from Prez Clin-tohn. And no, I don't really want her to die...I just think she should have used her head a little better and re-worded her statement. After all those decades of playing the game, she made the wrong move. I suppose if one is 90 years of age, one slips every now and again. Helen Thomas was a life long Liberal and many of us will always remember her contribution to the field of journalism. It's quite sad the way her career (at least with Hearst) had to end. Over the last few years, however, she had become an opinion writer for Hearst, and I'm not so sure an op-ed columnist ought to have a front seat at the show--but if anyone ever deserved it, Helen was it.

Even if she hadn't bollixed herself into a tight corner last week by loudly declaring that all Jews in Israel "should leave Palestine and go back to Poland and Germany," I would have called for and endorsed Helen Thomas' overdue demise. I mean just look at her. Hasn't she been around for long enough? Give somebody else a chance, madame. Should there not be term limits on that badass, front row seat in the White House press room?

What in hell is that thing hunched over and making gurgling noises every day? Christ, if I didn't know any better, I'd have thought it was this nasty thing from Genesis' "Land of Confusion." How's that for an earworm. But I digress.

Ms. Thomas later apologized for the incendiary remarks, saying they did not properly reflect her position on the conflict of the Middle East (wtf? How is that an un-clear position?) but the criticism has been scorching ever since. Late Friday night, former White House spokesman Ari Fleischer called for Thomas' firing from Hearst news service, where she serves as a columnist. And yesterday, Nine Speakers, Inc. -- Thomas's long time speaking agency -- announced they've dropped her (inquiring minds are anxiously awaiting to see if they change their name accordingly to Eight Speakers, Inc.) from their line up.

To me, this sort of nonsense is de rigueur for the majority of old people--famous or not--who obtusely believe that their prolonged longevity on this planet, gives them Carte Blanche to disseminate their racist, sexist vitriol that, supposedly, had been festering inside for decades--more than likely checked by the semi-lucid realization that one could not really function in civilized society spewing daily Nazi mantra.

But apparently once one becomes a septuagenarian all bets are off. There seems to be a "Common Sense" switch up there in ye olde grey matter that magically gets turned off. Incredibly, that coincides with the involuntary all-out geyser of shit that begins to spew from the mouth around the same age.

"Respect your elders" has always been a laughable concept to me. In my life, most of the elders I've encountered have thought along the lines of Ms. Thomas. In their philosophy, they have shown themselves to be brutish, conservative, bigoted, sexist, fear-laden insects with skewed values and outdated familial ideas. Respecting these people or giving them credence or a voice is detrimental to a civilized society. This is the generation that holds back progress; that clings tightly to outdated ideas, concepts, and way of life.

Personally, I root for the quick demise of such parasitic vermin. And foot-in-mouth, career-ending statements like the recent one from Ms. Thomas only make me rejoice at the consequences.

Hopefully there are consequences.

BREAKING (as of 12:22 pm EST): Helen Thomas announced today that she is retiring, effective immediately, according to a statement from Hearst Newspapers.

Monday, May 31, 2010

BP = Big Phuck-UP

0 comments



I've kept quiet about the role of the White House in this calamity some still insist on calling a "spill." But on the heels of the failure of "Top Kill" this past Saturday, I feel I should chime in.

I think, unfortunately, this situation, coupled with a slow economic recovery, a severely watered down healthcare bill, and incessant Congressional spending on Afghanistan while constantly slashing education, infrastructure, arts, and science budgets will make Barack Obama a one-term president. The frustrating thing is that his successor will step in and do nothing more, or nothing better. I am thoroughly convinced that with our Congress operating in the way it has, nothing of substance can get done. So all the perturbed proclamations from either side (Tea Baggers/Partiers whatever they're called) don't send waves of panic in me anymore. The Elephants' trunks will be just as gridlocked and tied as the Donkeys' tails have been. Until we get rid of the entrenched nepotism and corruption in Congress, we shall expect nothing to be passed.

Watching the millions of gallons being let loose into the Gulf has enraged me beyond belief. I dream about this catastrophe almost every night. I am obsessed with it. Like millions of citizens, I want to hold the White House responsible or--rather--yell at it for seemingly not doing anything. But then the more rational side takes over and I realize that the White House doesn't know what to do.

If BP has no idea, how can the White House? And even if it did, we are flat broke. There is no money to do anything...other than allocate borrowed Chinese funds to the perpetual disaster that is Afghanistan. And so, while I'd love to shake my fist and yell obscenities at the gates of the West Wing (and believe me, I have done that before, at the risk of looking like a fool or being arrested), realistically there is nothing they can do about this but stand by like all of us suckers and wait for August when both relief wells will have been completed and the gusher finally tamed.

The repercussions of this atrocity will be felt for generations. I literally foresee two to three decades of environmental affect from this unimaginable catastrophe. What no one seems to be underscoring is that, as of tomorrow, we're into "hurricane season." And so the drilling of the relief wells that is scheduled to be completed by August can be potentially shut down a few times. This, coupled with NOAA's forecast of an active storm season, is a recipe for...I've run out of synonyms for "disaster."

No one knows what to do in the short term. While the administration will be forever tainted with this as "Obama's Katrina," in reality it is as clueless as BP. Besides, it's not quite fair to invoke Katrina here--the White House did not have a 5-day warning on this catastrophic explosion. Mark my words (which don't really carry any gravitas, but still): we will all be standing by, holding our bollocks for the next 6 weeks, if we're lucky, while everything in and around the Gulf of Mexico begins to die off.

The oil geyser catastrophe is a horrendous crime upon both humanity and environment, assigned to be solved by its perpetrators.

Tuesday, May 25, 2010

TheWar of Northern Aggression

2 comments

via Google images

All is not peachy and sunny as these North Korean babes (via Beloved Leader Kim Jong-il) would have you believe. Take a nice, good look at this...and now imagine hundreds of thousands of people being starved by the government... literally dying on the streets, on railroad tracks, in concrete, government housing.

What has been happening the last few days between North and South Korea has been personally un-nerving. Mainly because this writer, having been born and having lived under a similar closed society regime for eleven years, does not believe the international community has a solution for North Korea.

On Monday, South Korea cut off trade with North Korea, denied North Korean merchant ships use of its sea lanes and called on the United Nations to once again censure the North for what it called the deliberate sinking of one of its warships by a North Korean submarine. Forty-six sailors were killed in the March 26 sinking.

Past experience with sanctions has shown that only innocent people are affected by embargoes. North Korea's citizens have been starving in the streets for decades. And the world has yet to find solutions for dealing with closed society systems; particularly ones with nuclear capabilities (Iran--and make no mistake, Iran is a closed, totalitarian regime--if you believe otherwise you are naivé)

South Korea formally designated North Korea as its “principal enemy” in 1994 after the North threatened to turn Seoul into a “sea of fire” during the height of an international crisis over its development of nuclear weapons. But that designation was dropped in 2004, the same year the two Koreas also suspended propaganda broadcasts across their border.

The North Korean leader, Kim Jong-il, whose government has threatened an “all-out war” against any sanctions, has ordered his military and reserve forces to be ready for war, said an organization of North Korean defectors on Tuesday. Last Thursday, when the South formally accused the North of torpedoing its ship, a senior North Korean general relayed Mr. Kim’s order through a broadcast to intercoms fitted at most North Korean homes, said North Korea Intellectuals Solidarity, a Web site based in Seoul and run by North Korean defectors.

Moreover, concerns over this grave situation have shaken global markets--particularly the super-fragile European economy.

“The North Korean situation is also putting pressure on stocks,” said Philippe Gijsels, head of research at BNP Paribas Fortis Global Markets in Brussels. “In a normal environment, this wouldn’t be having such a big impact — they talk about going to war every few months, it seems. But markets are quite nervous and will take any excuse to sell off.” (NY Times)

At this point, no one has any idea why the DPRK sank the South Korean ship in March. No one has much of an idea of anything that's happening inside that country.

Secretary of state Hillary Clinton wrapped up two days of high-level meetings with the Chinese in Beijing on Tuesday with no progress on winning China’s backing for international measures against North Korea.

So where we stand is basically on the sidelines, with no viable solutions. The situation is grave; North Korea pops up, it seems, every few months with bizarre behaviour and aggressive tactics. Time and time again the international community has shown it has no answers other than imposing embargoes on an already starving population.

My father, a simple peasant at heart, once told me: often times people don't understand or thoroughly process anything but extreme violence and oppression brought down upon them. The brutes of North Korea ought to be exterminated with nuclear weapons. And with extreme prejudice (he likes to quote from Conrad's Heart of Darkness, whenever possible).

While I'm far from endorsing that hawk-ish proclamation, I can't help to wonder what exactly it would take to tame an insane cult leader.

Wednesday, May 19, 2010

A New Season of War

2 comments

Saurabh Das/AP

Remember Afghanistan? Think hard. I know other, more important stories have taken over our attention lately: the gushing geyser of oil threatening the eco chain in the Gulf of Mexico and beyond, the pseudo civil war in Thailand, the European economy in the toilet, Rachel dating Jesse St. James of Vocal Adrenaline...

But guess what tovarich? Spring in Afghanistan doesn't just mean a fresh, new field of fiery red poppies to refine into opium and heroin. No suh, you crazy trainspotters. May means we're back in the business of war, wa-hoo! Unlike most Americans who have so moved on with this story, yours truly is obsessed with the "Central Asian Roundabout." Maybe it's because, as the namesake of You Know Who The Great who failed to annex Afghanistan to his collection of real estate, I feel the need to vindicate my brother-from-across-the-centuries and pick up the slack--pen, not sword, you understand. Hey baby what can I say... I'm a lover, not a fighter.

Or maybe it's because somwhereabouts the winter of '79 your not so humble opinion writer was hanging around a disgusting pensione in Rome, waiting for his entry visa into the United States, and befriended an old Soviet emigré who proceeded to school yours truly on the catastrophic mistake the CCCP had just made, invading Afghanistan. And ever since, this always-curious writer has been shaking his head at just how idiotically analogous to the Reds, America's meddling into افغانستان has been. Maybe not.

In any case, Spring has sprung, the roads have defrosted, and it's back to the front we go. If you haven't yet heard, Taliban insurgents launched a brazen assault on the American base at Bagram Wednesday morning, sparking a "large and confusing gun battle that left at least five American soldiers wounded and seven guerrillas dead." (NY Times)

Taliban leaders claimed that seven suicide bombers had blown themselves up at the gates of the base, clearing the way for more than 20 other fighters to get inside. The Taliban reports appeared a bit conflagrative, as they often are. But American officials confirmed that the base, one of the largest in Afghanistan, had come under an "ambitious and unusual assault." (NY Times)

An American official confirmed that the base was bumrushed by as many as 30 insurgents, but that no one had actually breached the defenses.

The assault on Bagram comes on the heels of an attack Tuesday by a suicide bomber in Kabul, who rammed an explosives-laden bus into an American convoy, killing 18 people, including five American soldiers and a Canadian officer.

That attack — and the one on Bagram on Wednesday — appeared to be part of a larger campaign directed at the capital and its environs. In recent days, the Taliban have smuggled five suicide bombers into the area, an American military official said.

A last check still has the White House muttering something about packing up and getting out only after establishing a strong, local governance. Historically speaking...good luck with that. If the Achaemenid Empire, the Macedonian Empire, the Indian Maurya Empire, the Muslim Arab Empire, the Sasanid Empire, and the Great Soviet Empire couldn't tame the baby, chances look a bit thin for our broke-ass selves. But hey, have you heard? Fox is putting on Glee after the Super Bowl next year.

In a move to head off questions about its long-simmering tensions with Hamid Karzai, last week the Obama administration rolled out the red carpet for Our Man in Afghanistan, granting him unprecedented access to Washington's top brass and royal treatment denied to even the closest of US allies.

But don't be fooled by appearances. Tensions are still boiling just below the surface. For all the pomp and circumstance of the four-day visit by the Afghan president and his posse of cabinet ministers and senior advisors, the Obama administration is working hard behind the scenes to weaken his authority by reinforcing local governance to boost elusive stability of the war-torn country.

Stay tuned. This series is slated to develop very slowly. And more than likely, never end. But you know, in the wise words of Eric Arthur Blair (aka Georgie Porgie Orwell): "War is Peace."

A salam alaikum brothers, and pass the AK-47s.

Wednesday, January 20, 2010

K Bai

0 comments
 
At the end of this I am divorcing myself from writing about and dissecting anything that is political, so this will be a natural end to my relationship with this oh so wonderful, but sadly defunct site. The fellas and gals who usually contribute but lately have not been writing here, have nevertheless remained good friends across various other online milieus. In fact, in some form or another, they are people without whom I couldn't traverse my daily bridges or perform the usual duties in an orderly fashion; that is to say, without contact and interaction with them, life would grind even heavier.

Though he has been dealt a rough hand, Obama has disappointed this supporter back into his decades-old apathy and cynicism about politicians. More so now than ever, I truly believe nothing of import can be done in this country because there really is no consensus or majority to be had on anything. If 53% is considered a hefty win or a substantial margin for change, then truly nothing of substance can be passed or done here in the United States. Imagine what life would have been like had we been allowed to pass in school with 53% on our test scores. In fact, imagine if that were to be considered a majority or, rather, an A-like result.

My better half and I have been talking and planning our eventual emigration to a yet unknown country for 18 months and the plan is more alive now, after one year into Obama's administration, than before. For we both are truly convinced that this country is too large to effect any positive change on virtually anything. Too large and too equally and evenly divided. This country is primed for perpetual political stalemate.

Time after time Obama's administration, as well as Congress, has disappointed me by watering down proposed bills (health care is the star) and legislation in order to appease a government run by lobbyists (corporations). The change that was promised was a pipe dream. I should have known it. I should have known it like I always have, but I was guilty of being swept up by hope. I truly believed our politicians were capable of and ready for change. And like a young fool, I supported them. I invested myself emotionally and defended them. I cannot tell you how much time I wasted privately, whether through emails or phone calls or person to person interaction, arguing for the more liberal side. I would love to have that time and energy back; I would probably have been able to write half my novel by now.

The problem we have (and likely and truthfully not just in the States but mostly everywhere around the world) is that politicians look upon their chosen affairs as a lifelong job. Therefore the point is preservation, job security, perpetual longevity, nepotism. They have never cared for their constituency. They are not interested in making hard decisions or going against ingrained party lines because it is exactly that which puts one's job in danger.

The centrist position of a politician is analogous to and reinforces my belief in the inefficiency we have with a 50-50 split on most anything or everything. And the fact that corporations and banks---by nature animals committed to status quo---run our government and sadly within our empirical, capitalist, central-bank oriented system will always run our government, the political machine will never allow for full liberal or social inclination in our laws, teabaggers rest assured. It will never fully and truly be sensitive to our needs and our inextricable connection to our physical environment, and mandate change to improve the human condition. You can take that into the sunset and ride yourself out, cowboy. John Ford will see to it that you get a good exposure on that last screen shot.

And so it is that I end this personal struggle right here. I am not one to make resolutions, but this new year I am hoping to start and maintain a life as free of politics and involvement in them as possible. I don't quite care that I'll be labeled a cynic, a misanthrope, an apathetic citizen whose aim in life is indolence; at least I'll be much less bogged down intellectually, and have more free time to enjoy music, art, literature--you know, the things that truly count. My hope may be diminished on a grand, international scale, but there is a "local" life to be nurtured, brought up, guided, and educated. We are all cogs in the machine, yes, but some cogs tend to run smoother than others when they're not quite as concerned with the machinations of things. Once we realize the ghastly control exercised upon us by The Corporation (and our mind-boggling, consumer-driven blind refusal to oppose it), we can intellectually extricate ourselves from the system, Vaclav Havel stylee. The true, attainable idea of freedom that we still have in this country (although not for long) is the opportunity to divorce yourself from everything you deem detrimental in your life, and focus your efforts on a smaller, more local and personal microcosm.

I am growing a bushy moustache and a mullet, and I'll be donning incredibly truncated, tight, OP shorts and tube socks pulled up to my knees. If you should ever run into me, please refrain from talking about politics or the weather. Do feel free to buy me a drink, however. I am nearly broke and will gladly accept your gift. I drink most anything...in fact, I cannot think of something that offends me to the point of not accepting it gratis.

I'll see you around, gators.


The Daily Show With Jon StewartMon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Mass Backwards
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show
Full Episodes
Political HumorHealth Care Crisis

Monday, December 14, 2009

The Short View

1 comments
 
The more I delve into our documented, muddled, historical involvement in Afghanistan, the more incredulous I become at the short-sighted war mongering of hawks like William Casey (former director of CIA under Reagan and the man almost solely responsible for escalating the covert war against the Soviet occupation of the late 70s-80s), Robert Gates (current Sec'y of Defense and former director of CIA), Charlie Wilson (didja see the movie with Tom Hanks?), Michael Vickers, Michael Pillsbury, and a whole slew of self-professed communist slayers playing backroom politics during the Reagan years.

Short-sightedness seems to be America's modus operandi in anything and everything; from internal issues at the municipal levels of government to international foreign policy. We believe more in slapping on band-aids and hoping for a natural wound heal, than applying stitches and nurturing the rift with careful tractability.

To learn about the fervent, Mujaheddin hatred of communism and capitalism equally during the time of Soviet occupation, and to realize that Casey et. al for some reason either overlooked this fact, or didn't have the foresight to anticipate the quick about-face by their beloved, supported Taliban, is beyond mind boggling. It's egregious, political thinking; or lack thereof. It makes a regular citizen like me almost scream outloud: politicians, are you kidding me? You honestly had no idea that once the Soviet "infidels" would eventually retreat (or be defeated), the Mujaheddin or Taliban fighters would re-focus their efforts on the imperialist Gargantua that is the United States?

A lowly schmuck like me can see the Jihadi tsunami coming for miles; and I have nary a course in political science, much less a degree in it like all proper analysts.

Is there a resolution viable in this "graveyard of empires?" Militarily, no. But there might be a small chance of self-governance if both the United States and NATO commit to (wait for it Fox News)...nation building. Yes, the two most awful words in political vernacular since "healthcare reform."

In a way, it's what U.S. military presence has been obtusely attempting with local Afghan ethnic groups---Pashtuns, Tajiks, and Hazaras alike. But it hasn't been altogether successful. How could it be? The high command's version of "nation building" consists merely of hand shaking and exercising good, pro-U.S. public relations. But guess what? We cannot slip these people a couple of packs of chiclets and hope to coax them to our way of life.

The Taliban resurgence, particularly in the southern provinces and on the Pakistani border, has been a sobering by-product of our failure to connect with the Afghan people and provide them with the necessities of a decent life. Indeed, it's our responsibility to do that, if we're occupying.

I realize the prospect of "nation building" sits in the mouth of an American tax payer as snugly as a root canal without anesthetic. But given the failed history of potential conquerors of this geographically-challenging, complex country, we have little choice. If this tactic is not employed by both the United States and its NATO partners, history will once again repeat itself and claim countless lives on both sides as collateral damage.

(Soviet Foreign Minister Eduard) Sheverdnadze had asked for American cooperation in limiting the spread of "Islamic fundamentalism" (after the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan). (Secretary of State George) Shultz was sympathetic, but no high-level Reagan administration officials ever gave much thought to the issue. They never considered pressing Pakistani intelligence to begin shifting support away from the Muslim Brotherhood---connected factions and toward more friendly Afghan leadership, whether for the Soviets' sake or America's. The CIA and others in Washington discounted warnings from Soviet leadership about Islamic radicalism. The warnings were just a way to deflect attention from Soviet failings, American hard-liners decided.
--Steve Coll, "Ghost Wars"

Sunday, June 28, 2009

While you were lamenting...

1 comments
 
...the passing of Ed McMahon or Farrah Fawcett or Michael Jackson or even that guy who YELLED REALLY LOUDLY ABOUT LOUSY CLEANING PRODUCTS AND SOME OTHER SHITE, the Honduran army swiftly ousted President Manuel Zelaya on Sunday in Central America's first coup since the fall of the Iron Curtain.

Soldiers entered the presidential palace in the capital, Tegucigalpa, and disarmed the presidential guard early Sunday, military officials said.

Political tensions had increased in recent weeks, as Zelaya pressed ahead with his Hugo Chavez-like plans for a nonbinding referendum that opponents said would open the way for him to rewrite the Honduran constitution to run for re-election despite a one-term limit.

President Obama said Sunday that he was deeply concerned by the reports from Honduras about the detention and expulsion of the president.

“I call on all political and social actors in Honduras to respect democratic norms, the rule of law and the tenets of the Inter-American Democratic charter,” Mr. Obama said in a statement. “Any existing tensions and disputes must be resolved peacefully through dialogue free from any outside interference.”

Unfortunately I believe Obama is playing this ballgame a bit too safely in his condemnation of this latest infraction on the "democratic system." Zelaya is a close buddy of Venezuelan honcho Hugo Chavéz, enjoying full support and adulation of labour unions and the poor.

That being said, however, Honduras has long been a banana republic puppet controlled by rich corporations with North American interests. And so, as with everything that is the dirty game of politics and wrangling for power, the Honduran people are faced with two awful choices: Communism or Capitalism.

Tuesday, June 16, 2009

Eeee-rahn, Numbah One

0 comments
 
The iron cleric is now blinking. Get hot water quick.

Iran's Supreme Leader the Ayatollah Somethin' Somethin' Khamenei has agreed to a partial re-count of disputed ballots in Friday's divisive elections, although he ruled out an annulment of the vote.

Despite the Ayatollah's celestial right to govern, the presidency of Iran is far from unimportant. It is a critical part of the "managed democracy" that the ruling clerics have used to govern Iran for the last three decades. Khamenei himself is a former President. The job is important enough to have brought millions of Iranians to the polls on Friday, and thousands into the streets afterward — both supporters of the apparent loser--reformist candidate Mir-Hossein Mousavi--and members of the radical volunteer paramilitary forces who support the reelected President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

But the system is tricky. It actually allows the Supreme Leader to present different faces to the world. While he has strongly backed Ahmadinejad, for example, Khamenei also for a time designated one of the president's key pragmatist critics, Ali Larijani, as the point man in negotiations with the West over Iran's nuclear program.

I wonder, though, if the Obama administration wouldn't be under extreme pressure should Mousavi, the reformist, moderate candidate emerge victorious, while Iran's hard line regarding nuclear weapons is still maintained?

In dealing with Ahmadinejad, the administration has been able to gather international support and put enough pressure on Iran to at least soft-arm them into minute concessions. In the political milieu, we need to have a clear, defined enemy at the helm over there in order that we shine as the world's democratic example. And as all political establishments aim for status quo, I am suspicious of the United States' desire to truly oust Ahmadinejad.

In every fairy tale there is a clear good guy and there is a clear bad guy. Mir-Hossein Mousavi would muddy-up the equation enough to cause the administration severe migraines.

Monday, June 15, 2009

Machination

4 comments
 
It's beyond obvious that since the inauguration we've all lost our verve around here. Personally speaking, it took a bit longer than the rest of the contributors, but it's happened. I've turned back to the wall of cynicism and distrust of politics and its actors.

It shouldn't be a surprise. I was raised and went to university in the Washington D.C. area, and the weight and influence of the political machinery churning its soul-sucking cogs drove me away from this most corrupt of disciplines for the two decades I spent in that godforsaken city. Life inside the Beltway is so exclusive and insular, fraught with backroom deals and chest-stabbing followed by luncheons and myriad cocktails at The Old Ebbitt Grill, that I thoroughly believe everyone encircled and entrenched in that insufferable layer of hell has lost track of life outside it.

Having worked within it for six years I can testify to the ignorance of politicians for their constituency outside the Beltway--no matter what they all crow about on C-SPAN. The fact is, a pol's main mission(s) is/are to either get rich (hello corporation lobbying), headline the revered Cocktail Circuit, or get on the list of Ben Bradlee's and Sally Quinn's frequent Georgetown parties. Bob Woodward has become such an elite stalwart on the D.C. circuit that he himself now hosts the second most popular annual shin-dig at his Victorian or Tudor or whatever the hell style townhouse he has on M Street.

But Woody is a...journalist, and we all know journalists have no power to influence, no matter how much access they're given to an administration or how many "inside scoop" - type books they pen. Yes?

Basically, what I'm seeing now is a half-assed push for change by the current administration, which is being met in typical, status-quo fashion by the good ol' boys (and some girls) in Congress. Make no mistake, I knew from the start Obama was Obama--a skilled, intelligent, forward-thinking...POLITICIAN. And so I didn't expect anywhere as much as was promised. But what I'm seeing now is our system's machinations working flawlessly to effectively cut off any and every thing. Sure, you can give me your examples of this and that being passed or worked through, but generally it's business as usual on the old hill.

And if this administration isn't successful in pushing anything through, then I will not see true change in my lifetime. Of that, I am confident. That may be cynicism, but you won't blame me for inaccuracy. You'll see. I'm an old dog with wide open eyes.

On the healthcare issue*, I recently found out that one of the more popular versions (if there exists such a term for this initiative here in the States) of coverage with Congress is the mandatory purchase of the government-sponsored plan (Public Option). That is to say, EVERYONE must at least pay the government-sponsored premium, otherwise they will be fined. So, basically, if you're too poor to afford health insurance to begin with, the government wants to give you the option to pay the mandatory premium for its plan, otherwise be fined--a la the IRS coming after you. In some cases, people have chimed that the government fine for NOT choosing an option is actually more affordable than its premium.

Ladies and gents, this has GOT to be the most idiotic, half-assed scheme I've heard. I was under the impression that "everyone will be covered" meant healthcare is given to EVERYONE who...stay with me here...CANNOT AFFORD A HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUM OF EVEN $1. But no. In typical American fashion, we're going to make our citizens pay up, or be fined.

My friends, this is why I've said now for over a year that this system here, in this country, does not work for me and my family. It's compromises such as this that succeed in making me want to pick up that M-16, take the Orange Line to the Capitol South station, and pay a little visit to that revered hill. Say hello to my leeetle friend, you elitist, scheming, corporation and central bank-bought swine!

I am reduced to this. And it happens every time I dig down far enough into the nuts and bolts of our system. Fundamentally it doesn't work to help its citizens have a chance at a decent life.

And so I leave you with this cheery column on this soggy, cloudy Monday. I don't know what there is to be done about anything in Washington anymore. At this point, my personal answer to improving my life and my family's is to emigrate. All in due time; there are some loose ends that have to be slowly tied here, but the plan has been put into motion.

*Please note correction of single payer vs. Public Option note in the Comments by Teresa

Sunday, May 10, 2009

Thrifty is Nifty

2 comments
 
I've been reading lately a whole slew about how thrifty Americans have become all of a sudden. The savings rate, according to an article in the NY Times this morning, has risen from zero percent to a bit over 4, in the last year. We went from a savings rate of 14 percent in the 1970s, to negative 2.7 percent in 2005, meaning Americans were spending more than they made.

Corporations had been salivating on the heels of these numbers. They had finally turned us into super-consumers who were actually brainwashed into living on credit. I recall a conversation I had with a friend in 1997 in which I extolled the virtues of paying off your home as fast as possible. My parents paid off their first home in 7 years, and their second in two. My friend shook her head and proceeded to explain how it's "healthy" to be in mortgage debt, and besides...you get to write off the interest at tax time.

Stupid Americans! (I thought). They'd rather pay off a mortgage perpetually and deduct A PERCENTAGE of the interest paid from taxes, than not have a mortgage at all. I never understood it. And never will. Perhaps I'm old school, but my idea is not busting out half my salary on a mortgage for the rest of my life. I'd rather take that $1500/month and store it up for travelling to Italy, Spain, France, Bali, Tokyo, Melbourne....somewhere else.

Now the Econ experts are biatching about how we're all going to railroad the already-struggling economy by not spending. I just shake my head at all of this; they continue to drive into our heads this horseshite that has already bankrupted us. But how to get the economy started again? Spend! Spend what? I think it's time for a new model, fellas.

In any case, I don't believe the majority of Americans have learned their lesson; they'll store away capital out of necessity, not enlightenment. But I am optimistic that our government will regulate bank products such as no-down-payment or no-income-verification mortgage loans and credit lines, thus putting some sort of halt on the Frankenstein that has been created by banks.

And a quick shout-out to all skewed, warped Americans who are now holding their heads in sorrow over the fact that they can no longer afford that third SUV: WAKE UP! "He who dies with the most toys..." still dies.

Let us know how well that overdrive system works in the 9th Circle of the Inferno.

Wednesday, April 8, 2009

Revolution, 21st Century Style

3 comments

photo: net.effect
 
"Revolution happens 140 characters at a time."

This is what I recently sent out as my daily "Tweet" into the vast electronica of the Internets. This story holds much interest for me, as Moldova was once part of my Mother Country (and is also my father's birthplace) before it became independent with the fall of the Iron Curtain in 1989.

Recent events in Chisinau, the capital of this small, forgotten "new" country in the Balkans, have made the front page of The New York Times, but not necessarily for the cause of the still peaceful, massive student protests against the Communist Party, which is back at the helm of government. This is the first full-on revolution aided by the instantaneous use of technology---mainly Twitter. And the news outlets are buzzing all about it.

For quite some time now I've been explaining to friends that Twitter is best used as a tool for disseminating information, not for banal friend status updates as part of the popular social network it's recently become. Twitter's initial purpose was to keep northern California firefighters informed of rapid-moving wildfires in the region.

I've been following the barrage of information being sent and shared by the Moldovan people right there at the scene---involved in the scene---and it's been an incredibly fascinating experience. Instructions are being given out on where to organize, which buildings to try to occupy (TV, of course), which services have been cut, which rail lines are inoperable, where troops are amassing, etc. I am witnessing live entities (crowds) move about this small country in real time, in real experiences, from real vantage points, sometimes as detailed as certain alleys on certain streets. It's mind boggling. I feel a mix of revolt and interest and desire to join the masses, if I could only board a flight out tonight.

If I could only...

What?

I wonder if the comfort of an ocean and a few thousand miles' buffer zone don't give me the bravado displayed in the paragraph above. I wonder if all of us Americans would be bothered to emulate the Moldovans if unfairly-elected governments came to power amid shenanigans at the polls (2001). Or would we be afraid of missing the next installment of "Lost" ?

I am first to say that I'm a master at doling out excuses of inconvenience. Am I the only one good at running in the opposite direction of the Revolution?

One day I'm gonna...

(update Tweet from one of the protesters: "the people's focus is too much on HOW students got to meet in #Moldova and not why?" )

(More developing events)

(Read an opposing opinion on the role of Twitter in this situation)

Wednesday, March 25, 2009

This Is Why I hate on the Media (Swine Version)

1 comments
 
I've had it up to my thinning, graying crown with the American press corps; and with people in general. I am fully convinced we are the most despicable animals in universal history, and I ain't just sayin' this 'cause I'm the resident curmudgeon here.

This morning is abuzz with the nay-sayers and critics of Obama's press conference last night. The consensus among the swine periodistas is that the Prez appeared too non-plussed, too rational, too "...distant and intellectual" (according to Republican strategist Matthew Dowd, who in the past has extolled Obama's virtues). If we are to believe this excrement---and a lot of us do---then our leader is apparently a disconnected elitist smoking Gauloises cigarettes out on the West Wing porch, without any interest in or concern with the gargantuan economic outhouse in which we, and the rest of the world, find ourselves.

Ladies and gents, this is the type of horseshite that has, over the last thirty years, accumulated and finally tipped me over the edge of reasonable sanity. Never in my life have I seen such anti-education, anti-intellectual backlash as has been practiced in this country. "I" is the new scarlet letter, you hear that Nathaniel? I am baffled by the continuously low standards we are pushing onto ourselves and our children, and remain fully incredulous at what a negative connotation the word "education" continues to have in our vernacular. It's easy to recognize the psychology in this: set the bar low enough and no one stands to disappoint. Everyone wins, right? A nation of mediocrity forging through time and history like a blind donkey. But with guns. Big guns, at that.

I wonder: what exactly would have made the media happy last night? To stand before an irrational, sabre-rattling, fist-shaking rabid dog spewing revolutionary bile and incoherent solutions? If so, may I suggest they migrate their critiquing arses down to Venezuela and take a look at what's happening down there.

At one point during the conference, newly-minted Press Corps Douchebaggius Extraordinaireus Chuck Todd stood and delivered this doozy.

It was nothing less than astounding, considering what we now know about lack of responsibility and accountability from banks and the likes of AIG. But then again, it shouldn't be too outrageous or revolting. News outlets are, after all, owned by corporations. Or insufferable despots like Rupert Murdoch. Oh wait...that's redundant.

Monday, March 23, 2009

Por Ahora (Part Deux)

1 comments
 
Good morning. Remember me? I've been locked away for a while but way-ell...I've been keeping my eye on you. Yes you, Señor El Presidente Douchebag Chávez. Some of us here in the "North American Empire" are actually endowed with the education and ability to not only read, but analyse and form opinions and...as far as I can tell, are still allowed to criticise governments.

For our dear readers who haven't yet scoured the news wires this morning, El Presidente launched an uncalled-for, disrespectful salvo at the U.S. yesterday on his usual, interminable Sunday babblefest of a show, calling President Obama "ignorant," and saying he has a lot to learn about Latin America.

“At least one could say, ‘poor ignorant person,’” Chávez said, adding that Obama “should read a little bit so that he learns about the reality.”

Chávez continued his usual diatribe: “If Obama respects us, we’ll respect him. If Obama tries to keep disrespecting Venezuela, we will confront the North American empire.”

May I remind our loyal readers what I wrote in my original piece (December, '08) on this Castro-wanna-be clown:

...despite the muscle flexing, tough talk, and anti-American rhetoric, Chávez knows full well he's engaged in an interdependent political game with the United States to buy his country's oil. What most people don't realize is that Venezuela has no other market for the greater part of its oil: heavy crude.

Heavy crude is special stuff and is not for the average refinery. The majority of Venezuela's oil can only be processed in the specialist refineries run by Hovensa (a joint venture between US refiners Hess Corp and PdVSA) located in the US Virgin islands, among other places. Meanwhile, the U.S. readily accepts the Venezuelan heavy crude because without it the heavy crude refineries would close. There is no other supplier of this special crude available, so the U.S. would lose around 11% of its total domestic oil products supply in one fell swoop.

The result is of the 2.15 million barrels per day (mbpd) Venezuela pumps presently, 1.35mbpd has to go to the U.S. Simply put, without Venezuela, U.S. refineries will close and the country will have an oil supply crisis. Meanwhile without the United States, Venezuela will have no market for the lion's share of its crude, and thus Señor Presidente would be voted out.


Forget dependence on foreign oil; when will the American people and politicians realise that a total and complete divorce from reliance upon oil via innovation and the harnessing of alternative sources will not only spearhead the effort of a global movement to save this rapidly-declining planet, but will in effect get these irrelevant bozo Commie barbudos off our backs once and for all? These insufferable parasites hang around rattling their sabres like flies for a reason: we continue to produce and provide the manure which attracts them.
(source for Chávez quotes: The New York Times)

Thursday, March 5, 2009

Rush--New Leader of the GOP

2 comments

(Charlie's Angels, circa 1974)

See, I am, like, totally omigod excited at the prospect, even though I must admit to being just a bit frazzled by the obtuse allegiance with the Elephants. Given their long history with all that is experimental in music, art, and literature, I honestly pegged Geddy, Alex, and Neil for liberals---in fact, socialists.

So you can imagine my surprise when they decided to lean right. I will allow them this strange mis-calculation, however, due to their advanced age and decades of drug use. And anyway, seriously. Everyone over fifty is Republican, right? Still...it will be good to see the boys from Toronto in the spotlight again, especially as the new mouthpiece for the Republican Party. I am very much looking forward to Neil's eloquent speeches and rebuttals, seeing how our new prez is young, pragmatic, sharp, and thought of by most as...GASP...an intellectual who eats the likes of Bobby Jindal for lunch. With some kind of green leaf vegetable called arugula. Fight muscle with muscle, baby:

When our weary world was young
The struggle of the ancients first began.
The gods of Love and Reason
Sought alone to rule the fate of Man.

They battled through the ages,
But still neither force would yield.
The people were divided,
Every soul a battlefield.
(Rush, Cygnus X-1, Book ii; Lyrics by Neil Peart)

I mean, seriously? Our prez is toast.

Neil's retort to Obama's articulate and elevated rhetoric, and Alex's and Geddy's abilities to weave an improvisational ditty around those words as they are being delivered, are exactly what the struggling Republican Party needs in order to boost its dwindling image (26% of voters with positive impressions of the GOP). Who else but a bunch of old white guys from the North to shake up a party made of a bunch of old white guys from the South?

I say Hallelujah. Pass the dutchie on the left hand side and the hell with Jindal and Barbour, the lousy stiffs!

Exit...stage left.

Thursday, February 26, 2009

Coming Out With a Boiiiing-Boom-Tschak!

0 comments

 
Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal was slated to have a grand coming out party Tuesday evening as the GOP's new, young gun delivering the response to the President's address before Congress. Instead, Jindall came across as an over-coached, over-rehearsed stiff spewing the same old tired rhetoric that the Elephants have been trumpeting now for what seems like eternity.

Jindal's speech garnered near instant criticism, including from those in conservative circles who have promoted the 36-year-old governor as the GOP's most likely advocate to bring the party back from the brink of irrelevance. Many conservatives admitted Jindal appeared at best off-balance and at worst buffoonish in his national debut.

From CNN Online:
"Some conservative needs to start a campaign to fire whoever wrote this cheesy response and coached him to talk like this," wrote conservative columnist Amanda Carpenter on the popular social networking Web site Twitter. "I can't watch."

"He should never be allowed near a teleprompter again!" declared the National Review's Kathryn Jean Lopez on Wednesday, while noting the governor had a much stronger performance on NBC's "The Today Show" the morning after his speech.


And on PBS' "The Newshour," conservative columnist David Brooks described the speech and the ideology it represented as "insane," "nihilist," and "a disaster for the Republican Party."

Generally an opposition party's response rarely wins wide praise. The location itself is a gigantic setback. While the President stands before a chamber full of opinionated, if at times grumbling old hags, hacks, and various partisan stalwarts who go about their usual jack-in-the-box applauding routine, the opposition response comes out of an ultra-quiet, usually depressing, and somber solitary room. The rebuttal is delivered straight into (what I suspect is) a locked camera, and if we're lucky we get the occasional slow push-in or pull-out on the zoom lens. That is, if the camera operator is awake.

But Jindal may be a victim of overhype and unrealistic expectations. The governor's impressive resume and compelling background have been touted to make him a natural fit to compete against the oratorically-skilled Obama. And let's face it, the prez is a hell of a tough act to follow, no matter what a cunning linguist one may be.

However, Jindal can take solace in the fact that in politics, one often gets to move on to Act 2. Some of the most prominent politicians still making waves today floundered on their first attempt in the national spotlight. Among them, former President Bill Clinton, whose speech at the 1988 Democratic Convention was immediately deemed a disaster, with many political chatterboxes predicting the end of his political career.

Tuesday, February 24, 2009

Le Fabuleux Gouverneur-Morons!

3 comments
 
Fuck Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana and fuck Gov. Mark Sanford of South Carolina and fuck Gov. Haley Barbour of Mississippi. How's that for a cerebral, eloquent opening line to a column? Fortunately, top brass at S.E.I. is keeping me on a fairly long leash; in fact even encouraging profanity when profanity is warranted.

And profanity is warranted in this mind-boggling case of idiocy. For those still hanging in with us and following the circus that has again commenced in Washington, the aforementioned trio of bozos---all rising stars in the Republican Party---have sternly threatened to turn away federal (stimulus) aid rather than use the money to expand access to unemployment insurance programs in ways that many other states have already agreed upon.

These awful decisions are little more than political posturing reinforcing the terrifying conclusion that the Republican Party is more interested in ideological warfare than in working on policies that get the country back on track.

The GOP's attacks on the unemployment insurance portion of the stimulus package are disturbing. From The New York Times:

"States that accept the stimulus money aimed at the unemployed are required to abide by new federal rules that extend unemployment protections to low-income workers and others who were often shorted or shut out of compensation. This law did not just materialize out of nowhere. It codified positive changes that have already taken place in at least half the states.

To qualify for the first one-third of federal aid, the states need to fix arcane eligibility requirements that exclude far too many low-income workers. To qualify for the rest of the aid, states have to choose from a menu of options that include extending benefits to part-time workers or those who leave their jobs for urgent family reasons, like domestic violence or gravely ill children.

Data from the National Employment Law Project, a nonprofit group, show that 19 states qualify for some of the federal financing and that a dozen others would become eligible by making one or two policy changes. Unemployed workers are worst off in the Deep South, where relatively few people are eligible to receive payments. Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas stand out."


The governors have complained that the federal unemployment aid would lead directly to new state taxes. This is not complete horseshit, but very close to it. Fact is no one really knows what the economic situation will be several years from now when the federal aid has been used up. But dumping billions of dollars into shrinking state unemployment funds puts money into the hands of people who will spend it quickly on food and shelter. The immediate injection of capital could help the states through the recession and into a time when unemployment trust funds can be replenished. In other words, the stimulus could make a tax increase less likely.

Governors like the young, ambitious, and up-and-coming Mr. Jindal should be worrying about how to end this recession while helping his constituents put food on the table and keep their houses, not about finding ways to resuscitate tired old election-year arguments about big spending versus small government.

Friday, February 20, 2009

More than the Cartoon...

4 comments
 I hate to disagree with my friend, Alex on anything, even mildly, especially since he invited me onto his lovely site to write and contribute.

All I can do now, is offer my perspective as an African-American. (Oh, and by the way, for those readers who didn't know before my "startling" announcement, uhhh, surprise! Yeah, I know. It's a blog, it can be hard to tell.)

There isn't an African-American that I know who saw that cartoon and didn't have a visceral reaction to it.

And yes, I mean that visceral reaction.

Drawing a cartoon, like that, with that subject matter, and placing a monkey anywhere within fifty miles of it, is asking for that reaction. I also believe that the (yes) racist, editor who approved the piece knew exactly what he was doing. The history of stereotyping African-Americans and animals is far too long, far too deep to be ignored.

I know there is a reaction from the quote-unquote white community that pushes back against anything the Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are for. I think a lot of my, again, quote-unquote white friends would be surprised how many in the African-American view these two as clowns. To me, Sharpton and Jackson's number one cause has always been Sharpton and Jackson. Any actions they undertake must always be viewed through that prism.

At the same time, when they're right, they're right. Don't blame the weak-ass messenger for the message.

Personally, I think you can debate the racial connotations of the cartoon. I think you'd be wrong, but you can debate it.

What cannot be debated is the violence associated with this cartoon, and in context of the Obama Presidency...that, more than the monkey itself is what's fueling the anger in the African-American community.

The President's personal safety is something that is personal to a lot of African-Americans. Lord knows its personal to me. It is a fear that almost kept some African-Americans from voting for him, much less believing he could win.

Look at the some of the incidents that have happened since the President's Election:

Sales of handguns have gone up.

A cross was burned on the lawn of Obama supporters in Hardwick, New Jersey.

Political Figures in both Georgia and Texas warned their constituents of an "Obama Dictatorship" or "Obama Tyranny".

A Teachers' Aide from the Allison Park suburb of Pittsburgh told a bi-racial student: "that Obama was going to be shot and killed. And that our flag is going to be the KFC [Kentucky Fried Chicken] flag and that the new national anthem will be 'Moving On Up' "

Again, told this to a freakin' student.

Students on a School Bus in Idaho started chanting "Assassinate Obama".

The Secret Service arrested a guy in Mississippi for threatening to kill the then-President-Elect. (BTW, thank you Secret Service for nabbing this guy.)

A Colorado Man was indicted recently for threatening the same.

Three men torched black churches (allegedly) within hours of the President's swearing in.

And of course, there was the lovely story of the man who said he had a delivery for the President, and was actually packing a rifle. (Again, thumbs up Secret Service...but this one sounded kinda easy. He did walk up to the front door thinking he could get in and just see the President.)

Again, just since the Election.

Forgive us for being more than a little bit paranoid.

The introduction of anything resembling violence toward this President isn’t going to be greeted warmly by anyone in my community, not even in jest.

In the end, this was an image of a Police shooting, in and of itself a sensitive subject in my community. It is an image of the shooting of a monkey, given the history of stereotyping African-Americans, every bit as painful. The monkey is also supposed to represent the author of the stimulus bill. This is where there's room for debate over the racial connotations of the cartoon; the Artist going so far as to say "if anything, the monkey represents Nancy Pelosi."

Yes, because gunfire is exactly the reaction you should have to a piece of legislation you disagree with.

But while the President may or may not be the author of the Stimulus Package, his was the face most associated with it. (He may not have written it, but I have no doubt than an awful lot of it came out of the White House.) In the end, this Artist and his Editor have decreed, however seriously you want to take it, that the penalty for this bad legislation, should be death.

That struck a nerve.

It was not without good reason.


Originally posted on Fort McHenry