"Only dull people are brilliant at breakfast"
-Oscar Wilde
Brilliant at Breakfast title banner "The liberal soul shall be made fat, and he that watereth, shall be watered also himself."
-- Proverbs 11:25
"...you have a choice: be a fighting liberal or sit quietly. I know what I am, what are you?" -- Steve Gilliard, 1964 - 2007

"For straight up monster-stomping goodness, nothing makes smoke shoot out my ears like Brilliant@Breakfast" -- Tata

"...the best bleacher bum since Pete Axthelm" -- Randy K.

"I came here to chew bubblegum and kick ass. And I'm all out of bubblegum." -- "Rowdy" Roddy Piper (1954-2015), They Live
Saturday, March 22, 2008

Superfreakonomics! Bill Maher's New Rules!
Bookmark and Share

Water, Food, Life....



Happy World Water Day!



Remember the big pet food scare last year when we were made aware of what amounts to plastic being put into animal feed and pet food by Chinese companies trying to save a buck? Remember how it put the spotlight on globalization and its impact on our food supply, and how we are really fucked when it comes to our government checking on imports?...that old Reagan line about deregulation being fine because corporations will police themselves. Well, as anyone coulda predicted then, its not working. The thing is that the problems that we think we can solve in food tainted with this substance that has killed some pets and caused massive recalls of pet foods, are pervasive in a world where we cant control what a second or third world country is feeding its livestock. Nor can we even begin to grasp where that feed comes from, and, of course, the health of the animals used to make so many things that we use, from gelatin to plant fertilizer. There are things that we should be able to control, like what we produce in this country and what we import. The fact that most Americans have abdicated their responsibility to mindfully feed themselves, much less vote for candidates who will protect us from the kind of corporate greed that would put our children, much less our pets, in physical harm, is a symptom of the dumbing down of our culture. At some point a line has to be drawn connecting the cutting of social services, the housing situations in varying parts of the country that seems to always put lower classes in places far from food choices, and allows fast food places to congregate and prey on those populations; the cutting of education funds, and the evolution of the global marketplace to the point where, even if you could think straight between your uniquely American 3 jobs, you couldn't sort it out anyway. Add to that a couple of generations who think that a hamburger is a quarter inch thick piece of brown leather with special sauce, (each made of the meat from some 2000+ cows,) and that salad is the lettuce and tomato on that, and you have kids who turn their nose up at any real food offered to them that doesn't have a full week's sodium in one serving and isn't cooked in old brown oil!

There is a continent of plastic waste floating in our oceans which is the size of Texas and getting bigger all the time, Americans are consuming more and more plastic in the form of individual and convenience sized foods and our worry about germs makes us apt to choose disposable everything rather than reusables. It may be easy to dismiss this problem because its out there in the middle of the ocean and we aren't seeing it here, in front of us, but surprise folks, there is an insidious mass of near invisible plastic particles floating among this mass that contains 6 times more plastic particles than plankton! Get that? Fish eat plankton...if there are tiny bits of plastic in and around the main food of fish, then the plastic is in the fish. Take that a step further beyond the direct effect of that on our food supply to the fact that fish is used for everything from fertilizer to stock feed to pet food, and the conclusion is obvious. The plastic is here and we are likely ingesting it.



Besides the energy used to create the bottles themselves, most bottled water facilities use much more energy in importing and bottling etc than is warranted by their environmental claims about the purity of their water. Starbucks charges almost $2 for a bottle for their Ethos water claiming that they are giving back to the world's water shortage, a mere 5 cents per bottle, while the markup still makes it the most expensive of fine waters. No matter how its bottled, they cant deny that a similar program pushing reusable water bottles would be much more helpful to the planet all around. Its just that bottled water is such a great business, and Starbucks has the corner on bullshit environmental practices with their bogus charity that ensures them a healthy profit.





We live in a water paradise compared to so many other parts of the world. As the climate changes at an alarming rate, it occurs to me that we are maybe not so far from the many in this small world who have to walk, sometimes 3 hours, to get to a community well. The entire day for these individuals is spent in collecting water and returning it to the village. Meantime, we are chugging and tossing out any plastic piece that isn't marked with the few codes that our particular city is or is not recycling. Its really time to become much more aware of our use of and disposal of our resources...and where our food is coming from. There are things that we can effect in this world, and there is really no excuse for not doing the few things that we can; reuse, recycle, be aware, and stay politically active! Blue Girl has a very good post on the water issue here.

Life for our children is already going to be so different than it has been for us. Lets make sure that they will be able to experience life that allows for even a little relaxed enjoyment without the barrage of poison that we are fighting through every day.

c/p RIPCoco

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share

For whom did the contract employees who accessed the passport files work?
Posted by Jill | 9:04 AM
Three of the contract employees who accessed the passport files of the three presidential candidates worked for Stanley, Inc. and the fourth for a company called The Analysis Corporation.

Who are these companies?

Interestingly, the first sentence in the MSN fact sheet for Stanley Inc. is "Stanley isn't afraid of big government."

Indeed.

Stanley, Inc.'s current customer base:

Department of Commerce
Department of Energy
Department of Health & Human Services
Department of Homeland Security
Department of Justice
Department of State
Department of Transportation
Department of Treasury
Environmental Protection Agency
Library of Congress
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Smithsonian Institution
U.S. Coast Guard

...and the following agencies of the Department of Defense:

Defense Information Systems Agency
Defense Intelligence Agency
Intelligence Community
Joint Strike Fighter Program Office
Naval Air Systems Command
Naval Sea Systems Command
Office of the Secretary of Defense
Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command
U.S. Air Force Materiel Command
U.S. Army Forces Command
U.S. Army Materiel Command
U.S. Army Reserve Command
U.S. Marine Corps
U.S. Transportation Command
U.S. Patent & Trademark Office

It's probably purely coincidental as well that in 2007, Stanley opened a passport processing center in Bill Clinton's former home town Hot Springs, Arkansas and will open another one in Tucson in John McCain's home state of Arizona this spring.

Stanley's official statement about the passport file breaches distances the company from the breaches of passport files for Hillary Clinton and John McCain.

[/tinfoil off]

Stanley, Inc. is headed by one Phil O. Nolan. This diarist over at Le Grand Orange dug up Nolan's political contributions. There are an awful lot of donations to Republican Congressman Tom Davis.

Let's just take a quick look at Tom Davis, shall we?

According to Congresspedia, Davis is linked to one David Safavian, former chief of staff of the United States General Services Administration and convicted criminal in l'affaire Jack Abramoff. The link is through Safavian's wife Jennifer, who is the chief investigative counsel to the House Committee on Government Reform, which Davis chairs. The committee, handles procurement issues.

Davis announced his retirement in January.

The Analysis Corporation is described on the company web site:


For the past 16 years, The Analysis Corporation (TAC) has provided invaluable service to the U.S. Government's national security effort. Increasingly, and especially since 9/11, TAC has made its most important contribution in the counterterrorism (CT) realm, supporting national watchlisting activities as well as other CT intelligence and analytic efforts. Led by the former head of the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) and staffed by other former senior officials from the Intelligence Community, TAC is at the forefront of the fight to safeguard U.S. national interests.


TAC's client list:

The U.S. Intelligence Community
Defense Intelligence Agency
Department of Homeland Security
Department of Homeland Security, National Targeting Center
Department of State, Bureau of Consular Affairs
Department of State, INR
Federal Bureau of Investigation
National Security Agency
Terrorist Screening Center

Hey, I'm just citing stuff from the company's public web site. Sometimes the tinfoil just writes itself.

TAC too is distancing itself from the passport scandal, essentially saying "We had no idea."

TAC's CEO, John O. Brennan, is quite the interesting fellow as well, with an extensive background in intelligence:

Career Highlights : Interim director, National Counterterrorism Center; director, Terrorist Threat Integration Center; deputy executive director, CIA; chief of staff to director of central intelligence, CIA; chief of station, Middle East, CIA; executive assistant to the deputy director of central intelligence, CIA; deputy director, office of Near Eastern and South Asian analysis, CIA; daily intelligence briefer at the White House, CIA; deputy division chief, Office of Near Eastern and South Asian analysis, CIA; chief of analysis, DCI's counterterrorism center, CIA; Middle East specialist and terrorism analyst, directorate of intelligence, CIA; political officer, U.S. Embassy in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, Department of State; and career trainee, directorate of operations, CIA.


When he joined TAC in December 2005, he was interviewed by the Washington Post, from which the above information is taken. A quote from Brennan when asked how he got to where he is:

I am a big believer in delegating responsibility and authority within the organization. But I am also a firm believer that leaders of organizations need to understand the business that they oversee and are involved in the day-to-day business activities, not from a micromanagement standpoint but from an awareness and guidance standpoint. I also think it was useful for me to have, early on in my career, specialized expertise, and mine happened to be on the Middle East and terrorism, to include Arabic language capability. This specialization opened doors for me to establish my credentials within the intelligence business, and overtime I tried to broaden my experience to include having opportunities to manage and lead the work of others.

The greatest challenge in the intelligence business is that there really is a high premium placed on accuracy of information as well as the intellectual and analytic rigor in one's work. There are major national security interests that are at risk. And the role of intelligence is absolutely critical, which was evidenced in the decision to go to war in Iraq. And every person in the intelligence community understands the importance of their role and strives to provide as much insight as possible to policy makers about intelligence challenges as well as the opportunities for U.S. interests. Lives are at stake of American citizens as well as lives of individuals who are helping the United States here and abroad.


Gee, do you think that an Administration with a vested interest in making sure that its policies are not overturned by a new Administration might agree? Funny how Brennan doesn't talk about how the so-called intelligence before the Iraq war was just so much horsepuckey.

But Brennan is even more interesting than Nolan. He worked for the CIA for 23 years, and in 2003 was appointed by George Tenet to head up the Terrorist Threat Integration Center. He's clearly a Big Brother kind of guy, as evidenced by his testimony before the 9/11 commission.

But let's go back to his company, TAC. The company was acquired in 2003 by SFA, Inc., which is in turn owned by Global Strategies Group, whose bizarrely cryptic web site doesn't make clear exactly what it does at all, but which describes the company's services:

Our services include the delivery of national security initiatives in counter terrorism, counter narcotics and borders security, the protection of critical infrastructure, global supply chain assurance, humanitarian assistance, reconstruction and stabilisation, peace support operations, and a suite of business facilitation and enterprise risk management tools. All of our offerings are underpinned by unrivalled experience and leading edge technologies.


Alas, I don't have time right now to dig further, but there's certainly a web of private intelligence companies here, working in conjunction with Big Business in some of the most unstable areas of the world, and these companies are being given innumerable government contracts to privatize the most sensitive aspects of our government. More later as I can find it, so stay tuned for updates.

UPDATE: Perhaps this is what happens when you outsource IT functions to companies headed not by IT guys, but by military/intelligence guys:

Mr. McCormack said Mrs. Clinton’s file was breached last summer during an exercise in which the department was training new workers to deal with a backlog of passport applications created by changes in national security procedures. Another Congressional staff member said the trainee was employed by the State Department.

“Usually in these training circumstances, people are encouraged to enter a family member’s name, just for training purposes,” Mr. McCormack said. “This person chose Senator Clinton’s name. It was immediately recognized, they were immediately admonished. And it didn’t happen again.”


Is Mr. McCormack saying that when they're training new employees, they're giving them access to production data? Even if they're taking a copy of the production database and putting it on a test server, this is still sensitive data about individuals, some of them high-profile, that they're using for TRAINING NEW EMPLOYEES? And if a trainee immediately decides to look up information for Hillary Clinton, shouldn't that have set off a red flag as to what this new employee was likely to do?

Where I work, we deal with private health information, and we are subject to HIPAA rules. Data we deal with is only identified by an ID that really means nothing to us as IT people or even data managers. Our test data is entered when testing the case report form screens, and our training database is populated with dummy data entered specifically for that purpose. So no one who shouldn't have it is ever exposed to any kind of identifying patient data. It's just not that hard to develop a training database. That this agency is using actual, identifiable production data to train new employees is unprofessional and reprehensible.

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share

...unless the group you're generalizing about is liberals
Posted by Jill | 8:40 AM
How many times have you heard Bill O'Reilly generalize about "liberals" on Faux Noise?

But, sayeth Gretchen Carlson, you should never, ever, ever generalize about white people. Props to Brian Kilmeade for refusing to listen to any more of this crap from Carlson and the even more idiotic Steve Doocy:



Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
Friday, March 21, 2008

Now here is an issue that should be getting more attention
Posted by Jill | 6:19 AM
This morning Joe Scarborough is trying desperately to draw attention away from the breach of Barack Obama's passport file by having the vapors about Obama referring to his grandmother as having the response of "a typical white person" to black men she doesn't know (and if you're white and you say you have never, ever in your entire life clutched your handbag, even if you weren't consciously doing it, when a black kid iwalks into the elevator with you in a major American city, you're a goddamn liar). Because EVERYONE's a little bit racist:





And the whole point of Obama's speech, and this remark, is that we can't address the problem until we admit it's there.

But if we can just examine every word out of Barack Obama's mouth, perhaps we can keep people from wondering why it is that people are living in FEMA trailers two and a half years after Hurricane Katrina but the goverment can come up with over $200 billion within 24 hours to help J.P. Morgan Chase buy up Bear Stearns at garage sale prices? It keeps them from wondering why the president vetoes SCHIP because $35 billion is too much but over $200 billion to bail out a private company from its own mismanagement and bad investments is a necessary expense.

The New York Times has an editorial today that should be hammered by BOTH Democratic candidates: The bailout of Bear Stearns, and why it's not OK to provide health care for everyone in America because that would be socialized medicine, but it's OK to socialize the consequences of financial risks taken by the private sector:

There should be financial accountability for the man who led Bear Stearns as it gorged on dubious subprime securities to boost its profits and share price, helping to set up one of the biggest financial collapses since the savings-and-loan crisis in the 1980s. Some might argue that he should have lost it all.

But that’s not how it works. The ongoing bailout of the financial system by the Federal Reserve underscores the extent to which financial barons socialize the costs of private bets gone bad. Not a week goes by that the Fed doesn’t inaugurate a new way to provide liquidity — meaning money — to the financial system. Bear Stearns isn’t enormous. It doesn’t take deposits from the public. Yet the Fed believed that letting it implode could unleash a domino effect among other banks, and the Fed provided a $30 billion guarantee for JPMorgan to snap it up.

Compared to the cold shoulder given to struggling homeowners, the cash and attention lavished by the government on the nation’s financial titans provides telling insight into the priorities of the Bush administration. It’s not simply a matter of fairness, though. The Fed is probably right to be doing all it can think of to avoid worse damage than the economy is already suffering. But if the objective is to encourage prudent banking and keep Wall Street’s wizards from periodically driving financial markets over the cliff, it is imperative to devise a remuneration system for bankers that puts more of their skin in the game.

Financiers, of course, dispute that they are being insufficiently penalized. “I received no bonus for 2007, no severance pay, no golden parachute,” E. Stanley O’Neal, the former chief executive of Merrill Lynch, told a House committee recently. That doesn’t seem like much of a blow to Mr. O’Neal, who was removed earlier this year following gargantuan subprime-related losses.

[snip]

Bankers operate under a system that provides stellar rewards when the investment strategies do well yet puts a floor on their losses when they go bad. They might have to forgo a bonus if investments turn sour. They might even be fired. Their equity might become worthless — or not, if the Fed feels it must step in. But as a rule, they won’t have to return the money they made in the good days when they were making all the crazy bets that eventually took their banks down.


But this is the same American public that decided in 1988 that the issue of whether the Pledge of Allegiance should be mandatory was an important enough campaign issue to affect their vote. So we'll continue to dump money into Iraq, and bail out more troubled investment banks, give more no-bid contracts to Republican campaign contributors, and bridges will continue to fall into the rivers they cross, but gosh dang it, we ain't gonna put up with no black people dissing their white grandmothers. [/sarcasm off]

Labels: , , ,

Bookmark and Share
Thursday, March 20, 2008

Meanwhile, back on the Jeremiah Wright beat....
Posted by Jill | 9:27 PM
Look at who attended a White House get-together for religious leaders on September 11 (!!!), 1998.

So much for Wright being some kind of fringe figure in the religious community. And I guess this is why the Clinton campaign's response to the largely media-fueled foofarah about him has been somewhat, well, subdued.

Labels:

Bookmark and Share

You aren't paranoid if they really are out to get you
Posted by Jill | 8:10 PM
MSNBC is reporting that two contract employees at the State Department have been fired and one "disciplined" after an investigation revealed they were illegally accessing Barack Obama's passport file.

More on this as it develops.

UPDATES AS THEY OCCUR: Howard Fineman on Countdown is wondering how much the higher-ups at State knew about these three contract employees. The breach occurred in January at the Consular Affairs office.

It's interesting to note that Bill Clinton's passport files were breached by the first Bush Administration in 1991.

I suspect that by tomorrow this will be whitewashed as "a few bad apples", but I'm going to go out on a limb here and speculate that it's possible these employees were chosen specifically so that they could be easily jettisoned if the breach were discovered, as it apparently now has been.

8:32 PM: There's going to be a conference call at 9. A senior State Department official says there were no political considerations. The official says that the contract employees accessed Obama's records "out of curiosity". The most recent incident was on March 14 -- months after the initial breach on January 9 -- and no one every contacted the Obama campaign or Barack Obama to notify about the breach. "No political considerations. Yeah, right. And I am Marie of Rumania.

8:40 PM: Andrea Mitchell is incredulous that no one at State seemed to take this seriously. She points out, how can you ascribe motivation until you know more about the people involved? At least at MSNBC, they smell blood here. "This at least rises to the level of spectacular incompetence, if not political skulduggery."

8:46 PM: Pete Williams is spewing the State Department's spin that this was just a case of "imprudent curiosity" on the part of these contract employees. My question is why "imprudent curiosity" took place in the form of accessing this particular individual's file, and why this "imprudent curiosity" took the form of multiple accesses over the course of three months.

8:50: State Department is stating that Obama's passport file was accessed in January, February, and March. Again -- why did "innocent curiosity" warrant three separate accesses? And why was this not referred to Obama's campaign or Senate office until today?

8:55: Eric Holder from the Obama campaign is on the phone with Keith Olbermann. Holder says that if you had one incident it could be someone snooping around, but when you have three separate incidents, one in each of the three months, he wonders as a former prosecutor just what is going on here. He wants to know why this was never referred to the Justice Department. He says at the least this is serious administrative bungling, and at worst a criminal offense that should be referred to the Justice Department. It's the pattern that he finds disturbing.

It's hard for me to imagine that this is just a question of "imprudent curiosity." Whether these employees were paid by someone doing opposition research, or if they thought that someone MIGHT pay for this information, whether an opposing campaign or a media outlet, that someone tried to keep this under wraps as it went on for three months is certainly suspicious.

ANOTHER UPDATE:

10:00 PM: Watching Anderson Cooper now; he's on the phone with Joe deGenova, who investigated the breach of Bill Clinton's passport files. It seems that the State Department spin now is that low-level State Department officials did not pass the information up. Frankly, all this, combined with the Secret Service calling off the Dallas police last month from checking people entering a rally for firearms, makes me wonder just how committed the people who are assigned to protect Barack Obama are to doing that.

Reports keep mentioning the "alert systems" that trigger when an unauthorized breach takes place, but that doesn't explain how this took place three times and no one kicked it upstairs.

Color me skeptical.

AND ANOTHER UPDATE: Josh Marshall notes:

According to a new piece out in the Post from Glenn Kessler, the breaches occurred Jan. 9th, Feb. 21st and March 14th.

That would be the day after the New Hampshire primary, the day of the Democratic debate in Texas and the day the Wright story really hit.

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share

Thursday Big Blue Smurf Blogging: What They Said
Posted by Jill | 11:34 AM
Today's honoree: Dday, for noting that it's OK for Bill Maher to opine on Hardball that maybe...just maybe...putting bases in the Middle East may be why terrorists want to attack us; and it's OK for Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson to say that the lesbians and the feminists and the gays and the ACLU caused 9/11, and it's OK for Christians to reframe the song "God Bless America" into "Why Should God Bless America", but when a black guy dares to say it in a raised voice, it's some kind of scandal.

Labels:

Bookmark and Share

Let's see what happens when I give the kids hamantaschen on Halloween this year
Posted by Jill | 11:00 AM
In the world of willfully ignorant Republican Christians like John McCain, I guess Chanukkah is Jewish Christmas, Passover is Jewish Easter, and Purim is Jewish Halloween:

When McCain made a foreign policy gaffe in Jordan on Tuesday, it was Sen. Joe Lieberman who quietly pointed out the mistake, giving McCain an opportunity to correct himself in front of the international press corps. In Israel yesterday, NBC’s Lauren Appelbaum reports, Lieberman once again intervened when McCain made an incorrect reference about the Jewish holiday Purim -- by calling the holiday "their version of Halloween here."

McCain made the incorrect statement during a press conference with Defense Minister Ehud Barak after touring the Israeli city of Sderot to view buildings damaged by Hamas rocket fire. McCain was discussing the numerous rock attacks on the city. "Nine hundred rocket attacks in less than three months, an average of one every one to two hours. Obviously this puts an enormous and hard to understand strain on the people here, especially the children. As they celebrate their version of Halloween here, they are somewhere close to a 15-second warning, which is the amount of time they have from the time the rocket is launched to get to safety. That's not a way for people to live obviously."

Purim is not the equivalent of an Israeli Halloween, Appelbaum notes. The holiday -- although a joyous one -- commemorates a time when the Jewish people living in Persia were saved from mass execution. When Sen. Lieberman had a chance to speak at the press conference, he placed the blame of the mistake on himself. "I had a brief exchange with one of the mothers whose children was in there in a costume for Purim," Lieberman, who is Jewish and celebrates the holiday, said. "And it's my fault that I said to Senator McCain that this is the Israeli version of Halloween. It is in the sense because the kids dress up and it's a very happy holiday and actually it is in the sense that the sweets are very important of both holidays."


It doesn't matter if Lieberman is trying to be a good little Sancho Panza here for McCain's Don Quixote, not when McCain seems to NEED Lieberman to do his thinking for him. There's something so utterly clueless, so completely George W. Bush about this level of just plain stupidity, that makes the prospect of a McCain presidency even more depressing than it was before, and makes this image worth posting yet again:





And yes, Harry Reid looks like a major league schmuck right about now.

Labels: , , ,

Bookmark and Share

Do we really want another clueless president?
Posted by Jill | 6:52 AM
While Joe Scarborough is looking increasingly hysterical this morning as he continues to pound the drum of How Dare Rev. Wright Say Those Mean Things About America and extolling the virtues of yesterday's 200-plus point drop in the Dow because it means people are taking PROFITS (!!!!!), he's conveniently ignoring the fact that John McCain, the man painting himself as the most qualified candidate to handle Middle East policy, doesn't seem to have a clue as to just who is whom in the Islamic world.

Good thing Keith Olbermann recognizes that not knowing the difference between Sunni and Shia is not just something we've seen before, but a serious problem. Watch this segment from last night's Countdown, especially when Jonathan Alter talks about McCain not being "a detail guy." Haven't we had a president like this already? And isn't this why we're in this mess?




So someone please tell me the difference between John McCain and the clueless man who is unable to admit a mistake in this segment from last night's show:





As the New York Times says this morning, "It was clear long ago that Mr. Bush had no plan for victory, only a plan for handing this mess to his successor. Americans need to choose a president with the vision to end this war as cleanly as possible."

It's equally clear that John McCain is not that individual.

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share

One in Three Children Left Behind
Posted by Jill | 6:29 AM
In a wealthy country like this, only 70% of students graduate high school, and schools are fudging the data to make the dropout rate seem less severe:

Like Mississippi, many states use an inflated graduation rate for federal reporting requirements under the No Child Left Behind law and a different one at home. As a result, researchers say, federal figures obscure a dropout epidemic so severe that only about 70 percent of the one million American students who start ninth grade each year graduate four years later.

California, for example, sends to Washington an official graduation rate of 83 percent but reports an estimated 67 percent on a state Web site. Delaware reported 84 percent to the federal government but publicized four lower rates at home.

The multiple rates have many causes. Some states have long obscured their real numbers to avoid embarrassment. Others have only recently developed data-tracking systems that allow them to follow dropouts accurately.

The No Child law is also at fault. The law set ambitious goals, enforced through sanctions, to make every student proficient in math and reading. But it established no national school completion goals.

“I liken N.C.L.B. to a mile race,” said Bob Wise, a former West Virginia governor who is president of the Alliance for Excellent Education, a group that seeks to improve schools. “Under N.C.L.B., students are tested rigorously every tenth of a mile. But nobody keeps track as to whether they cross the finish line.”

Furthermore, although the law requires schools to make only minimal annual improvements in their rates, reporting lower rates to Washington could nevertheless cause more high schools to be labeled failing — a disincentive for accurate reporting. With Congressional efforts to rewrite the law stalled, Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings has begun using her executive powers to correct the weaknesses in it. Ms. Spellings’s efforts started Tuesday with a measure aimed at focusing resources on the nation’s worst schools. Graduation rates are also on her agenda.

In an interview, Ms. Spellings said she might require states to calculate their graduation rate according to one federal formula.

“I’m considering settling this once and for all,” she said, “by defining a single federal graduation rate and requesting states to report it that way. That would finally put this issue to rest.”

In 2001, the year the law was drafted, one of the first of a string of revisionist studies argued that the nation’s schools were losing more students than previously thought.

Jay P. Greene, a researcher at the Manhattan Institute, a conservative research organization, compared eighth-grade enrollments with the number of diplomas bestowed five years later to estimate that the nation’s graduation rate was 71 percent. Federal statistics had put the figure 15 points higher.

Still, Congress did not make dropouts a central focus of the law. And when states negotiated their plans to carry it out, the Bush administration allowed them to use dozens of different ways to report graduation rates.


Instead of worrying so much about what the definition of "graduate" is, why aren't schools and parents worrying about why one in three American kids isn't finishing high school; about why one in three kids is being thrown into the educational trash can?

The sure bet of a college diploma as ticket to higher income may no longer apply, as more professional careers every day are being outsourced. But the lack of a high school diploma is almost a sure ticket to a lifetime of poverty.

When you look at the Republican economic agenda as implemented over the last seven years -- huge tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans and tokens for everyone else, arbitrary testing standards in schools that measure nothing, a diminishing job base, it should be crystal clear to those "Reagan Democrats" that the Republicans have absolutely no interest in allowing every American the opportunity to enter their club if they just work hard enough. Instead, they are quietly building the kind of plutocracy that marked the U.S. at the turn of the 20th century. Those working and middle class voters who vote for representatives who support these efforts are voting against their own interest and that of their children.

Labels:

Bookmark and Share
Wednesday, March 19, 2008

John McCain's "Slip" is More than Just That...Its Part of a Talking Points Campaign to Talk Iraq Into Iran. Stop the Insanity! End the War!
Posted by Anonymous | 10:11 PM
We have to nip this kind of propaganda in the bud. This talking points campaign is aimed at the news byte conscious. The retraction is usually on page 20, unless its caught in such an embarrassing light, as in this case.
This tragic week marks our 5th year in Iraq, and the occasion has been used as a propaganda tool for everyone in this administration, from the top on down, to get us ready for the NEXT war! Just as you're thinking that it couldn't be possible, and how could they think that America has the will or strength to enlarge our presence in the middle east, think again. These people don't care what you or I think. They care only for their bottom line and for their own best interest. They will expand this war, lying all the way, until they are stopped. And its up to us, as Americans, to stop them.

Labels: , , ,

Bookmark and Share

Would someone please get the mainstream media laid already?
Posted by Jill | 9:42 PM
It's no secret that I simply cannot support Hillary Clinton. Her support for the war, her willingness to tear the party to bits to obtain the nomination she seems to feel is her due, and the steamer trunks of baggage she brings to the table with her make her a distasteful option in November.

That said, THIS is just beyond the pale. Why is this news? Why is this relevant? There are plenty of real things to object to about the Clintons, must we REALLY dig this up again? Or is this part of the same mentality that helps some sad, screwed-up girl working as a hooker and fucking the governor of New York get a career of the singer and makes HER newsworthy. It's the same mentality that is dredging up the sex lives of a former governor of New Jersey, and wants to make a big deal out of the marital history of the new governor of New York.

Enough with the sex lives of politicians and the tawdry secrets in their lives.

As Marc Maron used to say when doing his impression of a caller during the Morning Sedition days: "Why don't they talk about the issues? We're fighting for our lives here!"

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share

Desperately seeking notebook PC < $1000. Thin and/or lightweight a must
Posted by Jill | 3:15 PM
Last summer I spent three days at YKos shlepping my bigass HP Pavilion around the McCormick Center in a backpack. It's a preposterously powerful machine, but I really need something smaller and lighter for travel. So I'm looking for recommendations, just to confuse the issue further. I was mulling over the $399 ASUS eee, but it just doesn't seem to quite do the trick, and it won't handle the VPN I need for work. So right now, unless someone knows of a fantastic alternative, I'm looking at the base model Dell XPS M1300 and the HP Pavilion tx2000z, which I can get for $900 with 2.2ghz AMD Dual-core processor, 2GB memory, 250GB hard drive, Fingerprint Reader + Webcam + Microphone, wireless networking with bluetooth, the HP USB TV tuner and 8x LightScribe (you can burn labels on the discs) double-layer DVD / CD burner.

The advantage of the HP is a tablet, which means I could easily use it on a flip-down shelf in the kitchen when I'm not traveling, so I didn't have to print out recipes and have all this miscellaneous paper around the house. But it's an AMD chip.

So, all you techie folks out there, what do YOU think?
Bookmark and Share

Video killed the radio star
Posted by Jill | 11:09 AM
Or it would, so that's why I stay on radio....internet radio, that is. I'll be on Mid Stream Internet Radio at 1 PM today.

For more info, go here.

Labels:

Bookmark and Share

Wednesday Big Blue Smurf Blogging: What They Said
Posted by Jill | 10:39 AM
Today's honoree: Driftglass, for When Your Enemies....are your leaders.

Labels:

Bookmark and Share

Praisation by Faint Damns
Posted by Jill | 8:20 AM
Even when trying to praise Obama's speech yesterday, Maureen Dowd manages to both snark AND make it all about HER and HER people:

Certainly, Senator Obama was exercising sophisticated damage-control on his problem with Jeremiad Wright. But he did not pander as Mitt Romney did with his very challenging speech about Mormonism, or market-test his own convictions, as most politicians do.

Unlike what the Clintons did to Lani Guinier, responding to her radical racial ideas by throwing her under the bus, Obama went to great pains to honor the human dimension of his relationship with his politically threatening “old uncle,” as he calls him.

Displaying his multihued, crazy-quilted DNA, he talked about cringing when he heard the white grandmother who raised him use racial stereotypes and confess her fear of passing black men on the street.

He tried to shine a light on that clannish place where grudges and grievances flourish. After racing from race for a year, he plowed in and took a stab at showing blacks what white resentment felt like and whites what black resentment felt like.

(He was spot-on about my tribe of working-class Irish, the ones who have helped break his winning streak in New Hampshire and Ohio, and may do so in Pennsylvania.)

[snip]

A little disenchantment with Obama could turn out to be a good thing. Too much idealism can blind a leader to reality as surely as too much ideology can.

Up until now, Obama and his worshipers have set it up so that he must be so admirable and ideal and perfect and everything we’ve ever wanted that any kind of blemish — even a parking ticket — was regarded as a major failing.

With the Clintons, we expect them to be cheesy on ethics, so no one is ever surprised when they are.

But Saint Obama played the politics of character to an absurd extent. For 14 months, his argument for leading the world has been himself — his exquisitely globalized self.

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share

The "Marlboro Man" speaks out
Posted by Jill | 8:12 AM
Remember that photo of the gritty soldier with the cigarette hanging out of his mouth? The one papers like the New York Post used to whip us into a frenzy? The BBC caught up with him recently:





(h/t: C&L)

Labels:

Bookmark and Share

Five Years Ago
Posted by Jill | 6:07 AM


Five years ago, the President of the United States took this country to war based on lies:


"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Cheney, speech to national VFW Convention, August 26, 2002

"Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent." -- George W. Bush, State of the Union Address, January 28, 2003

"We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass destruction, is determined to make more." -- Gen. Colin Powell, remarks to U.N. Security Council, February 5, 2003

"We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have." -- George W. Bush, radio address, February 8, 2003

"Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised." -- George W. Bush adddress to the nation, March 17, 2003

"There is no doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction. And . . . as this operation continues, those weapons will be identified, found, along with the people who have produced them and who guard them." -- Gen. Tommy Franks, press conference, March 22, 2003

"We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat." Donald Rumsfeld, ABC interview, March 30, 2003

"But make no mistake -- as I said earlier -- we have high confidence that they have weapons of mass destruction. That is what this war was about and it is about. And we have high confidence it will be found." -- Press Secretary Ari Fleischer, press briefing, April 10, 2003

"I'm absolutely sure that there are weapons of mass destruction there and the evidence will be forthcoming. We're just getting it just now." -- Colin Powell, remarks to reporters, May 4, 2003

"I'm not surprised if we begin to uncover the weapons program of Saddam Hussein -- because he had a weapons program." -- George W. Bush, remarks to reporters, May 6, 2003


Many, many, many more here.

Five years later, 3990 American soldiers are dead. Tens of thousands more are wounded -- missing limbs, faces, parts of their brains. Countless Iraqi civilians are dead, maimed, missing family members, homes, and all that makes life normal. Women the Bush Administration claimed to have liberated from the spectre of Saddam Hussein's "rape rooms" are now resorting to prostitution to feed their children.

Today, Baghdad is as divided as ever. The death toll in Monday's bombing in Karbala is now 47, with 75 people wounded. Bombings occurred on Monday in Madaen, eastern Baghdad's Ghader, Shaab and Binoog districts, in Mosul, and near a checkpoint in Iskandariya.


All because of lies. All because of a bunch of lunatic chickenhawk men who see sovereign nations as just colored spots on a map, and the soldiers who fight their wars as just so many plastic chess pieces. All because of a president with serious father issues who wanted to show his daddy just who had the bigger penis, at the same time that he craved that very daddy's love.

It is five years into a war born of insanity, fought of insanity, continuing because of insanity. It is a war that has cost trillions of dollars, much of it missing into the black hole of sweetheart deals, cronyism, private military, and no-bid contracts -- trillions of dollars that could be spent here at home to rebuild our crumbling bridges and roads, educate our children, invest in alternative energy, provide health care for all Americans. Instead, it's being squandered in a war without end; an unnecessary war, a war based on lies told to a frightened American population by evil opportunistic men.

When we look at how the Iraq war came about and why it's being continued. When we look at the billions of dollars of missing money, and at Abu Ghraib, and at men like Sgt. Ty Ziegel and Bryan Anderson, the living faces of those who gave so much for so little reason, and the names and faces behind the numbers of the dead, and the many, many more who suffer in silence after a horror most of us can't even imagine, it seems ridiculous that as I write this, Joe Scarborough and Tucker Carlson are still having the vapors over inflammatory statements made by the pastor of a church in Chicago; remarks that taken in this context, seem to be perhaps a sane response to an insane situation.

But this is how they want it, isn't it? They, and their bosses in the executive suite WANT an election based not on hard looks at American policy, but based on the fears and knee-jerk responses of Americans who are seeing the life they've lived and the nation they thought they knew turn into some kind of perverse gargoyle nightmare. They WANT an election where they can pit the guy who spent five years in a a Hanoi prison against the uppity, haughty black man who didn't even have the DECENCY to do their bidding and throw his pastor under the bus in a vain attempt to placate the giant maw of the media. That the seemingly addled man who spent five years in a Hanoi prison doesn't seem to know -- much like his predecessor -- the difference between Sunni and Shia, and babbles about how Iran is arming al-Qaeda militants in Iraq until his handler, Joe Lieberman, gives him the correct information, doesn't seem to matter.



If Chris Matthews says he's a maverick, we're supposed to forget that John McCain is talking about occupying Iraq for 100 years and that he's joked about bombing Iran. We're supposed to forget that while John McCain may not have George Bush's issues with his father, he has plenty of issues with his past and I have the sense that he wants the presidency so he can finally, once and for all, win the Vietnam war for which he gave five years of his life in that Hanoi prison. Do we really want another president who is willing to spill American blood rather than get some goddamn psychotherapy?

This country is bankrupt. Scarborough may be crowing that happy days are here again because the market surged yesterday after the Fed's rate cut, but the pain has just begun. Americans sense this, and that's why the reptilian brain that is so disturbed by the ravings of an embittered man in a pulpit of a Chicago church is so raw and sensitive right now. We are broke, we are no longer an economic superpower, and all we are now is a paper tiger that is on the way to becoming a wholly-owned subsidiary of China and the oil sheikhs of the Middle East -- only with nukes.

And it all began five years ago, when the perfect storm of a sociopathic president combined with a bloodthirsty, overly-powerful vice president, and the military-industrial complex decided to indulge their various lusts by invading a country that had done nothing to us.

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
Tuesday, March 18, 2008

John McCain....He Is Old!

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share

Dick Morris Calls Obama THE Democratic Nominee...Pundits Call Speech THE Most Important on Race EVER!
This story is THE biggest story out there. Like Rachel Maddow, I am tired of the race issue and I didn't want to give more time than necessary to any more divisive issues in the democratic party, but this speech was important and challenging. Every one of us should sit and listen to this speech and think about what Obama is saying. Clearly, the ideas that Obama brought to light are unsettling for some and unpalatable for others. For many, many others, what Obama talked about today is a way of life and a reality that needs to be brought to light. No one else could have made this speech...and I'm glad that he was forced into it. I think that those who would use the pastor story to call Obama out, bit off a little bit more than they bargained for.

The hyperbole coming from the cable news shows on this story is incredible: Chris Mathews thinks that it was one of the most important speeches on race since MLK jr's Dream... others are saying that it is the most important speech in their lifetimes. The pundits have embraced Obama after this "historic" speech, which was, according to them, earth shattering and something that surely has changed everything.

I was watching the speech this morning when I realized that Marc Maron and Sam Seder's Vod-cast was on...so I switched over to find Sam and Marc talking about how the speech was on and maybe they should watch it and then continue the show. At which suggestion, Marc brought his laptop over to his TV and we watched the rest of it sorta together through Marc's web cam...if that makes sense. What was great about watching it that way was that we got the little asides from Maron during, and then immediately afterwards we got a great assessment of Obama by both Seder and Maron. Check it out here. And be sure to catch Maron on one of the simulcast First Freedom First; Separation of Church & State events on March 26th, 2008.

So, having been in so much of a liberal bubble during the speech, I ran out to the dentist where I found that working people on the street were pretty much still repeating the network news talking points about what the pastor had said. I figured that the turning point would be more around the evening news and how this speech is going to be handled for the wider audience with a shorter attention span.

Sure enough, alongside the cable pundits going bonkers, the network news channels began at 5 PM reporting it right up front. How it plays will become clear only after a few days...but it seems like largely this thing is being embraced as the beautiful speech that it was. The only problem that I see is that it was very long. YouTubers had already chopped it into 2 minute sound bytes labeled with names like "Obama on the Pastor," "Obama on Race," immediately afterwards. How the thing plays in bits will probably be more important for all current intents and purposes. If this speech is something that school children will listen to is something that history will decide, but its too bad that it is so rare that we talk about anything real that is happening right in front of us anymore. Its too bad that its a historic moment in that someone stood up and spoke the truth. If Chris Matthews could predict the future, we have seen an MLK jr. who has outspoken the great speakers of our time. It seems that largely, except for some clearly sour grapes reporting, the talkers believe that Obama is the next President. (after some sneering mention of McCain's skewering on Letterman last night...which is something I will have to look into.)

Over at Faux News; Obama the next President?....not so much. The plastic sneering talking heads were going through their paces in their full and expansive glory.
Dick Morris, all in-your-face, said that though he was fascinated by Obama's ideas about race and society, he is not any more interested in his ideas about politics than he is interested in his hairdresser's. His hairdresser apparently talks about politics while she cuts his hair, but he doesn't listen to her any more than he would to Obama. Stupid, silly, little man; don't you see that it's the people on the street that reflect what is going on with people in real life? Dick Morris said that there is no doubt to him that Obama is THE democratic nominee...and that this issue is going to dog him and be the subject of "swiftboat like" attacks. Don't say that Dickie didn't warn you. He is probably on board as a mercenary to position that attack as I write this. What a horrible human being Dick Morris is. He makes me want to spit...and that's not because I'm so in love with anyone that he has smeared; its because of the way in which he sell his skills to the highest bidder or the devil.

The anchor, another mean looking ken-doll who's name I didn't care to catch, acted as if he was breaking a huge story in which Obama said that he was not in the pew during any of these speeches, and then saying that OH MY! He WAS!! The "I didn't know about it" defense has gone out the window, according to Brit Hume. What a great bunch of journalists these losers are... I have to take anything they say with a grain of salt because I know how much they lie. And, speaking of liars, Brit Hume was immediately brought in to talk about how Jesse Jackson had been in and had talked to him about the skill necessary for a black man to go between the establishment and the streets. He went on to say that Obama was particularly adept at it.

This may be an Achilles heel in the making. Its reminiscent of Obama claiming that he had tried drugs and then his friends saying that they never saw him with any drugs; so is he a lair trying to pretend that he has street cred and is the way that he moves between the two worlds so adeptly a plus or a minus when its examined? Should he have stood up and told the reverend to stop that language? Or is it OK to just see what people are saying and to take that with him into the other world as information gained while living his other life? How are people going to feel ultimately, to have to come to terms with the fact that for anyone who is not exactly in the middle of the mainstream there is quite a bit of bluffing necessary for any sort of public relations mastery.

See, most of us move between worlds with no problem; ist second nature and part of our survival mechanisms. Part of growing up is learning how to act in school versus home, and how to be cool to your friends but not to swear in front of grandma. The problem is that when a person of color who might have, in another time been suspect, uses that particular talent to integrate into white society, it can be unsettling. Is he a spy for the other side? Have we uncovered a fiery and dangerous side to Obama that we don't want in office? These are some of the gut feelings that are going around. Its so clear...and this is one of those psychological knee-jerk things that is going to have to play itself out.

Obama did alot of good today with his "ground-breaking" speech. Not only did he do much to explain his seat in that pew for all of those years, watching one half of the American experience rehashed, but he did much towards opening up our own fears of the anger that exists hidden, sometimes not so well, in the black community. Hopefully this discussion will go further than we have previously gone in coming to terms with what we all feel about our shared history.

c/p RIPCoco

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share

"Henry, you're doing a heckuva job"
Posted by Jill | 3:26 PM
I knew that watching Captain Codpiece praising Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson last night on Countdown made my head explode. After reading Dan Froomkin, I just figured out why:

As the storm clouds gathered, was President Bush once again asleep at the wheel?

A consistent theme in today's political and economic coverage is that Bush's failure to recognize the severity of the ongoing financial crisis and act accordingly is reminiscent of his disastrously slow and inept response to Hurricane Katrina.

Maura Reynolds and Janet Hook write in the Los Angeles Times: "In some ways it was a throwaway line, the kind of praise a boss tosses out casually. But as the economy teetered Monday, President Bush's words to Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson struck many as discordant and disengaged.

"'I want to thank you, Mr. Secretary, for working over the weekend,' Bush said as he met with his economic advisors at the White House. 'You've shown the country and the world that the United States is on top of the situation.'

"Actually, many analysts and critics said, by focusing on Paulson's working hours instead of on the fear gripping Main Street and Wall Street, the president seemed to show just the opposite -- that he has failed to grasp the gravity of the country's economic crisis.

"'He has no idea what's going on. Even by his standards, he's wrong,' said Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, who said he had been trying to get the president to pay more attention to the economy for more than a year.

"Bush's 'working over the weekend' line also suggested a comparison to another disaster in which he was accused of acting too slowly: Hurricane Katrina. After the storm, the president was ridiculed for praising FEMA Director Michael D. Brown for doing 'a heck of a job' -- even as thousands remained stranded in floodwaters in New Orleans."

What's the equivalent of the broken levees this time around? "[S]ome economists and lawmakers said that the administration had too strongly resisted efforts to regulate either the mortgage industry or Wall Street's new mortgage-backed securities out of a misplaced faith in free markets," Reynolds and Hook write.

"Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.), chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, said he had been trying to get the administration to tighten the rules for mortgage lenders for more than a year -- to little avail.

"'They could have done a lot of things over the last year, in my view, to make a difference and refused to do so,' Dodd said. 'They are lagging in terms of their response to all of this. Had steps been taken over the last year, we could have avoided a lot of this.'"


It's tempting to just push Bush aside and wait until we have a new president, even if that president is John McCain, who, like the current occupant of the White House, doesn't seem to understand that Al-Qaeda is Sunni and Iran is Shia and so Iran is unlikely to be arming Al-Qaeda in Iraq. But this just reminds us that the Idiot-in-Chief can do...dare I say it?....a heckuva lotta damage betweeen now and January 20, 2009.

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share

Barack Hussein Obama Speaks, March, 18th, 2008
Its a proud day to take the name Hussein to your blog...Lets all listen to this very carefully and then hope to God that the democrats will sit down and figure this thing out according to what the majority of the people want.



As Prepared for Delivery...

“We the people, in order to form a more perfect union.”

Two hundred and twenty one years ago, in a hall that still stands across the street, a group of men gathered and, with these simple words, launched America’s improbable experiment in democracy. Farmers and scholars; statesmen and patriots who had traveled across an ocean to escape tyranny and persecution finally made real their declaration of independence at a Philadelphia convention that lasted through the spring of 1787.

The document they produced was eventually signed but ultimately unfinished. It was stained by this nation’s original sin of slavery, a question that divided the colonies and brought the convention to a stalemate until the founders chose to allow the slave trade to continue for at least twenty more years, and to leave any final resolution to future generations.

Of course, the answer to the slavery question was already embedded within our Constitution – a Constitution that had at is very core the ideal of equal citizenship under the law; a Constitution that promised its people liberty, and justice, and a union that could be and should be perfected over time.

And yet words on a parchment would not be enough to deliver slaves from bondage, or provide men and women of every color and creed their full rights and obligations as citizens of the United States. What would be needed were Americans in successive generations who were willing to do their part – through protests and struggle, on the streets and in the courts, through a civil war and civil disobedience and always at great risk - to narrow that gap between the promise of our ideals and the reality of their time.

This was one of the tasks we set forth at the beginning of this campaign – to continue the long march of those who came before us, a march for a more just, more equal, more free, more caring and more prosperous America. I chose to run for the presidency at this moment in history because I believe deeply that we cannot solve the challenges of our time unless we solve them together – unless we perfect our union by understanding that we may have different stories, but we hold common hopes; that we may not look the same and we may not have come from the same place, but we all want to move in the same direction – towards a better future for of children and our grandchildren.

This belief comes from my unyielding faith in the decency and generosity of the American people. But it also comes from my own American story.

I am the son of a black man from Kenya and a white woman from Kansas. I was raised with the help of a white grandfather who survived a Depression to serve in Patton’s Army during World War II and a white grandmother who worked on a bomber assembly line at Fort Leavenworth while he was overseas. I’ve gone to some of the best schools in America and lived in one of the world’s poorest nations. I am married to a black American who carries within her the blood of slaves and slaveowners – an inheritance we pass on to our two precious daughters. I have brothers, sisters, nieces, nephews, uncles and cousins, of every race and every hue, scattered across three continents, and for as long as I live, I will never forget that in no other country on Earth is my story even possible.

It’s a story that hasn’t made me the most conventional candidate. But it is a story that has seared into my genetic makeup the idea that this nation is more than the sum of its parts – that out of many, we are truly one.

Throughout the first year of this campaign, against all predictions to the contrary, we saw how hungry the American people were for this message of unity. Despite the temptation to view my candidacy through a purely racial lens, we won commanding victories in states with some of the whitest populations in the country. In South Carolina, where the Confederate Flag still flies, we built a powerful coalition of African Americans and white Americans.

This is not to say that race has not been an issue in the campaign. At various stages in the campaign, some commentators have deemed me either “too black” or “not black enough.” We saw racial tensions bubble to the surface during the week before the South Carolina primary. The press has scoured every exit poll for the latest evidence of racial polarization, not just in terms of white and black, but black and brown as well.

And yet, it has only been in the last couple of weeks that the discussion of race in this campaign has taken a particularly divisive turn.

On one end of the spectrum, we’ve heard the implication that my candidacy is somehow an exercise in affirmative action; that it’s based solely on the desire of wide-eyed liberals to purchase racial reconciliation on the cheap. On the other end, we’ve heard my former pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, use incendiary language to express views that have the potential not only to widen the racial divide, but views that denigrate both the greatness and the goodness of our nation; that rightly offend white and black alike.

I have already condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy. For some, nagging questions remain. Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely – just as I’m sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed.

But the remarks that have caused this recent firestorm weren’t simply controversial. They weren’t simply a religious leader’s effort to speak out against perceived injustice. Instead, they expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country – a view that sees white racism as endemic, and that elevates what is wrong with America above all that we know is right with America; a view that sees the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam.

As such, Reverend Wright’s comments were not only wrong but divisive, divisive at a time when we need unity; racially charged at a time when we need to come together to solve a set of monumental problems – two wars, a terrorist threat, a falling economy, a chronic health care crisis and potentially devastating climate change; problems that are neither black or white or Latino or Asian, but rather problems that confront us all.

Given my background, my politics, and my professed values and ideals, there will no doubt be those for whom my statements of condemnation are not enough. Why associate myself with Reverend Wright in the first place, they may ask? Why not join another church? And I confess that if all that I knew of Reverend Wright were the snippets of those sermons that have run in an endless loop on the television and You Tube, or if Trinity United Church of Christ conformed to the caricatures being peddled by some commentators, there is no doubt that I would react in much the same way

But the truth is, that isn’t all that I know of the man. The man I met more than twenty years ago is a man who helped introduce me to my Christian faith, a man who spoke to me about our obligations to love one another; to care for the sick and lift up the poor. He is a man who served his country as a U.S. Marine; who has studied and lectured at some of the finest universities and seminaries in the country, and who for over thirty years led a church that serves the community by doing God’s work here on Earth – by housing the homeless, ministering to the needy, providing day care services and scholarships and prison ministries, and reaching out to those suffering from HIV/AIDS.

In my first book, Dreams From My Father, I described the experience of my first service at Trinity:

“People began to shout, to rise from their seats and clap and cry out, a forceful wind carrying the reverend’s voice up into the rafters….And in that single note – hope! – I heard something else; at the foot of that cross, inside the thousands of churches across the city, I imagined the stories of ordinary black people merging with the stories of David and Goliath, Moses and Pharaoh, the Christians in the lion’s den, Ezekiel’s field of dry bones. Those stories – of survival, and freedom, and hope – became our story, my story; the blood that had spilled was our blood, the tears our tears; until this black church, on this bright day, seemed once more a vessel carrying the story of a people into future generations and into a larger world. Our trials and triumphs became at once unique and universal, black and more than black; in chronicling our journey, the stories and songs gave us a means to reclaim memories tha t we didn’t need to feel shame about…memories that all people might study and cherish – and with which we could start to rebuild.”

That has been my experience at Trinity. Like other predominantly black churches across the country, Trinity embodies the black community in its entirety – the doctor and the welfare mom, the model student and the former gang-banger. Like other black churches, Trinity’s services are full of raucous laughter and sometimes bawdy humor. They are full of dancing, clapping, screaming and shouting that may seem jarring to the untrained ear. The church contains in full the kindness and cruelty, the fierce intelligence and the shocking ignorance, the struggles and successes, the love and yes, the bitterness and bias that make up the black experience in America.

And this helps explain, perhaps, my relationship with Reverend Wright. As imperfect as he may be, he has been like family to me. He strengthened my faith, officiated my wedding, and baptized my children. Not once in my conversations with him have I heard him talk about any ethnic group in derogatory terms, or treat whites with whom he interacted with anything but courtesy and respect. He contains within him the contradictions – the good and the bad – of the community that he has served diligently for so many years.

I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother – a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe.

These people are a part of me. And they are a part of America, this country that I love.

Some will see this as an attempt to justify or excuse comments that are simply inexcusable. I can assure you it is not. I suppose the politically safe thing would be to move on from this episode and just hope that it fades into the woodwork. We can dismiss Reverend Wright as a crank or a demagogue, just as some have dismissed Geraldine Ferraro, in the aftermath of her recent statements, as harboring some deep-seated racial bias.

But race is an issue that I believe this nation cannot afford to ignore right now. We would be making the same mistake that Reverend Wright made in his offending sermons about America – to simplify and stereotype and amplify the negative to the point that it distorts reality.

The fact is that the comments that have been made and the issues that have surfaced over the last few weeks reflect the complexities of race in this country that we’ve never really worked through – a part of our union that we have yet to perfect. And if we walk away now, if we simply retreat into our respective corners, we will never be able to come together and solve challenges like health care, or education, or the need to find good jobs for every American.

Understanding this reality requires a reminder of how we arrived at this point. As William Faulkner once wrote, “The past isn’t dead and buried. In fact, it isn’t even past.” We do not need to recite here the history of racial injustice in this country. But we do need to remind ourselves that so many of the disparities that exist in the African-American community today can be directly traced to inequalities passed on from an earlier generation that suffered under the brutal legacy of slavery and Jim Crow.

Segregated schools were, and are, inferior schools; we still haven’t fixed them, fifty years after Brown v. Board of Education, and the inferior education they provided, then and now, helps explain the pervasive achievement gap between today’s black and white students.

Legalized discrimination - where blacks were prevented, often through violence, from owning property, or loans were not granted to African-American business owners, or black homeowners could not access FHA mortgages, or blacks were excluded from unions, or the police force, or fire departments – meant that black families could not amass any meaningful wealth to bequeath to future generations. That history helps explain the wealth and income gap between black and white, and the concentrated pockets of poverty that persists in so many of today’s urban and rural communities.

A lack of economic opportunity among black men, and the shame and frustration that came from not being able to provide for one’s family, contributed to the erosion of black families – a problem that welfare policies for many years may have worsened. And the lack of basic services in so many urban black neighborhoods – parks for kids to play in, police walking the beat, regular garbage pick-up and building code enforcement – all helped create a cycle of violence, blight and neglect that continue to haunt us.

This is the reality in which Reverend Wright and other African-Americans of his generation grew up. They came of age in the late fifties and early sixties, a time when segregation was still the law of the land and opportunity was systematically constricted. What’s remarkable is not how many failed in the face of discrimination, but rather how many men and women overcame the odds; how many were able to make a way out of no way for those like me who would come after them.

But for all those who scratched and clawed their way to get a piece of the American Dream, there were many who didn’t make it – those who were ultimately defeated, in one way or another, by discrimination. That legacy of defeat was passed on to future generations – those young men and increasingly young women who we see standing on street corners or languishing in our prisons, without hope or prospects for the future. Even for those blacks who did make it, questions of race, and racism, continue to define their worldview in fundamental ways. For the men and women of Reverend Wright’s generation, the memories of humiliation and doubt and fear have not gone away; nor has the anger and the bitterness of those years. That anger may not get expressed in public, in front of white co-workers or white friends. But it does find voice in the barbershop or around the kitchen table. At times, that anger is exploited by politicia ns, to gin up votes along racial lines, or to make up for a politician’s own failings.

And occasionally it finds voice in the church on Sunday morning, in the pulpit and in the pews. The fact that so many people are surprised to hear that anger in some of Reverend Wright’s sermons simply reminds us of the old truism that the most segregated hour in American life occurs on Sunday morning. That anger is not always productive; indeed, all too often it distracts attention from solving real problems; it keeps us from squarely facing our own complicity in our condition, and prevents the African-American community from forging the alliances it needs to bring about real change. But the anger is real; it is powerful; and to simply wish it away, to condemn it without understanding its roots, only serves to widen the chasm of misunderstanding that exists between the races.

In fact, a similar anger exists within segments of the white community. Most working- and middle-class white Americans don’t feel that they have been particularly privileged by their race. Their experience is the immigrant experience – as far as they’re concerned, no one’s handed them anything, they’ve built it from scratch. They’ve worked hard all their lives, many times only to see their jobs shipped overseas or their pension dumped after a lifetime of labor. They are anxious about their futures, and feel their dreams slipping away; in an era of stagnant wages and global competition, opportunity comes to be seen as a zero sum game, in which your dreams come at my expense. So when they are told to bus their children to a school across town; when they hear that an African American is getting an advantage in landing a good job or a spot in a good college because of an injustice that they themselves never committ ed; when they’re told that their fears about crime in urban neighborhoods are somehow prejudiced, resentment builds over time.

Like the anger within the black community, these resentments aren’t always expressed in polite company. But they have helped shape the political landscape for at least a generation. Anger over welfare and affirmative action helped forge the Reagan Coalition. Politicians routinely exploited fears of crime for their own electoral ends. Talk show hosts and conservative commentators built entire careers unmasking bogus claims of racism while dismissing legitimate discussions of racial injustice and inequality as mere political correctness or reverse racism.

Just as black anger often proved counterproductive, so have these white resentments distracted attention from the real culprits of the middle class squeeze – a corporate culture rife with inside dealing, questionable accounting practices, and short-term greed; a Washington dominated by lobbyists and special interests; economic policies that favor the few over the many. And yet, to wish away the resentments of white Americans, to label them as misguided or even racist, without recognizing they are grounded in legitimate concerns – this too widens the racial divide, and blocks the path to understanding.

This is where we are right now. It’s a racial stalemate we’ve been stuck in for years. Contrary to the claims of some of my critics, black and white, I have never been so naïve as to believe that we can get beyond our racial divisions in a single election cycle, or with a single candidacy – particularly a candidacy as imperfect as my own.

But I have asserted a firm conviction – a conviction rooted in my faith in God and my faith in the American people – that working together we can move beyond some of our old racial wounds, and that in fact we have no choice is we are to continue on the path of a more perfect union.

For the African-American community, that path means embracing the burdens of our past without becoming victims of our past. It means continuing to insist on a full measure of justice in every aspect of American life. But it also means binding our particular grievances – for better health care, and better schools, and better jobs - to the larger aspirations of all Americans -- the white woman struggling to break the glass ceiling, the white man whose been laid off, the immigrant trying to feed his family. And it means taking full responsibility for own lives – by demanding more from our fathers, and spending more time with our children, and reading to them, and teaching them that while they may face challenges and discrimination in their own lives, they must never succumb to despair or cynicism; they must always believe that they can write their own destiny.

Ironically, this quintessentially American – and yes, conservative – notion of self-help found frequent expression in Reverend Wright’s sermons. But what my former pastor too often failed to understand is that embarking on a program of self-help also requires a belief that society can change.

The profound mistake of Reverend Wright’s sermons is not that he spoke about racism in our society. It’s that he spoke as if our society was static; as if no progress has been made; as if this country – a country that has made it possible for one of his own members to run for the highest office in the land and build a coalition of white and black; Latino and Asian, rich and poor, young and old -- is still irrevocably bound to a tragic past. But what we know -- what we have seen – is that America can change. That is true genius of this nation. What we have already achieved gives us hope – the audacity to hope – for what we can and must achieve tomorrow.

In the white community, the path to a more perfect union means acknowledging that what ails the African-American community does not just exist in the minds of black people; that the legacy of discrimination - and current incidents of discrimination, while less overt than in the past - are real and must be addressed. Not just with words, but with deeds – by investing in our schools and our communities; by enforcing our civil rights laws and ensuring fairness in our criminal justice system; by providing this generation with ladders of opportunity that were unavailable for previous generations. It requires all Americans to realize that your dreams do not have to come at the expense of my dreams; that investing in the health, welfare, and education of black and brown and white children will ultimately help all of America prosper.

In the end, then, what is called for is nothing more, and nothing less, than what all the world’s great religions demand – that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. Let us be our brother’s keeper, Scripture tells us. Let us be our sister’s keeper. Let us find that common stake we all have in one another, and let our politics reflect that spirit as well.

For we have a choice in this country. We can accept a politics that breeds division, and conflict, and cynicism. We can tackle race only as spectacle – as we did in the OJ trial – or in the wake of tragedy, as we did in the aftermath of Katrina - or as fodder for the nightly news. We can play Reverend Wright’s sermons on every channel, every day and talk about them from now until the election, and make the only question in this campaign whether or not the American people think that I somehow believe or sympathize with his most offensive words. We can pounce on some gaffe by a Hillary supporter as evidence that she’s playing the race card, or we can speculate on whether white men will all flock to John McCain in the general election regardless of his policies.

We can do that.

But if we do, I can tell you that in the next election, we’ll be talking about some other distraction. And then another one. And then another one. And nothing will change.

That is one option. Or, at this moment, in this election, we can come together and say, “Not this time.” This time we want to talk about the crumbling schools that are stealing the future of black children and white children and Asian children and Hispanic children and Native American children. This time we want to reject the cynicism that tells us that these kids can’t learn; that those kids who don’t look like us are somebody else’s problem. The children of America are not those kids, they are our kids, and we will not let them fall behind in a 21st century economy. Not this time.

This time we want to talk about how the lines in the Emergency Room are filled with whites and blacks and Hispanics who do not have health care; who don’t have the power on their own to overcome the special interests in Washington, but who can take them on if we do it together.

This time we want to talk about the shuttered mills that once provided a decent life for men and women of every race, and the homes for sale that once belonged to Americans from every religion, every region, every walk of life. This time we want to talk about the fact that the real problem is not that someone who doesn’t look like you might take your job; it’s that the corporation you work for will ship it overseas for nothing more than a profit.

This time we want to talk about the men and women of every color and creed who serve together, and fight together, and bleed together under the same proud flag. We want to talk about how to bring them home from a war that never should’ve been authorized and never should’ve been waged, and we want to talk about how we’ll show our patriotism by caring for them, and their families, and giving them the benefits they have earned.

I would not be running for President if I didn’t believe with all my heart that this is what the vast majority of Americans want for this country. This union may never be perfect, but generation after generation has shown that it can always be perfected. And today, whenever I find myself feeling doubtful or cynical about this possibility, what gives me the most hope is the next generation – the young people whose attitudes and beliefs and openness to change have already made history in this election.

There is one story in particularly that I’d like to leave you with today – a story I told when I had the great honor of speaking on Dr. King’s birthday at his home church, Ebenezer Baptist, in Atlanta.

There is a young, twenty-three year old white woman named Ashley Baia who organized for our campaign in Florence, South Carolina. She had been working to organize a mostly African-American community since the beginning of this campaign, and one day she was at a roundtable discussion where everyone went around telling their story and why they were there.

And Ashley said that when she was nine years old, her mother got cancer. And because she had to miss days of work, she was let go and lost her health care. They had to file for bankruptcy, and that’s when Ashley decided that she had to do something to help her mom.

She knew that food was one of their most expensive costs, and so Ashley convinced her mother that what she really liked and really wanted to eat more than anything else was mustard and relish sandwiches. Because that was the cheapest way to eat.

She did this for a year until her mom got better, and she told everyone at the roundtable that the reason she joined our campaign was so that she could help the millions of other children in the country who want and need to help their parents too.

Now Ashley might have made a different choice. Perhaps somebody told her along the way that the source of her mother’s problems were blacks who were on welfare and too lazy to work, or Hispanics who were coming into the country illegally. But she didn’t. She sought out allies in her fight against injustice.

Anyway, Ashley finishes her story and then goes around the room and asks everyone else why they’re supporting the campaign. They all have different stories and reasons. Many bring up a specific issue. And finally they come to this elderly black man who’s been sitting there quietly the entire time. And Ashley asks him why he’s there. And he does not bring up a specific issue. He does not say health care or the economy. He does not say education or the war. He does not say that he was there because of Barack Obama. He simply says to everyone in the room, “I am here because of Ashley.”

“I’m here because of Ashley.” By itself, that single moment of recognition between that young white girl and that old black man is not enough. It is not enough to give health care to the sick, or jobs to the jobless, or education to our children.

But it is where we start. It is where our union grows stronger. And as so many generations have come to realize over the course of the two-hundred and twenty one years since a band of patriots signed that document in Philadelphia, that is where the perfection begins.


c/p RIPCoco

Labels:

Bookmark and Share

It's high....it's far....it's GONE! A home run!!
Posted by Jill | 11:50 AM
Of course Joe Scarborough won't think so. Nor will the other talking heads of the media and their managers for whom the status quo has been very lucrative; those who think John McCain should be our next president.

But if this is the opening salvo in a conversation about race and religion that is long overdue, then Barack Obama has, if you'll excuse my all-over-the-place metaphors, not just stormed the Bastille but walked in calmly with his head held high and handed a list of demands to King Louis XVI, and said "Now it's up to you."

[text deleted because Melina posted it too, up here.]

And if you don't have tears in your eyes after reading that speech, you ain't fucking human. Imagine being a black man whose own grandmother was afraid of black men. We all walk around with our family baggage. God knows I've revealed enough of mine in this space. But this man, this Senator from Chicago, and his family, are like the living embodiment of hundreds of years of history. We've spent my entire lifetime talking around the edges of racism -- from liberals who swear they're not racist but still have to remember NOT to clutch their handbags tighter when the black messenger enters the elevator to politicians like Ronald Reagan and George Herbert Walker Bush and Jesse Helms scoring cheap political points out of "welfare queens", Willie Horton, and white hands crumpling a piece of paper after their owner finds out that a black guy got the job to which HE was entitled.

But this man has a very real shot at being our next president. Today he's offered himself up as the conduit by which the boils of our checkered racial history can finally be lanced; in the pursuit of a world in which it really and truly, finally, no longer matters.

I think that's an offer worth taking.

(UPDATE: Sully nails it. Again. He really has to stop this or else become the next John Cole and join the other side.)

Labels:

Bookmark and Share