The New York Times has gone gaga. There is a terrible, ignorant editorial in there today about Obama's speech to school children:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/05/opinion/05sat2.html?_r=1&ref=opinion
The editorial defends Obama, and rightly points out that this is not socialism, but then goes on an insane tear against socialism and its evil history. For someone educated in Britain, and a historian knowledgeable about the history of socialism, this is an incredibly ignorant mistake for the NYT. They meant, I assume, communism or Stalinism, not socialism--unless they are now the Washington Times. I wrote a letter which was a shortened version of the following:
To the Editor,
In your editorial today “Respect Your Children” you state, correctly, that there is “nothing socialist in any of Mr. Obama’s policies”, but then add “as anyone with a passing knowledge of socialism and its evil history knows”. You continue: “But in this country, unlike actual socialist countries, nobody can be compelled to listen to the president.” To quote Repesentative Barney Frank, what planet are you on? Socialism as a philosophy and political movement, represented by parties such as the Labour Party in Britain, has been responsible for most of the progressive changes in Western political systems in the twentieth century, including universal suffrage. Liberals and conservatives might challenge the effectiveness of socialism to “deliver the goods” when it comes to wealth creation, but “evil history”? Was Léon Blum “evil”? Was Clement Atlee “evil”? Olaf Palme? Willy Brandt, Helmut Schmidt? Yet they were all socialists. Is universal health care, an achievement mainly of socialist parties in Europe “evil”? No, they were the leaders of peaceful social change through the ballot box towards a fairer, more just society, which they thought best achieved by increased state intervention in the economy (nationalization) and civil society, because the state was, after all, run by the people in a democracy. Current socialist parties in Europe have backed away from this and adopted a “social market” approach, but the socialist heritage is anything but “evil”.
And what “actual socialist countries” do you mean? There are none. Sweden comes close, but even that country never gave up the basic profit incentive of capitalism (and did very well despite its near-socialism). The socialist parties never really attempted a complete socialization of any country. If you mean North Korea, or the Soviet Union and its satellites, or perhaps Hugo Chavez’s Venezuela, then I would put it to you that you are making an elementary mistake, confusing socialism with either communism or totalitarian personality cults, and have been reading far too much Hayek for your own intellectual good. Unless, of course, you are no longer the New York Times, but have morphed overnight into the northern edition of the Washington Times?
Next time, do not let someone with a “passing knowledge” of anything write editorials, if you want to preserve your newspaper’s estimable reputation as publishing all that is fit to print. This editorial was not.
Steven Beller, Washington DC
Sometimes all this activism seems to be vanishing into the void, but I was happy to see that one of my comments on the NYT site garnered 439 "recommendations." It was in response to Paul Krugman's article about the seeming lack of trust in the voting base...
Here it is:
I've seen our health care system up close over the past year.
I'm fortunate to have the finest medical care in the world. But I've seen far too many people unable to obtain the care they need because they can't afford it.
That's wrong. It's got to change, and it's about to change.
We're fighting for legislation in Congress to fix our broken health care system. Under President Obama's leadership, Republicans and Democrats are working together to write a bill that will guarantee good care at long last to everyone who needs it.
But we'll need strong nationwide support to produce the 60 Senate votes that will probably be required to avoid a filibuster and actually pass the bill. I need your support. Please sign our petition for quality, affordable health care for every American:
http://www.democraticmajority.com/healthcare
Our legislation includes five major provisions:We give Americans better choices for health insurance. We follow a simple principle: If you like the coverage you have now, you can keep it. If you don't like your current coverage, our bill offers new and more affordable options. We'll negotiate with insurance companies to keep costs low, make it illegal for companies to deny coverage because of pre-existing conditions, and give Americans the option to enroll in a public insurance program.
We reduce the cost of health care. We'll crack down on fraud and abuse, and we'll reduce red tape to keep costs down. We also make sure doctors use the most effective therapies to treat illnesses, so patients aren't paying extra for treatments that don't work.
We put new emphasis on prevention. The best way to treat a disease is to prevent it from ever striking, or to catch it at an early stage. By giving every American access to affordable health care, we'll enable millions of people to be screened for diabetes, heart disease, cancer and depression.
We bring more help to the elderly and the disabled. We make it easier for these Americans to live independently. We help pay for home upgrades such as wheelchair ramps, and for regular home care to enable people to live in their own homes, not nursing homes.
Finally, we develop a better health workforce, delivering modern and responsive care. We invest in doctors, nurses, and other health professionals to meet the needs of patients more effectively for years to come.These changes won't be easy to enact -- but we can't afford to wait, and we can't afford to fail.
Show your support for health reform that will benefit all our citizens, reduce the financial burdens on our nation's people and businesses, and put our health care industry on a strong and sustainable basis for the future:
I'll be working hard to pass this bill in the weeks ahead, and I hope you'll be there with me.
Thank you so much for the very real difference you can make in achieving this great goal we share.
Sincerely,
Senator Edward M. Kennedy
Tea Parties Forever By PAUL KRUGMANPublished: April 12, 2009 This is a column about Republicans — and I’m not sure I should even be writing it. Today’s G.O.P. is, after all, very much a minority party. It retains some limited ability to obstruct the Democrats, but has no ability to make or even significantly shape policy.Beyond that, Republicans have become embarrassing to watch. And it doesn’t feel right to make fun of crazy people. Better, perhaps, to focus on the real policy debates, which are all among Democrats.But here’s the thing: the G.O.P. looked as crazy 10 or 15 years ago as it does now. That didn’t stop Republicans from taking control of both Congress and the White House. And they could return to power if the Democrats stumble. So it behooves us to look closely at the state of what is, after all, one of our nation’s two great political parties. One way to get a good sense of the current state of the G.O.P., and also to see how little has really changed, is to look at the “tea parties” that have been held in a number of places already, and will be held across the country on Wednesday. These parties — antitaxation demonstrations that are supposed to evoke the memory of the Boston Tea Party and the American Revolution — have been the subject of considerable mockery, and rightly so. But everything that critics mock about these parties has long been standard practice within the Republican Party. Thus, President Obama is being called a “socialist” who seeks to destroy capitalism. Why? Because he wants to raise the tax rate on the highest-income Americans back to, um, about 10 percentage points less than it was for most of the Reagan administration. Bizarre.But the charge of socialism is being thrown around only because “liberal” doesn’t seem to carry the punch it used to. And if you go back just a few years, you find top Republican figures making equally bizarre claims about what liberals were up to. Remember when Karl Rove declared that liberals wanted to offer “therapy and understanding” to the 9/11 terrorists?Then there are the claims made at some recent tea-party events that Mr. Obama wasn’t born in America, which follow on earlier claims that he is a secret Muslim. Crazy stuff — but nowhere near as crazy as the claims, during the last Democratic administration, that the Clintons were murderers, claims that were supported by a campaign of innuendo on the part of big-league conservative media outlets and figures, especially Rush Limbaugh.Speaking of Mr. Limbaugh: the most impressive thing about his role right now is the fealty he is able to demand from the rest of the right. The abject apologies he has extracted from Republican politicians who briefly dared to criticize him have been right out of Stalinist show trials. But while it’s new to have a talk-radio host in that role, ferocious party discipline has been the norm since the 1990s, when Tom DeLay, the House majority leader, became known as “The Hammer” in part because of the way he took political retribution on opponents.Going back to those tea parties, Mr. DeLay, a fierce opponent of the theory of evolution — he famously suggested that the teaching of evolution led to the Columbine school massacre — also foreshadowed the denunciations of evolution that have emerged at some of the parties. Last but not least: it turns out that the tea parties don’t represent a spontaneous outpouring of public sentiment. They’re AstroTurf (fake grass roots) events, manufactured by the usual suspects. In particular, a key role is being played by FreedomWorks, an organization run by Richard Armey, the former House majority leader, and supported by the usual group of right-wing billionaires. And the parties are, of course, being promoted heavily by Fox News.But that’s nothing new, and AstroTurf has worked well for Republicans in the past. The most notable example was the “spontaneous” riot back in 2000 — actually orchestrated by G.O.P. strategists — that shut down the presidential vote recount in Florida’s Miami-Dade County.So what’s the implication of the fact that Republicans are refusing to grow up, the fact that they are still behaving the same way they did when history seemed to be on their side? I’d say that it’s good for Democrats, at least in the short run — but it’s bad for the country.For now, the Obama administration gains a substantial advantage from the fact that it has no credible opposition, especially on economic policy, where the Republicans seem particularly clueless. But as I said, the G.O.P. remains one of America’s great parties, and events could still put that party back in power. We can only hope that Republicans have moved on by the time that happens.
Tea Parties Forever
By PAUL KRUGMANPublished: April 12, 2009
This is a column about Republicans — and I’m not sure I should even be writing it.
Today’s G.O.P. is, after all, very much a minority party. It retains some limited ability to obstruct the Democrats, but has no ability to make or even significantly shape policy.Beyond that, Republicans have become embarrassing to watch. And it doesn’t feel right to make fun of crazy people.
Better, perhaps, to focus on the real policy debates, which are all among Democrats.But here’s the thing: the G.O.P. looked as crazy 10 or 15 years ago as it does now. That didn’t stop Republicans from taking control of both Congress and the White House. And they could return to power if the Democrats stumble. So it behooves us to look closely at the state of what is, after all, one of our nation’s two great political parties. One way to get a good sense of the current state of the G.O.P., and also to see how little has really changed, is to look at the “tea parties” that have been held in a number of places already, and will be held across the country on Wednesday.
These parties — antitaxation demonstrations that are supposed to evoke the memory of the Boston Tea Party and the American Revolution — have been the subject of considerable mockery, and rightly so. But everything that critics mock about these parties has long been standard practice within the Republican Party. Thus, President Obama is being called a “socialist” who seeks to destroy capitalism. Why? Because he wants to raise the tax rate on the highest-income Americans back to, um, about 10 percentage points less than it was for most of the Reagan administration. Bizarre.But the charge of socialism is being thrown around only because “liberal” doesn’t seem to carry the punch it used to. And if you go back just a few years, you find top Republican figures making equally bizarre claims about what liberals were up to. Remember when Karl Rove declared that liberals wanted to offer “therapy and understanding” to the 9/11 terrorists?
Then there are the claims made at some recent tea-party events that Mr. Obama wasn’t born in America, which follow on earlier claims that he is a secret Muslim. Crazy stuff — but nowhere near as crazy as the claims, during the last Democratic administration, that the Clintons were murderers, claims that were supported by a campaign of innuendo on the part of big-league conservative media outlets and figures, especially Rush Limbaugh.
Speaking of Mr. Limbaugh: the most impressive thing about his role right now is the fealty he is able to demand from the rest of the right. The abject apologies he has extracted from Republican politicians who briefly dared to criticize him have been right out of Stalinist show trials. But while it’s new to have a talk-radio host in that role, ferocious party discipline has been the norm since the 1990s, when Tom DeLay, the House majority leader, became known as “The Hammer” in part because of the way he took political retribution on opponents.
Going back to those tea parties, Mr. DeLay, a fierce opponent of the theory of evolution — he famously suggested that the teaching of evolution led to the Columbine school massacre — also foreshadowed the denunciations of evolution that have emerged at some of the parties.
Last but not least: it turns out that the tea parties don’t represent a spontaneous outpouring of public sentiment. They’re AstroTurf (fake grass roots) events, manufactured by the usual suspects. In particular, a key role is being played by FreedomWorks, an organization run by Richard Armey, the former House majority leader, and supported by the usual group of right-wing billionaires. And the parties are, of course, being promoted heavily by Fox News.
But that’s nothing new, and AstroTurf has worked well for Republicans in the past. The most notable example was the “spontaneous” riot back in 2000 — actually orchestrated by G.O.P. strategists — that shut down the presidential vote recount in Florida’s Miami-Dade County.
So what’s the implication of the fact that Republicans are refusing to grow up, the fact that they are still behaving the same way they did when history seemed to be on their side? I’d say that it’s good for Democrats, at least in the short run — but it’s bad for the country.
For now, the Obama administration gains a substantial advantage from the fact that it has no credible opposition, especially on economic policy, where the Republicans seem particularly clueless.
But as I said, the G.O.P. remains one of America’s great parties, and events could still put that party back in power. We can only hope that Republicans have moved on by the time that happens.
Henry M
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/05/magazine/05rabbi-t.htmlHallelujah, shalom: Rabbi Funnye singing at Shabbat services.Alec Soth/Magnum, for The New York Times
Rabbi Capers Funnye celebrated Martin Luther King Day this year in New York City at the Stephen Wise Free Synagogue, a mainstream Reform congregation, in the company of about 700 fellow Jews — many of them black. The organizers of the event had reached out to four of New York’s Black Jewish synagogues in the hope of promoting Jewish diversity, and they weren’t disappointed. African-American Jews, largely from Brooklyn, the Bronx and Queens, many of whom had never been in a predominantly white synagogue, made up about a quarter of the audience. Most of the visiting women wore traditional African garb; the men stood out because, though it was a secular occasion, most kept their heads covered. But even with your eyes closed you could tell who was who: the black Jews and the white Jews clapped to the music on different beats.Alec Soth/Magnum, for The New York Times Rabbi Capers Funnye Funnye, the chief rabbi of the Beth Shalom B’nai Zaken Ethiopian Hebrew Congregation in Chicago, one of the largest black synagogues in America, was a featured speaker that night. The overflowing audience came out in a snowstorm to hear his thoughts about two men: the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Barack Obama. King is Funnye’s hero. Obama, whose inauguration was to take place the following day in Washington, is family — the man who married Funnye’s cousin Michelle.A compact, serious-looking man in his late 50s, Funnye (pronounced fu-NAY) wore a dark business suit and a large gray knit skullcap. He sat expressionless, collecting his thoughts, as Joshua Nelson and his Kosher Gospel Band steamed through their sanctified rendition of the Hebrew hymn “Adon Olam.” Nelson, a black Jew, was raised in two Jewish worlds — a white Reform temple in New Jersey and a Black Jewish synagogue in Brooklyn — and he borrows from both. The first time the Rev. Al Sharpton heard a recording of Nelson’s “Adon Olam,” he said, “I can hear that’s Mahalia Jackson, but what language is she singing in?”Mary Funnye, Capers’s wife, tapped her foot to the music and smiled with apparent equanimity, but her husband knew she was seething inside. “Mary has been a rabbi’s wife for a long time,” he told me a few weeks later. “She has an excellent synagogue poker face. But she really wanted to be in Washington that night” — for the early inauguration festivities — “not New York. And you can’t really blame her.”The Funnyes were invited to Washington by the Obamas for a full calendar of inaugural events, including a dinner that evening held by the president-elect for his family and close advisers. Mary’s brother, Frank White Jr., a businessman who served as a prominent member of Obama’s national finance committee, was invited. So were three of Funnye’s sisters. It was going to be the family reunion of the year, the social event of the season and a crowning moment in American history. Mary had a formal gown ready. But here she was, singing “Adon Olam,” as she did virtually every Shabbat in Chicago.Still, to be fair, this night was a historic moment for her husband too. For the first time in a rabbinical career stretching back to 1985, Funnye had been invited to speak at a white, mainstream synagogue in New York. Plenty of black Christian ministers, in a spirit of ecumenism and racial harmony, have addressed Jewish congregations in the city. But a black rabbi? Many American Jews regard the very concept as an oxymoron, or even, given the heterodoxies of much Black Jewish theology, some sort of heresy. Funnye has been trying for years to demonstrate that he and his fellow Black Jews belong in the Jewish mainstream. Mostly he has been ignored.But it is hard to ignore a man with a cousin in the White House. Tonight was payback for all those years of stupid jokes (“Funnye, you don’t look Jewish”), insulting questions and long, wondering stares. Funnye was finally being given the stage at a high-profile Jewish event. “My Broadway debut,” he said, without evident irony, as he prepared to go on. “Been a long time getting here, but I’m ready.”
Rabbi Capers Funnye celebrated Martin Luther King Day this year in New York City at the Stephen Wise Free Synagogue, a mainstream Reform congregation, in the company of about 700 fellow Jews — many of them black. The organizers of the event had reached out to four of New York’s Black Jewish synagogues in the hope of promoting Jewish diversity, and they weren’t disappointed. African-American Jews, largely from Brooklyn, the Bronx and Queens, many of whom had never been in a predominantly white synagogue, made up about a quarter of the audience. Most of the visiting women wore traditional African garb; the men stood out because, though it was a secular occasion, most kept their heads covered. But even with your eyes closed you could tell who was who: the black Jews and the white Jews clapped to the music on different beats.
Rabbi Capers Funnye
Funnye, the chief rabbi of the Beth Shalom B’nai Zaken Ethiopian Hebrew Congregation in Chicago, one of the largest black synagogues in America, was a featured speaker that night. The overflowing audience came out in a snowstorm to hear his thoughts about two men: the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Barack Obama. King is Funnye’s hero. Obama, whose inauguration was to take place the following day in Washington, is family — the man who married Funnye’s cousin Michelle.
A compact, serious-looking man in his late 50s, Funnye (pronounced fu-NAY) wore a dark business suit and a large gray knit skullcap. He sat expressionless, collecting his thoughts, as Joshua Nelson and his Kosher Gospel Band steamed through their sanctified rendition of the Hebrew hymn “Adon Olam.” Nelson, a black Jew, was raised in two Jewish worlds — a white Reform temple in New Jersey and a Black Jewish synagogue in Brooklyn — and he borrows from both. The first time the Rev. Al Sharpton heard a recording of Nelson’s “Adon Olam,” he said, “I can hear that’s Mahalia Jackson, but what language is she singing in?”
Mary Funnye, Capers’s wife, tapped her foot to the music and smiled with apparent equanimity, but her husband knew she was seething inside. “Mary has been a rabbi’s wife for a long time,” he told me a few weeks later. “She has an excellent synagogue poker face. But she really wanted to be in Washington that night” — for the early inauguration festivities — “not New York. And you can’t really blame her.”
The Funnyes were invited to Washington by the Obamas for a full calendar of inaugural events, including a dinner that evening held by the president-elect for his family and close advisers. Mary’s brother, Frank White Jr., a businessman who served as a prominent member of Obama’s national finance committee, was invited. So were three of Funnye’s sisters. It was going to be the family reunion of the year, the social event of the season and a crowning moment in American history. Mary had a formal gown ready. But here she was, singing “Adon Olam,” as she did virtually every Shabbat in Chicago.
Still, to be fair, this night was a historic moment for her husband too. For the first time in a rabbinical career stretching back to 1985, Funnye had been invited to speak at a white, mainstream synagogue in New York. Plenty of black Christian ministers, in a spirit of ecumenism and racial harmony, have addressed Jewish congregations in the city. But a black rabbi? Many American Jews regard the very concept as an oxymoron, or even, given the heterodoxies of much Black Jewish theology, some sort of heresy. Funnye has been trying for years to demonstrate that he and his fellow Black Jews belong in the Jewish mainstream. Mostly he has been ignored.
But it is hard to ignore a man with a cousin in the White House. Tonight was payback for all those years of stupid jokes (“Funnye, you don’t look Jewish”), insulting questions and long, wondering stares. Funnye was finally being given the stage at a high-profile Jewish event. “My Broadway debut,” he said, without evident irony, as he prepared to go on. “Been a long time getting here, but I’m ready.”
Down and dirty. Our lovable lady scounderal is finally back from wherever the hell she went. A couple of real thinly written columns, some wishy-washy stuff about utter nonsense...hell, maybe she was afraid to be in the same issue as that horrid article about the 'Black Heart.' You know, the medal this idiot (sanctioned by the governing idiots of the New York Times) columnist put forward, in place of the Purple Heart for sufferers of post traumatic stress disorder, was labeled the Black Heart. I still have trouble getting past that slight against all veterans who have ever been in combat. How could the Times 'dis' us like that? I don't know, but I am not done with them over it either. Today, at the North Chicago Naval complex I brought the article to the attention of the commanding Admiral of the base. He was outraged too. He is going to bring it to the attention of the Pentagon. Whatever the hell that means. Still, it is better than nothing, or simply blogging away into the twilight of late inattentive reading times. Some tattered and tough Marine needs to be ordered to present himself in full uniform at the offices of The New York Times and call them out. That's right. The senior editor of the New York Times needs to have his ass kicked for that one (hell, I hope the editor is a guy, or there could be trouble there).
Maureen, bless her lovely soul, is going down on these bastards that have stolen all the money, and keep stealing all the money, as it is continuously forked over in one bailout after another. Maureen, to her great credit, attacked these bastards this morning. She demanded some sort of violent retribution against them. And, make no mistake, as Nixon would say, this is not the kind of retribution wherein the thieving cretins get to simply be fired and escape with their forty to fifty million dollar parachutes. No, when Maureen goes down, she goes down all the way. To their slimy little hidey-holes (normal people would refer to those as chateaus). To their well-stocked, well furnished but poorly disguised lairs. As I have been saying out here, for quite some time, the addresses of these people are available online. They never thought to hide. They never thought the money would all be stolen and that there would be nothing left. And if they did think about that, they thought that nobody would do anything to them about it. Well, readers out there, have a go at Maureen's column. She is not quite as over the edge about this as I am, but she is getting closer. And don't be fooled by the fact that some of these murderous crooks are catching on, and deeding their multi-million dollar chateaus over to their wives and children. They are still going to be living there. When you have lost your home, some of you. When you have lost your job, some more of your. When you have lost any shred of an ability to house and feed your family....do not commit suicide. No, that would be a waste of your abilities and allow those creeps to be victorious. Get on the internet. Find out where those people live and then put your thumb out. If anybody stops to pick you up, in this day and age, then tell them about your mission. I am willing to bet that, almost to a single person, your ride will drive you all the way to the door of your intended target. If you don't have any 'mission equipment' then just ask around, again telling your story and intent. America is armed to the gills. You will likely find arsenals of 'mission equipment' dropped at your feet.
I am not losing my home. My income has not suffered because of this coming nightmare, and it is not likely to. And I wonder about that. Here I sit, relatively immune. But I am at least pitching in where I can. And i don't mean by writing this blog. I have helped save two homes from foreclosure (it is wondrous, the power of a retained attorney to get the attention of mortgage bankers who think that they are dealing with people on their last legs, or taking their last financial gasp!). I have taken in a few people and placed them into situations where they can still have a decent income and a roof over their heads. I visit prisoners when I can get into those places (it is hard to visit prisoners today, if you have not tried. Our cold uncaring corrections officers do not want the prisoners to have visitors). I experience collect calls from people inside in the order of over a hundred bucks a month. Yes, I believe in second, third and fourth chances. But that is me. And here I am, about as unlikely a package as you might want to run across; not believing in Christ but trying to be 'Christ-like,' angry with systems that are unfair and torturous, but trying to work within those same system rules to relieve unfairness and torture, in search of a redemption that I have not one hope of ever coming close to accomplishing, and finally, never believing that I am doing nearly enough. What about you? What are you doing? What are you thinking?
Thank you Maureen Dowd. I love you. I know you are probably some effete snob, back there in New York society, but I will continue to try to minimize that in my mind. You write hugely, and have a tremendous voice out here, compared to most of us on the fringes of the publishing world. You are in 'the show,' so to speak, and your meaning and understanding reaches greats swaths of humanity. I encourage you to continue. Take from wherever you must (including here!) to maintain the momentum of this last column. Now, start writing it every day. I do, and I don't have your talent. But I do share your mission. You have many more people behind you than you know. Most just read, then move on, like at this site. Very few comment. But they are there and they are thinking...and loving you too.
from-the-chateau-dif.blogspot.com
Melding Obama’s Web to a YouTube Presidency By JIM RUTENBERG and ADAM NAGOURNEY New York Times Published: January 25, 2009 http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/26/us/politics/26grassroots.html WASHINGTON - Lyle McIntosh gave everything he could to Barack Obama’s Iowa campaign. He helped oversee an army that knocked on doors, distributed fliers and held neighborhood meetings to rally support for Mr. Obama, all the while juggling the demands of his soybean and corn farm. Asked last week if he and others like him were ready to go all-out again, this time to help President Obama push his White House agenda, Mr. McIntosh paused. “It’s almost like a football season or a basketball season - you go as hard as you can and then you’ve got to take a breather between the seasons,” he said, noting he found it hard to go full-bore during the general election. Mr. McIntosh’s uncertainty suggests just one of the many obstacles the White House faces as it tries to accomplish what aides say is one of their most important goals: transforming the YouTubing-Facebooking-texting-Twittering grass-roots organization that put Mr. Obama in the White House into an instrument of government. That is something that Mr. Obama, who began his career as a community organizer, told aides was a top priority, even before he was elected. His aides — including his campaign manager — have created a group, Organizing for America, to redirect the campaign machinery in the service of broad changes in health care and environmental and fiscal policy. They envision an army of supporters talking, sending e-mail and texting to friends and neighbors as they try to mold public opinion. The organization will be housed in the Democratic National Committee, rather than at the White House. But the idea behind it — that the traditional ways of communicating with and motivating voters are giving way to new channels built around social networking — is also very evident in the White House’s media strategy.
This should have been a day of great reading, because the first thing that caught my attention was the little additive at the end of my namesake's column (that would be William Kristol). He is done at the Times. Today was the end. He is out of there. That is great news! The Times is waking up. The only downside is that I will not have Kristol to pick on anymore. I am not going out to get the Nation, or one of those magazines, to find out what idiocy he is putting on paper there. I mean when he is really gone. His departure article was actually not bad. It was a 'damn Obama with faint praise' kind of a thing. He took Obama's inauguration speech apart. That speech was written by Obama himself, which should be applauded in this day and age. We heard, on the given day, a speech from the man himself, not some sycophant'a abridged, negotiated and aborted step-child of a speech. You know, the 'norm' of today. I did note that several of the networks discussed the 'speech writers' anyway, even though there were none. Obama wrote the thing on the train, just like Lincoln did when he created the Gettysburg Address. That speech was panned the next day in the Boston Globe. I have a copy of that paper! William Kristol's existence is of multiple continuance. He is born-again. To totally mis-use that phrase.
But that good thing was it, as things sort of stuttered to a halt. I read on. Right down the center of the paper's op-ed section ran two articles about the Purple Heart Decoration. Our nation's award for the combat wounded. I know it well, as I have one for what happened to me in Vietnam. Neither writer of either article has a Purple Heart. I did not need wikipedia to come to that conclusion. It was obvious from the writing. The first article laid out the facts. It seems that there is controversy over the merits of the award these days because of another of my regular subjects. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Some people wanted to have the decoration issued for returning combatants who are diagnosed with this psychological problem. I would be willing to bet that the idea, and it's support, came from returning veteran's who wanted to enjoy the benefits of having the medal (like free license plates and special treatment at V.A. centers). The problem, which you yourself have probably already concluded, is that the diagnosis for this disorder is conjectural. The diagnosis is primarily based upon a psychologist's opinion. He gets his information mostly from the veteran. Records in combat are not too detailed. If the records say a veteran served in an area where combat occurred, that is about all the support the veteran needs. The rest of the conclusion rests upon the veteran's word. Quite properly, the panel evaluating this issue came to the conclusion that the Purple Heart was not intended for such stuff, and they denied the petition, or whatever the paperwork was.
But now we come to the second article. I thought the author of that article was being funny, as I read. It seems that the thrust of this article was based upon acceptance of the idea that the Purple Heart would be the wrong decoration for PTSD sufferers too. So, a new medal was conjectured. The Black Heart. I kid you not! I started to laugh. I thought the author was being funny. But no. The article went on to list why such a designation would have merit; the black feelings of PTSD sufferers, the black bleak existence they have....and so on. I stopped laughing. What kind of research had the author done for this article? Could the author really be that unaware? Having a black heart in almost all Western cultures is indicative of being evil. This is the designation we want to assign returning warriors who suffer terrible mental problems from doing our bidding overseas? Maybe it was humor. Humor of the very worst sort. But, and once again, we come back to the idiocy of the editorial board of the New York Times. This article was barely read by them. If they read it, and cleared it, then shame on them. Again. As they correct one mistake (Kristol) they commit another. On the same day and on the same page. They are arcanely and brilliantly displaying some sort of twisted stupidity, or a depth of perverted intellect I cannot reach....or, I can, but don't want to.
Indeed, based upon this article alone, the New York Times itself may be said to have a black heart. A sign of our Times.
I real Gail Collins in the Times this morning. Harvey does not like her, and cats are to be respected. Maybe it is that I complain a bit about her. Harvey sits there this minute, as I mouth strange things to myself about her, and pundits in general. Sometimes I think that he looks at me with a 'you are just jealous that you have not been selected to be one of them' kind of a look. But maybe that is my imagination. When I get in the tub every morning, he stands on the very thin edge with all four paws (how do they do that?), then he dips one into the water and has a taste. I yell at him. He yells back. Then he goes to lay next to the hot air vent on the rug, near the wall. Smug. Looking at me. Like he has done his duty. What duty? Yes, there is something there. I just don't get it. I will never get it. But back to Collins. She is not all that obnoxious, really. It is this Geithner thing that has got me going, because she is so totally wrong, and her opinion is read by so many. Half of her column in the paper was spent running on about the fact (her fact) that anyone whom is brought into this current administration must be squeaky clean. They must bear no stain of failure at all. And Geithner is her example of the kind of failure that should be given enough negative credit to have him disqualified from service. He did not pay enough in taxes for two years. Oh please. And here is Gail Collins, another of the Ivy Leaguer's. I have been hard of them of late, mostly because of the devastation they have wrought with their 'legacy' operation of our nation's financial houses. Gail would allow us to believe that the best person for any job is the person who has never had a published or demonstrated failure. In any way. In any area. Else Geithner's venial sin would not even be brought up by her. The current crop of Ivy Leaguer's running the banks had no failures. No, most of them went straight to their top positions right out some post college training program (usually owned by their Dads). Do we not all know, deep down in our heart of hearts, that failure is the single force that has helped us all be better at what we do? When we fail we are faced with only one real conclusion. That we failed in some way. Even in a marriage gone bad. The other person may have gambled, drank, drugged or slept around...but, at the very least, we failed in selection going in. We face the full realization, when we fail, that we are not so great. That we must do better. That is what we are looking at right this minute, as an entire nation. We have failed. What are we to do? Follow Gail's unspoken advice? Move aside and let another country lead? Resign? Be fired? Assign ourselves to the scrap heap, for cause? No, I do not believe so. Not me. Not you. Not Obama. We need the weathering and toughness our failure has wrought. We need it for the awareness, the hyper vigilance it can give us.
I went to dinner with a guy who wears a phoniy Seiko watch. I did not know that they made phony Seiko watches. I would have thought that the phony watches out there, and there are a whole ton of them, would have Seiko insides. But I learn as I age. It seems that there is an automatic special Seiko that is fairly expensive, so it is worth it to some to copy and make a cheaper version. What does this fact have to do with anything, as the man who was wearing it exudes quality in every other area of his life. It was a conundrum and I had a hard time trying to puzzle the opposition out. The obvious opposition of genuine quality demonstrating fakery and trash. He let me carry that mental juggling load all through dinner. Then he revealed that he had acquired the watch to wear for our dinner alone, so that I would have to spend the evening in wonder. I have a very few friends (this one is like no other) who are every bit my equal when it comes to arcane clever aforethought and deep consideration. My friend will read this blog and find my rendering of the event as a bit fictional. He will wonder why I added or subtracted from what really happened. Or so I hope.
Not long ago I wrote about an article which appeared in the New York Times by this new author. Her article was, in fact, a short story. I did not take to the story, but I am going to read it again. In light of a communication I received, and I believe the writer, the author of that work (Ms. C.E. Morgan) is anything but what I described her to be. She is not connected to the Times by birth or management situation. Not by marriage or monied influence. She is just good enough to have her stuff accepted by the New York Times on its editorial page. In fictional form, no less. And I stand corrected. This email I received, about C.E. Morgan, made me feel less of a person for my writing than I would have thought such a communication could. And, so, because C.E. Morgan is probably a whole lot more like what I would like to be, and because I did not properly do my homework before I offered a public assassination piece about her, I apologize. And I really really mean it. I will not write about a budding new author like that again. Not without doing the homework I get so angry with other people for not doing.
God Bless you C.E. Morgan, and I hope God continues to make his face smile down upon you. I hope my small following of readers will see this retraction. It is the first I have ever written. And I do not like the feeling inside me which caused me to write it. I am a better person than that. Or, at least, I will be. This retraction and apology will also appear on my 'outside' blog (from-the-chateau-dif.blogspot.com) in a few minutes, for those of you who run back and forth.
Domestic Violence laws are in desperate need of change on how abusers are prosecuted across the nation. Tougher laws need to be implemented and taken out of the States hands and be prosecuted on the Federal Level. Thus, making it tougher for the perpetrators of violence to plead down to lessor charges and the safety of all women and their children will be protected. Within this reform, child visitation and child custody will be change, as well, how protection orders are obtained and enforced. There are more women disappearing at the hands of their abuser’s and murdered. Abusive father’s gaining custody of their children with the carelessness of the courts blind eyes and not protecting the interests and safety of children, for fear of violating parental rights. Protection orders not being enforced and many violations are ignored because the lack of “proof”. This has to change.
Women’s Legal Resource Foundation will lobby for the Regan Martin Domestic Violence Reform Act commencing immediately. Please join Women’s Legal Resource in our crusade to change Domestic Violence Laws.
For more information please feel free to email all inquiries to: randi@womenslegalresource.com
Thank you for your support.
By: Randi RosenWomen’s Legal Resource
An astounding 2,300 Americans are reported missing every day, including both adults and children. But only a tiny fraction of those are stereotypical abductions or kidnappings by a stranger.
For example, the federal government counted 840,279 missing persons cases in 2001. All but about 50,000 were juveniles, classified as anyone younger than 18. In an article by David Krajicek on Tru TV reports, Slightly more than half—about 25,500—of the missing are men. About four out of 10 missing adults are white, three of 10 black and two of 10 Latino.
Among missing adults, about one-sixth have psychiatric problems. Young men, people with drug or alcohol addictions and elderly citizens suffering from dementia make up other significant subgroups of missing adults.
About half of the roughly 800,000 missing juvenile cases in 2001 involved runaways, and another 200,000 were classified as family abductions related to domestic or custody disputes.
Only about 100 missing-child reports each year fit the profile of a stereotypical abduction by a stranger or vague acquaintance.
Two-thirds of those victims are ages 12 to 17, and among those eight out of 10 are white females, according to a Justice Department study. Nearly 90 percent of the abductors are men, and they sexually assault their victims in half of the cases.
So where does this leave family members and friends of missing persons? Where do they go? Sure, there are support groups within local church organizations, social services and victims of crime organizations, but is that enough? What happens to those who can’t speak out about their loss? What happens to those who are hurt so much so, to get out of bed is a task in itself. The grief no one can imagine but the person feeling it. With missing persons, there is never closure, no finality until that person is found and often a lifetime goes by without a sound. Sitting by the phone dreading the day it rings with news but in your heart,you know they are not alive. How do you remember their face? How do you remember their voice, their dreams?
When I started Women’s Legal Resource, I focused on domestic violence, divorce and custody issues. Women go through much more at the hand of their abusers without being in court. More and more women each day are missing at the hands of their abusers. Women are no longer just beaten down, they are murdered and never to be found again. I met a woman by the name of Delilah. Delilah shared with me a story of a little girl who died in a car crash and was set to testify against the man who molested her. Becca McEvoy who endured a year of rape and sodomy at the hands of her step father, Bob Ingle, a police officer. This man was going to get away with this crime because now since in a court of law, you are entitled to face your accuser and since Becca McEvoy is no longer alive, no crime? Crawford vs Washington . The law is not black and white, nor is justice balanced.
I followed Delilah to her site Peace4 The Missing. I was in awe. I joined with no expectation but to be a resource of support, instead found a community of people helping one another in a very special way. Delilah and Maggie’s Rose are Co-founders of Peace4 The Missing, who found each other while on a blog for Stacy Peterson and who both held the same compassion to see Stacy’s safe return home. As I became more involved with Peace4 The Missing, I felt cared for, nothing like I have ever felt in a online-community before. This felt different, I felt safe and never did I feel preyed upon by nosy newbies butting in trying to force their opinion of how I should feel, like most other online communities do.
These ladies have created a network of love, support, hugs, buddies all with a will to let you know you are okay and that it’s okay to feel not okay. With little baby steps, new members speak of their pain, loss and fears and are always embraced with love, kindness and respect. Each member has a unique story to tell and are not always willing to tell it. With the more time you spend on Peace4 The Missing, the more you want to tell your story to be understood or to just let it out once a for all with hope to reach out to another member who is pain and needs a hug.
For example, it was Christmas time and for most people, not a very happy time of the year. I know for myself personally, I wish they would let Christmas fly by without notice. Delilah and Maggie’s Rose created the buddie system and each member was paired up with a member for the holiday. I found that to be a warm act of kindness. I was notified of my buddy and I sent emails of support and hugs. However, I was not a great buddy as I was sick more than present, but none the less I checked in to let them know I was there for them without feeling burdened or wanting to hide under the covers until Spring.
Peace4 The Missing has over 240 members and counting and has over 34 different and unique groups. If you have family member who is missing, you can post your photos, get advice on how to search for a missing person and other very valuable information you need in every state. If you are a victim of an unsolved homicide and need support, you will find it here and all with unconditional love. I am proud to be a member of this community, I have gained new friends who mean a great deal to me and I have a better understanding of what it’s like to feel the loss of someone missing something I never experienced before.
You can start your own blog, post events and conferences about Missing Persons and be rest assured the administrator will be there to protect you at all times. Be forewarned, this is not a community where you will be invisiable, you will picked to participate, either on the newsletter, or remembering someone’s birthday, this community helps you come out of your shell and to become pro-active and embraces you to be part of a very special family.
It is two days after. My hangover is just starting to clear, and I do not even drink. The weather has responded in kind, with a tepid weepy mess of a presentation, splashing ran all over the lovely clean snow mass out there. Well, it was lovely and clean out there before, albeit cold as hell. Fog. Gray. Christmas is gone. I have a wonderful Mont Blanc pen that the professor gave me, two shirts and three new sweaters. They are all green, or so I am told, being color blind as I am. I put one sweater on this morning. I had laid out the best one (in my damaged opinion) but, after finishing morning clean-up and shave, I forgot I had laid it out and instead threw on one of the other folded one's. I guess I can't tell the difference, and that is okay. Einstein used to have five suits, all of the same color and cut. Then he wore only white shirts and black socks. I like Einstein's style. He was probably as color blind as I, but he was too important for anybody to ask him to his face, or make fun of him (but then, maybe they did and that is why he ended up with the collection he came up with). Harvey has gone into the basement to hunt his 'stocked' supply down there. The pump is running non-stop, but keeping up. Harv checked that out, but, after just one sniff, went back to his dogged pursuit of his genetically enhanced prey. He is not quiet down there. Empty boxes fly and stacked stuff tumbles. The only rule is that he cannot bring his catches up here though, so I ignore a muted crash or two, coming from down there. If he has any catches I mean, which I doubt. But, in his world, as in mine, make believe is a lot more important than reality.
C.E. Morgan wrote a Christmas story and got it placed in the editorial section of the New York Times on Christmas Day! How do you get a short story into the New York Times at all? By being family I guess. I don't know who C.E. Morgan is, except I did read that the first novel written by this person was demanded by the publisher. That same publisher produced a mid-six figure advance. It is all a crock. Oh, it happened all right, but you see, nobody, and I mean nobody unheard of, gets a six figure advance on a first novel. And nobody gets a short story published on the editorial page of the New York Times on Christmas Day. And finally, nobody gets a rotten story published like that. 'Over By Christmas,' the name of the story that person wrote, should really be the title of the author's career, if the story is any indication. A story about the killing and/or training of horses...and the 'gift' of the necessary torture applied during the training process. "You can't shoot a dog while patting it's head, she had learned the hard way..." Good Christ, what bunk. Then there was the phony alternate sub-story of 'Dean, over in iraq, talking to her on the phone. In the background was an explosion so loud it made her "cry tearlessly." I have already used the phrase 'Good Christ,' so what can I reach for now? Cry tearlessly, give me a break. And somebody died from that explosion, in her story. Now what are the chances of that? Zip. Only in a bad story does that happen. Why am I going on about this? Because C.E.'s very existence in print displays one of the major problems we have in the withering writing culture of our nation. Good writing is seldom read, much less published. Instead we have a litany of the 'Over by Christmas' crap. And, instead of looking at the origin of the piece for answers, we question ourselves. "What is wrong with me? Why can't I understand this story?" It is not you. It is poor leadership. it is nepotism. It is profit-taking. It is keeping it in the family. It is good for them, in the short run, but bad for us all in the long run. The New York Times is dying and the stench of that slow decay is right there, seeping out from the Christmas Day editorial page.
Today, we have humor, once again, from that same editorial staff. Judith Warner, one of my favorite dumb columnists, has a run down one side of the page, while Bob Herbert ("I can too push a pencil across a table top with my nose") Herbert has the opposing side. His article is titled "Stop Being Stupid," but then, of course, he writes on and becomes illustrative of his own title! Part of his rant is about people being so stupid as to purchase houses that they knew they would not be able to afford. What rubbish. People buy a house on hope. And then there is the assistance from the talking heads they got. Even the head of the Federal Reserve was telling them that everything would be alright. He sure as hell was not telling them that whatever they bought would be worth fifty percent less one year later! But, in Herbert's twisted view, it was those poor people once again, pulling us all down. Those grubby, selfish and unionized auto workers. You know the routine. But back to the humor. Judith Warner starts her column with this sentence: "What if you could just take a pill and all of a sudden remember to pay your bills on time." I looked at that sentence and then back over at Herbert's title and then started to laugh. You guys! Saturday Night Live is not that droll!
As if we have a problem, in this current culture, remembering to pay the bills. We are not paying the bills because we do not have the money!!!! We remember. No kidding. We remember every night we go to bed and try to think about the unpaid bills. We remember because our phone does not stop ringing, and it is not friends calling because they forgot Christmas! Judith Warner and Bob Herbert do not have those problems. If you are writing regular columns for the New York Times you are wealthy. Not to mention the books and other perks that go with those jobs. Judith's article was all about a group of shrinks that think it is great to take some of these new 'brain enhancing' substances produced by our wonderful drug companies. How it is as okay as enhancing our intellect by eating a proper diet or working out. Trash. Go ahead, take the junk. Prosac and Paxil and Zanax, and all of the other's of the same ilk, were created to help people who suffer from depression. They take those drugs and become robots. Robots who tend to kill themselves. And the shrinks even know that but prescribe them anyway. I know two people who might benefit from those intelligence enhancing drugs, however. They are both columnists writing on the same page, this day, in the New York Times.
Ami Pedezhur, columnist with the New York Times, writes to us this day about the spawning of terrorism. You see, in her view, it goes all the way back to the sixties. It was just not called terrorism then. More high humor from supposedly intelligent writers, or maybe writers who simply have a goal other than that which they claim. You see, terrorism began when we wanted it to begin. It has been a very useful word, since it was coined and then converted into our modern linguistic medium. We actually have a war on terrorism. War on a word. Not a specific enemy, no that was back in the old days when we fought the terrible Hun (Germans), the Japs (well, you know who) and the Gooks (Vietnamese). Now we no longer need to specify an opponent, and that is so much more convenient for the military industrial complex and governmental leaders. Terrorism, even using the modern definition, is merely that activity which opposes any current government or force in control, with violence. What kind of violence does not matter, although it seems to be better for everyone if it involves suicide, bombs of any kind, and damage to 'innocent' victims. That we carpet bombed and burned Dresden, killing hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, well, that would never ever be termed terrorism. Nor A-bombing Nagasaki or Hirosima. Those were not exactly military targets, and we could have picked military targets if we chose to at the time. So terrorism is really more like piracy. It goes way way back. In fact, it is all over the Old Testament. That we rail against terrorism all the time now is indeed true, but the question is why. Why do we so go on about it? Because it supports decisions to spend money and control people's lives. We won't even let our vaunted, and supposedly free, press view and report on such stuff anymore. We have not covered Iraq or Afghanistan anything like we covered Vietnam. The complex and the government did learn a lot from Vietnam. Tell the people nothing and they have nothing upon which to make decisions. Kill the reporters, if necessary. Bar the reporters from the return of our dead troops, from going to the funerals. It is all there right in front of us. We will always be at war against terrorism, unless intellect and sanity take over. Which is not likely. Oh yes, Barack is intelligent. There is no question about that. But does he want to give up the war on terror? Does he want to give up the perks available to people who maintain the war on terror? I don't know. This coming year is going to be a really interesting one. And it is portended by ominous talk on Obama's part. He wants a huge surge in Afghanistan. What for? Whom do we have to beat over there? The Taliban? Who the hell cares? The Taliban, last time around, eradicated the Opium production of that country. We took over and brought Afghanistan back to being the world's largest opium producer. So what are we doing there? Really. We don't have a clue. We are depending upon Obama. And the outlook is not good, not in this area.
Bob Herbert wrote of the end of the war on American workers. We have a new Labor Secretary coming in who is fond of the American workers, and unions even. Supposedly. This person has never been a Secretary of anything, other than a steno pool, perhaps. Take a look at the auto bailout. It is so badly written that Ford opted out. They would rather risk bankruptcy than take that worm medicine. At the top of the agreement is wage cutting. We have got to get the wages of American workers down to those of the Japanese companies in the U.S. who have American workers. The fact that those companies have not been here long enough to have pension obligations, well, that is ignored. The unions must also accept the fact that, instead of money going into the current worker's pension plans, under this bill, they will get some kind of equity transfer. Have we not heard enough of this kind of 'garbage financial talk' from these creeps? The Congressional creeps? The Republicans? So the bailout passed American Auto Workers, but it is a mighty cold and snowy world out there this December, if you have not noticed. And those executives and members of Congress still have their residence addresses online and in phone books. Firewood is to be found there. The only. I repeat. The only way that our leadership is going to make the changes you need to survive yourself and your family in any credible and comfortable way is to cause fear to live and breathe inside these dreadfully powerful people. It is just the way it works. It has always worked that way, except for brief respites too short to even mention. You either run them or they will run you. Take note of the last eight years. We have been run right into the ground in just about every area that can be mentioned. The only person, whom I have noticed, that has done anything at all about it is locked up in an Iraqi prison, being tortured by our people right this minute. He threw his shoes at George Bush. By God that took balls. By God that took good judgment. By God I love that guy. If it could only start a trend. Wherever that Bush clown goes, people throw shoes. Not at him, as that will get you twenty years in administrative maximum in this country. No, people should just throw shoes before him. Let him get the idea. Let him understand that God, and we, can punish very very harshly and for a very long time. This guy and his people hurt the hell out of us and we are a long way from being beyond that hurt. Do you feel it yet? This country is built upon a Puritanical base of Calvinistic thinking and is righteous in the presentation of those ideas and philosophy. It is time to get righteous indeed.
My cards are not done. I labor on into the night. The foil is hard to work with. But the effect is great. That the cards will be taken from their envelopes, briefly read and then discarded is not the issue (although I do indeed sometimes think about that). The issue is that it is meaningful for me to do it. It is good to think of the neat nature of every one of the people I am sending to. I thank God that I have fifty of them. Many people have none. It is a Merry Christmas, as it has been for many years, at least for me. And it is snowing again. My Advent trees stagger under the weight. I thought it could not snow more than last year but I was mistaken. Global warming is making it colder. I do not understand that, but I think that I am not supposed to. Sometimes global warming, the phrase, seems to sound like terrorism.
My cards are like the song, maybe: Knights in White Satin, never reaching the end, letters I've written, never meaning to send. There was a television show on the science fiction channel a while back. I liked it. Most of the show was hookum (everyone above a certain age had died of a virulent virus) but the show always opened with this really poignant scene. The protagonist was standing over an open fire, reading a letter he had written to his father that day (the father had, of course, died from the virus years before) and then burning it. There was no point to it. But there was every point to it. Letters I've written, never meaning to send.
The historic election is over and the new administration is in the process of recruiting members for key positions.
It is still important to reflect on the role of media and news organization in this electoral process.
Extreme media bias towards one candidate and overwhelmingly condescending against another caused a great deal of frustration, anger and disappointment among the electorate.
The anti-media sentiments reverberated all over the cyberspace.
Media hype was intense during the Democratic Primary election.
Since I was vigorously involved during that time, I have great memories that will remain part of me for a long time.
There were several incidents but some of them have a greater impact on individuals, more severely than others do.
Mainly due to the smear tactics and negative attacks hurled on people like me entering the political campaign for the first time as surrogates, representatives or grass root supporters.
One particular incident is worth the spotlight because it is about the media personalities conducting themselves as the world authority in all matter especially the political race such as the Presidential election.
Ironically, in this Presidential election they were repeatedly wrong with both Democratic and Republican nominees.
Why?
They followed the conventional wisdom and failed to see or accept new possibilities and developments.
Only to steer course once the tide turned in a different direction sweeping anything and everything on the way.
The spotlight is precisely on MSNBC.
The network that took lot of heat from the public and rightfully so, for being excessively in favor of Obama Campaign in an unprecedented appeasement of the candidate then, Senator Barack Obama.
It is noteworthy that MSNBC initially rejected the candidate Senator Barack Obama against their preferred candidate, Senator Hillary Clinton.
Likewise, the venerable New York Times endorsed Senator Hillary Clinton way back on January 25, 2008 as the “IDEAL COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF.” and
Emphasizing that President-elect Barack Obama was not qualified in that respect,
Quoted by the recent Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman through national and international telecast on CNN.
I was devastated to note the hasty decision by a leading and the most respectable news organization such as New York Times.
Immediately, I made my first and only contact with the cable media outlet, Free Speech and World Link Television expressing my emotion on the endorsement.
Here is extract of the email titled The Moment of Truth sent to Amy Goodman of Free Speech Television on January 25, 2008, 12.22P.M PST , in that context:
“This morning the endorsement by New York Times is another way of indicating that Senator Clinton will be the future President of the United States.
Senator Clinton made many overtures in her recent T.V talk show appearances that I should go away and abandon the Obama campaign to suppress the Iraq war issue finally.
The impression I have is,
If Senator Obama becomes the nominee, there is absolutely no turning back for him as he would win the general election.”
———————————————-
In reality, what exactly happened prior to our President-elect Barack Obama establishing himself as a formidable candidate in the election is attention worthy.
First, my personal experience with MSNBC goes back to the days when the incumbent administration laid out the strategy to sell the unpopular Iraq war to the public and the United Nations.
I happened to be one of the unfortunate victims of mandatory public opinion survey superficially conducted by the administration to gain public support for the illegal invasion of Iraq.
This matter verified and confirmed truthful by the Institute for Public Policy, a non-profit organization, following the claim in my blog post during the Democratic Primary election.
With the relentless pro-Iraq war rally from networks such as MSNBC and FOX, the administration successfully launched their mission.
Although, there were other major networks equally involved in drumming their support for the Iraq war…
MSNBC displayed no qualms in abruptly eliminating dissent like the popular and visibly democratic, none other than their own talk show host, Mr. Phil Donahue.
My first unpleasant experience with MSNBC is regarding the anti-Iraq war message conveyed to the administration in response to the mandatory survey.
In my statement, I clearly emphasized the blunder by the administration on their commitment to wage war against Iraq and,
The consequences ensuing in terms of loss of lives, economic costs, national reputation and everything else that followed the disastrous war.
The born again liberal MSNBC demonized and targeted me as anti-patriotic with spam mail flooding my Inbox.
Further, the obscene materials via virus corrupted my database, forcing me to abandon the hard disk for a new one.
It was nothing short of homegrown terrorism for my anti-war position.
It is important to cite the article by Victor Davis Hanson, A senior fellow at the Hoover Institution,
Ref. San Jose Mercury News, November 13, 2008.
The article quotes “Most polls reveal that American voters believed that their media was biased in favor of Obama.
The popular journalist Chris Matthews even bragged that it was his job responsibility to see that Obama succeeds.” ———————————————————————-
Chris Matthews brags about his support to Obama during the election.
It might be the case but the evidence is against such claim.
Chris Matthews threw his weight not until the candidate Barack Obama proven the Democratic nominee against all odds.
Mr. Chris Matthews clearly knows about what this is.
During the fiercely battled Democratic Primary election, Nevada Primary & Caucus held on Saturday, January 19, 2008.
I published the following blog post that morning 4.19 am EST, my time 1.19am PST causing fury and anger among the Clinton campaign and their surrogates in the media, especially Chris Matthews of MSNBC.
Post from Padmini Arhant’s Blog: - www.my.barackobama.com
Electability Factor By "Voice behind the movement" - Jan 19th, 2008 at 4:19 am EST
Comments | Mail to a Friend | Report Objectionable Content Electability Factor:
The voters should focus on the electability factor when casting the vote in the primaries for their respective candidates.
The candidate, who can eventually lead the Democratic Party to victory in the general election in November 2008, will be the ideal nominee.
There will be various issues discussed and debated between the two parties during the general election.
Given the track record of the Republican Party in the general election, the Democratic Party would be well positioned with a candidate voting against the Iraq war.
Senator Barack Obama had consistently opposed the Iraq war.
He voted for the funding of the Iraq war to protect the interest and security of our brave young men and women in harm’s way and enable Iraq stabilize as a sovereign nation ultimately leading to the withdrawal of our troops.
The illegitimate Iraq war has been a major catastrophe for our national economy, security, credibility to deal with International crisis, and our image as the leader of the new world.
The Republican Party nominee voting for the Iraq war could be challenged and held accountable by the Democratic Party nominee voting against the war.
The victory strategy for the Democratic Party in the general election should be on the premise of Iraq war to honor the sacrifice by brave young men and women who lost their lives and all those currently serving in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The victory for Democratic Party would then truly represent the ‘real change’ against the ’status quo’ or the establishment.
Padmini Arhant - Copyrights reserved
OBAMA SUPPORTER
————————————————————
To emphasize again, the blog post created enormous outrage with the Clinton campaign bitterly complaining about my attempt to influence the election negatively on that date.
As usual, mainstream media lend support to the power and establishment expresses their reaction in a manner to warn a private citizen like myself to stay off the campaign trail.
Like the BET CEO, Mr. Robert Thompson a close Clinton surrogate, with his exclusive appearance on–
The Situation Room, hosted by Mr. Wolf Blitzer, on CNN specifically advised me by referring to me as,
The “woman of color” to cease my campaigning for the candidate then, Senator Barack Obama.
The Nevada Primary was won by Senator Hillary Clinton.
President-elect Barack Obama had the caucus victory.
The MSNBC coverage on Saturday, January 19, 2008, the day Nevada results was declared, is evidence to the outburst of a media commentator against a private citizen.
Chris Matthews, in particular admonished me directly by wagging his finger and in uttermost condemnation of my interference in the Presidential election.
He said, “This is not a horse race for betting. It is a serious Presidential race.
Individuals with no knowledge or experience should stay out of political campaigns.”
It was a clear indication that individuals like me have no place in politics or public forum.
The sentiment was shared by another MSNBC host Andrea Mitchell who initially tried to remain objective during the discussion with Clinton aid about that particular blog post that morning.
However, she later on made a bizarre remark about a possible substance abuse by me because of my daring attempts to envision a future with an African American Presidency.
Only, if Andrea Mitchell would have played a similar role in critiquing her spouse and the ex-Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan,
Equally responsible for neglecting the warnings of the economic turmoil that nearly brought the domestic and international financial markets on the brink of collapse,
The recent bailouts may not have been necessary. Thankfully, we are living in a technology driven age, where such incidents cannot possibly be buried in a time capsule with a hope of never being found until it becomes irrelevant.
All these blatant attacks and innuendoes were to demoralize me and debilitate my effort in spreading the message of our movement.
I owe my passion, commitment and drive to get further involved in the campaign to my children especially my eleven-year-old child.
He encouraged me to stand up to partisan politics and send a strong message to commentators like Chris Matthews, Andrea Mitchell and the likes,
That, ordinary people can do extraordinary things in life.
In fact, he was targeted as well with a nickname sidekick by the President-elect Barack Obama’s opponents for his exceptional role in exploiting the web technology with the publication of my blog posts.
My son’s advice to me was, not to rest until Senator Barack Obama is elected "The President" Barack Obama. I am glad and proud of my son’s advice to fight against the odds given the extreme stressful situation at that time.
Surely, children have a better sense of rationality enabling them to behold a different vision for the world.
They realize the burden on them with respect to the national debt, credibility and financial security as future taxpayers of the economy.
Prior to the election coverage, MSNBC’s show –
The Countdown by Keith Olbermann targeted the American idol contestant Sanjaya Malakar and
Sadistically mocked him almost on a daily basis to survive competition with condescending remarks through critic like Maria Melito.
Maria Melito in her brutal attack against Sanjaya Malakar claimed that the reason for Sanjaya to gain unprecedented votes was because…
“The people of his ethnicity i.e. India, voting for him never had anyone rise to the hall of fame in history.” Sadly, such comment reflected ignorance as anyone born on Planet Earth, should know the ancient Indus valley civilization which is India is not new to fame and wisdom.
The land in South East Asia is the origin and birth place of celestial beings like the Holy Lord Krishna, Holy and Graceful Gautama Buddha and sentient beings of the twentieth century such as Mahatma Gandhi –
The noble soul, the light of the world, the mentor of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Dr. Nelson Mandela, preached and practiced non-violence, peace and unity that are oxy-moron in the contemporary world.
Not excluding other notable scholars like Nobel laureates…
The Poet Rabindra Nath Tagore for literature in 1913 and DR. Har Gobind Khorana for Physiology or Medicine in 1968 to name a few.
Besides, Sanjaya Malakar fan base sprawled across the social spectrum as demonstrated by his young admirer, Ashley Ferl awestruck during his performance.
Young Ashley Ferl, was in return summoned to the Senate for rigorous interrogation by the elected officials…
Prioritizing investigation of genuine admiration for a young performer on the national stage over serious issues like Abu Ghraib, Katrina and deliberate exposure of CIA overt operative Mrs. Valerie Plaim.
To revert to the article by Victor Davis Hanson, ref. San Jose Mercury News, Nov 13, 2008, titled — “The kind of real ‘hope and change’ we can believe in for next year”
“The media, meanwhile should be careful not to abandon fairness and discretion for short-term political advantage.
When the wheel turns - and it too, always does - what you did or said will come back to haunt you.”
I could not agree more with the affirmation.
I hope Chris Matthews and others learned a lesson or two from this historic political event. When Change occurs, it happens all around much to the dismay of those consumed with fallacy and egocentrism regardless of the empire they reign. The mainstream, far left and right media as well as some news organization with an exception of cable network like –
“The Daily Show with Jon Stewart”, “The Colbert Report” and “The Late Night Shows”, Failed to meet the journalistic standards of objectivity and professionalism required in the presentation of views and analysis of any events particularly a Presidential election or for that matter, serious missions like the war.
The role of MSNBC and FOX in their relentless bashing of the candidates from both political aisles successfully drove the viewers to the cyberspace in search of…
Truth and Transparency desperately sought by people of the human race.
Whether it is young Sanjaya Malakar reaching for the stars or young Senator from the State of Illinois, President-elect Barack Obama successfully taking a shot at the highest office on land,
Their audacity of hope was challenged with rhetoric filled with racial slur, negative attacks and divisive politics to deny them the spotlight.
It is admirable that both individuals displayed a decorum signifying unity and poise seen unlike before in dealing with excessive criticism from the entities exhibiting power in the corporate media and Public office.
United States is a nation of immigrants from all over the world.
Any social progress to the satisfaction of all those feeling disfranchised is attainable only if the media and the elected officials recognize their share of responsibility in the service to democracy.
Further, the author of the cited article, Mr. Victor Davis Hanson, concluded with the following passage:
“Obama and his giddy Democratic majority sound like they think they will now be novel exceptions to these iron laws of politics, as if they really believe their hype that they are the “change” we have been waiting for, with cosmic power to stop the planet from heating and the seas from rising.
But the only real difference from the past old politics is that the present avatars of “hope and change” apparently don’t believe that the age-old adage - “The more things change, the more they remain the same” - will really apply to them as well.”
————————————————————–
It does not require the cosmic power to stop the planet form heating and the seas from rising.
It is doable by the ordinary human power to respect life in general and act responsibly for their survival now and in the future.
Failing that,
Perhaps the cosmic power could influence the resisting human nature to preserve and protect the ecological balance necessary for the sustenance of the planet.
As for the age-old adage referenced above applying to the present avatars of ‘Hope and Change”, It entirely depends on the agents of change and their target.
The age-old adage applies to those involved in cosmetic change rather than fundamental change, the ultimate goal and mission of the present avatars of “Hope and Change.”
Cosmetic change is delusional and beneficial for short-term gains affecting a selective few, hence it yields “more of the same” result.
Whereas, fundamental change target the philosophy of the institution as the sovereign power and,
Therefore, it is real, long lasting and universal.
As per the Hindu mythology, Almighty God Shiva is depicted the
“Lord of Destruction.”
Destruction is Deliverance for a New beginning with a divine commitment to depart from the age-old adage towards new-era prophecy, a divergence from
“The Oscillating Pendulum.” –
The significance and the sole purpose of the avatars of “Hope and Change.”
Thank you.
Padmini Arhant
June 12, 2008 - The Pew Global Project Attitudes [Complete Report ]
I live in Malaysia. I don't know why this kind of feeling exist in my heart once I heard the news of Mr. Obama's victory. My eldest son (10 years old) kissed me and congrats me for the victory. What a touchy and I cried.
I cried only because of 1 thing. This is a Great History. I prayed for this victory This is the victory of all Americans and entire Human Race. This is the victory of PEACE against WAR.
I can feel the feeling. Congratulation to the PEACE FIGHTERS WHO LOVE PEACE of America and entire World. Congratulation Mr. Barrack Hussein Obama and Mr. Joe Biden. Congratulation Democrats, Congratulation Americans and Congratulation to those who believe in CHANGE !!!
Nazzcaveman
http://umnokapar.blogspot.com/
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/24/opinion/24fri1.html?_r=1&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=all Editorial
Barack Obama for President
Published: October 23, 2008
Hyperbole is the currency of presidential campaigns, but this year the nation's future truly hangs in the balance.The United States is battered and drifting after eight years of President Bush's failed leadership. He is saddling his successor with two wars, a scarred global image and a government systematically stripped of its ability to protect and help its citizens — whether they are fleeing a hurricane's floodwaters, searching for affordable health care or struggling to hold on to their homes, jobs, savings and pensions in the midst of a financial crisis that was foretold and preventable.As tough as the times are, the selection of a new president is easy. After nearly two years of a grueling and ugly campaign, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois has proved that he is the right choice to be the 44th president of the United States.•Mr. Obama has met challenge after challenge, growing as a leader and putting real flesh on his early promises of hope and change. He has shown a cool head and sound judgment. We believe he has the will and the ability to forge the broad political consensus that is essential to finding solutions to this nation's problems.In the same time, Senator John McCain of Arizona has retreated farther and farther to the fringe of American politics, running a campaign on partisan division, class warfare and even hints of racism. His policies and worldview are mired in the past. His choice of a running mate so evidently unfit for the office was a final act of opportunism and bad judgment that eclipsed the accomplishments of 26 years in Congress.Given the particularly ugly nature of Mr. McCain's campaign, the urge to choose on the basis of raw emotion is strong. But there is a greater value in looking closely at the facts of life in America today and at the prescriptions the candidates offer. The differences are profound. Mr. McCain offers more of the Republican every-man-for-himself ideology, now lying in shards on Wall Street and in Americans' bank accounts. Mr. Obama has another vision of government's role and responsibilities. In his convention speech in Denver, Mr. Obama said, "Government cannot solve all our problems, but what it should do is that which we cannot do for ourselves: protect us from harm and provide every child a decent education; keep our water clean and our toys safe; invest in new schools and new roads and new science and technology."Since the financial crisis, he has correctly identified the abject failure of government regulation that has brought the markets to the brink of collapse.The EconomyThe American financial system is the victim of decades of Republican deregulatory and anti-tax policies. Those ideas have been proved wrong at an unfathomable price, but Mr. McCain — a self-proclaimed "foot soldier in the Reagan revolution" — is still a believer. Mr. Obama sees that far-reaching reforms will be needed to protect Americans and American business.Mr. McCain talks about reform a lot, but his vision is pinched. His answer to any economic question is to eliminate pork-barrel spending — about $18 billion in a $3 trillion budget — cut taxes and wait for unfettered markets to solve the problem. Mr. Obama is clear that the nation's tax structure must be changed to make it fairer. That means the well-off Americans who have benefited disproportionately from Mr. Bush's tax cuts will have to pay some more. Working Americans, who have seen their standard of living fall and their children's options narrow, will benefit. Mr. Obama wants to raise the minimum wage and tie it to inflation, restore a climate in which workers are able to organize unions if they wish and expand educational opportunities.Mr. McCain, who once opposed President Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy as fiscally irresponsible, now wants to make them permanent. And while he talks about keeping taxes low for everyone, his proposed cuts would overwhelmingly benefit the top 1 percent of Americans while digging the country into a deeper fiscal hole.National SecurityThe American military — its people and equipment — is dangerously overstretched. Mr. Bush has neglected the necessary war in Afghanistan, which now threatens to spiral into defeat. The unnecessary and staggeringly costly war in Iraq must be ended as quickly and responsibly as possible.While Iraq's leaders insist on a swift drawdown of American troops and a deadline for the end of the occupation, Mr. McCain is still taking about some ill-defined "victory." As a result, he has offered no real plan for extracting American troops and limiting any further damage to Iraq and its neighbors. Mr. Obama was an early and thoughtful opponent of the war in Iraq, and he has presented a military and diplomatic plan for withdrawing American forces. Mr. Obama also has correctly warned that until the Pentagon starts pulling troops out of Iraq, there will not be enough troops to defeat the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. Mr. McCain, like Mr. Bush, has only belatedly focused on Afghanistan's dangerous unraveling and the threat that neighboring Pakistan may quickly follow.Mr. Obama would have a learning curve on foreign affairs, but he has already showed sounder judgment than his opponent on these critical issues. His choice of Senator Joseph Biden — who has deep foreign-policy expertise — as his running mate is another sign of that sound judgment. Mr. McCain's long interest in foreign policy and the many dangers this country now faces make his choice of Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska more irresponsible.Both presidential candidates talk about strengthening alliances in Europe and Asia, including NATO, and strongly support Israel. Both candidates talk about repairing America's image in the world. But it seems clear to us that Mr. Obama is far more likely to do that — and not just because the first black president would present a new American face to the world.Mr. Obama wants to reform the United Nations, while Mr. McCain wants to create a new entity, the League of Democracies — a move that would incite even fiercer anti-American furies around the world. Unfortunately, Mr. McCain, like Mr. Bush, sees the world as divided into friends (like Georgia) and adversaries (like Russia). He proposed kicking Russia out of the Group of 8 industrialized nations even before the invasion of Georgia. We have no sympathy for Moscow's bullying, but we also have no desire to replay the cold war. The United States must find a way to constrain the Russians' worst impulses, while preserving the ability to work with them on arms control and other vital initiatives.Both candidates talk tough on terrorism, and neither has ruled out military action to end Iran's nuclear weapons program. But Mr. Obama has called for a serious effort to try to wean Tehran from its nuclear ambitions with more credible diplomatic overtures and tougher sanctions. Mr. McCain's willingness to joke about bombing Iran was frightening. The Constitution and the Rule of LawUnder Mr. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the justice system and the separation of powers have come under relentless attack. Mr. Bush chose to exploit the tragedy of Sept. 11, 2001, the moment in which he looked like the president of a unified nation, to try to place himself above the law. Mr. Bush has arrogated the power to imprison men without charges and browbeat Congress into granting an unfettered authority to spy on Americans. He has created untold numbers of "black" programs, including secret prisons and outsourced torture. The president has issued hundreds, if not thousands, of secret orders. We fear it will take years of forensic research to discover how many basic rights have been violated.Both candidates have renounced torture and are committed to closing the prison camp in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.But Mr. Obama has gone beyond that, promising to identify and correct Mr. Bush's attacks on the democratic system. Mr. McCain has been silent on the subject.Mr. McCain improved protections for detainees. But then he helped the White House push through the appalling Military Commissions Act of 2006, which denied detainees the right to a hearing in a real court and put Washington in conflict with the Geneva Conventions, greatly increasing the risk to American troops. The next president will have the chance to appoint one or more justices to a Supreme Court that is on the brink of being dominated by a radical right wing. Mr. Obama may appoint less liberal judges than some of his followers might like, but Mr. McCain is certain to pick rigid ideologues. He has said he would never appoint a judge who believes in women's reproductive rights.The Candidates It will be an enormous challenge just to get the nation back to where it was before Mr. Bush, to begin to mend its image in the world and to restore its self-confidence and its self-respect. Doing all of that, and leading America forward, will require strength of will, character and intellect, sober judgment and a cool, steady hand.Mr. Obama has those qualities in abundance. Watching him being tested in the campaign has long since erased the reservations that led us to endorse Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton in the Democratic primaries. He has drawn in legions of new voters with powerful messages of hope and possibility and calls for shared sacrifice and social responsibility. Mr. McCain, whom we chose as the best Republican nominee in the primaries, has spent the last coins of his reputation for principle and sound judgment to placate the limitless demands and narrow vision of the far-right wing. His righteous fury at being driven out of the 2000 primaries on a racist tide aimed at his adopted daughter has been replaced by a zealous embrace of those same win-at-all-costs tactics and tacticians.He surrendered his standing as an independent thinker in his rush to embrace Mr. Bush's misbegotten tax policies and to abandon his leadership position on climate change and immigration reform.Mr. McCain could have seized the high ground on energy and the environment. Earlier in his career, he offered the first plausible bill to control America's emissions of greenhouse gases. Now his positions are a caricature of that record: think Ms. Palin leading chants of "drill, baby, drill."Mr. Obama has endorsed some offshore drilling, but as part of a comprehensive strategy including big investments in new, clean technologies. •Mr. Obama has withstood some of the toughest campaign attacks ever mounted against a candidate. He's been called un-American and accused of hiding a secret Islamic faith. The Republicans have linked him to domestic terrorists and questioned his wife's love of her country. Ms. Palin has also questioned millions of Americans' patriotism, calling Republican-leaning states "pro-America."This politics of fear, division and character assassination helped Mr. Bush drive Mr. McCain from the 2000 Republican primaries and defeat Senator John Kerry in 2004. It has been the dominant theme of his failed presidency. The nation's problems are simply too grave to be reduced to slashing "robo-calls" and negative ads. This country needs sensible leadership, compassionate leadership, honest leadership and strong leadership. Barack Obama has shown that he has all of those qualities.
