Mayor Michael Bloomberg is refusing to appear at the first official mayoral debate that is being held at the Apollo Theater next Thursday
..................
Instead of participating in the first debate, the Bloomberg campaign will join two other debates scheduled in the final days before the November election.
Ferrer blasted the mayor for the move, releasing a statement which reads in part: “Bloomberg's decision...to refuse to attend next week's Campaign Finance Board debate should give New York City voters reason to pause and ask the fundamental question, ‘Why is Mike Bloomberg unwilling to defend his record?’"
The Times has an article on Freddie Ferrer's "self-inflicted" wounds.
This tops all of them to a degree which is simply unimaginable.
It is widely understood that he needs black voters to win reelection. Yet, he thinks he can avoid a debate at the Apollo?
Who the hell is advising him? Didn't he hire some blacks to work with him, to network with him on getting votes and influencing people?
So who the fuck said avoiding a debate at the Apollo would be anything but mind-numbingly stupid?
Let me explain: the Apollo is the heart of Black New York. It is where our legends were made. The control of the Apollo was and is a major issue in New York politics. To snub it, is to snub black New York. If the debate had been anywhere else, the strategy of late debates might be smart. But, considering the first debate was at the Apollo, not showing up says something very simple to black New Yorkers: disrespect.
I simply cannot believe that Bloomberg would not realize how black New York would take this.
To not appear at the Apollo is a gross insult to black New York and one which will not be forgotten. Why? Because it harks back to how Giuliani refused to meet black New Yorkers in his town hall meetings, for one thing. It also reflects poorly of his understanding of how black New Yorkers feel about the Apollo and about respect. And Sunday radio will be all over this. If he thinks a Friday news dump will hide this, he couldn't be more wrong.
To let Tom Ognibene and Freddie Ferrer take the stage of the Apollo without him would be amazing. And very stupid. Bloomberg cannot win without black votes. Refusing to debate in Harlem, especially the Apollo of all places, will not help him with black voters.
I would be surprised if he didn't change his mind.
No one is asking why you aren't a Democrat. No one cares.
What I am asking is why you refuse to stand up for black people. You don't need a party card for that.
You know, when black Democrats didn't like how Mark Green treated their leaders, they voted Republican. They didn't need his insults and they didn't have to vote Democratic. Why? Because they could and Mark Green was sent into electoral oblivion.
But time and again, you remain a Republican, you swallow their insults and then, amazingly, worry about my language? I'm a 40 year old black man. I remember reading Dick Gregory's Nigger as a kid. I still own the book, battered and taped, but it's still around. Do you want to know why the word comes to mind, because you people act like niggers. No pride, no dignity, no self-respect.
You know, my mother would ascribe your conservatism to being West Indian, and thinking you're better than American blacks and slavishly seeking white approval. I disagree with her. I think you're an idealist. I think you believe you can be a conservative, and black and treated fairly. Reality, however, means you must constantly prove your loyality and fidelity to your mentors. The problem is that to do, you must constantly belittle and deny the plight of blacks in America, or attack the Democratic Party and the black support they get.
Why is it a mystery that blacks don't support the GOP? Why do you think none of you people could run in a black electoral district and win? You would be lucky to get 20 percent of the vote and we both know it.
You see how the New York GOP has treated Randy Daniels like a red-headed stepchild? He's been shoved out the Senate race and is begging for support to lose to Eliot Spitzer for governor. They treat him as if he's unwanted. And we see this and know the GOP has no home for us.
No, Bob, it's not racism, but contempt. If you don't like being called a house negro or a slave stop acting like one. Stop chasing after white people who show their contempt for your people openly. Who discuss race as if you're not in the room. Clearly Bill Bennett has dealt with blacks in his career, even as staffers, and then, despite that, tosses off genocide as if it it's just a bad idea. Your friends at the WSJ editorial page ran a racist screed Southern Partisan would be embarassed to run. The folks at Stormfront are more subtle.
See, Bob, here's the problem, you say you disagree with them, but you still work for them, still explain away their positions. Sure, you complain a little, but you never stand up. A sharply worded essay is no challenge. How Deroy Murdock looks himself in the face is amazing to me. His coworkers wrote about black people like barely domesticated animals. A man, a real man, would have challenged that, quit his job. The insult would have been to shameful to live with. To explain that his coworkers thought black people, people like himself, should die, must take the kind of seperation of self which would amaze a VA shrink.
What does he think? They don't mean me. They mean those low-class niggers in Anacostia.
No, they mean him, you and the rest of their house pets, Bob. That is who they mean. Despite knowing you, they can write that and laugh.
Speaking of treacherous black conservatives, well Bob, it's nice to know that you folks admit that your agenda is to betray black people. I mean, you people push vouchers, knowing that they will ultimately go to fund seg academies in the South, you people parrot lines about blacks being dumb and voting Democratic, you people support tax cuts which harm working class people, especially the black working class. You support the end of public housing, so that black people are at the mercy of slumlords.
We can talk about your treachery, your placing of self above all, all day.
But I want to also talk about words. Not words like nigger and porch monkey, but other words:
Social Justice
Education
Health Care
Fair Housing
Diverse Media
Affirmative Action
You know, Bob, the words that matter.
While words like nigger may unnerve you, upset you, I suspect that it really your conduct which bothers you. The fact that, close to the surface, you know my words are true, like a dagger into your conscience. You know the people you have supported have shown their real face, their hateful contempt for black life. Your pathetic challenges are flicked away like gnats. They don't have to respond to you, much less apologize, because they own you. All you do is serve as window dressing. Makes the soccer moms feel better.
But ask them for something real, like those ministers did on prison reform and see what happens. Nothing. Because when it comes down to it, they will not sacrifice one white vote for you. Not one.
Let's talk about Rev. Flake for a minute. Remember why he left Congress? Something about sexual harassment? Then he went back to his church and then sucked up to the most racist mayor in New York's modern history, Rudy Giuliani. How many times did you defend him, Mr. George. How many times?
Now, I don't have a problem dealing with the GOP, I've worked for them. But what I do have a problem with is this: not standing up. When the NYPD was murdering black people, where was Flake? Nowhere to be found. Was he meeting with the mayor? Leading his congregation in protest? No. He was out for him and his. As long as he got the money, he kept his mouth shut and built his empire. What he did not do is shepard his flock in the way of the black church. He stood for material gain, and this is a man you laud?
I don't have to tell people the GOP is evil. my 10 year old nephew knows that. And we don't have say something as simplistic as the GOP is racist. Howard Stern said that today on the radio. That's assumed. Last year, they had a mock election in my niece's class, and she mistakenly voted for Bush. When she got on the phone, she apologized, "I'm sorry Uncle Steve, I voted for Bush by accident". She was all of seven. Even then, she knew that wasn't the right thing, and given how busy my sister is, she isn't giving lectures on politics to her tweener kids.
The question you need to ask is this, Mr. George: why do you still associate with a party who embraces racists? Do you think you can change them?
I mean, that's right out of the battered spouse playbook. "If I love them enough, I can change them".
Well, no. Because they don't want to change. What was that? Project 21? What happened to that? And all the other iniatives of the GOP to gain black voters? Didn't people quit because the party wouldn't listen to them?
You know, Republicans are great at talking up capitalism, but better at keeping the door closed to blacks. I don't see any move to end housing discrimination or redlining, acts which wouldn't cost a dime to impliment. If you want more entrepreneurs, something which you can see in Harlem today, it might be nice if you could get loans and insurance without jumping through hoops. Not just a payoff to their allies and their "minority-owned" firms with the figurehead black "owner" and white backers.
You mentioned Michael Steele being different than Alan Keyes, and lo and behold, here's an article about Bob Erlich holding a fundraiser at an all-white country club.
Maryland’s Lt. Gov. Michael S. Steele back-pedaled Saturday on previous comments that downplayed Gov. Robert Ehrlich’s decision to hold a fundraiser in a restricted country club that allows blacks to enter but prohibits them from becoming members.
When Steele, who analysts suspect will run for a U.S. Senate seat against former NAACP president Kweisi Mfume in 2006, was first asked to comment on the location of the fundraiser, he referred to the flap as “all a bunch of nothing.”
During an interview with a Washington, D.C.-area radio station, Steele said his opinion has changed a bit. “I admit that my initial reaction to this was a little more flippant than it should have been. When I was posed with this question, my response was in the context of all the things I am fighting for and thinking about,” said Steele, stating that minority access to a better education is more important to the community than access to the restricted Elkridge Club in Baltimore.
See, Bob, that's why we don't trust or like Black Republicans. Because there is no position that will force them on their hind legs. It's outrageous that a major country club in Maryland doesn't accept blacks as is. It's more outrageous that the governor of the state would hold ANY event there. But you know what's worst of all? What really sucks? That Michael Steele, when confronted with this, acts like it's no big deal. Shit, if it was no big deal, they'd let blacks in as members. He's acting as if this is not a problem. He's the lieutenant governor and the racists in this club would not have him as a member. A man would at least note that minor fact. But not a black Republican.
Why did he backtrack? Because black citizens were outraged and whites were stunned. But he acted like he didn't even understand why it would be a problem. That is why black voters hold Black Republicans in contempt.
You think that inspires confidence in voters, black or white? How can you trust someone who won't stand up for himself. Black Republcians don't get that their craven behavior repels white voters as well. If he can't recognize an insult, how can he actually stand up for what he says he believes in?
Bob, you keep missing the point, sadly, broadly, and completely.
Even today, yet another Black Republican seems eager to sell his people down the river for little reason.
By Brian DeBose THE WASHINGTON TIMES September 30, 2005
A Bush Cabinet officer predicted this week that New Orleans likely will never again be a majority black city, and several black officials are outraged.
Alphonso R. Jackson, secretary of housing and urban development, during a visit with hurricane victims in Houston, said New Orleans would not reach its pre-Katrina population of "500,000 people for a long time," and "it's not going to be as black as it was for a long time, if ever again."
Rep. Danny K. Davis, Illinois Democrat and a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, quickly took issue.
"Anybody who can make that kind of projection with some degree of certainty or accuracy must have a crystal ball that I can't see or maybe they are more prophetic than any of us can imagine," he said.
Other members of the caucus said the comments by Mr. Jackson, who is black, could be misconstrued as a goal, particularly considering his position of responsibility in the administration.
"I would beg and hope that the secretary, if that is what he is saying, would re-evaluate the situation," said Elijah E. Cummings, Maryland Democrat.
Mr. Jackson, whose remarks were reported by the Houston Chronicle, said New Orleans might reach a population of 375,000 people sometime late next year with a black population of about 40 percent at the highest, down from 67 percent before Hurricane Katrina sent a storm surge that overwhelmed New Orleans levees and flooded 80 percent of the city.
I mean, why would he say that? And then act that if the people of New Orleans have no right to reclaim their homes?
He acts like land theft would be no big deal. Now, it's clear that at present, many do not plan to return, but this makes it seem as if they would not have the right to.
Once again, a black Republican seems to advocate policies which would harm black people.
When it isn't ignoring insults. it's actively seeking to harm black people, their own people.
So exactly why should any black person be a Republican if they aren't ambitious to the point of willing to harm other people?
Update: I think Bob has lost his fucking mind. Seriously.
This transcript is from today's Good Morning America
REP. JESSE JACKSON JR. (D-IL): He should be removed from the airwaves as soon as possible. Bill Bennett owes America an apology. He certainly owes African-Americans an apology.
SEN. PATRICK LEAHY (D-VT): I'm not even going to comment on something that disgusting. I'm really not, and I'm thinking of my black grandchild, and I'm just going to hold.
TAPPER: On Hannity & Colmes, Bennett said he was just making a hypothetical argument.
BENNETT (video clip): This is like Swift's "Modest Proposal," for people who remember their literature. You put things up in order to examine them. I put it up, examined it and said that is ridiculous and impossible, no matter who advances it.
TAPPER: But why immediately link blacks and crime? Bennett told me on the phone that race was on his mind because of recent stories in the media about New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.
BENNETT (audio clip): Stories about looting and shooting and gangs and roving gangs and so on. ... I'm sorry if people are hurt, I really am. But we can't say this is an area of American public policy that we're not allowed to talk about race and crime.
TAPPER: Robert George, a Republican editorial writer for the New York Post, agrees that Bennett's comments were not meant as racist but he worries they feed into stereotypes of Republicans as insensitive.
GEORGE: He should know better the impact of his words and sort of thinking these things through before he speaks.
TAPPER: In light of accusations that the Bush administration was not as sensitive to victims of Hurricane Katrina because many of them were black, one Republican official tells ABC News that Bennett's comments were probably as poorly timed as they were politically incorrect.
SAWYER: Well, Jake, I saw that you talked to him. What adjective did he use for what he said?
TAPPER: He didn't -- he said he was being provocative. He has a background in philosophy, and the idea was merely to put out a construct to discuss and shoot down. He did not seem particularly apologetic. He said he was sorry if anybody was hurt, but he saw this as a way that his enemies, his opponents were out to get him.
Are you fucking kidding me? Here we go again, explaining away racist words. Oh, he didn't mean to call for genocide, it just came out of his mouth. Bob, why didn't you just denounce this fucking statement for being racist, like everyone else. But no, you have to explain away the comment, minimize it.
What the fuck is wrong with you? Are you ill? Does Bennett have pictures of you blowing him? Why in God's name would you defend this? What possible motivation would you have to do something so fucking sad. Like I said, if you don't want to be called an Uncle Tom, stop acting like one.
MIAMI (AFP) - Welcome to Florida, but avoid arguments or thanks to a new law you run the risk of getting shot, according to an ad campaign launched by a gun-control group.
The campaign coincides with a state law that enters into effect authorizing gun owners to shoot anyone in a public area who they believe threaten their safety.
The law, supported by the National Rifle Association (NRA), was approved by the state legislature in April. Governor Jeb Bush described it as a "good, common sense, anti-crime issue" when he signed it into law. His is a brother of US President George W. Bush.
Supporters call it the "Stand Your Ground" law, while opponents call it the "Shoot First" law.
Under the previous law gun owners had first to attempt to withdraw and avoid a confrontation, and were authorized to shoot the threatening individual inside their home or property.
Critics say the current law allows gun owners to shoot if they engage in a simple argument. Supporters say that criminals will think twice when they try to attack someone in public.
Before the law was "on the side of the criminal," said Marion Hammer, head of Unified Sportsmen of Florida and a former NRA president. "The new law is on the side of the law-abiding victim," Hammer said.
Enter the Washington DC-based Brady Campaign to Control Gun Violence. The group will run ads in US and British newspapers warning tourists planning to visit Florida that a "nervous and frightened" Florida resident could shoot to kill. "Warning: Florida residents can use deadly force," the ad states.
"If you are involved in a traffic accident or near-miss, remain in your car and keep your hands in plain sight. If someone appears to be angry with you, maintain to the best of your ability a positive attitude, and do not shout or make threatening gestures," the ad reads.
The Brady Campaign promises to also run ads in French, German and Japanese newspapers if they can stretch their budget. They also plan to hand out fliers and post signs on the Florida highways with the warnings.
"It is reasonable to make people know that while they're visiting Florida they should take the right precautions to avoid potentially being victims of violence," Brady Campaign spokesman Peter Hamm told AFP.
Ooops. What? No Christmas at Walt Disney World?
Well, not unless you like dodging bullets from maniacs.
Couldn't just shoot someone and say they threatened you?
NASHVILLE, Tennessee (AP) -- A leading Jewish organization is condemning the Southern Baptist Convention for using a group of "messianic" Jews -- those who have converted to Christianity -- in its evangelism.
Anti-Defamation League director Abraham Foxman said the effort is offensive because the Southern Baptists are using Jews who have converted to Christianity "to go after other Jews."
"If people convert, that's their individual business," Foxman said. "But don't use them as a tool to convert other people."
At the heart of the ADL's complaint is a decision by the Southern Baptist Convention executive committee to ask its missionary boards to study the idea of recognizing the Southern Baptist Messianic Fellowship as "an evangelistic mission to Jewish people."
The fellowship is made up of about a dozen congregations in the United States. Its Web site says its mission is "to encourage Jewish believers that their ethnic and historical heritage need NOT be lost upon their commitment to Yeshua [Jesus]."
The idea to use the fellowship was proposed at the national convention in Nashville in June. The SBC executive committee recommended last week that its International Mission Board and North American Mission Board study the possibility.
Jim Sibley, coordinator of Jewish Ministries for the SBC's North American Mission Board, said the ADL was overreacting. The committee was simply forwarding the proposal, he said.
"Personally, I don't really see this (recommendation) going anywhere," Sibley said Thursday.
There's a history of conflict between Jews and Southern Baptists over this issue.
The Southern Baptist Convention passed a resolution in 1996 calling on its members to "direct our energies and resources toward the proclamation of the gospel to the Jewish people."
A 1999 prayer guide by the International Mission Board recommended conversion of Jews to Christianity during their High Holy Days, an effort labeled "offensive and disrespectful" by Jewish leaders.
.............
Jen
I'm glad to see that this issue is getting some press. These guys are little more than thinly-disguised "Jews for Jesus" freaks. When I was in college they went out of their way to disrupt High Holy Day services. If these guys had one-half of one testicle, they'd go set up their shop outside of Mosque #7 up in Harlem or a Fruits of Islam center. Seriously, I'd love to sell the rights to the footage of that. Then again, I have a grain of a feeling that they "converted" just so they could call their fellow congregationists "heebs" and "kikes" to their faces. Next project: They try to convert to being Black.
Happy Yom Kippur is what Stephen Colbert said to Jon Stewart on the Daily Show, as a stunned Stewart tried to explain how wildly inappropriate it was.
Nicholas Negroponte, chairman and founder of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Media Labs, has been outlining designs for a sub-$100 PC.
The laptop will be tough and foldable in different ways, with a hand crank for when there is no power supply.
Professor Negroponte came up with the idea for a cheap computer for all after visiting a Cambodian village.
His non-profit One Laptop Per Child group plans to have up to 15 million machines in production within a year.
A prototype of the machine should be ready in November at the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) in Tunisia.
Children in Brazil, China, Egypt, Thailand, and South Africa will be among the first to get the under-$100 (£57) computer, said Professor Negroponte at the Emerging Technologies conference at MIT.
The following year, Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney plans to start buying them for all 500,000 middle and high school pupils in the state.
Professor Negroponte predicts there could be 100 million to 150 million shipped every year by 2007.
Virtually indestructible
The laptops will be encased in rubber to make them more durable, and their AC adaptors will also act as carrying straps.
The Linux-based machines are expected to have a 500MHz processor, with flash memory instead of a hard drive which has more delicate moving parts.
Jen
If these things came with full immunizations and a personal water-purification tube, this would be perfect.
So, who writes the software?
It's not like you can use Office, can you?
I think the next governor of Massachusetts might well pass on this when parents and school districts start bitching about support issues. Someone has to develop software to run on the code, educational software, which now comes in Mac and Windows. They have to train people to support these machines.
Wi-fi. Interesting. If you can set it up, that is.
This isn't a bad idea, but it seems to be less thought out than you would think.
by JOEL BRINKLEY and THOM SHANKER Published: September 30, 2005
WASHINGTON, Sept. 29 - Senior American officials say they are confident that Iraq's draft constitution will be approved in the referendum to be held Oct. 15, even though Sunni Arabs in Iraq are mobilizing in large numbers to defeat it.
In testimony before Congress on Thursday, the senior American military commander in Iraq, Gen. George W. Casey Jr. of the Army, said the most recent analysis of intelligence from across the country supported the Bush administration's optimistic predictions that the referendum would pass.
But if the constitution is defeated, several officials said they feared that Iraq would descend into anarchy.
Approval "is critically important," a senior administration official said, "to maintain political momentum. That is the critical thing for holding this whole thing together."
Private organizations in Iraq, many working with government financing, say their own analyses, based on discussions with hundreds of Iraqis, polling data and other information, have also led many of them to believe that the constitution would be approved.
Their calculations are complicated, because by law the constitution will fail if it is rejected by two-thirds of the voters in any three of Iraq's 18 provinces, even if a majority of voters nationwide approve it.
In regions dominated by Sunni Arabs, opinion polls have shown sentiment running just about two to one against it. It is unclear, in those provinces, how get-out-the-vote campaigns by the opposing factions may tilt the balance, or how much the turnout on either side may be suppressed by the continuing violence.
But no matter how the vote goes, several officials said in interviews, the violence in Iraq is likely to increase significantly.
Tom Friedman suggested that if the Sunnis didn't play ball, we arm the Kurds and Shia.
He is an especially stupid man.
The Sunnis are only a minority in Iraq and Iran. They are the majority of Muslims in the world. You turn them into vicitms, you'll have Lebanon 2.
The fact is that there is no good solution for the US in Iraq. At the end of the day, Moqtada Sadr is looking better and better as Saddam's real successor. This is amazing. Just amazing.
Judy Miller's contortions to explain her snitching
Miller Agrees to Testify in CIA Leak Probe
- - - - - - - - - - - -
By JOHN SOLOMON Associated Press Writer
September 29,2005 | WASHINGTON -- After nearly three months in jail, New York Times reporter Judith Miller was released Thursday after agreeing to testify in the investigation into the disclosure of the identity of a covert CIA officer, two people familiar with the case said.
Miller left the federal detention center in Alexandria, Va., after reaching an agreement with Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald. Legal sources said she would appear before a grand jury investigation the case Friday morning. The sources spoke on condition of anonymity because of the secrecy of the grand jury proceedings.
Goddamn it, if I have to listen to Tony Yayo's Thoughts of a Predicate Felon one more time, I wil shank someone. All day in the cell block, all night. And it's not that, then it's fucking Pussycat Girls. Jesus. I can't take any more, get me Scooter Libby
Judy: Scooter release me from my agreement or I'll tell your wife I fucked you
Scooter: But, that didn't happen.
Judy: So I've fucked enough people that she'll believe me.
Scooter: Please
Judy: Sign the fucking paper. NOW!!!.
Scooter: Ok.
I think she had enough of the cornrows and tats set to make a point. Fitzgerald was tougher than her in the end and jail sucked, especially when you're 30 years older and far better educated than your cellmates. Machisma has it's limited
OP-ED PAGE TRENDS. Over at Duncan Black's place yesterday, historian Rick Perlstein, now at work on a book on Richard Nixon's southern strategy and the political dimensions of recent racial tensions, finally gave up circulating his post-Katrina op-ed to newspapers and put it to pasture on the blogs. That Rick, who'd never before failed to place an op-ed, couldn't seem to find this one a home was odd. It was timely, counterintuitive, sober, considered, and even important. It argued that reports of marauding bands of blacks were way overstated, that horror stories from the Superdome and tails of post-deluge drivebys were largely myth, as were similar fables that circulated after similar disasters in the past. That struck me as an important topic, the sort of thing we keep historians around for, but clearly the nation's op-ed page editors thought hysteria and reawakened racism were better for circulation.
Which brings us to today's Wall Street Journal atrocity. Penned by Charles Murray, he of The Bell Curve fame, it argues that what we're seeing post-Katrina isn't poverty but a once-again visible "underclass," a sort of shadow society of unsocialized black men with no appetite for work, no capacity to hold jobs, and no ability to be helped through conventional methods. They are, quite literally, savages, unable to function in the world the rest of us inhabit. They are, as he puts it, the "looters and the thugs," not to mention the "inert women doing nothing to help themselves or their children." And government attempts to craft helpful policy will fail because, after all, it doesn't matter if you give a gorilla a college loan, it's still a gorilla.
I've no idea where Murray got the idea that the New Orleans evacuees lacked jobs rather than cars and social skills rather than transportation -- from deep within his own prejudices, I'd guess. And where he got the concept that these men and women are somehow incapable of holding jobs and unwilling to send their children to school -- that's all similarly obscure. The absence of autos affects the social and the unsocialized alike; the folks you see on buses are often en route to jobs they hold, contra Murray, perfectly well.
But if his argument is flawed, its aim is clear. All those stories of urban anarchy were, to Murray, accurate, everyday manifestations of the Black people we'd hidden from sight. The normal explanation, that their assumed bad behavior was a reaction to extraordinary circumstance -- that was the wrong part. This had nothing to do with Katrina; it was part and parcel of an inferior race, an incorrigible culture.
The difference between he and Perlstein couldn't be starker. Where Perlstein set out to debunk the racialized hysteria, Murray embarked on a campaign to rationalize it. Where Perlstein brought historical insight to the issue, Murray simply asserted policy failures without offering a way forward. And where Perlstein found his op-ed universally rejected, Murray got published in one of the nation's largest papers. As has happened so often in the past, racial fable proved far more attractive than fact.
--Ezra Klein
You know, it's like a sewer opened up and all the racists are floating to the top like shit. I mean, this is just disgusting, and shows what a lack of minority managers in the news media leads to.
Murray doesn't want a way forward. He's a racist who wants blacks to disappear. I mean, I want to know what the hell the editors of the WSJ editorial page are thinking.
Murray knows nothing of black life, nothing about black people. Most of those people were low wage workers, not animals. Yet, this racist tripe ran on the pages of the nation's leading financial paper.
You know, if I was Bob George, I'd worry about these words. This isn't secret, or muttered in a chat room. You would get hammered for that in Free Republic. Even they don't tolerate racists like this.
I wonder how many Black Republicans will denounce these words? Or will they make yet more excuses for this.
DALLAS - Alex LeBlanc left Beaumont on Thursday to begin a 50-hour bus trip across East Texas. What he experienced, he said, was "like a horror movie."
He couldn't get off the bus to buy food. The drivers were exhausted. And he couldn't go to the bathroom.
"Just had to wait," he said. "I tried to drink as little as I could, but I'm a diabetic. I need a lot of fluids."
LeBlanc was one of about 3,000 evacuees who fled Hurricane Rita aboard a convoy of about 50 Beaumont Independent School District school buses. The drivers originally were scheduled to pull into Lufkin, but were prevented from stopping there. That pattern continued until they reached Canton, about 250 miles from Beaumont, at about daybreak Saturday.
In Lufkin, 81-year-old Charlotte Ranger of Beaumont was struck by a vehicle and killed Friday afternoon after exiting a bus. Lufkin police were unsure whether the bus was part of the convoy. Several bus drivers from the convoy on Tuesday were staying in Reunion Arena, one of the three main Dallas shelters now housing about 1,700 people from Jefferson County.
As they sat outside on folding chairs, having a smoke, they described seeing people on their front lawns glaring at them with shotguns in hand, and pickup trucks with nooses hanging in back (most of the bus passengers were black).The drivers said whenever they tried to stop to rest or let their passengers use the restroom, town officials had court orders waiting for them to get out of town, an assertion those town officials later denied.
Driver Toni Soularie, 49, said she nearly had a violent confrontation when she pulled into a rest area.
"This officer said he was going to shoot me if I didn't get back on the bus," she said. "At that point I was prepared to let him shoot me. I had this invalid on the bus who was already embarrassed because she urinated all over herself. And I was not going to let her embarrass herself again. We just got off.
"But the officer stayed right there with me - made sure we were going to get back on."
Tela Mange, spokeswoman for the state Department of Public Safety said she was unaware of anybody drawing guns.
"I have not heard about that," she said. "At one point several people got off. One refused to get back on, but we helped her get back on."
Drivers said they carried some food and water with them, but it was quickly exhausted, and for two days, they had almost no other way of getting provisions to their fellow evacuees. What help they did receive was meager.
"In Lufkin they actually gave us hot water," said Cori Williams, Soularie's son, who also is a driver for BISD. "And this is our home state. We shouldn't have to drive all over creation to find some place to sleep."
With nowhere to stay the night, desperate drivers were letting passengers (most of whom had no commercial driver's license) take a turn behind the wheel while they rested. Soularie said some were singing gospel music and praying over the radio to help each other stay awake. Eventually, BISD Transportation Director Clifton Guillory said, DPS drivers came on to offer some relief.
Guillory said he knew there were problems, but not to what extent.
"It was very hard to get communications out of East Texas," he said.
.....................
Soularie said that in Kilgore, they thought about stopping in an empty Wal-Mart parking lot, but again were turned away. The town, drivers said, was one of the roughest portions of their journey.
"When we tried to exit there, cars would actually back up on the ramps and force us to get back on the freeway," Cassandra Francis, a 46-year-old BISD driver, said.
Gregg County Judge Bill Stoudt said he didn't know much about the convoy, but echoed DPS's concerns about the need to press on.
"There were 10,000 people moving north at the same time," he said. "If they stopped, everybody might want to get off, and that would create even more delays."
By the time the vehicles got to Tyler, winds and rain were lashing them. The convoy arrived in Canton, the only place Mange said could take them in, about 6:30 a.m. Saturday. The buses themselves remain there and Soularie, Francis and Williams, as well as most of the other drivers who accompanied them on the trip, are stranded. They say they don't know when they're going back and haven't heard much news from home, other than the fact that Beaumont is a mess. When they do return, it'll probably be by a different route.
"I don't ever want to go back to some of those towns," Francis' 70-year-old father, Billy Bossette, said.
Lower Manhattanite responds to Mr. George's comments.
I'll have more to say later, but let me put it like this: if you don't want to be called a nigger, don't act like one. I'm a New Yorker, I say exactly what I mean.
Wow. Who knew it would get to this point?
A reading of my actual comment notes several times that I actually give George a bit of distance from a lot of his damaged Black brethren on the right. I also call attention to his seeming conflict with his place among his White brethren on the right as well. I did...I did use some pretty blunt and yeah, I'll say it...downright venomous language to describe his runnin' buddies.
Why?
Because these folks...these few, for the most part unquestioning, self-centered folks do damage far in excess of their number to African Americans by giving the wide, evil vein of bigotry in the GOP cover for its destructive policies against Black folks on the whole. I'm thinking beyond myself and of African Americans as a whole...the people Bush and his FEMA jockey Mike Brown left to die in fetid water and pestillence. The people who GOP anointed "morals" exemplar William Bennett oh-so-easily imagined having all their babies aborted as some draconian crime-lowering measure. The people who in virtually every election since reconstruction have seen racists in power champion, exult in and actively foster suppressing their votes while their ancestors built so much of this land via their uncompensated slave labor.
If I come off as harsh and hostile, well then allow me to quote from an old school joint by Public Enemy.
"Hostile? I got a right to be hostile! My people's bein' persecuted!"
His tortured and wan spinning for the GOP and by extension, these policies spurs a wellspring of white-hot anger in me and evidently the vast majority of Black folk as well when one considers their bitter response to these sparse colored chips in the right's powdery sugar cookie.
My comment on the two middle-aged noir-cons from D.C. stands. Trotting out a "fantasy" (and a fantasy is exactly what it is) about some multitude of Black conservatives swanning about D.C. is well...kind of nutty when one looks at teh facts. Is D.C. or is it not a staggeringly majority Black, Democratic city? It is almost legendary for that status. (And has seen it's voting power and representation diminshed for thaat very reason) Considering the repeated, and well-chronicled attempts for Black conservatives to marshall their feeble numbers and band together, the idea that these two men havdn't crossed paths still seems kind of strange.
And my calling George "kid" was based on his youthful on-air appearance--flatteringly, he scans as about fifteen years younger than his stated age. (Which is still a touch younger than mine)
I do compliment him on his Dorian Gray-ish presentation.
But I will continue to savage his race-damaging coziness with those who hate us and mean us literal harm. My tossing out fightin' words like "Boy", "Tom", "Lawn Jockey" and "Buck Dancin'" are meant to shock and stun--to be a sledgehammer between the eyes to get the attention of glaze-visioned deniers of his ilk and to set off warning klaxons for those of us who may sleep on the sneakiness of the selfishly seductive Black GOP message.
As to Floyd Flake, let us not go there with him...please? I lived in his district for much of my life. That pork he got from the GOP enriched virtually nothing but his little local fiefdom. His church's housing, his church's senior citizen center, his church's voucher-funded school. Parks, streets and the Addisleigh Park VA hospital in his district all went wanting while projects he benefited from drowned in largesse. He was a dirty politician even before his "sleeping GOP" got out. Financial impropriety and personal sleaziness sticks to him like a polyester choir robe in August.
And what is so terribly telling...what drives the point Steve and I made home all the more is Robert's sad equivocating. In his world, Black people loudly decrying injustice and its enablers are somehow equal to, if not worse than a racism-striated GOP that actively enacts impactfully negative policy that actually damages the lives of African Americans.
Mean Black words and opinion tops tangible, destructive, anti-Black GOP actions.
Ain't that a b*tch?
Believe it or not though, I don't dislike George. At least he apparently has moments where he looks to his left and right and occasionally senses the suit and flag-pin concealed evil standing about him. That's more than a Thomas Sowell, Ken Hamblin, Larry Elder and most certainly a Clarence Thomas ever think to do. And even within his rather pissant comeback-ing, I can see an actual sincerity there in him. Someone trying to figure it out. Whatever it may be.
I can respect that.
Oh. One last thang?
"However, none of the words uttered by these GOpers are laced with the overt historically demeaning and racist venom that seeps throughout Steve Gilliard's post. One response is that, "Black people can use these words; we can take them back, just like rappers have taken the N-to-the-I-to-the-Double-G-A slur." Well, on the latter one, there is much debate: Hip-hop has managed re-introduce into everyday language a hateful word that all but the most blatant racist refrained from ever using in public."
"Re-introduce into everyday language"?
Are you serious?
I'm reminded of a joke a member of a prominent Black Broadcasting family told me years ago.
He said, "Do you know what the word n*gger means? It's shorthand for Black person who just left the room""
...............
Gravatar One last thing on Floyd Flake and his willingness to compromise to enrich himself and his interests...
What makes his act al the more disgusting is that 40 years ago, another prominent pastor from New York who was also a congressman used his access to the levers of power to help downtrodden people in general...not his own collection plate-filling flock. This congressman rammed through HeadStart, college grants, food stamps, minimum wage increases, financed education and training for the deaf and funded vocational training.
Millions...millions of disenfranchised Americans were fed, schooled and found jobs thanks to this congressman's actions.
Adam Clayton Powell Jr.
Who while a flawed, overly gregarious man of huge, bacchanalian tendencies, actually looked out for the little guy.
Unlike the pocket-lining, opportunistic coward Flake.
Ok, Mr. George has decided to reply to my comments, which I mailed to him directly. After all, I don't talk behind people's back. If I'm man enough to say it, I'm man enough to let his reply go unedited on my site.
I shared the frustrations that I, as a black GOPer, felt over various Republican statements during the Katrina aftermath. That turned out to be the most widely-read post in the brief history of RAGGED THOTS and elicited over a 100 comments spread between that and a follow-up post that constituted an extended response to a number of comments (especially from the always-prolific Steven J. Kelso of Ohio).
Well, a few readers noted that I never fully answered the original question. The simple reason for that -- it is a complex query, mixing intellectual views, upbringing and temperament.
However, what is easier to answer is: Why don't I just pack it in and cross the aisle (metaphorically speaking) and join the Democrats (understanding that they won't exactly reflect my generally libertarian beliefs)?
The reason for that? Well, it is because it has been made only too clear what Democrats have to offer me -- or anyone who might share some of my rather idiosyncratic views. After listing the comments of Dennis Hastert, Barbara Bush and Rep. Richard Baker (R-La.) in the earlier entry and the obstacles that they presented to those interested in trying to reach out to just about any non-traditional Republican audience, I thought it appropriate to now turn the tables and see how the rank-and-file black Democrat feels about their GOP counterparts.
Consider then the testimony of Mr. Steve Gilliard in his response,
At the outset, let me apologize to Mr. Gilliard for misspelling his name in my original item. Considering I chastised him for doing the same with my friend Deroy Murdock, I should have been more careful.
That said, here is Steve's almost exhaustive descriptive catalogue for those black folks that dare line up under the Republican banner: "s-l-a-v-e", "slave", "pathetic clowns," "token...negro," "house negro." How many real, live, actual white racists feel so comfortable in their racism to use these words in public? Steve is obviously not so shy.
Note, too, the use of the diminutive familiar of my name, "Bob." That, too, has a history in the American drama of race. In Jim Crow, the white man didn't show any respect to the "negro," so he never had to call him by any name that would connote any equality.
And, forget, of course, the need to actually know anything about one's supposed inferior. Steve charges, "You never confront your racist party members, you never challenge their racist words and plans, and you wonder why most black people hold you in contempt?" Oh right, I never confront my party or critique it on race matters -- or anything else. It must have been someone else -- maybe that guy from Princeton -- who wrote this. And this. And this. And this . And, for that matter, this .
In fact, just looking at the comments from last week , and it can be seen that more than a few people read it in the spirit that it was meant -- a direct challenge to my fellow Republicans, reminding them of the impact of their words. Those words, though, were not explicitly racial. At worst, they betrayed a class blindness that has no place in politics. Does their class-ism betray an inner racism? I don't know. They certainly don't go so far as "nigger," which Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) used in a televised interview not too long ago. The one-time Klansman says that his use of the word doesn't mean that he still harbors racist thoughts. If we take him at his word, perhaps the same should be done with the GOP trio. Perhaps they should be given a pass.
I chose not to, because I thought that keeping these viewpoints hidden serves no purpose.
However, none of the words uttered by these GOpers are laced with the overt historically demeaning and racist venom that seeps throughout Steve Gilliard's post. One response is that, "Black people can use these words; we can take them back, just like rappers have taken the N-to-the-I-to-the-Double-G-A slur." Well, on the latter one, there is much debate: Hip-hop has managed re-introduce into everyday language a hateful word that all but the most blatant racist refrained from everr using in public.
Too early to say whether Steve will be successful in sparking some revival in massa-slave linguistics. Perhaps they will only be used in this most narrow of circumstances -- as rhetorical bullwhips to be used on the treacherous black conservatives who need to be made into examples. Responding to a commenter, Steve adds, "[Ohio Secretary of State] Ken Blackwell, [Maryland Lt. Gov.] Michael Steele and the rest of the Uncle Toms will wind up like Alan Keyes, despised by blacks and unelected by whites."
Wow. It takes a pretty drastic "they-all-look-alike" sensibility to lump Blackwell and Steele into the same basket as Alan Keyes. But there you have it.
Anyway, since this rhetorical whipping in the fields wasn't enough, Steve elevates a commenter, Lower Manhattanite to get in additional licks. LM introduces a high-minded critique of my televised "froggy, little visage," goes after us newbies who must be "racism and self-hate damaged Black folks" eager to replace "dinosaur Toms." To the Lower Manhattanite, I am "'Boy' George" (now, there's an original one) and my colleagues are a "buck-dancing band."
Lower Manhattanite, of course, demonstrates a certain tortured logic in this attack:
(How small is the Black Republican wave? Let Bobby say it himself: Two lifelong African American Republicans the same age in D.C. who've never met? As sparse as Black GOP'ers are in D.C. and these guys have never crossed paths? Case rested, baby.)
One could actually infer exactly the opposite -- there are actually so many black Republicans that it isn't completely out of the ordinary that we actually all haven't met one another -- have all you black Democrats met? Oh, and I never said that both men have lived in D.C. all their lives. Just that they both happen to be there now. Please pay attention.
Following Steve's lead, LM dubs me, "Bobby" and continues with the racial barrage: "shifty", "lawn jockeys" and concludes by referring to me as "the kid" (ah, calling a 40-year old man a "kid" -- Jim Crow white overseers couldn't have done any better).
Former Rep. Floyd Flake, a minister and president of an historically black college, is an "Uncle Tom." Why? Because he dared actually work with Republicans to bring resources to his district and his church -- oh, yeah, and believed that creating options to the disastrous public school status quo might actually be in the best interests of black people.
And so, the answer on why I'm still a Republican lingers, but Steve Gilliard and his friend help clarify why I'm not a Democrat: A party with members that seem to feel the need to brandish racist imagery as a disciplinary bullwhip, without even attempting to engage an opponent intellectually, has a great deal of problems. Indeed, Gilliard and Company are good representatives of a party that appears to do little to woo supporters beyond "Republicans are Evil/Racist" platitudes.
As for me, I'm Robert -- not "Bob", "Bobby", or some "poor kid." I am a black man living in America in the 21st century. At various times, I may be frustrated, reflective, angry, disappointed -- and more -- over my political choices and allies. However, if the alternative is the world view that Steve Gilliard and Lower Manhattanite offer, well, I'll stay over on this side of the fence for the time being, thank you very much.
(For an example of a black man who seems actually interested in opening give-and-take space on issues of party and identity, check the blog of one of the newer visitors to these parts, Alton Darwin. Welcome, Mr. Darwin.)
Seems that soldiers over in Iraq are still without either body armor, or if they've gone out and bought their own body armor, without reimbursement for the money they've spent.
Nearly a year after Congress demanded action, the Pentagon has still failed to figure out a way to reimburse soldiers for body armor and equipment they purchased to better protect themselves while serving in Iraq. ... Pentagon spokeswoman Air Force Lt. Col. Ellen Krenke said the department “is in the final stages of putting a reimbursement program together and it is expected to be operating soon.” But defense officials would not discuss the reason for the delay.
Krenke said the Pentagon’s first priority is to ensure that soldiers “have all they need to fight and win this nation’s wars.” ... Soldiers and their families have reported buying everything from higher-quality protective gear to armor for their Humvees, medical supplies and even global positioning devices.
“The bottom line is that Donald Rumsfeld and the Defense Department are failing soldiers again,” said Paul Rieckhoff, executive director of Operation Truth, an advocacy group for Iraq veterans.
“It just became an accepted part of the culture. If you were National Guard or Reserve, or NCOs, noncommissioned officers, you were going to spend a lot of money out of your pocket,” said Rieckhoff, who was a platoon leader with the 3rd Infantry Division and served in Iraq from the invasion in March 2003 to spring 2004.
On the other hand, if you're a huuuge contributor to the Bush Administration, like some companies that won't be named halliburton, you not only get paid, you don't even have to bid for contracts to get piles of taxpayer-supplied cash.
It's another sign that the civilians running the Pentagon know nothing about the wars they have been complicit in starting, or how to wage them. The dumbest second lieutenant or ensign knows that taking care of your troops is their NUMBER ONE priority. Pentagon civilians and others in charge of this administration's alleged "policy" apparatus never learned that little, incontrovertable fact. They were too busy reading the "One Minute Manager" and getting their mail-order MBAs while doing their part as party functionaries to learn that simple ground truth.
So many people have said "you don't have to be a Veteran to know how to fight a war". True. But looking at BS like this, it's certainly clear that any competant vet would not leave these troops over-exposed and not reimbursed.
September 29, 2005 -- John "Junior" Gotti was freed on $7 million bail yesterday — leaving the grim confines of the federal prison where he'd been locked up since 1999 for his luxurious digs on Long Island's Gold Coast.
The jubilant former mob boss greeted reporters from the deck of his Oyster Bay Cove mansion, where the son of the late John "Teflon Don" Gotti is under house arrest after a judge declared a mistrial in his sensational racketeering case.
"How are you, my friends?" Gotti, 41, called out, giving a thumbs-up sign.
Asked how it felt being home for the first time since 1999, Gotti said, "I feel great. It feels magnificent."
A sign saying, "Welcome Home Dad" and a 25-foot arch of bright-yellow balloons greeted Gotti upon his arrival at the estate, where his wife, Kim, and five kids have lived since 1999
Of course, they didn't report on the "Thank You Curtis Sliwa" sign.
If he hadn't been such a shitty, lying withness, Gotti would still be in jail. But he was, and Gotti gets a nice, big Italian meal tonight.
Maybe if Sliwa was a credible witness and not a fantasist, the jury might have believed him.
Democratic mayoral candidate Fernando Ferrer emerged from Flushing High School yesterday after speaking with members of the class of 2006, likely hoping that three days of unpleasant media attention were behind him.
But once again, there was a problem: The press was asking about a Giuliani-era rule, which bars candidates from visiting public schools within 60 days of an election.
That followed the flap over a church speech, the inaccurate statement on his Web site that he attended public school when he did not, and the fact that his name won't appear on the Working Families Party line, even though the party endorsed him.
Faced with these controversies, and being outspent and 14 points down according to one poll, Ferrer has repeatedly tried to turn the conversation back to the larger issues -- citing, for example, a "50 percent dropout rate" in the public schools.
"It's a really desperate attempt [by the Bloomberg campaign] to try to change the subject from the fact that we're standing in front of a school with an on-time graduation rate of barely 46 percent," Ferrer said yesterday.
The NY media has a habit of playing this game with minority candidates. They did it in 2002 with Carl McCall, filling up days of newspaper copy with how his daughter got a job, while ignoring the ramapnt corruption in Albany.
Lucky for Ferrer, this shit is so minor, and getting such little play, that it doesn't matter. These are the kinds of issues white voters hide behind to deny minority candidates votes.
But because the demographics place the election in the hands of black voters, this cat and mouse game won't mean nearly as much.
Ferrer is smart to make the high schools the issues. Because Bloomberg doesn't talk about them. All his changes have affected the lower grades, not the high schools, which seem to be in real crisis.
The papers say they understand that black voters are the key, but they aren't really responsing to it, you know, by doing detailed polling of black voters and the like and asking one simple question: would you lie to a white pollster to hide your true intentions? Because that's the most important number.
She said she would watch football with me if I went to Sephora and Lush, and expressed an opinion on what she bought.
Well, of course I have opinions, I do own a penis and do like women. But I can't dress my niece, how am I going to dress a grown woman? Much less advise her on makeup?
But being game, I said "Ok, meet me in front of Sephora on 34th Street at 1:30 on Sunday. The Giants come on at 8"
She e-mailed me saying "Oh it was a joke, I'd never make you do that."
Hell, she's already made me do that, but without opinions. She even took my niece to Sephora. My eight year niece. Who loved the place. And who I wouldn't buy anything for because my sister would have killed me.
But it amused me to call her bluff.
So, tonight, Josh Marshall had gotten tickets to a screening of Serenity, the movie version of the shortlived Fox series Firefox Firefly. My only question what do Fox execs regret more, cancelling Family Guy, or this show?
It's a good, exciting movie, more fantasy than sci-fi.
I won't spoil it, so all I'll say is that we had a good time and shared nachos. Which with a soda cost $10.25.
And let me thank Josh for the tickets.
On the way out, Jen was bitching about not having cable. In that way, she's like my mom, frugal. She won't pony up for Time Warner and is hoping RCN will cover her building.
I suggested that she, of course, get a Direct TV Dish. Which she could do, would be cheaper than cable, and get pretty good reception. She has a 27" Sony Wega. I have a 24".
"And, no, I'm not going to get a Dish TV and Sunday ticket, so you can sit on your ass all day and I make pea soup, that is the plan, isn't it."
"Well," I said "something like that." I mean, I wouldn't make her fix pea soup, she lives near enough restaurants for me to bring food. But yeah, that was the idea.
Not really, but it made us laugh.
I like stopping in the bar and yelling for a couple of hours. I don't think Jen would appreciate that.
Some owners of Apple Computer's new "impossibly small" iPod Nano are starting to wonder if the device is also impossibly delicate.
The most widespread complaint about the otherwise highly praised device seems to be that the color display screen gets scratched extremely easily.
Nano owner Brian Cason posted one of 250-some threads in response to a recent post on Apple's discussion board about screen scratching.
"I don't really care if the case on my Nano gets scratched but my screen has scratched up so badly that all the images are starting to become distorted," Cason wrote, echoing the sentiment of many others in the discussion. "I have only carried it in my small pocket in my shorts and nothing is in there to scratch it. I still can't figure how the screen looks like it has been rubbed with sandpaper when the entire time it has been safe in my pocket (with absolutely no items)."
But this week, several users also started complaining about screens cracking, or failing, inexplicably. Nano owner Matthew Peterson set up the site flawedmusicplayer.com (formerly ipodnanoflaw.com) to tell the story about how his Nano screen shattered after just four days, to see if others have had the same problem, and to suggest that Apple recall the Nano and use a stronger screen product.
"It is way too fragile. Apple markets it in a pocket. Hell, Steve Jobs himself pulls it out of his when he announces it," wrote Peterson, who himself was smitten with the Nano upon its release. "It was in my pocket as I was walking and I sat down. No, I didn't sit on it."
An Apple official was not immediately available for comment on the alleged problems with Nano screens
Of course, Peterson backed down and closed the site, but here's the deal: users are not Beta testers. I cannot believe, yet again, Apple sent out a product to the market place with an obvious flaw. I cannot believe no one caught this in testing.
Looking cool is not a substitute for working well. And if it was just one product, ok. But the Powerbook fires, the Ipod battery issues, come on. how many times do we have to have this discussion? All people want is their product to work without a hassle. Not another saga with a messed up product. Even if the numbers are small, they aren't that small at $250.
But of course, with their compliant cult fan base, any criticism is bashing. After all, Apple is immune to the laws of customer satisfaction and selling working products. Maybe if their fans acted like consumers, they could get cool products which worked out of the box for a few months.
After a summer of furious and steadily rising criticism, Gov. George E. Pataki announced today that he was evicting the proposed International Freedom Center museum from its place next to the World Trade Center memorial site. With that, the center declared itself to be out of business.
"The I.F.C. cannot be located on the memorial quadrant," Mr. Pataki said in a statement issued shortly before 5 p.m. That quadrant, at the southwest corner of the trade center site, contains the footprints of the twin towers. It is regarded by many as sacred ground, too hallowed for a museum dealing with 9/11 in the context of greater geopolitics and social history.
"There remains too much opposition, too much controversy over the programming of the I.F.C.," the governor said, "and we must move forward with our first priority, the creation of an inspiring memorial." Mr. Pataki said he had instructed the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation to "work with the I.F.C. to explore other locations."
But 42 minutes later, the center said in its own statement that there was no other location to explore, since the memorial quadrant was "the site for which the I.F.C. was created, at the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation's request, and as an integral part of Daniel Libeskind's master site plan."
"We do not believe there is a viable alternative place for the I.F.C. at the World Trade Center site," the center's executives, Tom A. Bernstein, Peter W. Kunhardt and Richard J. Tofel, said in the statement. "We consider our work, therefore, to have been brought to an end." The Freedom Center was designated for the site in June 2004.
The surprising tumble of events raises new questions around the redevelopment of ground zero: What will go into the cultural building, designed by the firm Snohetta, on the memorial quadrant? (The Drawing Center, its other designated tenant, is already looking for other space.) Will the cultural building be constructed at all? How will that affect plans for an underground 9/11 museum?
Why did they want a museum there anyway?
This is just another indication of the mangling of the WTC development and another case where Mike Bloomberg simply has nothing to say. He should be pissed at this crap. But remains silent.
The fisaco of development here is sad, but is because of weak leadership at both City Hall and Albany.
By Glenn Kessler Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, September 29, 2005; A16
ISTANBUL, Sept. 28 -- A group of Turkish women's rights activists confronted Undersecretary of State Karen Hughes on Wednesday with emotional and heated complaints about the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, turning a session designed to highlight the empowering of women into a raw display of the anger at U.S. policy in the region.
"This war is really, really bringing your positive efforts to the level of zero," said Hidayet Sefkatli Tuksal, an activist with the Capital City Women's Forum. She said it was difficult to talk about cooperation between women in the United States and Turkey as long as Iraq was under occupation.
.............
In this case, the U.S. Embassy asked an umbrella group known as Ka-Der, which supports women running for office, to assemble the guest list. None of the activists currently receives U.S. funds or had any apparent desire to mince words. Six of the eight women who spoke at the session, held in Ankara, Turkey's capital, focused on the Iraq war.
"War makes the rights of women completely erased, and poverty comes after war -- and women pay the price," said Fatma Nevin Vargun, a Kurdish women's rights activist. Vargun denounced the arrest of Cindy Sheehan, the mother of an American soldier killed in Iraq, in front of the White House this week.
Hughes, who became increasingly subdued during the session, defended the decision to invade Iraq as a difficult and wrenching moment for Bush, but necessary to protect the United States.
"You're concerned about war, and no one likes war," Hughes said. But "to preserve the peace, sometimes my country believes war is necessary," she said. She also asserted that women are faring much better in Iraq than they had under the rule of deposed president Saddam Hussein.
"War is not necessary for peace," shot back Feray Salman, a human rights activist. She said countries should not try to impose democracy through war, adding that "we can never, ever export democracy and freedom from one country to another."
Tuksal said she was "feeling myself wounded, feeling myself insulted here" by Hughes's response. "In every photograph that comes from Iraq, there is that look of fear in the eyes of women and children. . . . This needs to be resolved as soon as possible."
What? Do they think these women are idiots?
This was the only audience which didn't have links to the US and well, they gave her what she deserved.
Wow, no wonder they're afraid of Cindy Sheehan. Even I could have told you a Turkish audience would have reacted this way.
America is not the greatest place on earth to every human, and Hughes' offesnively simplistic answer would have insulted high school students, much less adults.
September 28, 2005 will be seen as the day, Black Wednesday, the first day of the death of the conservative movement.
Tom DeLay's fall from grace is no small thing. In some ways, it's more important than Karl Rove facing trial. DeLay ran a network of influence peddling which ran from K Street to the Texas Lege. To get him under oath, and he's shitting his pants now, could mean the end of GOP rule. Naked corruption is a bad thing in American politics, especially when it reaches into the White House. And this does.
People may want to pretend that DeLay is a victim here, but the thing about courtrooms and jails, they make people squeal like pigs. Does anyone think DeLay will go to jail alone?
The problem is when Earle gets the small fry, the messengers and secretaries who will confirm the details. the corporate execs who will do the same. A "great man" like DeLay doesn't notice them, but Earle does.
But this is just the latest disaster to befall the GOP.
It's a culture of corruption which spreads from Baghdad to Washington to Texas. It's cronyism and incompetence for all to see. It's cowardice on display.
Take a hard look at George Bush. He looks more beaten and hollow with each appearance. That swagger is replaced by a nervous smirk. He fumbles his words with hesitancy. Whether he's drinking or not, he's under a lot of visible stress. He's failing and he knows it. It's the past come back with a vengence.
And now, Bush is facing the loss of the Hammer, just not for now, but permenantly. Why? Because the trial won't happen until next year, and by then, Jack Abramhoff may be facing charges a lot more serious than bribery. Seems they found some bodies attached to a scandal he was involved in. DeLay would need a serious miracle to recover from this and a serious race in Texas 22.
What I don't think people see is this: once you start having scandal after scandal, you start to bleed political power. DeLay's indictment and Frist's SEC problems (the kind you NEVER want) mean that an independent Katrina commision will be formed. Also, Social Security theft is now dead. Bush lost his main Congressional allies, after all Hastert does nothing but say stupid things on camera. And Roy Blunt has his own ethical problems.
People have been jumping on the Dems for being slow to act, except they haven't. They've just picked their shots. And they can pick a lot more with First and DeLay jumping through legal hoops. The Congressional GOP is basically leaderless. Just wait until Blunt stands on his hind legs and makes sure that DeLay's vacation is permanent, which he will, if he has the smarts of a Missuori mule. The GOP Civil War is coming. It's taken a few months, but the GOP, in two weeks, have been placed on the defensive.
And the best part is that it doesn't matter if DeLay is convicted. By the time that all plays out, his seat will be in danger.
Chancellor Klein has given himself superb grades for his package of school "reforms." Shock and awe meets autumn high jinks!
Teachers and principals share an almost universal outrage at the mean-spiritedness and climate of loathing that Klein and his wrecking crew have visited from top down upon the school system. To him, the dignity of professional educators is a collective bargaining perk that he begrudges. Educational researchers and historians have nearly to an individual protested the deceit and ignorance of his once welcomed reforms.
Klein insists that it is managerial prerogative to lock out educators from their own profession. It is a profession that he is not embarrassed not to share as he commands it. He would rather break chops than break bread with educators who must now look down to see their bosses above them. Their counsel is neither sought nor tolerated. They are given no knowledge of what they must do until they are condemned for not doing it. Virtually every talented veteran teacher and principal alike, eligible to retire, is bailing out with a deep cleansing breath as soon as possible. They are united in suffering a horrid spiritual fatigue.
Klein's work is all about sound bites and sound stage. It is about performance art, not the art of performance. All his appeals to the public trust are plays on words: accountability, empowerment, standards, professional development, standards, parental engagement.
This is not the result of a turf war between management and "special interests" like children and unions. In the past, labor ( such as teachers with 200 college credits) and management could be adversaries without being antagonists, From conflict came wholesome collusion. The dynamic tension was healthy. All that has been replaced by an absolutism and repression that practically every school employee, including principals, will admit to off the record.
When Klein came on board, teachers, administrators and parents were optimistic. It hardly mattered that the band of attorneys setting educational policy had not themselves ever been imbedded in the classroom. We all shared the thrilling vision of a rehabilitated Department of Education. Change was desperately overdue. The old order had to be disarticulated.
But no sooner had Klein taken over and his policies taken off they should have been taken away.
His promised model of answerable corporate efficiency delivered nothing more in the way of renaissance than a retrograde hostile takeover. Under previous chancellors, scandal took cat- naps. Under Klein, scandal is an insomniac. But it is not a scandal that can be indicted. The racketeering is in the attitude.
Klein isn't driven by sentimental hangups about education being anything more than another numbers operation, like managing a collection agency or ambulance chasing. His dollar divas have so risen to the bottom-line that they have found a way to streamline management by bloating it more. Hundreds of new supervisors, and a dozen new job titles, have been pulled out of a six-figured hat. They were hired to count paper clips so that principals could be freed to push papers. No-bid contracts, costing but hardly worth many dozens of millions, have been awarded to foreign staff developers whose programs have been discredited by experts and experience. Lies told loud, incessantly, and boldly can echo like truth. It is not surprising that Klein's self-congratulation has the ring of veracity.
He claims to have "replaced the politically controlled...system with a streamlined regional structure." Actually he has destroyed the final vestiges of meritocracy and returned the schools to the pre-civil service era of raw patronage. Supervisors are appointed with no competition and no oversight. Klein's "regional offices" are incommunicado with the community. There is no phone service. All business is transacted by e-mail. All the historical lines of communication have been shut down. There is mass and pervasive alienation among all constituencies: administrators, teachers, parents, and others .The majority of principals in the middle-schools of the best-performing district in the city recently retired en masse in declared disgust.
Klein commends himself for having restructured "special education." In fact he has gutted it. He has abolished all "educational evaluators" , who delivered vital testing and placement services. He then released children with special needs into a population where they will be deprived of support..He has provoked litigation. His mandated curriculum, uniform and delivered lockstep with no flexibility for learning needs or teaching styles, has been condemned from all quarters except his cabinet. By following it religiously, schools are covering more butt than curriculum.
Klein touts his dissolution of "large, unproductive schools." All the evidence shows is that he has thereby created several smaller unproductive schools. His proud achievements on issues of "school choice", leadership training, professional development, and summer school, are considered bogus by most educators.
Klein's signature tune is the standardized test. Here too most experts are skeptical of their soundness in both conception and interpretation. These tests may have been cooked up by publishers awarded no-bid contracts to devise exams that lend themselves to favorable statistical spin-doctoring.
The chancellor celebrates the inroads he has made in school safety. Many serious incidents are unreported by victims who fear administrative reprisal for calling attention to endemic problems. It is common for assaults to be demoted into the category of "harassment." There are more safety agents at their duty stations in our schools than soldiers in many nations.
Special effects are the new mark of the educational bureaucracy. They have long been widespread in the movie and embalming industries. Cars can jump across canyons. Corpses can emerge from wood chippers with facial expressions suggestive of lottery winners. And thanks to the special effects of language, the public school system can rise from the dead and the public will think Klein is a reformer. It's all perception. He can dive into an empty pool and make a splash. Perception takes on a life all its own. Tragically for our children, Klein's defining moments will never add up to a finest hour.
Addressing a caller's suggestion that the "lost revenue from the people who have been aborted in the last 30 years" would be enough to preserve Social Security's solvency, radio host and former Reagan administration Secretary of Education Bill Bennett dismissed such "far-reaching, extensive extrapolations" by declaring that if "you wanted to reduce crime ... if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down." Bennett conceded that aborting all African-American babies "would be an impossible, ridiculous, and morally reprehensible thing to do," then added again, "but the crime rate would go down."
Bennett's remark was apparently inspired by the claim that legalized abortion has reduced crime rates, which was posited in the book Freakonomics (William Morrow, May 2005) by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner. But Levitt and Dubner argued that aborted fetuses would have been more likely to grow up poor and in single-parent or teenage-parent households and therefore more likely to commit crimes; they did not put forth Bennett's race-based argument.
From the September 28 broadcast of Salem Radio Network's Bill Bennett's Morning in America:
CALLER: I noticed the national media, you know, they talk a lot about the loss of revenue, or the inability of the government to fund Social Security, and I was curious, and I've read articles in recent months here, that the abortions that have happened since Roe v. Wade, the lost revenue from the people who have been aborted in the last 30-something years, could fund Social Security as we know it today. And the media just doesn't -- never touches this at all.
BENNETT: Assuming they're all productive citizens?
CALLER: Assuming that they are. Even if only a portion of them were, it would be an enormous amount of revenue.
BENNETT: Maybe, maybe, but we don't know what the costs would be, too. I think as -- abortion disproportionately occur among single women? No.
CALLER: I don't know the exact statistics, but quite a bit are, yeah.
BENNETT: All right, well, I mean, I just don't know. I would not argue for the pro-life position based on this, because you don't know. I mean, it cuts both -- you know, one of the arguments in this book Freakonomics that they make is that the declining crime rate, you know, they deal with this hypothesis, that one of the reasons crime is down is that abortion is up. Well --
CALLER: Well, I don't think that statistic is accurate.
BENNETT: Well, I don't think it is either, I don't think it is either, because first of all, there is just too much that you don't know. But I do know that it's true that if you wanted to reduce crime, you could -- if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down. That would be an impossible, ridiculous, and morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down. So these far-out, these far-reaching, extensive extrapolations are, I think, tricky.
Bill Bennett's Morning in America airs on approximately 115 radio stations with an estimated weekly audience of 1.25 million
See, Bill, even thinking such a racist thought makes you a stone racist.
I won't even bother to point out all the racist assumptions here
Tom DeLay stepped down as House majority leader Wednesday after a Texas grand jury charged him with conspiracy in a campaign finance scheme.
DeLay, who has been under investigation for a year and was indicted along with two political associates, released a statement saying he would "temporarily step aside."
The combative DeLay, in charge of fighting for the Republican agenda in the House of Representatives, was charged in connection with a Texas political action committee.
The longstanding investigation involves corporate contributions funnelled through the Republican National Committee and back to the state, illegal under campaign finance laws.
John Colyandro, former executive director of the Texas committee, and Jim Ellis, who heads DeLay's national political committee, were also charged.
DeLay, 58, who will keep his seat representing suburbs southwest of Houston, has long denied committing any crime.
He maintains the investigation, led by Democratic district attorney Ronnie Earle, is a political witch hunt
I agree with Noel Weyrich, fuck that dead nigger bitch
You know, there are some white hipsters, young, snarky, who think they can be "contrarians" and say what they want. I don't think that's the case. Especially when it comes to race, a subject they don't understand. They think if they listen to rap and have some blues, and a Bob Marley poster, everything is cool.
A few days after very minor local stories about the Figueroa case, Cranium (real name: Richard Blair) wrote a blistering assault on the disparity between the coverage of a missing young white women and a missing young woman of color. His piece became a cause celebre in the blogosphere and led to massive publicity about the case, both locally and in the national media. On Aug. 20, police found Figueroa's body in a remote area of Chester, Pa., and charged her ex-boyfriend Stephen Poaches, with the murder.
The story didn't end the way that her friends and family had hoped, but the grim discovery and the arrest of Poaches did bring some closure. And the work of Cranium and the rest of the blogosphere in raising the profile of the case was widely praised -- until "contrarian" Weyrich stepped up to the plate. His take?
But you don't have to look very far to see that the Figueroa case proves nothing about racial bias in cable crime coverage. What it does prove is that bloggers are a gang of dimwits happy to taunt a big dopey dog called cable news. And this time the dimwits found the dopey dog's tickle spot.
You can read it yourself, but to sum it up: Weyrich thinks there's no racism in cable news since there must be lots of missing white women who don't have a compelling story line also don't get covered. But bloggers don't need to check out their facts like the mainstream media, and so the real problem is guilty TV producers who allowed themselves to be browbeaten into covering Figueroa by ignorant bloggers. Here's his money graph, comparing this case to the murder of Laci Peterson:
Laci's story was Hollywood. LaToyia's story—unmarried, scratching out a living, knocked up by some lowlife probationer—isn't. Push the hot button of race, however, and it's very easy to make an oversimplified case that the media puts a higher value on missing white women. Essence magazine ran a story listing eight black women whose sudden disappearances failed to create Aruba-style media circuses. But I suspect there are a good number of disappeared white women who haven't had their relatives interviewed by Greta Van Susteren either, since the FBI currently has files on 29,000 missing people of all races who have disappeared under suspicious circumstances, and homicide is a leading cause of death among pregnant women. Media coverage of the missing and murdered isn't about fairness or responsible news standards—it's about myths and fables, the perfect husband with a secret, the dark side of an island paradise, the evil that lurks within. To quote that Don King movie, “It's entertainment, baby.”
Actually, when you read the whole piece, you get the sense that the main reason Weyrich wrote it was because of the pleasure he takes from using the phase "Dick Brain" (His translation of "Richard Cranium," although Cranium himself notes it should be "Dick Head") -- a phase that he manages to use some eight times with immense self glee. Our son would have found it funny...last year. He's in 5th grade now.
Also..."I suspect there are a number of missing white women..." I thought it was bloggers who are too lazy to check things out, Noel.
But as far as his "substantive" arguments go, two things strike us as very, very wrong.
First, he claimed that all the attention "didn't help solve LaToyia's murder. But it felt good to the bloggers because the blogosphere is a great big cyberspace circle-jerk."
Well, within a couple of days after the blogosphere cranked up, police dramatically stepped up their probe, bringing in homicide detectives and searching for her with helicopters and cadaver dogs. They searched Poaches' Philadelphia home, his Ford Tempo, and the house of the mother of his first child. Police also visited several oil yards of his employer, F.C Haab Oil Co. More importantly, a reward offered by the Citizens Crime Commission soared to $100,000 because of the publicity -- and it was that reward that prompted a tipster -- a friend of alleged killer Poaches -- to call the cops and led to the sting operation in Chester that solved the case. Would any of this happened without blogger action? We don't think so.
Secondly, and arguably worse, is that in trying to dismiss the racial aspects of the case, Weyrich strikes us as...well, a tad racist. We were especially troubled by his portrayal of Figueroa as "unmarried, scratching out a living, knocked up by some lowlife probationer." That broad-brushed, dismissive spin is technically true.
You can use this form to ask the editors of Philadephia Magazine why they think black life is cheap.
Also, if you live in the Philly area, you might want to call your local black radio station and have them ask the same thing.
I don't find it a tad anything. I'll say it outright. Noel Weyrich is a racist who thinks black life is cheap. He may not think he's a racist, but few people do.
He would have never described a white victim in such a way, never in his life. He can cheapen Figeroa's life precisely because he attaches no value to it. She's just another dead nigger. The fact that she had a family who loved her, who cared about her is irrelevant. He just has to get in some digs on bloggers.
Only problem for him is that his bosses will probably have to answer for his racist rant. Because, while he may not like blogs much, they do generate stories, and a racist column is a great story.
Black people don't begrudge the Holloway family for caring that they find Natalee. So why should Weyrich begrudge bloggers for caring that there was a missing black woman who got no attention. Unless, of course, you think black life is cheap.
By DIANE CARDWELL and PATRICK D. HEALY Published: September 28, 2005
A supporter of Fernando Ferrer accused one of Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg's allies of using "coded, fear-mongering language" by linking Mr. Ferrer to former Mayor David N. Dinkins, raising a racial element in the mayoral race as the two candidates battle for the support of black voters.
Responding to a comment in The New York Times on Tuesday by a Staten Island congressman, Vito Fossella, that a Ferrer victory would mean going "right back to the antagonistic years under David Dinkins," Representatives Jerrold L. Nadler of Manhattan and Gregory W. Meeks of Queens released statements accusing him of using Mr. Dinkins, the city's only black mayor, to pit voters against one another.
"The Bloomberg campaign and Representative Fossella ought to know better than to inject this kind of coded, fear-mongering language into what ought to be a thoughtful debate about our city's future," Mr. Meeks said.
"For the Republicans to fall back on tired, divisive scare-mongering the way Representative Fossella did is to show that they will do anything, including sowing seeds of divisiveness, in order to retain control of City Hall."
Mr. Meeks, who added in an interview that Mr. Fossella's comments seemed aimed at dividing the city along ethnic lines. "There's always this coded language when you talk about David Dinkins like there's a dark cloud," he said. "First of all, it's not fair," he added, "and I don't think we should go there."
As the mayoral campaign has heated up in recent days with a flurry of charges and countercharges, the two campaigns have been careful to use surrogates to make their more explosive accusations. That way, the campaigns can try to immunize themselves from charges of dirty campaigning.
And in suggesting that Mr. Fossella was using coded comments in linking Mr. Ferrer to Mr. Dinkins, Mr. Ferrer's surrogates could have a deeper goal in mind: stirring up black anger and tainting Mr. Bloomberg.
In his prepared statement, Mr. Nadler echoed Mr. Meeks's sentiments, saying of Mr. Fossella, "It troubles me that he sees our city in such a divided, us-against-them way," and, "his attempt to divide New Yorkers from one another by smearing the legacy of David Dinkins good work is one step too far."
The problem which is fast appearing for Bloomberg is that the Dems are backing Ferrer fully. He doesn't have enough allies to blunt charges like this. For Jerry Nadler to jump in like this means that this is being coordinated by a higher power. This was a well-timed attack, the kind the Dems haven't waged in years. Ferrer is getting help Green never did. For thing, Ferrer is getting help from the DNC, he's met with Dean for a second time in the last three weeks.
In the last poll, Bloomberg has 50 percent of the black vote, that number is going down. The question is how far. Abd like I've been saying, the Bradley effect is in play here.
But Fossella just said what many white people are thinking. The fact that he got hammered for it means the Dems are working off a different playbook.
This is fast coming down to debates and the UFT. But I think Bloomberg's internals are showing that he needs to lock down the black vote and isn't doing it. Because he's acting like it. And so are the Dems.
By RAYMOND HERNANDEZ Published: September 28, 2005
WASHINGTON, Sept. 27 - Michael D. Brown, who stepped down as director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency after the government's much-criticized response to Hurricane Katrina, told a Congressional committee on Tuesday that he had warned the White House of impending disaster several days before the storm struck.
Asked when the White House became aware that a "disaster was looming" in the Gulf Coast region, Mr. Brown said he had warned Andrew H. Card Jr., President Bush's chief of staff, at least three days before the hurricane hit New Orleans on Aug. 28.
"They were aware of that by Thursday or Friday because Andy Card and I were communicating at that point," Mr. Brown told a special House committee investigating the government's response. "In fact, I remember saying to Andy at one point that this is going to be a bad one. They were focused about it. They knew it."
In his testimony, Mr. Brown was careful not to blame President Bush or the White House for the government's handling of the situation. But his comments raised questions about whether the White House responded aggressively enough in light of the warnings Mr. Brown said he offered.
Brown: Blame New Orleans and Louisiana
Brown: Blame Chertoff
Brown: I did my job
The whole hearing reminded me of a failed general trying to explain why he lost a battle.
"But, but, it's not my fault we lost two Ranger battalions and I refused to move on Rome."
By STEVEN R. WEISMAN Published: September 28, 2005
JIDDA, Saudi Arabia, Sept. 27 - The audience - 500 women covered in black at a Saudi university - seemed an ideal place for Karen P. Hughes, a senior Bush administration official charged with spreading the American message in the Muslim world, to make her pitch.
Karen P. Hughes, the under secretary of state for public diplomacy, was hired to publicize American ideals in the Muslim world.
But the response on Tuesday was not what she and her aides expected. When Ms. Hughes expressed the hope here that Saudi women would be able to drive and "fully participate in society" much as they do in her country, many challenged her.
"The general image of the Arab woman is that she isn't happy," one audience member said. "Well, we're all pretty happy." The room, full of students, faculty members and some professionals, resounded with applause.
The administration's efforts to publicize American ideals in the Muslim world have often run into such resistance. For that reason, Ms. Hughes, who is considered one of the administration's most scripted and careful members, was hired specifically for the task.
Many in this region say they resent the American assumption that, given the chance, everyone would live like Americans.
The group of women, picked by the university, represented the privileged elite of this Red Sea coastal city, known as one of the more liberal areas in the country. And while they were certainly friendly toward Ms. Hughes, half a dozen who spoke up took issue with what she said.
Ms. Hughes, the under secretary of state for public diplomacy, is on her first trip to the Middle East. She seemed clearly taken aback as the women told her that just because they were not allowed to vote or drive that did not mean they were treated unfairly or imprisoned in their own homes.
"We're not in any way barred from talking to the other sex," said Dr. Nada Jambi, a public health professor. "It's not an absolute wall."
By GREG BLUESTEIN, Associated Press Writer 22 minutes ago
ATLANTA - Ashley Smith, the woman who says she persuaded suspected courthouse gunman Brian Nichols to release her by talking about her faith, discloses in a new book that she gave him methamphetamine during the hostage ordeal.
Smith did not share that detail with authorities at the time. But investigators said she came clean about the drugs when they interviewed her months later. They said they have no plans to charge her with drug possession.
In her book, "Unlikely Angel," released Tuesday, Smith says Nichols had her bound on her bed with masking tape and an extension cord. She says he asked for marijuana, but she did not have any, and she dug into her illegal stash of crystal meth instead.
Smith, a 27-year-old widowed mother who gained widespread praise for her level-headedness, says the seven-hour hostage ordeal in March led to the realization that she was a drug addict, and she says she has not used drugs since the night before she was taken captive.
...................
"It's hard for people to understand the miracle of the story," she told the newspaper. "This was totally a God thing, to me in my life. This was God getting my attention, going, `I'm going to give you one more chance.'" ....................
Smith says in her book that as the night wore on — after Nichols had snorted some of Smith's meth — she tried to win Nichols' trust by talking about her faith in God and relating to him her personal stories.
She says she told him how her husband had died in her arms four years earlier after being stabbed during a brawl.
She writes that she asked Nichols if he wanted to see the danger of drugs and lifted up her tank top several inches to reveal a five-inch scar down the center of her torso — the aftermath of a car wreck caused by drug-induced psychosis. She says she let go of the steering wheel when she heard a voice saying, "Let go and let God.
"
So, I guess the Purpose-Driven Life goes best with a little crank.
She was prattling on about how she talked to him about Jesus, instead, she gave an unstable man fucking meth.
Jesus Christ, if she was black, people would rip her a new asshole. She was a stone junkie, and people were making her out to be some kind of missionary. How she calmed the crazy negro down and shit like that. Instead, she gave him crank. Yeah, exactly what a crazy person needs. I wonder if she thanked the guy in his trailer full of chemicals for the meth like she did Rick Warren.
Six weeks before he faces reelection, Mayor Bloomberg finally sent his aides back to the bargaining table yesterday with our city's 80,000 teachers.
But it could be too late.
United Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten blasted the mayor for making her members wait 21/2 years without a contract.
During an interview before the talks resumed, Weingarten told me she is ready to negotiate "2-4/7 for a fair contract," but said she sees few signs City Hall "is serious" about a deal.
To underscore her concern, Weingarten scheduled a meeting tomorrow with Fernando Ferrer, Bloomberg's Democratic opponent. She also has planned a series of parent and community meetings and new radio commercials for this week, both aimed at marshaling public support for the teachers.
The sitdown with Ferrer is bound to irk City Hall.
Bloomberg, our education mayor, vowed last week he wouldn't let politics influence his bargaining stance.
No matter what he says, his campaign strategists know teachers are a huge voting bloc. Keeping thousands of them dissatisfied is not the best way to boost the mayor's reelection effort.
"Freddy gets it and they [Bloomberg and Schools Chancellor Joel Klein] don't," Weingarten told me. That's the clearest signal so far that she's leaning toward backing Ferrer.
She and her union members are furious at Bloomberg's campaign commercials - with their "great man" theory of history. Those commercials would have New Yorkers believe Bloomberg pushed up test scores in the lower grades all by himself.
They have yet to acknowledge that teachers had anything to do with it. "My members have done everything they possibly could, they've worked hard," Weingarten said. But the mayor and Klein "don't understand the fundamental work teachers do in this city." ...................
So she scheduled a meeting with the other guy. She's hoping Ferrer will offer her members more respect after Nov. 8 than the current management in City Hall.
Bloomberg is no fan of unions to begin with, like most people of his class.
But his contempt for the UFT has been astounding. He has belittled teachers, taken credit for their achievements and demeaned their work. The implication is that they work less than other professionals. Which is a lie. Nurses don't pay for asprin for their patients, lawyers have access to law libraries, architects don't have to bring their own paper to work. Yet, this is what we ask of teachers. New York City cannot even supply basics to their classrooms.
New York is hemorraging experienced teachers to the suburbs, who pay more. Which means the largely minority kids of New York get a second rate education because Mayor Mike would rather spend $1b on the now-Quarterbackless Jets, a team with a decade long waiting list for season tickets, than fight for the billions owed the city by Albany, In fact, he'd rather give Pataki money than get the money oweed to us. Bloomberg is no fighter, except when it comes to city employees and fair wages.
Sure, Bloomberg is pro-education, when he can take the credit for the hard work of 80,000 teachers. But when it comes to paying them, they're worth less than the people in Nassau and Westchester.
His campaign staff now realizes that this is a problem?
This should have been settled months ago. Bloomberg has black staffers, but then, he's probably been listening to Jonathan Capehart, who has been anti-union like a good Black Republican. Nothing to stop hurting black people.
But what amazes me is that he was completely clueless about the stature teachers have in minority communities. They are the deacons in church, they save families, they have a large political voice. Treating teachers badly, then saying you want black votes is, well, really fucking stupid.
George Clooney and Bill O'Reilly remain the best of enemies.
Media-dog watchers worried that the long-running feud between the actor and the Fox News scourge had cooled last week when O'Reilly was invited to a VIP screening of "Good Night and Good Luck," Clooney's movie about the 1953-54 clash between CBS eminence Edward R. Murrow and Communist-hunting Sen. Joseph McCarthy.
The two combatants were seen chatting pleasantly at the event, which drew the likes of Walter Cronkite, Tom Brokaw, Dan Rather, Brian Williams, Morley Safer, Harry K. Smith and Andy Rooney.
"O'Reilly actually said some nice things about the movie," Clooney told us Friday at the opening night of the New York Film Festival.
This comes as high praise indeed, considering that the movie's archival footage of McCarthy reminds some people of the "No Spin" pundit. The U.K.'s Guardian newspaper wrote, "You don't have to squint too hard to recognize O'Reilly — who makes it his business to shout down and then de-mike his guests on the air — in the hectoring robot-voiced McCarthy."
Clooney thinks O'Reilly is untroubled by comparisons with McCarthy because "he sees himself as "Murrow, like a lot of broadcasters."
And, in fact, Clooney thinks it unfair to compare O'Reilly and McCarthy.
"Unlike McCarthy," a broadly grinning Clooney told us, "O'Reilly was never elected to public office. What's more, Joe McCarthy was never accused of telling one of his female staff members she should use a vibrator" — one of the sex-harassment claims former Fox News associate producer Andrea Mackris made against O'Reilly, who denied her allegations. A Fox News spokeswoman said that O'Reilly would have no comment on Clooney's latest tweak. But we feel one of his "Back of the Book" commentaries coming on.
How can you not love a man who not only doesn't forget an insult, but humiliates the person in a way he can't respond.
George Clooney is not a man to fuck with. On a TV show he was on, he went after the producer. At the time, I thought it was bullshit, a little puffery. Then he did the same on Three Kings, with witnesses.
Not bullshit.
So I have to wonder why he thought he could start with Clooney and think everything would be cool. He's Irish and from Kentucky. I don't think those folks believe in forgive and forget. O'Reilly runs his mouth, Clooney isn't gonna file that in the asshole file. He's gonna fuck with him when he gets the chance. And did.
Update: I've moved this up because I posted this up over the weekend. I don't have any more info, but when I get some, I will update this. Once again, I want to thank you for your help here. My friend asked me to get this up just before he went to Europe. Which means while he was dealing with travel issues, he took time to reach out to me.
Let me tell you a story: My friend once lived in a tall building off 42nd Street. I asked him if he wouldn't mind if I brought my niece and nephew by his place. Not only did he say yes, he keprt asking me about them. My sister went to the movies instead, but his generousity has always been amazing. This is a small way to repay that.
This is a letter from my friend's father about helping animal relief in New Orleans
Dear Fellow Animal Lovers:
Thank you so much for your interest in trying to help H.E.A.R.T. secure an air-conditioned animal transport vehicle for our relief efforts in the New Orleans area for animal rescue. Our last donated vehicle had to be returned to it's owner.
As you know we have been rescuing animals in the N.O. area for the last several weeks. We started out doing boat rescues in the Jefferson Parish and Orleans Parish areas. We made many rooftop and attic rescues of animals over many days.We had to break doors down sometimes when we could here barks for help behind the doors. We personally witnessed the remains of a few unfortunate pet owners that would not evacuate because of their animals. As you know the heroic rescuers of humans almost never allow their animals to accompany them. They are forced to leave behind what most of us regard as family, that is, our animals...... our best friends.
We were the first animal rescuers allowed into St. Bernard's Parish. This is the dreaded lockdown area that has places designated as the 'Red Zone'. There the mercury levels that permeate the putrid water and mud were reported to us by the military at 3,000 parts per million when 2 parts per million is the norm.It's not good for us and it will eventually kill all the animals !!! We have training in Haz Mat conditions but the poor animals don't. On the last tour of duty there we rescued many, many dogs and cats of course but we also rescued pet pigs( which wallow with deep gratitude at the sanctuary now), pet rabbits and ferrets, pet snakes found inside homes in aquariums, etc.,etc. and yes even an emu we wrestled aboard our transport. When we left there was still just about everything God created roaming the Parish. We know of Shetland ponies that we couldn't get to yet, a miniature horse, the cattle we brought feed and 165 Gallons of water to, and of course the many dogs and cats that were left behind the first time the floods came. They hung on for life and survived and some we eventually rescued but many many remain behind and as you know at this very minute, because of the new floods, they are once again clinging to something to survive hopefully once again and wondering ' what the hell is going on' and ' where is my dang caregiver' !!! ( we don't like the term ' owner"). Pray for them and help us to return to rescue them.
HELP US GET THEM OUT OF THERE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If anybody can help us get a transport vehicle (on Loan) we would be eternally grateful.This air conditioned vehicle or trailer serves as our 'Mothership' at the rescue site. Our Search & Rescue teams fan out in grid search mode in boats or 4 wheel drives with highly trained animal rescuers. They bring their captured animals back to the Transport vehicle manned by a driver, vet tech and usually a vet also. The animals are field triaged if necessary and put in pet carriers. At the end of the day we transport them to the sanctuary where teams await us to catalogue all rescued and tend to the sick and injured, water and feed, walk and then bedded .
This a/c vehicle or trailer should be able to hold 30, 40, to 60 animal carriers safely. We allow sponsors to display banners or such. On our last tour National Geographic, Dateline, a Red Cross cinematographer, and a renowned Washington Post photo journalist accompanied our rescuers. If you truly want to help we'll give you all the exposure we can get for you.
JUST HELP US GET THE ANIMALS OUT OF THERE !!!!!!!!!!
My team members are heading for our rendezvous starting tomorrow (Sunday) They are getting a much needed rest and many are pleading with employers and loved ones to let them redeploy. So far we have paid all expenses on our own and some are stretched to the limit.We expect to be fully operational by Tues. or Wed. My contacts with the military and police at the checkpoints has been very favorable. They have at times personally escorted me and my teams under armed guard to rescues of animals of which THEY knew their whereabouts. But I know that , as much as it pains me for I know personally some of the animals I looked in the face and said 'I'm coming back for you" , the military and police are going to allow NO ONE to enter for a few days. And when they do it will be with strict documentation of entry papers as it was last time.
If you would like to help find us a transport vehicle to borrow or send us a $$$ donation to H.E.A.R.T. (that stands for Hernando Emergency Animal Response Team). We are a non- profit org. that volunteered way back in Hurricane Andrew and have worked hurricanes, forest fires, floods, local disasters such as overturned livestock trailers on the interstate, etc.
DONATIONS:
H.E.A.R.T (of which I am a board member) is a 501 3/C non-profit. Donors can send cash or checks to H.E.A.R.T. ( that stands for Hernando Emergency Animal Response Team). Any donors requesting a receipt for tax purposes will be mailed a receipt with-in 60 days. Sorry for the delay, but with this disaster situation our members are stretched to the limit.
* Please make Checks out to H.E.A.R.T. * Those requesting a receipt will be mailed one with-in 60 days. Sorry, but we are stretched to the limit right now so I don't want to promise a receipt any sooner.
H.E.A.R.T. will be up with a web site of the disaster very soon and we will have many pictures from our first rescues.
VOLUNTEERING:
For those of you that think you might want to volunteer send a brief description of your skill. Shelter people, animal handlers, dog walkers, cat people, maintenance/handy persons, clerical are all needed.
Thanks for your interest! We sure hope you can support us in saving our animal friends' lives.
By MARY WILLIAMS WALSH and RIVA D. ATLAS Published: September 27, 2005
When Congress agreed this spring to tighten the bankruptcy laws and crack down on consumers who took on debt irresponsibly, no one had the victims of Hurricane Katrina in mind.
Bridget Cloud, a refugee from two hurricanes, enjoying a motel pool with a granddaughter in Laredo, Tex.
But four weeks after New Orleans flooded and tens of thousands of other residents of the Gulf Coast also lost their homes and livelihoods, a stricter new personal bankruptcy law scheduled to take effect on Oct. 17 is likely to deliver another blow to those dislocated by the storm.
The law was intended to keep individuals from taking on debts they had no intention of paying off. But many once-solvent Katrina victims are likely to be caught up in the net intended to catch deadbeats.
Right after Hurricane Katrina struck, several lawmakers - mostly Democrats but including some Senate Republicans - suggested that storm victims along the Gulf Coast should get relief from the new law's stricter provisions, which are intended to screen filers by income and make those with higher incomes repay their debts over several years. Under the old law, which remains in effect until mid-October, many more filers can have their debts canceled quickly in federal bankruptcy courts.
But House Republicans, who fought off a proposed amendment that would have made bankruptcy filings easier for victims of natural disasters, said there was no reason to carve out a broad exemption just because of the storm. ................ Professor LoPucki said he thought the majority of lawmakers were averse to enacting blanket bankruptcy relief for hurricane victims because that might raise questions about why victims of other uncontrollable events - like accidents, major illnesses or mass layoffs - should not get a break, too.
"If you admit that the bill is bad for Katrina victims," he said, "then there's really no reason it isn't bad for the others, too. They're all in some kind of problem. For most of them, it's largely their fault. But for a lot of them, it isn't their fault."
Yeah, until the horror stories come in.
This is amazing. They know that this will screw people over, fill the media with horror stories, but it's no big deal.
I think this is a disaster in the making, myself, for people and Congress. It's just another way of showing how inept Congress has been in dealing with Katrina. They simply will not make the changes needed to ensure stability. Instead, they want to test their theories, no matter what the cost.
Food recipes have been in short supply lately here, due to exigent events. Here's one from Cooking for Engineers. Hit the link for the pictures of the recipe in progress.
When the English, who seem to have a national fascination with minced meat pies, combined mashed potatoes with minced meat, a truly remarkable dish was born. For over two hundred years, Shepherd's Pie has been made by cooking chopped up lamb or mutton mixed with gravy, topped with mashed potatoes, and baked until a crispy crust forms. When made with beef, this dish is traditionally called Cottage Pie.
Start by chopping up 1-1/2 lb. potatoes into rough 1-inch cubes for boiling. Fill a large pot with enough water to cover the potatoes and bring to a boil. Once the water boils, add the potatoes to the water and return the water to a boil. Turn the heat down to medium to keep the water at a simmer. Cook the potatoes until fully tender, about fifteen minutes.
While, cooking the potatoes, prepare the vegetables. Use one medium carrot, a celery stalk, and a medium onion (a classic combination known as a mirepoix).
Dice the carrot, celery, and onion and place in a bowl. Assemble the rest of the ingredients: 1 tablespoon flour, 1 teaspoon each of dried rosemary and dried thyme, 1 cup beef broth, and 1 pound of ground lamb or beef.
When the potatoes are tender, remove them from the water into a large bowl, reserving 1/2 cup of the water. Mash the potatoes with 1 Tbs. butter, the 1/2 cup of reserved water. Add salt and ground white pepper to taste while mashing. I use white pepper in my mashed potatoes so black flecks of pepper are not visible in the finished product. Feel free to use the pepper of your choice.
After the potatoes have been mashed, set them aside. Heat 3 Tbs. vegetable oil or clarified butter in a large pot over medium heat.
Add the diced onion, carrot, and celery and stir until the vegetables are coated.
Reduce the heat to medium-low and cook, stirring occassionally, until tender, about fifteen minutes. This is a good time to preheat your oven to 400°F.
Increase the heat to medium-high and add the ground meat. Use a wooden spoon (or the potato masher you used on the potatoes) to break the meat apart while cooking.
Cook the ground meat while stirring until no longer pink, about five minutes.
Tilt the pot and allow the excess fat to run to one corner. Spoon off the excess fat.
Add 1 Tbs. flour to the mixture. Mix and cook for a couple minutes while stirring. The flour is added here to help thicken up the gravy that we'll prepare in this mixture. We cook it for a couple minutes during this step so there will not be a raw flour taste to our final dish.
Add the beef stock, dried thyme, dried rosemary, and nutmeg. Cook while stirring until the liquid has thickened, about 5 minutes. While the gravy thickens, add salt and ground black pepper to taste.
Pour the meat mixture into a casserole or baking pan.
Cover meat mixture with the mashed potatoes and fluff the top of the potatoes with a fork. This will allow the bits of potato sticking up to brown and form a crispy crust. Instead of fluffing the potatoes, you can use the fork to carve patterns into the potatoes producing a dramatic crust.
Cut 2 Tbs. of butter into small pieces and sprinkle over the top of the potatoes. Cover with a healthy amount of paprika. (Optionally, an ounce or two of finely grated cheese, like parmesan, can be used to top the potatoes.)
Place the shepherd's pie into the oven onto a rack in the center of the oven. After thirty minutes, the potatoes should have formed the golden brown crust. Remove from the oven and allow to rest ten minutes before serving.
For larger groups or potlucks, I double the portions and prepare exactly as above until the meat mixture is done cooking. Instead of transfering the meat to a baking pan, I put the potatoes into the pot to cover the meat mixture. (If I know that there will be many carb dishes at the meal, then I won't double the potato portion.) After fluffing the potatoes, I bake the whole pot for 30 minutes at 400°F.
Personally, I like this with a dough crust, but when Jen was studying at LSE, she really liked this, or so she says.
My First Time by CindySheehan [Subscribe] Mon Sep 26th, 2005 at 16:04:44 PDT
The rumors are true this time. I was arrested in front of the White House today. It was my first time ever being arrested.
We proceeded from Lafayette Park to the Guard House at the White House. I, my sister, and other Gold Star Families for Peace members and some Military Families requested to meet with the President again. We again wanted to know: What is the Noble Cause? Our request was, to our immense shock and surprise, denied. They wouldn't even deliver any letters or pictures of our killed loved ones to the White House.
We all know by now why George won't meet with parents of the soldiers he has killed who disagree with him. First of all, he hates it when people disagree with him. I am not so sure he hates it as much as he is in denial that it even happens. Secondly, he is a coward who arrogantly refuses to meet with the people who pay his salary. Maybe the next time one of us is asked by our bosses to have a performance review, or we are going to be written up for a workplace infraction, we should refuse to go and talk to our bosses sighting the fact that the President doesn't have to. The third reason why he won't talk to us is the he knows there is no Noble Cause for the invasion and continued occupation of Iraq. It is a question that has no true answer.
After we were refused a meeting with the Disconnected One, we went over to right in front of our house...the White House (behind the gate of course) and we sat down and refused to move until George came out and talked to us. We actually had a good time singing old church songs and old protest songs while we waited. I tied a picture of Casey on the White House fence and apparently, that is against the law, too.
After three warnings to get up and move off of the sidewalk in front of our house, we were arrested. It is so ironic to me that the person who resides in our White House swears to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America. The person who is the (p)resident of the White House now has no concept of the Constitution. He was appointed by the Supreme Court for his first term, invaded and continues to occupy a sovereign country without a declaration of war from the Congress, and violated several treaties to actually invade, Iraq too. Not to mention the condoned torture that pervades the military prisons these days. These are all violations of the Constitution. The Patriot Act and denying us our rights to peaceably assemble are serious breaches of the Bill of Rights. George is so concerned about Iraq developing a Constitution and he ignores and shreds our own Constitution.
Being arrested is not a big deal. We were arrested for "demonstrating without a permit." We were protesting something that is much more serious than sitting on a sidewalk: the tragic and needless deaths of tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis and Americans (both in Iraq and here in America) who would be alive if it weren't for the criminals who reside in and work in the White House.
Karl Rove (besides just being a very creepy man) outted a CIA agent and was responsible for endangering many of our covert agents worldwide. Dick Cheney's old company is reaping profits beyond anyone's wildest imaginations in their no-bid contracts in Iraq, Afghanistan, and New Orleans. John Negroponte's activities in South America are very shady and murderous. Rumsfeld and Gonzales are responsible for illegal and immoral authorization, encouragement and approval of torture. Not to mention, violating Geneva Conventions, torture endangers the lives of our service men and women in Iraq. Along with the above mentioned traitors, Condi lied through her teeth in the insane run-up to the invasion. The list of crimes is extensive, abhorrent, and unbelievable. What is so unbelievable is that we were arrested for exercising our first amendment rights and these people are running free to enjoy their lives and wreak havoc on the world.
The fine for Demonstrating Without a Permit is $75.00. I am certain that I won't pay it. My court date is November 16th. Any lawyers out there want to help me challenge an unconstitutional law??
War Pornography US soldiers trade grisly photos of dead and mutilated Iraqis for access to amateur porn. The press is strangely silent. By Chris Thompson
Published: Wednesday, September 21, 2005
If you want to see the true face of war, go to the amateur porn Web site NowThatsFuckedUp.com. For almost a year, American soldiers stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan have been taking photographs of dead bodies, many of them horribly mutilated or blown to pieces, and sending them to Web site administrator Chris Wilson. In return for letting him post these images, Wilson gives the soldiers free access to his site. American soldiers have been using the pictures of disfigured Iraqi corpses as currency to buy pornography.
At Wilson's Web site, you can see an Arab man's face sliced off and placed in a bowl filled with blood. Another man's head, his face crusted with dried blood and powder burns, lies on a bed of gravel. A man in a leather coat who apparently tried to run a military checkpoint lies slumped in the driver's seat of a car, his head obliterated by gunfire, the flaps of skin from his neck blooming open like rose petals. Six men in beige fatigues, identified as US Marines, laugh and smile for the camera while pointing at a burned, charcoal-black corpse lying at their feet.
The captions that accompany these images, which were apparently written by the soldiers who posted them, laugh and gloat over the bodies. The soldier who posted a picture of a corpse lying in a pool of his own brains and entrails wrote, "What every Iraqi should look like." The photograph of a corpse whose jaw has apparently rotted away, leaving a gaping set of upper teeth, bears the caption "bad day for this dude." One soldier posted three photographs of corpses lying in the street and titled his collection "DIE HAJI DIE." The soldiers take pride, even joy, in displaying the dead.
This could become a public-relations catastrophe. The Bush administration claims such sympathy for American war dead that officials have banned the media from photographing flag-draped coffins being carried off cargo planes. Government officials and American media officials have repeatedly denounced the al-Jazeera network for airing grisly footage of Iraqi war casualties and American prisoners of war. The legal fight over whether to release the remaining photographs of atrocities at Abu Ghraib has dragged on for months, with no less a figure than Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Richard Meyers arguing that the release of such images will inflame the Muslim world and drive untold numbers to join al-Qaeda. But none of these can compare to the prospect of American troops casually bartering pictures of suffering and death for porn.
People need to look at the other pics, the non-grisly ones as well.
Why? Because they're as fucked up. Not in the same way, of course, but the fact is that our Army in Iraq is fucked.
I don't know why anyone is shocked that soldiers would trade grisly pictures for porn. The Army created this market by banning porn in theater, and these kids could care less about the people who tried to kill them.
They're trying to turn this into a joke, a sick joke, but joke nonetheless.
But the reality is that these pictures are the basis of their future PTSD. They seem callous, but in reality, these pictures will be their nightmares, crippling them long after the war. They're kids, they're trapped ih hell, and they're turning their horror into a joke. Of course, the degeneracy here will make us look even worse, if that is possible.
Soldiers have always done this. Omer Bartov caused a shitstorm when he created an exhibit of Wehrmacht pictures of the Eastern Front. It was the same kind of thing.
While revolting, I can see why soldiers take pictures of this. But soliciting these pictures? Why? To make a point about the war? To get some notice?
But I think people need to look at all the pictures. Not just the gory ones. Because they tell the same story. George Bush's colonial adventure in full color.
However, if you think the soldiers won't pay for this, you'd be wrong. This will be in their heads long after you've forgotten you've seen these shots.
The Justice Department is investigating whether a company sold defective bulletproof vests for President Bush, federal agents and local police and then waited nearly two years to alert customers that the body armor could be unsafe.
A former research chief for Second Chance Body Armor Inc. is cooperating with the criminal investigation and testified this month that the Secret Service tested and bought some of the defective vests for the president and first lady Laura Bush. The Pentagon obtained the same armor for elite troops who guard generals, according to transcripts obtained by The Associated Press.
Many sales occurred well after Michigan-based Second Chance had been alerted that the Japanese-made Zylon synthetic material in the vests was degrading faster than expected from heat, light and moisture exposure, allowing bullets to potentially penetrate the armor, according to the former employee's testimony and other company documents.
Prosecutors have gathered documents showing that Second Chance was alerted as early as 1998 by the Japanese material maker, Toyobo Co., that there were problems with Zylon maintaining its protective properties under certain conditions.
By 2001, Second Chance's research chief, Aaron Westrick, was pleading unsuccessfully with his company's president to replace the vests after his own tests showed them degrading rapidly, the memos show.
"Lives and our credibility are at stake," Westrick wrote then-Second Chance president Richard Davis in a Dec. 18, 2001, memo. "We will only prevail if we do the right things and not hesitate. This issue should not be hidden for obvious safety issues and because of future litigation." ...............
Yeah, parents were saying the same thing when they had to buy their kids Body Armor when they were in Iraq.
CBS News' Bob Schieffer just announced that the Federal Emergency Management Agency has rehired ex-FEMA chief Michael Brown-- as a consultant to evaluate the agency's response to the disaster!
From CBS's Katrina blog: "Sept. 26, 2005 /6:44 p.m. (CBS) ? CBS News correspondent Gloria Borger reports that Michael Brown, who recently resigned as the head of the FEMA, has been rehired by the agency as a consultant to evaluate it's [sic] response following Hurricane Katrina." Advertisement
CBS says they've confirmed Brown had been rehired. Brown resigned after taking heat when a Time Magazine article revealed that he had padded his resume with bogus jobs.
The Associated Press, however, tells the story differently: "Brown is continuing to work at the Federal Emergency Management Agency at full pay, with his Sept. 12 resignation not taking effect for two more weeks, said Homeland Security Department spokesman Russ Knocke."
Brown had been shopping his resume in Washington. Wrote U.S. News' Washington Whispers last week: "Ex-FEMA Administrator Michael Brown seems to be doing for his career what he did for the beleaguered agency. Less than a week after FEMA's dismal Hurricane Katrina response forced Brown out of the agency, he has been shopping his resume to headhunters and Washington PR firms. And it's not working. "He's radioactive," said one exec. An ally of Brownie in the PR world said he should have waited a month before starting his job hunt. "It's just a bad play."
These people don't pray to Jesus, they pray to Mobutu Sese Seko, the king of kletopcracy.
In a few years, Europeans will get letters like this:
FAX#: 1-202-759-5783 TEL/FAX 1-202-288-1489 WASHINGTON, DC 09-28-05
ATTN: THE PRESIDENT
STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL
Dear Sir,
I am Mr. ___________, a senior accountant with the Agency for International Development (AID). I came to know of you in my search for a reliable and reputable institution/person who can handle a very strictly, confidential transaction which involves transfer of a reasonable sum of money to a foreign account.
Presently, there is Twelve million United States Dollars($12,000,000.00) only, in my department awaiting remittance.
I was a member of the contract award committee that monitored the award and execution of a contract of US$145M by an Iraqi firm, my colleagues and myself over invoiced this contract and declared US$145M.
After the successful execution of the contract, and the original contractor paid his US$145M, we now have US$12M that we can only claim with the assistance of a foreign firm.
I now seek if you would permit the said funds to be remitted into your personal company account, so that the money so remitted willbe shared mutually among the parties concerned, including you.
However, I would wish to receive your personal assurance that you would not sit on the money when it goes into your account. More importantly, you keep confidential this transaction, in order not to tarnishthe confidence reposed in the officials involved in this transaction,
Tentatively, we have agreed that 70% of the money goes to the officers where this money originated, 20% to the owner of the account,while 10% would be used to defray whatever expenses that may be incurred in the course of this transaction.
You are expected to forward to me through the above telefaxnumber, the following details:
(a) Name of bank where you want the money to be transferred; (b) Account number and name of the account: (c) Bank address, telephone, fax and telex number; (d) Your personal telephone and fax number
Be informed that on the completion of this business, Iwill use my share of the money to procure goods from your company or anycompany you may introduce.
Do not contact your bank yet because payment justificationis going to be provided by the FEDERAL RESERVE to your bank.
Finally, on acceptance of this request, please reply throughthe above fax number 1-202-759-5783 Tel/fax 1-202-288-1489. This is to guarantee the confidentiality of your interest.
New York's 31 school districts. None works without teachers.
This is from the local teacher's union, the UFT's, blog, edwise. It seems that the Post has been running around saying teachers are well paid. Funny, did they deduct the cost of supplies teachers have to buy for their kids, like toilet paper and crayons? If teachers were paid fairly, why are so many fleeing to the suburbs for more money?
None of these wingnuts ever complain about overpaid CEO's, do they?
On cue from City Hall and Tweed, Manhattan Institute fellows Jay Greene and Marcus Winters appeared on the op-ed page of Thursday’s New York Post to declare that New York City public school teachers are already very well paid. And just in case someone might miss the immediate import of those comments [this is, after all, the Post, which never overestimates the intelligence of its readers], the piece begins with an explicit reference to Tuesday’s UFT Delegate Assembly resolution which laid down a deadline for the completion of contract negotiations.
Someone is overpaid here, but it isn’t the public school teacher.
There are two extraordinary features of Greene’s and Winters’ argument. First, they build their entire edifice on a premise that they know to be false, and that the scholarly literature clearly and unambiguously refutes: the notion that teachers only work the contractually required hours. And to add insult to injury, they suggest that teachers do not even work the contractually required number of hours: “if we make the generous assumption that the average teacher in New York works the maximum 6.6 hours a day allowed by the union contract…” In this intellectually dishonest way, Greene and Winters misrepresent the contractually required minimum as the maximum a teacher can work, as if the collective bargaining agreements somehow prevent teachers from working a minute beyond the official teacher work day.
In point of fact, all of the scholarly literature which has examined the work day, work week and work year of teachers has found that the actual work of teachers is, on average, at least 30% greater than the minimum time required under collective bargaining agreements. The last national Schools and Staffing Survey produced by the US Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics found that American teachers were contractually required to work a minimum of 37.9 hours per week, but that they put in, on average, an additional 11.9 hours of work every week. A study published in the Monthly Labor Review, the publication of the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the US Department of Labor, concluded that teachers engaged in over ten hours of school related work every day, even though the contractually required time was only six and a half hours. Moreover, there is evidence that the work of teachers has intensified over the last decade, and that teachers are now working longer hours than they have anytime since scholars began studying these questions. And these are studies produced not by teacher advocates or ‘special interest’ groups, but by government agencies with a well-deserved reputation for the production of independent and accurate information.So when Greene and Winters do all of their calculations of how well teachers are paid based on the contractual minimum a teacher must work, they knowingly understate, by rather significant magnitudes, the actual work time of teachers. This produces, in turn, a rather overstated hourly wage of teachers. They then go on to compare that understated hourly wage with the hourly wage of other occupations, such as police, firefighters, biologists, chemists and mechanical engineers, almost all of whom receive overtime [time and a half] pay for any work beyond the contractually minimum work day. They also incorrectly suggest that the latter three occupations require more of an education than teachers, which is certainly not the case in New York, where all teachers must possess a Masters’ Degree.
The same sort of disingenuousness characterizes the Greene and Winters discussion of the median annual salary of NYC public school teachers, which the DOE reports as $53,017. Without any consideration of the cost of living in New York City, which is second highest in the United States [behind only San Francisco], or any consideration of teacher salaries in the metropolitan area [the median salaries in suburban districts range are between 31% and 33% greater the NYC median salary], they pronounce NYC school teachers “especially well paid.” Yet New York City teachers rank near dead last among teachers from major metropolitan centers in the United States on key indices, such as the ratio of teacher salaries to the average annual salary and per capita income in the metropolitan area.
The secondary extraordinary feature of the Greene and Winters argument is the way they simply disregard and ignore a whole body of data and analysis on the subject of teacher salaries which does not conform to the thesis they advance. Consider the following data, which they never address. Among college educated professionals with advanced degrees, American teachers’ annual earnings are at the bottom of the salary scale, below not only doctors, lawyers and business executives, but also accountants, nurses, sales supervisors, writers and artists, and social workers, the Economic Policy Institute reports.
According to the Quality Counts 2000 report of Education Week [registration required], American teachers at the start of their career [ages 22 to 28] with Bachelors’ degrees earn $7894 less than similarly aged college graduates; at the height [ages 44 to 50] of their career, the gap has grown to $23655. The differentials are even greater for teachers with Masters’ degrees, such as those in New York; at the height of their career [ages 44 to 50], they earn $32,511 less than other similarly aged Masters’ degree holders outside of teaching.
The last decade has seen the lowest increases in teacher salaries in the last forty years [since the advent of collective bargaining] and a decline in the relative standard of living of teachers [ratio of teacher salary to per capita GDP] to the lowest mark in the last forty years, and teachers are losing ground to other professions, according to the AFT’s annual surveys and analysis of teacher salary trends.
So upon investigation it is not the notion of an “underpaid New York City public school teacher” which is mythic, but rather, Greene’s and Winter’s argument that those teachers are “especially well-paid.” And make no mistake about it: they know they are promulgating a fable of the “over-paid teacher” here. This is one of the highlights of their new book they are promoting, Education Myths: What Special Interest Groups Want You To Believe About Our Schools. The book is full of arguments such as the one we just dissected, leading Richard Lee Colvin to describe it in the Los Angeles Times as a “selective and unconvincing” journey through “the labyrinth of educational research.” While Greene and Winters present themselves as ‘independent’ and ‘neutral’ voices in educational policy discussions and debates, they are well-known partisans of vouchers and other efforts to privatize public education. They are modern versions of the traditional Chinese mandarins, intellectuals trained and committed to the service of those within the state who would impose a ‘laissez-faire market’ solution to every problem.
By Brian Thevenot and Gordon Russell Staff writers
After five days managing near-riots, medical horrors and unspeakable living conditions inside the Superdome, Louisiana National Guard Col. Thomas Beron prepared to hand over the dead to representatives of the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
Following days of internationally reported killings, rapes and gang violence inside the Dome, the doctor from FEMA - Beron doesn't remember his name - came prepared for a grisly scene: He brought a refrigerated 18-wheeler and three doctors to process bodies.
"I've got a report of 200 bodies in the Dome," Beron recalls the doctor saying.
The real total was six, Beron said.
Of those, four died of natural causes, one overdosed and another jumped to his death in an apparent suicide, said Beron, who personally oversaw the turning over of bodies from a Dome freezer, where they lay atop melting bags of ice. State health department officials in charge of body recovery put the official death count at the Dome at 10, but Beron said the other four bodies were found in the street near the Dome, not inside it. Both sources said no one had been killed inside.
At the Ernest N. Morial Convention Center, just four bodies were recovered, despites reports of corpses piled inside the building. Only one of the dead appeared to have been slain, said health and law enforcement officials.
That the nation's front-line emergency management believed the body count would resemble that of a bloody battle in a war is but one of scores of examples of myths about the Dome and the Convention Center treated as fact by evacuees, the media and even some of New Orleans' top officials, including the mayor and police superintendent. As the fog of warlike conditions in Hurricane Katrina's aftermath has cleared, the vast majority of reported atrocities committed by evacuees have turned out to be false, or at least unsupported by any evidence, according to key military, law enforcement, medical and civilian officials in positions to know.
"I think 99 percent of it is bulls---," said Sgt. 1st Class Jason Lachney, who played a key role in security and humanitarian work inside the Dome. "Don't get me wrong, bad things happened, but I didn't see any killing and raping and cutting of throats or anything. ... Ninety-nine percent of the people in the Dome were very well-behaved."
Dr. Louis Cataldie, the state Health and Human Services Department administrator overseeing the body recovery operation, said his teams were inundated with false reports about the Dome and Convention Center.
"We swept both buildings several times, because we kept getting reports of more bodies there," Cataldie said. "But it just wasn't the case."
Orleans Parish District Attorney Eddie Jordan said authorities had confirmed only four murders in New Orleans in the aftermath of Katrina - making it a typical week in a city that anticipated more than 200 homicides this year. Jordan expressed outrage at reports from many national media outlets that suffering flood victims had turned into mobs of unchecked savages.
"I had the impression that at least 40 or 50 murders had occurred at the two sites," he said. "It's unfortunate we saw these kinds of stories saying crime had taken place on a massive scale when that wasn't the case. And they (national media outlets) have done nothing to follow up on any of these cases, they just accepted what people (on the street) told them. ... It's not consistent with the highest standards of journalism."
It's far easier to believe the worst of black people than not for many people. Even blacks.
I'm a good Republican, honest. Please vote for me. And I'm black as well.
Votes Illustrated Lynn Swann -- celebrity or substantive candidate for governor? If he doesn’t decide, you may have to next year.
While he's not the first African American to run for Pennsylvania governor, Lynn Swann is the first to do so on the Republican ticket.
With a party that, according to a July Gallup Poll, has only a 9 percent African-American membership, having Swann face Rendell could be a boon in a contest that might be down to the wire in November 2006.
Rendell isn't exactly making friends following the pay-raise debacle. He could be ripe for a kill by the right candidate. If Swann develops a clear platform in time to win the endorsement and the primary, his ability to court African-American voters could be the much-needed X factor.
Swann, says campaign manager Ray Zaborney, is not running so that Republicans can appeal to African Americans. But, he adds, "I expect Lynn will do very well among African-American voters. And I think that's a dynamic that Lynn has that the others who want to face Ed Rendell don't."
Gates admits the GOP has to work harder than it has in the past to secure the black vote. But he believes Swann will make an ideal black candidate for statewide office. "An African-American candidate has to get out and campaign in every community in Pennsylvania," Gates says, "and some candidates are more comfortable than others in doing that. I think Lynn is very comfortable in that role."
Allegheny County Councilor Bill Robinson, a black Democrat, agrees that a potential Swann candidacy would provide a certain level of excitement for African-American voters -- to a point.
"Since the majority of African-American voters are Democrats, that edge will have little to do with securing a victory in the Republican primary," Robinson says. "If you ask me, the real challenge for Lynn Swann is going to be convincing European Americans that he's worthy of their consideration. I think there's a segment of whites that won't vote for a black candidate regardless of what party he represents or how good a candidate he is. Let's be honest: An average black man wouldn't stand a chance running for governor on the Republican ticket, but if Republicans give Swann a chance, they'll probably find he's the perfect match for them philosophically."
Zaborney says Swann is already proving that he has a mass, statewide appeal. He points to fund-raising dinners earlier this year in Blair and Lancaster counties. These events, which a year earlier had garnered just 100 people, quadrupled in attendance when Swann appeared, and the Blair County event netted $70,000 for the county party.
"So, how we will do in Central Pennsylvania," Zaborney says, "is not on our list of worries."
Pitt's Susan Hansen says Swann's candidacy follows a trend among Republicans to try to chip away at the Democrats' dominance among African-American voters. However, she adds, "there has been a sharp increase in the poverty level and black voters know who and which party serves their best interest."
Says radio host Lynn Cullen: "I don't think there's any chance of any Republican gaining a large number of African-American votes. Especially given what's happened in New Orleans, I don't think any African-American voter will fall for a black poster-child candidate knowing how much that party discounts them."
Why would black voters look to Swann as a compelling political figure? What is he going to offer the black comunity to draw voters? His main appeal is to white conservatives and he will advocate policies which appeals to them.
Why do reporters think a black face is enough to get black votes. Black voters think about their votes like every other American. Lynn Swann is going to promote an agenda which will harm blacks and limit their aspirations. So why, exactly should they vote for him? Because he played for the Steelers? Because he's black? Lynn Swann has done nothing to earn black votes and he seems to be courting conservative whites, who have done nothing to court black votes. Swann will not meet the loyalty test which he would need to get black votes.
In fact, Swann is likely to face racism right in his GOP primary. He will be expected to be more loyal than other Republicans. Any sign of independend thought on his part will be punished. Only slavish loyalty will be accepted. And then, they still won't vote for him.
Why? Daryl Cain, Vernon Robinson and Alan Keyes can tell you. White Republicans think they can run a black man, get black votes and then get white votes as well. That has never happened. Black Republicans have run in white districts and won. And they have run and won minor offices.
There have been two successful practioners of this theory: Gary Franks and JC Watts. Franks was defeated in his mostly white Connecticut district and Watts resigned when the Congressional leadership killed a project in his district without telling him.
Others are either so right wing as to question their sanity or white voters just don't vote for him.
The Swann campaign thinks his fame will get him over the hump as long as he says the right words. It won't, because at the end of the day he's still black as the ace of spades. And to many Republican voters, that means their vote will go elsewhere.
DHS" the TV series is coming soon to a federal court near you.
Producer Joseph M. Medawar was arrested Friday by FBI and IRS agents on charges he bilked investors out of more than $5.5 million for a TV series about the Dept. of Homeland Security that never existed.
Instead, an FBI affidavit charges, Medawar and his associate, Alison Heruth-Waterbury -- who was supposed to be an executive producer and star of the series -- spent most of the funds on personal expenses.
Those included $40,000 per month rent on a Beverly Hills house, numerous luxury cars, meals at the Peninsula Hotel and Eurochow and tuition for Heruth-Waterbury's daughter at Pepperdine U.
Medawar produced several films in the 1980s and early '90s, with his last credit on 1992's "Sleepwalkers."
He allegedly told investors that he had permission from the Dept. of Homeland Security to use its logo and even claimed that President Bush personally endorsed the series and provided voiceover.
In fact, the White House and DHS denied working with Medawar.
Nevertheless, Medawar and Heruth-Waterbury repeated the claim in interviews with high-profile media outlets such as the Boston Globe, E! Online and NPR's "On the Media."
Steeple Entertainment, Medawar's company, did set up a flashy Web site for the series (www.dhstheseries.tv). Site includes a trailer that appears to consist largely of clips culled from other films and TV shows, along with a few scenes of Heruth-Waterbury and an actor.
...................
One person with a company that briefly worked with Medawar said the producer failed to pay invoices and falsely claimed "DHS" would promote Christian values.
Over the more than two years during which Medawar allegedly perpetrated his fraud, he inaccurately told investors the series was close to being sold to networks including Fox and HBO and that deals were done for it to air in 137 countries. At various times, he said "DHS" would be a drama, a reality show and a newsmagazine.
A receptionist at Steeple said nobody from the company was working at the office presently. A message for Steeple executive Jeffrey Rosenberg was not returned.
According to the U.S. Attorney's Office, the investigation is ongoing, which means Heruth-Waterbury, Rosenberg or others associated with Steeple may be arrested.
Medawar is currently being held by authorities pending the completion of a bail hearing. ...................
This isn't how TV works.
For a high profile action series, take NCIS or Rescue Me, $5.5 million would maybe get you through an episode and a half. Why? Because location shooting and stunts aren't cheap.
Second, no network is going to run a series that expensive without known stars, unless someone else is footing the bill, like the BBC with HBO's Rome.
Also, given the unpopularity of US policy, the idea of selling a show based on the DHS around the world is well, loopy.
But basically, if he was looking for cash, it should have been going for a pilot.
The trailer was, well, a great use of stock footage, but Marines seizing a building has little to nothing to do with reality for DHS. Chasing Mexicans across the Sonoran desert and having FEMA sit on their hands is the reality. This idea of hunting terrorists, well, I would think the show would be more like Hogan's Heroes without the laughs.
There were actually two events yesterday in Washington DC. One was the coming together of many thousands of Americans to voice their opposition to the war in Iraq. By all accounts, this event was inspiring and successful despite the lack of coverage from the television news media.
The other was a made for TV stage production designed to exploit the opposition to the war to promote the radical, anti-American, anti-Semitic, pro-communists (or socialist) agenda of International ANSWER, their mother ship, the International Action Center, and the Workers World Party.
And for this latter event, we should all thank mother nature for Hurricane Rita. For had this been a slow news day, and the press really wanted to stick it to us, that stage production (call it Karl Rove's dream come true) could have been beamed out to millions of households instead of just the CSPAN audience.
According to people who attended, the overwhelming majority were there for the singular cause of opposing the Iraq war. They came from all walks of life, and undoubtedly different political backgrounds: liberals, progressives, moderates and even some conservatives. By all reports, the crowd was far more mainstream then one normally expect at a protest rally.
But what did Americans watching the ANSWER stage see from their living rooms? Well, after studying the footage from my Tivo recording, I would liken it to militant, Marxist-Leninist rally.
They would have seen Peta Lindsay , one of the ANSWER coordinators who helped emcee the event, proclaim that our "movement" has come together to stand "with the people of the world against the aggression of the US government."
They would have gotten the impression that our "movement" has come together to "stand with the people of Iraq as they fight back against the brutal US occupation."
They would have gotten the impression our movement has "come together to stand with the people of Palestine as they fight for their homeland."
They would have gotten the impression that all of us who oppose the Iraq war are on the sides of the Iraqi insurgents and the suicide bombers.
Of course, the CSPAN cameras could not reveal that their "movement" did not include even 1% of the people attending the march. And this is where the "victim" part comes in.
I can find zero indication that all those people who came from all parts of the country, who crowded into buses, who loaded their families into cars, who slept on floors and sofas and in cheap hotels just to exercise their constitutional right of assembly, did so to lend support to the agenda represented on that stage.
Not even close.
I have read Meteor Blades' diary, Quit Your Bellyachin' About Antiwar Demonstrations, and frankly, I don't think he understands just what went beaming out to potentially every every cable and satellite TV subscriber in the country.
I watched it three times, taking notes for this diary, and I can tell you, what went beaming out was the apparent confirmation of the image of the left that the right has been trying to sell the American public for years. In a strictly political context, what went beaming out was a complete, political disaster.
And the worst part for me, is that it was a deliberate disaster. This event was billed as an anti-Iraq war protest. And though astute observers, a couple of which tried to warn us, knew the agenda of ANSWER and the political risk of hitching our horses to their wagon, my research and Googling tells me that hardly anyone was aware of it.
And my research also indicates that this was ANSWER's plan. They host a big rally under one pretext, the opposition to the Iraq war, then exploit that opposition to piggyback their real agenda on top of it.
How many people would have shown up for a rally to denounce the "occupation" of Palestine by Israel? Or to free the Cuban 5? Or to protest the expulsion of Jean-Bertrand Aristide from Haiti? Or to promote the the communist sympathising, pro-North Korea, pro-Castro agenda of the Worker's World Party?
I would venture to guess no more than a hundred people. But if you believed your TV, tens of thousands of people showed up to support all of these things. This is the cleverness of ANSWER's method.
Brian Becker ANSWER Coalition National Coordinater, in an attempt to play down the controversial aspects of the show, tried to explain why everyone was there:
"Why? Not because everybody in the movement has to have the same slogans on their banners. But we have to march, shoulder and shoulder against the real enemy. And he's in the White House."
But I assure you, what was beaming off of that stage was much, much more than the difference in slogans. It was another world altogether. A world that has no chance but to completely alienate the American people from the left.
I'm sorry Meteor Blades, I love ya man, but this was us getting the shaft in a politically devastating way.
A pivotal moment in the Vietnam war was when average Americans, mothers, grandmothers and people of all political persuasions joined in march on Washington. This was essential to the effort. No longer could Nixon and others characterise the anti-war movement as just a bunch of pro-communists, radical, hippy leftists. The anti-war movement had gone mainstream.
And this is what needs to happen now. Indeed, what has begun to happen now. But the mainstreaming of opposition to this war was dealt a severe blow yesterday, only negated by the diversion of a hurricane.
What should have been presented on that stage was a testament to American patriotism. A demonstration of mainstream Americans, who love their country and its people, challenging their leadership on the singular issue of this war.
If I had produced it, I would have had a giant American flag draping the backdrop. I would have assembled a cast of mothers and grandmothers as featured speakers and hosts. I would have tried to bring in as many soldiers and military personnel as possible, especially those who have advocated immediate withdrawal. It would have framed the opposition to this war as an all-American, red, white and blue patriot fest. Just short of serving apple pie to the huddled masses.
But with repeated viewings, I only caught one American flag. And it was turned upside down. There were a bunch of other flags, one in particular, which I have yet to identify. Far more important than the actual words spoken however, was the overall image of a cast of people who see America as the enemy. People who, if their political beliefs were known, most Americans would not want to be in the same room with.
Understand, this is not about my political beliefs. I'm probably as radical as some of these people in my own way. No, this is about political expediency. This is about winning over the majority of the American population to the wrongness of this war. This is about mainstreaming the opposition.
By blatant neglect, we allowed ANSWER et al. to put a radical, extremely controversial, and politically disastrous face on the otherwise increasingly mainstream opposition to this war.
And while we can be thankful that hardly anyone was paying attention, rest assured, our political enemies were. And they will no doubt use it to portray all of us as America hating, commie loving, terrorists sympathising malfeasants. Of course, that would be nothing new, and I normally advocate ignoring them and sticking to attacking them instead of defending against their attacks.
But now they have footage. And for that we need an accountability moment. They say a stupid friend is worse than a smart enemy. I couldn't agree more. And it should be clear to anyone with even the slightest political sensibilities that we have some really stupid friends. And I am not talking about ANSWER.
I am talking about those who thought it was a good idea to join in and help promote this event. Those who either did not bother to find out who they were getting into bed with, or those who knew and didn't care, should seriously rethink their judgement.
Out of all the comments I've read here, the most absurd is that, for better or worse, we need ANSWER because they are the only ones who can pull off a protest of this magnitude. What utter rubbish. Kossaks could not only do it, but do it right. In fact, ANSWER appears to have even tried to co-opt the Daily Kos logo for their flyer:
I don't know. What do you think?
I'm sorry, but these people are scum. For example, after about the third anti-Israel speaker left the stage, and the audience began to walk off, probably in disgust, one of the emcees came out and said, "We have a very important announcement about the march itself. We have a very important announcement about the march itself..."
Then they sent Gloria LaRiva from the National Committee to Free the Cuban 5 claiming that it's "not possible to move right now so yo are actually better off in staying here a little while longer cause it's totally jammed."
This, according to a friend who was there, was an abject lie. They were so desperate to keep an audience for their parade of radical speakers that they lied to the audience to keep them from joining the march.
Make no mistake, ANSWER is not our friend. And we must never again allow our real movement to be associated with them. In fact, we should do our best to make sure that no one ever shows up to one of their events again.
When I first saw the show, my first thought was that this was a CIA op to discredit the effort. That is, by the way, what they did in the Vietnam days. Infiltrate, sabotage, discredit.
I can find no evidence of that. But, regardless, we should treat them as if they were a CIA front because, effectively, they might as well be.
Craig Livingston, a Caribbean-American real estate developer and Democrat who lives in Harlem, has never voted for a Republican in his life. But on Nov. 8, he is prepared to do just that, casting his ballot in the New York City mayoral race for Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg over his Democratic opponent, Fernando Ferrer.
Craig Livingston, left, a real estate developer, said he would vote for Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, a Republican, while his friend Hakeem Jeffries, a lawyer, said his choice was Fernando Ferrer, a Democrat.
Mr. Livingston feels that the mayor has been accountable on his chief concern, improving the public schools, while Mr. Ferrer has failed to demonstrate that he is more than a lifelong politician.
But there is no consensus among black voters in his circle.
His cousin is voting for Mr. Bloomberg. One of his friends, Hakeem Jeffries, 35, a politically active lawyer from Brooklyn, supports Mr. Ferrer.
Mr. Jeffries sees a split in the black vote in his own life. His parents are backing Mr. Ferrer. A friend is critical of Mr. Ferrer but undecided. And Bill Howell, a deacon at Mr. Jeffries's Baptist church in Bedford-Stuyvesant, is such a fan of the mayor's that he joined the newly formed African-Americans for Bloomberg.
"This is the first time that I know of in my lifetime where the black electorate has been this receptive to the Republican agenda, and in New York City that is huge," said Mr. Livingston, 35.
Mr. Ferrer's victory in the Sept. 13 Democratic primary has provided Latinos with an historic opportunity to flex their political muscle, as Mr. Ferrer tries to become the city's first Hispanic mayor.
But to win City Hall, Mr. Ferrer's strategists believe he must build a multiracial coalition, a feat requiring him to capture a significant percentage of the black vote. Interviews with dozens of black voters suggest that that may pose a formidable hurdle, as the nature of the black electorate changes, an early misstep by Mr. Ferrer threatens his support among blacks, and Mr. Bloomberg proves to be an attractive candidate to many of these voters.
Some remain angry over Mr. Ferrer's remark in March that he did not believe that the fatal 1999 police shooting of Amadou Diallo, an unarmed African immigrant, was a crime. Others say they are satisfied with Mr. Bloomberg's handling of schools and crime, and they see the mayor as a less polarizing figure than his Republican predecessor, Rudolph W. Giuliani. Still others say the nature of racial politics in the city has changed, and they are less likely to vote for a candidate because of his or her race or ethnicity.
A poll taken by The New York Times in August, before Mr. Ferrer won the primary, showed that the mayor had the support of 45 percent of registered black voters in a race against Mr. Ferrer, who had the support of 39 percent. A poll by Quinnipiac University after Mr. Ferrer's primary victory reversed those numbers, putting Mr. Ferrer ahead among likely black voters. (Both polls had a margin of sampling error of roughly plus or minus 3 percentage points.)
The numbers suggest that these voters are up for grabs, evidence that the black vote has been undergoing a transformation and is becoming harder to predict.
"It's the maturing of black politics," said Walter Fields, vice president for political development at the Community Service Society, a liberal research and advocacy group. "No one expects white consensus on any one political issue, and they shouldn't expect it in the black community. I think it's very healthy when you have this discourse going."
As the city's black population has grown more ethnically diverse and as the black middle class has expanded, the black electorate has become increasingly fragmented, political consultants and academics said. One example of this shift was the failure of C. Virginia Fields, one of the few black women to run for mayor in the city's history, to inspire widespread excitement among black voters in the Democratic primary.
One point: I would take any poll like this with a grain of salt.
First, the majority of black voters are not middle class, but working class, and the largest unions with black professionals, the UFT and 1199 are backing Ferrer.
Second, there is the Bradley effect.
When white pollsters ask black people who they will vote for, more than a few will lie. I think people will say they will vote for Bloomberg, but when election day comes, they will change their minds, right in the voting booth.
Why? Because when race is an issue, people tell pollsters what they want to hear.
It happens in Republican primaries, and in general elections.
Bloomberg is trying to subvert the Democratic political leadership, by working with local leaders. The problem is that those same leaders need the political establishment to service their needs. So while a lot of people may say they support Bloomberg, trusting that they do is risky for his campaign.
This doesn't mean Ferrer doesn't have real problems with black voters. He does.
But I think the fact that no Dem elected officials have supported Bloomberg is a bad thing for him. Even Giuliani got some crossovers. We don't have any, even term limited councilmembers who would need a job. My feeling, Spitzer and his Harlem allies put the hammer down.
Right now. Bloomberg's biggest problem is the unresolved teacher's contract. The teachers are so pissed they may strike.
Bloomberg's campaign team doesn't seem to get that the teachers can undermine his claims for performance improvements. He's wanted to take credit for improving the schools without passing that credit on to the teachers. Does he thank them in his ads? Does he mention them in his stump speeches? No?
The teachers think he wants to break the union, for one thing.
And amid all this happy talk, the UFT is trying to keep their most experienced members in the city, and not fleeing to the higher salaries of the suburbs. New York's staffing has been so bad that they have recruited teachers in Austria and Italy.
The Bloomberg record on schools will be challenged, the question is if Bloomberg will come up with a deal before the teachers act. If they don't, that black support could evaporate.
Third: I think the implication that voting straight Dem was some kind of "immature" act was insulting. If Bloomberg was as responsive to black voters as Giuliani, he'd lose in a landslide. Black voters have always argued their choices, the difference is that Bloomberg is a viable alternative to discuss voting for, while Giuliani simply was not.
Also, there is a sharp split between West Indian and African American voters. They have different concerns, but usually both elect Democrats.
One day my husband and I were talking about women's clothing. I asked him what he likes and does not like about the way conservative women dress. His answer shocked me.
He said that women dressed in denim skirts and jumpers all the time reminded him of Fidel Castro. What!?! What could Christian homeschooling moms concerned with modesty have to do with an evil communist dictator from South America? My brain was doing gymnastics trying to see how this fit.
He went on to explain. Castro and his minions wore army fatigues all the time; it was their uniform. They did not look happy, they did not look pleasant; they looked angry and militant. He thought it was the same with many "jumper moms."
I thought about this and realized he was right. Often our jumper-wearing is just a slightly feminized version of wearing sweatpants around the house. Our jumpers are often unattractive and do not make us more beautiful. Sometimes they are stained or faded and would be better used cut up as rags.
Once upon a time denim was considered a fabric for work clothes. Cowboys, miners, and railroad workers wore denim jeans. I do not recall seeing pictures of people wearing denim in everyday life until the 1950's. (I was not born then, I have seen pictures)
I confess that I wear denim skirts and jumpers a lot. My mom made me my very first one when I was pregnant with my oldest child 21 years ago! I like them; they are comfortable. I can put layers of warm things under them in the winter. They go with every color of blouse. I can clean the kitchen in them and not worry about ruining my clothes. There is a lot to be said for this kind of clothing.
What we have to ask ourselves is this: Are we dressing to glorify God, to please our husbands, and to make the world a more beautiful place; or are we trying to make a political statement with our clothing? Is there anything wrong with making a statement with our clothing?
The answer, I believe, is no, in moderation. Our outward appearance is part of our testimony. When we appear in public wearing beautiful, yet modest clothing that is, of course, within our budget and in keeping with who we are as Christians, we tell people that being a feminine woman is good. When we add a joyful countenance and a sense of humor, it looks even better. We are saleswomen promoting God's order of things.
Some of us unfortunately have sold the wrong information. When a woman appears in public wearing soiled or wrinkled clothing, looking stressed and harried, she is promoting the wrongheaded idea that staying home with children is bondage to be avoided. Is it better to appear so before our husbands? What message would we be telling him?
A few years ago, I met an older woman. She wore beautiful, modest clothing. Her son and daughter-in-law and their children lived with her. I loved to watch their family. Soon after our meeting she began only wearing denim and neutral colors. The same dress code applied for the rest of their family. They got stricter and stricter until they began to look more like Arab women than Christians. They got involved in a fringe political movement. Their joy went out the proverbial window. This is where my husband got his Fidel Castro illustration.
Not coming to a reception near you Okay, it's Saturday night, and I'm supposed to be getting some work done. However, I can't get in to the remote system that I have to, and IT at work doesn't have live callings until 4 PM tomorrow. As a result, I got some laundry done, slept excessivley, and decided to catch up on some of my long-promised blog threads.
So, without further ado, let me announce:
THE NEWSBLOG FIRST UGLY BRIDESMAIDS DRESS CONTEST
Yes, folks, it's the end of summer, and many of us have gone to at least one wedding. Now, one universal issue that most ladies have is knowing what to wear--if it's a daytime wedding, one worries if what one has is "too formal," while fancy-schmancy evening weddings can often mean many pained hours of shoppinig for something "dressy" that one will actually wear more than once. Of course, best men and bridesmaids have the choice of what they are wearing made for them. For the guys, it's usually just some variation on gaudy cummerbund-and-tie sets on a tux, although I've seen wedding pix of a full groomsmen's party in kilts (a choice which was made apparently without any consideration for the participants' age, body weight, or race). However, this kind of cruell and unusual treatment is usually only reserved for the ladies.
In the US anyway, bridesmaids can sometimes get off easy, and are only asked to wear a dress of a certain type or color (ie "strapless black, long skirt" or "dove grey, any cut."). However, most weddings are more along the lines of what my best friend from college, B., has attended over the past 10 years.
B. is D.A.R. out of Boston, has a BA and her PhD in advanced logic mathamatics, and has gone to an average of 4 weddings a year since graduating college--a number that has slowed down only in the past year or so as her last few holdout friends and neighbors tie the knot. In many of these, she has been a bridesmaid. In all but one of these, she has had to endure the dreaded Bridesmaids Dress. B. is also rather tall--almost 6 feet--and very buxom. Almost nothig "off the rack" fits her. Fortunatley, she's also a skilled seamstress (everyone in her family, including her dad and two brothers, sews), and can do most of her own alterations. Nevertheless, she winds up spending upwards of at least a grand most years for dresses that she knows she will likely never wear again--most so hideous that she can't even shorten them, de-trim them, or otherwise salvage them for any kind of later use.
Now, B. has friends and neighbors that have been through this also. So, one day, she actually had an Ugly Bridesmaids Dress Tea. Five of her best galpals got together and wore their ugliest bridesmaids dresses for a boozy midafternoon tea party. Entries included a tiny-floral-print, toga-style sateen number that would make Kate Moss look ready for gastric bypass surgery, and a magenta off-the-shoulder mass of ruffles that looked like either something a drag queen imitating Carmen Miranda would wear, or a giant ruffled sea slug intent on devouring the wearer. No door prize was offered, but she may hold another one with either a "how to sew" book or a gift certificate to a local clothing retailer up for grabs.
And now, for The Rules:
First and Most Important: This contest is done without any guarantees of its completion, or of any prize being actually delivered. The News Blog does not accept any responsibility for any damages, real or imagined, caused by anyone sending in their picture or our use of it. All entries will be considered as bona fide and sent in in good faith. The News Blog reserves the right to cancel, change, or withdraw this contest at any time. All pictures sent to The News Blog become the property of The News Blog. Entries may be posted on The News Blog by News Blog staff. All entrants shall indemnify and hold harmless The News Blog for any damages arising from The News Blog's soliciting, receiving, or use of any contest materials by entrants. The News Blog cannot and will not verify the identity of any sender or persons shown in any pictures entered. The News Blog offers this contest for entertainment purposes only. In other words, everyone chill out and have fun here, and nobody be a jerk and send in pix of folks that people may not want to see on the Web. If you do, it's not our problem; we're not mindreaders. If your picture winds up in our Inbox and you didn't send it, we're sorry--take it up with your new ex-friend but don't call us.
By submitting a picture to this contest, participants warrant that they have read and understood all of the rules of this contest, that they have permission from all parties concerned to send in said picture, and that they understand that said picture may appear on the News Blog or on a survey sub-site created by The News Blog as part of the contest.
All pictures must be sent in as attachments to an e-mail, and must be in either a GIF or JPEG format. If you feel especially angelic, you will pre-format it for the Web. All must be under 1 meg, and should actually be substantially smaller. Anything really big that clogs our contest inbox may be deleted without being viewed.
Be sure to include a valid return e-mail address in the event that you are the winner.
It is highly suggested that you block out any faces if you don't want it plastered up here for the world to see in the event that you're a finalist. However, once you send it in, The News Blog will NOT doctor pix for you. Send it out only if you want the world to potentially see it as-is.
It is also highly recommended that you be the person wearing the dress in the picture--no fair raiding your relative's wedding pix for material. Guys, if you are daring, we WILL accept pix of you wearing the dress, even if you didn't wear it to the wedding. However, this is not a Drag Thing--it's not about you, it's about the dress.
Feel free to also include in your e-mail an explanation of the wedding, and why your dress is Especially Hideous.
Oh yeah, what you've all been waiting for: The winner may receive $50, either in the form of a money order, a gift certificate, or a PayPal payment. Foreign entrants are welcome, but the final cash value will be $50 US dollars in value, as per the exchange rate of whatever day we get off our butts and send out the prize item.
All entries must be emailed to: jenblog-dresscontest at usa.net <---obviously, replace the "at" with "@" and close up the spaces.
All entries must be received by October 31st, 2005. The winner will be selected either by The News Blog staff, or possibly by a group vote depending upon the number of entries received and/or the motivational levels of The News Blog staff.
The winner will be announced by November 30th, 2005, and probably substantially earlier if we aren't too busy.
Having said that, have fun and let the horror show begin!
Oh, and as a postcript: My friend B. finally tied the knot a few years ago. It was a sensible wedding with 50 guests at a small historical inn in Massachusetts. Her Maid of Honor and Bridesmaids all wore different dresses, with the only requirement that they be light tan, beige, or peach, cut with a long skirt, and of a somewhat drapey material. Everyone looked wonderful in their choices. B. bought a wedding dress at a huge warehouse in Texas (where she last taught), and did the final trimming herself. As a result, she didn't spend enough to buy a small car on her dress and she still looked radiant. We look forward to seeing what you send us! Watch this area. We may repost this periodically to remind y'all. --Jen
OMG—Can This Be True?! The Observer (once again, we’ve got to get our news from Britain) reports that Bush’s charity fundraising effort to solicit donations from war supporters isn’t going so well.
An extraordinary appeal to Americans from the Bush administration for money to help pay for the reconstruction of Iraq has raised only $600 (£337), The Observer has learnt…
The public's reluctance to contribute much more than the cost of two iPods to the administration's attempt to offer citizens 'a further stake in building a free and prosperous Iraq' has been seized on by critics as evidence of growing ambivalence over that country.
Ouch! Cernig at Newshog notes:
Insta-skinflint, Powerlame, Little Green Mothballs, Captains Sixteenths, QandBigO, Charging RI-NoMoney, My Vast Right Wing Bankruptcy....
I could go on but I'm laughing too hard.
The chickenhawks are as unwilling to put their money where their mouths are as they are to put their necks on the line. Figures.
No shit. This is the first time our government has ever made an appeal to taxpayers to privately contribute foreign aid money, and it looks like quite the stinky flop. I guess all those war supporters aren’t too keen to pony up, evidently having used up their tax breaks to slather Support the Troops magnets on their bumpers. I mean, those are each a couple of bucks. ~Shakespeare's Sister
And in other news, Packer fans think Viking fans are sissies who like purple.
My God, any blogger could raise more in a few hours.
I think there are two lessons we need to take away from the Katrina fiasco:
First, the people we saw rioting in New Orleans are America's flotsam, and they exist in every society. Other than the physically disabled, young children and seniors 80 years old and up, the people we saw holed up in the Superdome and elsewhere are the perfect demonstration of what happens to people who choose (yes, choose) to lead third-world lives in a captialitst society.
They were accustomed to living off a government check every month, accustomed to subsidized housing, accustomed to food paid for by food stamps. They've elected politicians like Mayor Ray Nagin and Gov. Kathleen Blanco to make them comfortable in that third-world existence, and now they have neither the resources nor the political leadership to survive in a time of crisis. Such has been the case throughout history for people who don't take charge of their lives.
.........................
Make no mistake about it: State and local government in Louisiana have been in the hands of Democrats for generations. There might be a mayor somewhere else in America as inept as Ray Nagin, but I doubt it. An earlier hurricane, Georges in 1998, demonstrated that using the Superdome for emergency shelter wouldn't work. And Governor Blanco, despite a declaration of disaster by the president two days before the storm hit, failed to take advantage of the offer of federal troops and aid until two days after the storm hit.
It's worth mentioning that Alabama, Florida and Mississippi - all of which were hit hard by Katrina but fared far better - all have Republican governors.
We have important elections coming up in 2006. The U.S. Senate races will serve as a barometer for where the country wants to go. I hope we'll go for security. Picture Democrats in charge of national security or a truly national emergency. And be very afraid.
Z. Dwight Billingsly is a principal of Branford Gateway Investment Co., a longtime activist in local Republican politics and a regular contributor to the Commentary page.
First, Nagin was a lifelong Republican until he ran for office.
Most of the people in the Superdome were working class, people who got up every morning and got on the bus and served food, or vacuumed floors or wiped people's asses. They didn't lay back and get checks. They didn't expect a handout. They owned their homes and worked like hell to get them. This man slandered them to make himself look good. Some of the poor got that way because they had shitty, backbreaking jobs until their health gave out. The idea that they were waiting for a handout is dead fucking wrong.
And the people of Gulfport still haven't seen FEMA
I'm sure they chose the shitty schools, low tax base and service economy of New Orleans. In a population which is 50 percent functionally illiterate, I'm sure they chose every aspect of their lives.
Second, only in Billingsly's world does the blame fall on the state and not FEMA.
Everyone else is scared witless of Bush's inept management. Nowhere in this sad narrative is the horse lawyer, Flying Dutchmen bags of ice, or cronyism.
But why is he so slavishly supportive of Bush while even David Brooks is critical of his leadership?
This is the note which came with the link:
Given your recent writing about black Republicans, I thought you might be interested to read this op-ed from Z. Dwight Billingsly, an African-American who has run unsuccessfully for public office several times as a Republican. I'd love to read your take on his victim-blaming and excuse-making.
Well, I'm not surprised he's lost repeatedly. After his groveling, no self-respecting black person would vote for him. And white people forget to.
See, as a black Republican, he has to grovel to be accepted. He can't just be a Republican, he has to slander the people of New Orleans, like he's not black or something. That he's a better class of Negro.
He's a fine one to talk about "taking charge of their lives". He slavishly runs after a GOP who will not elect him to dog catcher. He isn't in charge of his life, he's waiting for white people to like him enough to vote for him. They tend, like black people, to dislike black Republicans in the voting booth. They just lie about it.
You know, I thought about Bob George today. I thought hard about him. And I realized something, the difference between us is simple. No matter what I've done, it's been because I could do the job. This isn't to say I haven't had help, everyone has help. But I wasn't part of anyone's agenda. There was never a point when I was editing something, or covering something, where I was being used to make a point. I wasn't doing TV, I wasn't going to political conferences. And now that I do go there, I would think half the audience has no idea I'm black until I walk in the room. When I go on Air America, I don't think most people know I'm black. Hell, people on this site don't know I'm black until I say so.
The reason I got in the room was because of my work and my opinions. And I think I can say the same for Kos, Olliver Willis and the few known minorities on line. I'm friends with John Lee, one of the old school hackers, an extremely intelligent man. I don't think people hire him because they need to fill a slot, they hire him for his immense skills. The fact that he's black usually isn't relevant.
Now, the thing is that 90 percent of the stuff on Kos or here has little relevance to race. My opinions on food or Andy Warhol or beer are not race specific. But like when people bring history into the conversation, I comment on the things I know about race as well. But my prime purpose here is not to defend black people or promote them or explain them. Any more than I explain New York or working as a reporter.
The problem with people like Bob is that their whole careers are about being race men. Now, that's an old term to denote civil rights activists. Thurgood Marshall was a race man. But people like Bob George and Jonathan Capehart, a Bloomberg staffer and former Daily News editorial writer, exist in their roles because they are black. But these race men serve to hurt black people to promote their careers. They may believe conservative dogma, but they know social democracy works a lot better for black people and that they vote that way every time. They propose policies which will make more black people poor, limit opportunity and close off the options they had when they were young men.
Imagine if Sam Seder pointed me out as a black liberal. Poor Janeane would fall over laughing. That would be like being pointed out as a Knicks fan on 7th Avenue in December.
But when the Post can use George or the Daily News Capehart, they can say, hey we have a black conservative here. They can use them to push an agenda which harms people.
I think Bob thinks I should see there are variations in black Republicans and all I see are people dedicated to making black people lives harder. Just so they can curry favor with the white people who can promote them. I don't see the dignity, the strength, I was raised to embrace in manhood. I guess some people would rather run after success, no matter what the cost, to their dignity, to the respect of others.
It hurt me to see Bob try to explain away the way that his white "allies" made it so clear that black life was cheap and expendable. It was like he couldn't admit the people who patted him on the back laughed when he was out of the door. This time, they didn't even close the door. They just started laughing like he wasn't even there.
As much as Stanley Crouch frustrates me, he's his own man. He stands on his own two feet and while I disagree with much of what he says, I know he's not saying it to please his masters. I wish I could say the same about Bob George, but I'd be lying to myself. He's no more his own man than Pinocchio was. His entire career was predicated on being that Negro who would attack his brethren and convert them to the wisdom of Republicanism.
I think to myself, what would it be like if black Republicans like him were men, and not real-life Gollums, entranced by the GOP like it was a ring. Precious, precious....if I just get closer to George Bush I will get .....precious. Peter Jackson did an amazing job with Gollum, he made Tolkien's words come to life, his description of Gollum, the sad, gnarled figure always chasing after an illusion which ruined him and broke his soul.
When I see Armstrong Williams stung by the fact that his conservative buddies let him twist in the wind, Gollum comes to mind. That sad, gnarled figure crawling along the ground, hoping to be reunited with the ring.
I realize what makes me so angry about them, and I think other people, too.
Our black heroes are the men and women who challenged the system.
Malcolm X was right about field Negroes and house Negroes. But what he didn't explain is that house Negroes wasn't just people who served massa. They were also on slave hunting teams. White overseers would use them to track down runaways. The Emerge cover depicted Thomas as a lawn jockey, because slave owners would use lawn jockeys to signal if slaves had escaped. The article wasn't much nicer. How hated is Thomas? When he tried to speak before a junior high school, half the parents wanted to retract the initiation. To a sitting Supreme Court justice. Many didn't let their kids go.
Keep in mind, this is in middle class, suburban Maryland, home of DC's professional class. Yet the reaction was nearly uniform.
Why is he hated? Because he violated a compact of black life: he trashed his sister to make him look good in front of white people. He claimed she was on welfare, when she had quit her job as a nurse's aide to take care of their aunt. You can do a LOT of things, and be forgiven. But not that. For most black people, he went from just another tom to Public Enemy number one.
So when someone ran away, they not only had to challenge the white power structure, but the blacks who would enforce it.
Now, you can explain away the servants, but hunting down your kin? Nope.
Because of that, there has always been two aspects to black political life. One is a loyalty test, the other is standing up to power.
When Harriet Tubman helped slaves escaped, he had a revolver, ready to shoot anyone who would lose their nerve. If they went with her, they were on for the full ride or the ride would end right there. There was no going back. Anyone even thought of being disloyal was dealt with.
When Barrack Obama ran for Bobby Rush's Congressional seat, he was vilified. He was called every kind of white interloper and Uncle Tom in the book. Why? Because Rush had earned his stripes as a Black Panther. Everyone knew where he stood with the community and what he had done for them. Obama was just a man on the make. And he lost, badly. He didn't even get a fair hearing. Now, remember, this is in a Cook County Democratic primary and the liberal Obama was vilified like he was on the board of the Heritage Foundation.
But two years later, Alan Keyes was nearly attacked in the same streets as Obama got 94 percent of the same people's vote. People ran up to Keyes and spit on him, that's how reviled he was by them. Why? Because Obama had proven he was trustworthy and Keyes was anything but.
So when I see people like Bob defend the GOP, I know no one would ever take him seriously in black political life. Contrary to popular belief, blacks may vote Dem, but they do not do so quietly. They bitch and moan when things aren't right. They don't sit back and take it. Black Republicans do.
They always have to explain away the insults and the hurt, the degradation. We see this, we see these people and how they can never stand up to oppose the insult, the hurt. It's worse than battered wife syndrome, it's slave syndrome, massa's always right, no matter how hard he hits you, or how badly he shames you. I've never seen a black Republican without a white patron. They had some conference at the Heritage Foundation and most of the people there were white. When black Democrats need to meet, they don't need a room full of white people to give them permission or pay the bills.
If just one of them called the GOP on their bullshit, said "you know, George Bush has ignored black people since he became President and backed people and policies which harmed black people" people would respect them. Then, we could have a debate on policy. But they won't. Because they can't. They simply lack the courage to do so.
But you can't debate a man on his knees, you can either pity him or scorn him. But you cannot respect him.
WASHINGTON, Sept. 24 - Vast numbers of protesters from around the country poured onto the lawns behind the White House on Saturday to demonstrate their opposition to the war in Iraq, pointedly directing their anger at President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.
A sea of anti-administration signs and banners flashed back at a long succession of speakers, who sharply rebuked the administration for continuing a war that has cost the lives of nearly 2,000 Americans and many more Iraqis. Many of the speakers also charged Mr. Bush with squandering resources that could have been used to aid people affected by the two hurricanes that slammed into the Gulf Coast.
Thousands of protesters gathered on the lawns south of the White House to demonstrate against the war in Iraq.
As protesters moved from the rally to a march around the White House, they packed city streets, and in some areas, came face to face with groups of pro-administration demonstrators, who held up signs expressing support for the war.
Organizers of the rally and march had a permit for 100,000 people, but the National Park Service no longer provides official estimates for large gatherings in Washington.
You know, it's time for the campus radicals to go home and take ANSWER with them.
I watched an hour or so of the rally and I wanted to smash my screen.
Why can't they have adults who can speak in words, not slogans.
Here's a hint, Palestine is really unpopular in the US, even among liberals. You do not gain support for the Palestinians by having some campus clown talk about the injustices of the Palestinian people. You know, why not have a real Palestinian from Palestine who doesn't speak in slogans. You know, but a human face on it. And leave the support of terrorists like FARC at home, after all, you can't call Israelis terrorists when you're praising drug dealing terrorists.
This is serious shit and I had to listen to someone say he was a communist. Now what in the fuck does that have to do with Iraq? Too many people on the left glom on to any protest and use it as their hobby horse. You know, the only people I wanted to express solidarity with were the families of the soldiers, the soldiers and the people of Iraq suffering from US occupation. It may be cute to have diversity, but it takes away from the seriousness. You have a rally where only soldiers and their families speak, with a few pols, and even Bush couldn't ignore that.
One of the most effective protests of the Vietnam War was the Winter Soldier Hearings in Detroit. They talked about the war and their role in it. That is something people need to see more than once a week on FX.
As long as you prattle on about anti-imperialism and other college campus radical causes, you don't get taken seriously. ANSWER in their own way is as bad as the Chickenhawks. Both are amazingly selfish. The chickenhawks refuse to serve, the ANSWER crowd uses people like Cindy Sheehan to promote their own agenda. Mumia's ass is in jail, and you couldn't more than 10 minutes on black radio about him. And that's a cause?
I just want to see a protest where there is only one topic, Iraq, the only speakers are talking about Iraq and all the signs are about Iraq. That anyone who mentions some nonsense like the "Popular Front" is shoved off the stage with a flying tackle. Talk about Iraq. But leave the other causes at home. I don't really care about what a Israeli refusenik has to say if the topic isn't Iraq.
Look at this list of speakers:
Jessica Lange, actor
* George Galloway, British Member of Parliament * Ramsey Clark, former U.S. attorney general * Cindy Sheehan* * Dolores Huerta, Co-Founder, United Farm Workers of America * Malik Rahim, New Orleans community activist who survived Hurricane Katrina * Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney * Ralph Nader * Mahdi Bray, Exec. Dir., Muslim American Society Freedom Foundation * Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, attorney/co-founder, Partnership for Civil Justice, National Lawyers Guild * Elias Rashmawi, National Council of Arab Americans * Brian Becker, National Coordinator, A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition * Lynne Stewart, human rights attorney * Rev. Al Sharpton* * Anita Dennis, mother of Iraq War veteran / resister * Clayola Brown, President of the A. Philip Randolph Institute, Vice President of UNITE HERE* * Ben Dupuy, Former Ambassador At Large for the government of President Jean-Bertrand Aristide * Jos Williams, President, President of the Metropolitan Washington Council, AFL-CIO * Michael Berg, father of Nicholas Berg * Christine Araquel, Alliance for a Just and Lasting Peace in the Philippines * Andy Thayer, Equality Campaign * Curtis Muhammed, Community Labor Union of New Orleans * Margaret Prescod, Global Women's Strike * Hadi Jawad, founder of Crawford Peace House * Chris Silvera, Teamsters Black Caucus * Musa Al-Hindi, Al-Awda National * Michel Shehadeh, L.A-8 defendant, a Palestinian activist framed COINTELPRO-style * Nancy Wolforth, Executive Vice President, AFL-CIO * Manuel Santos, Socialist Front of Puerto Rico * Brenda Stokely, Million Worker March, New York City Labor Against the War * Peta Lindsay, Youth and Student A.N.S.W.E.R. Student, Howard University student * Mounzer Sleiman, National Council of Arab Americans * Macrina Cardenas, Mexicanos Sin Fronteras * Jeanette Caceres, Spoken word artist from New York University * Gloria La Riva, National Committee to Free the Five * Riya Ortiz, Network in Solidarity with the People of the Philippines, Campaign for Justice Not War * Larry Holmes, Troops Out Now Coalition * Chuck Kaufman, Nicaragua Network * Women's Anti-Imperialist League * Representative of Bayan USA * Eugene Puryear, Youth and Student A.N.S.W.E.R. Student, Howard University student" link
Let's face facts. ANSWER are parasites who use our good intentions to push their agenda. So instead of rejoycing about the massive turnout, a hint that Bush's war is extremely unpopular, we're debating the speaker list and their abuse of their audience.
The reason ANSWER does this shit is because no one stands up to them. They get the permits, but UFPJ draws the crowd. If Leslie Cagan said no to their antics, ANSWER would have like 3000 people.
There is nothing wrong at being angry at ANSWER, but remember, other people use them to make their points and swallow the polemics.
That needs to stop. If people are sick of ANSWER's antics, call them on it. Bitching about them isn't enough.
I mean some of the speakers were in fantasyland. The slogans were from the 1970's.
Nader, Galloway, even the ANSWER people don't bother me. But Mexicanos Sin Fronteras? Lynne Stewart? Uh, she was convicted of aiding a terrorist. She may be innocent in the end, but isn't she a distraction now?
A lot of people want to downplay their role, or ignore it, but the reality is, that every minute of CSPAN devoted to them and their message is going to dilute the anti-war message. A lot of people saw them, and thought that was the rally. Remember, news is about showing what will interest people and if some campus radicals upstage the show, guess what people talk about.
Because CSPAN will be the record of the event, not pictures or news reports, but CSPAN.
And what's even more special is that ANSWER people think that can convince people by bringing up Palestine as an issue and linking it to Iraq. Winning strategy, if you're Osama Bin Laden. For Americans, it doesn't work so well.
Let's just call it the spoiled child, tone deaf approach to politics.
The next protest should have two sets of speakers: veterans and their families.
Leave the Palestinian flag waving anti-imperialists at home.
Why?
Because this is about politics and one clear message works really well. The left parade doesn't. Even if the press ignores it. AIPAC didn't. Which kept the Congressmembers away. And they were right to point out that the groups there would bash Israel and forget about the senders of child suicide bombers from Hamas. It's an ugly two way street and raising the issue was stupid as all hell.
People can pretend that the CSPAN coverage didn't matter, but it did. It mattered to millions of liberals who saw that circus and said they would pass on the next protest. It mattered to people who financially support such protests. It mattered to polticians and their staffs. It matters. How you conduct yourself matters and what you represent matters.
Think about this: do you have a school prayer protest at an anti-abortion rally?
Ok, this is from one of my closest friends on the planet. I've known him almost 20 years and he's asking me for help to save animals in New Orleans. I'll be honest, at first, I didn't think it was all that important. Now I think it's critical, since the people have been saved. If anyone can help me, please e-mail me and I'll send on the contact information.
I have no idea on how to get hold of such a vehicle or even how to send anything yet. But if you can help, please e-mail me.
Steve,
Hello, my friend. I need your help again. My father just got back from rescuing animals in New Orleans for the past couple of weeks. He's a certified animal rescuer and involved with many different Animal Organizations like HART, DART, CERT, HSUS, and Best Friends. He's resting at home here in Florida for a few days and will be going back to New Orleans early next week.
Unfortunately, even with all of these great organizations volunteering their resources and time my father says they are still in dire need of some very important things. Most importantly, he is trying to get his hands on an AIR CONDITIONED Transport vehicle. They need these type of vehicles to put the rescued and often injured animals in. Some times, these animals have to be in cages in NON-Air Conditioned vehicles for hours at a time. Some do not make it because of this.
I was hoping that you could use your influence to get the word out amongst your friends, coworkers and clients. Maybe someone will have an appropriate vehicle to donate for a month or so.
Of course, if you are unable to help with that request, my Dad says that food and other types of animal supplies are always appreciated and needed.
My Dad says that recognition of sponsors will be displayed on all rescue equipment and will be mentioned when addressing the media.
The Down Side of Pop At the Corcoran Gallery, Andy Warhol's Comment On a Sold-Out Society
By Blake Gopnik Washington Post Staff Writer Saturday, September 24, 2005; Page C01
Some museum exhibitions put up disclaimers about sex. Others warn about violence in their art. The impressive Andy Warhol show that opens today at the Corcoran Gallery of Art ought to begin with a big sign that reads something like this: "The following exhibition may cause depression or anxiety in visitors -- viewer discretion advised."
For all the bubble gum colors and crisp commercial graphics in much of Warhol's art, its larger vision is profoundly grim. It's that austere underpinning to the Warhol glitz that gives this exhibition so much weight and depth.
People talk about Warhol's art as ironic, or cynical or maybe as satirical -- all of which implies a certain good humor, or at least a distance from the things it talks about. I think his project goes much further than that. I think there's profound, considered despair in it. Taken as a whole, Warhol's art seems to portray a world so thoroughly sold out that there's no hope for it.
"Warhol Legacy" was chosen from works in the Andy Warhol Museum in Pittsburgh, filled out with a few loans. Most of his signature series are represented. The early Campbell soup cans are there, along with a stack of his giant Brillo boxes. There are his trademark silk-screen paintings of Marilyn, Liz, Jackie and Warhol himself. A gallery titled "Death and Disaster" shows Warhol riffing on news photos of suicides, car crashes, the electric chair and botulism-laden cans of tuna. Other galleries concentrate on fascinating works -- some of Warhol's best -- that may not be well known to the general public: his grim little Polaroids of guns and knives; his "abstract" images derived from shadows, Rorschach blots and camouflage; his gripping "Screen Tests," in which one subject after another stares into a movie camera's lens for four long, uneventful minutes.
And almost all of the more than 150 works in the exhibition seem to point to a culture of consumption that, in one way or another, has broken down.
As art historian Thomas Crow pointed out in a famous article, the "Pop" side of Warhol's art, which can feel like a celebration of American consumerism, is more than counterbalanced by a tragic side. There are the crashes and suicides and executions, even that lethal tuna, that suggest not everything is right in big-box America.
Even Warhol's most famous celebrity images aren't so much celebrations of Hollywood values as records of their failure. Warhol's first Marilyns were painted right after her breakdown and suicide. His Liz Taylors were made after her very public illness and many scandalous affairs, and they don't exactly show her at her best. Every one of the Warhol Jackie pictures that render the first lady in her stylish heyday, when she was a symbol of American optimism and energy, was painted after her husband had been gunned down.
If she's on your list of women you've slept with, you've done pretty good
September 23, 2005 -- SIENNA Miller must be t
hrilled that Kate Moss' life is going to hell in a Gucci handbag. Miller went thermonuclear when reports surfaced that before he nailed the nanny, her lover Jude Law had wild three-way sex with a coked-up Moss and his ex, Sadie Frost. Before she took him back, Miller forced Law to make a list of all the women he'd slept with — but he'd omitted Moss' name. Now the Daily Telegraph in London reports Burberry, which dropped Moss in the wake of the coke scandal, will likely hire Miller as her replacement. Miller has ordered Law to keep it in his pants and keep away from Frost and Moss, or else. Meanwhile, Moss' contract with cosmetics giant Rimmel will likely be torn up, insiders say, following in the footsteps of H&M and Chanel. And we're told Jefferson Hack, father of Moss' daughter, Lila Grace, is now pressing for sole custody. Of course, PAGE SIX readers saw this coming. Back in January, when Moss and smack-rocker Pete Doherty first hooked up, we quoted a Moss pal: "Kate's friends think this is a really bad idea. He's a bad influence. They're really worried about her daughter."
Why the fuck would she want to know that, besides the list being arm-length long, it just seems, well maschoistic.
You know that scene in Four Weddings and Funeral, where Hugh Grant asks Andie McDowell how many men she's slept with and he comes up with eight women and she comes up with 34 men. Not good. Or the scene in Clerks where Dante's girlfriend says she's slept with three guys, but blown 37. Didn't need to know that. Oh, and if women are wondering, blowing 37 guys is worse than fucking 37 guys. Really. Why? Don't know for sure. The images of parked cars and cheap sex come to mind.
There is NO profit for a man to EVER ask that question, because the number, being more than zero, will always be higher than you want to hear. It's not that men want to marry virgins, they decidedly don't, but they don't need the details. Men can live a happy life guessing about who women screw without confirmation.
Women, for some reason, want to know every detail, or at least enough details which are none of their fucking business. Like the name of every woman you've slept with.
At the extremes, you get a Maury Povich baby daddy situation. Where we're not talking about one of two guys, but 13 guys within a month.
Look, any guy dumb enough to ask that question will not like the answer, because, A: it's probably an undercount, B: any number sucks, C: do you really want to fill your pretty little mind with images of your current woman blowing her boss after the Christmas Party? Or her last vacation with a boyfriend. To St. Tropez? No. Fuck no. Ignorance can be bliss and this is one of those times.
See, in my understanding, women often leave out some one nighters, guys who turned out to be duds and other strays. Now, guys usually count everyone, women like to leave a few aside. Which, as Maury Povich shows two-three times a week, can be a problem.
"I swear he's the only one, the baby looks just like him"
"Peanut, you are not the father."
After running off the stage, they usually fall down and scream "no, no, no, it has to be him. The test is wrong."
Maury usually holds them and says "no it isn't."
It's bad enough that you don't know who your child's father is, but to be wrong on national TV? That's gotta suck.
So a threesome slipped his mind, shit happens. If she had minded her fucking business, she wouldn't have been upset. She just needs him to be faithful, not inspect his entire sexlife. But think about this for a minute. You have a threesome with a supermodel and you fucking forget? How the fuck do you forget a threesome with Kate Moss?
"Oh, sorry about that? Yeah, we did do that. Kinda slipped my mind."
What kind of sex life did this guy have? One doesn't forget that kind of thing. Trust me on that.
He's got to have a lot of women around to forget that one.
the middlebrow Tom Joyner The voice of Hurricane Katrina. By Bryan Curtis Posted Wednesday, Sept. 21, 2005, at 3:57 PM PT
Who was the voice of Hurricane Katrina? Not CNN's Anderson Cooper, who met the floodwaters with a commensurate response from his own tear ducts. And not Kanye West, the hip-hop mogul, whose anti-Bush tirade was bush-league. Allow me to nominate Tom Joyner, the self-proclaimed "hardest working man in radio," who has out-hustled Cooper and out-sloganeered West. On The Tom Joyner Morning Show, which has 8 million listeners, Joyner has styled himself as the newsman, altruist, and social conscience of the hurricane. In the morning hours of Tuesday, Aug. 30, Joyner summoned reporters from black-radio affiliates across the South for an on-air debriefing. They described the early casualties while the TV networks stumbled into action. Joyner's verdict, reached instantly, was that Katrina's victims were mostly African-American. That morning, Joyner and Tavis Smiley, a longtime collaborator, dubbed the hurricane the "black folks' tsunami"—a phrase so catchy and wildly overheated that Al Sharpton was repeating it a day later.
To listen to the Joyner show lately has been to swim in an alternate media universe. What Fox News is to CNN—a refuge for the dispossessed—Joyner's radio show is to Fox News and CNN. His show is pitched to African-American listeners with an abiding distrust of the major news media. Since Katrina hit, Jesse Jackson has appeared on Joyner's show to make common cause; New Orleans mayor Ray Nagin and Lt. Gen. Russell Honore have called in to defend themselves. Joyner has begged listeners to donate plus-size clothing, explaining that Size 10 blouses will not fit many of those swimming out of New Orleans. He started his own relief fund, which has raised more than $1.5 million for Samaritans who are housing the displaced. This in addition to the free-range comedic riffs that characterize The Tom Joyner Morning Show. "They're gonna blame the mayor," one of Joyner's sidekicks quipped a few weeks ago. "It's the Nagin's fault. It's always the Nagin's fault." Substitute another n-word for "Nagin" and you get the joke—and a good idea of the worldview of The Tom Joyner Morning Show.
Joyner has been called "the most powerful media personality you've never heard of" so many times that I won't repeat the charge here. What makes Joyner worth pausing over is his retrograde vision for black radio. The more swollen Joyner's media empire has become—his show plays in 120 markets, and he has a new book and TV series in the offing—the smaller and more concentrated his vision. Joyner wants to move black radio back toward its founding mission, when radio was a subterranean political mechanism—a conduit, Joyner writes, for "talking specifically to black folks."
...........................
Underlying this folksiness is the idea that the Joyner show is a place to find out "what's really going on"— where truths overlooked by the TV stations and newspapers get told. "Black radio is culturally ingrained in African-Americans," Oscar Joyner told me. "We're culturally ingrained to listen to our radios because we know that's where we can speak directly to each other." Thus the parallel-universe feel of Joyner's show, where a regular soap-opera segment, "It's Your World," features black characters who are filthy rich; and where Red Cross President Marty Evans comes to seek the host's blessing after Hurricane Katrina. Black America Web, an Internet venture Joyner calls an "honest look at news from a black perspective," has lately featured headlines like "Dave Chappelle happy to be working clubs."
Joyner has stated that his show is not designed for white listeners. In his new book, I'm Just a DJ But…, he argues that "to deliberately try to cross over to attract white people is detrimental." Those of us who are white fans of the Joyner show find ourselves in a slightly odd position. One can admire his altruism while noting that this is a decidedly limited view. For those of us who insist on sticking around, Joyner encourages us to think of listening to The Tom Joyner Morning Show as eavesdropping—as "a chance to hear what we really talk about when they're not around." During Hurricane Katrina and the gruesome, racially tinged catastrophe that followed, that's exactly why I tuned in.
While Joyner doesn't air in New York anymore, he is the single most important black media personality. If it airs on his show, black America listens to it.
I would strongly suggest people listen to his show if they want to see how black people think. While black conservatives get face time, they simply havce no influence in the community. Black Republicans don't get much air time on his show because they simply don't merit the respect. Joyner represents the wide spectrum of black opinion in his guests and callers, and while conservatives get time, Republicans rarely do. People do not want to hear them.
One of the things that I think is missing from the political dialogue is a clear understanding of how black politics work. They see the Black GOP and think they have a constiutency, which simply doesn't exist when they get beyond C-SPAN and The Word. Joyner is far closer to a political barometer than any politician.
It clearly is a dialogue for and by black people, who are denied that in most other forums, BET is vulgar, cheap and ignorant. If you want to get a sense of black America, Joyner's a great place to start.
By DAVID E. ROSENBAUM and STEPHEN LABATON Published: September 24, 2005
WASHINGTON, Sept. 23 - Faced with accusations that the Bush administration is stocking the government with unqualified cronies, the Republican chairwoman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee is holding up the nomination of a lawyer with little background in immigration or customs to head the law enforcement agency in charge of those issues.
Democrats have seized on the political fury that developed over the apparent lack of qualifications of Michael D. Brown, the director, and others in the Federal Emergency Management Agency who were called on to deal with the calamity caused by Hurricane Katrina. Day after day, Democratic lawmakers have begun aggressively challenging the credentials of people President Bush wants to place in midlevel government positions.
The homeland security chairwoman, Senator Susan Collins of Maine, says she now wants to inquire further into the qualifications of Julie L. Myers to be assistant secretary of homeland security for immigration and customs enforcement.
The senior Democrat on the Senate committee, Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, said Friday that he was not persuaded by a confirmation hearing last week that Ms. Myers, who has worked the last four years at the White House and in several agencies, satisfied the legal requirement that the official in charge of the immigration agency have at least five years' experience in law enforcement and management.
Ms. Myers, 36, is on her honeymoon and cannot be immediately called to testify again. She has strong Republican connections and is the niece of Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Before she joined the Bush administration, she was a federal prosecutor in Brooklyn.
The White House continued to express support for her Friday.
So how many people had to die before Congress does their job?
GREENWICH, Conn., Sept. 23 - Even in Greenwich, the $15 million to $18 million fortune they stand to inherit stands out as serious money. And yet few would trade places with them. They are 11-, 8- and 5-year-old siblings who have endured nearly as much tragedy in their short lives as the waifs of the Lemony Snicket stories who lurch from crisis to crisis.
Last month, their mother was convicted of killing their father in 2003 at their luxurious Hong Kong home, after he learned of her affair with a television repairman. Their maternal grandfather moved them to Illinois to live with him but changed his mind after two weeks.
Then the rich uncle who gave them refuge at his picture-perfect home in Greenwich was charged with orchestrating a fraud that is punishable by years in prison and could leave him penniless. His wife, the children's main caregiver for the last year and a half, is seeking a divorce. She has said she would like to keep custody, but must battle creditors to preserve any semblance of the life she has led.
The question, then, of who will raise the three Kissel children, and, not coincidentally, what happens to the money their father left behind, will now be left to the American judicial system. Stamford Superior Court has begun revisiting the issue of temporary custody, and Surrogate's Court in Manhattan, which probated their father's will, is scheduled to take up the larger question of guardianship next Friday.
In the meantime, the squabbling continues, extending a spectacle that began overseas in late 2003 when Nancy Ann Kissel was accused of giving her husband, Robert P. Kissel, a Merrill Lynch executive, a sedative-laced milkshake before clubbing him to death. It spread here with this summer's news that Robert's brother, Andrew M. Kissel, was battling criminal and marital problems of his own.
Squaring off over custody and guardianship of the children are Andrew's estranged wife, Hayley Wolff Kissel, a former stock analyst on Wall Street, and his sister, Jane Kissel Clayton of Mercer Island, Wash.
Ms. Clayton has criticized the children's current living arrangement as "bleak and problematic" and accused her sister-in-law in court of using the children as pawns to solve her own deepening financial woes.
Court records show that the Kissels of Greenwich received $170,000 from Robert P. Kissel's estate last year and are operating under an agreement in which the estate allots $8,000 a month toward the children's food, clothing, travel, sports, gifts and baby sitter, an amount that can rise or fall on the basis of actual expenses. Major outlays like tuition and medical bills are not expected to come from that but are paid directly by the estate.
"Hayley has represented to me that her and Andrew's legal problems have left her in a desperate financial situation and that she intends to fight for custody of Robbie's children - even though she admits that it is not in their best interests to remain with her - in order to benefit from their considerable assets," Ms. Clayton wrote in an affidavit.
Though Hayley Kissel petitioned for divorce earlier this year and is now embroiled in civil litigation stemming from Andrew's ill-fated deals, she seems prepared to do battle over the three children, Elaine, June and Reis, as well.
She notified Stamford Superior court last month that she was interested in remaining responsible for the children despite her own changed circumstances. Without disclosing much detail about the tumult in her life, she wrote, "I take my role as custodian very seriously, care deeply for the welfare of the Kissel children and am happy to continue as temporary custodian."
Lawyers and family members say they believe she is the author of an item posted on the Web earlier this month by an author identified only as H who described seeing to it that her three young charges had the same fun-filled year as her two children: a year packed with sleepovers with friends, music lessons and weekend ski trips. Although it is "far from a perfect situation," the writer wrote, "they are doing well, all things considered."
Wow, this is just fucked up.
Tell me these kids will be normal. Please.
Because this is like All My Children and Lemony Snicket, without the jokes.
This looks like this will get very ugly, very quickly.
A memorial to Army Sgt. Michael Mitchell of Porterville, California, who was killed in Iraq April 4, 2004, rests on the grass near the Washington Monument in Washington Friday, Sept. 23, 2004.
Diane Ibbotson and H. Elaine Johnson are grieving mothers. Both lost sons in Iraq, and both feel strongly enough about the war to travel to the nation's capital for demonstrations. That is where the similarities end.
Johnson will be protesting the war, while Ibbotson will be speaking out in support of the military action.
Organizers of Saturday's anti-war protest predict about 100,000 people will crowd the Ellipse near the White House for a rally and march. Among those expected are Cindy Sheehan, the California mother who drew thousands of protesters to her 26-day vigil outside President Bush's Texas ranch last month.
Sheehan's 24-year-old son, Casey, was killed in an ambush in Sadr City, Iraq, last year. Ibbotson's son, Forest Jostes, was killed in the same ambush.
Ibbotson, from Albion, Ill., said war protesters dishonor the service of her son and others who have died.
"There are families who lose children in accidents, in tragic illnesses. Young people die and it seems without a purpose," said Ibbotson, whose son was 21. "My son gave his life for a cause that he believed in. He fought and died for God and country."
Ibbotson is part of the Iowa-based group Families United for Our Troops. She's one of 25 "Gold Star" families who lost loved ones in Afghanistan or Iraq who will speak at a news conference Saturday morning and then attend a rally for military families on the Mall on Sunday.
Johnson, from Orangeburg, S.C., lost her son, Darius Jennings, when his Chinook helicopter was shot down in Iraq in November 2003. The United States, she said, should not have invaded Iraq.
"My son gave his life for his country," she said. "The war was a mistake from the beginning, so my son died for oil."
Darius Jennings was 22. Johnson says she will continue to speak out against the war until the last soldier is brought home.
Arrrgh. These are not competing anything.
One is a small astroturf march, one a grassroots movement.
I know they both have valid viewpoints, but reporters need to explain that one march is tiny, like all pro-war events and one is massive and will fill the streets of Washington.
There is a false equivilency here. The oppostion to the war is growing. People no longer support it and Bush can only come up with the lamest excuses for it. Katrina ended that and Rita is putting the exclaimation point on it.
Robert George is a black Republican columnist in these parts. He mentioned my name in a post and I had to reply to him. Now, I like Bob, because he's generally a nice guy, but he should be ashamed to be a Republican.
The president finally spoke to the country Thursday to outline his plans for rebuilding the Gulf region -- at a cost of well over $200 billion: "As emergency expenditures soar -- with new commitments as high as $2 billion a day -- some budget analysts and conservative groups are warning that the Katrina spending has combined with earlier fiscal decisions in ways that will wreak havoc on the government's finances for years to come."
Not surprisingly, there are many GOPers gasping at the divergence between Republican principles and the nation's actual spending record under several years of Republican majority status.
But, my concern goes beyond simple philosophical discussion over budget priorities: Yes, I have a certain set of beliefs related to the size of government, the appropriateness of certain social welfare programs and the proper level of taxation. But, it's also more than that. My Republican sensibility extends beyond just basic values and personal preference. I happen to be a black person who's invested a fair bit of time actively involved in this "party of Lincoln."
That time (approximately 18 years and counting right now) has been spent as something of a translator -- official or otherwise -- between the party and the black community. In many ways, this is just an extension of the position many professional African Americans find themselves in the context of American society -- "explaining" some black sentiment or reaction that their white colleagues might not understand.
Similarly, working in a Republican leadership office AND for the co-chairman of the Republican National Committee, one becomes a "spokesman" for the party whether that happens to be in the job description or not.
I don't exactly like talking about this in public. I mean, why give Steve Gillard the satisfaction? (Hey, Steve, if you're going to do an all-out slam on black conservatives, at least spell the names correctly: It's Deroy Murdock. The fact is that, with respect to those on the right, Steve has as good/evil Manichean worldview -- "you're either with us or your against us"-- as the president he so despises.)
We've been down this road before. But, it's seen as an isolated incident -- except, how isolated can it be when it occurs over and over again. How long can all this same BS go on? How long before the Republican Party gets it? What if it never does?
The newest buppie kid on the block, the National Black Republican Association, managed to implode less than a month after it's much ballyhooed launch, primarily because of a difference of vision -- though the Katrina political aftermath is said to have something to do with it:
[T]here also were questions surrounding approval of the latest news release issued by the NBRA, praising President Bush's leadership after Hurricane Katrina. "President Bush is to be commended for deploying all of the resources of the federal government to help the refugees," [Chair Frances] Rice stated in the release.
Christopher Arps, the group's former communications director, disputes that characterization:
This is not the case! The disagreement was a question of style and content of the press release more than the substance. I felt it was reprehensible for the Congressional Black Caucus and similar groups to use the disaster for partisan advantage to foster more racial divide. In a time of such a momentous disaster, I felt the NBRA should take the high road and encourage our citizens to give their time, money, and other resources to help the victims of this tragedy.
I take Christopher at his word, but even in the context of his own personal post, it's clear that Katrina created some tremors that were uniquely problematic for black Republicans.
The truth is that I had two fairly lengthy conversations with two African American men last week (before Bush's speech). They are both in their 50s and have been Republican their entire lives. They both currently live in the Washington, DC area but have never met.
From each, there was a sense of sad resignation, a feeling of, "How can we going through this one more time -- after we've had to so many times before?"
To use the tortured metaphor of the moment, one could say that if the initial Katrina response could be considered, "the hurricane" -- something that caused a fair bit of damage -- well then, what can we call the continued outpouring of rhetorical stupidty pouring from the mouths of prominent Republicans?
................
Bob, don't you dare suggest that my opnion on you people is a solitary one.
You know damn well that it isn't, and it's not my fault your loyalty is to people who don't respect you. Most black people are ashamed of black Republicans and you know it. Maybe in your little parties you might buck each other up, but in the real world, you're just pathetic clowns, begging for scraps at massa's table. And believe me, I despise Bush a lot less than those people who's kids are in Iraq. Those black people detest Bush in ways you cannot imagine.
My father was a Republican when blacks couldn't be Democrats. He stopped voting for them years ago, because they moved away from him. I don't know about you new Black Republicans, always running after people who could care less about you or your people.
Come on, Bob, we both know that you're the token Republican negro on TV. At least you're honest, unlike Armstong Williams. Murdoch, Murdock, it's still spelled s-l-a-v-e in the end. Because he works for racists, and not the subtle kind either. If he were a man, and not a slave, he would have quit NRO a long time ago, but espeically after Derbyshire's little rant. I mean he works with a black man and still thinks he's inferior. A normal person would have more pride than that. What kind of self-hatred would keep a man working there when his coworkers think black life has no value.
Some problems? Are you joking? Most black people believe Bush left those people to die and plans to steal their land for gentrification. They don't believe there no accident in this, and there is not one of your motley crew with the credibility to speak to Black America without a snicker to your face to counter that. Condi showed her love for black people by seeing Spamalot. I don't think Eric Idle would have done that.
I don't take any satisfaction in your plight, I am just ashamed you people are all so spineless, hoping the GOP will finally love you, we the rest of us can see that they never will.
Why are you still a Republican, Bob? You're a bright guy. You know the GOP stabs black people in the back like the bayonet course at Parris Island. You think you're some kind of bridgehead for black people in the GOP? Are you insane? The GOP loves to run against black people, like we're making their lives harder. Sure, they smile at their house negros, pat y'all on the head, but they won't ssacrifice the time of day for you. Some people, like Kemp and McCain mean well, but they're outnumbered and outgunned by the redneck coalition. Lincoln's been dead a long time and he didn't like black people all that much to begin with. I'd rather be a member of the party of Roosevelt, Franklin, that is.
Bob, you misunderstand me.
It's not with or against us, us being black people, not the Democratic Party.
It's that I don't respect you and your friends, because none of you act like men and women. You act like servants to the man in the big house.
Do you think we're blind? We see what happens to you when you expect to be treated like a Republican. You get treated like a bad puppy, shoved in a corner and hit with a rolled up newspaper. The GOP doesn't even respect you enough to talk to you when they need advice. They rather talk to their bought and paid for ministers. But then, it's not like black people will send any of you to Capitol Hill.
When was the last time you or any Republican did black radio? If you had to rely upon the black community for support, you'd be as broke as a junkie.
You even list the comments of your GOP "friends" about how they could care less about dead black people, forget the living ones.
Bob, do you know why most black people have no respect for black Republicans? Did it ever cross your mind?
You're listing insult after insult and you're still defending the party? What the hell is wrong with you? You're wondering about defending the GOP after they have verbally smacked black people in their face during their worst time since Reconstruction? I mean, you have to think about this?
Black people would respect you if you just stood up for us. You never confront your racist party members, you never challenge their racist words and plans, and you wonder why most black people hold you in contempt?
Please, Bob. We can't respect people who don't respect themselves.
Update: Lower Manhattanite posted a brilliant comment which deserves to be seen up frot
Damn, Steve! That was a rough takedown. Poor Bob was crossin' the middle looking upfield and as soon as the ball settled in his grasp--BAM! The Gill(i)ard clothesline shiver! Snot, sweat and clumps of turf a 'flyin in super slo-mo.
Give that poor kid some smelling salts. Whew!
On the serious tip, I almost feel a little sorry for ol' Bob. I see him all the time on NY1 defending this indefensible GOP position and that one, looking oddly sad and out of place--his froggy, little visage in a perpetual state of furrow as he tries to spin imbedded, ten-ton blocks of blatant hypocrisy and racism. He always looks a little bit besieged, like small ghosts only he can see of dead Black martyrs and leaders are flitting about him, clucking their tongues, pinching and kicking him for his self-destructive shilling for the GOP.
Reading the article, the l'il fella does seem somewhat conflicted. It's as if he's been hanging out with a vampire mentor for 18 years, unbitten and in denial about all the blood-drained deaths in the village. Then, while walking past a mirror with the mentor, he sees--holy sh*t!--his mentor has no reflection. The sight was over in a moment. Did it happen? Of course it did. He's not prone to hallucination. And now all those blue-faced corpses make sense--but no!--it just can't be, can it? Wouldn't that make all his mentor taught him, everything he's benefitted from just a lie?
What would that say about the value of the lie of a life/mindset he's led and promoted/"translated"?
The myth of a groundswell of Black Republicanism is just that. A sorry, tawdry little fable. There have always been just enough racism and self-hate damaged Black folks to replace the dinosaur Toms who die off, stuck in the tar pit of their own misguided beliefs. "Boy" George and his little buck-dancing band of replacements seem upset that they have to still act as bridges (lures), translators and spokesmen. Why do they have to work so damned hard when the message they bring is "soooo gooood"? Where are the numbers? Why can't they grow their group? (How small is the Black Republican wave? Let Bobby say it himself: Two lifelong African American Republicans the same age in D.C. who've never met? As sparse as Black GOP'ers are in D.C. and these guys have never crossed paths? Case rested, baby.) Bob gives away the game with his own words as he runs down the litany of disses, slights and outright smackdowns he and his fellow noir knockdown clowns face from his GOP patrons. Black folks in general know the deal about the GOP, what it stands for and who it tends to kick squarely in the nuts.
And they don't cotton (pun unintentional) to their own siding with the crew that screws 'em over. Think for a moment as to why Bush, knowing he was hated in NoLa couldn't send Condi or as a big favor to the ol' boss, Colin down there as a proxy. Because those desperate, dissed and dumped-on folks would've kicked their *sses as hard as Dubya's. They are seen, and rightly so as pawns, marketing tools and shifty, Black, open back doors to somehow sneak the GOP agenda through. Folks ain't buyin' it and Katrina just removed any impulse to even window shop.
How hard are Black folks on the GOP and the little lawn jockeys who shill for it? Even Black Democrats who cozy up too close to the GOP lose almost all credibility. Witness the case of Floyd Flake, onetime "Dem" congressman from St. Albans. Leader of the massive Allen AME church there with a flock in the thousands. Always leaning a bit conservatively, he started palling around with Al D'Amato, George Pataki and worse, Rudy Giuliani in return for pork leveraged from a GOP congress and soon took to visibly supporting them. Once he did that, this leader of one of the largest Black congregations in NY, a gifted orator, in the media capital of the world found that he had NO pull beyond his little bourgie South Jamaica fiefdom.
He was seen as an Uncle Tom for his cozying up and has never recovered from it--in spite of his remaining if in name only, a Democrat. Black folks look at the GOP and see Helms, Thurmond, Lott, Nixon, Reagan, white robes by cross-light and "Black bodies swinging from the poplar trees." And if you're a Black person who deigns to ally him or herself with said GOP you're looked at as either dumb, a joke, a mercenary and often all three.
How many times have I heard Black folks mock the odd, glassy-eyed, almost holographically projected look Black conservatives have when called on to be on camera and explain away this GOP gaffe or that one? Too many to mention. I was in Augusta a few years ago for a function when on the TV appeared Shelby Steele, trotted out to deflect the GOP indignity of the week against Black folks. A woman I did not know and assumed to be in Shelby's camp politics-wise commented venomously about how he appeared unreal and "computer generated". "All these Uncle Tom negroes have that look...kinda blurry, like they're not actually there, y'know?"
The crowd erupted into derisive laughter at the poor brow-furrowed Steele's expense. They then for the next fifteen minutes pointed out a slew of these "computer-generated" negroes and how ridiculous they seemed.
Someone goofed about them being little more than computer files the GOP punches up, like the holographic message from Princess Leia in "Star Wars".
When one person said "Let's see...lemme scroll through...ah! Here it is! Ward Conerly 2.0! Let's use that one!" the room collapsed into guffaws.
Black folks for the overwhelmingly large part have no use for the GOP and it's wooly-headed minions of bridge-building. Bob knows it, knows why, and it pains him...moreso than his fellow minions, but his pain is palpable and apparent in his questioning column title.
Like I said...I almost feel a little sorry for the kid.
A bus carrying elderly Hurricane Rita evacuees from the Houston area has burst into flames outside Dallas, killing at least 24 people trapped inside.
Multiple explosions were heard before the bus became engulfed in flames, lighting the morning sky near Wilmer, a southern suburb of Dallas, witnesses said.
The bus was carrying 38 residents of the Brighton Gardens of Bellaire home, owned by McLean, Virginia-based Sunrise Senior Living.
The fire shut Interstate 45, a major escape artery for hurricane evacuees from the Houston area going toward Dallas and beyond.
Traffic reportedly was backed up at least 32 kilometres and officials diverted drivers on another highway.
Some passengers used oxygen tanks, although it was not immediately known if they contributed to the blaze, according to the Dallas County Sheriff's Department.
The bus driver survived. He and sheriff's deputies helped several of the survivors, who were rushed to Dallas-area hospitals, out of the vehicle before it was engulfed.
The carcass of the bus was covered in blue tarps - bodies still aboard - so it could be hauled away.
"Sunrise has been devastated by this tragedy," Sunrise chief executive Paul Klaassen said. "Our hearts go out to the families and friends of the residents involved in this unfortunate incident."
The White House has issued a statement, saying that US President George W Bush was saddened to hear reports of the explosion.
"He was briefed on that this morning in his hurricane briefing. Our thoughts and prayers are with the families of the victims. We were all saddened to learn of the news," spokesman Scott McClellan told reporters.
Jen
Okay, the oxygen contributed to this. Now, one of two things caused this:
--someone smoking on the bus or --the bus had extra, improperly-secured cans of gas in it.
I bet on the latter. With stories of gas shortages rampant, I betcha the driver didn t want to chance getting stuck.
Sep 22, 2005 — An interfaith group released a new textbook Thursday aimed at teaching public high school students about the Bible while avoiding legal and religious disputes.
The nonprofit Bible Literacy Project of Fairfax, Va., spent five years and $2 million developing "The Bible and Its Influence." The textbook, introduced at a Washington news conference, won initial endorsements from experts in literature, religion and church-state law.
American Jewish Congress attorney Marc Stern, an adviser on the effort, said despite concern over growing tensions among U.S. religious groups, "this book is proof that the despair is premature, that it is possible to acknowledge and respect deep religious differences and yet still find common ground."
Another adviser, evangelical literature scholar Leland Ryken of Wheaton College, called the textbook "a triumph of scholarship and a major publishing event."
The colorful $50 book and forthcoming teacher's guide, covering both Old and New Testaments, are planned for semester-long or full-year courses starting next year.
The editors are Cullen Schippe, a retired vice president at textbook publisher Macmillan/McGraw-Hill, and Chuck Stetson, a venture capitalist who chairs Bible Literacy. The 41 contributors include prominent evangelical, mainline Protestant, Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Jewish and secular experts.
Gilly--oh, you mean that "interfaith" group had Hindus, Muslims, and Buddhists on it? Hey Shtetl Jews--putting a "Chanukkah Bush" on your front lawn still won't stop kids from spraypainting swatstikas on your car. This is NOT "Interfaith"--this is "Jesus was Christian" disguised Christofascism. Stop aiding and abetting the enemy!
Jen is a more social person than I and thus gets more e-mail than I do from various groups. If it isn't a social event, it's an e-mail list
From: Chameleon
Title: Nomadic Canadian chick visiting NYC after Burni...
Hey all, I'm returning to one of my favorite cities to visit after a LONG absence...haven't been back since I arrived from Amsterdam back in early 2002. I'm a street performer (fire poi & hoop, hand drums) and I also do astrology readings (sexual compatibility, relationship guidance and personal counselling) tarot readings (Zen Osho deck, Cosmic Tribe, Medicine Wheel, Goddess Oracle) and I've been working as a freelance writer & photographer and a house & pet sitter for about 8 years now...which is how I manage to travel the globe and see new places. That's also what brought me to NYC in the first place years ago.
So if anyone needs a reading, please contact me. I do all my readings by donation, so please don't worry about the money aspect of it, if you need help I'm here for you regardless of your financial situation. Barter and trades are also VERY welcome (especially for a couch to crash on or dinner, etc) so if you need some insight, please let me know. Cash is always helpful as well but I prefer barter, to tell the truth.
I also have a number of other work skills I'm offering in exchange for some aid with some gear, which I'll list below. I'm in dire need of a laptop, a small tape recorder for taking notes, and a digital video camera (with a camera person ideally!) to travel down to Venezeula in January and film the World Social Forum while I'm down there. I've been doing research over the past few years on sustainable alternative communities and alternative ways to live other than by conventional capitalist means and now I'm ready to film, so any help in this endeavour would be appreciated. I'm also moderator of the Dream CO(llective) tribe: dreamcollective.tribe.net if you want to see what else I've been working on.
Here are some of my other skills that I can offer as a work trade in exchange for your help on this project:
-Editor, proofreader, researcher, reviewer, press release writer -Event/party organizer, promoter and decorater -PA, video editor, script writer, transcriber -Gourmet chef, personal assistant, dog walker -Caretaker, gardener, carpentry assistant, painter
The list goes on and on, I was a DJ in clubs in Hawaii, ran a pirate radio station out on my house back in Canada, I've been a 'plant manicurist' for a number of years, done HTML coding, erotic photography, I was an English tutor in Italy, etc, etc. Basically, let me know what you need done and I can probably help out.
Mad love to all and keep dreaming, Lilith the Chameleon
Jen Note the complete lack of a job description, but seemingly unlimited cash supply. Anyone who says that "anyone can get by like this" is full of shit.
You know, what about a portfolio? A real resume? A list of projects worked on? Look, Daddy sends her some cash when she gets low and now she wants to become your problem. What this sounds like is a rich girl who's gotten a free ride and now is looking for her next free ride.
Look, doing a little ok is not going to get you a job, especially when you're asking for a fucking laptop to go to Venezuela.
She prefers barter? Only rich people think like this. Only rich people can pick up and move from country to country. People who have bills to pay do not practice fire poi, whatever the fuck that is.
Jen and I have been broke as fuck for parts of our lives. It drive us nuts when we see a trustifarian, you can bet your ass that she didn't barter those tickets to Amsterdam, with vague job skills looking for what is basically a handout.
The problem is that she's never been committed to anything. She flits from job to job like a pair of Ferragamos in Condi's closet.
I mean the whole e-mail reads like rich daddy neo-hippie chick. But more than that, it reads unreliable. You don't do 87 jobs if you're good at one of them.
John Tabin created a website to post the syndicated versions of Times columnists. The Times now has to run around and stop their subscribers from posting up their columns
Cyrus Farivar, who interviewed me on Tuesday, has a story about Never Pay Retail up at Wired News.
When Farivar talked to New York Times Digital flak Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf Diane McNulty, she noted the change in the New York Times News Service's syndication policy, and, like NYTNS Exectutive Editor Lawrence M. Paul in the Editor & Publisher story the other day, insisted that everything is under control:
Upon being alerted to the existence of Never Pay Retail, McNulty said that the Times has contacted the publishers of the online editions of those newspapers and that the posts were all honest mistakes or oversights.
As of now, the Kristof column is still there, though the link from the PI's opinion page is not.
The Times said that it's watching for sites that don't follow the syndication rules.
"We don't expect such infringements to spread or to last long and we will be keeping a close eye on it," McNulty said.
Well, I'll be keeping a closer eye on it, too.
UPDATE: Commenter stosine asks: "How about linking to people who post columns on internet bulletin boards? I'm sure some must do that, and google can search them out." Yes, there is a copy of today's Bob Herbert column that you can find, if you really want it, by searching Google Groups (a reader emailed it to me), but we hashed this out the other day, and though such cut-and-pastes may technically be legal, most commenters seemed to share my discomfort with going that route.
The Times managers don't understand that no one is going to pay $50 for their columns. I mean, it's a dumb idea to begin with, because the price is at least $20 dollars too much. Second, they are under the misapprehension that their columns are essential to the public discourse online.
Well, sure, when they were free. But now? Hell no. There's nothing like a formal boycott, but you don't see the Times columnists quoted on the blogs.
When I wanted to sign up for the free trial, they wanted my credit card number. Fuck no. Not for a trial.
If the Times could have done this more ineptly, I don't know how. I think it comes from the world of thinking too highly of themselves.
As Rita Nears, Chaos Spreads # Massive evacuation order causes gridlock. Landfall is expected near the Texas-Louisiana border, and forecasters warn of storm surges.
By Scott Gold, Nicole Gaouette and Stephen Braun, Times Staff Writers
BEAUMONT, Texas — With Hurricane Rita bearing down on the Texas and Louisiana coastline, authorities ordered more than 2 million people to flee inland, setting off marathon traffic jams that paralyzed major highways for hours, straining fuel supplies and spreading anxiety in both states.
After surging to a Category 5 hurricane with 175-mph winds, Rita eased to Category 4 by nightfall Thursday, still brimming with 140-mph winds that extended out at least 80 miles and forming massive cloud cover that loomed over half the Gulf of Mexico.
One day from Rita's expected landfall, the storm taxed the massive preparations of a region still reeling from Hurricane Katrina and confronted fleeing evacuees with a cascade of personal crises.
Hundreds of thousands of Texans heading away from the area in cars and vans overloaded with possessions endured hours of gridlock in wilting 90-degree heat. Some spent an entire day in their cars, inching through traffic. Some diverted to gas stations only to find many pumps out of fuel. Long convoys of yellow school buses, lined as if on field trips, ferried thousands of poor and car-deprived residents who suffered long hours without air conditioning.
Long lines and chaos snarled evacuees when they tried to catch flights out from either of Houston's airports. After about 100 federal security screeners failed to report to work Thursday, scores of passengers missed flights and waited for hours at sparsely monitored X-ray machines and luggage conveyors. Transportation Security Administration officials were at a loss for an explanation and scrambled to send in a team of replacement workers from Cleveland.
Forecasters said the hurricane would come ashore somewhere between Galveston and the Louisiana border, but emergency officials were told that the likely landfall point was near the Texas towns of Beaumont, Port Arthur and Sabine Pass. The National Weather Service warned of storm surges 15 to 20 feet high and the prospect of flooding miles inland.
Wow, this is amazing. Houston's roads are clogged, the TSA workers decide to save their own asses. At a loss? Are they fucking insane? This is a $10 dollar an hour job. They were told to evacuate, which they did. What? They were going to walk around in a hurricane to tend an empty airport.
No one is thinking. No one can plan. No one can prepare. This is just the flip side of Katrina. They enact a plan, but the plan is so flawed, it can kill people in massive traffic jams. No planning for refuelling, or food or water. Didn't anyone think evacuating the fourth largest city in the US might require some serious coordination?
Well, 14 hours into the traffic jam, people realized this might be flawed. Really flawed.
Why can the Cubans do this and not look like assclowns.
See, marriage can work out, the second time around, if you're rich
It's funny how people get their backs up when you suggest being a stay at home mom might not need a Yale degree.
I take the Times article as seriously as I took the WaPo article on blowjobs in junior high. Reporters need to write, sometimes they find a couple of people to make a story.
Relying on the ideas of 19 year olds about their future is, well, unreliable, but it makes great copy.
But there is an underlying reality here which I want to deal with.
First of all, the option of staying at home with children exists for the very rich and the very poor. Most of us do not have that option. High tax school districts, mortgages, credit card bills, all make a one income family a very difficult act to pull in 2005 America. Now it's nice to have fantasies about this, but like the perfect wedding, the odds are against you.
And all that rubbish about needing to be home with kids is about your ego, more than reality.
Let me explain: my sister is a day care administrator, my mother was a day care provider for 14 years. This idea that day care is some impersonal farm for kids is just wrong. When I worked in one, what I noticed that kids thrived being around other kids. I think the best thing parents can do is reenforce what a good day care teaches.
Because, and I've done it, sitting at home with kids is boring. You can only watch Clifford for so many hours before you take the kids in the street to play.
Now, some women are geared towards that, they're good at it, but many simply are not. They can't discipline their kids, they aren't socialized, they're brats. They find rasing kids at home to be oppressive. Which why, when you go around Manhattan, kids are farmed off to immigrant nannies or au pairs. Then they wait to get the kids into the right nursery, then the right private school.
This idea of 2 kids in a white picketboard fence house is not something most of us can expect in our lives. Sure, people can try it for a couple of years, but kids do not get cheaper as they grow older. The fact is that even with a Yale degree and professional credentials, our bills will keep us all working to some degree.
The point I made about stay at home dads in the first post was lost. Now, some guys are perfectly fine home with the kids. But the article depicted a world of high achiever men and women. I can't imagine some guy at a white shoe law firm going back to Rye with the tots. He's far more likely to leave his wife first. These guys, even if they're losers, will not admit it.
Now, if a guy can raise kids at home, that's great, but the odds of him being a rich, high achieving male who can afford to do so are low. Unless your name is Mel Gibson.
The other factor is divorce.
Guys who make a lot of money tend to be around a lot of eager young women, all looking to be the exciting partner he thought he had at home. So you can be loyal for 20 years, it just takes one year to make your marriage part of history. And what happens to a lot of women is this: they get poor.
These girls are forgetting the fact that money brings independence , and kids will like mommy a lot more if they can keep their friends and stay in a nice house and not move in with grandma while mommy takes a real estate course.
I think these girls are worried about the wrong thing. Being a good parent is providing security above all else. It isn't feeding them or taking them on play dates, but making sure that when bad things happen, you can protect them. Your kids will not mind day care. They like playing with the other kids. They will mind living off food stamps when they didn't before. They'll mind the Salvation Army shopping trips. They'll mind moving from a house to an apartment.
They will mind losing both their father and their lives.
I think women need to be independent. If they can make enough money and raise their kids at home, that's great. If they can't, working is better for everyone concerned. Because there is nothing worse than realizing that when daddy goes, and that's 50 percent of all marriages, so does their entire life.
These girls have the gift of indpendence with their degree. They can work anywhere, do anything. And that is a great gift to pass down to kids. The ability to live life on their terms. Now, being a stay at home mom may be that, and that is how I was raised, but in 2005 America, that's not reality for the vast majority of people.
The new pint-size Panda, available at Pet Smart and Petco today.
Chris Bowers makes some good points, but I disargee on others.
First of all, I'm not in the business of editing other people's writing. If I see a blog post worth reading, it's worth reprinting in full.
Why? Because that person wrote what they wrote, the way they wrote. Editing is tricky. You start chopping up people's words, you delute their meaning. When asked, I always want my words reprinted in full. I don't want them edited.
In my experience, people have been grateful I've posted their words in full, which has boosted their traffic. Why? Because if you like what someone writes, you're likely to click on the link and keep reading them. A good paragraph isn't enough. I think it's the best way to promote people, let them express themselves the way they want to without you picking their words.
The problem with websites, and I've been doing this for 10 years, is that it isn't like print, it's like radio or TV. You have to get people in 10 seconds or less. The writing has to be vivid. If someone takes the time to make a point, why are you dicking around with their words.
I also like to reprint comments as well. Why? Because people often have great ideas and exposing them is important.
When you edit professionally, you can work with the writer to shape a piece. But when you get a blog post or Kos Diary, picking words can simply ruin the impact of a piece.
Also, I don't think people hit links all the time. A lot of people read blog posts via e-mail or printout. They don't see it on the web. So by not reprinting a piece in full, you may do the writer a disservice.
As far as building traffic, there is no single way. But one key is to write cleverly. Some people are great at snippy three word comments, others at essays. But everyone is different, there is no one route to success.
As far as blogrolling goes, I don't have one. I use my links for personal reseach. Now, I'll run posts from sites and that does seem to work to draw readers, but I think a blogroll is pretty much useless. Blogrolls just sit there. A post shows how talented and interesting you are.
Chris also suggests niche blogging, but to do that you really have to have expertise in an area. I mean, it has it's own demands and it's a lot harder than just commenting on the news. I mean, if you comment on the law, a law degree would help.
Use of the Common Creative license for blogs should be a lot more common. People should want their unedited words spread around. Excerpts are as likely to get ignored as not. People need to understand that blogs are not just read online. Writers need to make it easier for the reader to understand the points they're making without having to hit a link, because they may not be able to.
I don't look at blogging as a writing exercise as much as a conversation exercise. The idea is to have a conversation, sometimes, that's with my words, sometimes with the Guardian or the Times. I don't think you waste time writing something someone else has written perfectly well. That's just an act of ego and it sucks up a lot of time where people can be discussing ideas.
Sure, blogs are written, but without comments, conversation, they're just masturbation in print.
Also, people who waste their time worrying about traffic are doing the one thing which will not help them get exposure. This is a written medium, you have to write well to succeed. It doesn't matter on what, but you have to do it. If you can build an audience, your traffic will grow. If you worry about it and being blogrolled, your mind is not correct. You should worry about doing your best, keep your readers interested. The rest may or may not come. But that's a distraction. If you're happy with what you run, then you're doing a good job.
This is a form letter response on how to build blog traffic and influence.
Dear anonymous blogger,
Around 25-30 times a week, at least, I receive emails from bloggers such as you asking me to put them on the MyDD blogroll. Overall, in less than a year and a half of blogging, I have easily received more than 1,000 such requests. By now, if "blogroll" or "link" is in the title of an email sent to me from someone I don't know, I simply delete that email without even reading it.
I am not angry that people send me these emails. In fact, it has happened so often that by now even annoyance has worn away. There are many benefits of blogging "fame," and they have dramatically changed my life for the better. I simply accept requests to be blogrolled as a fact of life now, and I don't imagine that this letter will cause them to stop (much as I didn't imagine that my Diary Purge post would cause inappropriate diaries to cease).
I can imagine that many "smaller" bloggers have a significant amount of justifiable frustration toward the "mid-major" and "A-list" blogs. After all, such blogs do engage in a number of annoying activities, such as:
1-1. "A-list" bloggers seem to link to each other a lot more often than they link to smaller blogs.
1-2. When they do link to smaller blogs, many "A-list" bloggers will reprint a significant amount of the post they are linking, thus giving readers little reason to visit the website in question.
1-3. Even when "A-list" bloggers don't quote much of the post they are linking to, they have far more commenters at their site, thus often times making the "A-list" blog that links the post, rather than the small blog that wrote the post, the better place to go for a conversation about the post.
1-4. Often times, "A-list" bloggers seem to do little more than quote whatever just came off the news wire, add a sentence or two of banal commentary, and that's their post. I mean, that gets you tens of thousands of readers a day? You have got to be kidding me.
There are defenses for some of these activities, and for others there are none. On the first point, there are literally tens of thousands of progressive political blogs in America, and how many can someone really read in a day? I myself read about ten or fifteen a day. On some days, I'll read up to twenty-five. That is a lot of reading, and it still only covers a miniscule fraction of what is on offer out there. Do you really expect all A-list bloggers to read several hundred blogs every day and report back with the best of what they saw?
The second point is not defensible, and it is a practice that should be avoided at all costs. Don't rip off smaller bloggers, A-listers. Make people go to their websites to read what they wrote.
The third point simply cannot be avoided. There is nothing that can be done about that. It is no one's fault.
The fourth point is also something that, at least in my opinion, is a pretty lame habit that has set in on a lot of blogs. Even leaving aside the copyright issues that may arise from it, I don't go to blogs to hear two sentences of commentary on an article in the New York Times. That just isn't interesting, and it isn't why blogging took off. Give me something I can't get anywhere else. That is why I started reading Dailykos and MyDD--because they gave me information about the 2002 midterms I couldn't get anywhere else.
However, even with these issues aside, as a serious student of blog traffic, I'm hear to tell bloggers of all shapes and sizes that linking, especially blogrolling, is neither the main engine for building website traffic nor is it the main way for validating that what a website is doing is productive. First, here are some points about the impact of blogrolls on blog traffic:
2-1. Blogroll links do jack squat for traffic. With few exceptions, traffic from blogrolls accounts for less than 2% of all blog traffic. With one exception that I will explain below, this is even the case at MyDD, even though we are linked by several hundred blogs, including every "A-list" progressive political blog there is.
2-1A. The exceptions to the above rules are very rare. The most obvious exception is the blogroll link to MyDD on Dailykos, which accounts for around 5-10% of all traffic to MyDD. The extreme case of this particular blogroll cannot be emphasized enough, since MyDD is allotted a special, premiere "blogfather" blogroll link on what is easily the largest political blog in the world. Even then, it still only brings in 1,000-2,000 daily readers (not that I'm complaining, and thank you very much kos). That should give you an idea how much other blogroll links are worth in terms of traffic.
2-1B. The only other exceptions I can think of to this rule have to do with specialized blogrolls and webrings. For example, MyDD receives a disproportionate amount of its incoming blogroll traffic from blogrolls that only list Philadelphia progressive political blogs. If a blogroll tells you what you are going to get when you click through the link, someone is more likely to click through that link. This is because when someone looks at a Philly blogroll, they are probably looking for Philadelphia bloggers. I am sure the same works for any area or topic.
2-2. The larger the blogroll, the less it does for traffic. Some blogrolls have several hundred links. These also tend to be the blogrolls with the highest number of "small" blogs linked. However, does anyone seriously think that anyone who reads a blog is going to sift through all 400 blogs to which it links? That would take several days of only doing that. There is a law of diminishing returns, where the larger the blogroll, the less traffic it generates to all blogs on the blogroll. And this is a law of diminishing returns on a tool that doesn't generate much to begin with.
Simply put, there is no number of blogs that could blogroll you, no matter how large they are, that will ever propel your blog even into "mid-major" status. Blogrolling isn't going to get you anywhere in terms of traffic. It has almost nothing to do with what separates the "A-list" blogs from the smaller blogs.
Here are some more traffic tips:
3-1. Over 80% of the daily traffic to almost every blog is generated by people going directly to the main URL of a blog without any prompting from a link, blogroll or web search. If you want to build an audience for your blog, you are going to have to get them to come in through the front door on a regular basis. More on how to do this later on.
3-2. The secondary traffic generator to blogs is web searches. It is entirely possible, though still difficult, to build up blog traffic through this means. Drudge Retort and Swing State Project are perhaps the best examples of this. I wrote for Swing State Project through 2004, and after the site had been around for long enough, eventually it came to dominate Google searches for a number of variations on "Swing State," which obviously was a common search in the 2004 election. Building your blog so that it comes up high on a number of common web searches is an effective means of building up traffic.
3-3. Traffic generated via links from larger blogs almost always doesn't last. After two days, your traffic spike will die down and, in all likelihood, every single new person who came to visit your blog will not return unless prompted with another link from a front-page blog. MyDD has been linked on the front page of either Atrios or Dailykos on at least one hundred occasions. If even 1% of the people who came through those links had become regular readers, our traffic would now be close to Eschaton's. It isn't. People come for the one post, but they don't stay. Like I said before, you need to get people to come in through the front door.
3-3A. The only exception I can think of to the previous rule is when you get several links from several big bloggers on several consecutive days. This can cause a blog to permanently change its traffic levels in a short period of time. I saw this happen to Captain's Quarter's and MyDD last year, and I saw it happen to Americablog this year. What happens in this circumstance is that so many people are being directed to your blog on such a regular basis, that before long they just start coming in through the front door on their own in order to save time. This however, is a very, very, rare occurrence, and can only happen when your blog is at the absolute center of a major online event. So, if you can consistently prove to be the absolute best source of information for something like, say, Gannon or polling information before an important election, then you might be good to go. More on this later as well.
3-4. Another means of improving traffic to your blog is to become a commenter and poster on the big blogs that cover the topics most similar to the topics you cover on your blog. This is a useful means of building up a reputation as a person to turn to on that subject(s). In fact, on some major blogs, even a comment can briefly generate decent traffic to your blog (as long as you post a link to your blog and you are trusted on that blog). Dailykos is the best example of this, as it has spawned a large number of "A-list" and mid-major blogs written by members of the Dailykos community.
Before I move onto a summary of what works and what doesn't, I'd like to cover the two points where I said "more on this later" in greater detail. How do you get more people to come in through your front door, and how do you become the center of a major event?
4-1. The answers to both questions are the same: don't write about everything. The primary "catch all" blogs have been firmly entrenched for some time. You will never be another Dailykos, another Atrios or another TPM. Those roles are covered. These three blogs have been at the very top of liberal blog traffic for nearly all of the past two and a half years, and unless one shuts down, that isn't going to change. BooMan Tribune has succeeded in becoming a pretty large blog even though it is new and writes about pretty much everything, but that was achieved primarily by drawing from several authors who had a lot of respect on Dailykos.
4-2. Find a niche (aka, brand yourself). Find a small number of topics you are comfortable writing about, and focus extensively on those. Find even one such topic. Write about the state, city, or neighborhood in which you live. Find a reporter you want to hassle. Find a single campaign you want to write about, like Bolton, and write about it over and over and over again. Do not, under any circumstances, delude yourself into believing that providing short commentary on several large quotes from news sources that address a wide variety of topics will ever generate more traffic to your site. This is especially the case if you already don't have much traffic. However, if you carve yourself a niche, people interested in that niche will start to turn to you on a regular basis. Best of all, large numbers of people will turn to you when that niche becomes important to a large number of people. This will also do a lot more to guarantee that what you are doing is useful, and properly targeted to the audience you want to reach. Progressive blogging has a difficult time targeting specific issues, so targeting yourself will instantly make you useful. Just look at Crooks and Liars (video blogging) or Juan Cole (Middle East policy) if you need any examples.
4-3. Take that niche and build yourself into a like-minded community. Comment on those blogs that focus on your niche. Stay in email contact with those bloggers who also focus on your niche. If there is no such community, or if the community you find is disorganized, the best thing to do is to build up a community around you. For example, if you live in the Phoenix area, and no one has started a progressive Phoenix blog ring, find other Phoenix bloggers and build one. Have regular get togethers, like Drinking Liberally and local DFA. Build an email listserv for yourselves, and create a graphic that advertises the webring. Exchange phone numbers. Almost instantly you will become a local authority that people interested in your target area will turn to--including local politicos. Not only that, when something big happens in your area, you will be authority that all of the big bloggers turn to. You can do this with single-issue based blog rings as well (as long as they don't spiral out of control in terms of size).
That is how you become a well-read and influential blogger. General blogrolling and front-page linking doesn't help. That is like when congressional campaigns post diaries on Dailykos--they might get a quick surge of visits to their website, but they won't get many people, if any, coming back to walk through their front doors on a regular basis.
So, to summarize, when looking to become better read and more productive / influential, here is what does not work:
Generalized blogrolling. Doesn't work no matter how many people blogroll you, and no matter how big those people are.
Writing about everything. The roles for "A-list" blogs that write about everything are already taken. You may not like that, but that won't change anything.
Being sporadically linked by "A-list" bloggers. Even if Atrios links you five times in a month, one month later your traffic will be right back where it started.
Standing alone. If you don't join other communities and / or build one around yourself, no one will notice you.
Being ripped off. People need to raise a lot more hell when bloggers quote too much from a post to which they are linking.
On the positive side, here is what does work:
Structure the URL's within, and the links to, your blog in a way that will allow them to turn up near the top of common web searches. You can do this entirely by yourself.
Focus your writing to become an expert on a small number of issues. MyDD doesn't write about everything--that isn't how we became big. People turn to us for election, activism, and strategy information.
Take part in blogs that have a focus similar to that of your blog. This is a good way of building up trust as an authority on your issues without anyone ever visiting your blog.
Build a like-minded community. Stay in touch with, and try to organize, bloggers who focus on the same subjects as you. This will do even more to build up authority and awareness of the subjects on which you focus.
Targeted blogrolling. Once you are a member of a community, develop a specialized blogroll that directs people around that community.
Becoming the center of a blogswarm. This doesn't happen very often, but if you are an established authority on a subject, it has a much better chance of happening to you.
Write every day. People won't keep coming through your front door if you are regularly closed. Personally, I have taken around twenty days off since I started blogging seventeen months ago, and that includes weekends. That may sound insane (because it is insane) but hey, if you don't have the stomach for it, reconsider your goals when it comes to blogging.
Write original material. If people just wanted to see a short comment on the news they can find at established outlets, they would hang out at bus stops all day and look at the expressions on faces as people read the newspaper. Blogging offers people ideas, viewpoints, and research they can't find elsewhere. Provide it to them, or they won't come back.
So yeah, I'm not going to blogroll you, but that wouldn't really help you anyway. It is easy to look at things on the surface and think that blogrolls are an important factor in building up a blog. However, if you spend a year and a half studying blog traffic like I have, and helping build two blogs up from nearly scratch to major status, the real causes for blog success become a lot clearer to you. Take the hard steps that actually work.
And if you ask me to blogroll you, from now on I'm just going to send you this post as an attachment.
All my best, Chris Bowers ww.mydd.com September 22, 2005
Who says you can't have a career and be a good mom? For most of history, men did. Now, Ivy League coeds are saying it for them.
Some of the most brilliant women at the most brilliant colleges are declaring that they will end, or at least curtail, their careers once they have children. So says an article that ran on the front page of yesterday's New York Times.
"My mother always told me you can't be the best career woman and the best mother at the same time," said one Yale sophomore, declaring she expects to be a stay-at-home mom by the time she is 30.
Leaving aside the fact that life is chock-full of potholes, even for Ivy League grads, what's incredible about this attitude is how demeaning it is - to women.
I speak not just as a mom who works. I speak as a woman who went to Yale just a few years after the first women were admitted. How we laughed at the reason we had been excluded for so long. Yale's mission was to educate a thousand leaders every year, the old rationale went. But if it started admitting women, it couldn't do that because women would never be leaders.
...................
What most stay-at-home moms do have a lock on is this: wealthy husbands. So, whether the bright young things aiming for uninterrupted motherhood admit it or not, they are aiming for a good catch, too, a la 1952. I suspect they did not put this on their Why I Want to Go to Yale applications.
Of course, 10 or 20 years after they've been at home and are ready to reenter the job market, they may be shocked to learn that a yellowing diploma does not open doors, no matter how smart its owner.
On that day, summoning all their education, leadership and credentials, these mild-mannered moms may just take up where their feminist foremothers left off: Leading a revolution, this time on behalf of returning women stonewalled by the working world.
And, as with the any great revolution, this will be better late than never.
By IAN FISHER and LAURIE GOODSTEIN Published: September 22, 2005
ROME, Sept. 21 - Homosexuals, even those who are celibate, will be barred from becoming Roman Catholic priests, a church official said Wednesday, under stricter rules soon to be released on one of the most sensitive issues facing the church.
The official, said the question was not "if it will be published, but when," referring to the new ruling about homosexuality in Catholic seminaries, a topic that has stirred much recent rumor and worry in the church. The official, who has authoritative knowledge of the new rules, spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the church's policy of not commenting on unpublished reports.
He said that while Pope Benedict XVI had not yet signed the document, it would probably be released in the next six weeks.
In addition to the new document, which will apply to the church worldwide, Vatican investigators have been instructed to visit each of the 229 seminaries in the United States.
Although work on the document began years ago under Pope John Paul II, who died in April, its release will be a defining act in the young papacy of Benedict, a conservative who said last spring that there was a need to "purify" the church after the deeply damaging sex scandals of the last several years.
The church official said the ban would pertain only to candidates for the priesthood, not to those already ordained. He also said the document did not represent any theological shift for the church, whose catechism considers homosexuality "objectively disordered."
Although the document has not been released, hints of what it will say are already drawing praise from some Catholics, who contend that such a move is necessary to restore the church's credibility and who note that church teaching bars homosexuals, active or not, from the priesthood.
Other Catholics say, though, that the test should be celibacy, not innate sexuality, and they predict resignations from the priesthood that can worsen the church's deep shortage of clergy.
"I'm hearing that some men will choose to leave, because if they don't, it would be like living a lie," said the Rev. Robert Silva, president of the American National Federation of Priests' Councils, who opposes a ban because it would be "extremely hurtful" to chaste gay priests who are serving the church.
But the church official who discussed the expected new rules said the document called for barring even celibate men who considered themselves homosexual because of what he contended were the specific temptations of seminaries.
So they won't have any priests now?
Are they kidding? Without gay priests, there won't be a priesthood.
The state Democratic Party ambushed Mayor Bloomberg yesterday, sending a President Bush impersonator to a campaign event with a sign saying, "Thanks, Mike, for Your Support!"
The political street theater unfolded in Times Square, where Bloomberg yesterday picked up the endorsement of the city's stagehands union.
Nearby was the rubber-masked Bush impersonator. ..............................
"Billionaire Republican Michael Bloomberg is George W. Bush's biggest donor," said State Democratic Committee Chairman Herman (Denny) Farrell. "And his attempts to run away from Bush now won't fool anyone."
Bloomberg aides were not amused.
"They have nothing to say about the mayor's record; they have nothing to say about their candidate's record," said Bloomberg spokesman Stu Loeser. "It's a negative attack.
"
That's their response? It's a negative attack? Lame.
Well, they're jammed. If they go after Ferrer too hard, it becomes racial. If they ignore Bloomberg's slavish loyalty to Bush, they just have tossed in their face.
Bloomberg's real problem is that slavish loyalty to Bush has not helped the city one bit. Which is why it's a sore point.
But this signals that the Dems are going to play hardball. It won't get them over the hump, but it can place Bloomberg on the defensive
By Jonathan Weisman Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, September 22, 2005; Page A01
National gambling companies -- already rushing to rebuild casinos on the Gulf Coast -- would be granted access to millions of dollars in tax breaks under President Bush's plan to entice businesses into the Katrina disaster zone.
In a break from previous Gulf Coast economic development practices, White House officials said they do not plan to exclude the gambling industry from huge tax write-offs for investment in equipment and structures in the president's proposed Gulf Opportunity Zone. Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour (R) endorsed that policy yesterday, saying, "They should be treated like any other business. That's the way we do it in Mississippi."
But economic development officials in the state say Mississippi does not do it that way. The gambling industry largely has been excluded by statute from economic development incentives, said Brian Richard, former director of research at the Mississippi Gaming Association and an economic development expert at the University of Southern Mississippi. Until recently, the casinos even were prohibited from conducting employee training on state property, said Bill Crawford, deputy director of the Mississippi Development Authority.
"The casinos don't need this," said William F. Shughart II, an economist at the University of Mississippi. "If they are [eligible], that would be a complete waste of money."
This is not a simple call. The casinos have fueled much of the state's economic growth in the last 15 years. The question is will this keep them in the area and will they continue to provide jobs.
It may be a waste of money, it may not be, but I think a lot of people in Congress may have a tough call here. The fundies hate casinos, and a lot of people will not be eager to give money to them just on principle.
By Michelle Boorstein Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, September 22, 2005; B01
CHARLOTTESVILLE -- The recent surge of racist incidents at the University of Virginia is a blow to a two-year effort by the institution to end a lingering legacy of racial segregation and inequality, and has left many black students feeling shaken and looking at their colleagues with a wary eye.
Reports of nine incidents in which black students were verbally assaulted in the past few weeks are unparalleled in the school's contemporary history but reflect the type of problems the school said it has been trying to solve with new strategies.
"We are going to stay the course," said Patricia Lampkin, vice president for student affairs. "We want to move to another place, a new place -- one that's better, we hope."
For the 9 percent of black undergraduate students, the assaults simply amplify their awareness of themselves as minorities at a university that fully accepted black undergraduates only 35 years ago.
Although the school stands as a beacon of independence and excellence in education for Virginians, it has long wrestled with racial strife. But now, things look different. Some parents of black students are considering removing their children, and about 60 students, many of them white, have tried to help by patrolling the campus in small groups each night to aid security. ...........................
Her equilibrium, however, has been thrown off balance by the incidents that some officials are calling "racial terrorism." Racist epithets have been shouted from cars, left scrawled on apartment and dorm doors and on a note under a windshield. Although officials are conducting interviews and dusting for fingerprints, no arrests have been made and university officials have said it is probable that no one will be caught -- as no one has been for other racist incidents in recent years.
........................
"The frustration for us is the lack of urgency" on campus, said Gregory Jackson, 20, a junior from Roanoke who is black. "I would have said things were getting better before this year." Some students said they knew little about the incidents. Others were disgusted but seemed unsure how to express it.
"I just feel like the president isn't doing anything," said Leah Whiteside, 20, a junior from Charlottesville who is white, as she played pool Monday at the student center.
Her pool partner, Eli Adler, 20, a white New York native, was more subdued. "I don't think it's anything out of the ordinary here," he said.
"But I don't think that makes it any less important," Whiteside said. Asked whether they wore black shirts to a recent football game -- something black students requested as a show of solidarity -- the pair turned self-conscious.
"Of course, no one wants to do that," Adler said, "because they want to wear orange shirts" -- the school's color.
"I wore a black skirt," said Whiteside, apologetically. "I'm sort of bad at that sort of thing."
To some, the issue is not about the university but about the national culture.
"There is nothing at all unusual about what's happened. It's regrettable, just like the hundreds of thousands of things that happen every day that human beings do," said Larry Sabato, a political science professor who has been on campus since he was an undergraduate in the 1970s. "This place is a relative oasis compared to much of America."
.......................
Until last weekend, some black parents feared the situation could escalate into violence and were frustrated that it took three weeks for Casteen to make a public appearance on the issue.
"We feel these students have the right to attend this university without being racially harassed," said Rosalind Lynch, Angelique's mother, her voice rising as she sat at her daughter's kitchen table Monday, jabbing the tabletop.
The incidents are no surprise to M. Rick Turner, who has been dean of the office of African-American Affairs for 18 years. In a newsletter article titled "A Disturbing Trend" that was published this summer before the incidents began, Turner wrote about racial incidents on campus. The article cited a survey that found that 29 percent of black seniors were satisfied with race relations on campus, compared with 61 percent of other students.
"There is a subculture of racial insensitivity; these are people who feel all these seats belong to white people," he said.
Some said they believe the reports of incidents might not signal more trouble, but simply that students feel more comfortable coming forward.
"The issue is out in the open largely because the University is focusing so much energy on addressing it," says an editorial that ran Monday in the Cavalier Daily, using the uppercase "U" that reflects students' reverence for the institution. "We should be at once upset and proud; upset that these acts are happening and that our culture has allowed them to happen," the editorial reads, "but proud that we are confronting the problem with our collective might."
Oh, bullshit. Sabato's denial is pretty fucking sad. I don't think people walk across Duke's campus and get called nigger, Or UNC-Chapel Hill or Maryland. It's culturally tolerated by the students and alumni. Confronting? When they expel a few frat boys for this shit, and a couple of houses lose their charter, then yeah, that's confrontation.
You can bet that this comes from frat row, home of thuggish behavior on many campuses. I would love to know the number of minorities in traditionally white fraternities.
If they took it seriously, you know called in the State Police, started investigating seriously, put survelliance on the campus, you can bet that they would find some suspects. But if they don't take proactive steps, it's the state which will ultimately be sued for permitting a racially hostile environment on campus. A lack of arrests and expulsions and Sabato's incredibly clueless comments indicate Virginia takes this anything but seriously.
Let me say this before people start in: the National Enquirer has beaten more libel suits than most major newspapers. Their stuff is vetted by libel lawyers before it hits the stands. In fact, their accuracy is no worse than their MSM peers. Up until the 1970's, they ran alien stories, but then switched to celebrity coverage.
Why do I trust the NE? They pay their sources. So someone close to the WH got a big fat check for this, over $10K. And if they deny this or lie, the NE has a file on them. When dealing with gossip, this is quite effective. Now they may wind up paying the wrong people, but this is what they were told. Come on, if you ran the NE, would you risk a libel suit with your reputation?
Also, first Capital Hill Blue, now the NE, slowly, but surely, this is going to reach the MSM. Gossip is sually tomorrow's news today.
Faced with the biggest crisis of his political life, President Bush has hit the bottle again, The National Enquirer can reveal.
Bush, who said he quit drinking the morning after his 40th birthday, has started boozing amid the Katrina catastrophe.
Family sources have told how the 59-year-old president was caught by First Lady Laura downing a shot of booze at their family ranch in Crawford, Texas, when he learned of the hurricane disaster.
His worried wife yelled at him: "Stop, George."
Following the shocking incident, disclosed here for the first time, Laura privately warned her husband against "falling off the wagon" and vowed to travel with him more often so that she can keep an eye on Dubya, the sources add.
"When the levees broke in New Orleans, it apparently made him reach for a shot," said one insider. "He poured himself a Texas-sized shot of straight whiskey and tossed it back. The First Lady was shocked and shouted: "Stop George!"
"Laura gave him an ultimatum before, 'It's Jim Beam or me.' She doesn't want to replay that nightmare — especially now when it's such tough going for her husband."
Bush is under the worst pressure of his two terms in office and his popularity is near an all-time low. The handling of the Katrina crisis and troop losses in Iraq have fueled public discontent and pushed Bush back to drink.
A Washington source said: "The sad fact is that he has been sneaking drinks for weeks now. Laura may have only just caught him — but the word is his drinking has been going on for a while in the capital. He's been in a pressure cooker for months.
....................
The result is he's taking drinks here and there, likely in private, to cope. "And now with the worst domestic crisis in his administration over Katrina, you pray his drinking doesn't go out of control."
Another source said: "I'm only surprised to hear that he hadn't taken a shot sooner. Before Katrina, he was at his wit's end. I've known him for years. He's been a good ol' Texas boy forever. George had a drinking problem for years that most professionals would say needed therapy. He doesn't believe in it [therapy], he never got it. He drank his way through his youth, through college and well into his thirties. Everyone's drinking around him."
Another source said: "A family member told me they fear George is 'falling apart.' The First Lady has been assigned the job of gatekeeper." Bush's history of drinking dates back to his youth. Speaking of his time as a young man in the National Guard, he has said: "One thing I remember, and I'm most proud of, is my drinking and partying. Those were the days my friends. Those were the good old days!"
.......................
Dr. Justin Frank, a Washington D.C. psychiatrist and author of Bush On The Couch: Inside The Mind Of The President, told The National Enquirer: "I do think that Bush is drinking again. Alcoholics who are not in any program, like the President, have a hard time when stress gets to be great.
"I think it's a concern that Bush disappears during times of stress. He spends so much time on his ranch. It's very frightening."
Great. We hardly need a drunk Bush running shit. And with Rita now a Catagory 5 hurricane, the most powerful storm to hit Texas, the entire gulf coast west of Pennsacola to Matamoros could be a flooded wasteland.
Look, I drank like a fish, but I am not proud of it. If Bush is, he must have a pretty empty soul. That's just fucking sad.
But it's time to face reality, Bush acted like a dry drunk for years, and now he may be acting like a real drunk. His inability to function, Rice and Cheney missing in action, his arrogant boast that he wouldn't need foriegn help.
If Rita does anything like the damage Katrina did, Bush could be in real trouble. We're already at $200b, Rita could add $100B to that.
With that kind of pressure and Bush's congential weakness, this could slip into a 25th Amendment situation more quickly than anyone would want to imagine. If Bush is drinking hard, how competent is he?
By Shailagh Murray and Jim VandeHei Washington Post Staff Writers Wednesday, September 21, 2005; A01
Congressional Republicans from across the ideological spectrum yesterday rejected the White House's open-wallet approach to rebuilding the Gulf Coast, a sign that the lockstep GOP discipline that George W. Bush has enjoyed for most of his presidency is eroding on Capitol Hill.
Trying to allay mounting concerns, White House budget director Joshua B. Bolten met with Republican senators for an hour after their regular Tuesday lunch. Senators emerged to say they were annoyed by the lack of concrete ideas for paying the Hurricane Katrina bill.
"Very entertaining," Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said sarcastically as he left the session. "I haven't heard any specifics from the administration."
"At least give us some idea" of how to cover the cost, said Sen. Conrad Burns (R-Mont.), who is facing reelection in 2006. "We owe that to the American taxpayer."
The pushback on Katrina aid, which the White House is also confronting among House Republicans, represents the loudest and most widespread dissent Bush has faced from his own party since it took full control of Congress in 2002. As polls show the president's approval numbers falling, there is growing concern among lawmakers that GOP margins in Congress could shrink next year, and even rank-and-file Republicans are complaining that Bush is shirking the difficult budget decisions that must accompany the rebuilding bonanza.
Rep. Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) said he and other fiscal conservatives are feeling "genuine concern [which] could easily turn into frustration and anger."
Congressional Republicans are not arguing with Bush's pledge that the federal government will lead the Louisiana and Mississippi recovery. But they are insisting that the massive cost -- as much as $200 billion -- be paid for. Conservatives are calling for spending cuts to existing programs, a few GOP moderates are entertaining the possibility of a tax increase, and many in the middle want to freeze Bush tax cuts that have yet to take effect.
The resistance suggests that Bush's second term could turn out far rockier and more contentious than his first. One indicator many Republicans are watching to gauge whether Bush is becoming a liability for the party is in Pennsylvania, where Rick Santorum, the No. 3 Republican in the Senate, is trailing state treasurer Bob Casey Jr. by double digits.
"My caucus would do anything for Senator Santorum," Sen. Lincoln D. Chafee (R-R.I.) said of his colleague. Chafee, who himself faces a tough reelection battle next year, predicted Republicans will increasingly be faced with the choice of propping up Bush or protecting their own. "I think they're going to collide," Chafee said of the two options.
Asked whether Bush's problems were a factor in his slump, Santorum responded, "That may be."
The White House is aware of the growing political problem and has moved on several fronts to pacify Republicans -- with decidedly uneven results. Treasury Secretary John W. Snow, in a speech yesterday, said the White House will be forced to put several plans on the "back burner," including changes to the estate tax and permanently extending first-term tax cuts. "It's taken over the national agenda, and I think it will for a while," he said.
This prompted protests from one of the White House's closest allies, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.), who said waiting on taxes was unacceptable. But White House officials said Snow was accurately reflecting Bush's intentions
.
This isn't just tactics. The Bush coaltion, built solely on victory and power, is now facing a real test of leadership, one they have no idea on how to deal with.
The Bushies want to continue the Long March Forward, but people are looking around at a $200B bill and saying someone has to pay for it. The tax cuts are an obvious target, so is the estate tax, but once you get past that, hard choices have to be made. And the GOP has avoided hard choices like a potential daddy on Maury Povich. Except there's no DNA test for political leadership.
Chaffee is right, at some point, tossing Bush over the side is going to be a real option.
While impeachment is less likely than Bush having a nervous breakdown, which I place at 50 percent, the GOP may have to isolate him to save their jobs. People talk about Democratic cowardice, but I think Republican cowardice is far more striking. The GOP has let Bush place it into a sinkhole where if they are going to survive as a party, something major has to give. The fundies can cost the GOP votes in the North and West, the moderates have no voice, the fiscal conservatives are ignored and the ideologues want to play games with Katrina relief.
This is a recipe for disaster for the GOP. Race and fiscal responsibility is the perfect GOP storm. A lot of GOP pols have ridden on the back of Bush's popularity. Now that it's gone and doesn't look like it's coming back, GOP pols have to actually stand on their own and they can't. They have no clue how to. McCain has rabid enemies because he displays common sense, DeLay is thisclose to some kind of trial, Frist sold his soul to the Antichrist Dobson, Northeast Republicans could find 2006 could be ugly, and Mike Bloomberg may be the canary in the coal mine for that. Bush isn't just disliked, in some places he's positively radioactive.
By Petula Dvorak Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, September 21, 2005; B01
FAYETTEVILLE, N.C. -- In military communities across the United States, a debate over the Iraq war is being waged by reluctant, neophyte activists. Their microphones chirp and squeak, or don't pick up their quiet voices at all. Their signs are too small. They forget the banners.
"This is my community. I don't want to offend people here. But my husband is a soldier; he can't say anything. So it's my duty as a citizen to speak up," Kara Hollingsworth, a D.C. native and Army wife at Fort Bragg whose husband served two tours in Iraq, said as she took a seat on a panel of antiwar activists last week.
A few hours earlier, another Army spouse stood in the red-brick village square near the base and held up a handmade sign supporting the war. She threw it together after she heard that an antiwar caravan was coming to town.
"I've never done this before. I'm usually a quiet military wife. But I can't take this anymore," said Marlene Lowrey, whose husband also served in Iraq. "This isn't right, coming into a town like this with that antiwar stuff. Those people don't realize this brings down morale."
Military families, stoic and tight-lipped during most of the nation's wars, have become a powerful voice on both sides of the bitter argument over U.S. involvement in Iraq. And their growing prominence will add a poignant note to Saturday's antiwar march and rally near the White House.
Organizers of the protest, who anticipate a crowd of about 100,000, estimate that thousands of military families and veterans will join in the demonstration. Three busloads of military families have been touring the country since Aug. 31 and will converge on Washington today to promote Saturday's rally.
In recent weeks, war supporters have been countering those bus stops, rallies and vigils with demonstrations of their own. They've got their own bus touring the country and are planning three days of counter-protests in Washington this weekend.
Both sides embrace the slogan "Support our troops." They just disagree on how to do it. They also were inspired by the same person: Cindy Sheehan, who lost her son in combat and kept a vigil near President Bush's ranch in Crawford, Tex., through most of August.
..........................
Carolyn Culbreth, whose father is a retired Special Forces soldier, came to downtown Fayetteville on her lunch hour to meet the antiwar bus. "What they're doing is unpatriotic," Culbreth said, spangled head to toe in red, white and blue. "And in a place like this, it's just like a slap in the face."
When Chito parked the Bring Them Home Now bus in the center of Fayetteville the next day, cars whizzing by it honked and drivers barked at the slogans all over the windows and sides.
A woman in a silver Mercedes leaned out and shouted, "Go home!" A man in a red muscle car gave members of the group an obscene gesture. A soldier in a beat-up Olds Cutlass gave them a peace sign.
In a startling setback to federal prosecutors, John A. Gotti, the Gambino crime family prince who said he wanted to leave the mob life behind and spend his days driving his children in a minivan, avoided conviction yesterday in his racketeering trial, as the jury returned hung verdicts on three charges against him and voted not guilty on a fourth.
After deliberating almost eight days in the six-week trial, the deeply divided jury reached no verdict on the most serious charge against Mr. Gotti, the accusation that he ordered the June 19, 1992, kidnapping of Curtis Sliwa, the founder of the Guardian Angels street patrol and a radio talk show host. He was abducted in a taxi in the East Village and shot several times at point-blank range.
The jurors, seven women and five men, had sharply mixed reactions to a case the prosecutors built primarily on the contradictory and often chilling testimony of two high-profile Gambino turncoats, both of whom confessed coolly in court to crimes more bloody than anything in the charges against Mr. Gotti.
Judge Shira A. Scheindlin said that she would allow Mr. Gotti, 41, to go free once he posted bail, rejecting a request from a prosecutor, Michael McGovern, that he remain in jail pending possible retrial.
"The time has come" for Mr. Gotti to be released, Judge Scheindlin said, and applause erupted from the many Gotti clan members in the courtroom, in Federal District Court in Manhattan.
"God hears a mother's prayer," said a happily tearful Victoria Gotti, Mr. Gotti's normally publicity-shy mother, who sat in the courtroom throughout the deliberations. ........................
Mr. Sliwa, dressed in the Guardian Angels uniform of a red sateen jacket and red beret, said he was stunned and disappointed and saw "a page out of O. J.," referring to the acquittal of O. J. Simpson in 1995 in the murders of his former wife and a man she knew.
"This jury was out to lunch," Mr. Sliwa said. "So let's make it Round 2. I can.'t wait." He predicted that Mr. Gotti and the Gambino family would continue "a reign of terror" once he was released from jail.
"John Gotti Junior is still down to the marrow of his bone an enemy of society, a thug," Mr. Sliwa said.
And Curtis Sliwa is like poison as a witness. He lied so often and so boldly, his testimony was useless.
Bwaaaaaah.
This amuses me because that loudmouth Sliwa got exactly what he deserved.
Fernando Ferrer, the Democratic nominee for mayor, has emerged from the turbulent primary season in surprisingly solid shape for the general election. He has quickly united old rivals, labor leaders and party elders behind him while also proving unexpectedly nimble at putting Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg on the defensive.
Yet it is Mr. Bloomberg who appears to have changed more tellingly in light of this Democratic turnaround. Despite high poll ratings and a hefty advantage in campaign cash, Mr. Bloomberg has made new strategic choices, taking unusual steps to distance himself from his own Republican Party while choosing not to engage an energized Mr. Ferrer.
As Mr. Ferrer has linked him at every opportunity to President Bush's current political troubles, Mr. Bloomberg has been drawn away from his tight focus on city issues and into divisive national debates over Hurricane Katrina and abortion rights, much to the delight of Mr. Ferrer and New York Democrats.
Twice in the last five days, the mayor has opposed President Bush on priorities for Republicans in Washington: On Friday, he came out against Mr. Bush's nomination of John G. Roberts Jr. to be chief justice of the United States, saying that Mr. Roberts's views on abortion were not clear, and yesterday he urged the president to reverse a decision and support paying standard local wages for federally financed reconstruction along the Gulf Coast.
Perhaps more than any other major figure in the Republican Party today, Mr. Bloomberg has highlighted the political thickets now ensnaring Mr. Bush - and, by extension, Mr. Bloomberg himself, as a Republican mayor seeking re-election in one of the nation's most Democratic cities.
The president has gone from being the mayor's V.I.P. guest here at the Republican National Convention, just one year ago this month, to being criticized by the mayor in a manner that seems calculated to please supporters of Mr. Ferrer, a former Bronx borough president who defeated three other Democrats in last week's primary. The mayor is trying to appeal to Democrats who support abortion rights and dislike Mr. Bush's judicial nominees, and to Hispanic and black voters who are enraged by what they saw as the Bush administration's racially insensitive response to the hurricane.
After the mayor announced his concerns about Gulf Coast wages yesterday, a reporter asked whether he regretted endorsing Mr. Bush in the last presidential campaign.
"I have my own views, and I have never been reticent to express them," Mr. Bloomberg said, adding that he did not regret the endorsement.
Yet it is also true that until recently, Mr. Bloomberg had pledged to avoid publicly criticizing the White House, as the head of the state Democratic Committee, Herman D. Farrell Jr., was quick to point out yesterday.
This may be a moment of reckoning for Mr. Bloomberg, as a Republican leader in a town where being a Republican is something of a kabuki art, political analysts say.
If Ferrer can actually offer a program of real changes, like ending union strife with City Hall, he's gonna have Bloomberg against the wall. Tying Bloomberg to Bush in a city where he's anathema, can hurt.
Remember, demographics work against Bloomberg naturally, and he needs significant black voters to win, the more Ferrer reminds people how tight Bloomberg is to Bush the more it hurts him with people who think Bush committed something akin to genocide.
The current Quinnapiac poll still shows a 52-38 gap between Bloomberg and Ferrer, but that's hardly surprising. Ferrer has just begun his campaign, while Bloomberg is all over the media on and offline. But with 1199 and the UFT in his corner, Ferrer has some pretty intense help in a New York City election. Bloomberg has to buy help. The Times has a photo of Bloomberg with some ministers, but in the contest between union and preacher, bet the union every time. Preachers don't have phone banks, unions do. Preachers don't canvas, unions do.
I would put as many pictures of Bush and Bloomberg at the RNC around as possible, remind people of his $7m donation to Bush while reminding him of his refusal to offer teachers a decent wage, while taking credit for their work.
If you live in New York, New Jersey or Eastern Pennsylvania, you've seen Doug Forrester's ads using "disaffected" Dems. Which annoys the piss out of me, because Forrester is an idiot. Matt Stoller is posting this up at the Corzine blog. Now, normally, I don't post up stuff from campaign blogs, but this was just too funny to pass on.
Forrester is up on the air with his ads. I'm going to quote Rich McGrath of the New Jersey State Democratic Committee:
Doug Forrester's self portrayal as a reformer was further betrayed by the revelation that one of the so-called Democrats complaining about public corruption in Forrester's new TV ad was until recently a Republican who was fired from a post with the courts for embezzlement.
Following months of rhetorical condemnations of public corruption, Mr Forrester went to the airwaves with a spot entitled "Fed Up," in which a number of self described Democrats decry ethics abuses and pledge support for Forrester.
One of the ad's principals, Dave McGraw, a registered Republican until two months ago, was fired from his post as court clerk in Essex County. In fact, Mr McGraw served as an Essex County Republican Committeeman.
Mr McGraw was charged with embezzling $55,000 in court funds and lying to the county prosecutor in 1985. The assignment judge removed him from his post after a hearing officer found that Mr McGraw stole cash from court deposits, had other employees cash checks knowing they would bounce and attempted a cover-up by deceiving investigators.
The prosecutor was unable to convict Mr McGraw in court, but the ruling by the hearing officer and dismissal by the assignment judge both withstood appeals to an administrative law court and to the state Merit Board.
Mr Forrester, who earns an estimated $89 million annually from no-bid contracts with public entities in New Jersey, is under investigation by the Attorney General's office for illegal campaign contributions, has been accused of donating money in exchange for contracts, is suspected of pocketing drug company rebates and has repeatedly refused to disclose details of his practices and profits.
An antiwar speech by Cindy Sheehan, the mother of an American soldier killed in Iraq, was cut short yesterday after the organizer of the event was arrested and police officers confiscated his audio equipment.
The claps and cheers that had greeted Ms. Sheehan's arrival at the rally in Union Square quickly turned to furious chants of "Let her speak!" as officers ushered away the organizer, Paul Zulkowitz, who the police said lacked audio permits for the event.
Cindy Sheehan, whose son died in Iraq, was guided away from Union Square after a rally was cut short.
Angry activists followed officers as they led Mr. Zulkowitz away, waving their fists and shouting, "Shame, shame, shame." Ms. Sheehan, who was visiting New York on the last leg of a bus tour across the country, was nearing the end of her speech when the police officers arrested Mr. Zulkowitz. She was whisked to a car by two supporters just before the police officers seized the microphone. Mr. Zulkowitz was arrested because he did not have a permit, said the commanding officer of the 13th Precinct, Inspector Michael J. McEnroy.
Detective Kevin Czartoryski said Mr. Zulkowitz was charged with unauthorized use of a sound device and disorderly conduct, and was released after being given a court summons.
Detective Czartoryski said the police had taken the "appropriate action" in response to a lawbreaker.
But many people attending the event, dozens of whom yelled accusations into the faces of the more than 20 police officers who blocked them from following Mr. Zulkowitz, interpreted the arrest as a demonstration of citywide disdain for free speech, referring to last year's arrests of protesters at the Republican National Convention.
"This is what's been happening for the last couple of years," said Daniel Starling, the co-chairman of the Green Party chapter in Manhattan, who attended the event yesterday. "Every time we try to hold a demonstration, they arrest us."
The crowd of New Yorkers had waited more than an hour to catch a glimpse of Ms. Sheehan, who was thrust into the national spotlight in August when she sought a meeting with President Bush by camping out for days near his ranch in Crawford, Tex. Though soft-spoken, Ms. Sheehan has not shied away from controversy, opening her New York visit on Sunday night in Brooklyn by accusing Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of failing to challenge the Bush administration's policies in Iraq.
.....................
Laurie Arbeiter, 46, of Brooklyn, said she flew to Crawford in August and spent two weeks camped out with Ms. Sheehan and others.
Ms. Arbeiter said that the arrest of the event organizer, Mr. Zulkowitz, was another example of the "country's suppression of dissent."
"We are being railroaded toward a state in which we can't speak up," she said.
OK liberals, this is in the New York Times.
This was cleared with City Hall, because no cop is politically ignorant enough to do this on his own. You think Ray Kelly was surprised by this? You think this was done behind Bloomberg's back?
Hell no. They have been harassing Critical Mass for two years. They have tried to black protests and shunt them to Randalls Island or the West Side Highway since 2002.
Do you want four more years of this?
Cindy Sheehan was protected by the Crawford sheriff. She was silenced by the NYPD.
That's pretty fucking shameful.
Bloomberg acts like a Democrat when it comes time to placate people. But he's a control freak Republican when it comes to Bush and national policy.
Remember, protecting the grass of the Great Lawn is more important than free speech, unless Disney wants to rent it.
So tell me again how Freddie Ferrer is a party hack. Because I think it is highly unlikely these policies would continue. Bloomberg has fought every protest which would make the GOP look bad.
I guess he wants to protect his $7m investment. The question is do you?
# Recovery efforts now give the GOP a chance to rebound from initial political missteps.
By Peter Wallsten and Tom Hamburger, Times Staff Writers
WASHINGTON — For many of the black ministers who have allied themselves with President Bush and a Republican strategy to boost the party's African American support, the government's slow response to Hurricane Katrina put a severe strain on new and still-fragile bonds of trust.
But just as some ministers had denounced a government recovery effort that seemed to leave many blacks in the gulf region behind, a number of those African American clergy say an aggressive outreach campaign by Bush and senior White House aides in recent days has begun reversing what might have been lasting political damage.
Moreover, the ministers — as well as a cadre of conservative policy analysts who consult with the White House — contend that the Katrina relief response, though tarnishing the GOP image in the short term, could foster a Republican-led battle against poverty that would give the party a list of new selling points for African American voters who have long viewed Democrats as the best advocates for the downtrodden.
....................
"The strategic question is whether or not the White House senior staff are smart enough to seize this historic and strategic opportunity," said the Rev. Eugene Rivers, pastor of Boston's Azusa Christian Community and one of about two dozen African American ministers Bush has courted heavily. "If they fail to practice the compassionate conservatism that they have preached, history may not be kind to them."
..................
Other ministers said they took solace in Bush's sudden shift in tone last week, as he admitted making mistakes, unveiled a massive rebuilding plan and pledged a renewed look at the relationship between race and poverty.
In language that resonated with many of the black ministers, Bush during his nationally televised speech Thursday cited the "deep, persistent poverty" in the gulf region and said it "has roots in a history of racial discrimination…. We have a duty to confront this poverty with bold action." The Republican Party chairman, in a recent appearance, even talked about a new "war on poverty."
The White House outreach to its allies among black clergy has been intense and has engaged Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove, chief domestic policy advisor Claude Allen, and James Towey, director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives.
Their efforts show how important the black electorate is to Republican efforts to maintain and build its political majority — and how threatened those plans have been by the images of deaths and destruction in New Orleans, which has a black majority.
Towey said he had spoken to some pastors "two and three times a day" since the storm's wrath became clear, and he acknowledged that some were upset during their conversations.
"I've heard their frustration, and I've heard their deep concern for the people who are suffering," Towey said. But, he added, the fact that a dialogue continues is a sign of potential progress. "I'm encouraged because they're still calling and we're still talking, and we've moved past the first week into the phase the president is talking about now," Towey said.
......................
Vivian Berryhill of Mississippi, president of the National Coalition of Pastor's Spouses and one of Bush's most vocal black supporters last year, praised the president's new words and promises. But she acknowledged that feelings were raw.
"The president can't make a 20-minute speech and think it's all over," she said. "If Republicans ever hope to appeal to African American voters, they need to come out publicly and support the citizens of America who have a great need."
Even an outspoken member of the all-Democratic Congressional Black Caucus said the Katrina reconstruction outlined last week by Bush could present a history-changing opportunity — if the president and the Republicans in charge of Congress followed through.
"I did not expect [Bush] to be so strong" in addressing race, poverty and the federal commitment to rebuild in the gulf, said Rep. Elijah E. Cummings (D-Md.). While cautioning that "rhetoric is one thing and action is another," Cummings wondered whether Katrina's aftermath has been "a life-altering event for the president, making him more compassionate and more empathetic."
Cummings said his Baltimore constituents remained "very, very skeptical" of the Republicans' ability to deliver on the lofty promises of the president's speech.
Yet, the Democratic congressman added, "We have to roll up our sleeves and work with him."
In addition to enhancing the Republican appeal among African Americans, senior party strategists believe that remaking the Gulf Coast has the potential to reignite the Bush "compassion agenda" that had been shunted aside by a post-Sept. 11 focus on terrorism, and provide a laboratory for long-simmering Republican ideas for targeting urban poverty. ..............................
"What this president says is we need to move from a regulatory system that creates dependency to an opportunity society that creates ownership and says more folks can own their own home and poor parents can choose where their kids go to school and poor people can own a personal retirement account."
While Towey said the black pastors would have a major role in helping to devise policy, the White House has also been soliciting advice from conservative thinkers.
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is advocating vouchers to allow displaced children and families to make their own choices in education and a market approach to housing.
Jack Kemp, the 1996 Republican vice presidential nominee and former U.S. Housing secretary, wrote last week that conservatives could turn Katrina into an opportunity just as presidents Lincoln and Franklin D. Roosevelt did during other periods of crisis.
In an essay in the online conservative journal Human Events, Kemp wrote: "In the wake of this national catastrophe we should all be imagining the unimaginable."
These people are going to expect the White House to do things no Republicans will do, like fund federal jobs and training. People like Cummings are setting themselves up for the "Lucy moment", the point where Bush pulls the ball away and leaves them exposed. Which will happen, and happen quickly.
You can't get to the end of the article before you heard the GOP lines about "personal accounts" and vouchers. They tried similar crap with limiting pain and suffering awards after 9/11, only to be savaged. Black pastors who align themselves with Bush are courting a major backlash as the GOP continues with their agenda.
What has to be understood about black politics is this: most black Americans, as an article in the Black Commentator writes, range from Mondale Liberals to Swedish Social Democrats. The talk about "opportunity society" rings hollow to people who made $16K a year. They want government guarantees, of work, of housing, of protection. Bush and his ideologue allies have no idea how to provide these things.
These ministers have large congregations but very little political power. They have to tread carefully when dealing with Bush and the GOP, because their parishioners are deeply mistrustful of the GOP. If Rivers got up in his church and said support Mitt Romney, he'd be stared at. What people don't get is that political power in the church doesn't come from the pulpit, but is reflected by the pulpit. If the minister is to the right of the congregation, his words may be listened to, but then ignored.
The great weakness in Prosperity Gospel is that is it basically self-centered. While these ministers may like to pretend that they are in a battle of ideology with people like Jesse Jackson, they aren't even close. Because they aren't there when shit goes down. You can bitch and moan about Jackson seeking publicity, but he was in New Orleans, TD Jakes was in Dallas. They are empire builders, not social activists. Jakes wants a larger church, he doesn't want to be an independent voice for black people. There is a lot of envy from these people towards their liberal counterparts.
Take Calvin Butts. Despite being head of Abyssinian Baptist Church, Harlem's most reknowned, he has been jealous of Sharpton for a decade. He has felt that Sharpton has taken the place which was his, due to Adam Clayton Powell's prominance. The problem is that Butts has no charisma and poor leadership skills, and no sense of timing. He has been favored by white pols for years, but when kids get shot, it's Sharpton and Wyatt Tee Walker and Herbert Daughtry in the streets. And that is respected because you never know when that can happen to your kid.
I would bet, that despite Jakes fame and money, when shit needs to get done in Dallas, there's a real minister people go to. A large congregation and books means little when it comes to political influence.
Why? Because that is earned, not bought. When people talk about this subject, they never ask how people gain power within the black church. They have to do things to gain respect, running a school and having a big church isn't enough. They have to deliver, and confront the powers that be.
The problem is that the GOP has two choices, deliver for these black ministers on their concerns or deliver to their racist constituency. While they talk a good game, the plan is the same one as always, pick the negro leader and hope people will follow. Well, that didn't work in 1963 and it won't work now. Because they can't deliver. And when they can't deliver, they will be proven to be weak accomodationists. The Republicans will never place the needs of blacks above the needs of the white racists who kept them in power. Blacks are not going to vote GOP in large numbers until the racists are gone.
So Jakes can kiss the ass of the president all he wants, it will not give him the political power he seeks, because he will risk nothing for that power.
Friday, showing up on the fifth day of a national tragedy, Bush made a little humorous aside about the times he was in New Orleans celebrating too much. Beautiful! If he tried to walk fifty yards he could have tripped over somebody's dead black grandmother under a blanket.
How do you like it? How do you like having a president who at a time like this reminisces about getting drunk in New Orleans? White boy with Daddy's money roaring at Mardi Gras in a town black for the rest of the year.
If whites were in trouble in New Orleans, trust that his government would have been there early and the aid massive.
This racism, which is at the bottom of everything in America, makes it only natural for Bush and his people to talk about turning to Rudolph Giuliani to save New Orleans as he supposedly saved New York after the World Trade Center attack.
In New York, Giuliani did nothing but go on television. That's all he did and all he ever can do. Beautiful! There are television cameras in New Orleans. And just as Bush, Giuliani doesn't want many blacks near him. If more than two blacks entered City Hall, he called for snipers. Giuliani doesn't even have a show black like Condoleezza Rice, who bought shoes in Ferragamo in Manhattan this week.
Bush got found out this week and he needs his own rescue. Assure Giuliani that he could run for president if he does the job. As New York found, he can do nothing good about anything. That doesn't matter. Without somebody in front, Bush stands there, uncovered, without an American flag draped around him, as the most incompetent president we've ever had.
HUNDREDS of tons of British food aid shipped to America for starving Hurricane Katrina survivors is to be burned.
US red tape is stopping it from reaching hungry evacuees.
Instead tons of the badly needed Nato ration packs, the same as those eaten by British troops in Iraq, has been condemned as unfit for human consumption.
Katrina crisis victim
And unless the bureaucratic mess is cleared up soon it could be sent for incineration.
One British aid worker last night called the move "sickening senselessness" and said furious colleagues were "spitting blood".
.................
The Ministry of Defence in London said last night that 400,000 operational ration packs had been shipped to the US.
But officials blamed the US Department of Agriculture, which impounded the shipment under regulations relating to the import and export of meat.
The aid worker, who would not be named, said: "This is the most appalling act of sickening senselessness while people starve.
"The FDA has recalled aid from Britain because it has been condemned as unfit for human consumption, despite the fact that these are Nato approved rations of exactly the same type fed to British soldiers in Iraq.
"Under Nato, American soldiers are also entitled to eat such rations, yet the starving of the American South will see them go up in smoke because of FDA red tape madness."
The worker added: "There will be a cloud of smoke above Little Rock soon - of burned food, of anger and of shame that the world's richest nation couldn't organise a p**s up in a brewery and lets Americans starve while they arrogantly observe petty regulations.
"Everyone is revolted by the chaotic shambles the US is making of this crisis. Guys from Unicef are walking around spitting blood.
"This is utter madness. People have worked their socks off to get food into the region.
"It is perfectly good Nato approved food of the type British servicemen have. Yet the FDA are saying that because there is a meat content and it has come from Britain it must be destroyed.
"If they are trying to argue there is a BSE reason then that is ludicrously out of date. There is more BSE in the States than there ever was in Britain and UK meat has been safe for years."
They can't do anything right. Not one fucking thing.
Monday, September 19, 2005; Posted: 10:56 p.m. EDT (02:56 GMT)
BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- A British armored vehicle escorted by a tank crashed into a detention center Monday in Basra and rescued two undercover troops held by police, an Iraqi Interior Ministry official told CNN.
British Defense Ministry Secretary John Reid confirmed two British military personnel were "released," but he gave no details on how they were freed.
In a statement released in London, Reid did not say why the two had been taken into custody. But the Iraqi official, who spoke to CNN on condition of anonymity, said their arrests stemmed from an incident earlier in the day.
The official said two unknown gunmen in full Arabic dress began firing on civilians in central Basra, wounding several, including a traffic police officer. There were no fatalities, the official said.
The two gunmen fled the scene but were captured and taken in for questioning, admitting they were British marines carrying out a "special security task," the official said.
British troops launched the rescue about three hours after Iraqi authorities informed British commanders the men were being held at the police department's major crime unit, the official said.
Iraqi police said members of Iraq's Mehdi Army militia engaged the British forces around the facility, burning one personnel carrier and an armored vehicle.
Video showed dozens of Iraqis surrounding British armored vehicles and tossing gasoline bombs, rocks and other debris at them.
With one vehicle engulfed in flames, a soldier opened the hatch and bailed out as rocks were thrown at him. Another photograph showed a British soldier on fire on top of a tank.
Ah, looks like two SBS troopers were caught out. Of course, their mates had to go spring them.
But the real danger is this: Iraqi officials are asserting national authority, which is conflicting with coalition needs. First they went after ther mercs at the airport, now they arrest SBS members. There is a clash coming between the government and the coalition coming, if it isn't already happening. Our time in Iraq is coming to an end.
Cynthia Liu is precisely the kind of high achiever Yale wants: smart (1510 SAT), disciplined (4.0 grade point average), competitive (finalist in Texas oratory competition), musical (pianist), athletic (runner) and altruistic (hospital volunteer). And at the start of her sophomore year at Yale, Ms. Liu is full of ambition, planning to go to law school.
So will she join the long tradition of famous Ivy League graduates? Not likely. By the time she is 30, this accomplished 19-year-old expects to be a stay-at-home mom.
"My mother's always told me you can't be the best career woman and the best mother at the same time," Ms. Liu said matter-of-factly. "You always have to choose one over the other."
At Yale and other top colleges, women are being groomed to take their place in an ever more diverse professional elite. It is almost taken for granted that, just as they make up half the students at these institutions, they will move into leadership roles on an equal basis with their male classmates.
There is just one problem with this scenario: many of these women say that is not what they want.
Many women at the nation's most elite colleges say they have already decided that they will put aside their careers in favor of raising children. Though some of these students are not planning to have children and some hope to have a family and work full time, many others, like Ms. Liu, say they will happily play a traditional female role, with motherhood their main commitment. ............. Two of the women interviewed said they expected their husbands to stay home with the children while they pursued their careers. Two others said either they or their husbands would stay home, depending on whose career was furthest along. ................... It is a complicated issue and one that most schools have not addressed. The women they are counting on to lead society are likely to marry men who will make enough money to give them a real choice about whether to be full-time mothers, unlike those women who must work out of economic necessity.
And then reality sets in.
My friend, who's a Smith graduate, who knows someone who did this. She married a doctor, despite a Masters in Social Work. The only problem is that her husband turned out to be a freak. I mean a cheating, straight up freak. Now she's in the middle of a bitter divorce, and he's taunting her with a new girlfriend.
They are living in an economic and personal fantasy land.
First, it is unlikely that they will marry a man who will exceed their earning potential. Match it? Sure. Exceed it? Unlikely.
Second, it is unlikely that they can afford to stay at home. It is unlikely that they can live a middle class lifestyle on one salary. The Times reporter is making an assumption contradicted by surveys which shiw
Third, raising kids sucks. I mean, kids are wonderful, they teach you so much, but at the end of the day, it's really hard and isolating. Look, kids do fine in day care and women do fine at work. These women are gonna find sitting at home watching junior chase the cat mind numbingly dull.
Fourth, not having independent money can turn a marriage into a nightmare. Men can get really and truly resentful of a woman staying at home all day. No matter how hard child care is, men come to resent women at home.
What this is about is redressing the inadequacies in their lives for having working moms.
But they act as if there is choice involved and for many women, there simply won't be. Given the difficulties of child support, and of even paying bills, staying at home is more childish fantasy than reality.
And if their marriages go bad, judges will take a very dim view of an Ivy League graduate not working, especially with a professional degree. So these girls could find themselves as 40 year old women looking to start careers. Which is not where you want to be.
Being a stay at home mom was once practical. I doubt that it is for most people now. And if these women think they can marry someone and expect them to stay at home if they aren't a consultant or writer is frankly delusional. I can imagine the conversation "honey, you aren't going to make partner, but I will, so you can stay home with the kids." His reaction may not be what she expects. That husband stay home bit is as much fantasy as their wedding plans.
To all the folks complaining about the "drowned" school buses, hey guess why they weren't used! FEMA said not to, they would send air-conditioned commercial buses to save people. Only they didn't send them until Thursday. This according to the Louisana governor.
From the above linked article:
"Hours after the hurricane hit Aug. 29, the Federal Emergency Management Agency announced a plan to send 500 commercial buses into New Orleans to rescue thousands of people left stranded on highways, overpasses and in shelters, hospitals and homes.
On the day of the storm, or perhaps the day after, FEMA turned down the state's suggestion to use school buses because they are not air conditioned, Blanco said Friday in an interview.
Even after levees broke and residents were crowding the Louisiana Superdome, then-FEMA Director Mike Brown was bent on using his own buses to evacuate New Orleans, Blanco said.
The state had sent 68 school buses into the city on Monday.
Blanco took over more buses from Louisiana school systems and sent them in on Wednesday, two days after the storm. She tapped the National Guard to drive them. Each time the buses emptied an area, more people would appear, she said.
The buses took 15,728 people to safety, a Blanco aide said.
..Blanco...realized she had made a critical error.
"I assumed that FEMA had staged their buses in near proximity," she said. "I expected them to be out of the storm's way but accessible in one day's time."
It was late Wednesday. The buses wouldn't get to New Orleans until Thursday. By then, many of the sickest and the weakest were dead or dying.
If you walk around New York on a fall Sunday afternoon, you'll see three types of men, people who could care less about sports, men running errands so that they can watch football or on their way to watch football, and the pussywhipped.
Now I know women will disagree, but if a man can't carve out a few hours on a Sunday, that's just fucking sad.
I saw two of these poor bastards on Sunday, when I was getting lunch. These two miserable bastards were trapped eating brunch with their girlfriends and their friends. They looked like they had agreed to this to catch the 4:00 games in exchange for their humiliation. Unless a trip to Bed Bath and Beyond was in the offing.
I mean, it was hard not to laugh in their faces and point:"you fucking pussies. Why are
Boy, did you hear that Brownie is back.
