Monday, February 22, 2010
1,000,000 Voices Virtual March for Health Care Reform
On Feb. 23rd -- that's tomorrow! -- and 24th. More information at DailyKos. Please join. You don't have to wait till tomorrow. Do it now.
SHOSHANA JOHNSON – QUIET COURAGE
As Black History Month draws to a close I thought I would end my little series with the story of someone more contemporary. Shoshana Johnson stands out not only for what she has endured but also what she has accomplished.Most of us will remember the dramatic 2003 rescue of American POW Jessica Lynch in Iraq after her capture by Iraqis in the early days of the invasion, but little was reported about the six others also taken captive in that same ambush.
One of them was Specialist Shoshana Johnson, who would spend her 22 days in captivity with gunshot wounds to both legs. While the media frenzy was focused on the rescue of Lynch, the eventual rescue of the others by the Marines went largely unnoticed.
Ms Johnson, the first black female POW, came home but her troubles were far from over. While her physical wounds would eventually heal, her mental health was more precarious. To add insult to injury she not only suffered from PTSD but also had to endure being misaligned as being greedy for challenging her disability rating so that she could get better benefits.
But the true nature of Shoshana Johnson is seen in her refusal to give up and succumb to her illness. Instead she continued therapy and soldiered on. Today she and her 9 year old daughter are living in Texas where she is training to be a pastry chef so she can make wedding and birthday cakes.
"Even when I came home, I didn't think I'd ever get better. I didn't think the issues I had would ever ease," Johnson said in the (AP) interview. "But as time goes on and I stick with my therapy, it has gotten easier, and I know if I keep on the right track, I'll be OK."
Ms Johnson has written a book about her experiences called, “I’m Still Standing.” It is available at amazon.com.
The ambush in 2003 resulted in 11 deaths of US soldiers. Of the seven soldiers taken captive, Private Lori Piestewa would die of her mortal injuries just hours later.
The survivors who were all eventually rescued by the Marines are:
Jessica Lynch, Shoshana Johnson, Joseph Hudson, James Riley, Edgar Hernandez and Patrick Miller.
May they all find peace and happiness.
Friday, February 19, 2010
Who Will Hold Them Accountable?
CPAC is looking a lot like the national Tea Party convention in Nashville a couple weeks ago, which is to say, three days of hating on President Obama from the far-right fringe. And that’s pretty much all they’ve got.
The rhetoric that comes out of these conservative gatherings is alarming. At the Tea Party we had immigrant-bashing, gay-bashing, conspiracy theories, birthers, and a lot of anti-Obama anger framed in apocalyptic terms. CPAC follows the same script, it’s just different scenery. Here’s Darrell Issa, doing his best to fan the fear:
The rhetoric that comes out of these conservative gatherings is alarming. At the Tea Party we had immigrant-bashing, gay-bashing, conspiracy theories, birthers, and a lot of anti-Obama anger framed in apocalyptic terms. CPAC follows the same script, it’s just different scenery. Here’s Darrell Issa, doing his best to fan the fear:
“I intend to use every resource of my office to make sure that this Administration does not escape serious, thorough, and consistent oversight of its policies, its use of taxpayer money, and its aggressive determination to impose a foreign ideological vision on the people of the United States," he says in his prepared remarks.
What “foreign ideological vision” would that be? We don’t know, because the reporter never asked, or if he did, he didn’t get an answer.
Now here’s Jim DeMint framing the national situation as
"a battle between the American people and Democrats.”
A “battle.” Huh.
What I heard on TV was DeMint call the Democrats to task for their “unprecedented power grab.”
What? You mean the election? The one your side lost?
This is nothing new. The conservative language is one of fear, one that incites action, and it’s well thought out. Here’s Jim DeMint from last year’s CPAC conference:
Earlier this week, we heard the world’s best salesman of socialism address the nation.
Obama had been president all of five weeks.
Five weeks.
Let that sink in for a minute. It certainly set the stage for the next eight months’ worth of “Obama is a Socialist” rhetoric.
How do they get away with this constant drum-beat of anti-Democratic Party, anti-liberal, anti-Obama bile at conservative gatherings? Back in 2004 I remember liberals being criticized--constantly--for being “too angry.”
How come no one outside of a few liberal bloggers and the occasional journalist points out this hypocrisy? How come no one ever calls these folks on their angry rhetoric?
How come no political leader--the head of the DNC, perhaps--ever steps up to say, “what are you people smoking? Socialism? You cannot be serious!”
You know, if no one on the national stage ever challenges this right wing lie factory, then the point has been ceded. You’re letting them get away with the lies. You have allowed them frame you.
Maybe it’s not the media’s job to call the CPAC/Tea Party crowd to account for their rhetoric (at least, not 100% of the time). But someone needs to. Liberals need to stop being so damn polite and worried about "decency" all the time and start realizing that it’s a damn war to the other side, so time to start acting like it’s a war on your side.
Are you afraid Rush Limbaugh will have a sad? Will Glenn Beck have an even bigger sad? Limbaugh said today that
Joe Stack "sounds just like any liberal Democrat," writings "almost word for word" like Obama, Pelosi, Reid
That's a pretty outrageous claim. Has no one stepped up and said, no, it's not true? Not close to true?
Glenn Beck poured “gasoline” and lit a match to demonstrate his take on what Obama was doing to “the average American.” This wasn't challenged because, I guess, of some lame idea that to address it was to validate it. But people, it's been validated already. It's out there.
This constantly-unchallenged over the top rhetoric is dangerous. It fans the flames of populist anger. We're dealing with a low-information populace, and if no one ever challenges the idea that “Obama is a socialist” then the talking point is left out there to fester. Ultimately it creates right wing nutballs who burn their McMansions down before flying a private plane into the IRS building.
It results in people like Warren "Gator" Taylor who took hostages at a Virginia post office.
It encourages the Timothy McVeighs and James Von Brunns and Scott Roeders and Eric Rudolphs. You can’t scream “Obama is destroying the country, Democrats are evil baby killers, everything wrong with the country is the fault of liberals” 24-7 and not expect something to happen.
So what I want to know is: who is going to counter this hate speech? Who is going to step up on the national stage and say enough already?
Why haven’t we done it yet?
Unnatural sexual behavior
People who seek to denounce or prohibit some particular form of sexual behavior often like to brand it as "unnatural", logically meaning that it does not exist in nature -- that is, among non-human animals -- and therefore cannot be normal for humans either. Oddly, the people who do this often tend to be those who reject evolution and thus do not believe that we are related to the other animals, but let that pass.
In most cases, in fact, they're wrong. Animal sexual behavior is very varied, and unsurprisingly, it's our fellow mammals who tend to be the most imaginative. Masturbation, promiscuity (in both genders), oral sex, foreplay, incest, rape, homosexuality (in both genders), erotic dances to whip up a partner's interest, sexual play among adolescents, and even lifelong commitment to a single partner -- all these things have been observed among other mammal species and are common enough in at least some to qualify as normal behavior for them. (Notice too that a couple of these examples remind us that blindly taking what occurs in nature as a guideline for what should or shouldn't be acceptable among humans would be rather dangerous.) Even people who think life was created by a deity should be able to see that activities in which so many species engage cannot be "unnatural" in the eyes of their alleged creator.
But there is one form of human sex-related behavior (indeed, one which the moralists consider an essential prerequisite to sex of any kind) which has no counterpart in nature. It's marriage. No naturalist studying any species on Earth has ever reported a case in which two animals who wanted to mate with each other insisted on finding a third animal to stand around reciting mumbo-jumbo at them first. Only humans do that.
Personally I've always found the concept a bit insulting. It seems to assume that the feelings two people have for each other are not enough in themselves, and need to be "legitimized" by bringing a third party -- the church or the government -- into the relationship to provide its stamp of approval.
In fact, if people feel motivated to be monogamous, they will be, with or without a piece of paper from the state. And if they don't feel motivated, the piece of paper won't help much -- as quite a few Republican politicians have recently demonstrated.
Of course, as a liberal I support the right of conservative humans to engage in their preferred form of unnatural sexual behavior. But they're on rather shaky ground calling anyone else names.
In most cases, in fact, they're wrong. Animal sexual behavior is very varied, and unsurprisingly, it's our fellow mammals who tend to be the most imaginative. Masturbation, promiscuity (in both genders), oral sex, foreplay, incest, rape, homosexuality (in both genders), erotic dances to whip up a partner's interest, sexual play among adolescents, and even lifelong commitment to a single partner -- all these things have been observed among other mammal species and are common enough in at least some to qualify as normal behavior for them. (Notice too that a couple of these examples remind us that blindly taking what occurs in nature as a guideline for what should or shouldn't be acceptable among humans would be rather dangerous.) Even people who think life was created by a deity should be able to see that activities in which so many species engage cannot be "unnatural" in the eyes of their alleged creator.
But there is one form of human sex-related behavior (indeed, one which the moralists consider an essential prerequisite to sex of any kind) which has no counterpart in nature. It's marriage. No naturalist studying any species on Earth has ever reported a case in which two animals who wanted to mate with each other insisted on finding a third animal to stand around reciting mumbo-jumbo at them first. Only humans do that.
Personally I've always found the concept a bit insulting. It seems to assume that the feelings two people have for each other are not enough in themselves, and need to be "legitimized" by bringing a third party -- the church or the government -- into the relationship to provide its stamp of approval.
In fact, if people feel motivated to be monogamous, they will be, with or without a piece of paper from the state. And if they don't feel motivated, the piece of paper won't help much -- as quite a few Republican politicians have recently demonstrated.
Of course, as a liberal I support the right of conservative humans to engage in their preferred form of unnatural sexual behavior. But they're on rather shaky ground calling anyone else names.
Civil Rights Movement: The Promise
Clockwise from left: the Rev. Joseph Lowery, the Rev. C.T. Vivian, Andrew Young and the Rev. Fred Shuttlesworth, all members of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, at Martin Luther King, Jr.,'s church in Atlanta. Photo by Platon for The New Yorker magazine.Continuing the theme of this month, I'd like to direct you to the multimedia portfolio at The New Yorker, titled The Promise, which features photographs of the civil rights movement's (willing and not so much) icons. The photos, also in the most recent issue of the magazine, are unforgettable, and so are the stories of their subjects.
As a bonus, watch Charlie Rose's interview with Platon, the photographer who took the pictures. A fascinating person himself -- talented, sensitive, and humble -- he describes his creative approach and how this particular project has changed his life.
Worth your time.
Thursday, February 18, 2010
The GOP's close resemblance to a Psychrolutes marcidus
When I first read John Kass' article yesterday, I could have sworn he was describing Republicans.
He said, the cunning blobfish [Republican] is boneless [spineless], "a gelatinous orb hovering in the deep [shadows], covered in slime and mucus."
"A blobfish [Republican] looks like some fat, drunken judge [congressman] and may be highly intelligent. And therefore quite dangerous."
"It frowns. It leers. Sometimes, it even drools."
The blobfish [Republican] hovers just above the ocean [senate/house] floor without having to expend energy.
The blobfish [Republican] is becoming extinct.
As you've seen, Kass is talking about the spineless fish and not the dangerous Republicans. But you have to admit the similartities are uncanny.
He said, the cunning blobfish [Republican] is boneless [spineless], "a gelatinous orb hovering in the deep [shadows], covered in slime and mucus."
"A blobfish [Republican] looks like some fat, drunken judge [congressman] and may be highly intelligent. And therefore quite dangerous."
"It frowns. It leers. Sometimes, it even drools."
The blobfish [Republican] hovers just above the ocean [senate/house] floor without having to expend energy.
The blobfish [Republican] is becoming extinct.
As you've seen, Kass is talking about the spineless fish and not the dangerous Republicans. But you have to admit the similartities are uncanny.
A face only its mother can love.
THE RICH GET RICHER …
This article by David Cay Johnston, Tax Rates for Top 400 Earners Fall as Income Soars, is a damning indictment of economic inequities caused by Bush era tax cuts:
Since 1992, the bottom 90 percent of Americans have seen their incomes rise by 13 percent in 2009 dollars, compared with an increase of 399 percent for the top 400.More tax cuts for the wealthy? Why isn't this called “socialism?”
The annual top 400 report was first made public by the Clinton administration, but the George W. Bush administration shut down access to the report. Its release was resumed a year ago when President Obama took office.
(…)
The top 400 reports understate actual top incomes because of deferral rules. For example, managers of offshore hedge funds who deferred their gains may not be counted in the top 400 reports, which are based on the figure on the last line of the front page of Form 1040.
At least three hedge fund managers made $3 billion in 2007. It is not known how much, if any, of their income they deferred.
(…)
The biggest source of income was capital gains, which are taxed at a maximum rate of 15 percent. Gains accounted for 66.3 percent of 2007 income for the top 400, up from 62.8 percent in 2006 and 36.1 percent in 1992.
(…)
The report shows that the number of the top 400 who paid an effective tax rate of 0 percent to 10 percent declined slightly, to 25 in 2007 from 31 in 2006. In 1992 only 6 of the top 400 paid an effective income tax rate of less than 10 percent.
Another 127 paid 10 percent to 15 percent in 2007, up from 113 in 2006.
Only 33 of the top 400 paid an effective tax rate of 30 percent to 35 percent, which is the maximum federal tax rate.
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
BLACK HERITAGE TRAIL, BOSTON, MASS.
I took a nice long walk through the slushy streets of Boston today and was reminded of the Black Heritage Trail that winds around the West End and parts of Beacon Hill.
The first Africans arrived in Boston in February of 1638, eight years after the city was founded. They were brought as slaves, purchased in Providence Isle, a Puritan colony off the coast of Central America. By 1705, there were over 400 slaves in Boston and the beginnings of a free black community in the North End.
I live in a section of the North End that is near to where the free black community was established--Copps Hill. This part of the city was the least desireable because it was not near the docks and it was situated on a hill.
The two most famous blacks in colonial Boston were Phillis Wheatley and Crispus Attucks. Wheatley arrived in Boston as a frail, sickly slave girl, about 7 years old, directly from Africa. The family that bought her taught her to read and write. Phillis began to write poetry and for a times perhaps the most famous African born person in the world. She was set free, but never prospered from her poetry. She died in poverty.
On Being Brought from Africa to America
'Twas mercy brought me from my Pagan land,
Taught my benighted soul to understand
That there's a God, that there's a Saviour too:
Once I redemption neither sought nor knew.
Some view our sable race with scornful eye
"Their colour is a diabolic die.
Remember, Christians, Negro's, black as Cain,
May be refin'd, and join th' angelic train.
--Phillis Wheatley
Attucks, who also went by the name of Michael Johnson, became famous as one of the victims of the Boston Massacre. He was described as black and American Indian.
The American Revolution was a turning point in the status of Africans in Massachusetts. At the end of the conflict, there were more free black people than slaves. When the first federal census was enumerated in 1790, Massachusetts was the only state in the Union to record no slaves.
The all-free black community in Boston was concerned with finding decent housing, establishing independent supportive institutions, educating their children, and ending slavery in the rest of the nation. All of these concerns were played out in this Beacon Hill neighborhood.
The first Africans arrived in Boston in February of 1638, eight years after the city was founded. They were brought as slaves, purchased in Providence Isle, a Puritan colony off the coast of Central America. By 1705, there were over 400 slaves in Boston and the beginnings of a free black community in the North End.
I live in a section of the North End that is near to where the free black community was established--Copps Hill. This part of the city was the least desireable because it was not near the docks and it was situated on a hill.
The two most famous blacks in colonial Boston were Phillis Wheatley and Crispus Attucks. Wheatley arrived in Boston as a frail, sickly slave girl, about 7 years old, directly from Africa. The family that bought her taught her to read and write. Phillis began to write poetry and for a times perhaps the most famous African born person in the world. She was set free, but never prospered from her poetry. She died in poverty.
On Being Brought from Africa to America
'Twas mercy brought me from my Pagan land,
Taught my benighted soul to understand
That there's a God, that there's a Saviour too:
Once I redemption neither sought nor knew.
Some view our sable race with scornful eye
"Their colour is a diabolic die.
Remember, Christians, Negro's, black as Cain,
May be refin'd, and join th' angelic train.
--Phillis Wheatley
Attucks, who also went by the name of Michael Johnson, became famous as one of the victims of the Boston Massacre. He was described as black and American Indian.
The American Revolution was a turning point in the status of Africans in Massachusetts. At the end of the conflict, there were more free black people than slaves. When the first federal census was enumerated in 1790, Massachusetts was the only state in the Union to record no slaves.
The all-free black community in Boston was concerned with finding decent housing, establishing independent supportive institutions, educating their children, and ending slavery in the rest of the nation. All of these concerns were played out in this Beacon Hill neighborhood.
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Salome Thomas-El, A Breath of Fresh Air
A breath of fresh air swept through my church on Valentine’s Day as educator Salome Thomas-El inspired the true believers at the Unitarian Universalist Church of Delaware County (UUCDC) that we could indeed make a difference in the life of a child. Thomas-El, who grew up in
At a time when folks in this country are hunkering down into corners and screaming at one another, it is refreshing to participate with a group of people who want to create positive change. People who see a bright future in helping children, largely minority, largely inner city, people who want to ensure that these children do have a chance to get their fair share of the American Pie. Speaker and audience alike looked for ways to help rather than hinder the upward mobility of some of this country’s most challenged children.
The presentation was made possible through monies from the Homer Jack Fund at UUCDC. Homer Jack was an activist UU minister who spent his final years as a congregant of our church.
Here are links to some organizations striving to help young people succeed. Rather than argue, blame, divide, and scream, how about if we all pick an organization and provide support to our young people?
After School Activities Partnership
Created in 2002 in response to a civic outcry for help with activities for the city’s youth during the critical unsupervised hours after school, ASAP/After School Activities Partnerships has provided after school recreational and enrichment activities to Philadelphia kids in some of the poorest and most dangerous areas of the city.
http://www.phillyasap.org/Home.aspx
The Achievement Project
TAP is a nonprofit organization that helps young people in Chester, Pennsylvania to succeed in high school; to apply to and be admitted to college; and to arrive at college having acquired the capacity to succeed there.
Provides afterschool programs and summer day camps to children of Chester’s East Side
9th & Potter Sts.
(484) 995-0828
Chester Eastside Ministries
Provides afterschool programs and summer day camps to children of Chester’s East Side
9th & Potter Sts.
RevBerniceWarren@chestereastside.org
The Be Proud Foundation
The overall mission of the Be Proud Foundation is to provide experiential learning opportunities for youth targeted at exposing their thinking errors, misconceptions and gaps in knowledge thereby increasing their chances for a successful life.
(610)891-8808
Fax (610)891-8919
email: beproud@comcast.net
Peace in the Streets/Peach on Earth
Teaches conflict resolution techniques, primarily for Chester, PA youth.Contact Wanda Moore
Pspe2002@yahoo.com
Big Brothers/Big Sisters
The Big Brothers Big Sisters Mission is to help children reach their potential through professionally supported, one-to-one relationships with mentors that have a measurable impact on youth.
1341
Bigs@bbbssepa.org
http://www.bbbssepa.org
Fresh Air Fund
Since 1877, The FreshAir Fund, a not-for-profit agency, has provided free summer experiences in the country to more than 1.7 million New York City Canada
http://www.freshair.org/top-links/about-us.aspx
NAACP Scholarship Fund
The NAACP is a leading advocate of equal access to quality education. In an effort to promote and ensure higher education opportunities for minority youth, the NAACP offers the following national scholarships: Earl G. Graves Scholarship, Agnes Jones Scholarship, Historically Black College & Universities Scholarship Fund, Lillian and Samuel Sutton Scholarship, Roy Wilkins scholarship, and the Hubertus W.V. Willems Scholarship. These awards help eliminate financial difficulties that may hinder students’ higher education goals. Scholarship award amounts range from $1,000 - $5,000 and are disbursed in two installments throughout a specified school year. Each scholarship contains its own set of requirements and students are encouraged to apply for each award that aligns with their eligibility.
Contact your local NAACP
Nationalizing Wal-Mart
So let me get this straight, President Obama, or if you're a Republican, just plain Obama, is a dangerous leader because when someone tried to blow up a plane he took hours before mentioning the magic word "War." That was bad. Never ever talk of criminal activity when you can describe it as an act of war, unless of course it's our criminal activity. The non-sequitur correlate of this principle is that no rules apply when the words are coming from on official right wing spokesman, like Rush or Sarah. So it's OK for him to call people "retards" on the air, but just disgusting for Rahm to use it in private. Likewise it's OK for Rush to insist there's no war on while all the rest of his party continue to justify each and every contradiction. Actually no rules apply to Rush at all, since he can get away with such statements as insisting that the President has already dealt the US a more devastating blow than we suffered in World War II without being called a liar, an ignoramus or the worst enemy Truth ever had.
But let's start at the beginning, Rush claimed yesterday that Wal-mart was lobbying heavily to keep "Obama" from nationalizing the company. Lord knows they have lobbyists, but it takes a certain kind of person to broadcast that there is any likelihood of such an action and a really special kind of person to believe it. Now why would that be something awful you might ask Rush? Because there's no war on, says he, driving home the point that whether there is or isn't is situational and specific to any particular argument he's trying to make. There's a war when you can attack the President with it and there isn't when you can attack the President with it and both times Rush will be right.
Does anyone reading this believe that Rush Limbaugh isn't stark raving mad with power, thinking he can invent alternate histories, create alternate realities and use them to attack the government and the people of the United States of America? There are millions who do and it may be that one or two of them will take it upon themselves to do Rush's bidding and rid us of the man who has already ruined everything for everyone.
Of course it's a United States of America where the president's imaginary "gun grab" has already taken place, where people who just got a tax cut are protesting an imaginary increase, where people who can't afford a check-up much less treatment for a serious illness are screaming about "Obama" taking away their ideal situation and somewhere, somebody is plotting acts of violence because after all, "Obama" is not only a Nazi, but a more dangerous one than Hitler. Thus spake Limbaugh.
But let's start at the beginning, Rush claimed yesterday that Wal-mart was lobbying heavily to keep "Obama" from nationalizing the company. Lord knows they have lobbyists, but it takes a certain kind of person to broadcast that there is any likelihood of such an action and a really special kind of person to believe it. Now why would that be something awful you might ask Rush? Because there's no war on, says he, driving home the point that whether there is or isn't is situational and specific to any particular argument he's trying to make. There's a war when you can attack the President with it and there isn't when you can attack the President with it and both times Rush will be right.
"The last time this happened was World War II, but that was because there was a war on and it made sense"The last time what happened, Rush? It may make sense to him, but not only are we losing men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan, we did not nationalize Wal-Mart then or ever, nor is anyone contemplating it but Rush.
"Country is under assault, more so than we were during World War II, other than the Japanese. But the Germans never attacked us, the Japanese did."he continued and I'll leave it to you to figure out what alternate universe these "facts" come from. I suspect there are numbers of people who will simply accept that the current administration is more dangerous to our national security than what in the late 1930's was the most powerful military on Earth, will simply nod and accept that Germany didn't declare war on us and didn't over-run Europe and attack England and that we didn't lose almost half a million troops or that untold tens of millions of people didn't die -- Obama is dangerous and has already done us more harm than the Axis powers and without a doubt is going to nationalize Wal-Mart.
Does anyone reading this believe that Rush Limbaugh isn't stark raving mad with power, thinking he can invent alternate histories, create alternate realities and use them to attack the government and the people of the United States of America? There are millions who do and it may be that one or two of them will take it upon themselves to do Rush's bidding and rid us of the man who has already ruined everything for everyone.
Of course it's a United States of America where the president's imaginary "gun grab" has already taken place, where people who just got a tax cut are protesting an imaginary increase, where people who can't afford a check-up much less treatment for a serious illness are screaming about "Obama" taking away their ideal situation and somewhere, somebody is plotting acts of violence because after all, "Obama" is not only a Nazi, but a more dangerous one than Hitler. Thus spake Limbaugh.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)