Has Columbus Just Discovered Injustice, Too?

Yes, it could be that I've spent too much time discussing global capitalism's reliance on racism and the oppression and exploitation of people of color. Organizations and people who advocate for people of color and the poor, like ACORN, have been dismantled, disparaged, and dismissed. The Rev. Jesse Jackson led a march on Wall St as early as December 2007. (Boy, has it catch on!)

But now that the shit has hit the fan, and white unemployment is as high now, during this economic crisis, as black unemployment was low in 2007, you see fit to organize and Occupy Wall St. Now that even you, average white American, can be knocked around - but not shot and killed while handcuffed - by the police, you want to protest police brutality.

Passing on Capitalism

All in all, one might say it wasn't an episode in which capitalism cloaked itself in glory. That is, unless one is Wall Street Journal deputy editorial page director and "Wonder Land" columnist Daniel Henninger. In his October 14 column, "Capitalism Saved the Miners: The Profit = Innovation Dynamic Was Everywhere at the Mine Rescue Site," Henninger argued that the miners owed their rescue to a special drill bit developed by a private U.S. company. That was his entire argument. . . .

It'd be funny if it weren't so sad. One of those "laughing just to keep from crying" situations. Besides, I thought one problem with current liberalism was our deification of "the state." But blind faith in capitalism is . . . good? via Portside:

'Capitalism Saved the Miners'? Only in Wonder Land

Here's Your Free-Market at Work

I very much disagreed with Bob Herbert's last op-ed piece. I've said before and say again, the numbers for black folks are no different than any other folks. Our problem is racism, and I refuse to pretend we should be super-human.

But he redeemed himself with this most recent piece. Not to say he knows me or would care what I have to say, but you get my gist:

September 3, 2010

Of Janitors and Kings

By Bob Herbert

Martha Escobar is staring into the cold, dark, unforgiving eyes of destitution.

Ms. Escobar is one of 16 janitors who were laid off from their jobs at a luxury complex in Los Angeles that houses some of the wealthiest tenants imaginable. JPMorgan Asset Management, a unit of the vast JPMorgan Chase empire, manages an intricate investment web that owns the buildings. The layoffs were ordered by a maintenance contractor, ABM Industries.

I Knew Something Wasn't Right!: This Market Ain't Free

Maybe I'll comment more on this later, but reading this article makes things clear for me. Working class Republicans, or more specifically whites, have allowed themselves to be duped into voting against their own economic interests. I mean, come on! They're still planning tax-day protests against an administration and Congress that cut their taxes.

My only qualm is that Dean Baker says the healthcare bill that recently passed will eventually become unaffordable - though not because of government action. But the CBO estimates have the reform bill lowering the deficit over the next 10 years. So I'm confused about that. And, I guess I should also mention that I think he could've come up with a better example than "medical treatment on the world free market." But I definitely do agree with his point. So here goes Dean Baker ~ No1State:

Ending the Myth of ‘Market Fundamentalism’

Dean Baker
Dissent, Spring 2010

BlueCross BlueShank

Here, make your statement:

Subject: Blue Cross

Hi,

We hear all the time about rising health care costs, but this really takes the cake.

Blue Cross has just announced that it's immediately raising premiums charged to hundreds of thousands of individual customers by as much as 39% -- even though their parent company's profits soared to a record $4.7 billion last year.

A Money Quote, Literally

Combine all that spending to boost home prices with a still-bloated financial industry – too big to fail, expecting to get bailed out, and rewarding executives with huge bonuses in exchange for taking big risks – and, warns Barofsky, the U.S. financial system is headed for The Great Crisis, Part II. "Even if TARP saved our financial system from driving off a cliff back in 2008, absent meaningful reform, we are still driving on the same winding mountain road, but this time in a faster car," cautions the report.

The thing is, though, that we've got to keep people in their homes, right? So let's break up the banks, put caps on bonuses, and, well, it seems like we're gonna have to let the worst of the idiots fail. Or, rather, be foreclosed on. Read the rest of the article here.

Since When Do Creditors Just Sit and Watch While You Don't Pay?

Take this opportunity to speak out against AIG's outrageous bonuses. Honey, they still owe you (taxpayers).

I signed a petition [I actually did.] telling Congress that it's long past time to take real action to stop companies from giving out taxpayer dollars in bonuses. Can you join me at the link below?

http://pol.moveon.org/aigagain/?r_by=18831-8677709-cKNJwwx&rc=comment_paste

Last year, AIG gave out $450 million in bonuses to the very people who wrecked our economy. And despite the uproar that caused, and the fact that AIG still owes taxpayers $182 billion, they're at it again.

They're giving out another $100 to these same people. That's just plain unacceptable.

It's long past time that Congress does something about these obscene bonuses. Tell them that we won't leave them alone until they do.

Is the Dream a Reality, or Are We Waking to Reality

If you don't know my health situation, just ask. Or search, cause I really don't like talking about it.

I would love to do more regular posting of my own original thoughts. Love to!! But that's a little out of my reach right now. Still stretching towards the mark, though. Don't doubt that. And I may do something original later this week.

But until then, one thing I can do is find an article that captures my thoughts. What will follow is one. Economic and racial justice are inseparably entwined. Dr. King came to realize this towards in his last years. A lot of the poverty we see in black America today reaches back to post-WWII racism in handling the GI Bill and in FHA redlining. (Which gets to my case that reparations are due; and if white Americans can't stomach going back to 1865, going back to just 1945 is another option.) In his time, King didn't realize this until he came to notice that having the right to sit at the lunch counter didn't mean much if you couldn't afford to eat there. Moreover, the negative stereotypes used against all blacks, light-skinned and Negro-dialect included, that result in unemployment rates among blacks being nearly twice as high as that among whites are based on the social ills that exist among the black poor. As such, a good bit of these issues could be address just by alleviating financial pressures.

Wait. I don't think I'm being clear. I'm trying to point out the circular pattern of poverty and racism. Things that happen among the black poor are used to restrict opportunities for all blacks. Even though once socioeconomics is accounted for, gaps in crime disappear. Then, these restricted opportunities result in more disproportionate poverty.

So, anyway, I lost my train of thought and commented on another blog and couldn't recover my train of thought. But I really want to share this op-ed by Bob Herbert with you.

Lastly, please MA Dems, get out and vote!! Coakley ain't perfect, but she ain't a 'Publican, either!

Back to the Drawing Board. Seriously.

According to an article in the New York Times, college degrees aren't helping black men find jobs. "Well, No1KState, everybody's struggling now." At a ratio of 8.4 to 4.4 for black men with college degrees to white men with college degrees?

The administrators at racismreview noted that the article failed to explicitly say white hiring managers had a problem with black job applicants. The closest Michael Luo came to blaming white people was quoting stories like this one:

Mr. Williams recently applied to a Dallas money management firm that had posted a position with top business schools. The hiring manager had seemed ecstatic to hear from him, telling him they had trouble getting people from prestigious business schools to move to the area. Mr. Williams had left New York and moved back in with his parents in Dallas to save money.

But when Mr. Williams later met two men from the firm for lunch, he said they appeared stunned when he strolled up to introduce himself.

“Their eyes kind of hit the ceiling a bit,” he said. “It was kind of quiet for about 45 seconds.”

The company’s interest in him quickly cooled, setting off the inevitable questions in his mind.

Mr. Johnny R Williams has JPMorgan Chase and an M.B.A. from the University of Chicago on his résumé.

I'm not really surprised Luo fails to acknowledge that if companies were excited about a particular job applicant until they see him, then the problem is with the interviewers, not the applicant. After all, have you listened to the way people talk about slavery? Almost as though the country just had black slaves running around with no white slaveowners. As for today, this whole problem that black men with amazing resumes are having a harder time finding jobs than white men isn't white people's fault. After all,

The discrimination is rarely overt, according to interviews with more than two dozen college-educated black job seekers around the country, many of them out of work for months. Instead, those interviewed told subtler stories, referring to surprised looks and offhand comments, interviews that fell apart almost as soon as they began, and the sudden loss of interest from companies after meetings.

And plus,

There is also the matter of how many jobs, especially higher-level ones, are never even posted and depend on word-of-mouth and informal networks, in many cases leaving blacks at a disadvantage. A recent study published in the academic journal Social Problems found that white males receive substantially more job leads for high-level supervisory positions than women and members of minorities.

See? None of this alleged "discrimination" has anything at all to do with some supposed racist conspiracy white people have against black men with degrees from Yale and MBAs from the University of Chicago. No! White employers would love to hire more Morehouse me, but

. . . [they simply gravite] toward similar people, casting about for the right “cultural fit,” a buzzword often heard in corporate circles.

After all,

they conceded, there are times when their race can be beneficial, particularly with companies that have diversity programs. But many said they sensed that such opportunities had been cut back over the years and even more during the downturn. Others speculated there was now more of a tendency to deem diversity unnecessary after Mr. Obama’s triumph.

In fact, whether Mr. Obama’s election has been good or bad for their job prospects is hotly debated. Several interviewed went so far as to say that they believed there was only so much progress that many in the country could take, and that there was now a backlash against blacks.

Now that you've gotten the basic gist of the article, I can share my true feelings. Of course, I absolutely agree with the "blacklash" theory. Also, are we really gonna consider being black "beneficial" just because some company has realized they've already met the quota for white men? Cause actually, diversity improves performance and profits.

And what the hell is "cultural fit" and doesn't it already raise a red flag?

Essentially, the phrase refers to an employee or applicant who shares the employer's business attitudes, values, goals, and overall view of how the particular business should be run. Every workplace has a style that is reflected in the way its employees act and dress; how they deal with clients, customers, and each other; and how they comport themselves in the larger work world.

I found another definition/explanation here:

In the work setting, lack of fit between an employee and an organization can be described as culture clash. Culture encompasses the shared, taken-for-granted assumptions that a group has learned throughout its history -- values held in common that extend beyond the framed mission statement hanging in the lobby. It includes the following:

 Work style -- the way work is done.

• Team orientation -- hierarchical versus egalitarian.  
• Management style -- collaborative or commanding. 
• Customer orientation -- a nuisance as opposed to reason for being.  
• Political style -- the importance of what you know versus who you know.  
• Attitudes toward things like learning and risk taking.  

Lack of cultural fit is largely due to a misguided hiring process supported by ineffective execution. Even the best-intentioned organizations - those that focus on competencies and relevant behaviors, in addition to education and experience -- frequently don't assess the issue of cultural fit accurately. Failure to do this minimizes the likelihood of arriving at a successful match.

So how does this play out in real life terms? Let's take a look at one of Harvard's Baker Scholars (awarded only to the top students of the MBA graduate class), a black man named James who kept being rejected because he wasn't the white, oh, I mean, right cultural fit. His race wasn't necessarily the problem.

He mentioned, for instance, that he was extremely fastidious in his working style, and would stay long hours to ensure that he always produced work of the highest quality. Admirable within some companies, perhaps, but others might see it as being detrimental to team spirit if James were not able to prioritise, or to relax once in a while if the work he was doing at the time wasn’t critical.

He also mentioned that he liked to take initiative and present the people around him with highly-polished work. But if the organisation was used to getting everyone involved in the problem so that the solution was jointly developed, would James accommodate this or not?

So, although the recruiter could be more helpful to James in the feedback which is given to him, there is nothing underhand going on. In fact, the recruiter is working in James’s interests to ensure that he does not join a firm where he will not fit in and excel.

So black men, here's some job advice, based mostly on what I've laid out and in the spirit of this particular post (Which I hope you realize is mostly sarcasm . . . about the reasons for the disparity in employment between black male college grads and white male college grads, not the disparity itself.).Don't demonstrate initiative.

1. Don't be so committed to high-quality work that you stay extra hours on the job making sure you get things just right.
2. Send a white guy as a stand-in for your interviews and talk into his ear using blue-tooth.
3. Use initials if you have an ethnic name.
4. Don't mention any awards you've received or organizations you've joined as a high achieving minority.
5. And if all else fells, don't get a college degree. Particularly one from a prominent university.

James became neither an investment banker nor a consultant. The deeper he looked into those careers, the more he realised himself that he would not succeed. He is now a teacher just outside of Chicago where he is able to develop young minds. And Lord knows we need more black male teachers!

No, sarcasm aside, we really do need more black male teachers in our public schools. But I'm not sure I'm okay with black men going into teaching as a last resort. What are we supposed to tell our kids? You can be anything you want, just stay in your place? Cause no matter how much you accomplish, you can still be arrested in or protested against in your own home.

This Is Why Healthcare Should Never Be Left to the Free Market

. . . er, duh!

Goldman To Private Insurers: No Health Care Reform at
All Is Best

Sam Stein
11-12-09

The Senate Finance Committee bill, which Goldman's
analysts conclude is the version most likely to survive
the legislative process, is described as the "base"
scenario. Under that legislation (which did not include
a public plan) the earnings per share for the top five
insurers would grow an estimated five percent from 2010
through 2019. And yet, the "variance with current
valuation" -- essentially, what the value of the stock
is on the market -- is projected to drop four percent.

It's Not Racist, But . . .

If you know me, then you know I do think race is playing a part in the persecution of ACORN. How many dangerous contractors do we still have in Iraq? And to the extent that senate Dems are just appeasing Republicans, I coulda sworn that appeasement was pointless. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I don't subscribe to that notion the way BushCo used it. But. I do know people who make a big to-do out of "appeasement" should never be "appeased." ~ No1KState


The ACORN Vote: End The Appeasement
By Isaiah J. Poole

September 15, 2009 - 1:55pm ET

Last night, on a 83-7 vote, the Senate voted to bar ACORN from receiving any funds in the fiscal 2010 Transportation and HUD appropriations bills. If the House follows suit, that would effectively end several housing assistance and advocacy programs that ACORN has successfully done for several years.

The vote is the latest fallout from Glenn Beck’s jihad against all signs of progressivism in the Obama White House. First it was Van Jones, fired from his green jobs advisory post after right-wing websites branded him a Communist radical. Now it’s ACORN. Who’s next?

The worst part is that a majority of Senate Democrats went along with the vote against ACORN. Freshman Sen. Mike Johanns, R-Neb., sponsored the amendment cutting the funding, and used to back up his argument a deluge of right-wing propaganda — from the entrapment of ACORN employees by a conservative video hit squad to an 88-page screed ginned up in July by Rep. Darrell Issa and House Republicans entitled “Is ACORN Intentionally Structured As A Criminal Enterprise?”

Not one Democrat had the guts to speak up on the Senate floor against this right-wing attack.

Digby on Saturday shared a reader observation that helps put this in context: Recall that Xe, formerly known as Blackwater, has had a contract with the State Department extended this month despite the fact that five Blackwater guards were charged with 35 counts of manslaughter. Blackwater almost singlehandedly undercut Iraqi support for the American presence in Iraq, but Congress took no action to bar it from further contracts.

There is one word for the Democratic votes to de-fund ACORN: appeasement. The conservative machine to which Glenn Beck is beholden gins up a controversy based on either facts blown out of proportion or total falsehoods. And when faced with the opportunity to stand up for truth, fairness, due process and the mandate the voters gave Congress and the White House to stand up for progressive policies, too many Democrats either run silent or run scared.

We should know from the health care debate that appeasement is as failed a strategy today as it was in 1938 when Neville Chamberlain tried it against Nazi Germany. The more Democrats give in—whether it's deep-sixing the public option in response to fear-mongering about "government-run health care" or cutting funds to badly needed services for low-income people because of a few bad actors in a grassroots organization—the more empowered and hungry the unprincipled power-grabbers in the conservative movement will become. It is a losing strategy for Democrats and a dangerous path for America.

Congress, stop the appeasement. Get a spine. Draw a line. Now

You're Still Here!

Oh, that's great!

A lot of things have been happening in my personal life. All good . . . and perfect, thankya Jesus! Hallelujah! For real.

I've finally been given a firm diagnosis - a mild narcolepsy - which explains my fatigue, but not the pain. Which, is okay since both are being treated. The new medication for fatigue hasn't yet made me feel "normal"; just not so week-old road-kill sick. And that's absolutely fabulous! Yeah, I still spend much of my day on the couch or online; but, like I said, I feel better. And that feels great.

Now, as for my continued inconsistency. First off, like I said, I still don't feel normal. And secondly, my brain has been some vacation of sorts for at least a couple of weeks now. I don't know why. It's not that I feel dumb; and trust, I do know that feeling. No, I'm just mentally tired. I mean, when I say a lot has been going on in my personal life, I do mean a lot. It's taking quite a bit of mental energy to keep things straight. So I don't have the usual zest for thinking out examples or implications or anything of the such of racism or sexism or anything in our current events.

In fact, I have a post on draft right now that I started last week, and just couldn't get my head to finish. Something about how the little racist "Obama chia pets" and "nappy-headed hos" comments are all part of a society that enables what amounts to essentially robbing the black community: Well's Fargo targeting the black community for sub-prime loans. I was gonna explain how all the seemingly harmless statements mount up to damage the black community. The whole circle made sense in my head, I just couldn't quite find the words. But since I'm on a bit of a roll, let me just say this - people who see nothing racist about the recent "tea parties" nurture an environment where people see nothing wrong with gouging the black community of very hard earned moneys. And to make a point that hard-working white Americans need to hear: the people who saw nothing wrong with loan officers lying both to the client and to the underwriter so the cost of the loan will be higher leading to higher profits for the company and higher bonuses for the loan officer also see nothing wrong with the exorbitant bonuses received by the executives who brought down the global economy. Mark my words chumpy, which shit gets to flying, everybody gets hit. Instead of listening to the idiots who propagate the lie the affirmative action is "reverse" racism, you should be listening to those of us tell you that "injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."

Well. Guess the good ole noggin' is doing better than I thought!

Also, I've just touched base with my cousin Lauren. If you don't remember, I have a cousin and cousin-in-law who're both based in Afghanistan right now. They're army medics, kinda like on MASH I would imagine. Lauren describes what she does as kinda working in an emergency room with injured people coming in all day. Her working hours were increased, so she works 12-hours shifts now. She has a furlough next month. I can't wait! It's not even about seeing her. It's just about knowing she's home safe and sound.

Oh! What brought about this sudden post anyway? This op-ed piece in the New York Times by Frank Rich. Pretty cogent stuff. Gets straight to the point. Gotta read. Here's a quote:

Then he brought up another recent gunman: "If you're one who believes that abortion is murder, at what point do you go out and kill someone who's performing abortions?" An answer, he said, was provided by Dr. George Tiller's killer. He went on: "If you are one who believes these sorts of things about the president of the United States ..." He left the rest of that chilling sentence unsaid.

Rich also mentioned something I hadn't really thought about, but which is true:

We don't know whether the tiny subset of domestic terrorists in this crowd is egged on by political or media demagogues - though we do tend to assume that foreign jihadists respond like Pavlov's dogs to the words of their most fanatical leaders and polemicists.

I'm not quite sure why it never crossed my mind, but at any rate. If you're interested in a discussion on whether or not hate speech should be regulated, here's a good start. I already have comments there, but I'm about to add Rich's thought to the convo.

Anyway, I hope you're still here when I get back. Don't know when I'll be posting again. Just can't shake the dead-brain feeling.

What the . . . !!

Douglas J. Besharov, resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, says: "There are social costs of being poor, though it is not clear where the cause and effect is. We know for a fact that on certain measures, people who are poor are often more depressed than people who are not. I don't know if poverty made them depressed or the depression made them poor. I think the cause and effect is an open question. Some people are so depressed they are not functional. 'I live in a crummy neighborhood. My kids go to a crummy school.' That is not the kind of scenario that would make them happy." Another effect of all this, he says: "Would you want to hire someone like that?"

The quote comes from a Washington Post article - one of the recent articles I've seen out on the web detailing the ways in which you have to be rich to afford being poor!

I just used to quote because conservatives and their "economics" really angers me. That quote displays classic conservative apathy towards the poor. "It's not clear where the cause and effect is . . . Would you want to hire someone like that?" Yeah, it's not the fault of the invisible hand or anything like demonizing unions and deregulating the financial market that people who're poor pay more for stuff everyone else takes for granted. Take having a checking account. Initially, in can cost to open an account, but in the end, it's cheaper. But, what if you can't afford the initial cost?

Tax Cuts?! Tax Cuts?!

I am fed up with the Republicans. They have to be the stupidest bunch in politics around the world. And to make matters worse, they have a healthy dose a pure evil, too.

After all this time and whining and complaining, they finally get something they should be happy with. Something they should be thrilled with in my opinion. A Senate stimulus plan that is 58% spending and 42% of the same tax cuts that got us in the mess in the first place. And David Vitter, who won his seat after castigating Bill Clinton for dishonoring the Oval then turned around a slept with a couple of prostitutes at least, is leading the Republican delegation who is asking for "time" to look things over. They wanna read exactly what's in the 42% of tax cuts.

Now, on one hand, you can't blame them. They don't want "tax cuts" that are targeted to workers. They especially don't want "tax cuts" that really aren't "tax cuts" at all that are targeted to the working poor, those who work but don't make enough to pay income tax. No. Even though these are the people who're really hurting, the people who haven't caused this whole mess, god forbid they get some help.

Not to mention, the unemployed, whose numbers keep growing by the day, don't pay taxes and therefore can't receive any tax relief.

Really. The Republicans are just putting on this whole show just to make sure President Obama fails. This isn't about the stimulus. This isn't about doing what's "right" for America. Economists across the ideological spectrum all agree Washington is gone have to turn the spigots wide open. So it's not the economics of the bill. Not the tax cuts, not the amount of spending, none of that. They just want Pres. Obama to fail, pure and simple.

The past 8 years have demonstrated that Republicans neither care nor know what's best for American citizens. Yet, they have the gall, the unmitigated audacity to get self-righteous over this?

You, John Boehner and Mitch McConnell and all the other Congressional conservatives should be mortality ashamed of yourselves. Really.

You know what I hope? I hope Pres. Obama burns them Monday, and the final bill has everything the House Democrats wanted in the first place. The family planning spending, the National Mall grass, and everything. And if the Republicans want to filibuster, for once, make them stand and talk and explain to everybody why they want this recession to become worse.

My Two Soldiers

Blagojevich smalojevich. Barack Obama has had nothing to do with this pay-for-play scandal. Whatever Blago had in mind, it's clear he knew that bleeping Obama was only interested in giving him bleeping appreciation.

And to the US Senate Republicans: come of it! Stop hating on the UAW. The labor union isn't the problem. US auto companies haven't been making cars people want to buy. When I buy a car, I don't even have intentions of buying from the US auto industry. So, if you wanna clear out the ranks of upper-level, executive management, please do. But leave the union alone. Cause the way I see it, you're coming up against to philosophical contradictions. One is that the cost of workers in the North is too high, especially do to healthcare cost. One way to get rid of the healthcare cost burden on employers would be some sort-of "socialized medicine" via national medicaid/medicare for all, some sort-of single payer system. At the very least, we got to get rid of the system we have know: healthcare for profit. Sorry. People's lives shouldn't depend on insurance companies' bottom lines. And some form of "socialized medicine" will help cut costs for American business - and that's important to you, right?

The other contradiction you're up against is this notion of the free-market. The way I've understood it, in a free market, labor is a form of capital. Why are you so willing to help one side of the free market, business, but not the other, labor? In a truly free market, labor is allowed to make the same self-interested decisions that business is allowed to make. So, in the end, quit hating on a system you purport to support.

Now that I've expressed my feelings about that, I'm moving on. The Republicans are idiots. They're being obnoxious to block the American auto bail-out, or rather, bridge loan. And they're being especially obnoxious to demand Obama come clean about any contact and talk he or his staff or any emissary may have had with Blagojevish. I repeat: if we know nothing else, we do know that Blagojevich was angry that Obama wouldn't play game with him. Doesn't that clear Obama? Quit trying to paint him with Illinois corruption and call me when the Cubs win the Series, or the Bulls win the Finals. I have bigger fish to fry.

My cousin and her husband are due to be ship out to Afghanistan in early January. Hence, my title. And, quite frankly, I'm conflicted about the situation. I understand we need to finish the job in Afghanistan's, and I'm pissed that lame-a, er, -duck Bush didn't do so in the beginning. And the latest reports are that Afghans aren't do any better than they were before. For some, especially women, the situation has become worse. Just a few months ago, I watched part of a special about Afghan women setting themselves on fire as acts of rebellion against someone, be it an abusive husband or an abusive mother-in-law. (I don't know whether or not they had access to guns. But I do know that women aren't likely to use guns to commit suicide. And, I suppose, watching "your" woman burn to death at her decision can stick in the craw of the men who claim control of them.) I only watched part of the special because my stomach couldn't take it. Many of these women were unsuccessful at the quick suicide they intended and eventually died slow, painful deaths. They lived long enough to tell their story, so I guess that's something to support. But watching these talking faces with charred skin and lips noses burned off was more than I can take. Don't get me wrong. When it comes to the crime dramas I love so much, I can stomach stuff like that. I know it's fake. But when it's real, it causes not just my stomach to ache, but my heart as well.

So, part of me understands we may need the military to stabilize the situation enough so that, I would hope, we could send in more nonmilitary aid. But I hate that my cousin and her husband's lives are at risk. Now, I must confess, my cousin, who I'll call Lauren, and I aren't that close. I haven't really spoken to her in almost a year. But she's my cousin, and I love her. And I think she was dumb to have joined the army in the first place. I mean. First of all, I don't believe the myth that for this country is all that honorable. I mean, for me, it kinda depends on the war. I don't know. I just don't think America is worth my life. It's kind of hard to explain, so I'll leave it for a later post. Suffice it to say I think dying for America means you've died to maintain a system that cause more harm than good. And, I just can't accept the notion of dying for America in the face of having committed my life to Christ. I and anyone else who professes to be a Christian is supposed to be seeking God's kingdom and righteousness, and I just don't think America represents either one.

Plus, all the military deaths I can think of post-WWII haven't been for "freedom." They've been for oil or just maintaining control of the world. All this hype about winning the Cold War without bloodshed is just that - hype. Hundreds of thousands have died in the "Cold" War between Russia and America. Don't get me wrong, it's a good thing the situation never came to a war of nuclear weapons, but really. Do you really think someone would've turned America into a communist nation against our will? If you do, it's no wonder you think Al Qeada or any other terrorist organization could turn us into a Muslim country against our will. Or that the immigrants from south of the border will suddenly turn us into a Spanish-speaking 3rd world country. You're delusional.

Did I mention I'm actually angry at Lauren for having joined the Army in the first place? That's why I'm a bit conflicted about her and her husband, who I'll call Jamie, being called to Afghanistan. That's a choice they made as much as a mess BushCo. created. Now, from what I understand, the army was a way out for him. But her? She just initially joined the National Guard for the grad school money. It's not like she couldn't have earned scholarships or my aunt and uncle couldn't have chipped in. In fact, another aunt of ours said they would've gone door to door raising money for my cousin to go to school. For generations, our family has supported education, starting with my great-grandfather who opened a school.

And here's what really bothers me. Lauren and Jamie have three children. Three. One child should be two-years-old by now. Another turns three after Christmas. The oldest turns four in February. So, with 12-16 month tours, my cousin and her husband are going to miss the birthdays of their children, and the missing starts right away.

And what happens if Lauren and Jamie die? I know all of my family will do whatever we can to take care of the children. In fact, that's not even anything I personally have to worry about. But it's something the children will have to deal with. One memory I have of the oldest when she wasn't quite one is of her picking up telephones and remote controls and saying into them, "Elno. Doing!" as though she were expecting Lauren on the other end. And I can hear my cousin always answering the phone, "Hello? How you doing?" I'm not sure the children are old enough to understand death. In my mind, I can only imagine how long they'll expect their parents to be on the other side of a ringing phone or opening door.

Then again, what happens if Lauren and Jamie both survive? We know that post-traumatic stress disorder is under-reported and undertreated. Are they going to be the same parents the children remember?

I'm just conflicted about this whole thing.

And to top it off, cause I feel it needs to be, bin Laden has lived to see his nefarious plan come to fruition. At this point, over 4200 American soldiers have died in Iraq alone. That's more than the number of people who died in the 9/11/01 attacks. 540 Americans have died in Afghanistan. I haven't even started on the number of dead, injured, or displaced Iraqi and Afghan civilians. The total is well over 2 million. Closer to 3 million I would venture to guess. And for what? Are we really any safer? Isn't Obama still sending out messages? And last I heard, this whole Gitmo/torture/rendition method has been working against us; and, according to someone who's talked to foreign insurgents in Iraq, there's an untold number of American deaths due to US torture of so-called enemy combatants.

And now, the Mumbai attacks.

What of my cousin? What of her husband? What of their children? What of them and other families like them. Has this venture really been worth it? If you think it has, you're either delusional or evil. Maybe both.

Socialism from a Person Who Knows More About It Than Me

"Socialist" Is Not an Epithet

John Nichols

The Nation October 20, 2008
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat/373974

"There is always a charge that socialism does not fit
human nature. We've encountered that for a long time.
Maybe that's true. But can't people be educated? Can't
people learn to cooperate with each other? Surely that
must be our goal, because the alternative is redolent
with war and poverty and all the ills of the world." --
Frank Zeidler

John McCain hopes to revive his campaign by suggesting
that Barack Obama is some kind of socialist.

The Republican nominee for president says that his
Democratic rival's plan for stimulating the economy
sounds "a lot like socialism."

"At least in Europe, the socialist leaders who so
admire my opponent are up front about their objectives.
They use real numbers and honest language. And we
should demand equal candor from Senator Obama," the
Arizona senator claimed over the weekend.

Asked if he thinks Obama is a socialist, McCain offers
an insinuating raised eyebrow and a shrug non-response:
"I don't know."

McCain is not really concerned about socialism. He is
trying to suggest that Obama is somehow un- American.

Obama's no socialist.

But, as a Wisconsinite, I can't buy the basic premise
of McCain's argument.

I grew up in a state where socialism was as American as
my friend Frank Zeidler.

Zeidler, an old-school American socialist who served
three terms as the mayor of Milwaukee from 1948 to
1960, died two year ago at age 93. His passing was
mourned by Democrats and Republicans, liberals and
conservatives, who recognized the gentle radical as one
of the most honorable men ever to cross the American
political landscape.

Zeidler actually ran for president in 1976 as the
nominee of the American Socialist Party. In fairness,
it was more an educational campaign than a serious bid
for an office that the former mayor never really
coveted. Like so many of the great civic gestures he
engaged in over eight decades of activism, Zeidler's
1976 campaign promoted the notion that: "There's
nothing un-American about socialism."

Campaigning on a platform that promised a shift of
national priorities from bloated defense spending to
fighting poverty, rebuilding cities and creating a
national health care program, Zeidler won only a
portion of the respect that was due this kind and
decent man and the values to which he has devoted a
lifetime.

Had Zeidler been born in another land -- perhaps
Germany, where the roots of his family tree were firmly
planted -- his Socialist Party run would have been a
much bigger deal. Indeed, he might well have been
elected.

In most of the world, the social-democratic values that
Zeidler advanced throughout his long life hold great
sway. Latin America has been experiencing a revival of
socialist fervor in recent years. And virtually every
European country has elected a socialist government in
the past decade. Indeed, the current leaders of Britain
and Spain head political parties that are associated
with the Socialist International, of which Zeidler's
Socialist Party was a U.S. affiliate. In the recent
Canadian elections, the socialist New Democratic Party
experienced a substantial boost in its parliamentary
delegation.

In Zeidler's youth, America's Socialist Party was a
contender. During the 1920s, there were more Socialists
in the Wisconsin legislature than Democrats, and a
Wisconsin Socialist, Victor Berger, represented
Milwaukee in the US House. When Norman Thomas sought
the presidency as a Socialist in 1932, he received
almost a million votes, and well into the 1950s
Socialists ran municipal governments in Reading,
Pennsylvania; Bridgeport, Connecticut and other
quintessentially American cities - including Zeidler's
Milwaukee.

For millions of American voters in the past century,
socialism was never so frightening as John McCain would
have us believe. Rather, it was a politics of principle
that added ideas and nuance to a stilted economic and
political discourse.

For the most part, Zeidler and his compatriots
campaigned along the periphery of presidential
politics, especially as the Cold War took hold.

But they earned respect in communities such as
Milwaukee, where voters kept casting ballots for
Socialist candidates even as Joe McCarthy was promoting
his "red-scare" witch hunt.

Years after he left the mayor's office, Zeidler's
contribution -- a humane, duty-driven, fiscally
responsible version of socialism that is reflective of
the man as much as the philosophy -- was always
recognized by Wisconsinites as a very American
expression of a legitimate and honorable international
ideal.

Zeidler was the repository of a Milwaukee Socialist
tradition with a remarkable record of accomplishment --
grand parks along that city's lakefront, nationally
recognized public health programs, pioneering open
housing initiatives, and an unrivaled reputation for
clean government -- that to his death filled the
circumspect former mayor with an uncharacteristic
measure of pride.

Because of its emphasis on providing quality services,
the politics that Zeidler practiced was sometimes
referred to as "sewer socialism." But, to the mayor, it
was much more than that. The Milwaukee Socialists, who
governed the city for much of the 20th century, led a
remarkably successful experiment in human nature rooted
in their faith that cooperation could deliver more than
competition.

"Socialism as we attempted to practice it here believes
that people working together for a common good can
produce a greater benefit both for society and for the
individual than can a society in which everyone is
shrewdly seeking their own self-interest," Zeidler told
me in an interview several years ago. "And I think our
record remains one of many more successes than
failures."

Would that John McCain - and, frankly, Barack Obama --
had the intellectual honesty to assess those successes,
and the ideals that underpinned them. The candidates
would not, necessarily embrace socialism. But they
would recognize the absurdity of tossing the "S" word
around as an epithet.

* Copyright (c) 2008 The Nation

_____________________________________________

Portside aims to provide material of interest
to people on the left that will help them to
interpret the world and to change it.

Case Study: Thailand

To be honest, I'm a little confused about what's going on in Thailand.

The former Prime Minister Thaksin is in England in self-exile. There was a military coup because PM Thaksin was accused of corruption. Charges included selling his family's controlling stake in telecommunications company Shin Corp. to Singapore's state-owned Temasek Holdings for a tax-free $1.9 billion. Critics allege the sale involved insider trading and complain a key national asset is now in foreign hands.

Thaksin also has been accused of stifling the media and mishandling a Muslim insurgency in southern Thailand that flared under his rule.

Here's the thing. People’s Alliance for Democracy, the coalition of businessmen, academics and activists, has accused the new Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat of being a political proxy for Thaksin, his brother-in-law. The PAD is now going for broke, according to many political analysts. The arrest of two of PAD leaders, Chaiwat Sinsuwong and Chamlong Srimuang, who were detained on treason charges in for their roles in the anti-government group's late August raids on government buildings, signals a renewed campaign to attempt to topple the government. Many believe Chamlong orchestrated his own capture to fire up the PAD protestors, whose enthusiasm for the battle has waned in recent weeks.

But, the Thai who live in the large rural sections of the country love Thaksin. Villagers point to the homes they built during Thaksin's tenure from 2001 to 2006, the refrigerators they bought, the general store they opened - all a result of the low-interest loans his government offered.

"Thaksin was the savior of the poor," said Kamcham Pokasang, 68, a farmer from Kok Loi in the northeastern province of Buriram, where lush green paddies of jasmine rice stretch to the horizon. "Before Thaksin we had nothing, only rice fields. Thanks to Thaksin, my family now has everything."

What's most sad is that the political crisis is a tug-of-war between Thaksin's supporters in the countryside, where two-thirds of Thailand's 65 million people live, and an educated middle class who feels threatened by the rural majority's growing political clout.

This isn't to say there hasn't been corruption and that Thaksin's opponents don't care for the poor - like our Republicans. They, unlike our Republicans, Thaksin's critics want to jettison his policies promoting privatization, free trade agreements and CEO-style administration.

There is more to be read about this story here, from BBC News Asia-Pacific, which leads with the fact that you know something ain't right when doctors break their hypocratic oath and refuse to treat injured policement. Also here, Bangkok Post General News details more Thaksin legal troubles.

Admittedly, I came upon this story because my mom has some thing about no one in the house changing the internet homepage, and the story popped up as soon as I opened the web browser. I caught glance of it just before I began to type in the web address to my email account. But, I think there's something here for us Americans to glean. And it does have to do with the difference between socialism and democratic socialism.

First of all, wow! I mean really politicians, do enter politics because you're corrupt? or is it that you were led astray?

Second of all, another wow! at how Asian countries deal with their corrupt politicians. Can you imagine what America would be like if we got rid of our corrupt politicians? And it's not even like Thaksin illegal invaded and sovereign nation or anything like that, and he's had to leave the country!

Third of all and actually most important, all kidding aside, I'm concerned that 1/3 of Thai people think they know what's best for the other 2/3. I'm concerned because maybe the 2/3 were bought off with the new houses and help entering modernity. I'm concerned because maybe the 1/3 are being so legalistic, they see the forest for the trees.

All said, I'm concerned that these groups can't come together and about the swirl of rumors of lies which are believed no matter how sensationalized or ridiculous. Sound familiar.

Listen, Americans. You can't make political decisions based on what you think is best for you as an individual. I mean, you can, I just question the wisdom of such thinking. And you certainly can't make a decision based solely on what the politicians are saying. Get informed. Find out what happens when. And especially, don't believe what one guy (McCain) is saying about the other guy (Obama, for whom I just voted!).

And you can't vote based on "scary" words like "socialism" or "spreading the wealth." Especially if you don't have any wealth, then, dumb- , er, I mean dear voter, you're gonna get some help from the government, which you probably deserve.

And you know what, I just can't figure out how we've gotten to this notion that a person worth is based solely on their paycheck. That if you don't make much, it's your fault, not the fault of the CEO who's milking your labor for all it's worth.

You gotta understand, in a capitalist society, labor is a form of capital. And many of us are allowing a labor to be undervalued. Whether it's because we're believing lies labor unions hurting rather than helping workers. Or, whether it's because you actually believe affirmative action puts whites, especially white men at a grave disadvantage. Or, maybe it's because you think we're being "invaded from the South of the border." Your labor is being undervalued and it's you're own fault. You don't keep yourself informed. You don't read all the different points of views about an issue. And Lord knows it seems like you can hardly read the truth about an issue, Mr and Mrs "I can't trust Obama because he's an Arab."

So, let's do some informing.

socialism: 1. a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole. 2. procedure or practice in accordance with this theory. 3. (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.

democratic socialism: a form of socialism with a democratic government; the ownership and control of the means of production, capital, land, property, etc., by the community as a whole -- combined with a democratic government

Now, am I saying that we should move to a completely socialist society where everybody makes the same no matter what work they do or how hard they work? No, no quite. What I'm saying is we shouldn't privatize corporate profit and then nationalize corporate losses. What I'm saying is that instead of being a proud know-nothing, maybe you should find sometime to learn what's really going on. And, trust me, when it comes to telling the truth, NY Times laps anything owned by Ruport Murdoch. (And by the by, am I the only who thinks it's funny the truth always happens to be "liberal.")

And while I encourage everyone to vote, especially for Obama, for the love of all that's good and holy, don't vote for a fellow proud six-pack know-nothing, which amounts to a drunk idiot. And yes, that's a shot a Sarah Palin, I'm sure you couldn't tell.

Democratic Socialism

I wanted to write a post about what socialist, especially democrat socialism is and how it could benefit our country. In fact, if you ask me, the Constitution's preamble indicates some sort of socialism is, in fact, the essence of America.

But I seem to be coming down with a cold. And that on top of CFIDS is . . . let's just say it's like being in the body a 90 year-old woman who has a cold.

And more about the charge that Powell is just supporting Obama because they're both black.

If that we're the case, to hold standards the same - something you should know I don't believe in. Symmetry doesn't mean equality - wouldn't that make Joe Lieberman one of the bigger, public racist? Just short of the Buchanans.

And by the way, contrary to Joe Scarborough, we're not a 51%-49% country. We are more 60%-40%. In fact, I'd argue, if so many people weren't so ignorant and filled with false hopes and selfishness, we'd be more 75%-25%.

Iraq and Some Help for the Tax Illiterate

Iraq's PM slams top US soldier over Iran comments
By HAMZA HENDAWI, Associated Press Writer Hamza Hendawi, Associated Press Writer
1 hr 59 mins ago

BAGHDAD – Iraq's prime minister said in remarks aired Friday that the top U.S. commander in Iraq "risked his position" by alleging Iran was trying to bribe lawmakers to vote against the proposed security agreement with the United States.

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki briefed top political leaders Friday about the draft agreement, which includes a timeline for U.S. withdrawal from Iraq by the end of 2011and a compromise giving Iraq authority to try U.S. contractors and soldiers for major crimes committed off-duty and off-base.

A government statement said the same group — including President Jalal Talabani, the two vice presidents and leaders of parliament — would meet again in a few days, suggesting some people raised objections.

One lawmaker who attended the meeting said there were discussions for and against the draft and that two Shiite parties boycotted the session. He spoke on condition of anonymity because the discussions were confidential.

"There were thorough and important comments," presidential spokesman Nasser al-Ani said. "To the political and national blocs, the agreement remains in the phase of analysis and study."

Yeah, we're doing such a wonderful job in Iraq. - No1KState

McCain criticizes Obama's promise of tax cuts
By GLEN JOHNSON, Associated Press Writer

MIAMI – Republican John McCain told crowds in this battleground state Friday to "hold onto your wallet" because his Democratic presidential rival, Barack Obama, has talked of spreading the wealth around. McCain suggested voters could not rely on Obama's promise of tax cuts while returning once more to the story of Joe the Plumber, a regular part of McCain's speeches since the Arizona senator first mentioned the tax concerns of Ohio plumber Joe Wurzelbacher in Wednesday's presidential debate.

Florida was McCain's first stop on a two-day tour through states, including North Carolina and Virginia, where he has surrendered his lead in polls during the past month despite their history of supporting Republican presidential candidates.

Last Sunday as Obama walked through Wurzelbacher's Holland, Ohio, neighborhood, Wurzelbacher asked him whether his plan to increase taxes on those earning more than $250,000 a year would impede his ability to buy the plumbing company where he works. Obama replied that those making over $250,000 would be taxed more but that money would be returned to the middle-class through tax cuts. "I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody," Obama said.

The McCain campaign seized on that remark.

"When politicians talk about taking your money and spreading it around, you'd better hold onto your wallet," McCain told a Miami rally crowd. "Sen. Obama claims that he want to give a tax break to the middle class, but not only did he vote for higher taxes for the middle class in the Senate, his plan gives away your tax dollars to those who don't pay taxes. That's not a tax cut; that's welfare."

McCain, who bestowed the nickname "Joe the Plumber" on Wurzelbacher during the debate, claimed Friday that "the response from Sen. Obama and his campaign yesterday was to attack Joe."

In fact, Obama, his running mate Joe Biden and their campaign have barely mentioned Wurzelbacher. Obama and Biden both attacked McCain for portraying Wurzelbacher as representative of most blue-collar workers, asking how many plumbers make $250,000 a year.

Nonetheless, McCain elicited boos from a fired-up crowd when he said of Wurzelbacher, "People are digging through his personal life and he has TV crews camped out in front of his house. He didn't ask Sen. Obama to come to his house. He wasn't recruited or prompted by our campaign. He just asked a question. And Americans ought to be able to ask Sen. Obama tough questions without being smeared and targeted with political attacks."

You read it for yourself. McCain seems to have lot all sense of integrity. And let's make something clear again, for the past 8 years, wealth has been redistributed up to the rich. So, yes, it's time to "spread the wealth" around. We all participate in making it. We should all get our fair share. That's not socialism. That preventing a socialist movement. -No1KState

Oh, Yeah. Joe the Plumber's (or not) Taxes (not the ones he already owes)

Here's what Obama was trying to explain to Joe and the rest of us.

When Joe was working so hard, 10-12 hours a day, years ago, he needed tax relief. But all the tax relief was going to the top 1%. Now that he's in that 1%, if indeed he does make over a quarter of million a year, he should help out the next guy. It's kinda like the Priest tells Edmond Dontez in Count of Monte Cristo, don't be found guilty of the crime was committed against you.

And, no, it's not "class warfare." It's not the redistribution of wealth. It's justice. The past 8 years have seen the greatest redistribution of wealth upwards to the top 1%. Is that "American?" And if you wanna call this "class warfare," let's keep in mind that the top 5% or so of Americans have been kicking our tails. And if you're not bitter about that, than you're either dumb or dead.

Here's the deal. If you earn less than $250K, you won't be taxed. If you make more than $250K, and you pay taxes, chances are, you'll still be bringing home more than $250K. And, yes, it's patriotic to help other Americans make it to the place where you are. To do otherwise is selfish and quite unChristian.

And listening to Lou Dobbs (my father is watching), I heard Joe the Plumber say something quiet intelligent. He said in our country, politicians are the nobles and the rest of us are the serf. With such insight, it's stunning that he votes Republican.