Wednesday, January 23, 2013
Tuesday, January 22, 2013
Thursday, January 10, 2013
Friday, November 23, 2012
Thursday, November 08, 2012
Obama & Martin Luther King
President Obama will be inaugurated on the day we celebrate the birthday of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.
Colorado & Washington State
I'm waiting to see how many of my friends will move to Colorado & Washington State
Wednesday, November 07, 2012
Monday, November 05, 2012
Election 2012
Alright it's time to talk about the 2012 elections. I have been strugglin to make sense of this election. At first glance, the question immediately arises: How is it possible for anyone who isn't in the 1% to imagine Mitt Romney as president of the U.S. But then the the answer becomes obvious. As Charles M Blow writes in the NYT, "We have a very racially divided electorate." He refers to a report in the WaPo, which says: "Obama has a deficit of 23 percentage points, trailing Republican Mit Romney 60 percent to 37 percent among whites. According to the latest Washington Post-ABC News tracking poll." He also says: "The report also says that nearly 80 percent of non-whites support Obama, while 91 percent of Romney's supporters are white". ("The Company Romney Keeps", NYT, 10/27/12) This argument is echoed by University of British Columbia political scientist Bruce Baum in a letter criticizing a NYT book review (10/14/12): "But [Mark] Lilla [the reviewer] is looking for answers in the wrong places as he misses the obvious: conservative responses to Obama are mediated - sometimes unconsciously - by the legacy of racism and white racial myopia in the United States. That is the 'something else.'
"Public opinion researchers have found that because Obama is identified - and self-identifies - as Black, he has become a lightning rod for white racial resentment and status anxieties despite his moderate policies. Moreover, as a Democrat, Obama is leading a party that has lost a majority of white votes in every presidential election since 1968, largely because many white Americans associate Democrats with support for minority interests and welfare dependency."
It's incredible that nearly 50 years after the march from Selma to Montgomery. (March 7, 1965) the U.S. is still as racially divided. And this election will ultimately turn on this. We can't let that happen.
There is another aspect to the election which needs to be taken into account. This election is, according to some analysts a choice of what kind of capitalism we want to define our country. The version represented by Romney and, particularly Ryan, which has been characterized as "a more cutthroat form of capitalism than most other industrial nations" have adopted. And "our cutthroat approach to capitalism has extracted high social costs". "Yet though we seem to suffer more than our fair share of social ills, by the O.E.C.D. Calculation our public spending to address them is smaller as a share of the economy than in any other country in the developed world." The alternative version of capitalism, offered by Obama sees "the government as an agent to assist" those who have been left out of the so-called American success story (ie. the 99%). Although it may be clear to many of us (perhaps a growing number) that neither form of capitalism can work for the vast majority of the American people and it's very unlikely that the version of capitalism favored by Obama would in any way mirror even European Social Democracy. But as with his relatively weak & lackluster response to the latest capitalist crisis, something is sometimes better than nothing.
To top it all off Romney/Ryan are reduced to arguments like this. "The country's economic problems are large and deeply rooted in overreaching Washington policies." (Jonathan M. Trugman, NY Post, 11/4/12) or perhaps the killer of all:
The Republicans in order to defeat Obama have stood in the way of all attempts by the President & the Democrats to compromise & pass needed legislation. Now they have the unmitigated gall to argue that if Obama wins it will be impossible to arrive at any compromises, but if Romney wins compromise will be possible. That used to be called a protection racket. "If you vote for Obama, we'll break your legs."
So all this leads me to reluctantly support Obama. But next time no "lesser of two evils".
But ultimately what is most important is to remember is, as Robert Reich has said, "In my experience, nothing good happens in Washington unless good people outside Washington become mobilized, organized and energized to make it happen. Nothing worth changing in America will actually change unless you [we] and others like you [us] are committed to achieving that change." ("Beyond Outrage: What has Gone wrong with our Economy and our Democracy, and how to fix it").
"Public opinion researchers have found that because Obama is identified - and self-identifies - as Black, he has become a lightning rod for white racial resentment and status anxieties despite his moderate policies. Moreover, as a Democrat, Obama is leading a party that has lost a majority of white votes in every presidential election since 1968, largely because many white Americans associate Democrats with support for minority interests and welfare dependency."
It's incredible that nearly 50 years after the march from Selma to Montgomery. (March 7, 1965) the U.S. is still as racially divided. And this election will ultimately turn on this. We can't let that happen.
There is another aspect to the election which needs to be taken into account. This election is, according to some analysts a choice of what kind of capitalism we want to define our country. The version represented by Romney and, particularly Ryan, which has been characterized as "a more cutthroat form of capitalism than most other industrial nations" have adopted. And "our cutthroat approach to capitalism has extracted high social costs". "Yet though we seem to suffer more than our fair share of social ills, by the O.E.C.D. Calculation our public spending to address them is smaller as a share of the economy than in any other country in the developed world." The alternative version of capitalism, offered by Obama sees "the government as an agent to assist" those who have been left out of the so-called American success story (ie. the 99%). Although it may be clear to many of us (perhaps a growing number) that neither form of capitalism can work for the vast majority of the American people and it's very unlikely that the version of capitalism favored by Obama would in any way mirror even European Social Democracy. But as with his relatively weak & lackluster response to the latest capitalist crisis, something is sometimes better than nothing.
To top it all off Romney/Ryan are reduced to arguments like this. "The country's economic problems are large and deeply rooted in overreaching Washington policies." (Jonathan M. Trugman, NY Post, 11/4/12) or perhaps the killer of all:
The Republicans in order to defeat Obama have stood in the way of all attempts by the President & the Democrats to compromise & pass needed legislation. Now they have the unmitigated gall to argue that if Obama wins it will be impossible to arrive at any compromises, but if Romney wins compromise will be possible. That used to be called a protection racket. "If you vote for Obama, we'll break your legs."
So all this leads me to reluctantly support Obama. But next time no "lesser of two evils".
But ultimately what is most important is to remember is, as Robert Reich has said, "In my experience, nothing good happens in Washington unless good people outside Washington become mobilized, organized and energized to make it happen. Nothing worth changing in America will actually change unless you [we] and others like you [us] are committed to achieving that change." ("Beyond Outrage: What has Gone wrong with our Economy and our Democracy, and how to fix it").
Thursday, November 01, 2012
Tuesday, October 30, 2012
Halloween
From our house to yours "Happy Halloween" may life provide you with many more treats than tricks
Halloween 👻👽 cancelled 😢😱
N.J. Idiot governor, Chris Christie, cancelled Halloween. But god didn't get the message, yesterday was one hell of a trick
Thursday, October 25, 2012
Sunday, October 14, 2012
Thursday, October 04, 2012
A Nationally-Televised Presidential Fail
I didn't watch last night's debate but all I hear is that Romney lied his way through it and Obama let him get away with all the lies. And that Jim Lehrer behaved like a substitute NFL referee
A Nationally-Televised Presidential Fail
A Nationally-Televised Presidential Fail
Tuesday, October 02, 2012
Barry Commoner & Eric J. Hobsbawm
In the last few days we've lost two giants of the people's movements: Barry Commoner on Sunday and Eric J. Hobsbawm on Monday.
Commoner (1917-2012) was probably the better known partially because he was American and because he was
Influential in several important moments in our history. "His work", according to the NYT, "on the global effects of radioactive fallout...contributed materially to the adoption of the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty of 1963." He also was a key mover in establishing the first Earth Day in 1970. Although with little success (234,000 votes), he also ran for president on the Citizens' Party ticket in 1980. He also founded the Center for the Biology of Natural Systems first in St. Louis & then brought it with him to Queens College in 1981. What differentiated his thinking from many others on the Left was his understanding that Capitalism was at the core of our problems (racism, inequality, male domination and our destruction of the earth on which we live). His view that all things are tied together and can't be dealt with separately - although the Times attributes it to an understanding of Marxism - also mirrors the world view of indigenous people that all things form a circle. Stephen Jay Gould is quoted saying of him: "Although he has been branded by many as a maverick, I regard him as right and compassionate on nearly every major issue." That sounds to me like a perfect epitaph.
Hobsbawm (1917-2012), being British and a Communist academic, is less known in wider popular U.S. circles. But just as Commoner transformed the study of ecology, Hobsbawm and his cohorts in the historians group in the British Communist Party brought the study of history into the 20th century. As did Howard Zinn in the U.S., they focused on people's movements to explain historical change. This group included Christopher Hill, E.P. Thompson, and Raymond Williams. Hobsbawm's major contribution is contained in his 4-volume history of the development of capitalism: (1) "The age of Revolution, 1789-1848"; (2) "The Age of Capital, 1848-1875"; (3) "The Age of Empire: 1875-1914"; (4) "The Age of Extremes: 1914-1991." His most recent book is "How to Change the World/ Reflections on Marx and Marxism." There is one more still to be published, "Interesting Times". Many of us who were in college and graduate school in the 60s and 70s learned history from the work of these scholars.
There is at least one point on which Hobsbawm and Commoner would agree. Hobsbawm writes in his latest book: "As the spectacular expansion of the global economy has undermined the environment, the need to control unlimited economic growth has become increasingly urgent. There is a patent conflict between the need to reverse or at least to control the impact of our economy on the biosphere and the imperatives of a capitalist market: maximum continuing growth in the search for profit. This is the Achilles heel of capitalism. We cannot at present know whose arrow will be fatal to it."
Commoner (1917-2012) was probably the better known partially because he was American and because he was
Influential in several important moments in our history. "His work", according to the NYT, "on the global effects of radioactive fallout...contributed materially to the adoption of the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty of 1963." He also was a key mover in establishing the first Earth Day in 1970. Although with little success (234,000 votes), he also ran for president on the Citizens' Party ticket in 1980. He also founded the Center for the Biology of Natural Systems first in St. Louis & then brought it with him to Queens College in 1981. What differentiated his thinking from many others on the Left was his understanding that Capitalism was at the core of our problems (racism, inequality, male domination and our destruction of the earth on which we live). His view that all things are tied together and can't be dealt with separately - although the Times attributes it to an understanding of Marxism - also mirrors the world view of indigenous people that all things form a circle. Stephen Jay Gould is quoted saying of him: "Although he has been branded by many as a maverick, I regard him as right and compassionate on nearly every major issue." That sounds to me like a perfect epitaph.
Hobsbawm (1917-2012), being British and a Communist academic, is less known in wider popular U.S. circles. But just as Commoner transformed the study of ecology, Hobsbawm and his cohorts in the historians group in the British Communist Party brought the study of history into the 20th century. As did Howard Zinn in the U.S., they focused on people's movements to explain historical change. This group included Christopher Hill, E.P. Thompson, and Raymond Williams. Hobsbawm's major contribution is contained in his 4-volume history of the development of capitalism: (1) "The age of Revolution, 1789-1848"; (2) "The Age of Capital, 1848-1875"; (3) "The Age of Empire: 1875-1914"; (4) "The Age of Extremes: 1914-1991." His most recent book is "How to Change the World/ Reflections on Marx and Marxism." There is one more still to be published, "Interesting Times". Many of us who were in college and graduate school in the 60s and 70s learned history from the work of these scholars.
There is at least one point on which Hobsbawm and Commoner would agree. Hobsbawm writes in his latest book: "As the spectacular expansion of the global economy has undermined the environment, the need to control unlimited economic growth has become increasingly urgent. There is a patent conflict between the need to reverse or at least to control the impact of our economy on the biosphere and the imperatives of a capitalist market: maximum continuing growth in the search for profit. This is the Achilles heel of capitalism. We cannot at present know whose arrow will be fatal to it."
Monday, October 01, 2012
Presidential debates
ABC has the greatest commercial ever. "Wednesday, the first presidential debates" followed immediately by a screen that says: "Comedy Wednesday." Best description ever of Tbe presidential debates.
Thursday, September 27, 2012
This is this morning's Democracy Now. It does two things(1)It debuts Bill Moyers expose of ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council), one of the most dangerous weapons in the Republican arsenal and (2)It broadcasts Julian Assange's message to the UN and discusses WIKILEAKS,after doicuments are said to show it was designated "an enemy of the people". Clearly the U.S. government & vampires share at least one characteristic - neither can stand the sunlight.
http://archive.wbai.org/files/mp3/wbai_120927_080006dn.mp3
Tuesday, September 25, 2012
Monday, September 17, 2012
"Romney seeks to sharpen message on his Agenda"
From today's NYT: "With the time dwindling for him to gain an edge😃 in the presidential race and with an outbreak of finger-pointing👎 signaling trouble in his campaign 😃, Mitt Romney plans to begin an offensive this week, his aids said, seeking to give voters a clearer picture of where he wants to take the country"
Well! If he provides even a remotely honest "picture of where he wants to take the country," an action I'm not sure he is capable of doing, he will clearly alienate any sane voters still considering voting for him.
Well! If he provides even a remotely honest "picture of where he wants to take the country," an action I'm not sure he is capable of doing, he will clearly alienate any sane voters still considering voting for him.
Saturday, August 25, 2012
Akin for the Truth: How Are US Religious Fundamentalists Any Different Than Middle Eastern Ones?
I have thought for some time: "Why are U.S. fundamentalists different from Middle Eastern fundamentalists?"
Akin for the Truth: How Are US Religious Fundamentalists Any Different Than Middle Eastern Ones?
Akin for the Truth: How Are US Religious Fundamentalists Any Different Than Middle Eastern Ones?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)