By Cody Lyon
Over the past few generations or so, the deep southern states of Georgia, Alabama and Mississippi have engaged in a sort of pecking order amongst themselves. Georgia people sometimes claim to be more sophisticated and worldly than the folks in Alabama while Alabamians have been known to say, well, at least we’ve got Mississippi.
But, those little put downs are the result of a shared regional psychology that extends back over the years as the South dealt with its many curses including a sense of defeat, the horrific sins of racism, along with a shared sense of defiance and pride in the face of a nation that made no secret of what part of the country was most looked down on.
And, despite dramatic social change over the past few decades and a greater integration into the economic national fold, there are still reasons for southern insecurity that are evidenced through inexcusable and dramatic social ills that should bother the conscience of every American who calls themselves progressive, and there is no place those ills are more evident than Mississippi.
Still, during national elections, the more progressive party, the Democrats, basically write off the South as un-winnable during national elections which in turn, further fuels a sense that parts of this nation have been truly left behind.
It’s as if Democrats gave up on the South after the successful Southern strategy by Republican candidates who first latched onto racism and later pedaled hot button right wing social topics that played well in the Bible Belt, while the truly immoral injustices of economic, health and educational equity continued to fester in many parts of the region.
In truth, it’s almost sad to watch horse race pundit powered Mississippi Democratic political primary coverage as Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton come calling for votes knowing full well that if the past is any indication, once November roles around, Barack and or Hillary probably won’t spend much time in Mississippi, Alabama or Georgia.
National Democratic leaders, inhibited by political strategy have proven lazy, almost timid in their approach to the vast swath of Southern voters who were hijacked by an empty right wing Republican social agenda. Perhaps now the time is right to repackage and aggressively sell a message that embodies the spirit of FDR, or perhaps more recently, John Edwards, a superior inclusive message that trumps the divisive, fear based tactics that have basically prayed upon deeply held beliefs while conveniently serving as political smokescreens that were used to further the economic interests of a few who end up doing more harm in Dixie than polluted dew.
There is no place that could benefit more from a confident progressive agenda than the Magnolia State, Mississippi, a state that year after year finds itself on the receiving end of one bad statistic after another.
For example, according to the American Community Survey, 21.6 percent of Mississippi citizens live below the poverty line.
A July 2007 “Washington Post” article titled “Poverty Tightens Grip on Mississippi Delta” said Fifty-Five percent of households in the tiny community of Coahoma Mississippi earn less than $15,000 a year.
The “Washington Post” article spoke to misperceptions many Americans have about rural areas saying “a lot of people believe it’s got to be cheap to live there (in rural areas) and food has got to be more available. But cheap is relative to income. Your ability to get yourself around is limited. There is no public transportation.”
Adding to the negative news, a June 2007 journal study titled “Preventing Chronic Disease” by Leonard Jack Jr. PhD said 51 percent of rural residents experience poverty levels that are hard for most Americans to imagine. That same report noted that from 2000 to 2003, the number of poor people in Mississippi increased by 38,000 to 456,000.
The 2004 “Kids Count Data Book” found that among the 50 states, Mississippi had the second highest level of children living in poverty with 13 percent living in “extreme” poverty compared to 8 percent nationally.
That sort of poverty translates into a sad report card on the general health of many of the state’s citizens.
In Morgan Quinto’s 2004 State Health Care Rankings that among other factors, looks at access to health care providers, affordable health care services and general health of a state’s population, Mississippi ranked last among all the states.
Adding to that, another report from the U.S. Census Bureau, from 2005 to 2006 found the number of uninsured Mississippi residents rose by 24 percent from 483,000 to 600,000. The number of un-insured children rose by 72 percent from 85,000 to 146,000 placing at the top of the list in the nation for that category.
As it stands today, around 17 percent of Mississippi’s citizens have no health insurance at all.
Another cruel symptom of poverty shows up in dietary choices since eating healthy costs more than high calorie junk food evidenced in Mississippi’s ranking as America’s most obese state with Alabama and Georgia not far behind on the scales.
And despite the hope that the 1954 Brown V Board decision would somehow equalize educational opportunities in the South and elsewhere, de-facto segregation and incredible funding disparities became the norm throughout the south.
Truth be told, this nation has yet to offer any sort of aggressive national public school education policy that seeks to address the epidemic of educational inequity so prevalent and obvious in the deep-south where a few wealthier districts funded by local tax dollars do exceptionally well, while a vast portion do poor in test scores, funding per pupil, drop out rates and other measurable factors. Mississippi education statistics, like much of the south are mind numbing, almost always at or near the bottom, all coupled with the fact that the state is home to one of the nation’s lowest literacy rates.
Still, according to 2004 Manhattan Institute report, Mississippi saw a 62 percent high school graduation rate which tied with Alabama and beat Georgia with its 54 percent rate of successful graduates.
But, that compares to a national average of 71 percent.
Proactive solutions are scarce if teacher pay is an indicator since Mississippi ranks 50th out of the 51 states including the District of Columbia in average teacher salaries.
Of course, a litany of statistics has the potential to bore people or perhaps ignite the usual dismissive, disparaging remarks about the South that are fueled by simplistic and ignorant stereotypes. And that sort of dismissive attitude is precisely when the ugly head of hypocrisy within the Democratic Party political strategy rears its ugly head.
Just miles away from the glass towers and majestic suburbs of places like Atlanta, Birmingham and Jackson are the real and living examples of Southern socio-economic injustice. They are found in countless isolated communities along back roads or in the poor often violent cities. These stories offer up evidence that we operate under a failed system run by a government that has in essence, relegated millions to cultures of poverty that continues to breed psyches of hopelessness and isolation. It is a system sorely lacking a national beacon of hope, direction and real solutions.
It would appear that ambitious programs like the New Deal, the Great Society are long gone, not even any sort of national education policy task force that seeks to target those desperate areas that need it most. Where and when did the Party and America lose its way and become such a fractious divided land where power grabs became the goal of politicians and where the collective goal to elevate all our people seemed to slide to a backburner of national indifference and individual greed.
Shrill tactics by Republicans created a pattern that neutered what should have been an aggressive plan to win Southern voters by offering policy solutions in a region where hope is a distant land that far too many can’t afford to visit. In the South, Democrats long ago failed to call the Republican bluff, and for that they should be ashamed. Perhaps it’s time to once again, explain and actively sell a progressive agenda that tells Southern voters what Democrats can do for them.
Otherwise, if national Democratic leaders continue the pattern of neglect, they are complacent in allowing its problems to fester since much of this region is a living laboratory filled with the ills the Party has long claimed it wanted to cure.
Monday, March 10, 2008
Thursday, March 06, 2008
In Florida, Worth Breaking the Rules
by Cody Lyon
There’s no denying that seating Democratic Party delegates from Florida and Michigan at the party’s convention in August would be controversial and potentially divisive since both States held their primaries on dates that violated party rules
As it stands, Senator Hillary Clinton stands to gain the most if they are seated and counted, so her campaign is working the system to try and make sure that happens.
Still, in Michigan’s case, a do-over of the primary, or a caucus, would probably be the only way to settle that state’s mess and re-empower voters since Clinton was the only candidate on the ballot in the state’s primary.
But down in Florida, it’s a different story altogether. While neither candidate campaigned in the sunshine state, both Clinton and Obama were on the primary ballot.
Further, there’s a common misperception fueled by the common rhetorical reference in the press and elsewhere to “Florida’s decision” to move the state’s primary to January.
It was not Florida Democratic ‘voters’ who made that decision, but instead, a Republican Governor and a Republican majority Legislature that passed HB 537 which changed the state’s primary date to January 29, ahead of February 5, which we all know now was in violation of national Democratic Party rules.
As a result of this violation, 1.75 million sunshine state voters may not be heard in August. Some are saying if that happens, the issue would move beyond politics and instead become a case of massive voter disenfranchisement.
And, while much of the growing effort to seat the Florida delegates in August has come from Clinton supporters who now see Florida as a decisive political factor that would work in their favor at the convention, there is a deeper concern for all voters that should be considered.
Any attempts by party officials to deny the voice of almost 2 million Florida voters would violate what many see as one of our most treasured rights.
It certainly would not be the first time in our nation’s history that “rules” have been used to discourage, take away or prevent entire swaths of US citizens from being allowed to participate in the political process. We now regard many of those rules with shame.
Regardless, it wasn’t so long ago that certain rules prevented Women and African American citizens from casting vote that would count in elections. Even as little as 50 years ago, in certain parts of the nation, black people were unable to vote thanks to absurd rules like poll taxes and other discriminatory tactics at polling places like reciting the state’s constitution before being allowed to even register to vote.
Fortunately, through the efforts of countless foot soldiers and brave political and judicial leaders, most of those rules rooted in racism and sexism were done away and eventually, voter empowerment for all citizens became an increasingly recognized as the precious right it is, and with that that we saw a greater attempts at distribution of voter equity in our democracy.
Despite the hard fought struggle for voter equality, over the past few decades, political disenchantment and other factors have led to decreasing national voter turnouts that have on average, been only around 50 percent according to the United States Census Beureau.
But, this particular 2008 election cycle is different.
The bells of politics are ringing through the internet, other media, street corners, bars, churches, activist organizations, school campuses and entire communities in every state, county and city all fueled by dialogue and debate that has led to a level of political engagement unlike anything witnessed in recent history.
There is a pronounced collective thirst for change and new leadership, largely the result of eight years of what many call a failed Republican White House and administration that has led to national malaise, partly the result of a nightmare called Iraq and an economy on the brinks of recession. Across the nation, voters are heading to polls in record numbers holding tight to the core belief that every person’s vote will count and effect the direction this nation takes in the future.
No doubt, our convoluted current system of selecting delegates to party conventions is confusing and flawed. But as it stands now, it’s the closest thing we can come up with in selecting the best candidates for the more important contest in November.
And, despite rules over when those votes were cast, any attempt to disenfranchise a voter, much less an entire state, regardless of what party officials point to as guidelines, is fundamentally wrong. Such a move threatens the very spirit of our democracy unless there is a tangible and workable solution that gives every voter a voice in the selection process.
According to a March 1, press release from the Florida Democratic Party, the state’s Party Chairwoman said “the party continues to move ahead with our delegate selection process, and we’re looking forward to our delegation being seated in Denver.”
The press release said the diversity of its delegation would be strong, representing the diversity that Florida is a delegation of multiple ethnicities, incomes, sexual orientations and genders.
And as Florida well knows, there have been questionable tactics and behaviors that have led to some of the country’s greatest scars in electoral history.
The hope is that in August, the elected delegates of Florida’s Democratic Party will be seated, and with them, the almost two million voices of Florida voters who went to the polls in January because that’s when their state’s officials told them they should go, will be heard. And, while some say that recognition of Florida’s delegates might threaten national party unity, there are still others who warn there are more important values within the concept Democracy itself that trump political aspiration and party cohesion.
\
There’s no denying that seating Democratic Party delegates from Florida and Michigan at the party’s convention in August would be controversial and potentially divisive since both States held their primaries on dates that violated party rules
As it stands, Senator Hillary Clinton stands to gain the most if they are seated and counted, so her campaign is working the system to try and make sure that happens.
Still, in Michigan’s case, a do-over of the primary, or a caucus, would probably be the only way to settle that state’s mess and re-empower voters since Clinton was the only candidate on the ballot in the state’s primary.
But down in Florida, it’s a different story altogether. While neither candidate campaigned in the sunshine state, both Clinton and Obama were on the primary ballot.
Further, there’s a common misperception fueled by the common rhetorical reference in the press and elsewhere to “Florida’s decision” to move the state’s primary to January.
It was not Florida Democratic ‘voters’ who made that decision, but instead, a Republican Governor and a Republican majority Legislature that passed HB 537 which changed the state’s primary date to January 29, ahead of February 5, which we all know now was in violation of national Democratic Party rules.
As a result of this violation, 1.75 million sunshine state voters may not be heard in August. Some are saying if that happens, the issue would move beyond politics and instead become a case of massive voter disenfranchisement.
And, while much of the growing effort to seat the Florida delegates in August has come from Clinton supporters who now see Florida as a decisive political factor that would work in their favor at the convention, there is a deeper concern for all voters that should be considered.
Any attempts by party officials to deny the voice of almost 2 million Florida voters would violate what many see as one of our most treasured rights.
It certainly would not be the first time in our nation’s history that “rules” have been used to discourage, take away or prevent entire swaths of US citizens from being allowed to participate in the political process. We now regard many of those rules with shame.
Regardless, it wasn’t so long ago that certain rules prevented Women and African American citizens from casting vote that would count in elections. Even as little as 50 years ago, in certain parts of the nation, black people were unable to vote thanks to absurd rules like poll taxes and other discriminatory tactics at polling places like reciting the state’s constitution before being allowed to even register to vote.
Fortunately, through the efforts of countless foot soldiers and brave political and judicial leaders, most of those rules rooted in racism and sexism were done away and eventually, voter empowerment for all citizens became an increasingly recognized as the precious right it is, and with that that we saw a greater attempts at distribution of voter equity in our democracy.
Despite the hard fought struggle for voter equality, over the past few decades, political disenchantment and other factors have led to decreasing national voter turnouts that have on average, been only around 50 percent according to the United States Census Beureau.
But, this particular 2008 election cycle is different.
The bells of politics are ringing through the internet, other media, street corners, bars, churches, activist organizations, school campuses and entire communities in every state, county and city all fueled by dialogue and debate that has led to a level of political engagement unlike anything witnessed in recent history.
There is a pronounced collective thirst for change and new leadership, largely the result of eight years of what many call a failed Republican White House and administration that has led to national malaise, partly the result of a nightmare called Iraq and an economy on the brinks of recession. Across the nation, voters are heading to polls in record numbers holding tight to the core belief that every person’s vote will count and effect the direction this nation takes in the future.
No doubt, our convoluted current system of selecting delegates to party conventions is confusing and flawed. But as it stands now, it’s the closest thing we can come up with in selecting the best candidates for the more important contest in November.
And, despite rules over when those votes were cast, any attempt to disenfranchise a voter, much less an entire state, regardless of what party officials point to as guidelines, is fundamentally wrong. Such a move threatens the very spirit of our democracy unless there is a tangible and workable solution that gives every voter a voice in the selection process.
According to a March 1, press release from the Florida Democratic Party, the state’s Party Chairwoman said “the party continues to move ahead with our delegate selection process, and we’re looking forward to our delegation being seated in Denver.”
The press release said the diversity of its delegation would be strong, representing the diversity that Florida is a delegation of multiple ethnicities, incomes, sexual orientations and genders.
And as Florida well knows, there have been questionable tactics and behaviors that have led to some of the country’s greatest scars in electoral history.
The hope is that in August, the elected delegates of Florida’s Democratic Party will be seated, and with them, the almost two million voices of Florida voters who went to the polls in January because that’s when their state’s officials told them they should go, will be heard. And, while some say that recognition of Florida’s delegates might threaten national party unity, there are still others who warn there are more important values within the concept Democracy itself that trump political aspiration and party cohesion.
\
Wednesday, March 05, 2008
From "The New Yorker"- The Other Obama
by Lauren Collins at "The New Yorker"
LINK TO FULL TEXT
Excerpt below:
The other Chicago connection that dogs the Obamas is Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr., their pastor at Trinity United Church of Christ. Wright, who drives a Porsche and references Bernie Mac and Terry McMillan in his unorthodox sermons (“Take what God gave you and say, ‘In your face, mediocrity, I’m a bad mamma jamma!’ ”), officiated at Michelle and Barack’s wedding and baptized their two daughters. Barack took the title “The Audacity of Hope” from a sermon that Wright preached. In 2006, the Obamas gave $22,500 to the church.
Wright espouses a theology that seeks to reconcile African-American Christianity with, as he has written, “the raw data of our racist existence in this strange land.” The historical accuracy of that claim is incontestable. But his message is more confrontational than may be palatable to some white voters. In his book “Africans Who Shaped Our Faith”—an extended refutation of the Western Christianity that gave rise to “the European Jesus . . . the blesser of the slave trade, the defender of racism and apartheid”—he says, “In this country, racism is as natural as motherhood, apple pie, and the fourth of July. Many black people have been deluded into thinking that our BMWs, Lexuses, Porsches, Benzes, titles, heavily mortgaged condos and living environments can influence people who are fundamentally immoral.”
In portraying America as “a Eurocentric wasteland of lily-white lies and outright distortions,” Wright promulgates a theory of congenital separatism that is deeply at odds with Obama’s professed belief in the possibilities of unity and change. Last year, Trumpet Newsmagazine, which was launched by Trinity United and is run by Wright’s daughter, gave the Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Trumpeter Award to Louis Farrakhan, leading to accusations that Wright was anti-Semitic.
LINK TO FULL NEWYORKER ARTICLE
LINK TO FULL TEXT
Excerpt below:
The other Chicago connection that dogs the Obamas is Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr., their pastor at Trinity United Church of Christ. Wright, who drives a Porsche and references Bernie Mac and Terry McMillan in his unorthodox sermons (“Take what God gave you and say, ‘In your face, mediocrity, I’m a bad mamma jamma!’ ”), officiated at Michelle and Barack’s wedding and baptized their two daughters. Barack took the title “The Audacity of Hope” from a sermon that Wright preached. In 2006, the Obamas gave $22,500 to the church.
Wright espouses a theology that seeks to reconcile African-American Christianity with, as he has written, “the raw data of our racist existence in this strange land.” The historical accuracy of that claim is incontestable. But his message is more confrontational than may be palatable to some white voters. In his book “Africans Who Shaped Our Faith”—an extended refutation of the Western Christianity that gave rise to “the European Jesus . . . the blesser of the slave trade, the defender of racism and apartheid”—he says, “In this country, racism is as natural as motherhood, apple pie, and the fourth of July. Many black people have been deluded into thinking that our BMWs, Lexuses, Porsches, Benzes, titles, heavily mortgaged condos and living environments can influence people who are fundamentally immoral.”
In portraying America as “a Eurocentric wasteland of lily-white lies and outright distortions,” Wright promulgates a theory of congenital separatism that is deeply at odds with Obama’s professed belief in the possibilities of unity and change. Last year, Trumpet Newsmagazine, which was launched by Trinity United and is run by Wright’s daughter, gave the Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Trumpeter Award to Louis Farrakhan, leading to accusations that Wright was anti-Semitic.
LINK TO FULL NEWYORKER ARTICLE
Tuesday, March 04, 2008
Sunday, March 02, 2008
Healthcare in America: Remote Area Medical's Lifeline
(Comment-Cody Lyon)This February 28, 60 Minutes report will probably go down as one of the most important and moving stories ever produced in television journalism. CBSNEWS' 60 Minutes holds up a mirror to America, and the reflection we see is a heartbreaking, cruel and unjust crisis in America's Health Care system. Absent from the story are the familiar policy wonks and debates over political rhetoric. Instead, viewers see and hear real life stories that illustrate the cold reality facing those who have no insurance or inadequate coverage at best.
But, it is also a story about real life angels like Stan Brock, founder of the organization "Remote Area Medical" or RAM, who works with teams of volunteer health care providers by setting up weekend clinics, that offer free health, dental and eye care to the often poor or working class who have inadequate policies or are fully uninsured.
As it stands, an estimated 47 million citizens of the world's wealthiest nation have no health insurance. While that's a startling number, even more startling are some of the real life stories shared in this report. It left this viewer asking, how is it that we as a nation allowed ourselves to become so indifferent to the plight of our own?
Thank you RAM for your efforts at providing some relief to these fellow Americans and thank you 60 Minutes for restoring some faith in the mission of modern day journalism.
FULL CBS NEWS 60 Minutes Report below:
CBS) One of the decisive issues in the presidential campaign is likely to be health insurance. Texas and Ohio vote on Tuesday, and those states alone have nearly seven million uninsured residents; nationwide, 47 million have no health insurance. But that's just the start: millions more are underinsured, unable to pay their deductibles or get access to dental care.
Recently, 60 Minutes heard about an American relief organization that airdrops doctors and medicine into the jungles of the Amazon. It's called Remote Area Medical, or "RAM" for short.
As correspondent Scott Pelley reports, Remote Area Medical sets up emergency clinics where the needs are greatest. But these days, that's not the Amazon. This charity founded to help people who can't reach medical care finds itself throwing America a lifeline.
LINK TO FULL REPORT FROM CBS NEWS "60 Minutes"
But, it is also a story about real life angels like Stan Brock, founder of the organization "Remote Area Medical" or RAM, who works with teams of volunteer health care providers by setting up weekend clinics, that offer free health, dental and eye care to the often poor or working class who have inadequate policies or are fully uninsured.
As it stands, an estimated 47 million citizens of the world's wealthiest nation have no health insurance. While that's a startling number, even more startling are some of the real life stories shared in this report. It left this viewer asking, how is it that we as a nation allowed ourselves to become so indifferent to the plight of our own?
Thank you RAM for your efforts at providing some relief to these fellow Americans and thank you 60 Minutes for restoring some faith in the mission of modern day journalism.
FULL CBS NEWS 60 Minutes Report below:
CBS) One of the decisive issues in the presidential campaign is likely to be health insurance. Texas and Ohio vote on Tuesday, and those states alone have nearly seven million uninsured residents; nationwide, 47 million have no health insurance. But that's just the start: millions more are underinsured, unable to pay their deductibles or get access to dental care.
Recently, 60 Minutes heard about an American relief organization that airdrops doctors and medicine into the jungles of the Amazon. It's called Remote Area Medical, or "RAM" for short.
As correspondent Scott Pelley reports, Remote Area Medical sets up emergency clinics where the needs are greatest. But these days, that's not the Amazon. This charity founded to help people who can't reach medical care finds itself throwing America a lifeline.
LINK TO FULL REPORT FROM CBS NEWS "60 Minutes"
Friday, February 29, 2008
Meanwhile in the Middle East
From Reuters-
Feb. 29 - War of words alongside the escalating rocket attacks and air strikes between Israel and Gaza.
Hamas has raised the stakes in the confrontation by using Soviet-designed Grad missiles, more powerful and accurate than improvised Gazan Qassams, to strike deep into Ashkelon, a city of 120,000 people.
Benet Allen reports.
Feb. 29 - War of words alongside the escalating rocket attacks and air strikes between Israel and Gaza.
Hamas has raised the stakes in the confrontation by using Soviet-designed Grad missiles, more powerful and accurate than improvised Gazan Qassams, to strike deep into Ashkelon, a city of 120,000 people.
Benet Allen reports.
(Reuters) Obama and Young Voters
Feb. 29 - Barack Obama trounces Hillary Clinton among the young even though he's of the same baby boomer generation as Clinton.
Clinton appeals to non-college goers, who are far less likely to vote than the campus crowd Obama pulls in.
Fred Katayama reports.
Clinton appeals to non-college goers, who are far less likely to vote than the campus crowd Obama pulls in.
Fred Katayama reports.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Sunday, February 24, 2008
More on Siegelman- From Alabama
FROM THE MONTGOMERY INDEPENDENT
Judge, conduct of Siegelman trial defended
Saturday, February 23, 2008
By Eddie Curran (Part I)
EDITOR'S NOTE: Eddie Curran is on leave from the Mobile Press-Register while writing a book on the Don Siegelman investigation, indictment and trial. The Independent's readers should be familiar with Eddie's articles about the former governor, most which were published in this newspaper and had a significant impact on the investigation and indictment of Siegelman.
This article seeks to defend Mark Fuller, the judge in the Siegelman trial, and in so doing, is very critical of columnist Scott Horton, who writes a blog for Harpers Magazine and is occasionally published in The Independent. Horton has been critical of the former "Newhouse" newspapers in Alabama, which includes the Press-Register, The Birmingham News and The Huntsville Times, for not reporting fairly on the Siegelman case. He has also criticized Curran, suggesting that his work relies heavily on the prosecutor's case.
The Independent has not published any criticisms of those newspapers, now operated under the corporate umbrella of Advance Publications, or any criticisms of Eddie Curran, a friend of the editor. Horton's writings are opinion columns and have been published in the opinion section of the newspaper. However, we have corroborated any facts reported in his articles, particularly those involving Judge Fuller's ownership in Doss Aviation, Doss of Alabama and Aureus International, their contracts with the Air Force, the FBI and the Department of Defense and Judge Fuller's 43.75% ownership, which is documented in federal court filings. Judge Fuller has not refuted this information. Eddie called and requested to write this article, which we publish without editing, and even though it is an opinion article, we start it on Page One.
I opened my mail the other day to find a one-sentence letter from a friend from Montgomery and someone, I might add, whose judgment I respect.
LINK TO EDDIE CURRAN ARTICLE
Judge, conduct of Siegelman trial defended
Saturday, February 23, 2008
By Eddie Curran (Part I)
EDITOR'S NOTE: Eddie Curran is on leave from the Mobile Press-Register while writing a book on the Don Siegelman investigation, indictment and trial. The Independent's readers should be familiar with Eddie's articles about the former governor, most which were published in this newspaper and had a significant impact on the investigation and indictment of Siegelman.
This article seeks to defend Mark Fuller, the judge in the Siegelman trial, and in so doing, is very critical of columnist Scott Horton, who writes a blog for Harpers Magazine and is occasionally published in The Independent. Horton has been critical of the former "Newhouse" newspapers in Alabama, which includes the Press-Register, The Birmingham News and The Huntsville Times, for not reporting fairly on the Siegelman case. He has also criticized Curran, suggesting that his work relies heavily on the prosecutor's case.
The Independent has not published any criticisms of those newspapers, now operated under the corporate umbrella of Advance Publications, or any criticisms of Eddie Curran, a friend of the editor. Horton's writings are opinion columns and have been published in the opinion section of the newspaper. However, we have corroborated any facts reported in his articles, particularly those involving Judge Fuller's ownership in Doss Aviation, Doss of Alabama and Aureus International, their contracts with the Air Force, the FBI and the Department of Defense and Judge Fuller's 43.75% ownership, which is documented in federal court filings. Judge Fuller has not refuted this information. Eddie called and requested to write this article, which we publish without editing, and even though it is an opinion article, we start it on Page One.
I opened my mail the other day to find a one-sentence letter from a friend from Montgomery and someone, I might add, whose judgment I respect.
LINK TO EDDIE CURRAN ARTICLE
A River of Smarmy Campaign Tactics Flows From Obama
OPINION-Cody Lyon
Once again, charges over misleading allegations are put on the back burner and met with a smarmy dismissive by spokespeople and even the candidate himself, Barack Obama. This time it's regarding loud allegations by Hillary Clinton over a pair of recent mailings by the Obama campaign in Ohio.
CNN reported that Obama said "There's nothing in that mailing that is inaccurate," adding that he was puzzled by the sudden scrutiny since the mailers had been around for days, if not weeks.
True, some of the campaign material which Clinton blasted as "right out of Karl Rove's playbook" had already been called into question by Clinton and others, but, as has been the case with much of this campaign, the media along with other players with platforms failed to take much notice.
One of the mailers says that "Hillary Clinton thought NAFTA was a 'boon' to the economy," going on to say that the New York Senator is "changing her tune" now that she's campaigning in the Buckeye State," of Ohio.
But as Sam Stein at the Huffington Post wrote in a piece on February 14, former Clinton officials and biographers like Carl Bernstein and Mickey Kantor had spoken in the media and elsewhere noting that Hillary had long held political and philosophical opposition to NAFTA, but being first lady, was unable to publicly oppose the legislation at that time it was enacted.
And, further, the quote "boon" was never verified. The other mailer, on the hot button, sensitive issue of healthcare coverage had drawn a loud condemnation from the Clinton campaign because of what it saw as a use of visual images that harkens back to the insurance industry sponsored 1993 ad campaign well known as the "Harry and Louise" commercials.
Whether or not the images of the kitchen table couple worrying over healthcare costs offers similarities to Harry and Louise is subjective to some, the text does engage in "misleading politicking 101."
According to Factcheck.org, the mailer opens with the claim that "Hillary's health care plan forces everyone to buy insurance, even if you can't afford it.
But Factcheck.org says "the mailer leaves out any information on cost reduction any information on cost reduction measures and low income help that Clinton's plan offers, while it touts such measures found in his plan, some of which very closely mirror Clinton's."
Naturally, politicians in the heat of campaign are going to engage in slippery talk and a tendency to plant seeds of doubt aimed at potential voters that is often laden with fact challenged or questionable text and messages. But in the end, voters suffer because they are misled into believing messages that simply aren't true. And that's where the news people come in since its there job to expose that sort of material and behavior to readers, viewers and listeners for what it is, misleading.
But, as this campaign season has shown, over the past few weeks, they've done a pretty lame job and have according to those on the Clinton side, appeared almost biased.
In fact, some in the public forum have already spun Clinton's attack over the mailers a desperate candidate resorting to harsher tactics to save her campaign.
Well hooray for Clinton for putting on the political hot foot because she and plenty of her supporters recognize that this is a fight for her political life and potentially a fight for a Democratic victory come November. Maybe a little drama is necessary to capture the attention of those watching the cameras. And, hopefully, those watching the footage will realize, that in November, when allegations over tactics and other questions start hurling from Republicans, it will be necessary for them to be met with answers, and not dismissive and arrogant missives. For one, the American people don't like that sort of condescension.
Eventually, they figure out when they are being misled or hoodwinked.
So far, it's only Hillary who's been nailed to the cross by a host of pundits and columnists who obviously had long running axes to grind with the Clintons. Her laundry has been hung out on the line for the world to see. Interestingly, the other side has not even been to the cleaners.
It has become increasingly disturbing to watch a complacent media participate in the "what a feeling" drumbeat of the Obama campaign. Indeed, it is a powerful message of change, unity coupled with hope filled packed houses led by a media darling rock star of politics. But, what might be in order is more reality checking where purveyors of news may need to do some digging despite the danger that it may upset the flow of "smarmy and misleading" rhetoric flowing down this very popular river.
Albeit a cynical observation, the Obama campaign's message feels increasingly shallow and synthetic, where its advisors and its candidate are in fact, willing participants in the old school ways of dirty politics it likes to point to as "tired".
As "The Chicago Tribune" reported on February 10, regarding Obama's message that he is taking the moral high ground when it comes to taking money from lobbyist and special interests.
The "Tribune" report said "those who lobby for a living say it's not that simple, and even Obama's stance shows some flexibility. He won't take money from federal lobbyists but accepts money from employees of firms and corporations that lobby, and he uses lobbyists and other government relations professionals as advisers."
With the exception of scattered print reporting like this, there has been no real and aggressive vetting of the man who would be President, more, a sense of blind faith in a stated message of hope and change. But, what is this change he speaks of? Who or what anointed this campaign with scrutiny Teflon?
Unfortunately, an appealing and infectious message of change is not the key to unlocking the reality that is the megalithic prickly, interest driven world of Washington DC politics where give and take is necessary to seizing that stubborn bull by its horns.
More importantly for this important moment in the race to the White House, if change is what a candidate offers potential voters on the campaign trail, the candidate might ought to be a willing participant in what he preaches in his own campaign methods and tactics lest he be called out as less than real.
Once again, charges over misleading allegations are put on the back burner and met with a smarmy dismissive by spokespeople and even the candidate himself, Barack Obama. This time it's regarding loud allegations by Hillary Clinton over a pair of recent mailings by the Obama campaign in Ohio.
CNN reported that Obama said "There's nothing in that mailing that is inaccurate," adding that he was puzzled by the sudden scrutiny since the mailers had been around for days, if not weeks.
True, some of the campaign material which Clinton blasted as "right out of Karl Rove's playbook" had already been called into question by Clinton and others, but, as has been the case with much of this campaign, the media along with other players with platforms failed to take much notice.
One of the mailers says that "Hillary Clinton thought NAFTA was a 'boon' to the economy," going on to say that the New York Senator is "changing her tune" now that she's campaigning in the Buckeye State," of Ohio.
But as Sam Stein at the Huffington Post wrote in a piece on February 14, former Clinton officials and biographers like Carl Bernstein and Mickey Kantor had spoken in the media and elsewhere noting that Hillary had long held political and philosophical opposition to NAFTA, but being first lady, was unable to publicly oppose the legislation at that time it was enacted.
And, further, the quote "boon" was never verified. The other mailer, on the hot button, sensitive issue of healthcare coverage had drawn a loud condemnation from the Clinton campaign because of what it saw as a use of visual images that harkens back to the insurance industry sponsored 1993 ad campaign well known as the "Harry and Louise" commercials.
Whether or not the images of the kitchen table couple worrying over healthcare costs offers similarities to Harry and Louise is subjective to some, the text does engage in "misleading politicking 101."
According to Factcheck.org, the mailer opens with the claim that "Hillary's health care plan forces everyone to buy insurance, even if you can't afford it.
But Factcheck.org says "the mailer leaves out any information on cost reduction any information on cost reduction measures and low income help that Clinton's plan offers, while it touts such measures found in his plan, some of which very closely mirror Clinton's."
Naturally, politicians in the heat of campaign are going to engage in slippery talk and a tendency to plant seeds of doubt aimed at potential voters that is often laden with fact challenged or questionable text and messages. But in the end, voters suffer because they are misled into believing messages that simply aren't true. And that's where the news people come in since its there job to expose that sort of material and behavior to readers, viewers and listeners for what it is, misleading.
But, as this campaign season has shown, over the past few weeks, they've done a pretty lame job and have according to those on the Clinton side, appeared almost biased.
In fact, some in the public forum have already spun Clinton's attack over the mailers a desperate candidate resorting to harsher tactics to save her campaign.
Well hooray for Clinton for putting on the political hot foot because she and plenty of her supporters recognize that this is a fight for her political life and potentially a fight for a Democratic victory come November. Maybe a little drama is necessary to capture the attention of those watching the cameras. And, hopefully, those watching the footage will realize, that in November, when allegations over tactics and other questions start hurling from Republicans, it will be necessary for them to be met with answers, and not dismissive and arrogant missives. For one, the American people don't like that sort of condescension.
Eventually, they figure out when they are being misled or hoodwinked.
So far, it's only Hillary who's been nailed to the cross by a host of pundits and columnists who obviously had long running axes to grind with the Clintons. Her laundry has been hung out on the line for the world to see. Interestingly, the other side has not even been to the cleaners.
It has become increasingly disturbing to watch a complacent media participate in the "what a feeling" drumbeat of the Obama campaign. Indeed, it is a powerful message of change, unity coupled with hope filled packed houses led by a media darling rock star of politics. But, what might be in order is more reality checking where purveyors of news may need to do some digging despite the danger that it may upset the flow of "smarmy and misleading" rhetoric flowing down this very popular river.
Albeit a cynical observation, the Obama campaign's message feels increasingly shallow and synthetic, where its advisors and its candidate are in fact, willing participants in the old school ways of dirty politics it likes to point to as "tired".
As "The Chicago Tribune" reported on February 10, regarding Obama's message that he is taking the moral high ground when it comes to taking money from lobbyist and special interests.
The "Tribune" report said "those who lobby for a living say it's not that simple, and even Obama's stance shows some flexibility. He won't take money from federal lobbyists but accepts money from employees of firms and corporations that lobby, and he uses lobbyists and other government relations professionals as advisers."
With the exception of scattered print reporting like this, there has been no real and aggressive vetting of the man who would be President, more, a sense of blind faith in a stated message of hope and change. But, what is this change he speaks of? Who or what anointed this campaign with scrutiny Teflon?
Unfortunately, an appealing and infectious message of change is not the key to unlocking the reality that is the megalithic prickly, interest driven world of Washington DC politics where give and take is necessary to seizing that stubborn bull by its horns.
More importantly for this important moment in the race to the White House, if change is what a candidate offers potential voters on the campaign trail, the candidate might ought to be a willing participant in what he preaches in his own campaign methods and tactics lest he be called out as less than real.
Friday, February 22, 2008
Don Siegelman and The Rove Connection (CBSNEWS)
Coming Sunday 2/24 at 7pm CBS
CBS) A Republican operative in Alabama says Karl Rove asked her to try to prove the state’s Democratic governor was unfaithful to his wife in an effort to thwart the highly successful politician’s re-election.
Rove’s attempt to smear Don Siegelman was part of a Republican campaign to ruin him that finally succeeded in imprisoning him, says the operative, Jill Simpson.
Simpson speaks to Scott Pelley in her first television interview, to be broadcast on 60 Minutes Sunday, Feb. 24, at 7 p.m. ET/PT.
PREVIEW FROM CBSNEWS "60 Minutes"
CBS) A Republican operative in Alabama says Karl Rove asked her to try to prove the state’s Democratic governor was unfaithful to his wife in an effort to thwart the highly successful politician’s re-election.
Rove’s attempt to smear Don Siegelman was part of a Republican campaign to ruin him that finally succeeded in imprisoning him, says the operative, Jill Simpson.
Simpson speaks to Scott Pelley in her first television interview, to be broadcast on 60 Minutes Sunday, Feb. 24, at 7 p.m. ET/PT.
PREVIEW FROM CBSNEWS "60 Minutes"
(Reuters) NY Times Scrutinized Over McCain Story
Feb. 21 - Following the story's publication, it is the New York Times -- and not John McCain -- that has appeared to face the toughest scrutiny.
The McCain campaign said the paper had engaged in what it called a "hit and run smear campaign."
Jon Decker reports. (REUTERS)
The McCain campaign said the paper had engaged in what it called a "hit and run smear campaign."
Jon Decker reports. (REUTERS)
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
For McCain, Self-Confidence on Ethics Poses Its Own Risk (NEW YORK TIMES)
The Long Run (New York Times)
For McCain, Self-Confidence on Ethics Poses Its Own Risk
By JIM RUTENBERG, MARILYN W. THOMPSON, DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK and STEPHEN LABATON
Published: February 21, 2008
John McCain’s relationship with a female lobbyist underscores a paradox: Even as he embraces high ethical standards, his confidence in his own integrity sometimes seems to blind him to potential conflicts of interest.
LINK TO FULL STORY
For McCain, Self-Confidence on Ethics Poses Its Own Risk
By JIM RUTENBERG, MARILYN W. THOMPSON, DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK and STEPHEN LABATON
Published: February 21, 2008
John McCain’s relationship with a female lobbyist underscores a paradox: Even as he embraces high ethical standards, his confidence in his own integrity sometimes seems to blind him to potential conflicts of interest.
LINK TO FULL STORY
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Is Barack Obama a True Agent of Change?
By CODY LYON
(Opinion)
There is no doubt that Democratic Presidential Candidate Barack Obama has clearly inspired millions of voters in what had become an arguably depressed electorate. His words have engaged many who might have otherwise watched the primary process from the sidelines those who were resigned to the belief that change is virtually impossible within America's current political landscape.
"If we don't inspire the country to believe again, then it doesn't matter how many policies and plans we have," said Obama on February 17, according to Bloomberg News.
True, words, even if some phrases are borrowed, have the ability to inspire the electorate. But it's the enacted policy that impacts and ultimately changes American lives. And when one takes a closer look at the nuts and bolts behind Senator Obama's message, there are troubling signs that the change Obama espouses might be nothing more than beautiful rhetoric.
You'd be preaching to the choir if you wanted to harp on the Clinton machine's flaws and scars and then, there's always her yes vote that giving President Bush military authorization before the invasion of Iraq.
But, the Clinton machine has been, and continues to be picked and cleaned dry by the press, its past, its campaign tactics, its relationships questioned, blasted and torn apart by conservative as well as liberal columnists, pundits and bloggers.
The Obama camp has yet to be fully vetted by the majority of a press that seems almost shy about interrupting what many have called a movement. Those that have done their homework and posed legitimate questions about policy, relationships and other issues have often been met with arrogant, evasive and dismissive shrugs and a fiercely protective network of supporters who shoot down critiques of the anointed beacon of change.
According to a February 17 "New York Times" article by Kate Zernike called "The Charisma Mandate," accounts of the Obama campaign's volunteer training sessions have a revivalist flavor where "volunteers are urged to avoid talking about policy to potential voters, and instead tell how they came to Mr. Obama."
But it would be naïve to think that sort of tactic will work in November and it would serve Democrat's interest if the contradictions and holes in the message were pointed out now, before the Republican attack machine brings out its own weapons of destruction and doubt.
Central to Obama's message of change are claims that he is free of lobbyist influence. But in fact, he has been, and still is being funded by some of the same types of corporate interests as Clinton and other candidates through big corporate donors known as bundlers.
In fact, he's received so much funding, an estimated $30 million per month, that his campaign appears to be backpedaling on a November pledge where he said if he was the Democratic nominee, he would aggressively pursue and agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election.
"The Washington Post" said in a February 16 editorial that "this kind of backtracking and parsing is't what the millions of voters who have been inspired by Mr. Obama are looking for."
More telling, a November 2006 Harpers article "The Making of a Washington Machine" by Ken Silverstein quoted an anonymous Washington lobbyist who said, "big donors would not be helping out OBama if they didn't see him as a player."
"What's the dollar value of a starry eyed idealist?" the anonymous source said according to the Harpers article.
No one can say for certain what kind of role that big money contributions would make in a future Obama administration but they deserve full airing and warrant further questions that require answers, not evasive missives from the man who might be President.
A February 3, article by "The New York Times" reported that Exelon Corp, the nation's largest nuclear plant operator is one of Obama's largest campaign donors. According to the article, Exelon's support of Obama far exceeds money given to the other candidates.
The "Times" pointed out that Exelon chairman John W. Rowe has been an Obama donor and is also chairman of the Nuclear Energy Institute, the nuclear power industry's largest lobbying group.
The article did not mention that Rowe, like several other powerful energy power players also sits on the influential, right wing and neo-conservative American Enterprise Institute's Board.
Alluding to the Exelon relationship, the Clinton campaign charged that Senator Obama had allowed the nuclear industry to water down a 2006 bill regulating nuclear plant safety. Her charges were met with evasiveness.
Obama spokesperson Bill Burton responded to the charges on CNN saying his campaign "doesn't need any lectures on special interests from the candidate who's taken more money from Washington lobbyists than any Republican running for president."
"Sen. Clinton may have said that attacks and distortions are the 'fun' and 'exciting' part of the campaign, but they're exactly what everyone else in America is tired of," Burton said according to CNN.
True enough, Americans are sick and tired of distortions. But unfortunately, much of the feel good rhetoric in the Obama camp has served as a convenient "distortion" for those hungry for a more forthcoming and critical examination of Obama.
For example, Senator Obama has touted his healthcare policy as part of his change we can all believe in since it would make healthcare available to everyone.
But, The Annenberg Political Fact Check, or Factheck.org said that Obama is being misleading when he says his healthcare proposal would "cover everyone."
Factcheck.org says Obama's plan would make coverage available to all, but experts that the organization consulted estimate that 15 to 26 million Americans would not take it up unless required to do so, which means, the new policy would still leave almost half the currently un-insured, still un-insured.
Another hot button topic close to any progressive's heart is how the future President will address the sub-prime mortgage crisis that has driven a recession that is still threatening world financial markets.
In his January 24 "The Nation" commentary titled "Subprime Obama" Max Fraser pointed out that predatory lenders "targeted the most vulnerable; black and latino borrowers have been twice as likely to receive sub-prime loans as whites: female homeowners, 30 percent more likely than male; black women five times more likely than white men.
But, Fraser noted that of the Democratic candidates, only Obama has not called for a moratorium and interest rate freeze. The article said "though he has been a proponent of mortgage fraud legislation in the Senate, he has remained silent on further financial regulations."
The "Nation" piece quoted Josh Bivens of the Economic Policy Institute who said "Edwards and Clinton talk much more about regulation of the financial industry going forward, and to the extent that blame is placed, they tend to place it on lenders for steering people into loans they couldn't afford."
Senator Clinton has loudly gone after Obama on several occasions regarding his yes vote on the 2005 energy bill.
To his credit, Obama led efforts to ensure investments in renewable energy and has sponsored legislation to strip incentives from oil companies.
Still, according to an August 9, 2005 report from the "Washington Post", the final bill included around $85 billion in tax breaks and subsidies for most forms of energy.
Many charged that the policy was co-written by big oil corporations under the watch of Vice President Dick Cheney but it got a yes vote from Senator Obama.
Senator Obama has said his vote for the energy bill was reluctant.
But more telling, in the heat of campaign season 2008, when Exxon Mobil announced, at $40 billion once again the largest corporate profits ever reported by any United States corporation, it was Hillary Clinton who called for a corporate windfall profits tax on oil companies that would be reinvested into a strategic energy fund.
While the Obama campaign has called for the removal of oil company subsidies and other tax breaks, he has steered clear of a clearly populist and progressive proposal that would impose a windfall profits tax on big oil corporations.
But finally, although Obama toots the horn of change for all people, happily embracing all members of the Democratic base, just four years ago, an incident in San Francisco offered telling traits that Obama is first a politician, who in the end, is probably capable of crafting a message or image that is capable of suiting whomever he seeks to appeal to.
According to a February 5, 2008 "San Francisco Chronicle" article by C.W. Nevius, in 2004, then Illinois Senatorial Candidate Obama told former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown, that "he would really appreciate if he didn't get his photo taken with my mayor," Gavin Newsome.
Newsome, San Francisco's current mayor, was then at the center of a national uproar over his decision to allow same sex marriage in San Francisco and according to the "Chronicle" report, Obama was worried about the image that would present to potential voters back in Illinois.
While things have certainly changed since then, and Obama has certainly championed LGBT individuals and issues, the incident doesn't speak well of Senator Obama as a real agent of change.
Instead, that incident along with other serious reporting beg the question, is Obama's message of change for real, or is it a carefully crafted political rhetoric that is in the business of selling an image.
NEWS UPDATE from AP 3/3/08- Political Positioning on NAFTA?
Associated Press ReportBarack Obama's senior economic policy adviser privately told Canadian officials to view the debate in Ohio over trade as "political positioning," according to a memo obtained by The Associated Press
(Opinion)
There is no doubt that Democratic Presidential Candidate Barack Obama has clearly inspired millions of voters in what had become an arguably depressed electorate. His words have engaged many who might have otherwise watched the primary process from the sidelines those who were resigned to the belief that change is virtually impossible within America's current political landscape.
"If we don't inspire the country to believe again, then it doesn't matter how many policies and plans we have," said Obama on February 17, according to Bloomberg News.
True, words, even if some phrases are borrowed, have the ability to inspire the electorate. But it's the enacted policy that impacts and ultimately changes American lives. And when one takes a closer look at the nuts and bolts behind Senator Obama's message, there are troubling signs that the change Obama espouses might be nothing more than beautiful rhetoric.
You'd be preaching to the choir if you wanted to harp on the Clinton machine's flaws and scars and then, there's always her yes vote that giving President Bush military authorization before the invasion of Iraq.
But, the Clinton machine has been, and continues to be picked and cleaned dry by the press, its past, its campaign tactics, its relationships questioned, blasted and torn apart by conservative as well as liberal columnists, pundits and bloggers.
The Obama camp has yet to be fully vetted by the majority of a press that seems almost shy about interrupting what many have called a movement. Those that have done their homework and posed legitimate questions about policy, relationships and other issues have often been met with arrogant, evasive and dismissive shrugs and a fiercely protective network of supporters who shoot down critiques of the anointed beacon of change.
According to a February 17 "New York Times" article by Kate Zernike called "The Charisma Mandate," accounts of the Obama campaign's volunteer training sessions have a revivalist flavor where "volunteers are urged to avoid talking about policy to potential voters, and instead tell how they came to Mr. Obama."
But it would be naïve to think that sort of tactic will work in November and it would serve Democrat's interest if the contradictions and holes in the message were pointed out now, before the Republican attack machine brings out its own weapons of destruction and doubt.
Central to Obama's message of change are claims that he is free of lobbyist influence. But in fact, he has been, and still is being funded by some of the same types of corporate interests as Clinton and other candidates through big corporate donors known as bundlers.
In fact, he's received so much funding, an estimated $30 million per month, that his campaign appears to be backpedaling on a November pledge where he said if he was the Democratic nominee, he would aggressively pursue and agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election.
"The Washington Post" said in a February 16 editorial that "this kind of backtracking and parsing is't what the millions of voters who have been inspired by Mr. Obama are looking for."
More telling, a November 2006 Harpers article "The Making of a Washington Machine" by Ken Silverstein quoted an anonymous Washington lobbyist who said, "big donors would not be helping out OBama if they didn't see him as a player."
"What's the dollar value of a starry eyed idealist?" the anonymous source said according to the Harpers article.
No one can say for certain what kind of role that big money contributions would make in a future Obama administration but they deserve full airing and warrant further questions that require answers, not evasive missives from the man who might be President.
A February 3, article by "The New York Times" reported that Exelon Corp, the nation's largest nuclear plant operator is one of Obama's largest campaign donors. According to the article, Exelon's support of Obama far exceeds money given to the other candidates.
The "Times" pointed out that Exelon chairman John W. Rowe has been an Obama donor and is also chairman of the Nuclear Energy Institute, the nuclear power industry's largest lobbying group.
The article did not mention that Rowe, like several other powerful energy power players also sits on the influential, right wing and neo-conservative American Enterprise Institute's Board.
Alluding to the Exelon relationship, the Clinton campaign charged that Senator Obama had allowed the nuclear industry to water down a 2006 bill regulating nuclear plant safety. Her charges were met with evasiveness.
Obama spokesperson Bill Burton responded to the charges on CNN saying his campaign "doesn't need any lectures on special interests from the candidate who's taken more money from Washington lobbyists than any Republican running for president."
"Sen. Clinton may have said that attacks and distortions are the 'fun' and 'exciting' part of the campaign, but they're exactly what everyone else in America is tired of," Burton said according to CNN.
True enough, Americans are sick and tired of distortions. But unfortunately, much of the feel good rhetoric in the Obama camp has served as a convenient "distortion" for those hungry for a more forthcoming and critical examination of Obama.
For example, Senator Obama has touted his healthcare policy as part of his change we can all believe in since it would make healthcare available to everyone.
But, The Annenberg Political Fact Check, or Factheck.org said that Obama is being misleading when he says his healthcare proposal would "cover everyone."
Factcheck.org says Obama's plan would make coverage available to all, but experts that the organization consulted estimate that 15 to 26 million Americans would not take it up unless required to do so, which means, the new policy would still leave almost half the currently un-insured, still un-insured.
Another hot button topic close to any progressive's heart is how the future President will address the sub-prime mortgage crisis that has driven a recession that is still threatening world financial markets.
In his January 24 "The Nation" commentary titled "Subprime Obama" Max Fraser pointed out that predatory lenders "targeted the most vulnerable; black and latino borrowers have been twice as likely to receive sub-prime loans as whites: female homeowners, 30 percent more likely than male; black women five times more likely than white men.
But, Fraser noted that of the Democratic candidates, only Obama has not called for a moratorium and interest rate freeze. The article said "though he has been a proponent of mortgage fraud legislation in the Senate, he has remained silent on further financial regulations."
The "Nation" piece quoted Josh Bivens of the Economic Policy Institute who said "Edwards and Clinton talk much more about regulation of the financial industry going forward, and to the extent that blame is placed, they tend to place it on lenders for steering people into loans they couldn't afford."
Senator Clinton has loudly gone after Obama on several occasions regarding his yes vote on the 2005 energy bill.
To his credit, Obama led efforts to ensure investments in renewable energy and has sponsored legislation to strip incentives from oil companies.
Still, according to an August 9, 2005 report from the "Washington Post", the final bill included around $85 billion in tax breaks and subsidies for most forms of energy.
Many charged that the policy was co-written by big oil corporations under the watch of Vice President Dick Cheney but it got a yes vote from Senator Obama.
Senator Obama has said his vote for the energy bill was reluctant.
But more telling, in the heat of campaign season 2008, when Exxon Mobil announced, at $40 billion once again the largest corporate profits ever reported by any United States corporation, it was Hillary Clinton who called for a corporate windfall profits tax on oil companies that would be reinvested into a strategic energy fund.
While the Obama campaign has called for the removal of oil company subsidies and other tax breaks, he has steered clear of a clearly populist and progressive proposal that would impose a windfall profits tax on big oil corporations.
But finally, although Obama toots the horn of change for all people, happily embracing all members of the Democratic base, just four years ago, an incident in San Francisco offered telling traits that Obama is first a politician, who in the end, is probably capable of crafting a message or image that is capable of suiting whomever he seeks to appeal to.
According to a February 5, 2008 "San Francisco Chronicle" article by C.W. Nevius, in 2004, then Illinois Senatorial Candidate Obama told former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown, that "he would really appreciate if he didn't get his photo taken with my mayor," Gavin Newsome.
Newsome, San Francisco's current mayor, was then at the center of a national uproar over his decision to allow same sex marriage in San Francisco and according to the "Chronicle" report, Obama was worried about the image that would present to potential voters back in Illinois.
While things have certainly changed since then, and Obama has certainly championed LGBT individuals and issues, the incident doesn't speak well of Senator Obama as a real agent of change.
Instead, that incident along with other serious reporting beg the question, is Obama's message of change for real, or is it a carefully crafted political rhetoric that is in the business of selling an image.
NEWS UPDATE from AP 3/3/08- Political Positioning on NAFTA?
Associated Press ReportBarack Obama's senior economic policy adviser privately told Canadian officials to view the debate in Ohio over trade as "political positioning," according to a memo obtained by The Associated Press
Monday, February 18, 2008
HADITHA REVISITED- Necessary Viewing
RULES OF ENGAGEMENT PREMIERS on PBS
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
9 P.M. (check local listings)
FRONTLINE cuts through the fog of war to reveal the untold story of what happened in Haditha, Iraq—where twenty-four of the town’s residents were killed by U.S. forces in what many in the media branded "Iraq’s My Lai." With accusations swirling that the Marines massacred Iraqi civilians "in cold blood," the Haditha incident has led to one of the largest criminal cases against U.S. troops in the Iraq war. But real questions have emerged about what really happened that day, and who is responsible. Through television interviews with Iraqi survivors and Marines accused of war crimes, FRONTLINE investigates this incident and what it can tell us about the harrowing moral and legal landscape the U.S. military faces in Iraq.
Watch online beginning 2/19/08
preview:
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
9 P.M. (check local listings)
FRONTLINE cuts through the fog of war to reveal the untold story of what happened in Haditha, Iraq—where twenty-four of the town’s residents were killed by U.S. forces in what many in the media branded "Iraq’s My Lai." With accusations swirling that the Marines massacred Iraqi civilians "in cold blood," the Haditha incident has led to one of the largest criminal cases against U.S. troops in the Iraq war. But real questions have emerged about what really happened that day, and who is responsible. Through television interviews with Iraqi survivors and Marines accused of war crimes, FRONTLINE investigates this incident and what it can tell us about the harrowing moral and legal landscape the U.S. military faces in Iraq.
Watch online beginning 2/19/08
preview:
Saturday, February 16, 2008
(Washington Post-The Trail)Black Commenter, Criticizing Obama, Causes Firestorm
FROM Darryl Fears at "THE TRAIL" at "The Washington Post"Tavis Smiley, the bestselling author of the "Covenant With Black America," is in a world turned upside down. He said he's being "hammered," "barbecued," and is "catching hell" from black Americans for suggesting that Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) made a major mistake by declining to speak at the State of the Black Union event that Smiley plans to host next week in New Orleans.
"There's all this talk of hater, sellout and traitor," Smiley said to me in a telephone interview. Smiley even mentioned getting death threats, but wouldn't elaborate. He said his office has been flooded with angry e-mails. "I have family in Indianapolis. They are harassing my momma, harassing my brother. It's getting to be crazy," Smiley said.
LINK TO FULL TEXT
"There's all this talk of hater, sellout and traitor," Smiley said to me in a telephone interview. Smiley even mentioned getting death threats, but wouldn't elaborate. He said his office has been flooded with angry e-mails. "I have family in Indianapolis. They are harassing my momma, harassing my brother. It's getting to be crazy," Smiley said.
LINK TO FULL TEXT
Sunday, February 10, 2008
On Siegelman Case: Corruption in a U.S. Attorney’s Office (Harpers)
excerpt: If we had to pick one state in the nation where these evil tendencies are most obviously on display, then certainly it is Alabama, home to the nation’s highest profile and most abusive political prosecution. A major television network will shortly be exposing a number of lurid details surrounding the Siegelman case which point to corruption inside of the Justice Department.From Scot Horton's "No Comment" at Harpers)
LINK TO FULL STORY
LINK TO FULL STORY
Friday, February 08, 2008
The Differences: Clinton, Obama and Health Insurance (New York Times-Krugman)
Clinton, Obama, Insurance
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: February 4, 2008
The difference between the health care plans of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama could well be the difference between achieving universal health coverage and falling far short.
LINK TO FULL TEXT AT NYT
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: February 4, 2008
The difference between the health care plans of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama could well be the difference between achieving universal health coverage and falling far short.
LINK TO FULL TEXT AT NYT
Wednesday, February 06, 2008
Horror, Devastation and Heartbreak in the South (CBS coverage of Tornadoes)
From CBS NEWS
Link to video report on deadly southern tornado outbreak:
***Please Remember the victims of this horrible event in your prayers, thoughts and or meditations***
Link to video report on deadly southern tornado outbreak:
***Please Remember the victims of this horrible event in your prayers, thoughts and or meditations***
On Exxon Mobil's Reported "Interest" in Developing Iraq's Oil Industry
Cody Lyon
(Opinion)
A Wednesday report from Reuters is saying that Exxon Mobil is “interested in helping to develop Iraq’s huge oil reserves. According to the February 6 report, the company declined to comment on whether it has registered yet to compete for contracts there.
The “Reuters” report also says that spokesperson Len D’Eramo said in an emailed statement “if the Iraqi government decides it wants international oil companies to partner with them in developing their resources, Exxon Mobil would be interested in participating."
The report said that D’Eramo wrote in the email that Exxon “would pursue profitable business opportunities as they arise in Iraq, just as it would in other countries in which is permitted to operate.”
While it’s not surprising that oil companies have long been interested in “developing” the resources of oil rich nations, there is a bit of collective bewilderment and sad resignation at the fact that this monolith of energy production is admitting its interest in nightmare stricken Iraq just a few days after reporting the largest profits ever for a United States corporation. Add to that, if Exxon Mobil takes part in the rebuilding of Iraq’s infrastructure, its profits only stand to increase thanks to PSA’s in Iraq’s oil law, profits that will increase the company’s corporate windfalls.
But, will those increasing windfalls benefit everyday Americans in any way like lower gas prices or perhaps investment in cleaner energy or alternative fuel initiatives?
According to Consumer Federation of America and Consumers Union, between January and May 2007, gasoline prices increased 80 cents, 60 cents of that going toward increased refining and marketing prices.
Some blame ongoing gas pump price increases on a lack of competition that allows the few large oil companies to exploit tight markets. Others say those prices were driven up by those same companies participating in “speculative” energy markets.
Regardless, there are a couple of easy to comprehend political issues that need to be addressed more openly and aggressively on the campaign trail. Democrats should be demanding that the US treasury re-coup billions of dollars in US tax subsidies to oil companies. A Senate measure to do just that, failed by one vote last year.
And then there’s a corporate windfall tax that so many seem to shudder at the very mention of.
We can only hope that candidates will spell out, and tout a corporate windfall profits tax. And, there’s always the hope that the additional tax money will be promised to fund clean or alternative energy initiatives under close government scrutiny.
As things stand, the Wednesday report from Reuters noting Exxon-Mobil’s interest in Iraq, seems to be at least part of the ugly crystal ball images some clearly saw back when the drumbeats for war for war began to roll.
**************
WHAT DOES IRAQ'S OIL LAW SAY ABOUT AN INVASION? Story link below
Link to Iraq Oil Law story (2007)
(Opinion)
A Wednesday report from Reuters is saying that Exxon Mobil is “interested in helping to develop Iraq’s huge oil reserves. According to the February 6 report, the company declined to comment on whether it has registered yet to compete for contracts there.
The “Reuters” report also says that spokesperson Len D’Eramo said in an emailed statement “if the Iraqi government decides it wants international oil companies to partner with them in developing their resources, Exxon Mobil would be interested in participating."
The report said that D’Eramo wrote in the email that Exxon “would pursue profitable business opportunities as they arise in Iraq, just as it would in other countries in which is permitted to operate.”
While it’s not surprising that oil companies have long been interested in “developing” the resources of oil rich nations, there is a bit of collective bewilderment and sad resignation at the fact that this monolith of energy production is admitting its interest in nightmare stricken Iraq just a few days after reporting the largest profits ever for a United States corporation. Add to that, if Exxon Mobil takes part in the rebuilding of Iraq’s infrastructure, its profits only stand to increase thanks to PSA’s in Iraq’s oil law, profits that will increase the company’s corporate windfalls.
But, will those increasing windfalls benefit everyday Americans in any way like lower gas prices or perhaps investment in cleaner energy or alternative fuel initiatives?
According to Consumer Federation of America and Consumers Union, between January and May 2007, gasoline prices increased 80 cents, 60 cents of that going toward increased refining and marketing prices.
Some blame ongoing gas pump price increases on a lack of competition that allows the few large oil companies to exploit tight markets. Others say those prices were driven up by those same companies participating in “speculative” energy markets.
Regardless, there are a couple of easy to comprehend political issues that need to be addressed more openly and aggressively on the campaign trail. Democrats should be demanding that the US treasury re-coup billions of dollars in US tax subsidies to oil companies. A Senate measure to do just that, failed by one vote last year.
And then there’s a corporate windfall tax that so many seem to shudder at the very mention of.
We can only hope that candidates will spell out, and tout a corporate windfall profits tax. And, there’s always the hope that the additional tax money will be promised to fund clean or alternative energy initiatives under close government scrutiny.
As things stand, the Wednesday report from Reuters noting Exxon-Mobil’s interest in Iraq, seems to be at least part of the ugly crystal ball images some clearly saw back when the drumbeats for war for war began to roll.
**************
WHAT DOES IRAQ'S OIL LAW SAY ABOUT AN INVASION? Story link below
Link to Iraq Oil Law story (2007)
Tuesday, February 05, 2008
Nature vs. Nurture: Research & Ideology Clash in Search for Roots of Homosexuality (EDGE)
Excerpt from my story at EDGE
Over the years, there have been countless theories and studies seeking to find some sort of biological or genetic factor that might play a role in determining sexual orientation. Debate over the validity of such studies and how they might impact the gay community in its quest for acceptance and greater equality has gone on for nearly just as long.
Some proponents of this sort of research hope the results reveal a scientifically conclusive genetic component in homosexuality whereby the hope is that social conservatives and other groups, especially those who call sexual orientation a "choice" might temper or silence some of their criticisms.
LINK TO FULL STORY
Over the years, there have been countless theories and studies seeking to find some sort of biological or genetic factor that might play a role in determining sexual orientation. Debate over the validity of such studies and how they might impact the gay community in its quest for acceptance and greater equality has gone on for nearly just as long.
Some proponents of this sort of research hope the results reveal a scientifically conclusive genetic component in homosexuality whereby the hope is that social conservatives and other groups, especially those who call sexual orientation a "choice" might temper or silence some of their criticisms.
LINK TO FULL STORY
Monday, February 04, 2008
VOTE
Cody Lyon
Vote because you can. Vote, because it matters and just so happens to be your right, some might say your duty, as an active citizen of these beautiful United States. Vote, because in the end, you'll respect yourself more if you participate in the process. Vote, since it could make a difference in some precincts where the tallies might be very close. Vote because almost every person in this country has relatives and ancestors who at one time in our nation's history, couldn't, simply because of their gender or race. Fortunately for all of us, they fought the hard fight, won the right, and now, we can all vote.
Vote because like working out, it makes you feel good and look better and you never know who you'll run into at the polls and perhaps you'll find someone like you, someone who actually cares.
Vote, and remember that in November, you'll need to vote again.
Vote,and keep in mind that whoever the person you support in this race will face a formidable candidate in November and that candidate will likely do whatever they can including the utilization of their party. The opposition party and its supporters will pull any number of tricks to de-rail your candidate. It will not be the kind exchange of ideas we've seen so far, the kissing of cousins, not the snip and snaps over issues or the mildly insulting rhetoric who said who and what did what, instead, rest assured, it could, most likely will, get very ugly, and who ever you vote for, must be strong enough to withstand sharp, well informed attacks as well as dirty tricks of those who engage in well funded swiftboat tactics. Your candidate must be able to use their intellect to respond with volleys of their own, that simply deflate the cheaper tactics we've seen in past general elections.
Regardless, hold on to vision, keep hope in your heart, believe in your system, realize that government can do good things for people and vote and vote and vote.
Go Vote with November in the back of your mind, then move it to the front and vote to win.
Vote because you can. Vote, because it matters and just so happens to be your right, some might say your duty, as an active citizen of these beautiful United States. Vote, because in the end, you'll respect yourself more if you participate in the process. Vote, since it could make a difference in some precincts where the tallies might be very close. Vote because almost every person in this country has relatives and ancestors who at one time in our nation's history, couldn't, simply because of their gender or race. Fortunately for all of us, they fought the hard fight, won the right, and now, we can all vote.
Vote because like working out, it makes you feel good and look better and you never know who you'll run into at the polls and perhaps you'll find someone like you, someone who actually cares.
Vote, and remember that in November, you'll need to vote again.
Vote,and keep in mind that whoever the person you support in this race will face a formidable candidate in November and that candidate will likely do whatever they can including the utilization of their party. The opposition party and its supporters will pull any number of tricks to de-rail your candidate. It will not be the kind exchange of ideas we've seen so far, the kissing of cousins, not the snip and snaps over issues or the mildly insulting rhetoric who said who and what did what, instead, rest assured, it could, most likely will, get very ugly, and who ever you vote for, must be strong enough to withstand sharp, well informed attacks as well as dirty tricks of those who engage in well funded swiftboat tactics. Your candidate must be able to use their intellect to respond with volleys of their own, that simply deflate the cheaper tactics we've seen in past general elections.
Regardless, hold on to vision, keep hope in your heart, believe in your system, realize that government can do good things for people and vote and vote and vote.
Go Vote with November in the back of your mind, then move it to the front and vote to win.
Sunday, February 03, 2008
Ask Not What J.F.K. Can Do for Obama (New York Times- Frank Rich)
Ask Not What J.F.K. Can Do for Obama (NYT)
By FRANK RICH
What has often been forgotten is that Barack Obamas weaknesses resemble John F. Kennedys at least as much as his strengths.
Link To Full Story
By FRANK RICH
What has often been forgotten is that Barack Obamas weaknesses resemble John F. Kennedys at least as much as his strengths.
Link To Full Story
Friday, February 01, 2008
Exxon Mobil Profit Sets Record Again (New York Times)
By JAD MOUAWAD
Published: February 1, 2008 (NEW YORK TIMES)
Exxon Mobil delivered its strongest performance ever last year, earning a record $40.6 billion in net income because of surging oil prices, the company said Friday.
The figure, a 3 percent increase from the previous year, exceeded the company’s own record for profits at an American corporation, set in 2006, and is nearly twice what it earned in 2003.
LINK TO FULL STORY
Published: February 1, 2008 (NEW YORK TIMES)
Exxon Mobil delivered its strongest performance ever last year, earning a record $40.6 billion in net income because of surging oil prices, the company said Friday.
The figure, a 3 percent increase from the previous year, exceeded the company’s own record for profits at an American corporation, set in 2006, and is nearly twice what it earned in 2003.
LINK TO FULL STORY
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
The Nightmare Continues
BY CODY LYON
President Bush did his best to salvage his legacy during his last State of the Union Speech Monday night, a legacy that will be defined primarily by two events, his response the events of September 11th 2001 and the invasion, and subsequent occupation of Iraq.
The President spent a large chunk of time pleading with the American people that the surge of American troops is working, that things are getting better and that history will show we’d done the right thing by invading the country and ridding it of Saddam Hussein.
“We must do the difficult work today, so that that years from now people will look back and say that this generation rose to the moment, prevailed in a tough fight, and left behind a more hopeful region and a safer America,” said President Bush during the State of the Union while speaking about Iraq.
But, some might say, the President was speaking to a nation that has turned a deaf ear to men who cry wolf. Unfortunately, they might also see a nation that’s turned a deaf ear to news from Iraq.
That’s due in great part to the media frenzy surrounding campaign primaries, certainly more fun news than stories from Baghdad, instead we hear about who crossed the line in a political attack, what groups will support who, who’s got the most money, and who struck a low blow on the trail today? All of that and so much more make for great tabloid headlines that are filled with all kinds of juicy human drama.
Then again, perhaps we are suffering from collective Iraq news fatigue which could be related to a frustrating lack of faith in our current, apparently along for the ride do nothing Congress, a body that seems to lack the courage to further challenge and air the current administration’s past sins. Those are the sins that continue to lead thousands of our sons, husbands, wives and daughters into a hideous mistake, a mistake that was based in large part, on lies.
Just a few days before the State of the Union, The Center for Public Integrity released a report that documented President Bush and seven top officials of his administration, made at least 935 false statements in the two years following September 11, 2001, about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.
The Public Integrity report further noted “532 separate occasions, in speeches, briefings, interviews, testimony and the like” where “President Bush and three key officials along with Secretary of State Colin Powell, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz and White House Secretary Ari Fleischer and Scott McClellan, stated unequivocally that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, or intended to produce them, links to Al Queda or both.”
This is part of an upsetting tale of falsehoods that has led to years of sad, frustrating and heartbreaking reality.
The same Monday as the day of the State of the Union, news reports that five American soldiers were killed in an ambush near the northern Iraqi city Mosul showed up in newspapers and on a few television broadcasts.
As of Wednesday, January 23, 2008, at least 3,932 members of the U.S. Military have died since the beginning of the Iraq war in March 2003 according to an Associated Press Count.
And of course, there’s the number of dead in Iraqis which is simply staggering
According to estimates from the World Health Organization, around 151,000 Iraqi’s died from violence in the first three years after the invasion began.
There are plenty of political junkies out there who are biting their nails and perhaps enjoying the dramatic and slip and slap antics of the campaign trail and the future it might lead to.
But, we are in Iraq now, and no one has offered a clear plan on how we’ll get out and no one is calling for some sort of national truth airing moment when we all admit, accept and conclusively know what went wrong when and where and why?
One thing is certain, there is no doubt, that this President does leave behind a legacy of deception and what seem to be misleading abuses of power that were clearly directed by individuals who saw the world through an arrogant, narrow and obviously naïve lens.
There was an almost sad undertone in President Bush’s last State of the Union Speech. In spite of an administration that has clearly bordered on inept and corrupt, the President himself, appears to be such an affable individual, someone that would be pleasant and personally charming. But, then the wall of damage his administration is responsible for rolls over your soul like a tidal wave of truth, and that truth is revealed through the horrors of Iraq.
No matter how its spun, Iraq has been a nightmare of death and carnage. Perhaps, that is why Americans had rather watch the Billary, Obama, John and John, Mitt and Mike and Rudy show.
But, while we doze, the nightmare continues.
Hopefully one of the cast of characters on the trail will someday wake us up.
President Bush did his best to salvage his legacy during his last State of the Union Speech Monday night, a legacy that will be defined primarily by two events, his response the events of September 11th 2001 and the invasion, and subsequent occupation of Iraq.
The President spent a large chunk of time pleading with the American people that the surge of American troops is working, that things are getting better and that history will show we’d done the right thing by invading the country and ridding it of Saddam Hussein.
“We must do the difficult work today, so that that years from now people will look back and say that this generation rose to the moment, prevailed in a tough fight, and left behind a more hopeful region and a safer America,” said President Bush during the State of the Union while speaking about Iraq.
But, some might say, the President was speaking to a nation that has turned a deaf ear to men who cry wolf. Unfortunately, they might also see a nation that’s turned a deaf ear to news from Iraq.
That’s due in great part to the media frenzy surrounding campaign primaries, certainly more fun news than stories from Baghdad, instead we hear about who crossed the line in a political attack, what groups will support who, who’s got the most money, and who struck a low blow on the trail today? All of that and so much more make for great tabloid headlines that are filled with all kinds of juicy human drama.
Then again, perhaps we are suffering from collective Iraq news fatigue which could be related to a frustrating lack of faith in our current, apparently along for the ride do nothing Congress, a body that seems to lack the courage to further challenge and air the current administration’s past sins. Those are the sins that continue to lead thousands of our sons, husbands, wives and daughters into a hideous mistake, a mistake that was based in large part, on lies.
Just a few days before the State of the Union, The Center for Public Integrity released a report that documented President Bush and seven top officials of his administration, made at least 935 false statements in the two years following September 11, 2001, about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.
The Public Integrity report further noted “532 separate occasions, in speeches, briefings, interviews, testimony and the like” where “President Bush and three key officials along with Secretary of State Colin Powell, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz and White House Secretary Ari Fleischer and Scott McClellan, stated unequivocally that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, or intended to produce them, links to Al Queda or both.”
This is part of an upsetting tale of falsehoods that has led to years of sad, frustrating and heartbreaking reality.
The same Monday as the day of the State of the Union, news reports that five American soldiers were killed in an ambush near the northern Iraqi city Mosul showed up in newspapers and on a few television broadcasts.
As of Wednesday, January 23, 2008, at least 3,932 members of the U.S. Military have died since the beginning of the Iraq war in March 2003 according to an Associated Press Count.
And of course, there’s the number of dead in Iraqis which is simply staggering
According to estimates from the World Health Organization, around 151,000 Iraqi’s died from violence in the first three years after the invasion began.
There are plenty of political junkies out there who are biting their nails and perhaps enjoying the dramatic and slip and slap antics of the campaign trail and the future it might lead to.
But, we are in Iraq now, and no one has offered a clear plan on how we’ll get out and no one is calling for some sort of national truth airing moment when we all admit, accept and conclusively know what went wrong when and where and why?
One thing is certain, there is no doubt, that this President does leave behind a legacy of deception and what seem to be misleading abuses of power that were clearly directed by individuals who saw the world through an arrogant, narrow and obviously naïve lens.
There was an almost sad undertone in President Bush’s last State of the Union Speech. In spite of an administration that has clearly bordered on inept and corrupt, the President himself, appears to be such an affable individual, someone that would be pleasant and personally charming. But, then the wall of damage his administration is responsible for rolls over your soul like a tidal wave of truth, and that truth is revealed through the horrors of Iraq.
No matter how its spun, Iraq has been a nightmare of death and carnage. Perhaps, that is why Americans had rather watch the Billary, Obama, John and John, Mitt and Mike and Rudy show.
But, while we doze, the nightmare continues.
Hopefully one of the cast of characters on the trail will someday wake us up.
Sunday, January 27, 2008
The Billary Road to Republican Victory (Frank Rich-New York Times)
Op-Ed Columnist
The Billary Road to Republican Victory
By FRANK RICH
Published: January 27, 2008
Any Democrat who seriously thinks that Bill Clinton will fade away if Hillary wins the party nomination is a Democrat who, as the man said, believes in fairy tales.
Link to full text at "New York Times"
The Billary Road to Republican Victory
By FRANK RICH
Published: January 27, 2008
Any Democrat who seriously thinks that Bill Clinton will fade away if Hillary wins the party nomination is a Democrat who, as the man said, believes in fairy tales.
Link to full text at "New York Times"
Saturday, January 26, 2008
Kenya's horror spreads (REUTERS)
From REUTERS-
Jan. 26 - Gunfire rang out in Nakuru as armed gangs manned roadblocks in the Kenyan town where at least 25 people have been killed in ethnic clashes.
Paramilitary police patrolled the Rift Valley provincial capital, which had previously been spared post-election chaos that has killed around 700 people since disputed Dec. 27 polls. More than 100 injured people were admitted at the local hospital, including one man with an arrow lodged in his head.
Sonia Legg reports.
Jan. 26 - Gunfire rang out in Nakuru as armed gangs manned roadblocks in the Kenyan town where at least 25 people have been killed in ethnic clashes.
Paramilitary police patrolled the Rift Valley provincial capital, which had previously been spared post-election chaos that has killed around 700 people since disputed Dec. 27 polls. More than 100 injured people were admitted at the local hospital, including one man with an arrow lodged in his head.
Sonia Legg reports.
Thursday, January 24, 2008
(New York Times) Foreclosures Prompt Cities to Make Plea for Aid
Foreclosures Prompt Cities to Make Plea for Aid
By IAN URBINA
Published: January 24, 2008
Faced with the collapse of the subprime mortgage market that has pockmarked their cities with vacant houses, the nation’s mayors pleaded for a huge infusion of federal aid.
LINK TO FULL STORY
By IAN URBINA
Published: January 24, 2008
Faced with the collapse of the subprime mortgage market that has pockmarked their cities with vacant houses, the nation’s mayors pleaded for a huge infusion of federal aid.
LINK TO FULL STORY
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Monday, January 21, 2008
A Legacy of Inspiration and the Dream that Remains
by Cody Lyon
Dr. Martin Luther King's 'I Have a Dream' speech is without a doubt, one of the most important moments in United States history. King, whose voice thundered those historic words from the Lincoln Memorial in Washington some forty five years ago, was and still is, unmatched on the pedestal of moral leadership. King's legacy still inspires the collective quest for equality and liberty for all. Taking this day to honor and remember Dr. King's brave leadership, speaks well of us as a nation.
But sadly, for far to many, the dream goes unrealized, remaining just that, a dream. America is still a land filled with barriers where the ladders of economic and educational opportunity arrive at birth on the doorsteps of some, but remain seemingly light years away for others.
In today's America, the quest for justice, equality and liberty for all Americans is alive, but as recent headlines show, enforcement has been in a state of collective lethargy. This is certainly a trend that must change, because in the end, if justice and morality do not eventually win, history has shown, whatever that system is, corrodes and eventually collapses from within.
Dr. Martin Luther King's "I have a Dream" speech woke up a nation to the sins of a government tolerated system steeped in racism. Although today's inequality umbrella is perhaps less blatant and covers a more racially diverse pool of our people there is plenty of evidence that the dream, remains a dream, evidence available for all to see in our schools, neighborhoods, prisons, banking system, our tax structure, crime victims, our military, our media and even in our churches.
Dr. Martin Luther King's 'I Have a Dream Speech' inspired a movement and called a nation to examine its conscience. It is as inspiring today as it was some forty five years ago.
*************************************************************************************
FULL VERSION OF THE "I HAVE A DREAM" SPEECH BY DR MARTIN LUTHER KING
Dr. Martin Luther King's 'I Have a Dream' speech is without a doubt, one of the most important moments in United States history. King, whose voice thundered those historic words from the Lincoln Memorial in Washington some forty five years ago, was and still is, unmatched on the pedestal of moral leadership. King's legacy still inspires the collective quest for equality and liberty for all. Taking this day to honor and remember Dr. King's brave leadership, speaks well of us as a nation.
But sadly, for far to many, the dream goes unrealized, remaining just that, a dream. America is still a land filled with barriers where the ladders of economic and educational opportunity arrive at birth on the doorsteps of some, but remain seemingly light years away for others.
In today's America, the quest for justice, equality and liberty for all Americans is alive, but as recent headlines show, enforcement has been in a state of collective lethargy. This is certainly a trend that must change, because in the end, if justice and morality do not eventually win, history has shown, whatever that system is, corrodes and eventually collapses from within.
Dr. Martin Luther King's "I have a Dream" speech woke up a nation to the sins of a government tolerated system steeped in racism. Although today's inequality umbrella is perhaps less blatant and covers a more racially diverse pool of our people there is plenty of evidence that the dream, remains a dream, evidence available for all to see in our schools, neighborhoods, prisons, banking system, our tax structure, crime victims, our military, our media and even in our churches.
Dr. Martin Luther King's 'I Have a Dream Speech' inspired a movement and called a nation to examine its conscience. It is as inspiring today as it was some forty five years ago.
*************************************************************************************
FULL VERSION OF THE "I HAVE A DREAM" SPEECH BY DR MARTIN LUTHER KING
Sunday, January 20, 2008
On the Day We Celebrate the Life of Dr. Martin Luther King, take time to learn about, and sign- and live, The Birmingham Pledge
From The Birmingham Pledge Website:In November 1997, inspired by the historic events in Birmingham during the civil rights movement, Birmingham attorney James E. Rotch composed a statement - - a personal commitment, to recognize the importance of every individual, regardless of race or color. This commitment became The Birmingham Pledge, a grassroots movement initiated and promoted by the Community Affairs Committee of Operation New Birmingham to eliminate prejudice in Birmingham and throughout the world . In the last five years, The Birmingham Pledge has worldwide recognition with tens of thousands of people signing this personal commitment. In January 2000 a Joint Resolution of Congress was passed recognizing The Birmingham Pledge and in 2001, President George W. Bush proclaimed September 14 through 21 as National Birmingham Pledge Week, encouraging all citizens to join him by renewing their commitments to fight racism and uphold equal justice and opportunity.
You can go to the Birmingham Pledge Website via this link. There you will find further insight, history and other information about the efforts.
You can go to the Birmingham Pledge Website via this link. There you will find further insight, history and other information about the efforts.
Obama Speaks At Ebenezer Baptist Honoring MLK
(Excerpt)Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama speaks at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, where Martin Luther King, Jr. once served as co-pastor. (AP)
Saturday, January 19, 2008
Meanwhile in Iraq-
Shi'ite fighters attack soldiers (REUTERS)
Jan 19 - Dozens killed as Iraqi soldiers and police fight running battles with gunmen from a Shi'ite cult in southern Iraqi cities.
Police said the head of the so-called "Soldiers of Heaven" cult in Basra had been killed in the fighting, which is reminiscent of clashes between the obscure group and Iraqi and U.S. forces a year ago.
Those battles near the holy Shi'ite city of Najaf left hundreds dead, mainly members of the cult. Penny Tweedie reports.
Jan 19 - Dozens killed as Iraqi soldiers and police fight running battles with gunmen from a Shi'ite cult in southern Iraqi cities.
Police said the head of the so-called "Soldiers of Heaven" cult in Basra had been killed in the fighting, which is reminiscent of clashes between the obscure group and Iraqi and U.S. forces a year ago.
Those battles near the holy Shi'ite city of Najaf left hundreds dead, mainly members of the cult. Penny Tweedie reports.
Lobbylicious "Confrontation" In South Carolina
During a Columbia SC media moment Republican Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney took a few questions from members of the Press, including AP's Glenn Johnson. Things got a bit heated, when Lord Have Mercy, AP's Johnson challenged Romney on Lobbyist Ron Kaufman's alleged role in his Campaign. The video has lit up blog land, but the most telling moments, first, Romney campaign press rep Eric Ferhnstrom tells Johnson that he's being "unprofessional and argumentative" with a candidate, begging the question, are Reporters meant to confront candidates about this sort of thing? But, perhaps an even more brilliant moment is heard at the end of the video when a Romney supporter, in a lovely South Carolina accent tells Reporter Johnson "I think you're being rude and ugly." Campaign Season 08 is going to be a Firecracker 500!
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Alabama Congressman who is State's Obama Chair Punts to the Preachers
By CODY LYON
A January 15, gathering of “like minded” suburban democrats in Birmingham Alabama on healthcare reform unintentionally became a point of contention for some local LGBT members who can point to potential veins of hypocrisy deep inside the regional realty of politics, signs of conflicts within the very fundament of proclaimed liberal idealistic thinking.
In truth, one Congressman’s statements exposed what might be seen as a disillusioning and ugly reality of American political life and perhaps the misguided faith in a system that continues to let many LGBT American citizens down.
Among those on a panel of speakers at the meeting of Birmingham’s “Over the Mountain” were Dr. Wally Retan, Dr. Max Michael, Terry Kellog, a VP at Blue Cross Blue Shield of Alabama and the liberal, African American Congressman, Artur Davis (D-7th District)
In Birmingham, over the mountain is synonymous with suburban, wealthier and whiter than the Mother Ship city in the valley to the north.
According to a number of participants, after a number of questions, discussions and stated commitment to the compassionate ideal of Universal health care for all Americans, a question was posed to Terry Kellog, a VP at Blue Cross Blue Shield or BCBS.
Kellog was asked why BCBS still refuses to offer a product to any of its clients that extends health insurance benefits to the partners or children of the unmarried, primarily same sex couples.
With 3.6 million Alabama customers and 4000 employees, the company is the state’s largest insurer. .
Reportedly, Kellog offered a widely expected litany of economic and business related excuses, noting that Blue Cross in Alabama does not offer benefits to domestic partners, either heterosexual or homosexual, arguing that ultimately, BCBS of Alabama’s customers don’t want to pay the alleged costs for additional coverage.
Despite signs from a number of major insurers that this arguably discriminatory policy is changing, the fact is, that Alabama’s Blue Cross Blue Shield is not alone since a number of large insurers throughout the nation still offer no such extension to domestic partners.
But, as Danny Upton, Executive Director of Equality Alabama, the state’s largest LGBT civil rights organization later said, the excuse by Blue Cross Blue Shield is unacceptable, considering the fact that 78 percent of the Fortune 100 largest corporations and 49 percent of the Fortune 500 offered health benefits to employee’s domestic partners. Upton says Alabama’s Blue Cross Blue Shield has simply not kept pace with social and corporate trends and as a result, is losing its reputation as a leader, innovator and competitor in the changing Alabama health market.
But then, Alabama’s “liberal” Congressman, Artur Davis concurred with Kellog. adding, much to some of the crowd’s surprise, that the LGBT community should not look to Washington or Montgomery, the state’s capital, for any sort of pro-activity that might affect change at Alabama’s largest insurer.
He also said that discussion of this issue would be driven by the clergy, and in Alabama, that more than likely would mean, outspoken Preachers who do no approve of gay lifestyles.
The day after the “Over the Mountain” Democrat organization meeting, Birmingham blogs were abuzz with reaction. Those sympathetic to local LGBT causes saw the Congressman’s comments as further evidence that leadership is lacking where it pertains to the millions of LGBT Americans. Local activists saw Davis’ apparent acceptance of this apparent Alabama reality as proof that LGBT citizens are still considered second class citizens when it comes to some of the most basic elements of American life.
Davis’ advice to the Alabama LGBT community seemed to say that Washington did not have a say, that in the heart of Dixie, that Preachers had the pull with the congregation, and among this congregations members, were the insurance company decision makers, and that they would in fact, be the sole decision makers on whether or not, gay couples would ever see this sort of benefit offered as a product.
Further, the fact that there is a link between Alabama’s Congressman Davis, and the Democratic Presidential Candidate who has been most enthusiastically touted as an agent of change in Washington.
Congressman Artur Davis is the Alabama state chairman of Senator Barack Obama’s campaign for President. To some, Davis’ role as head of Obama’s campaign, begged the question as to whether or not Senator Obama might speak out against, or express disagreement with Davis’ assessment regarding exactly who has more influence over this exclusionary policy, which to some LGBT Alabamians appeared to be a punt by Washington to the preachers.
That fired up a few participants at the Birmingham meeting.
“It’s ridiculous that our alleged secular leaders would punt to un-elected religious clergy when it comes to an issue involving healthcare for all Americans” said Danny Upton, Executive Director at Equality Alabama, the state’s largest LGBT civil rights organization.
Still, in a phone conversation this past Tuesday evening, Artur Davis press spokesperson Corey Ealons affirmed the Congressman’s statements saying that the extension of domestic partner benefits by an insurance company is a community issue.
“The individuals who will more than likely drive the discussion on domestic partner insurance benefits will be the clergy” said Ealons.
Equality Alabama’s Upton, who participated in the Democratic meeting said that after Kellog had offered his company’s excuse and Davis had said the Preachers would be the folks who decided if and when the gays would get domestic partner benefits, he just got up and left.
Upton says he felt let down and betrayed by the Congressman’s statement, that the very idea of asking preachers, the people who have told you all your life, that your very essence is immoral and wrong, to advocate for domestic partner benefits for same sex partners, was absurd.
And with this, a greater question arises, who does, or more importantly, who will advocate for LGBT Americans when it comes to the real nuts and bolts issues that impact folks outside of the liberal more officially gay friendly bastions like New York or California .
It became more obvious that LGBT activists have been wasting time hammering Presidential candidates over the broad definition of marriage. That’s not to say that, a number of nuts and bolts issues on the ground have seen some slow but real progress, even in this era of Bush, tangible benefits and acceptance of LGBT people where real benefits have trickled down and fought for by gay people even in more supposedly “conservative” places like Alabama.
But, the unfortunate reality seems to be, with each state that passes a gay marriage ban amendment, now at twenty, same sex marriage looks increasingly like a reality for another gay generation.
That’s not to say that change is not on the horizon.
With outspoken leadership from up above, in Washington, leadership that advocates and lobbies business leaders, not only for domestic partner benefits, but also foreign citizen partner sponsorship, adoption rights, gay youth homeless, job discrimination, tax relief for same sex couples and a number of other real and tangible protections that provide gay people and their relationships with a much needed sense of legitimacy beyond what they watch on network television shows or read about in other countries.
The hope is that the Alabama Obama campaign chairman Davis’ shirking of leadership is not representative of the candidate for President. But the greater hope is that whomever wins among the Democratic Presidential Candidates, all who have all been marketing themselves as agents of change and progress, will take on the nuts and bolts realities of change for LGBT Americans, and once elected, take a stand, and not make the mistake that Congressman Davis made when he punted his position as a leader to the Preachers of Alabama and elsewhere.
A January 15, gathering of “like minded” suburban democrats in Birmingham Alabama on healthcare reform unintentionally became a point of contention for some local LGBT members who can point to potential veins of hypocrisy deep inside the regional realty of politics, signs of conflicts within the very fundament of proclaimed liberal idealistic thinking.
In truth, one Congressman’s statements exposed what might be seen as a disillusioning and ugly reality of American political life and perhaps the misguided faith in a system that continues to let many LGBT American citizens down.
Among those on a panel of speakers at the meeting of Birmingham’s “Over the Mountain” were Dr. Wally Retan, Dr. Max Michael, Terry Kellog, a VP at Blue Cross Blue Shield of Alabama and the liberal, African American Congressman, Artur Davis (D-7th District)
In Birmingham, over the mountain is synonymous with suburban, wealthier and whiter than the Mother Ship city in the valley to the north.
According to a number of participants, after a number of questions, discussions and stated commitment to the compassionate ideal of Universal health care for all Americans, a question was posed to Terry Kellog, a VP at Blue Cross Blue Shield or BCBS.
Kellog was asked why BCBS still refuses to offer a product to any of its clients that extends health insurance benefits to the partners or children of the unmarried, primarily same sex couples.
With 3.6 million Alabama customers and 4000 employees, the company is the state’s largest insurer. .
Reportedly, Kellog offered a widely expected litany of economic and business related excuses, noting that Blue Cross in Alabama does not offer benefits to domestic partners, either heterosexual or homosexual, arguing that ultimately, BCBS of Alabama’s customers don’t want to pay the alleged costs for additional coverage.
Despite signs from a number of major insurers that this arguably discriminatory policy is changing, the fact is, that Alabama’s Blue Cross Blue Shield is not alone since a number of large insurers throughout the nation still offer no such extension to domestic partners.
But, as Danny Upton, Executive Director of Equality Alabama, the state’s largest LGBT civil rights organization later said, the excuse by Blue Cross Blue Shield is unacceptable, considering the fact that 78 percent of the Fortune 100 largest corporations and 49 percent of the Fortune 500 offered health benefits to employee’s domestic partners. Upton says Alabama’s Blue Cross Blue Shield has simply not kept pace with social and corporate trends and as a result, is losing its reputation as a leader, innovator and competitor in the changing Alabama health market.
But then, Alabama’s “liberal” Congressman, Artur Davis concurred with Kellog. adding, much to some of the crowd’s surprise, that the LGBT community should not look to Washington or Montgomery, the state’s capital, for any sort of pro-activity that might affect change at Alabama’s largest insurer.
He also said that discussion of this issue would be driven by the clergy, and in Alabama, that more than likely would mean, outspoken Preachers who do no approve of gay lifestyles.
The day after the “Over the Mountain” Democrat organization meeting, Birmingham blogs were abuzz with reaction. Those sympathetic to local LGBT causes saw the Congressman’s comments as further evidence that leadership is lacking where it pertains to the millions of LGBT Americans. Local activists saw Davis’ apparent acceptance of this apparent Alabama reality as proof that LGBT citizens are still considered second class citizens when it comes to some of the most basic elements of American life.
Davis’ advice to the Alabama LGBT community seemed to say that Washington did not have a say, that in the heart of Dixie, that Preachers had the pull with the congregation, and among this congregations members, were the insurance company decision makers, and that they would in fact, be the sole decision makers on whether or not, gay couples would ever see this sort of benefit offered as a product.
Further, the fact that there is a link between Alabama’s Congressman Davis, and the Democratic Presidential Candidate who has been most enthusiastically touted as an agent of change in Washington.
Congressman Artur Davis is the Alabama state chairman of Senator Barack Obama’s campaign for President. To some, Davis’ role as head of Obama’s campaign, begged the question as to whether or not Senator Obama might speak out against, or express disagreement with Davis’ assessment regarding exactly who has more influence over this exclusionary policy, which to some LGBT Alabamians appeared to be a punt by Washington to the preachers.
That fired up a few participants at the Birmingham meeting.
“It’s ridiculous that our alleged secular leaders would punt to un-elected religious clergy when it comes to an issue involving healthcare for all Americans” said Danny Upton, Executive Director at Equality Alabama, the state’s largest LGBT civil rights organization.
Still, in a phone conversation this past Tuesday evening, Artur Davis press spokesperson Corey Ealons affirmed the Congressman’s statements saying that the extension of domestic partner benefits by an insurance company is a community issue.
“The individuals who will more than likely drive the discussion on domestic partner insurance benefits will be the clergy” said Ealons.
Equality Alabama’s Upton, who participated in the Democratic meeting said that after Kellog had offered his company’s excuse and Davis had said the Preachers would be the folks who decided if and when the gays would get domestic partner benefits, he just got up and left.
Upton says he felt let down and betrayed by the Congressman’s statement, that the very idea of asking preachers, the people who have told you all your life, that your very essence is immoral and wrong, to advocate for domestic partner benefits for same sex partners, was absurd.
And with this, a greater question arises, who does, or more importantly, who will advocate for LGBT Americans when it comes to the real nuts and bolts issues that impact folks outside of the liberal more officially gay friendly bastions like New York or California .
It became more obvious that LGBT activists have been wasting time hammering Presidential candidates over the broad definition of marriage. That’s not to say that, a number of nuts and bolts issues on the ground have seen some slow but real progress, even in this era of Bush, tangible benefits and acceptance of LGBT people where real benefits have trickled down and fought for by gay people even in more supposedly “conservative” places like Alabama.
But, the unfortunate reality seems to be, with each state that passes a gay marriage ban amendment, now at twenty, same sex marriage looks increasingly like a reality for another gay generation.
That’s not to say that change is not on the horizon.
With outspoken leadership from up above, in Washington, leadership that advocates and lobbies business leaders, not only for domestic partner benefits, but also foreign citizen partner sponsorship, adoption rights, gay youth homeless, job discrimination, tax relief for same sex couples and a number of other real and tangible protections that provide gay people and their relationships with a much needed sense of legitimacy beyond what they watch on network television shows or read about in other countries.
The hope is that the Alabama Obama campaign chairman Davis’ shirking of leadership is not representative of the candidate for President. But the greater hope is that whomever wins among the Democratic Presidential Candidates, all who have all been marketing themselves as agents of change and progress, will take on the nuts and bolts realities of change for LGBT Americans, and once elected, take a stand, and not make the mistake that Congressman Davis made when he punted his position as a leader to the Preachers of Alabama and elsewhere.
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Deadly blast in Beirut
Jan. 15 - Reports say the explosion happened near a U.S. diplomatic car in Beirut, leaving several people dead or wounded.
At least four people have been reported killed and some 16 others wounded in the explosion which happened in a Christian neighborhood of the Lebanese capital.
Paul Chapman reports.
At least four people have been reported killed and some 16 others wounded in the explosion which happened in a Christian neighborhood of the Lebanese capital.
Paul Chapman reports.
Sunday, January 13, 2008
No Quick Fix to Economic Downturn (New York Times)
News Analysis- "New York Times"
No Quick Fix to Economic Downturn
By PETER S. GOODMAN and FLOYD NORRIS
Published: January 13, 2008
Many economists suggest that it may already be too late to change the course of the economy over the first half of the year.
Link to full story at "New York Times"
No Quick Fix to Economic Downturn
By PETER S. GOODMAN and FLOYD NORRIS
Published: January 13, 2008
Many economists suggest that it may already be too late to change the course of the economy over the first half of the year.
Link to full story at "New York Times"
Body n Soul's Memory From Summer
As campaign season begins to show its fangs and as winter sets in, a memory is recalled...a story from last summer in NYC.
SUMMER HOLIDAYS IN NYC GET ME UP
by CODY LYON
Although many New Yorkers grudgingly swear that more than half the
city’s residents are part of some loosely organized mass exodus to
a beach house on summer holiday weekends, those are actually the
weekends that the “left behind” can find the most memorable of New
York treats.
In fact, the non-jet ski set can sometimes find a dose of urban
spiritual nourishment that benefits the soul for months to come.
Not a religious experience, per se, but instead, a gathering of like
minded spirits, all very much alive, enjoying the fellowship of each
other, coming together for one reason, the music, at least that’s
what happened this past July 4th weekend.
The Body and Soul reunion party shook a collective booty to its core
at the PS-1 space in Queens, bringing together a cocktail of
cultures, families and sexual orientations that surely reminded
more than one participant that New York truly is a magnificent
mosaic as former Mayor David Dinkins once proclaimed.
Although Sunday afternoons at the Tribeca club Vinyl (later named
ARC) was the spot to meet the music on a weekly basis for many
years, the weekly Body and Soul party disbanded after facing
difficulty with the club space and other issues among the Djs and
organizers. But for one holiday weekend afternoon, Saturday from 3
til 9 was the time for church, as many of the party faithful liked
to call the Body and Soul experience, back in the day.
Djs Danny Krivit, Francois K and Joe Claussell did not disappoint a
crowd of thousands who had paid a ten dollar admission fee, and
another $6 each for ice cold draft beers that flowed far too easily
under a hot Queens sun in the concrete fortress of music at PS-1. The temperature kept getting hotter as a troubled nation moved another day closer to the 30 year anniversary of its highly celebrated bicentennial, a year that at least a third
of this party’s crowd, might actually remember.
A crowd wide chronic music infection was evidenced by smiles on faces
of every color of the human rainbow, every size on the scale, every
age from 3 to 65, all making moves to the beat of a different drum.
No judgment passed on who was cool and who was not, just pure
un-adulterated fun, joy, release and soul.
Occasionally, after a longer re-mix, or extended session people
would erupt into cheers and hollering this or that or whatever, it didn't matter as long as it felt good, real and true.
All the while, pulsing bodies poured in and out of the building at PS-1, moving among dancers on crowded steps that were crowned at the top with the DJ’s canopied booth. The sun gave everyone a glistening tone, some more than others, as sweat
flowed like a fountain, but, at this party, sweat was a badge of
success, a sign that you’d truly felt the light.
Speakers surrounded the main courtyard of the former school and
sound boomed against the old red brick walls rising up like a volcanic
eruption, only the lava was the sound, carried even further by
speakers in the back of the complex where others danced and played
in wading pools with their kids.
In its later years, Body and Soul saw pilgrimages by the curious
who’d heard about this place where the emphasis was on the music,
not the “scene.” Even European tourists began to make Body and
Soul part of the New York itinerary. According to those who’d
been, Sunday nights at Vinyl (ARC) were where one could still find
the real spirit of New York.
Certainly, like every nightclub party, there was rivalry,
differences, and any other number of shady events or normal human
interaction issues, but unlike most other dance club experiences,
Body and Soul was true to its name.
Martha Graham once said “I am absorbed in the magic of movement and
light. Movement never lies”.
Body and Soul did not lie to the participants left in the city this
past July 4th weekend. That day in Queens let everyone at PS-1 know
that movement is alive and well in New York City and New York is
still filled with magic.
SUMMER HOLIDAYS IN NYC GET ME UP
by CODY LYON
Although many New Yorkers grudgingly swear that more than half the
city’s residents are part of some loosely organized mass exodus to
a beach house on summer holiday weekends, those are actually the
weekends that the “left behind” can find the most memorable of New
York treats.
In fact, the non-jet ski set can sometimes find a dose of urban
spiritual nourishment that benefits the soul for months to come.
Not a religious experience, per se, but instead, a gathering of like
minded spirits, all very much alive, enjoying the fellowship of each
other, coming together for one reason, the music, at least that’s
what happened this past July 4th weekend.
The Body and Soul reunion party shook a collective booty to its core
at the PS-1 space in Queens, bringing together a cocktail of
cultures, families and sexual orientations that surely reminded
more than one participant that New York truly is a magnificent
mosaic as former Mayor David Dinkins once proclaimed.
Although Sunday afternoons at the Tribeca club Vinyl (later named
ARC) was the spot to meet the music on a weekly basis for many
years, the weekly Body and Soul party disbanded after facing
difficulty with the club space and other issues among the Djs and
organizers. But for one holiday weekend afternoon, Saturday from 3
til 9 was the time for church, as many of the party faithful liked
to call the Body and Soul experience, back in the day.
Djs Danny Krivit, Francois K and Joe Claussell did not disappoint a
crowd of thousands who had paid a ten dollar admission fee, and
another $6 each for ice cold draft beers that flowed far too easily
under a hot Queens sun in the concrete fortress of music at PS-1. The temperature kept getting hotter as a troubled nation moved another day closer to the 30 year anniversary of its highly celebrated bicentennial, a year that at least a third
of this party’s crowd, might actually remember.
A crowd wide chronic music infection was evidenced by smiles on faces
of every color of the human rainbow, every size on the scale, every
age from 3 to 65, all making moves to the beat of a different drum.
No judgment passed on who was cool and who was not, just pure
un-adulterated fun, joy, release and soul.
Occasionally, after a longer re-mix, or extended session people
would erupt into cheers and hollering this or that or whatever, it didn't matter as long as it felt good, real and true.
All the while, pulsing bodies poured in and out of the building at PS-1, moving among dancers on crowded steps that were crowned at the top with the DJ’s canopied booth. The sun gave everyone a glistening tone, some more than others, as sweat
flowed like a fountain, but, at this party, sweat was a badge of
success, a sign that you’d truly felt the light.
Speakers surrounded the main courtyard of the former school and
sound boomed against the old red brick walls rising up like a volcanic
eruption, only the lava was the sound, carried even further by
speakers in the back of the complex where others danced and played
in wading pools with their kids.
In its later years, Body and Soul saw pilgrimages by the curious
who’d heard about this place where the emphasis was on the music,
not the “scene.” Even European tourists began to make Body and
Soul part of the New York itinerary. According to those who’d
been, Sunday nights at Vinyl (ARC) were where one could still find
the real spirit of New York.
Certainly, like every nightclub party, there was rivalry,
differences, and any other number of shady events or normal human
interaction issues, but unlike most other dance club experiences,
Body and Soul was true to its name.
Martha Graham once said “I am absorbed in the magic of movement and
light. Movement never lies”.
Body and Soul did not lie to the participants left in the city this
past July 4th weekend. That day in Queens let everyone at PS-1 know
that movement is alive and well in New York City and New York is
still filled with magic.
Saturday, January 12, 2008
U.S. would have fired on Iran-(REUTERS)
Jan. 12 - The top United States military officer said he has no doubt the U.S. navy would have fired at Iranian patrol boats if necessary.
Navy Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the U.S. military's Joint Chiefs of Staff, said an incident where Iranian boats buzzed U.S. naval vessels in the Gulf showed the threat posed by Iran. Iran and the United States dispute the severity of the incident.
Andrew Potter reports.
Navy Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the U.S. military's Joint Chiefs of Staff, said an incident where Iranian boats buzzed U.S. naval vessels in the Gulf showed the threat posed by Iran. Iran and the United States dispute the severity of the incident.
Andrew Potter reports.
Friday, January 11, 2008
Citigroup Seeking More Foreign Investment (New York Times)
Citigroup Seeking More Foreign Investment
By ERIC DASH and ANDREW ROSS SORKIN
Published: January 12, 2008
The financial giant is in talks to sell a stake to a Chinese bank and other investors, people briefed on the plan said.
LINK TO FULL STORY AT "New York Times"
By ERIC DASH and ANDREW ROSS SORKIN
Published: January 12, 2008
The financial giant is in talks to sell a stake to a Chinese bank and other investors, people briefed on the plan said.
LINK TO FULL STORY AT "New York Times"
Thursday, January 10, 2008
High Alert in Pakistan (REUTERS)
Jan 10 - A suicide blast in the Pakistani city of Lahore has killed more than 20 and injured 60 people.
The attack occurred outside the High Court in Lahore, and most of the dead were policemen, a city official said.
Puja Bharwani reports. (Reuters)
The attack occurred outside the High Court in Lahore, and most of the dead were policemen, a city official said.
Puja Bharwani reports. (Reuters)
Bernanke hints at rate cut (REUTERS
Jan. 10 - Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke hinted at rate cuts to come saying "additional policy easing may be necessary."
At an economic forum in Washington DC, Bernanke said that he was concerned about what he sees on the economic horizon, citing. higher oil prices, lower stock values and a falling housing market all weighing on consumer spending.
Deborah Lutterbeck reports.(REUTERS)
At an economic forum in Washington DC, Bernanke said that he was concerned about what he sees on the economic horizon, citing. higher oil prices, lower stock values and a falling housing market all weighing on consumer spending.
Deborah Lutterbeck reports.(REUTERS)
Wednesday, January 09, 2008
More Troops Headed to Afghanistan (CBS NEWS)
David Martin Reports on new plan for the Forgotten War.
Link to Video Report
Link to Video Report
Gym Punditry Saying "Go Girl" To Hillary
BY CODY LYON
On New Hampshire Primary Tuesday, at around 730 pm, the work out floor at the Lafayette Street Crunch Gym in New York City was crowded, as it often is that time of night. Chests being pressed, arms were being curled, squats were being squatted and the cardio area filled with exercise bikes, cross country ski machines and such were occupied by women and men, mostly accompanied by IPOD headphones, tuning out the grunts, groans and loud conversation around them.
This three level Crunch also provides patrons with several television screens some which face the busy cardio area, and include a variety of network selections, including on this night, CNN’s coverage of the unfolding events in New Hampshire.
While most of the cardio crowd listened to tunes, watched the screens or read US Weekly, a group of four gym political pundits, two on machines, two standing, discussed the election and analyzed the potential future strategy for the woman candidate. In serious, worried tones, three argued that Senator Clinton was the better equipped to bring serious nuts and bolts change to America and rescue it from the morose state of mind and sense of insecurity it finds itself mired in, thanks in great part to current White House policy.
While all four claimed to identify with Senator Barack Obama’s message of hope and change, the loyalty was obviously with Clinton. They worried aloud that Obama’s lack of experience and failure to articulate a clear and specific agenda were he to be elected. They agreed with President Bill Clinton, that Obama had received a free ride by the press, but, that Obama’s victory in Iowa was historic, moving and a hopeful sign that America was slowly overcoming its racist curse.
Still, each argued that the Clinton campaign, with its "safe" promotion of Clinton as an anchor of staid leadership, was until recently, stale and un-enthusiastic. Where was that "Don’t Stop Thinking about Tomorrow" energy of yesteryear that culminated on Election night 1992 when those young looking Clintons and the Gores waved to a crowd of change seekers in Little Rock?
The frustrating conclusion among the Crunch Gym Pundits was that Hillary hasn’t owned her womanhood, and effectively sold the novelty of her own historic moment to voters, a moment they say should be an asset that might actually fire up the un-decided, both male and female? They claimed the coverage of the tears was sexist and that in fact, even if she’d been acting as some had claimed (an actor was among the pundits), it was a brilliant campaign moment.
In short, Hillary has not publicly embraced her power as a woman and icon, who as a serious contender for the White House, could along the campaign trail could chip away at the inherent plague of sexism that still infects America’s culture and power structure.
Where is the "Sisters are doing it for themselves" attitude on the campaign trail, the "I am Woman, Hear Me Roar" sense of confidence and catchy nuance in her television ads? Sure, her record speaks for itself and is available for all to see in this lifetime public servant’s long resume, but this is marketing 101, and America’s attention span is, well, short, so put on the pumps and work the campaign runway Hillary.
Hillary Clinton’s love for country is as evident as her obvious dedication to change. It’s clear, she wants a future America where all Americans are provided with ladders of opportunity that raise the socio economic bar for every person living within our borders, male, female and every race and ethnicity as well as sexual orientation. She is also someone to be reckoned with, what some would say is a force of nature, who on the world stage, has the nuts and bolts knowledge necessary to deal with any world leader.
She just happens to be a woman, the gender by which the majority of us were raised by, nurtured by, influenced in a classroom by, disciplined by, fed and clothed by and for many still intimidated by.
Unfortunately, we live in a nation obsessed with sexist pop culture drama where daily details of disturbed Hollywood type breakdowns fill headlines and network executives make a buck through false tawdry reality television shows like "The Bachelor" that reinforce sub conscious stone age imagery of women, images that little girls every where see and think this is something to aspire to be.
That night at Crunch on Lafayette in New York City, the selection on the screens was not just the election returns in New Hampshire.
Perhaps the Clinton Campaign needs to step up to the political and cultural plate and display some necessary courage and market Hillary not only as a staid leader, but show some female swagger and in their own iconic way, confront America's female imagery and mind set, own it, overcome it, and own it again, and yes, change America. Hillary, come on and Go Girl.
On New Hampshire Primary Tuesday, at around 730 pm, the work out floor at the Lafayette Street Crunch Gym in New York City was crowded, as it often is that time of night. Chests being pressed, arms were being curled, squats were being squatted and the cardio area filled with exercise bikes, cross country ski machines and such were occupied by women and men, mostly accompanied by IPOD headphones, tuning out the grunts, groans and loud conversation around them.
This three level Crunch also provides patrons with several television screens some which face the busy cardio area, and include a variety of network selections, including on this night, CNN’s coverage of the unfolding events in New Hampshire.
While most of the cardio crowd listened to tunes, watched the screens or read US Weekly, a group of four gym political pundits, two on machines, two standing, discussed the election and analyzed the potential future strategy for the woman candidate. In serious, worried tones, three argued that Senator Clinton was the better equipped to bring serious nuts and bolts change to America and rescue it from the morose state of mind and sense of insecurity it finds itself mired in, thanks in great part to current White House policy.
While all four claimed to identify with Senator Barack Obama’s message of hope and change, the loyalty was obviously with Clinton. They worried aloud that Obama’s lack of experience and failure to articulate a clear and specific agenda were he to be elected. They agreed with President Bill Clinton, that Obama had received a free ride by the press, but, that Obama’s victory in Iowa was historic, moving and a hopeful sign that America was slowly overcoming its racist curse.
Still, each argued that the Clinton campaign, with its "safe" promotion of Clinton as an anchor of staid leadership, was until recently, stale and un-enthusiastic. Where was that "Don’t Stop Thinking about Tomorrow" energy of yesteryear that culminated on Election night 1992 when those young looking Clintons and the Gores waved to a crowd of change seekers in Little Rock?
The frustrating conclusion among the Crunch Gym Pundits was that Hillary hasn’t owned her womanhood, and effectively sold the novelty of her own historic moment to voters, a moment they say should be an asset that might actually fire up the un-decided, both male and female? They claimed the coverage of the tears was sexist and that in fact, even if she’d been acting as some had claimed (an actor was among the pundits), it was a brilliant campaign moment.
In short, Hillary has not publicly embraced her power as a woman and icon, who as a serious contender for the White House, could along the campaign trail could chip away at the inherent plague of sexism that still infects America’s culture and power structure.
Where is the "Sisters are doing it for themselves" attitude on the campaign trail, the "I am Woman, Hear Me Roar" sense of confidence and catchy nuance in her television ads? Sure, her record speaks for itself and is available for all to see in this lifetime public servant’s long resume, but this is marketing 101, and America’s attention span is, well, short, so put on the pumps and work the campaign runway Hillary.
Hillary Clinton’s love for country is as evident as her obvious dedication to change. It’s clear, she wants a future America where all Americans are provided with ladders of opportunity that raise the socio economic bar for every person living within our borders, male, female and every race and ethnicity as well as sexual orientation. She is also someone to be reckoned with, what some would say is a force of nature, who on the world stage, has the nuts and bolts knowledge necessary to deal with any world leader.
She just happens to be a woman, the gender by which the majority of us were raised by, nurtured by, influenced in a classroom by, disciplined by, fed and clothed by and for many still intimidated by.
Unfortunately, we live in a nation obsessed with sexist pop culture drama where daily details of disturbed Hollywood type breakdowns fill headlines and network executives make a buck through false tawdry reality television shows like "The Bachelor" that reinforce sub conscious stone age imagery of women, images that little girls every where see and think this is something to aspire to be.
That night at Crunch on Lafayette in New York City, the selection on the screens was not just the election returns in New Hampshire.
Perhaps the Clinton Campaign needs to step up to the political and cultural plate and display some necessary courage and market Hillary not only as a staid leader, but show some female swagger and in their own iconic way, confront America's female imagery and mind set, own it, overcome it, and own it again, and yes, change America. Hillary, come on and Go Girl.
Tuesday, January 08, 2008
HILLARY WINS AS DOES McCAIN
Sunday, January 06, 2008
Pakistan's President Musharraf Speaks (CBS NEWS)
Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf rejects claims that Al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden is hiding inside Pakistan. Lara Logan's exclusive interview for "60 Minutes.
Link to Video
Link to Video
Saturday, January 05, 2008
BIRMINGHAM: With a Tortured Past, Bible Belt Locale, LGBT Leaders Make Progress
My story at EDGE
Bayless explained that a number of GLBT people as well as allies often assume a natural kinship with the civil rights movement. However, he says that is a mistake.
"The civil rights movement and the events of Birmingham were about dealing with racism," Bayless said. "African Americans were separated from whites in all eating, drinking, shopping, schools, even elevators here in Birmingham."
Bayless said its hard for whites to understand that many African Americans are still dealing with the fact that whites, through institutions based on racism, controlled their entire lives for over three hundred years in this country. He believes a more sensitive approach is necessary for any alliance between the two to work, particularly in Birmingham.
FULL STORY AT EDGE DALLAS
Bayless explained that a number of GLBT people as well as allies often assume a natural kinship with the civil rights movement. However, he says that is a mistake.
"The civil rights movement and the events of Birmingham were about dealing with racism," Bayless said. "African Americans were separated from whites in all eating, drinking, shopping, schools, even elevators here in Birmingham."
Bayless said its hard for whites to understand that many African Americans are still dealing with the fact that whites, through institutions based on racism, controlled their entire lives for over three hundred years in this country. He believes a more sensitive approach is necessary for any alliance between the two to work, particularly in Birmingham.
FULL STORY AT EDGE DALLAS
Friday, January 04, 2008
Tuesday, January 01, 2008
Monday, December 31, 2007
Sunday, December 30, 2007
Pakistan's Unfortunate Elephant in the Room (re-post)
FROM 2005
BY CODY LYON
On December 2nd, 2004, a high level United Nations panel issued a warning of diminishing international barriers to the acquisition of nuclear weapons. The 16 member panel that included former United States security advisor Brent Scowcroft, had been commissioned by UN Secretary Kofi Anan.
Titled “High Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change”, the report warns that the world is “approaching a point at which the erosion of the non-proliferation regime could become irreversible resulting in a cascade of nuclear weapon proliferation.” The report points out barrier breakdowns that increase the likelihood of terrorists obtaining nuclear weapons.
The UN report confirmed that the list of nuclear-armed nations was growing. It also become clear that one of America’s allies in the war on terror, Pakistan, had been the main supplier of these products of mass destruction, which in the end, created a complicated, tense yet apparently necessary relationship between the two nations.
In the course of just a few years, as the United States responded to the events of 9/11, the world had become a much more lethal place.
. “The nuclear barriers may not be crumbling, but there are certainly worrisome cracks” said Mellissa Flemming, spokesperson at the International Atomic Energy Association in Vienna.
Flemming said that when the IAEA discovered “a sophisticated black market in nuclear technology, we realized that nuclear technology was basically up for grabs.”
Less than one year earlier, Pakistani Scientist and metallurgical engineer, Dr. A.Q. Khan had been identified as a major player in the international nuclear black market. In February 2004, Khan admitted, and then IAEA officials confirmed, that over the course of a few years, Khan had sold technology and equipment to officials in at least five countries, including Iran. Khan, known as the “father” of Pakistan’s nuclear bomb, confessed his actions but was then almost immediately pardoned by President Pervaz Musharaf.
Pakistani officials placed Khan, seen by many Pakistanis as heroic for equalizing the nuclear playing field with India, under house arrest. Pakistani officials have not granted any foreign interrogators access to Khan. “Khan’s black market nuclear bazaar exposed what many say was a leaky export control system over Pakistan's nuclear arsenal that was demonstrated by the behind the scenes dealings with customers like Libya and Iran who were willing to pay millions of dollars for sensitive centrifuge parts and technological know how,” according to IAEA’s Mellisa Flemming.
The UN report apparently confirms fears expressed by a number of nuclear proliferation experts around the world. According to one of those experts in the United States, this could eventually lead to a very troubling outcome that includes increasing threats of nuclear terrorism.
“It is inevitable that we will see a terrorist with nuclear capability within the next decade” said Joseph Cirincione, Director of the Non Proliferation Project at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington.
Cirincione is concerned that the UN report’s confirms that security barrier breakdowns like the now exposed clandestine Khan network, increase the likelihood of a terrorist organization obtaining nuclear capabilities.
“There are groups out there intent on mass destruction” warned Cirincione of terrorist groups who seek nuclear weaponry.
Despite the dire tone of some observers, Mellisa Flemming at the IAEA, cautions against jumping to such frightening conclusions. She says the technology involved in making a nuclear weapon may be beyond the capabilities of a terrorist network.
“Whether terrorists, without the backing of a country, could make use of the goods on offer is questionable” said Flemming.
She notes that the centrifuge parts and designs of the kind that Khan was selling, require a tremendous amount of money and expertise to master. Further, there is the question of the nuclear material itself.
“Nuclear material is the required ingredient, and it does leave trails” insisting “there is no evidence of non-state actors who were customers” said Flemming.
But, that doesn’t dispel concerns expressed by some US political leaders, including a New York congresswoman who points out a number of potential avenues that nuclear technology or weapons could take and arrive in troubling situations.
“It would be naïve and dangerous to assume that terrorists are incapable of acquiring nuclear materials or weapons, whether from a rouge nation, or on the black market, or by theft” said New York Congresswoman Nydia Velazquez.
She believes that U.S. officials should be in direct contact with Pakistani scientists, especially those associated with Khan, so that his complete trail of proliferation is uncovered.
“The more we know about this black market network, the more likely we are to prevent nuclear material from falling into the wrong hands” said Congresswoman Velazquez.
Pakistani officials stress that the Khan nuclear network has been completely destroyed and that the government has been offering full details of the exposed trail of proliferation.
“The government of Pakistan has completely broken the ring of A.Q. Khan’s networkand Pakistan has provided all details to the IAEA” according to Haroon Shaukat, Consul General of the Pakistani Embassy in New York.
The IAEA said Pakistan has been cooperating and providing valuable information regarding the apparently extensive Khan Black market network.
“We are presently working out modalities with them to get more information” said Flemming. But, when considering whether or not the United States' allied relationship with Pakistan placed Washington in a position to exert greater pressure on the Pakistani government regarding direct access to Khan and his associates, Flemming was somewhat ambivalent.
“We are not in a position to judge US policy on this issue.”
Perhaps one of the more puzzling events in the Khan tale was the scientist's rapid pardon by President Pervaz Musharaf. Since the network's exposure and disruption, Khan has been under house arrest, and not available for any sort of questioning from officials outside of Pakistan.
Pakistani government reaction to the exposure of the Khan network concerns proliferation experts who suspect Pakistani government or military complicity in the distribution network.
“The confession and quick pardon of Khan was staged” said Joe Cirincione at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Cirincione says US officials have not been able to question Khan directly because of the instable nature of internal politics in Pakistan.
He goes on to say that the “staged confession” and the house arrest is part of a greater cover-up meant to protect higher up military officials.
“It is inconceivable that this was a private citizen affair” and that the nuclear proliferation conducted by Khan “could not have been done without the knowledge of military and political officials” said Cirincione. “There was a deal for Khan to take the blame in public, and that’s why we saw the fastest pardon since Gerald Ford pardoned Nixon.”
Khan’s network of proliferation was vast. It involved the shipping of materials through a large distribution network that reached far beyond clandestine labs. In spite of those concerns, the State Department, at least publicly, has not aggressively pursued any investigation of offical Pakistan’s alleged complicity.
Further, Cirincione’s sees US Government reaction to the Khan network as evidence that nuclear proliferation is a short sighted, and a secondary concern of the State Department in the greater war on terror.
Still, the State Department implies that much is being done behind the scenes to obtain more vital information about the nuts and bolts of the network.
“It is more fruitful for the United States to work through diplomatic channels with Pakistani officials in the matter of the Khan black market network” according to Sara Styker, Asia Expert at the State Department.
According to the State Department’s Stryker, “the cooperation US officials have received from Pakistani officials has helped us in eliciting vital information” and that “we are now focused on results”. Stryker points to success in Libya, as evidence that the information provided by Pakistan has been helpful in disarming dangerous nations and stopping nuclear proliferation. She says she understands concerns like those expressed by Cirincione, but notes that Khan is under house arrest, and out of the proliferation business.
Further,there are concerns about potential Pakistani public reaction to what might be seen as American intervention. As President Musharaf told the Washington Post, allowing outsiders access to Dr. Khan would ignite anger among Pakistanis who regard Khan as a sort of folk hero- for equalizing Pakistan's nuclear capabilities with Inida.
Joe Cirincione still raises troubling concerns.
“The Bush administration apparently believes the Pakistanis have done all they can do” and “I take that as a very troubling sign that we are not doing all that we should be doing.”
Cirincione says that “while the Bush administration was focused on the Axis of Evil, we should have been paying attention to our ally, Pakistan.”
“If it was not for Pakistan, Iran would not have nuclear technology now, the same holds true for Lybia, maybe others,” said Cirincione. He argues that the US placed other security issues, including President Musharaf’s stability, above our own real security issues. “We’ve placed nuclear proliferation second” and “that has come back to haunt us in the past, and I think it will again this time”.
BY CODY LYON
On December 2nd, 2004, a high level United Nations panel issued a warning of diminishing international barriers to the acquisition of nuclear weapons. The 16 member panel that included former United States security advisor Brent Scowcroft, had been commissioned by UN Secretary Kofi Anan.
Titled “High Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change”, the report warns that the world is “approaching a point at which the erosion of the non-proliferation regime could become irreversible resulting in a cascade of nuclear weapon proliferation.” The report points out barrier breakdowns that increase the likelihood of terrorists obtaining nuclear weapons.
The UN report confirmed that the list of nuclear-armed nations was growing. It also become clear that one of America’s allies in the war on terror, Pakistan, had been the main supplier of these products of mass destruction, which in the end, created a complicated, tense yet apparently necessary relationship between the two nations.
In the course of just a few years, as the United States responded to the events of 9/11, the world had become a much more lethal place.
. “The nuclear barriers may not be crumbling, but there are certainly worrisome cracks” said Mellissa Flemming, spokesperson at the International Atomic Energy Association in Vienna.
Flemming said that when the IAEA discovered “a sophisticated black market in nuclear technology, we realized that nuclear technology was basically up for grabs.”
Less than one year earlier, Pakistani Scientist and metallurgical engineer, Dr. A.Q. Khan had been identified as a major player in the international nuclear black market. In February 2004, Khan admitted, and then IAEA officials confirmed, that over the course of a few years, Khan had sold technology and equipment to officials in at least five countries, including Iran. Khan, known as the “father” of Pakistan’s nuclear bomb, confessed his actions but was then almost immediately pardoned by President Pervaz Musharaf.
Pakistani officials placed Khan, seen by many Pakistanis as heroic for equalizing the nuclear playing field with India, under house arrest. Pakistani officials have not granted any foreign interrogators access to Khan. “Khan’s black market nuclear bazaar exposed what many say was a leaky export control system over Pakistan's nuclear arsenal that was demonstrated by the behind the scenes dealings with customers like Libya and Iran who were willing to pay millions of dollars for sensitive centrifuge parts and technological know how,” according to IAEA’s Mellisa Flemming.
The UN report apparently confirms fears expressed by a number of nuclear proliferation experts around the world. According to one of those experts in the United States, this could eventually lead to a very troubling outcome that includes increasing threats of nuclear terrorism.
“It is inevitable that we will see a terrorist with nuclear capability within the next decade” said Joseph Cirincione, Director of the Non Proliferation Project at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington.
Cirincione is concerned that the UN report’s confirms that security barrier breakdowns like the now exposed clandestine Khan network, increase the likelihood of a terrorist organization obtaining nuclear capabilities.
“There are groups out there intent on mass destruction” warned Cirincione of terrorist groups who seek nuclear weaponry.
Despite the dire tone of some observers, Mellisa Flemming at the IAEA, cautions against jumping to such frightening conclusions. She says the technology involved in making a nuclear weapon may be beyond the capabilities of a terrorist network.
“Whether terrorists, without the backing of a country, could make use of the goods on offer is questionable” said Flemming.
She notes that the centrifuge parts and designs of the kind that Khan was selling, require a tremendous amount of money and expertise to master. Further, there is the question of the nuclear material itself.
“Nuclear material is the required ingredient, and it does leave trails” insisting “there is no evidence of non-state actors who were customers” said Flemming.
But, that doesn’t dispel concerns expressed by some US political leaders, including a New York congresswoman who points out a number of potential avenues that nuclear technology or weapons could take and arrive in troubling situations.
“It would be naïve and dangerous to assume that terrorists are incapable of acquiring nuclear materials or weapons, whether from a rouge nation, or on the black market, or by theft” said New York Congresswoman Nydia Velazquez.
She believes that U.S. officials should be in direct contact with Pakistani scientists, especially those associated with Khan, so that his complete trail of proliferation is uncovered.
“The more we know about this black market network, the more likely we are to prevent nuclear material from falling into the wrong hands” said Congresswoman Velazquez.
Pakistani officials stress that the Khan nuclear network has been completely destroyed and that the government has been offering full details of the exposed trail of proliferation.
“The government of Pakistan has completely broken the ring of A.Q. Khan’s networkand Pakistan has provided all details to the IAEA” according to Haroon Shaukat, Consul General of the Pakistani Embassy in New York.
The IAEA said Pakistan has been cooperating and providing valuable information regarding the apparently extensive Khan Black market network.
“We are presently working out modalities with them to get more information” said Flemming. But, when considering whether or not the United States' allied relationship with Pakistan placed Washington in a position to exert greater pressure on the Pakistani government regarding direct access to Khan and his associates, Flemming was somewhat ambivalent.
“We are not in a position to judge US policy on this issue.”
Perhaps one of the more puzzling events in the Khan tale was the scientist's rapid pardon by President Pervaz Musharaf. Since the network's exposure and disruption, Khan has been under house arrest, and not available for any sort of questioning from officials outside of Pakistan.
Pakistani government reaction to the exposure of the Khan network concerns proliferation experts who suspect Pakistani government or military complicity in the distribution network.
“The confession and quick pardon of Khan was staged” said Joe Cirincione at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Cirincione says US officials have not been able to question Khan directly because of the instable nature of internal politics in Pakistan.
He goes on to say that the “staged confession” and the house arrest is part of a greater cover-up meant to protect higher up military officials.
“It is inconceivable that this was a private citizen affair” and that the nuclear proliferation conducted by Khan “could not have been done without the knowledge of military and political officials” said Cirincione. “There was a deal for Khan to take the blame in public, and that’s why we saw the fastest pardon since Gerald Ford pardoned Nixon.”
Khan’s network of proliferation was vast. It involved the shipping of materials through a large distribution network that reached far beyond clandestine labs. In spite of those concerns, the State Department, at least publicly, has not aggressively pursued any investigation of offical Pakistan’s alleged complicity.
Further, Cirincione’s sees US Government reaction to the Khan network as evidence that nuclear proliferation is a short sighted, and a secondary concern of the State Department in the greater war on terror.
Still, the State Department implies that much is being done behind the scenes to obtain more vital information about the nuts and bolts of the network.
“It is more fruitful for the United States to work through diplomatic channels with Pakistani officials in the matter of the Khan black market network” according to Sara Styker, Asia Expert at the State Department.
According to the State Department’s Stryker, “the cooperation US officials have received from Pakistani officials has helped us in eliciting vital information” and that “we are now focused on results”. Stryker points to success in Libya, as evidence that the information provided by Pakistan has been helpful in disarming dangerous nations and stopping nuclear proliferation. She says she understands concerns like those expressed by Cirincione, but notes that Khan is under house arrest, and out of the proliferation business.
Further,there are concerns about potential Pakistani public reaction to what might be seen as American intervention. As President Musharaf told the Washington Post, allowing outsiders access to Dr. Khan would ignite anger among Pakistanis who regard Khan as a sort of folk hero- for equalizing Pakistan's nuclear capabilities with Inida.
Joe Cirincione still raises troubling concerns.
“The Bush administration apparently believes the Pakistanis have done all they can do” and “I take that as a very troubling sign that we are not doing all that we should be doing.”
Cirincione says that “while the Bush administration was focused on the Axis of Evil, we should have been paying attention to our ally, Pakistan.”
“If it was not for Pakistan, Iran would not have nuclear technology now, the same holds true for Lybia, maybe others,” said Cirincione. He argues that the US placed other security issues, including President Musharaf’s stability, above our own real security issues. “We’ve placed nuclear proliferation second” and “that has come back to haunt us in the past, and I think it will again this time”.
From "The Raw Story"-Lobbyist pressured to recant story about Abramoff meeting Rove on street corner
More on former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman:
Part I of this series explored the long-term involvement of two men -- GOP consultant Bill Canary and Alabama Attorney General William Pryor -- in the events leading to the imprisonment last summer of former Alabama Democratic governor Don Siegelman.RAW STORY
Link to full Investigative Piece
Part I of this series explored the long-term involvement of two men -- GOP consultant Bill Canary and Alabama Attorney General William Pryor -- in the events leading to the imprisonment last summer of former Alabama Democratic governor Don Siegelman.RAW STORY
Link to full Investigative Piece
Pakistan
Bhutto's Death Cause Debated -From CBS NEWS
FROM CBS NEWS:
Bhutto's Death Cause Debated
Pakistan's government has released new video of the attack that killed Benazir Bhutto. Officials claim that she died from a skull fracture, not from gunfire or shrapnel. Sheila MacVicar reports.
FROM CBS NEWS:
Bhutto's Death Cause Debated
Pakistan's government has released new video of the attack that killed Benazir Bhutto. Officials claim that she died from a skull fracture, not from gunfire or shrapnel. Sheila MacVicar reports.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
Stumble It!