Admittedly, I am not a "regular" watcher of his show, hold the impression of his intellectual curiosity, and knack for threading varying dissimilar conversations into a coherent conversation as a special skill.
After Ms. Edelmann of the Children's Emergency Fund eloquently restating the dream of an Democratic America. It was followed with a broad reaching conversation with 4 representatives of the media. One with NY Times Magazine, Philadelphia Inquirer, a private news research/analysis firm and the other with another major news source perhaps Newsweek. One of the curious sides of the discussion is the perception among popular media of how Senator Obama does not carry the mantle of angry black man, because he did not grow up with it. By way of conclusion, without this baggage, he is able to cross the racial barrier and appeal to white voters.
It is curious how the male speakers (white) could not speak to race directly. Whereas Ms. Edelmann spoke of Tubman and King Jr. and the aspirations of a nation aspiring to be a leader in a new world with a moral compass.
It is a time filled with anticpation as to the outcome of the US Presidency in the midst of an economic crisis.
Monday, November 03, 2008
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
How Racism Works
How Racism Works
What if John McCain were a former president of the Harvard Law Review?
What if Barack Obama finished fifth from the bottom of his graduating class?
What if McCain were still married to the first woman he said 'I do' to?
What if Obama were the candidate who left his first wife after she no longer measured up to his standards?
What if Michelle Obama were a wife who not only became addicted to painkillers, but also acquired them illegally through her charitable organization?
What if Cindy McCain graduated from Harvard?
What if Obama were a member of the Keating-5? (S&L)
What if McCain were a charismatic, eloquent speaker?
If these questions reflected reality, do you really believe the election numbers would be as close as they are?
This is what racism does. It covers up, rationalizes and minimizes positive qualities in one candidate and emphasizes negative qualities in another when there is a color difference.
You are The Boss. Which team would you hire with America facing historicdebt, 2 wars, stumbling health care, a weakened dollar, all-time highprison population, a mortgage crisis, bank foreclosures & failingbanks, a stock market melt-down, etc.?
Educational Background:
Obama:
Columbia University - B.A. Political Science with a Specialization in International Relations.
Harvard - Juris Doctor (J.D.) Magna Cum Laude
Biden:
University of Delaware - B.A. in History and B.A. in Political Science.
Syracuse University College of Law - Juris Doctor (J.D.)
Versus:
McCain:
United States Naval Academy - Class rank: 894 of 899
Palin:
Hawaii Pacific University - 1 semester
North Idaho College - 2 semesters - general study
University of Idaho - 2 semesters - journalism
Matanuska-Susitna College - 1 semester
University of Idaho - 3 semesters - B.A. in Journalism
Now which team are you going to hire?
P.S.: What if Barack Obama had an unwed, pregnant teenage daughter....
Joan Thormann, Ph.D.
Professor
Lesley University
29 Everett St.
Cambridge, MA 02138
617-349-8387
1-800-999-1959 ext 8387
thormann@lesley.edu
Cesar G. Abarca
Ph.D. Candidate
Boston University
moco@bu.edu
What if John McCain were a former president of the Harvard Law Review?
What if Barack Obama finished fifth from the bottom of his graduating class?
What if McCain were still married to the first woman he said 'I do' to?
What if Obama were the candidate who left his first wife after she no longer measured up to his standards?
What if Michelle Obama were a wife who not only became addicted to painkillers, but also acquired them illegally through her charitable organization?
What if Cindy McCain graduated from Harvard?
What if Obama were a member of the Keating-5? (S&L)
What if McCain were a charismatic, eloquent speaker?
If these questions reflected reality, do you really believe the election numbers would be as close as they are?
This is what racism does. It covers up, rationalizes and minimizes positive qualities in one candidate and emphasizes negative qualities in another when there is a color difference.
You are The Boss. Which team would you hire with America facing historicdebt, 2 wars, stumbling health care, a weakened dollar, all-time highprison population, a mortgage crisis, bank foreclosures & failingbanks, a stock market melt-down, etc.?
Educational Background:
Obama:
Columbia University - B.A. Political Science with a Specialization in International Relations.
Harvard - Juris Doctor (J.D.) Magna Cum Laude
Biden:
University of Delaware - B.A. in History and B.A. in Political Science.
Syracuse University College of Law - Juris Doctor (J.D.)
Versus:
McCain:
United States Naval Academy - Class rank: 894 of 899
Palin:
Hawaii Pacific University - 1 semester
North Idaho College - 2 semesters - general study
University of Idaho - 2 semesters - journalism
Matanuska-Susitna College - 1 semester
University of Idaho - 3 semesters - B.A. in Journalism
Now which team are you going to hire?
P.S.: What if Barack Obama had an unwed, pregnant teenage daughter....
Joan Thormann, Ph.D.
Professor
Lesley University
29 Everett St.
Cambridge, MA 02138
617-349-8387
1-800-999-1959 ext 8387
thormann@lesley.edu
Cesar G. Abarca
Ph.D. Candidate
Boston University
moco@bu.edu
Sunday, August 31, 2008
WOW Gustav veers Northwest sparing New Orleans
My goodness.
What will happen to all the fair people stranded on the highway, out hard earned money, and waiting for gas trucks to fill up stations so folks can make the return trip home.
This is labor day weekend, one clearly not about the majority of working people in New Orleans and surrounding parishes.
There will be analysis, meta analysis, counter analysis about the government's reactionary response to this storm.
What is the probability of a Category 4 storm and/or higher, with catastrophic impact hit the same area as Katrina. Nature is unpredictable, but untested modeling of storm patterns are also far from reliable.
One can only hedge a bet, there will be plenty of angry working people who left their homes, with the fear of tragedy in mind as the Mayor orders mandatory evacuations by a specific time. And for those who remained with bad taste in their mouths about imposed dusk to dawn curfew, loss wages, and threaten jail/incarceration for looters. Is that a way to rebuild faith and gain trust of those adversely affected by a disaster only 3 years ago?
For poor people who are already disenfranchised, believe government and corporations are corrupt, this incident further fuels persistent distrust and diminishing expectations about who will have their backs.
It can not be understated how the local, state and federal government was ill prepared and continue to be reactive while the region and the city of New Orleans slowly and painfully tries to rebuild the neighborhoods and communities loss.
Someone please ask where the aid has gone? What happened to the well intended charitable donations designated for New Orleans and surrounding areas. Walk the streets of the 7th ward, you will notice how many homes are occupied, an easier number to tally.
People have moved on and settled elsewhere. The fabric of communities, neighborhoods, family ties dating generations, and local rituals are lost. Much of what I've seen informs me, new buildings will be raised sometime in the foreseeable future, new people will settle in due time, but the ties that bound those communities will be only a memory recounted by the few who experienced it and decided to stay and share the new folk aka strangers.
I am thankful that the predicted Gustav scenario did not play out.
My friends and I prepared for it as best we could and stayed.
Now we will sleep easier, wait for the rain and gusting winds, perhaps when most of it has passed, time and light permitting have a barbecue, make sangria and smile at one another for the decision and effort.
What will happen to all the fair people stranded on the highway, out hard earned money, and waiting for gas trucks to fill up stations so folks can make the return trip home.
This is labor day weekend, one clearly not about the majority of working people in New Orleans and surrounding parishes.
There will be analysis, meta analysis, counter analysis about the government's reactionary response to this storm.
What is the probability of a Category 4 storm and/or higher, with catastrophic impact hit the same area as Katrina. Nature is unpredictable, but untested modeling of storm patterns are also far from reliable.
One can only hedge a bet, there will be plenty of angry working people who left their homes, with the fear of tragedy in mind as the Mayor orders mandatory evacuations by a specific time. And for those who remained with bad taste in their mouths about imposed dusk to dawn curfew, loss wages, and threaten jail/incarceration for looters. Is that a way to rebuild faith and gain trust of those adversely affected by a disaster only 3 years ago?
For poor people who are already disenfranchised, believe government and corporations are corrupt, this incident further fuels persistent distrust and diminishing expectations about who will have their backs.
It can not be understated how the local, state and federal government was ill prepared and continue to be reactive while the region and the city of New Orleans slowly and painfully tries to rebuild the neighborhoods and communities loss.
Someone please ask where the aid has gone? What happened to the well intended charitable donations designated for New Orleans and surrounding areas. Walk the streets of the 7th ward, you will notice how many homes are occupied, an easier number to tally.
People have moved on and settled elsewhere. The fabric of communities, neighborhoods, family ties dating generations, and local rituals are lost. Much of what I've seen informs me, new buildings will be raised sometime in the foreseeable future, new people will settle in due time, but the ties that bound those communities will be only a memory recounted by the few who experienced it and decided to stay and share the new folk aka strangers.
I am thankful that the predicted Gustav scenario did not play out.
My friends and I prepared for it as best we could and stayed.
Now we will sleep easier, wait for the rain and gusting winds, perhaps when most of it has passed, time and light permitting have a barbecue, make sangria and smile at one another for the decision and effort.
Gustav, NOLA and Daniel (part 3)
If you read the news, mainstream corporate news, it appears that the panic button worked. Mandatory evacuation for coastal residents, specially New Orleans, curfew between dusk to dawn, and threat of arrest for looters. Do I read this as a massive media campaign? Start and contain a panic.
Not oriented to conspiracy theories myself, how does one grasp what the true vs. perceived and or anticipated impact can be from this Category 3 hurricane.
Did anyone consider the real effect on the poor, who is the beneficiary of this large scale action. The price of gas has jumped at least 20 cents in the past few days. Gasoline stations are reporting to be running out of gas. The congested highways, were many folks sitting in gridlock have little else to do but worry about what can become, and not thinking about what they opened themselves up for.
Many of the folks who left, may have money reserve for incidences like these. How about those who don't. Some still await private insurance or federal support from Katrina to rebuild homes. Some do not have ready access to credit and may have little cash on hand. Some have no where to go but the shelters being quickly devised. Whether bussed or drive, many fleeing have little to no money available for what lies ahead. Where there water or food on the buses. Or are the evacuees to bring provisions they cannot afford, much less had time to collect. Where guaranteed water, safe living spaces,
For what is left of the middle/working class of New Orleans, evacuees will have to pay for gas, food, shelter, a total bill that could add up to more than $100 a day. They will be faced with long lines, rumors and fanned hysteria so that local, state and national governments can feel that they did some thing.
Why did we not fix some of the problems exposed by Katrina. Inequities can not be remedied in 3 years. However, the levee and canals could have been strengthened with the best technology available to withstand surges while looking to the Netherlands for a longer term solution.
Decent and affordable housing made available for those who can and want to work at reconstructing their neighborhoods. This would not have been a handout, rather a mens for people to regain dignity and be part of the solution to what is their own housing problems. Waiting for bids, proposals, cost projections, materials to be developed etc... 3 years later many in the city have not and cannot return because they may not have a home nor a community to return to.
I can only guess at the psychological and emotional devastation wreaked on those affected by Katrina. To be let down by an immobile government, profiteers bent on lining their own pockets, and do gooders.
I was informed that the state re-opened one health clinic in the city for a population reaching almost a million.
Not oriented to conspiracy theories myself, how does one grasp what the true vs. perceived and or anticipated impact can be from this Category 3 hurricane.
Did anyone consider the real effect on the poor, who is the beneficiary of this large scale action. The price of gas has jumped at least 20 cents in the past few days. Gasoline stations are reporting to be running out of gas. The congested highways, were many folks sitting in gridlock have little else to do but worry about what can become, and not thinking about what they opened themselves up for.
Many of the folks who left, may have money reserve for incidences like these. How about those who don't. Some still await private insurance or federal support from Katrina to rebuild homes. Some do not have ready access to credit and may have little cash on hand. Some have no where to go but the shelters being quickly devised. Whether bussed or drive, many fleeing have little to no money available for what lies ahead. Where there water or food on the buses. Or are the evacuees to bring provisions they cannot afford, much less had time to collect. Where guaranteed water, safe living spaces,
For what is left of the middle/working class of New Orleans, evacuees will have to pay for gas, food, shelter, a total bill that could add up to more than $100 a day. They will be faced with long lines, rumors and fanned hysteria so that local, state and national governments can feel that they did some thing.
Why did we not fix some of the problems exposed by Katrina. Inequities can not be remedied in 3 years. However, the levee and canals could have been strengthened with the best technology available to withstand surges while looking to the Netherlands for a longer term solution.
Decent and affordable housing made available for those who can and want to work at reconstructing their neighborhoods. This would not have been a handout, rather a mens for people to regain dignity and be part of the solution to what is their own housing problems. Waiting for bids, proposals, cost projections, materials to be developed etc... 3 years later many in the city have not and cannot return because they may not have a home nor a community to return to.
I can only guess at the psychological and emotional devastation wreaked on those affected by Katrina. To be let down by an immobile government, profiteers bent on lining their own pockets, and do gooders.
I was informed that the state re-opened one health clinic in the city for a population reaching almost a million.
Saturday, August 30, 2008
Florida Avenue Canal, 7th Ward
Back in the house Saturday around 2:15pm, after finish trimming the caulk of a 2nd window. The temperature came down some and there is a breeze. Though earlier in the day, I was sweating drenched and shirtless. I could imagine how the past 2 summers may have been for Angie and her crew working on the house, 12-14 hours a day.
Straddling the ladder working on the highest sill, the sounds of the immediate neighborhood plays in my ear. The cacophony of Cicadas, the motorized sound of a saw, whirring buzz of clippers as Ginger (Angie's spouse) trims Rocky the dog. Perhaps the happiest junk yard dog, a beautiful leaping herding breed, I've come in contact with. A separate story on how she found her future home.
As I continue to strip caulk, the absurdity and irony of our collective Saturday chores and house task did not escape my conscious awareness. When it intrudes, I pause and continuing with my contribution to finishing the home three years post the flood.
Earlier in the morning, Angie and Ginger had gone out grocery shopping for today's party and hurricane supplies. They had just returned when I awoke. We put away the groceries away as Ginger proceeded to nap. This after a brisk exchange when Ginger turns on the television to watch the Weather channel Angie asks for the TV to be turned off, there was no point in getting us more edgy she says.
Through the course of the morning and early afternoon, chicken was cooking, Rocky was getting a bath and I flexed from stripping caulk to helping Angie put gas into the camper, and listening to her plan in the event Gustav hits New Orleans.
Flashlights, generator, bottled water, batteries, extra gas in two 8 gallon tanks where being sequestered, as party supplies and beverages where getting laid out.
The party is slated to start at 4pm. many of guest have called to inform Angie or Ginger of their plan to evacuate. Before I moved in for a respite from the heat, standing near the porch chit chatting, we learned a six o'clock curfew had been imposed in the city. Each of us perhaps silently wondering who will show up. A silver lining, we have more food for those who come and leftovers/provisions in the event we loose electric or gas power.
Inside Angie's house are completely enclosed walls, beautiful Ralph Lauren painted walls, fully running bathroom and kitchen. Much of it completed this summer. Industry, the street where she lives is 2 blocks away from the Florida Avenue canal, in the heart of the 7th ward. When Katrina hit, after the levee broke, a series of canals were to capture over flow and as many know, it did not.
Angie and I as we pass each other, talked about the possibility of my having to be here longer than intended, and joking about extra store of frying oil, the propane stove and all the fish she'll be frying.
Angie already has in mind where we'll end up, the 2nd floor of a church, where she camped out while there was six feet of water on the streets around her neighborhood. The camper is to be stationed on a garage above Walgreens. A camper bought used with the first FEMA grant released. Both cars are filled with gasoline and to be parked on the interstate 20-30 min walk and swim from where we may be.
On occasion I over hear Angie speaking with concerned friends, acknowledging should it flood, she will be disappointed specially all the work that has been put into house. At another time, while we were waiting on the wash, her words to me continues to reverberate "if I have to do it again, I'll be more efficient and will get back into the house sooner."
We are prepping for the party, emergency provisions at the ready, and we intend to continue on.
More to come.
Straddling the ladder working on the highest sill, the sounds of the immediate neighborhood plays in my ear. The cacophony of Cicadas, the motorized sound of a saw, whirring buzz of clippers as Ginger (Angie's spouse) trims Rocky the dog. Perhaps the happiest junk yard dog, a beautiful leaping herding breed, I've come in contact with. A separate story on how she found her future home.
As I continue to strip caulk, the absurdity and irony of our collective Saturday chores and house task did not escape my conscious awareness. When it intrudes, I pause and continuing with my contribution to finishing the home three years post the flood.
Earlier in the morning, Angie and Ginger had gone out grocery shopping for today's party and hurricane supplies. They had just returned when I awoke. We put away the groceries away as Ginger proceeded to nap. This after a brisk exchange when Ginger turns on the television to watch the Weather channel Angie asks for the TV to be turned off, there was no point in getting us more edgy she says.
Through the course of the morning and early afternoon, chicken was cooking, Rocky was getting a bath and I flexed from stripping caulk to helping Angie put gas into the camper, and listening to her plan in the event Gustav hits New Orleans.
Flashlights, generator, bottled water, batteries, extra gas in two 8 gallon tanks where being sequestered, as party supplies and beverages where getting laid out.
The party is slated to start at 4pm. many of guest have called to inform Angie or Ginger of their plan to evacuate. Before I moved in for a respite from the heat, standing near the porch chit chatting, we learned a six o'clock curfew had been imposed in the city. Each of us perhaps silently wondering who will show up. A silver lining, we have more food for those who come and leftovers/provisions in the event we loose electric or gas power.
Inside Angie's house are completely enclosed walls, beautiful Ralph Lauren painted walls, fully running bathroom and kitchen. Much of it completed this summer. Industry, the street where she lives is 2 blocks away from the Florida Avenue canal, in the heart of the 7th ward. When Katrina hit, after the levee broke, a series of canals were to capture over flow and as many know, it did not.
Angie and I as we pass each other, talked about the possibility of my having to be here longer than intended, and joking about extra store of frying oil, the propane stove and all the fish she'll be frying.
Angie already has in mind where we'll end up, the 2nd floor of a church, where she camped out while there was six feet of water on the streets around her neighborhood. The camper is to be stationed on a garage above Walgreens. A camper bought used with the first FEMA grant released. Both cars are filled with gasoline and to be parked on the interstate 20-30 min walk and swim from where we may be.
On occasion I over hear Angie speaking with concerned friends, acknowledging should it flood, she will be disappointed specially all the work that has been put into house. At another time, while we were waiting on the wash, her words to me continues to reverberate "if I have to do it again, I'll be more efficient and will get back into the house sooner."
We are prepping for the party, emergency provisions at the ready, and we intend to continue on.
More to come.
Gustav, NOLA and Daniel (part 1)
Hello Family and Friends:
It is so like me to just get on the plane, land at Louis Armstrong airport, and wait an hour at the airport for my girl friend Angelamia (who many of you know for having ridden out Katrina). Last night's "traffic" incident as it is conveyed and affirmed by mid city neighborhood folks, crazy n racist adjacent Jefferson parish decided to close off all but one lane of an 8 lane freeway. A freeway that runs pass their neighborhood from the city -- fully aware that folks have been informed to evacuate the Orleans parish and New Orleans city. A trip that usually took 15 minutes turned into over an hour. This is the very same parish (white) who policed the highway and roads, and shot at people to turn them around back to NOLA in the midst of Katrina disaster --because they were afraid of being looted, and who knows what else...
Angie is throwing a party Saturday afternoon for her spouse Ginger, my return trip 4 years after my last visit, and to mark the 3rd anniversary of Katrina. This is not a macabre tale, simply a celebration of Angie's spirit, the surrounding communities tenacity for staying and help rebuild their neighborhood/community. There will also be a fish fry Sunday afternoon at the mid-city cafe Fair Grinds at Ponce de Leon, where the neighbors are invited to party, paid for by the host a local real estate broker -- who apparently gives these opportunities for the neighborhood to stay connected. People are fixing to leave. I'd say half of the folks Angie spoke with are leaving town.
There is an electric feeling in the air, though it is hot and humid 97 degrees when I last checked. The air is crisp, possibly with the positive ions stirred -- I am somewhat euphoric. There is also anxiety, long lines for gas and banks. A storm is coming.
I glanced at the weather coverage, as we were transferring wash to the dryers, Gustav out on the Carribean is building up to a level 3 tropical storm. Will it reached hurricane speed, this is a wait and see game. I could be heading home on Tues, depending on when and where it hits land, or I could be delayed a few days as Gustav decides to stay over the Gulf, or I will be here for part 2 of the story of Katrina, friendship, and feeling like you are the right place and the right time.
Angie's house is online and their home is an oasis amidst the neighborhood's devastation. Her home is almost 90% finished, considering, she, 3 day workers, friends who helped in some way put together a new house. Marciano and Emilio his 18 year old son, another classmate from St. Anthony, helped wire the house. Tony, helped with the AC/Heating system installation. Angie's cousin Delbert help plumbed the line from the house to the street sewer line, a church group from Seattle area helped put the roof up and returned to help to put sheet rock. Some of us chipped in what we could, others prayed, and many were probably inspired by what Angie was doing.
To date, there are 2 houses on her side of the block that is occupied. Across the street, a few people are in the long and slow process of re-building their homes. Last night in the late night light, Angie pointed out FEMA boats that are where, where they were left, stranded on this side of the canal. I wanted to photograph them, showing life growing in and around.
Why am I here at this time? It was 4 years ago when this segment of my life began. I agreed to meet Angelamia here when she made the trek to here home, hauling all her belongings from Boston to the 9th ward (bought her grandma's creole cottage) to begin a new life. I had offered to help her unload her Uhaul and hang with her (whom I've know since 7th grade).
Now, seemed fitting to me, I have time and an unused ticket on Delta and a part of me wanted to be here. All before Gustav came to the picture.
As Gustav is in the picture, Angie, Ginger and I will prepare what can be prepared, all the while planning and going forth with a birthday/anniversary/welcome party, and Sunday we will be going to a fish fry. Somewhere along there, listen to good live music, eat Creole/Cajun NOLA food, living in the Big Easy as it can be lead.
Angelamia and I shared her apartment in Cambridge back in 96-97, when I was living on unemployment. A segment in my life, perhaps a less sunnier time, where I accepted living with less and friends being there to prop you up and offer what they can to help you ride it out. If I can repay that favor (subconsciously this could be operating), I've lived up to my expectation of a true friend.
I will send forth missives and communiques over the next few days. This is shaping up to be an adventure.
Don't fret my friends, I am amidst folks who survived a disaster.
Love,
Daniel
It is so like me to just get on the plane, land at Louis Armstrong airport, and wait an hour at the airport for my girl friend Angelamia (who many of you know for having ridden out Katrina). Last night's "traffic" incident as it is conveyed and affirmed by mid city neighborhood folks, crazy n racist adjacent Jefferson parish decided to close off all but one lane of an 8 lane freeway. A freeway that runs pass their neighborhood from the city -- fully aware that folks have been informed to evacuate the Orleans parish and New Orleans city. A trip that usually took 15 minutes turned into over an hour. This is the very same parish (white) who policed the highway and roads, and shot at people to turn them around back to NOLA in the midst of Katrina disaster --because they were afraid of being looted, and who knows what else...
Angie is throwing a party Saturday afternoon for her spouse Ginger, my return trip 4 years after my last visit, and to mark the 3rd anniversary of Katrina. This is not a macabre tale, simply a celebration of Angie's spirit, the surrounding communities tenacity for staying and help rebuild their neighborhood/community. There will also be a fish fry Sunday afternoon at the mid-city cafe Fair Grinds at Ponce de Leon, where the neighbors are invited to party, paid for by the host a local real estate broker -- who apparently gives these opportunities for the neighborhood to stay connected. People are fixing to leave. I'd say half of the folks Angie spoke with are leaving town.
There is an electric feeling in the air, though it is hot and humid 97 degrees when I last checked. The air is crisp, possibly with the positive ions stirred -- I am somewhat euphoric. There is also anxiety, long lines for gas and banks. A storm is coming.
I glanced at the weather coverage, as we were transferring wash to the dryers, Gustav out on the Carribean is building up to a level 3 tropical storm. Will it reached hurricane speed, this is a wait and see game. I could be heading home on Tues, depending on when and where it hits land, or I could be delayed a few days as Gustav decides to stay over the Gulf, or I will be here for part 2 of the story of Katrina, friendship, and feeling like you are the right place and the right time.
Angie's house is online and their home is an oasis amidst the neighborhood's devastation. Her home is almost 90% finished, considering, she, 3 day workers, friends who helped in some way put together a new house. Marciano and Emilio his 18 year old son, another classmate from St. Anthony, helped wire the house. Tony, helped with the AC/Heating system installation. Angie's cousin Delbert help plumbed the line from the house to the street sewer line, a church group from Seattle area helped put the roof up and returned to help to put sheet rock. Some of us chipped in what we could, others prayed, and many were probably inspired by what Angie was doing.
To date, there are 2 houses on her side of the block that is occupied. Across the street, a few people are in the long and slow process of re-building their homes. Last night in the late night light, Angie pointed out FEMA boats that are where, where they were left, stranded on this side of the canal. I wanted to photograph them, showing life growing in and around.
Why am I here at this time? It was 4 years ago when this segment of my life began. I agreed to meet Angelamia here when she made the trek to here home, hauling all her belongings from Boston to the 9th ward (bought her grandma's creole cottage) to begin a new life. I had offered to help her unload her Uhaul and hang with her (whom I've know since 7th grade).
Now, seemed fitting to me, I have time and an unused ticket on Delta and a part of me wanted to be here. All before Gustav came to the picture.
As Gustav is in the picture, Angie, Ginger and I will prepare what can be prepared, all the while planning and going forth with a birthday/anniversary/welcome party, and Sunday we will be going to a fish fry. Somewhere along there, listen to good live music, eat Creole/Cajun NOLA food, living in the Big Easy as it can be lead.
Angelamia and I shared her apartment in Cambridge back in 96-97, when I was living on unemployment. A segment in my life, perhaps a less sunnier time, where I accepted living with less and friends being there to prop you up and offer what they can to help you ride it out. If I can repay that favor (subconsciously this could be operating), I've lived up to my expectation of a true friend.
I will send forth missives and communiques over the next few days. This is shaping up to be an adventure.
Don't fret my friends, I am amidst folks who survived a disaster.
Love,
Daniel
Saturday, August 23, 2008
Obama and Biden: A view from the other side of the pond
Barack Obama chooses Joe Biden as running mate
Suzanne Goldenberg in Washington
guardian.co.uk,
Saturday August 23 2008 14:42 BST
Article history
Link to this video
Days of speculation ended as Democratic contender announces Delaware senator as vice-presidential choice
Barack Obama ended days of speculation about his choice of running mate today, sending out an early morning message to supporters saying he had picked Joe Biden.
Biden, 65, is the man seen as the Democrats' authority on foreign affairs.
The voluble chair of the Senate foreign relations committee will appear with Obama for the first time later today in Springfield, Illinois, where the Democratic candidate began his run for the White House early last year.
The pair will then set off on a lightning tour of battleground states, hoping to build up excitement about the ticket before they arrive at the Democratic convention in Denver, which gets under way on Monday.
The choice of Biden was widely seen today as a sign that the Obama camp considered foreign policy would be an issue in the coming election against the Republican, John McCain, and that Obama could suffer from charges of inexperience.
Unlike earlier vice presidential candidates, Biden can not deliver a key battleground state: he comes from tiny Delaware.
After 35 years as a senator, he cannot easily deliver Obama's message of change and – perhaps most crucially – voted for the Iraq war.
Biden could also be haunted by attacks he made on Obama earlier this year, and his plagiarism of a speech by Neil Kinnock 20 years ago, but his knowledge of national security and foreign policy apparently overrode those considerations.
The Obama camp said as much on its website, with a message reading: "Joe Biden brings extensive foreign policy experience, an impressive record of collaborating across party lines, and a direct approach to getting the job done."
Biden reinforced his image as a wise man on foreign affairs with a trip to Georgia a week ago.
That intervention seems to have made him the firm favourite for vice-president, elevating him from a familiar figure in Washington -where he was a regular guest on television chat shows and think tank forums - to an indispensable counsellor.
Despite Biden's ubiquity in Washington, the Obama extracted the maximum drama with the timing of its announcement, keeping the choice under wraps until late on Friday night.
Then, the other top contenders, Tim Kaine, the governor of Virginia, and the Indiana senator Evan Bayh told reporters they would not be chosen.
The official campaign email announcing Biden as the vice presidential pick did not go out until around 3am.
The timing of the decision allows Obama to go into the Democratic convention on a high, rebounding from weeks of being battered by the McCain campaign as a mere celebrity figure unfit for the White House.
Obama had a few days' grace when McCain acknowledged he could not keep track of how many houses he owned with his beer heiress wife, Cindy.
But the Democrats are mindful that he has been on a slow downward slide in the polls all summer, in part because of the McCain attacks. The choice of Biden, with his long record, could reassure voters about Obama.
Biden brings other gifts as a campaigner. He is combative as well as a smooth talker – a combination that could serve him well in the traditional vice-presidential role as attacker.
He can also claim working class roots and is Catholic, which could help win over two core demographics that have so far been lukewarm to Obama.
He is known for regularly returning by train to his native Delaware rather than spending time in Washington. One of his sons, the attorney general for Delaware, is about to be deployed to Iraq in the state national guard.
Biden could also be an asset in trying to unite the party around Obama after the long and bruising primary battle.
He claims credit for passing legislation against domestic violence and is firm in his support of abortion, factors that might help bring support from female Democrats.
In an obviously co-ordinated effort, Clinton sent out an email early today praising Biden as an "exceptionally strong, experienced leader and devoted public servant".Biden has personal understanding of what it means to be a young rising star in Washington. He was first elected to the Senate at the age of 29 as a change agent.
Even so, he is not an entirely natural choice for a campaign predicated on change, and which has operated for more than a year as an extremely disciplined machine.
Biden's friendliness to reporters – and his occasional use of strong language – could make for an uneasy fit with the Obama campaign's rigour about preventing leaks and staying on message.
Quick talking has embarrassed Biden in the past. Earlier this year, when he and Obama were rivals in the race for the White House, Biden once described
Obama as the "first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy".
Biden dropped out after the first contest in Iowa, having struggled to raise funds from gain supporters against the combined star power of Obama and Clinton. He remained neutral until the end of the primaries, unlike other candidates.
But in the heat of the contest, Biden regularly attacked Obama for his lack of experience – comments that immediately resurfaced in Republican attack ads today. "I would be honored to run with or against John McCain, because I think the country would be better off," Biden says in the old footage.
Biden also has baggage from his first run for the White House.
In 1988, he was forced to drop out of the race for the Democratic nomination after it was revealed he had plagiarised a famous speech by Kinnock in which he talked about how he had been the first in his family to go to university.
About this articleClose
Barack Obama chooses Joe Biden as running mateThis article was first published on guardian.co.uk on Saturday August 23 2008. It was last updated at 17:34 on August 23 2008.
Related
Aug 23 2008
Poll: Is Joe Biden a good choice as Obama's VP?
Aug 23 2008
Oliver Burkeman's Campaign Diary: Joe Biden's Greatest Hits
Aug 23 2008
Michael Tomasky: Biden's positive attributes for Obama's campaign
Aug 23 2008
Oliver Burkeman's Campaign Diary: The first Republican anti-Biden ad
US elections 2008 ·
United States
Aug 19 2008
Thomas Noyes: Barack Obama should pick Joe Biden as running mate
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News and Media Limited 2008
Suzanne Goldenberg in Washington
guardian.co.uk,
Saturday August 23 2008 14:42 BST
Article history
Link to this video
Days of speculation ended as Democratic contender announces Delaware senator as vice-presidential choice
Barack Obama ended days of speculation about his choice of running mate today, sending out an early morning message to supporters saying he had picked Joe Biden.
Biden, 65, is the man seen as the Democrats' authority on foreign affairs.
The voluble chair of the Senate foreign relations committee will appear with Obama for the first time later today in Springfield, Illinois, where the Democratic candidate began his run for the White House early last year.
The pair will then set off on a lightning tour of battleground states, hoping to build up excitement about the ticket before they arrive at the Democratic convention in Denver, which gets under way on Monday.
The choice of Biden was widely seen today as a sign that the Obama camp considered foreign policy would be an issue in the coming election against the Republican, John McCain, and that Obama could suffer from charges of inexperience.
Unlike earlier vice presidential candidates, Biden can not deliver a key battleground state: he comes from tiny Delaware.
After 35 years as a senator, he cannot easily deliver Obama's message of change and – perhaps most crucially – voted for the Iraq war.
Biden could also be haunted by attacks he made on Obama earlier this year, and his plagiarism of a speech by Neil Kinnock 20 years ago, but his knowledge of national security and foreign policy apparently overrode those considerations.
The Obama camp said as much on its website, with a message reading: "Joe Biden brings extensive foreign policy experience, an impressive record of collaborating across party lines, and a direct approach to getting the job done."
Biden reinforced his image as a wise man on foreign affairs with a trip to Georgia a week ago.
That intervention seems to have made him the firm favourite for vice-president, elevating him from a familiar figure in Washington -where he was a regular guest on television chat shows and think tank forums - to an indispensable counsellor.
Despite Biden's ubiquity in Washington, the Obama extracted the maximum drama with the timing of its announcement, keeping the choice under wraps until late on Friday night.
Then, the other top contenders, Tim Kaine, the governor of Virginia, and the Indiana senator Evan Bayh told reporters they would not be chosen.
The official campaign email announcing Biden as the vice presidential pick did not go out until around 3am.
The timing of the decision allows Obama to go into the Democratic convention on a high, rebounding from weeks of being battered by the McCain campaign as a mere celebrity figure unfit for the White House.
Obama had a few days' grace when McCain acknowledged he could not keep track of how many houses he owned with his beer heiress wife, Cindy.
But the Democrats are mindful that he has been on a slow downward slide in the polls all summer, in part because of the McCain attacks. The choice of Biden, with his long record, could reassure voters about Obama.
Biden brings other gifts as a campaigner. He is combative as well as a smooth talker – a combination that could serve him well in the traditional vice-presidential role as attacker.
He can also claim working class roots and is Catholic, which could help win over two core demographics that have so far been lukewarm to Obama.
He is known for regularly returning by train to his native Delaware rather than spending time in Washington. One of his sons, the attorney general for Delaware, is about to be deployed to Iraq in the state national guard.
Biden could also be an asset in trying to unite the party around Obama after the long and bruising primary battle.
He claims credit for passing legislation against domestic violence and is firm in his support of abortion, factors that might help bring support from female Democrats.
In an obviously co-ordinated effort, Clinton sent out an email early today praising Biden as an "exceptionally strong, experienced leader and devoted public servant".Biden has personal understanding of what it means to be a young rising star in Washington. He was first elected to the Senate at the age of 29 as a change agent.
Even so, he is not an entirely natural choice for a campaign predicated on change, and which has operated for more than a year as an extremely disciplined machine.
Biden's friendliness to reporters – and his occasional use of strong language – could make for an uneasy fit with the Obama campaign's rigour about preventing leaks and staying on message.
Quick talking has embarrassed Biden in the past. Earlier this year, when he and Obama were rivals in the race for the White House, Biden once described
Obama as the "first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy".
Biden dropped out after the first contest in Iowa, having struggled to raise funds from gain supporters against the combined star power of Obama and Clinton. He remained neutral until the end of the primaries, unlike other candidates.
But in the heat of the contest, Biden regularly attacked Obama for his lack of experience – comments that immediately resurfaced in Republican attack ads today. "I would be honored to run with or against John McCain, because I think the country would be better off," Biden says in the old footage.
Biden also has baggage from his first run for the White House.
In 1988, he was forced to drop out of the race for the Democratic nomination after it was revealed he had plagiarised a famous speech by Kinnock in which he talked about how he had been the first in his family to go to university.
About this articleClose
Barack Obama chooses Joe Biden as running mateThis article was first published on guardian.co.uk on Saturday August 23 2008. It was last updated at 17:34 on August 23 2008.
Related
Aug 23 2008
Poll: Is Joe Biden a good choice as Obama's VP?
Aug 23 2008
Oliver Burkeman's Campaign Diary: Joe Biden's Greatest Hits
Aug 23 2008
Michael Tomasky: Biden's positive attributes for Obama's campaign
Aug 23 2008
Oliver Burkeman's Campaign Diary: The first Republican anti-Biden ad
US elections 2008 ·
United States
Aug 19 2008
Thomas Noyes: Barack Obama should pick Joe Biden as running mate
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News and Media Limited 2008
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
New Yorker Cover Depicts the Obamas as Terrorists
From the Blogger: There are times, when one has to comment on something so flagrantly beyond the pale of civility. Recognizing this was such a time, below is an essay by Mr. Williams on the criminal undertones of the New Yorker cover.
New Yorker Cover Depicts the Obamas as Terrorists
By Lloyd Williams
The closer Barack Obama gets to winning the White House, the more determined his adversaries have become to derail his campaign by any means necessary. Remember how Hillary refused to drop out of the race in May because she said that June was the month Bobby Kennedy was assassinated?
Hint-hint.
Or how one of her surrogates, former Senator Bob Kerrey, stated that Obama might be a Muslim Manchurian Candidate pre-programmed to hide his true anti-American agenda until after becoming President? Hint-hint.
Similar hateful sentiments have been echoed in the caricature of the Obamas contained on the cover of the July 21st issue of the New Yorker Magazine which shows the couple sharing one of their famous fist-bumps in the Oval Office, ostensibly celebrating soon after his inauguration. What is disturbing about the controversial tableau is that Barack is depicted in Arab garb complete with turban, and looking suspiciously like Osama bin Laden whose portrait has replaced that of a prior president on the wall. The not so subtle suggestion being made here is that a vote for Obama is a vote for an Islamic radical terrorist.
Meanwhile, Michelle is attacked in a different way, being drawn with a big afro and a machine gun slung over shoulder in front of a fireplace with a United States flag burning in it. These images are designed to imply that she’s a Sixties-style black militant who hates her country and advocates a violent revolution.
How dare the New Yorker put an automatic weapon in her hands! Are they trying to get her killed? What the heck is its rationale except to hint that she’s a traitor guilty of treason who deserves to be shot? And why link a natural hairstyle with anti-American sentiments, as if to say that African-Americans who don’t straighten their hair but wear it as God intended are automatically suspicious and unpatriotic!
Listen, this country has a rancid, wretched history of vigilante and state-sanctioned violence when it comes to dealing with black folks it deems a threat to the status quo. All I have to do is mention a few famous martyrs like Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, Fred Hampton and Medgar Evers to remind you of that long, ugly legacy of extermination marked by thousands of lynchings and assassinations.
So, sorry, I’m not buying New Yorker Editor David Remnick’s defense of his periodical’s incendiary cartoon as a satire of popular misconceptions about Obama. That shocking and offensive cover was no sophisticated parody, but rather a scare tactic, a fairly literal prediction of America’s worst nightmare as defined by some race-baiting bigots.
Frustrated at failing to derail his campaign, Obama’s detractors have grown increasingly desperate. And desperate times call for desperate measures. The power elite has ostensibly declared open season on Barack and Michelle as they stand poised on the brink of becoming the first black President and First Lady of the United States with this thinly-veiled appeal to the redneck class to do polite white society a favor by putting a bullet in their heads.
Remember how Muslims all around the world reacted in unison to that Danish cartoonist’s drawing of the prophet Muhammad with a bomb tucked in his turban? Well, African-Americans ought to have sense enough to complain to the New Yorker and to boycott all of its advertisers for such an irresponsible, potentially devastating hit job one would expect from the Ku Klux Klan, not from a supposedly intellectual, Ivory-towered publication.
Attorney Lloyd Williams is a graduate of the Wharton School and a member of the NJ, NY, CT, PA, MA & US Supreme Court bars.
New Yorker Cover Depicts the Obamas as Terrorists
By Lloyd Williams
The closer Barack Obama gets to winning the White House, the more determined his adversaries have become to derail his campaign by any means necessary. Remember how Hillary refused to drop out of the race in May because she said that June was the month Bobby Kennedy was assassinated?
Hint-hint.
Or how one of her surrogates, former Senator Bob Kerrey, stated that Obama might be a Muslim Manchurian Candidate pre-programmed to hide his true anti-American agenda until after becoming President? Hint-hint.
Similar hateful sentiments have been echoed in the caricature of the Obamas contained on the cover of the July 21st issue of the New Yorker Magazine which shows the couple sharing one of their famous fist-bumps in the Oval Office, ostensibly celebrating soon after his inauguration. What is disturbing about the controversial tableau is that Barack is depicted in Arab garb complete with turban, and looking suspiciously like Osama bin Laden whose portrait has replaced that of a prior president on the wall. The not so subtle suggestion being made here is that a vote for Obama is a vote for an Islamic radical terrorist.
Meanwhile, Michelle is attacked in a different way, being drawn with a big afro and a machine gun slung over shoulder in front of a fireplace with a United States flag burning in it. These images are designed to imply that she’s a Sixties-style black militant who hates her country and advocates a violent revolution.
How dare the New Yorker put an automatic weapon in her hands! Are they trying to get her killed? What the heck is its rationale except to hint that she’s a traitor guilty of treason who deserves to be shot? And why link a natural hairstyle with anti-American sentiments, as if to say that African-Americans who don’t straighten their hair but wear it as God intended are automatically suspicious and unpatriotic!
Listen, this country has a rancid, wretched history of vigilante and state-sanctioned violence when it comes to dealing with black folks it deems a threat to the status quo. All I have to do is mention a few famous martyrs like Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, Fred Hampton and Medgar Evers to remind you of that long, ugly legacy of extermination marked by thousands of lynchings and assassinations.
So, sorry, I’m not buying New Yorker Editor David Remnick’s defense of his periodical’s incendiary cartoon as a satire of popular misconceptions about Obama. That shocking and offensive cover was no sophisticated parody, but rather a scare tactic, a fairly literal prediction of America’s worst nightmare as defined by some race-baiting bigots.
Frustrated at failing to derail his campaign, Obama’s detractors have grown increasingly desperate. And desperate times call for desperate measures. The power elite has ostensibly declared open season on Barack and Michelle as they stand poised on the brink of becoming the first black President and First Lady of the United States with this thinly-veiled appeal to the redneck class to do polite white society a favor by putting a bullet in their heads.
Remember how Muslims all around the world reacted in unison to that Danish cartoonist’s drawing of the prophet Muhammad with a bomb tucked in his turban? Well, African-Americans ought to have sense enough to complain to the New Yorker and to boycott all of its advertisers for such an irresponsible, potentially devastating hit job one would expect from the Ku Klux Klan, not from a supposedly intellectual, Ivory-towered publication.
Attorney Lloyd Williams is a graduate of the Wharton School and a member of the NJ, NY, CT, PA, MA & US Supreme Court bars.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Justice and Peace
Will there be Peace if there were no justice or injustice?
The notion that it is an either or situation seems absurd beyond comprehension.
Nation's rise and fall based on perceived or real experiences of injustice. Avenging perceived or real wrongs seem to part of humanity's underlying impulses.
This quandry is very similar to a personal conversation on ethics and morality. Can I be immoral and ethical? In reverse is it possible to be moral and unethical.
more on this post 7.10
The notion that it is an either or situation seems absurd beyond comprehension.
Nation's rise and fall based on perceived or real experiences of injustice. Avenging perceived or real wrongs seem to part of humanity's underlying impulses.
This quandry is very similar to a personal conversation on ethics and morality. Can I be immoral and ethical? In reverse is it possible to be moral and unethical.
more on this post 7.10
Wednesday, July 02, 2008
Article:Obama opposes California ban on same-sex marriage
Back to Article
Obama opposes California ban on same-sex marriage
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Here is the text of a letter from Sen. Illinois Sen. Barack Obama to the Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club in San Francisco:
Dear Friends,
Thank you for the opportunity to welcome everyone to the Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club's Pride Breakfast and to congratulate you on continuing a legacy of success, stretching back thirty-six years. As one of the oldest and most influential LGBT organizations in the country, you have continually rallied to support Democratic candidates and causes, and have fought tirelessly to secure equal rights and opportunities for LGBT Americans in California and throughout the country.
As the Democratic nominee for President, I am proud to join with and support the LGBT community in an effort to set our nation on a course that recognizes LGBT Americans with full equality under the law. That is why I support extending fully equal rights and benefits to same sex couples under both state and federal law. That is why I support repealing the Defense of Marriage Act and the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy, and the passage of laws to protect LGBT Americans from hate crimes and employment discrimination. And that is why I oppose the divisive and discriminatory efforts to amend the California Constitution, and similar efforts to amend the U.S. Constitution or those of other states.
For too long. issues of LGBT rights have been exploited by those seeking to divide us. It's time to move beyond polarization and live up to our founding promise of equality by treating all our citizens with dignity and respect. This is no less than a core issue about who we are as Democrats and as Americans.
Finally, I want to congratulate all of you who have shown your love for each other by getting married these last few weeks. My thanks again to the Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club for allowing me to be a part of today's celebration. I look forward to working with you in the coming months and years, and I wish you all continued success.
Sincerely,
Barack Obama
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/07/02/BAS111I682.DTL
San Francisco Chronicle Sections DatebookCommentaryFoodBay AreaNewsSportsBusinessHome&Garden
Obama opposes California ban on same-sex marriage
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Here is the text of a letter from Sen. Illinois Sen. Barack Obama to the Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club in San Francisco:
Dear Friends,
Thank you for the opportunity to welcome everyone to the Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club's Pride Breakfast and to congratulate you on continuing a legacy of success, stretching back thirty-six years. As one of the oldest and most influential LGBT organizations in the country, you have continually rallied to support Democratic candidates and causes, and have fought tirelessly to secure equal rights and opportunities for LGBT Americans in California and throughout the country.
As the Democratic nominee for President, I am proud to join with and support the LGBT community in an effort to set our nation on a course that recognizes LGBT Americans with full equality under the law. That is why I support extending fully equal rights and benefits to same sex couples under both state and federal law. That is why I support repealing the Defense of Marriage Act and the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy, and the passage of laws to protect LGBT Americans from hate crimes and employment discrimination. And that is why I oppose the divisive and discriminatory efforts to amend the California Constitution, and similar efforts to amend the U.S. Constitution or those of other states.
For too long. issues of LGBT rights have been exploited by those seeking to divide us. It's time to move beyond polarization and live up to our founding promise of equality by treating all our citizens with dignity and respect. This is no less than a core issue about who we are as Democrats and as Americans.
Finally, I want to congratulate all of you who have shown your love for each other by getting married these last few weeks. My thanks again to the Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club for allowing me to be a part of today's celebration. I look forward to working with you in the coming months and years, and I wish you all continued success.
Sincerely,
Barack Obama
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/07/02/BAS111I682.DTL
San Francisco Chronicle Sections DatebookCommentaryFoodBay AreaNewsSportsBusinessHome&Garden
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Oakland Locals Guggenheim Fellows
JOHN S I M ON
GUGGENHEIM
MEMORIA L
FOUNDAT I ON
Fellowships to Assist Research and Artistic Creation
Keith Terry, Choreographer, Musician, and Dancer, Oakland, California; Artistic Director, Crosspulse: Choreography.
World culture, dance and percussions across continents
More about his life’s work.
http://www.crosspulse.com/index.html
Mason Bates, Composer, Oakland, California: Music composition.
Electronica and DJ
More about his life’s work.
http://www.masonicelectronica.com/
The John Simon Guggenheim memorial foundationwas established by United States Senator Simon Guggenheim and Mrs. Guggenheim as a memorial to a son who died April 26, 1922. The Foundation offers Fellowships to further the development of scholars and artists by assisting them to engage in research in any field of knowledge and creation in any of the arts, under the freest possible conditions and irrespective of race, color, or creed.
From the Press Release
4/3/08
…Guggenheim Fellows are appointed on the basis of stellar achievement and exceptional promise for continued accomplishment. One of the hallmarks of the Guggenheim Fellowship program is the diversity of its Fellows, not only in their fields of endeavor but in their geographic location and ages. This year’s Fellows continue that tradition. Composer Mason Bates from Oakland, California, is thirty-one; New Jersey resident Harry Bernstein, whose career as a writer stretches back to the 1930s, is ninety-eight. Another composer, Janet Maguire, will work at her residence in Venice, Italy, while Canadian Andrew Weaver will conduct his study of biogeochemical feedbacks on polar climate stability at the University of Victoria, British Columbia. Denise L. Herzing plans to continue her twenty-three-year study of wild dolphins during her Fellowship term, while Mark I. Friedman will further explore the link between diet and obesity.
Thursday, May 15, 2008
California's top court overturns gay marriage ban
California's top court overturns gay marriage ban
By LISA LEFF, Associated Press Writer 18 minutes ago
In a monumental victory for the gay rights movement, the California Supreme Court overturned a voter-approved ban on gay marriage Thursday in a ruling that would allow same-sex couples in the nation's biggest state to tie the knot.
Domestic partnerships are not a good enough substitute for marriage, the justices ruled 4-3 in striking down the ban.
Outside the courthouse, gay marriage supporters cried and cheered as the news spread.
Jeanie Rizzo, one of the plaintiffs, called Pali Cooper, her partner of 19 years, and asked, "Pali, will you marry me?"
"This is a very historic day. This is just such freedom for us," Rizzo said. "This is a message that says all of us are entitled to human dignity."
In the Castro, historically a center of the gay community in San Francisco, Tim Oviatt started crying while watching the news on TV.
"I've been waiting for this all my life," he said. "This is a life-affirming moment."
The city of San Francisco, two dozen gay and lesbian couples and gay rights groups sued in March 2004 after the court halted the monthlong wedding march that took place when Mayor Gavin Newsom opened the doors of City Hall to same-sex marriages.
"Today the California Supreme Court took a giant leap to ensure that everybody — not just in the state of California, but throughout the country — will have equal treatment under the law," said City Attorney Dennis Herrera, who argued the case for San Francisco.
The challenge for gay rights advocates, however, is not over.
A coalition of religious and social conservative groups is attempting to put a measure on the November ballot that would enshrine laws banning gay marriage in the state constitution.
The Secretary of State is expected to rule by the end of June whether the sponsors gathered enough signatures to qualify the marriage amendment, similar to ones enacted in 26 other states.
If voters pass the measure in November, it would trump the court's decision.
California already offers same-sex couples who register as domestic partners the same legal rights and responsibilities as married spouses, including the right to divorce and to sue for child support.
But, "Our state now recognizes that an individual's capacity to establish a loving and long-term committed relationship with another person and responsibly to care for and raise children does not depend upon the individual's sexual orientation," Chief Justice Ron George wrote for the court's majority, which also included Justices Joyce Kennard, Kathryn Werdegar and Carlos Moreno.
In a dissenting opinion, Justice Marvin Baxter agreed with many arguments of the majority but said the court overstepped its authority. Changes to marriage laws should be decided by the voters, Baxter wrote. Justices Ming Chin and Carol Corrigan also dissented.
The conservative Alliance Defense Fund says it plans to ask the justices for a stay of their decision until after the fall election, said Glen Lavey, senior counsel for the group.
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has twice vetoed legislation that would've granted marriage rights to same-sex couples, said in a news release that he respected the court's decision and "will not support an amendment to the constitution that would overturn this state Supreme Court ruling."
The last time California voters were asked to express their views on gay marriage at the ballot box was in 2000, the year after the Legislature enacted the first of a series of laws awarding spousal rights to domestic partners.
Proposition 22, which strengthened the state's 1978 one-man, one-woman marriage law with the words "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California," passed with 61 percent of the vote.
The Supreme Court struck down both statutes with its sweeping opinion Thursday.
Lawyers for the gay couples had asked the court to overturn the laws as an unconstitutional civil rights violation that domestic partnerships cannot repair.
A trial court judge in San Francisco agreed with gay rights advocates and voided the state's marriage laws in April 2005. A midlevel appeals court overturned his decision in October 2006.
___
Associated Press writers Terence Chea, Jason Dearen, Juliana Barbassa and Evelyn Nieves contributed to this report.
Copyright © 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.
Copyright © 2007 Yahoo All rights reserved.
By LISA LEFF, Associated Press Writer 18 minutes ago
In a monumental victory for the gay rights movement, the California Supreme Court overturned a voter-approved ban on gay marriage Thursday in a ruling that would allow same-sex couples in the nation's biggest state to tie the knot.
Domestic partnerships are not a good enough substitute for marriage, the justices ruled 4-3 in striking down the ban.
Outside the courthouse, gay marriage supporters cried and cheered as the news spread.
Jeanie Rizzo, one of the plaintiffs, called Pali Cooper, her partner of 19 years, and asked, "Pali, will you marry me?"
"This is a very historic day. This is just such freedom for us," Rizzo said. "This is a message that says all of us are entitled to human dignity."
In the Castro, historically a center of the gay community in San Francisco, Tim Oviatt started crying while watching the news on TV.
"I've been waiting for this all my life," he said. "This is a life-affirming moment."
The city of San Francisco, two dozen gay and lesbian couples and gay rights groups sued in March 2004 after the court halted the monthlong wedding march that took place when Mayor Gavin Newsom opened the doors of City Hall to same-sex marriages.
"Today the California Supreme Court took a giant leap to ensure that everybody — not just in the state of California, but throughout the country — will have equal treatment under the law," said City Attorney Dennis Herrera, who argued the case for San Francisco.
The challenge for gay rights advocates, however, is not over.
A coalition of religious and social conservative groups is attempting to put a measure on the November ballot that would enshrine laws banning gay marriage in the state constitution.
The Secretary of State is expected to rule by the end of June whether the sponsors gathered enough signatures to qualify the marriage amendment, similar to ones enacted in 26 other states.
If voters pass the measure in November, it would trump the court's decision.
California already offers same-sex couples who register as domestic partners the same legal rights and responsibilities as married spouses, including the right to divorce and to sue for child support.
But, "Our state now recognizes that an individual's capacity to establish a loving and long-term committed relationship with another person and responsibly to care for and raise children does not depend upon the individual's sexual orientation," Chief Justice Ron George wrote for the court's majority, which also included Justices Joyce Kennard, Kathryn Werdegar and Carlos Moreno.
In a dissenting opinion, Justice Marvin Baxter agreed with many arguments of the majority but said the court overstepped its authority. Changes to marriage laws should be decided by the voters, Baxter wrote. Justices Ming Chin and Carol Corrigan also dissented.
The conservative Alliance Defense Fund says it plans to ask the justices for a stay of their decision until after the fall election, said Glen Lavey, senior counsel for the group.
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has twice vetoed legislation that would've granted marriage rights to same-sex couples, said in a news release that he respected the court's decision and "will not support an amendment to the constitution that would overturn this state Supreme Court ruling."
The last time California voters were asked to express their views on gay marriage at the ballot box was in 2000, the year after the Legislature enacted the first of a series of laws awarding spousal rights to domestic partners.
Proposition 22, which strengthened the state's 1978 one-man, one-woman marriage law with the words "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California," passed with 61 percent of the vote.
The Supreme Court struck down both statutes with its sweeping opinion Thursday.
Lawyers for the gay couples had asked the court to overturn the laws as an unconstitutional civil rights violation that domestic partnerships cannot repair.
A trial court judge in San Francisco agreed with gay rights advocates and voided the state's marriage laws in April 2005. A midlevel appeals court overturned his decision in October 2006.
___
Associated Press writers Terence Chea, Jason Dearen, Juliana Barbassa and Evelyn Nieves contributed to this report.
Copyright © 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.
Copyright © 2007 Yahoo All rights reserved.
Friday, April 18, 2008
S.F. on verge of $4-per-gallon gas
S.F. on verge of $4-per-gallon gas
Friday, April 18, 2008
The age of $4 gasoline has arrived. And it's forcing Bay Area residents to change the way they live.
Sometime in the coming week, San Francisco is expected to become America's first major city to pay an average of $4 for a gallon of regular gas. The citywide average, tracked by the AAA auto club, stood at $3.96 on Thursday.
It's the latest milestone in a four-year run-up at the pump, fueled by crude oil prices that have climbed to their highest levels ever.
When gas prices began their current climb in early 2004, the run-up looked more like a nuisance than anything else, costing commuters an extra $5 to $10 per week. Now, the amount drivers pay to fill up has doubled, and it's enough to hurt.
In response, drivers in the Bay Area and elsewhere are re-examining the ways they live, work and shop. Some longtime car commuters have switched to BART, Caltrain or Muni. Others have ditched one of their family cars, traded in their gas-hog for a compact or - in the case of a determined few - said goodbye to the automobile altogether.
They have turned to telecommuting and combining all their weekly errands into a single outing. And the results are measurable.
Gasoline sales in California have fallen for two years in a row, according to state data. Mass transit ridership is rising in the Bay Area, while traffic on the region's toll bridges has shrunk.
"I think the temporary response to the price shock is past," said Rod Diridon, head of the Mineta Transportation Institute at San Jose State University. "People are beginning to move to different habits now. There are a lot of people looking for a permanent way to cut back on gas."
Cutting back on luxuries
Not everyone can. For those people, escalating prices have forced a different kind of change. They're finding ways to spend less on other parts of the monthly budget.
"It's the luxuries we all have - it's movies, dinners, stuff like that," said Michael Feeley, a landscaper who lives with his wife in Berkeley. "We don't actually sit down and say we've got to cut something out, but we're definitely more frugal."
Feeley used to spend less than $200 per month on gas for his Toyota Tacoma truck, which he uses to haul employees, equipment and supplies to job sites. Now he pays $500.
"When people say everyone's driving a gas-guzzler, well, some of us don't have a choice," Feeley said. "I can't run this business driving a Prius."
Many people, however, do have a choice.
The Bay Area, unlike much of the country, has a well-developed web of mass transit lines, linking cities via bus, ferry, subway and train. Their ridership is booming - particularly on regional systems such as BART and Caltrain that are heavily patronized by commuters.
BART has seen a 6.7 percent increase in the number of passengers through this week compared with the same period a year earlier, said BART spokesman Linton Johnson. Average weekday ridership is at 365,463, with riders taking almost 23,000 more trips on BART each weekday than they did a year earlier.
Bill Buehlman, who lives in San Francisco and works for the city's Homeless Outreach Team, has started relying on BART and Muni to commute and get around town. He estimates he's cut his driving from about 1,000 miles per month to 500 miles.
While Buehlman said he despises the oil companies, he's grateful that soaring gas prices are prompting him and others to reduce the amount they drive.
"I look at it as a gift, a blessing," he said. "The profiteers are giving us the opportunity to make a decision to do something better for our planet, for our community."
Mary Ann Buggs, who lives in Berkeley and works near San Francisco's AT&T Park, switched to BART and Muni after years of driving across the Bay Bridge. So did her husband. But she's a reluctant convert to transit.
"I'm not particularly enjoying it," she said, "because Berkeley to SoMa by the ballpark is expensive (in transit fares) and nowhere near as comfortable as a car ride. But it is cheaper than spending $60 twice a week in gas station excursions."
Buggs and her husband are among a growing number of people avoiding the bridge.
According to the Bay Area Toll Authority, the number of drivers crossing the region's seven state-owned toll bridges this fiscal year has dropped 2 percent compared with the previous year. Six of the bridges have seen falling traffic counts - from a 1 percent decline at the Bay and Dumbarton bridges to 4 percent at the Antioch and Carquinez bridges. Only the Benicia-Martinez Bridge, which received a new three-lane span last fall, has seen an increase in traffic.
While some people rely more on mass transit to avoid high gas prices, others have gotten rid of their least-efficient cars.
For Kim Howard and her husband, Edison Peinado, that meant selling their Jeep Cherokee. The sport utility vehicle got 11 miles per gallon in city driving - not good considering the couple lives north of the Golden Gate Park Panhandle in the middle of San Francisco.
Now Peinado, a pilot with SkyWest Airlines, takes BART to and from the airport when he can. Otherwise, he and Howard must split the use of their one remaining car, a 12-year-old Audi.
It's a juggling act. Howard drives to Campbell for her job as marketing director for the Infonetics tech-industry research firm, but she's able to telecommute much of the time. Peinado gets the car when his return flight to San Francisco arrives too late at night for BART.
"It was more painful in the beginning, but we're getting used to it," Howard said. "It's like most things - you adapt."
She says the change is worth it, both to save money and help the environment. But it's a trade-off, with the couple sacrificing convenience to make it work.
Trying telecommuting
Like Howard, many Bay Area residents have tried telecommuting as gas prices rise.
Barbara Heninger manages a team of technical writers at the Synopsys software firm, with five writers in Sunnyvale and three in India. One of her local employees lives in Santa Cruz and comes to the office once a week. Another, who lives in San Jose, averages three days in the office each week. They work from home the rest of the time.
"This last year or two has been the first when employees cited concerns about the environment and commute costs as some of the reasons for working at home," Heninger said. The arrangement works, she says, as long as telecommuters make a point of communicating regularly with their co-workers.
If gas prices keep rising, she said, she expects more people to try telecommuting. "It will either be that, or people will really start considering how far away they want to live from where they work," said Heninger, who lives in Los Altos. "When I started in the tech industry, it wasn't that unusual to have people commuting here from Danville, because they wanted the big house on the hill."
Still, there remain people who have to drive for work. In some cases, they must drive a lot.
San Francisco cab driver Jorge Perez now spends about $50 per day on gasoline. In addition, he has to pay $100 per day to lease his cab, he said.
"What happens on top of that is what I make for the day," he said. "Sometimes it's difficult to make that much."
It doesn't help that Perez drives a Ford Crown Victoria, which gets about 15 miles per gallon. "They're good cars for the hills of San Francisco," he said, "but they aren't known for their fuel efficiency."
E-mail the writers at dbaker@sfchronicle.com and mcabanatuan@sfchronicle.com.
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/04/18/MNO4107CO5.DTL
This article appeared on page A - 1 of the San Francisco Chronicle
Wednesday, April 09, 2008
My Kinda of town.....
I bet many joined the chorus.... Chicago is.
Right on for the countries second city. However, I am referring to my adopted home town, San Francisco. The democratic race for presidency is not enough to hold its attention, the town's Mayor aspirations for Governorship, the city's deficit that already affected schools, health care with across the board cuts -- it got into a quasi global fracas about Tibet, China, Burma, Darfur et al... Here is a town that needs no reason to protest, except some group believes a protest is what is called for, to shine a spot light for their particular issue du jour. The larger irony of the counter protest, as it is characterized by pro-China forces, how little critical thinking occurs within. Nationals in various media, feel national pride over rides increasing evidence of many abuses of a "non communist" regime.
I am not adverse to mass protest, with varying groups coming together to offer or object to a position/action/practice. To offer a reasonable, achievable alternative if wrongs are discover to be true.
more to follow.
Right on for the countries second city. However, I am referring to my adopted home town, San Francisco. The democratic race for presidency is not enough to hold its attention, the town's Mayor aspirations for Governorship, the city's deficit that already affected schools, health care with across the board cuts -- it got into a quasi global fracas about Tibet, China, Burma, Darfur et al... Here is a town that needs no reason to protest, except some group believes a protest is what is called for, to shine a spot light for their particular issue du jour. The larger irony of the counter protest, as it is characterized by pro-China forces, how little critical thinking occurs within. Nationals in various media, feel national pride over rides increasing evidence of many abuses of a "non communist" regime.
I am not adverse to mass protest, with varying groups coming together to offer or object to a position/action/practice. To offer a reasonable, achievable alternative if wrongs are discover to be true.
more to follow.
Tuesday, April 08, 2008
Obama at the Helm
Blogger comment later...
Obama at the Helm
Obama at the Helm
By Peter Beinart
Tuesday, April 8, 2008; A19
Washington Post
Deep into a primary campaign that was supposed be over by now, Barack Obama must still answer one fundamental question. Jeremiah Wright notwithstanding, it's not whether he's too black. It's whether he's too green. Hillary Clinton has made Obama's inexperience her chief line of attack, and if she goes down, John McCain will pick up where she left off. Luckily, Obama doesn't have to rely on his legislative résumé to prove he's capable of running the government. He can point to something more germane: the way he's run his campaign.
Presidents tend to govern the way they campaigned. Jimmy Carter ran as a moralistic outsider in 1976, and he governed that way as well, refusing to compromise with a Washington establishment that he distrusted (and that distrusted him). Ronald Reagan's campaign looked harsh on paper but warm and fuzzy on TV, as did his presidency. The 1992 Clinton campaign was like the Clinton administration: brilliant and chaotic, with a penchant for near-death experiences. And the 2000 Bush campaign presaged the Bush presidency: disciplined, hierarchical, loyal and ruthless.
Of the three candidates still in the 2008 race, Obama has run the best campaign by far. McCain's was a top-heavy, slow-moving, money-hemorrhaging Hindenburg that eventually exploded, leaving the Arizona senator to resurrect his bankrupt candidacy through sheer force of will. Clinton's campaign has been marked by vicious infighting and organizational weakness, as manifested by her terrible performance in caucus states.
Obama's, by contrast, has been an organizational wonder, the political equivalent of crossing a Lamborghini with a Hummer. From the beginning, the Obama campaign has run circles around its foes on the Internet, using MySpace, Facebook and other Web tools to develop a virtual army of more than 1 million donors. The result has been fundraising numbers that have left opponents slack-jawed (last month Obama raised $40 million, compared with Clinton's $20 million).
But the Web is the political equivalent of gunpowder: It can mow down your opponents, but it can also blow up in your face. In 2004, Howard Dean's campaign also raised vast sums online, but it spent the money just as fast. By embracing the anarchic ethos of the liberal blogosphere, Dean generated enormous excitement, but he couldn't harness it. Within his decentralized, bottom-up campaign, a thousand flowers bloomed, but not at the right time and in the right place. "You cannot manage an insurgency," said Dean's Web guru, Joe Trippi. "You just have to ride it."
The Obama campaign has proved that adage wrong. It has married Web energy with professional control. It has used the Web masterfully but, unlike Dean in 2004, sees it as a tool, not a philosophy of life.
At the top, in fact, the campaign is quite hierarchical. There's no question who's in charge: David Axelrod, a grizzled Chicago street-fighter whom Obama has known since he was 30. Axelrod and his subordinates believe their guy represents a new kind of politics, but they're not above using old-school, hard-ball tactics -- even against his own supporters -- to help him win. Last spring, for example, when the Obama campaign realized it couldn't control a popular Obama page on MySpace, it persuaded the company to shut the page down.
It is this remarkable hybrid campaign, far more than Obama's thin legislative résumé, that should reassure voters that he can run the government. As president, he'll need to keep his supporters mobilized: It will take a grass-roots movement, breathing down Congress's neck, to pass universal health care. But in dealing with those very supporters, he'll also have to be ruthless so as not to get caught up in the kind of side skirmishes, such as gays in the military, that weakened Bill Clinton early on. Obama's experience whipping up support on MySpace while simultaneously tamping it down is exactly the kind he'll need in the Oval Office.
The danger is that Obama will fall prey to the malady that ruined Woodrow Wilson and Jimmy Carter: self-righteousness. Elections are winner-take-all, but governing isn't. Candidates can denounce Washington, but presidents have to live there. If the lesson Obama draws from his outsider campaign is that he and his supporters are children of light while those who oppose them are cynics, he'll find it hard to compromise. Successful presidents know how to make half a loaf look like a big win, and presidents with messiah complexes don't do that very well. But if Obama can come across as idealistic without being moralistic, if he can keep his supporters' spirits high and their expectations in check, if he can fuse exuberance and discipline, he might just run the government pretty well. That won't be easy, but then, neither is running for president. Just ask Hillary Clinton and John McCain.
Peter Beinart, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, writes a monthly column for The Post.
Monday, April 07, 2008
Obama, Ferraro, Wright: 'Postracial' Meets Racism
This article can be found on the web at
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080407/younge
beneath the radar by Gary Younge
Obama, Ferraro, Wright: 'Postracial' Meets Racism
[from the April 7, 2008 issue]
"The way we see things is affected by what we know and what we believe," wrote John Berger in Ways of Seeing. "The relation between what we see and what we know is never settled."
When former vice presidential candidate Geraldine Ferraro sees Barack Obama--a black man, raised by a single mother, whose middle name is Hussein and whose surname rhymes with Osama--she sees privilege.
"If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position," she said. "And if he was a woman of any color, he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept."
Quite what concept Ferraro was referring to is difficult to fathom. Of the ten whitest states to have voted so far, Obama has won nine of them. Of the ten blackest states to have voted so far (including the District of Columbia), he has won nine of them. The votes are not weighted for melanin content. His lead is the product not of affirmative action but of democratic election.
Shortly after Ferraro made her comments, we saw just how advantageous Obama's race could be when controversy over his pastor, Jeremiah Wright, forced him to deliver a landmark speech about race. Every presidential hopeful has his racial moment. For Reagan it was the Neshoba County Fair near Philadelphia, Mississippi; George Bush Sr. had Willie Horton; Bill Clinton had Sister Souljah; Bush Jr. had Bob Jones University. Each one sought to comfort white voters with at worst their bigotry and at best their ambivalence toward African-Americans.
That was not an option for Obama. Boy, was he lucky. All he had to do was address black alienation and white disadvantage, set it in a historical context and then call on people to rise above it. In so doing, he had to acknowledge not just the fact of physical segregation--schools and housing--but psychic segregation. For while Wright's sermons clearly shocked many whites, to many blacks his sentiments were as banal an addition to the dinner table as hot sauce.
In truth there was only so long you could keep that elephant in the room before it dumped on the carpet. Obama cleared the mess up pretty well. Shifting the stains will be trickier. For all his talk about transcending race, not even this biracial, Ivy League, intact-black-family man could escape America's racial dysfunction.
Which brings us back to Ferraro. For if her initial comments were ridiculous, her response revealed just what Obama is up against. "Every time that campaign is upset about something, they call it racist," she said. "I will not be discriminated against because I'm white. If they think they're going to shut up Geraldine Ferraro with that kind of stuff, they don't know me."
And so Ferraro turns the world on its head. The perpetrator claims victimhood and takes to the airwaves to claim she is being silenced. Having asserted her right to be offensive, she then seeks to deny the right of others to be offended. Accusations of racism, real or imagined, are portrayed as more egregious than racism itself. Obama is lucky because he's black; Ferraro is discriminated against because she's white. White is the new black. We have race without racism.
There are many problems with her retort, but for now let's just deal with two. First, no one from Obama's campaign actually called her a racist. Obama called her comments "divisive" and "patently absurd." His chief strategist, David Axelrod, called her "divisive" and "polarizing."
Second, the comments are patently racist. Indeed, they are taken straight from the playbook of late-twentieth-century racism. Before the civil rights era the accusation used to be that black people could not succeed because they were black. Once affirmative action was introduced the emphasis shifted to suggest that they succeeded only because they were black. Either way the point is clear: black people are genetically ill equipped to succeed on their own merits.
This was no one-off either. Shortly before the New York primary in 1988, Ferraro declared, "If Jesse Jackson were not black, he wouldn't be in the race." One wonders what a black candidate would have to be or do to meet with Ferraro's approval. In November, after Hillary Clinton was subjected to tough questioning in a debate, Ferraro said, "It's OK in this country to be sexist. It's certainly not OK to be racist. I think if Barack Obama had been attacked for two hours--well, I don't think Barack Obama would have been attacked for two hours."
There is a word for people who consistently deny the existence and effects of racism while denigrating black achievement. It's called racist. It is not a word that should be used casually, and it is a word that has at times been misused. But it is not a word that we should refrain from using simply because some people might be offended. Ferraro is a racist. That's not all she is. And that's not all she has to be. But that is what she has consistently chosen to be in her response to black men in politics.
To insist on this is divisive only insofar as it divides racists from antiracists. Those who seek to set underrepresented groups against one another must be challenged. There can be no progressive coalition in this country that does not include black men and white women. But that coalition must be based on antiracism and antisexism. Feminism that does not embrace antiracism, like antiracism that does not embrace feminism, is little more than a campaign for sectional interests masquerading as a struggle for equality. It seeks not an end to inequity but just a different division of the spoils.
Given his looks, oratorical skills and intelligence, it is difficult to imagine what Obama couldn't do if he were a white man; but it's pretty obvious that he wouldn't have had to make that speech. In the end, though, it may be less useful to speculate about what his candidacy would look like if he were a different race than to wonder how he would fare if there were no racism.
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
A more perfect union (Speech by Senator Obama Mar 18, 2008
A prelude to restarting the dialog on the principle of equality and the reality of racism and discrimination. Senator Obama shows the courage of his conviction , no matter the precipitant, how the country systematically contributed to groups of people's pervasive poverty and marginalization of African Americans.
Posted By Editor On March 18, 2008 @ 10:27 am In Campaign 2008 | 563 Comments
Here, the full text of Sen. Barack Obama’s speech, “A More Perfect Union,” as prepared for delivery.
“We the people, in order to form a more perfect union.”
Two hundred and twenty one years ago, in a hall that still stands across the street, a group of men gathered and, with these simple words, launched America’s improbable experiment in democracy. Farmers and scholars; statesmen and patriots who had traveled across an ocean to escape tyranny and persecution finally made real their declaration of independence at a Philadelphia convention that lasted through the spring of 1787.
The document they produced was eventually signed but ultimately unfinished. It was stained by this nation’s original sin of slavery, a question that divided the colonies and brought the convention to a stalemate until the founders chose to allow the slave trade to continue for at least twenty more years, and to leave any final resolution to future generations.
Of course, the answer to the slavery question was already embedded within our Constitution – a Constitution that had at is very core the ideal of equal citizenship under the law; a Constitution that promised its people liberty, and justice, and a union that could be and should be perfected over time.
And yet words on a parchment would not be enough to deliver slaves from bondage, or provide men and women of every color and creed their full rights and obligations as citizens of the United States. What would be needed were Americans in successive generations who were willing to do their part – through protests and struggle, on the streets and in the courts, through a civil war and civil disobedience and always at great risk - to narrow that gap between the promise of our ideals and the reality of their time.
This was one of the tasks we set forth at the beginning of this campaign – to continue the long march of those who came before us, a march for a more just, more equal, more free, more caring and more prosperous America. I chose to run for the presidency at this moment in history because I believe deeply that we cannot solve the challenges of our time unless we solve them together – unless we perfect our union by understanding that we may have different stories, but we hold common hopes; that we may not look the same and we may not have come from the same place, but we all want to move in the same direction – towards a better future for of children and our grandchildren.
This belief comes from my unyielding faith in the decency and generosity of the American people. But it also comes from my own American story.
I am the son of a black man from Kenya and a white woman from Kansas. I was raised with the help of a white grandfather who survived a Depression to serve in Patton’s Army during World War II and a white grandmother who worked on a bomber assembly line at Fort Leavenworth while he was overseas. I’ve gone to some of the best schools in America and lived in one of the world’s poorest nations. I am married to a black American who carries within her the blood of slaves and slaveowners – an inheritance we pass on to our two precious daughters. I have brothers, sisters, nieces, nephews, uncles and cousins, of every race and every hue, scattered across three continents, and for as long as I live, I will never forget that in no other country on Earth is my story even possible.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Why the Fed's rate cuts won't help you (common man)
(parenthesis mine) Been thinking about "bail outs, lending crisis, bottoming out of the housing market, the depreciating dollar. "Yesterday on the drive to the city, I listened to a conversation "Where Does the Money Go?, Your Guided Tour to the Federal Budget Crisis" with authors Jean Johnson and Scott Bittle at KPFA's morning show. The authors spoke on the Federal Deficit, the Medicare crisis, the minute impact on the war in Iraq/Iran has on the whole picture of the USA economic decline, and the pentagon budget. What was salient for me is the point of Americans willingness (unwillingness) to pay additional taxes, cut spending, and resolve priorities by establishing them. Here included below is a more pointed perspective for the "middle class" to chew on, it seems many are deluded into believing "someday they will ascend to wealth" and benefit as the "truly rich" can only benefit.
http://kpfa.org/archives/index.php?arch=25326Why the Fed's rate cuts won't help you
In its efforts to keep irresponsible bankers on Wall Street afloat, the Federal Reserve is spurring inflation, crippling the dollar and cutting into retirees' incomes. And mortgages and car loans won't get any cheaper.
The Federal Reserve today continued its attempt to get out in front of the worst financial crisis to hit the world banking system in five decades by slashing short-term interest rates by three-quarters of a percentage point, to 2.25%, the lowest level since 2004.
But the Fed's effort will have little effect on the ability of the average American to get a cheap loan for a new home, car or college education even as it has a large effect on U.S. banks' ability to fix their balance sheets by racking up fat profits.
If that sounds unfair, welcome to the latest episode of a brutal new American business ethic, in which the government bails out bad bets by risk-taking banking executives in New York with money that it borrows from middle-class families and foreign investors. The effort is gilded with fancy financial language and cloaked in the guise of a rescue that helps all citizens, but the reality is that Washington is essentially robbing the poor to help the rich.
It seems odd, but these are extraordinary times. Normally, when the Federal Reserve cuts the rate at which it lends money to U.S. banks, those banks in turn cut the rates at which they lend money to citizens and companies for personal and commercial use. Simple enough. Yet in the past few months, banks have made three important changes in their usual practice:
- They have not been passing all of their interest-rate savings to customers.
- They have restricted lending only to most creditworthy, documented applicants.
- They have cut the total amount they're willing to lend.
Good for banks, bad for you
Banks are taking these seemingly perverse steps in an effort to reverse the effects of the massive losses they have withstood for lending too broadly to consumers and companies with lousy credit over the past five years.They're pulling a big 180, which is as confusing as it is disheartening. Rather than providing funds to prospective home buyers and business people with legitimate needs for moving into larger homes or expanding factory lines, records show the banks are hoarding the low-cost money they're borrowing from the Fed and investing it in Treasury bonds paying higher interest yields. They're then pocketing the windfall profits to repair their own ravaged balance sheets.
As if that's not bad enough, the Fed's swiftly conceived, unprecedented course of action harms the public in three other ways:
- It boosts inflation by lifting the total number of dollars in circulation.
- It undercuts the attractiveness of the U.S. dollar, which leads to higher food, energy and gold prices.
- It cuts the yields of dividend-paying investments such as government bonds upon which retirees depend for steady income.
In other words, the Fed action helps imprudent bankers dig out of a hole by putting prudent citizens and foreigners in one. This gives big financial businesses a shot at staving off disaster at the risk of cutting the spending and earning power of everyone else.
Continued: Outwitted and outplayed
Fed outwitted and outplayed
To be fair, the Federal Reserve never wanted to be in this position, and it told Congress as recently as a few months ago that the U.S. economy was in such great shape that it had no intention of lowering interest rates in a material way anytime soon. But the Fed's leaders, a dangerous mix of university professors and career bureaucrats, were drawn into a trap at amazing speed by dark forces in the global financing system that they now admit they scarcely understood.How could this happen? Albert Wojnilower, who was chief economist at Credit Suisse First Boston for a quarter of a century, observes that the history of finance is rife with examples of financiers who successfully outwit their referees -- the accountants, auditors, rating agencies, bank examiners and government agencies that are assigned to create and enforce rules.
Wojnilower, now an adviser to Craig Drill Capital in New York, points out that just as in sports, some of these officials may be corrupt, indifferent, incompetent, or even hostile to the rules themselves, but they always fall behind the financiers. He notes that as soon as lenders are freed of constraints -- as they were in this case by Bush administration officials eager to deregulate the industry -- they are spurred by huge short-term rewards "to compete addictively with one another in taking bigger and bigger risks.” Wojnilower says that eventually havoc breaks loose, forcing responsible government authorities to halt the chaos by providing bailouts to participants considered too big to fail.
It's a bit ironic, and not a little sad, that government has come to believe it has to fight fire with fire. The Fed, whose leaders are appointed by the president, is essentially trying to battle problems created in an era of overly cheap money and loose lending by making money even cheaper and lending even more aggressively.
In just the past few weeks, it has broken all of its own rules by providing hundreds of billions of taxpayer funds to brokerages at special auctions, opening a bigger "discount" window to permit a wider range of financial institutions to beg at the government till and accepting weaker-than-normal collateral such as iffy mortgage-backed securities. The Fed has put the government in the position of being the payday lender of last resort.
The Fed's hamster wheel
Just to top it all off, the Fed this week announced plans to allow the twin titans of government-supported mortgage finance, Fannie Mae (FNM, news, msgs) and Freddie Mac (FRE, news, msgs) -- which have proved themselves horrible at managing risk -- to make even bigger loans than they had previously. And it is telling banks to let individuals facing foreclosure to stretch out their payments a little longer.It is all a bit crazy, which is why many veteran financial advisers recommend that investors remain skeptical of rallies.
The market rallied before today's Fed action, expecting a full percentage-point cut, and reacted well initially even to the less aggressive action. But what you want to watch is the reaction of debt markets, not the equity markets. Credit investors, who are the real masters of the global economic system, believe that the Fed is like a hamster in a cage that has to run faster just to stay in place as events spin faster and faster out of its control. To have had a chance at getting ahead, by making money so cheap that lenders would have abandoned their policy of distrust toward borrowers, the Fed should have cut rates by 1.25 percentage points today. As the Fed's effort fell short, the hamster will likely just go back on the wheel.
At the time of publication, Jon Markman did not own or control shares of companies mentioned in this column.
Sunday, March 02, 2008
State Supreme Court takes up same-sex marriage
State Supreme Court takes up same-sex marriage
Sunday, March 2, 2008
As gay-rights groups call for marital equality and opponents warn of a public backlash, societal decay and religious conflict, the California Supreme Court is prepared for an epic three-hour hearing Tuesday on the constitutionality of the state law defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman.
It shapes up as the most momentous case the court has heard in decades - comparable to the 1981 ruling that guaranteed Medi-Cal abortions for poor women, the 1972 ruling that briefly overturned the state's death penalty law, and the 1948 decision, cited repeatedly in the voluminous filings before the court, that struck down California's ban on interracial marriage.
The arguments on both sides are weighty.
Supporters of same-sex marriage invoke the state's commitment to equality regardless of gender or sexual orientation, the needs of the children of gay and lesbian couples, the persistence of societal discrimination, and legal rights such as freedom of expression, association and privacy.
In defense of its law, the state cites a cultural tradition far older than statehood, the will of the people as expressed in a 2000 initiative, the steps California has already taken toward equal rights for gays and lesbians, and the power of lawmakers and voters to determine state policy.
Beyond those arguments, groups opposing same-sex marriage want the court to justify the state law on moral or scientific grounds, as an affirmation that limiting matrimony to a man and a woman is best for children and society.
A ruling is due within 90 days.
The case combines four lawsuits - three by nearly two dozen couples who want to marry and the fourth by the city of San Francisco, which entered the dispute after the court overturned Mayor Gavin Newsom's order that cleared the way for nearly 4,000 same-sex weddings in February and March 2004.
The suits rely on the California Constitution, which state courts have long interpreted as more protective of individual rights than the U.S. Constitution. The plaintiffs invoke a passage in the 1948 ruling on interracial marriage - the first of its kind by any state's high court - in which the justices recognized a "right to join in marriage with the person of one's choice."
Judge Richard Kramer of San Francisco Superior Court echoed that language in March 2005, when he ruled that the state's ban on same-sex marriage violated "the basic human right to marry a person of one's choice." He also said the marriage law constitutes sex discrimination - prohibited by another groundbreaking California Supreme Court ruling in 1971 - because it is based on the gender of one's partner.
But a state appeals court upheld the law in October 2006. In a 2-1 decision, the court rejected Kramer's findings of discrimination and said California was entitled to preserve the historic definition of marriage while taking steps to protect the rights of same-sex couples who register as domestic partners.
Advocates crowd in
As the case reached the state's high court, the participants and the arguments multiplied.
Conservative religious organizations, including sponsors of the 2000 ballot measure that reinforced the opposite-sex-only marriage law, accused the state of making a half-hearted defense of its law and sought to justify it as a pro-family measure. Marriage is for procreation, and children fare best with married fathers and mothers, they argued. They also said the definition of marriage is so deeply engrained in the law that judges have no power to change it.
The coalition of conservative religious groups warned that a ruling against the state law would "fracture the centuries-old consensus about the meaning of marriage."
An opposing assortment of liberal denominations counseled the court against a state endorsement of "the religious orthodoxy of some sects concerning who may marry."
The court also heard from hundreds of organizations representing psychologists, anthropologists and other professions, city and county governments, law professors, businesses, civil rights advocates and social institutions.
Judges and limits
Underlying all the arguments is a debate about the proper role of courts in a democracy, particularly on contentious social and political issues. It's the same question - how far, and how fast, judges should move to correct injustices they perceive in the actions of elected officials - that has confronted jurists pondering such issues as segregation, school prayer and abortion.
The subject was raised with unusual frankness in written arguments by Attorney General Jerry Brown's office, which is leading the defense of the marriage law that Brown signed as governor in 1977.
"One unintended and unfortunate consequence of too radical a change is the possibility of backlash," said Deputy Attorney General Christopher Krueger. Same-sex marriage may someday be legalized in California, he said, "but such a change should appropriately come from the people rather than the judiciary as long as constitutional rights are protected."
Brown said last week he wasn't asking the court to sacrifice principles to politics, only observing that rulings that "ride roughshod over the deeply held judgments of society" can have unintended consequences.
He noted that the court majority swung from liberal to conservative after three of his appointees, including Chief Justice Rose Bird, were unseated in a 1986 election that centered on their votes to overturn death sentences.
Legitimate concern?
Lawyers for San Francisco in the same-sex marriage case nonetheless accused Brown of using scare tactics and of encouraging the justices to abandon their duty to protect the constitutional rights of all Californians, regardless of public opinion.
"Far worse than any short-term controversy a principled but unpopular decision might engender, an unprincipled, politically based decision of the sort the attorney general seeks will invite and sanction the continued stigmatization and marginalization of lesbians, gay men and their families," said Chief Deputy City Attorney Therese Stewart.
But Cass Sunstein, a University of Chicago law professor who is not involved in the case, said concern about public reaction is a legitimate basis for judicial restraint.
Sunstein said he favors allowing gays and lesbians to marry, but fears that such a ruling in California "would have undue influence over the upcoming presidential election, would polarize the country in ways that are not desirable and would short-circuit a continuing process of democratic debate over this issue."
That debate has reached the state Capitol, where Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has vetoed two bills in the past two years that would have legalized same-sex marriage, and it may intensify statewide regardless of the court ruling. Two organizations are circulating initiatives that would write the current marriage law into the state Constitution; one of the measures would also repeal recently enacted laws protecting same-sex domestic partners.
Those laws, which grant domestic partners the same rights to property, finances, child custody and other benefits that spouses receive in California, are also at the heart of the state's case for upholding its marriage law. Brown's office argues that the partnership laws satisfy the state's obligation to treat same-sex couples equally and eliminate any need for judicial intervention.
"Maintaining the long-standing and traditional definition of marriage, while providing same-sex couples with legal recognition comparable to marriage, is a measured approach to a complex and divisive social issue," Krueger wrote in his argument to the court.
Benefits for married couples
Opponents of the marriage law counter that domestic partnership is a second-class status that leaves partners without the numerous federal benefits afforded to married couples, such as Social Security payments to survivors, joint tax filing, immigration assistance, the right to help a spouse immigrate, and recognition in other states. Within California, they argue, a household becomes a family in the eyes of the public only when its partners are legally married.
"The right to marry compels the state to sanction and support a unique expression of personal commitment, and that personal commitment is not the exclusive province of those who love someone of a different sex," said the National Center for Lesbian Rights, representing 15 same-sex couples who sued to overturn the state's law.
Other issues abound:
-- Whether the marriage law discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation, and if so, whether bias against gays belongs in the same category as laws that discriminate on the basis of race or sex, which courts rarely uphold.
-- Whether the 2000 ballot measure, Proposition 22, prohibited state legislators from legalizing same-sex marriage without voter approval.
-- Whether Prop. 22's sponsors and other organizations opposing same-sex marriage have the right to participate in the case on an equal basis with the state, based on their claim that broadening the marriage law would harm husbands and wives.
Cautious court
This case may not resolve all those questions. Under Chief Justice Ronald George's leadership since 1996, the court - with a 6-1 majority of Republican appointees - has been generally sympathetic to gay rights and civil rights, but has seldom overturned laws or thwarted popular majorities.
Over the last five years, with little dissent, the justices have established parental rights for same-sex couples, upheld an adoption procedure widely used by gays and lesbians and outlawed business discrimination against domestic partners.
But in more incendiary cases, the court has upheld the Boy Scouts' right to exclude gays and has broadly interpreted a voter-approved ban on preferences for women or minorities in public contracting.
Few court-watchers expect California to follow the lead of Massachusetts, whose top court - relying on the state's constitution - became the first and only tribunal to legalize same-sex weddings in 2003.
"This is a close case," said Clark Kelso, a professor at McGeorge School of Law in Sacramento and a longtime observer of the California court. "I don't think they will say anything like, 'Heterosexual couples are better at raising children.' But it's likely that the court will not blaze a trail.
"In cases of doubt," Kelso said, "the court is likely to tilt toward the expressed will of the people."
The proceedings are titled In re Marriage Cases, S147999. Briefs can be viewed at www. courtinfo.ca.gov/courts/supreme/highprofile.
How to watch the hearing
In the courtroom: The hearing is scheduled from 9 a.m. to noon Tuesday at the courthouse at 350 McAllister St. in San Francisco. Limited courtroom seating is available.
Remote viewing: The hearing will be telecast live in the Milton Marks Conference Center in the basement of the court building, and also at Hastings College of the Law, 198 McAllister St., first-floor auditorium. Limited seating is also available in the Koret Auditorium of the San Francisco Public Library, 100 Larkin St.
On cable: The hearing can be seen on the California Channel, a cable channel whose number varies from city to city. The channel is also online at www.calchannel.com. In San Francisco, the hearing will also be shown on SFGTV, Channel 26.
The law in other states
How other states treat same-sex couples.
Same-sex marriage legal: Massachusetts.
Civil unions, with most of the rights of spouses under state law: Vermont, Connecticut, New Jersey, New Hampshire.
Domestic partnerships recognized, with most of the rights of spouses under state law: California, Oregon.
Constitutional amendments outlawing same-sex marriage: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Wisconsin.
Statutes outlawing same-sex marriage: Arizona, California, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Minnesota, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, West Virginia.
E-mail Bob Egelko at begelko@sfchronicle.com.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)