I admit, I was wrong – dead wrong on the origin of the destabilizing and debilitating actions of the west - especially America - when it comes to the island nation of Haiti. For a long time I assumed it was because of what the Africans on that island did to France, the humiliation of having to be the first European colonizer to be ejected by African slaves brought upon it the wrath of the west - not the karmic justice that the infantile mind of Pat Roberson brought forth. Now I see things differently, and yes the cultural and ethnic ties that bind the west is often reflected in their uniformity animus toward Haiti - it runs deeper than support of a deposed colonizer nation. What appears as western hatred, is truly fear.
Now I am clear, it is not what happened to France that has evoked two hundred years of fear masked through hatred from the west, but what that revolution meant to the west. The import and impact was loud and clear to another fledging nation seeking to build its wealth on the back of African slaves – The United States of America. Indeed the pressure of the southern slave owners were borne to bare on the 2nd and 3rd American Presidents John Adams, and Thomas Jefferson (himself a slave owner) to enact odious embargoes against the new nation. In the first many hypocritical acts by the United States whose own revolution drew a bevy of armed, diplomatic and financial support throughout the halls of Europe, even before the was over, yet she refused to provide Haiti with the same planetary hand shake of “recognition” until 1862 over 50 years after Haiti achieved independence. By contrast, the United States recognized the new Cuban government of Fidel Castro within a few days after he came to power.
The ripple effect of the Haitian revolution was intense as America could ill afford to allow what happened in Haiti to be reduplicated on their shores. Historian Tim Matthewson whose writings focus on the relationship between the 1800 Haiti and America wrote in great detail about President Thomas Jefferson’s fear of what happened on the island then called Hispaniola could happen here. Cultures just like humans have a form DNA which permeates within the psyche of a people and within each culture there are thousands of subcultures with their own rules, and accepted practices - both best and worse. For black America we often talk about having the so called “slave mentality” that has negatively impacted the black community in America, yet we underestimate the “slave owner “mentality and how it has been passed down from generation to generation. As the civil rights marches forced integration on a recalcitrant America in the fifties and sixties, the unforeseen consequences was the successful assimilation of the sons and daughters of slaves into the American way of life, which accelerated the pace of the black pacification. As a result, the black community has not been able to connect the dots between the west’s treatment of Haiti, and our own failure to launch a successful slave revolution in America. Because black people in America can sip from the cup of American freedoms, we fail to comprehend that the mentality of the slave owner has never left, in short the slave owner mentality reflects the mentality of those who capture and enslave – once having gained an advantage over your competitors, or over another people, the mentality of the slave owner is to hold on to that advantage by any means necessary.
One best way to describe the mentality of the slave owner, those who have captured and enslaved fellow humans for their own advantage may be to consider it in the context of America’s favorite sport football. During a hard fought game there may be a critical moment when the team that is trailing finally takes the lead, the commentators often use the term “capture the lead” to describe the moment. The commentators then speak on the importance of capturing the lead; the cameras show the ecstasy on one sideline and the agony on the other. Next the commentators then tell us, that the team that just took the lead, must now concentrate their efforts to avoid losing it at all cost – and they will discuss the variety of strategies that team will take to prevent a recapture of the lead by the other team. Even in baseball, announcers will conclude their commentary on an inning where a lead change has taken place and mention as they go to commercial break – now the pitcher has to go out there and protect the lead, and not allow the other team momentum. Momentum changes are the most critical elements in sports – and even more so in the life of nations and cultures.
Captured slaves gave America a monumental boast in momentum – the kind of momentum allowed her to become the world’s strongest nation in less than two hundred years. That momentum also brought with it an opportunity for many to build enormous wealth, and by doing so, presented this country with a daunting dilemma of ethics versus economic and greed – there is little doubt which choice prevailed. As a result, what happened on Hispaniola was a clear and present danger to those who benefited from slavery, and American politicians succumbed to the pressure that would give rise to an American policy toward Haiti that has left that country impoverished, yet with the exception of earthquakes, and outbreaks, for most Americans a country many dismiss as irrelevant. Yet the American policy toward Haiti has been devastatingly effective in mitigating the fears of white slave owners who braced themselves for what would happened if the wind of the Haitian revolution blew north and sparked a similar uprising here. Actually only a few slave revolts – relative to the number of slaves took place, and none reaching the white hot intensity needed to break the chains. And at the same time, as a double benefit, American intermingling in Haitian affairs supporting despots, and criminal leaders has left the country on many levels in a near terminal state so much so many Haitians have left. This brain drain was confirmed during my recent visit to Haiti, as I met many young people who feel a strong passion and love for their country, but felt they would be compelled to seek more fertile opportunities in America or Canada. The inability to effectively compete for best and brightest has long standing ramifications.
There are some who hypothesize that one of the reasons for American interest and intervention is the possibility of oil off the coast of Haiti – my gut says if there was oil there, the US has had several opportunities to do a snatch and run with Haitian oil rights during their many invasions. My gut also says its human wealth, not mineral wealth that has the Americans and the west on the edge. And why? In 1776 Thomas Jefferson wrote, “When in the course of human events, it may become necessary for people to break the political bands that connect one another” that eloquence ironically coming from a powerful slave owner is illuminating on multi levels. Mr. Jefferson was no dummy, and his worldly experiences and studies helped him understand that human history was ripe with those whose understood that “in the course of human events” there would be those who were enslaved, would ultimately rise up and overthrow their captors. As the bands that bound slaves and slave owners would need to give way to a new order. However the key to that formulation is that clear understanding by those enslaved that they were indeed captives. In 1804 the year of the Haitian revolution, the Africans in this country had no illusions that they were physically free, they had no illusions that white people had their best interest at heart, therefore the echo of freedom continued to reverberate through their bones, and for some in their hearts and minds. Those whose freedom beat through the later, would always have the potential to lead a revolt, either an organized one, or an ad hoc one.
What happened in Haiti was not pretty, the Haitian Revolt was not one that was “tweeted” about or “liked” in the 18th century world, word travelled much slower, but it did travel, because word always has travelled, and always will. While one may assume the mere fact of being in chains would light a fire that would lead to a revolt, but sometimes you need inspiration, a template, something to say – “hey maybe this can work.” Perhaps those in chains in America needed an event that they can connect with, an energy they could bond with, and be charged by. It may begin in fits and starts, then street protests morph into something different, became reactive, and a critical mass unfolds in a manner which forces the status quo to respond, or capitulate. Often as that force grows, it loses an appetite for the one carrot the status quo has been successful in throwing – compromise. Post Civil Rights America has been especially keen in watering down real opposition with the illusion of inclusion and assimilation. It’s an unseemly game where the ruling class appears to give in with dramatic concessions, but they often gained more in return than they gave. I can only imagine what would have happened if a critical mass started in this country on a grand scale – while there were numerous mini revolts, they never sparked or ignited a galvanizing flame until perhaps Emmitt Till – but by then, the Americanization of the African was in full effect, and when the bullets stopped flying in the sixties, it seemed like our leaders were now amenable to march for the crumbs coming from the master’s table rather than burn “master’s house” down.
It is hard to quantify the connection between reign of terror waged on Haiti and the pacification of the American Negro, but instinctively I have little doubt they are intertwined. When I was in Haiti, I felt this was the closest to being in Africa without being there, ravaged as that country is, corrupt as its government has been, a nation that seemingly bounces from desolation to isolation has an amazing spirit. I have no illusions that the next President of Haiti be it popular singer Michel Martelly, or former First Lady Mirlande Manigat can singlehandedly reverse two hundred years of dysfunction both rooted internally and externally, much the same way Barack Obama cannot in four years reverse, hundred years of American imperialism, and neocolonialism. But what I do see, is an opportunity, albeit a fleeting one, that there are enough members of the African Diaspora despite our differences in hues, language, national origin, who can put the kind of political pressure on our government, the Organization of American States (OAS), and others to begin to seek real change. – Clearly if the west and America still feels that a strong Haiti will plant the seed for an African American uprising in 2011, they are clearly mistaken. The 21st Century passivity of the American black is so deep, so profound, and so disconnected with our modern day slave position that even an empowered, and enlighten Haiti, may not be able to spark an awakening.
Imagine if the genius of Haiti was allowed to foster unfettered by Europe and American manipulations, for the last two hundred years, and spread organically throughout this hemisphere – perhaps our connection to Africa would not have been lost, and we would not have to say we are African Americans, our lives, and our energy would simply reflect it. What the Haitian Revolution meant was that this nation must never allow real black revolution to ferment and cement on this soil – mission accomplished! We can only hope a new nation of black thinking in America can help liberate herself, and help bring about a new Haiti.
Yet my desire for this type of an awakening by black folks in this country, smacks against the reality that too many of us are Africans “in name only” and therefore are utterly incapable of such an undertaking the kind of liberating movement– that took place in Haiti. The revolution in Haiti and the unsuccessful revolts in America were led by true Africans endowed with the spirit of our ancestors - ancestors who provided support, guidance, and protection - which begs the question whether a people so disconnected from the true spirit of Africa can regain their inner urge for freedom because I believe only those with Africa in the hearts – not in “surname” only can lead a revolution.
The truth of Haiti has always rested in its African spirit. Haiti perhaps the only nation in this hemisphere that can truly lay claim to the greatness of Africa had to be brought to its knees to prevent their victory to augment or kickstart a bloody and final slave revolt in America; and buy America the needed time to extract Africa from its slaves so that their progegny would resemble Africa only in appearance. Now in 2011, the present mind set of the American black provides chilling and cruel testimony of the unique foresight of American founding fathers who understood the survival of their country and its slave culture depended on whether or not Haiti thrived or not. Far from being a curse - the pain of Haiti comes from a fear of a Black Nation.
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
Mr. Obama's Vision
In the days leading up to the State of the Union Address my first thoughts was, does President Obama see the same broken, country that I do, and my second thought was if yes, will his articulation of that vision will bring about comparisons to the Jimmy Carter “malaise” speech from the summer of 1979. A speech that helped doom his one term Presidency. Last night I got my answer. Yes Mr. Obama sees the same America that I see, but from his – and America’s perspective a “woe is me “speech was not what the doctor ordered. Instead Mr. Obama laid out his vision for America in a way that mirrored his campaign themes, but from a perspective of a man two years into governing this country as opposed to spending two years trying to be elected to govern. The distinction is critical and important. What is said on the campaign trail is often ethereal and often gives way to the bump and grind of inside the beltway politics. Progressives have hammered at President Obama since he was President Elect Obama for moving to the center, or in the words of former MSNBC host Keith Olberman, at times, capitulating to the right. Yet I have often wondered if many of those on the left simply don’t get the distinction between campaigning and governing. To be fair to his critics, Barack Obama has made some mistakes along the way, but then again who among us has been error free since January 20th 2009? Yet this address is coming from a man chastened by mistakes, and challenged by the political ramifications of his mistakes – and the political ramifications of a nation filled with fear. In November 2008 I wrote in my final support of Barack Obama’s candidacy for President that the 2008 election was about “big things” and that in my opinion Barack Obama – not John McCain would be able to deliver on an agenda that required bigness. Looking back, I have no doubt that I was correct in my assessment – Obama stumbles notwithstanding.
What was said in the State of the Union was an important and blueprint for the way forward. Let me be clear on one thing – those who want to fact check this speech on the details of policy initiatives can go to hell, because they are misdirecting the message. A few years ago I read American Theocracy by former GOP strategist Kevin Phillips who saw the combination of American dependence on foreign oil, American debt, and Christian conservatism as a clear and present threat to American democracy. I agreed with that assessment, and wondered if President Obama had the same perspective. I have never met Barack Obama so I can not say with clarity if he read Mr. Phillip’s neither book, nor have I engaged him in a conversation on the most salient points of that book, but it is clear listening to his speech that President Obama is aware of the consequences that Mr. Phillips laid out. In his address, President Obama evoked some of the key “talking points” of the book – speaking on energy reliance, debt, social liberalism and war.
Elections have consequences, and the 2008 election of Barack Obama brought with it , changes in health care, the finance industry, don’t ask don’t tell in the military, and an alterative to “no child left behind”. Likewise the 2010 midterm elections had consequences – one of the best lines in Mr. Obama’s speech was when he reminded both parties that the mandate of the 2010 election was for both parties to work together to solve serious problems. Sitting to behind him to his left was the man the US Constitution puts third in the line of succession to be President – Speaker of the House Congressman John Boehner. Congressman Boehner wanted to lead; now Speaker Boehner has that responsibility. Republicans can ill afford to misread their fall midterm victory, and behind the strategy of being the party of no, because now they are governing partners. Which means if President Obama is on his game, it will be the Republicans who pay a political price in 2012 for obstructionism. And that is the heart of the Obama challenge. Barack Obama won the White House on the wave of progressive initiatives, but his two years have shown that issues that are dear to conservative’s especially fiscal responsibility need to be addressed, secondly while Wall Street seems to have rebounded from the near collapse in 2008, Main Street – especially the middle class main street still struggles. Why? Jobs. Budgets reflect a nation’s priority, and the priority of a nation in debt, and a nation that is underperforming has to reflect seriousness in resolving both problems. Therein lays the heart of the Obama challenge – and the Obama opportunity. The State of the Union is one of a President’s biggest stage, where he can be both politician, and statesman. President Obama laid out a Statesman like vision for America – a vision for big things, while issuing a political challenge. But he must do more.
Yes we need to tighten our bootstraps, our national debt is unsustainable. Yet resolving our debt requires choices, and President Obama in his address was clear and concise in where his budgetary battle lines were drawn: education, clean energy, infrastructure, consumer regulations and social security. Moreover, Mr. Obama clearly articulated why each of those areas should be provided the needed funds in order to secure America’s future. This is critical. In 2008 candidate Obama laid out a rationale for health reform – a rationale that melted under the hot glare of Washington politics. President Obama simply can not afford to lose control of the budget narrative - his own presidential reelection hopes and more importantly, the future of this country depends on his ability to manage the debate on debt, jobs and energy. The same can be said for our international agenda especially in Afghanistan, where it is clear our partners are shaky at best, and duplicitous at worse – and where history cruel to invaders. President Obama reiterated his July 2011 timeframe for drawing down in Afghanistan, and he must not allow any pressures to change his mind.
Finally, President Obama talked about the hundreds of thousands of children of immigrants who are in America because of the choices made by their parents, and alluded to their plight as an opening salvo for a cogent and meaningful immigration policy. These are all part an ambitious agenda and will require bigness on the part of all of us. We can ill afford to waste energy micromanaging President Obama’s speech on the details, but rather we should embrace it as a challenge to America to live up to its ideas, its history, and its potential. The challenge for President Obama is to not allow his vision to be a one night “State of the Union” stand, but a predicate for change that he is willing to make the centerpiece of his second term. I listened and was impressed; as this was not malaise “Part II” but a blueprint for the restoration of American greatness. Well done, and well said!
What was said in the State of the Union was an important and blueprint for the way forward. Let me be clear on one thing – those who want to fact check this speech on the details of policy initiatives can go to hell, because they are misdirecting the message. A few years ago I read American Theocracy by former GOP strategist Kevin Phillips who saw the combination of American dependence on foreign oil, American debt, and Christian conservatism as a clear and present threat to American democracy. I agreed with that assessment, and wondered if President Obama had the same perspective. I have never met Barack Obama so I can not say with clarity if he read Mr. Phillip’s neither book, nor have I engaged him in a conversation on the most salient points of that book, but it is clear listening to his speech that President Obama is aware of the consequences that Mr. Phillips laid out. In his address, President Obama evoked some of the key “talking points” of the book – speaking on energy reliance, debt, social liberalism and war.
Elections have consequences, and the 2008 election of Barack Obama brought with it , changes in health care, the finance industry, don’t ask don’t tell in the military, and an alterative to “no child left behind”. Likewise the 2010 midterm elections had consequences – one of the best lines in Mr. Obama’s speech was when he reminded both parties that the mandate of the 2010 election was for both parties to work together to solve serious problems. Sitting to behind him to his left was the man the US Constitution puts third in the line of succession to be President – Speaker of the House Congressman John Boehner. Congressman Boehner wanted to lead; now Speaker Boehner has that responsibility. Republicans can ill afford to misread their fall midterm victory, and behind the strategy of being the party of no, because now they are governing partners. Which means if President Obama is on his game, it will be the Republicans who pay a political price in 2012 for obstructionism. And that is the heart of the Obama challenge. Barack Obama won the White House on the wave of progressive initiatives, but his two years have shown that issues that are dear to conservative’s especially fiscal responsibility need to be addressed, secondly while Wall Street seems to have rebounded from the near collapse in 2008, Main Street – especially the middle class main street still struggles. Why? Jobs. Budgets reflect a nation’s priority, and the priority of a nation in debt, and a nation that is underperforming has to reflect seriousness in resolving both problems. Therein lays the heart of the Obama challenge – and the Obama opportunity. The State of the Union is one of a President’s biggest stage, where he can be both politician, and statesman. President Obama laid out a Statesman like vision for America – a vision for big things, while issuing a political challenge. But he must do more.
Yes we need to tighten our bootstraps, our national debt is unsustainable. Yet resolving our debt requires choices, and President Obama in his address was clear and concise in where his budgetary battle lines were drawn: education, clean energy, infrastructure, consumer regulations and social security. Moreover, Mr. Obama clearly articulated why each of those areas should be provided the needed funds in order to secure America’s future. This is critical. In 2008 candidate Obama laid out a rationale for health reform – a rationale that melted under the hot glare of Washington politics. President Obama simply can not afford to lose control of the budget narrative - his own presidential reelection hopes and more importantly, the future of this country depends on his ability to manage the debate on debt, jobs and energy. The same can be said for our international agenda especially in Afghanistan, where it is clear our partners are shaky at best, and duplicitous at worse – and where history cruel to invaders. President Obama reiterated his July 2011 timeframe for drawing down in Afghanistan, and he must not allow any pressures to change his mind.
Finally, President Obama talked about the hundreds of thousands of children of immigrants who are in America because of the choices made by their parents, and alluded to their plight as an opening salvo for a cogent and meaningful immigration policy. These are all part an ambitious agenda and will require bigness on the part of all of us. We can ill afford to waste energy micromanaging President Obama’s speech on the details, but rather we should embrace it as a challenge to America to live up to its ideas, its history, and its potential. The challenge for President Obama is to not allow his vision to be a one night “State of the Union” stand, but a predicate for change that he is willing to make the centerpiece of his second term. I listened and was impressed; as this was not malaise “Part II” but a blueprint for the restoration of American greatness. Well done, and well said!
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Us versus Them – the Gun has left the Holster
Any who ever who played pickup basketball games in college or at the local YMCA can relate to the term “skins versus shirts”. For the uninitiated, the calculation was simple, one team had their shirts on the opposition went shirtless. It was a simple way to define “us versus them”. Us versus them playing out in a five on five hoops game is for all practical purposes a harmless manifestation of human classification that has operated for time immemorial. That classification of good guys versus bad guys can take on a variety of hues, agendas, size and scope. In our Westerns movies , the “us” wore the white hats; the bad guys – “the them” – had the black hats. In the 30’s Nazi Germany showed the world how “us versus them” can function at its most anti human level as they used it as a horrific justification to murder six million Jews. In America the Nation of Islam used the history of slavery, and injustice to create an “us verse them” pro black American template and in doing so built a powerful organization by framing white people ostensibly as devils.
“Us versus them” can also be a survival mechanism, as understanding with clarity, who your enemies are, is a useful stratagem. Yet even in the South during slavery, those like Harriet Tubman whose navigation of the Underground Railroad depended on the help of with abolitionists, understood that while white slavery is the enemy – every white person is not - thus redefining “us versus them” with a sense of nuance and perspective. Finally nationalism is “us versus them” writ large for example I recall in 1972 when the United States lost the Gold Medal Game to the Soviet Union in the Berlin Olympics, I was mortified, and how we all cheered in 1980 during the “Miracle on Ice as the United States defeated the Soviet Union in Hockey. Nationalism also serves to motivate a nation at war, therefore in the aftermath of Pearl Harbor and the World Trade Center attacks, Presidents Roosevelt and Bush respectively were able to rally a heaving and grieving nation to a war time posture primary by framing those tragedies in a nationalistic “us versus” them point of view.
When I think of tragic shootings that took place last weekend in Arizona, I am reminded of “us verses them”, but I am concerned that while much of the focus on toning down political discourse is appropriate, we may be blind to the reality that the violent gun may have forever left its holster, and America may be in for a period of violence unseen in this country in generations. In the immediate aftermath of the shootings, both the political right and political left backed into their respective corners with the left on the attack mode and the right for one of the few times in the last few years on the defensive. As one who leans toward the progressive end of the political spectrum, it felt good to see the left with their fangs out, but only for a moment. Because as the media strove to push their own partisan button they are doing America an utter and total disserve by ignoring the obvious.
While the information about the alleged shooter Jared Loughner is still evolving, one thing seems to be clear and was pointed out on NBC News by former FBI profiler Clift van Zandt. This shooting did not seem to be motivated by the rantings Glen Beck or Sarah Palin blogs and Tweets. Jared Loughner rather fits the profile of an anti government, long wolf loser with pent up anger/obsession with Congresswoman Giffords whose below the radar seethings eventually erupted last Saturday. Understanding this profile as well as the current climate in this country will prove critical if we as a country are to truly understand this event. If we only see this event through the lens of political discourse and talking head vitriol, we are missing a dangerous point.
In her eloquent blog on Open Salon Greer McVey pointed out a Homeland Security report in early 2009 that said that “long wolf extremism” is on the rise. A report that was attacked by the right, including now Speaker of the House John Boehner, and regrettably the Obama Administration backed down from its own findings. The report’s finding included:
“Threats from white supremacist and violent antigovernment groups
During 2009 have been largely rhetorical and have not indicated plans to carry
out violent acts. Nevertheless, the consequences of a prolonged economic
downturn—including real estate foreclosures, unemployment, and an inability
to obtain credit—could create a fertile recruiting environment for rightwing
extremists and even result in confrontations between such groups and
government authorities similar to those in the past.
Rightwing extremists have capitalized on the election of the first
African American president, and are focusing their efforts to recruit new
members, mobilize existing supporters, and broaden their scope and appeal
through propaganda, but they have not yet turned to attack planning.”
Furthermore in a chilling report titled Rage on the Right, the Southern Poverty Law Center offered a concurring assessment by saying:
“Since the installation of Barack Obama, right-wing extremists have murdered six law enforcement officers. Racist skinheads and others have been arrested in alleged plots to assassinate the nation’s first black president. One man from Brockton, Mass. — who told police he had learned on white supremacist websites that a genocide was under way against whites — is charged with murdering two black people and planning to kill as many Jews as possible on the day after Obama’s inauguration. Most recently, a rash of individuals with antigovernment, survivalist or racist views have been arrested in a series of bomb cases
It gets worse - Washington insider Ronald Kessler reported in his recent book The Presidents secret service Behind the Scenes with Agents in the Line of Fire and the Presidents They Protect that death threats against President Obama have increased 400 percent over his predecessor George W. Bush. And we all recall the Facebook page that asked should Barack Obama be killed. This is “Us versus them” in its most dangerous manifestation. As a nation grieves over the shootings in Arizona, the national media seems to be obsessed with making conservative politicians and talking heads repudiate any comments made in the past that may suggest violence – all well and good. While that may satiate the pristine inside the beltway commentators, I am certain that if for example Sarah Palin made a follow up speech with a clear and forceful statement and apologizing for her role in turning up the volume, it will be too little and too late. The underlying forces that give rise to hate groups are too hardwired and ingrained into their psychotic anti government DNA to be set aside by a single speech. These hate groups are trapped in an “ugly us versus them” mentality that is ticking American time bomb. They don’t need the vitriol of conservative talk show hosts to set them off, their own psychosis, hatred; and fears - both real and imagined will eventually spark them into action. My fear is that these attacks will grow in volume and voracity, and because of the rapid news cycle, each event will create new internet heroes, give rise to wannabees and will spur on more deadly events. “Us versus them” - unfortunately, this is not shirts versus skins, this the United States of America versus itself
“Us versus them” can also be a survival mechanism, as understanding with clarity, who your enemies are, is a useful stratagem. Yet even in the South during slavery, those like Harriet Tubman whose navigation of the Underground Railroad depended on the help of with abolitionists, understood that while white slavery is the enemy – every white person is not - thus redefining “us versus them” with a sense of nuance and perspective. Finally nationalism is “us versus them” writ large for example I recall in 1972 when the United States lost the Gold Medal Game to the Soviet Union in the Berlin Olympics, I was mortified, and how we all cheered in 1980 during the “Miracle on Ice as the United States defeated the Soviet Union in Hockey. Nationalism also serves to motivate a nation at war, therefore in the aftermath of Pearl Harbor and the World Trade Center attacks, Presidents Roosevelt and Bush respectively were able to rally a heaving and grieving nation to a war time posture primary by framing those tragedies in a nationalistic “us versus” them point of view.
When I think of tragic shootings that took place last weekend in Arizona, I am reminded of “us verses them”, but I am concerned that while much of the focus on toning down political discourse is appropriate, we may be blind to the reality that the violent gun may have forever left its holster, and America may be in for a period of violence unseen in this country in generations. In the immediate aftermath of the shootings, both the political right and political left backed into their respective corners with the left on the attack mode and the right for one of the few times in the last few years on the defensive. As one who leans toward the progressive end of the political spectrum, it felt good to see the left with their fangs out, but only for a moment. Because as the media strove to push their own partisan button they are doing America an utter and total disserve by ignoring the obvious.
While the information about the alleged shooter Jared Loughner is still evolving, one thing seems to be clear and was pointed out on NBC News by former FBI profiler Clift van Zandt. This shooting did not seem to be motivated by the rantings Glen Beck or Sarah Palin blogs and Tweets. Jared Loughner rather fits the profile of an anti government, long wolf loser with pent up anger/obsession with Congresswoman Giffords whose below the radar seethings eventually erupted last Saturday. Understanding this profile as well as the current climate in this country will prove critical if we as a country are to truly understand this event. If we only see this event through the lens of political discourse and talking head vitriol, we are missing a dangerous point.
In her eloquent blog on Open Salon Greer McVey pointed out a Homeland Security report in early 2009 that said that “long wolf extremism” is on the rise. A report that was attacked by the right, including now Speaker of the House John Boehner, and regrettably the Obama Administration backed down from its own findings. The report’s finding included:
“Threats from white supremacist and violent antigovernment groups
During 2009 have been largely rhetorical and have not indicated plans to carry
out violent acts. Nevertheless, the consequences of a prolonged economic
downturn—including real estate foreclosures, unemployment, and an inability
to obtain credit—could create a fertile recruiting environment for rightwing
extremists and even result in confrontations between such groups and
government authorities similar to those in the past.
Rightwing extremists have capitalized on the election of the first
African American president, and are focusing their efforts to recruit new
members, mobilize existing supporters, and broaden their scope and appeal
through propaganda, but they have not yet turned to attack planning.”
Furthermore in a chilling report titled Rage on the Right, the Southern Poverty Law Center offered a concurring assessment by saying:
“Since the installation of Barack Obama, right-wing extremists have murdered six law enforcement officers. Racist skinheads and others have been arrested in alleged plots to assassinate the nation’s first black president. One man from Brockton, Mass. — who told police he had learned on white supremacist websites that a genocide was under way against whites — is charged with murdering two black people and planning to kill as many Jews as possible on the day after Obama’s inauguration. Most recently, a rash of individuals with antigovernment, survivalist or racist views have been arrested in a series of bomb cases
It gets worse - Washington insider Ronald Kessler reported in his recent book The Presidents secret service Behind the Scenes with Agents in the Line of Fire and the Presidents They Protect that death threats against President Obama have increased 400 percent over his predecessor George W. Bush. And we all recall the Facebook page that asked should Barack Obama be killed. This is “Us versus them” in its most dangerous manifestation. As a nation grieves over the shootings in Arizona, the national media seems to be obsessed with making conservative politicians and talking heads repudiate any comments made in the past that may suggest violence – all well and good. While that may satiate the pristine inside the beltway commentators, I am certain that if for example Sarah Palin made a follow up speech with a clear and forceful statement and apologizing for her role in turning up the volume, it will be too little and too late. The underlying forces that give rise to hate groups are too hardwired and ingrained into their psychotic anti government DNA to be set aside by a single speech. These hate groups are trapped in an “ugly us versus them” mentality that is ticking American time bomb. They don’t need the vitriol of conservative talk show hosts to set them off, their own psychosis, hatred; and fears - both real and imagined will eventually spark them into action. My fear is that these attacks will grow in volume and voracity, and because of the rapid news cycle, each event will create new internet heroes, give rise to wannabees and will spur on more deadly events. “Us versus them” - unfortunately, this is not shirts versus skins, this the United States of America versus itself
We The People - Confessions of an anti Government Zealot
I wrote this piece December 12th. As I reflect on the tragic shootings in Arizona, and pray for the recovery of Congresswoman Giffords - I am mindful that one can distrust this government, believe it is corrupt, owned by corporate interests, incapable of big things, yet the solution is not violence - yet given the conditions outlined below, I feel blood will continue to flow -
We the People – America’s bloodless Revolution
we are putting faith in a broken and corrupt system.... a system where our government all 3 branches are wholly owned subsidiaries of global corporations.....only able to produce change lite...but seductive enough to draw in the American public into an electoral process by identifying charismatic candidates who can raise expectations, hopes, and money.....in 2008 it was Barack Obama....this system needs to be blow up.....how can that be done?....only by we the people - the steps to revolution can only come via a population that is either not programmed or de-programmed - so no you are not venting...u c the emperor has no clothes
In my 2003 poem"Black Power - Yeah Right"
I wrote
Our blindness energizes the new world order, Babylon’s daughter
We all say we want a better world, we pray about it, we talk about it, we blog about it, we march about it, we vote about it, yet despite the massive amounts of energy and resources expended in this country, we are slipping deeper and deeper into an abyss. Yet what is most frightening is the degree that now instead of laying face down execution style and taking a bullet to the brain, we now gladly take the gun from the executioner and do his work for him. We are smiling gleefully as we pull the trigger, and squeeze off a round ending our lives. I recently re-read Running Blind by Lee Child whose man character Jack Reacher was on the hunt for presumable a serial killer who was on a killing spree but leaving no evidence at the crime scene, but all of the women died by swallowing their tongues. Jack Reacher and the FBI were puzzled because their was no sign that these women were forced to do kill themselves in such a painful and frightening manner, until the end when they learned that the killer was an FBI trained hypnotist. So she hypnotized the victims and they followed her instructions to their demise.
Fiction or not, the Lee Child narrative effectively captures the plight of America today. I would image that astute archeologist of a future century would look through rubble of the American carnage and say wow! Cause of death mass suicide, brought on by congestive brain failure. Those same archeologist would then begun the work to deconstruct America’s unraveling, and what they would find was that same symptoms that brought down other empires, but in America’s case they would be amazed at the accelerated pace of America’s demise. Where would they start? Perhaps it would be the de-evolution of the American mind which has succumbed almost in whole to processing information, not by engaging critical thought, but by accepting as read, information that is downloaded, streamed, or pitched on television. As a sedentary nation bonds more and more with the internet and television, the best we can come up not is the ability to mimic often chapter and verse what TV talking heads and internet bloggers put out there. As a result the American public if often looking the wrong way, at the wrong time. As the mass media defines what we should like, what we should eat, how we should look, and most importantly what we should care about, we abrogate our power to decide our own priorities. The human fragilities of over consumption, living beyond our means, keeping up with the Jones, have been part and parcel of every society in some form or fashion since time immemorial. But the undue influence of the mass media, now accelerates, and spreads the gospel that self worth is tied to owning things, like a deadly virtual wildfire. There was a cellular telephone provider whose commercial that was played during last year’s NCAA Basketball tournament is dispositive on how the media creates neatly ties one’s self esteem to the capacity of his mobile device. In this commercial four friends are communicating by telephone discussing the latest basketball game. As the commercial ended, it was clear that one of those friends, by appearance a well to do young black man, did not have the same capability on his phone, the commercial ended with a close up shot of this man’s down casted face. At a macro level, media images and clever marketing campaigns have helped usher in American consumer debt, a rise in bankruptcy, foreclosures, and the ticking time bomb of sub prime loans that exploded with a viral impact on this nations – as well as other’s economies.
In the 20 so months of the Obama administration the mass media has had us gripped and dialed into the inside the beltway death match that included the President versus the Republicans, as well as the President waging war with his own party. At the same time I often wondered how many of us have made significant lifestyle changes on our own accord? How many of us, realize for example we – not Congress or the President have the ultimate control over our own health? How many of us realize that we – not Congress or the President have control over our personal budgets, and budgetary choices?
How many of us, realize that we – not Congress or the President have the ultimate responsibility for our children’s education, our neighborhoods and communities, and our future? Yet what is most frightening is the manner in which the media though all of it’s outlets continue to frame our political system as functional, how despite the fact that by all accounts our government at the national level – all three branches have been reduced to becoming a wholly owned subsidiary of corporate interests – both domestic and international – yet our system of government is still sustainable.
America is changing; the baby boomers are aging at time when Social Security becoming an unsustainable burden on our national budget. The unresolved plight of twelve million Hispanics threaten the social fabric of several communities, and challenge an impotent national government to respond to them. Millions of middle class white Americans face in their mind, threats both real and imagined as they see this no longer the world of 1959. Large federal and state deficits undercut safety nets, aging infrastructure, school systems, and the capacity of state and local governments to function. Those at the top of the pyramid are hoping American’s addictions, obsession with the lives of others and general slugginess, will allow them to continue their game of smoke and mirrors, as the rich get richer, and on the surface a slumbering nation appears to be ill equip to change the dynamic, and reject at large a failing system, and by any means necessary seek as this countries founding fathers did, a new nation.
Yet in America smoldering is a new fire, a new spirit of 1776, waiting to happen. It may not happen in ten years, or twenty years or even in my lifetime, but it will happen. This is a nation of people, and ultimately they will awaken. Our governments inability to resolve big issues, while at the same time losing lives, and resources in foreign wars, will ultimately force and awakening and with it, a revolution of the spirit. Will there be blood? Consider the history of how the status quo has responded to the awakening of the human spirit. Two thousand years ago, a man was crucified, as his revelations challenged both the Jewish and Roman centers of power. Josef Stalin killed of his own Russian citizens in an attempt to control, power. In the sixties change agents from John F. Kennedy, to Malcolm X, and Martin Luther King were all struck down, in order to pave way for America to assume the mantle of imperialist power from a battered Europe.
In the last year of Dr. King’s life he began to expand his message to connect the explosive dots of poverty in America both black and white, to poverty in third world nations. His death April 4th 1968 came one year to the day after his searing indictment of America and its role in Vietnam. The sixties a decade in America that started with President on the cusp of a new frontier ended on the cusp of revolution. That revolution never happened - primary because of the striking down of its leaders, but more importantly the manner in which the status quo moved to begin to create the illusion of inclusion. Whether by accident or design, many of those whose eyes sparked with revolutionary fervor in the sixties where now brought to the table, off went dashikis and afros, replaced by three piece suits, and low cut hair styles. Hippies ended their “summers of love” and rejoined the corporate world of their parents. Black folks left the inner cities in droves, now armed with college degrees, PHD’s and other advanced degrees. With the smoke of the sixties now in America’s hindsight, seeking a new hero to revitalize an American image that took a hit from both Vietnam, and Watergate, Ronald Wilson Reagan stood astride the Oval office, and behind the toothy smile, the warm benign visage, created massive debt, destabilizing Latin America, and ushered in crack to America's vulnerable urban centers. At the same time, the internet was taking form, which would ultimately usher in both an era of prosperity under the Clinton administration, but cause information to spread at an exponential level.
On January 20th 1993 when William Jefferson Clinton took the oval office, America was now a quarter of a century removed from Martin Luther King’s assassination, and black America was looking ahead – not back. At the same time, a new generation of blacks under the influence of “hip hop” listened to rap music from groups like Public Enemy and Tribe Call Quest, which brought with it a new wave of black awareness. Gangster rap rooted in the South Central LA rap groups like NWA, and Tupac Shakur were now challenging the status quo both black and white with their music.
Other blacks were under the influence of Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan who in October 1996 led a massive “Million Man March” day of "atonement" which promised to bring about a sea change in the attitude of black men, and with it a new sense of personal accountability. A few years earlier young blacks erupted in Los Angelas as a jury acquitted Los Angeles Police officers whose video taped beating of Rodney King, became the first true moment of the video new world. Now almost twenty years since the Million Man March and the Rodney king beating, many young blacks continue to lag behind in almost every category save prison sentences. Many young blacks have become disaffected, and disillusioned even with the presence of a man of color in the White House. Yet as our federal debt grows larger, and predicted budget cuts will impact those on the lower of the economic scale, while the inner cities burn while Washington dithers? The last twenty years conversely have had a different effect on America’s middle class.
On the watch of President Clinton America’s financial institution begun strides to shred some of the regulatory shackles that prevented them for risky misadventures, began to expand their credit portfolios, therefore opening lines of credit to Americans that heretofore would not be eligible for it. In home loans for example the credit – debt ratio of 28:36 was an industry standard. Meaning, your debt prior to the purchase of a home could not be more than 28 percent of your income, and your debt as a percentage of your income could not go above 36 percent after the purchase of the home. Now lenders by expanding that ratio to sometimes 28:40 were opening the floodgates for new home purchases, to buyers that were ill equip to handle the debt – in short subprime loans. These new homeowners then were seduced into using their home as an ATM machine, which fueled an overheated economy fueled on bad debt.
That all came to a crash on September 17, 2008. When the crash came, it took with, it iconic companies like Bear Stearns, Merrill Lynch, and Lehman Brothers, as the Federal Reserve, the Treasury Department, and both Presidential Candidates Obama and McCain were all swept away in the madness. But more importantly the crash depleted pension funds, 401ks, and brought lending almost to a halt. Suddenly Middle Class America had a wake up call, as the economy tottered, many Americans – especially white Americans faced fear on several fronts. Job loss, the specter of an emerging China, and India from the East, 12 million undocumented Hispanics at home, the ongoing war with Islam, and a Black man in the oval office, all gave rise to a political phenomenon called the Tea Party. Funded by conservative extremist like the billionaire Koch brothers, many of these ulber conservative groups challenged both Republican and Democratic incumbents – although their success was mixed, they served notice that gave both parties pause. As anger, disillusion, fears, reaches a critical mass, how will Americans respond? Many will undoubtedly continue to seek a political solution, but what about the rest – when the awakening takes place, will it bring with it the spirit of 1776, or has America become so dumbed down, we will all be asleep as America loses its thorny crown?
We the People – America’s bloodless Revolution
we are putting faith in a broken and corrupt system.... a system where our government all 3 branches are wholly owned subsidiaries of global corporations.....only able to produce change lite...but seductive enough to draw in the American public into an electoral process by identifying charismatic candidates who can raise expectations, hopes, and money.....in 2008 it was Barack Obama....this system needs to be blow up.....how can that be done?....only by we the people - the steps to revolution can only come via a population that is either not programmed or de-programmed - so no you are not venting...u c the emperor has no clothes
In my 2003 poem"Black Power - Yeah Right"
I wrote
Our blindness energizes the new world order, Babylon’s daughter
We all say we want a better world, we pray about it, we talk about it, we blog about it, we march about it, we vote about it, yet despite the massive amounts of energy and resources expended in this country, we are slipping deeper and deeper into an abyss. Yet what is most frightening is the degree that now instead of laying face down execution style and taking a bullet to the brain, we now gladly take the gun from the executioner and do his work for him. We are smiling gleefully as we pull the trigger, and squeeze off a round ending our lives. I recently re-read Running Blind by Lee Child whose man character Jack Reacher was on the hunt for presumable a serial killer who was on a killing spree but leaving no evidence at the crime scene, but all of the women died by swallowing their tongues. Jack Reacher and the FBI were puzzled because their was no sign that these women were forced to do kill themselves in such a painful and frightening manner, until the end when they learned that the killer was an FBI trained hypnotist. So she hypnotized the victims and they followed her instructions to their demise.
Fiction or not, the Lee Child narrative effectively captures the plight of America today. I would image that astute archeologist of a future century would look through rubble of the American carnage and say wow! Cause of death mass suicide, brought on by congestive brain failure. Those same archeologist would then begun the work to deconstruct America’s unraveling, and what they would find was that same symptoms that brought down other empires, but in America’s case they would be amazed at the accelerated pace of America’s demise. Where would they start? Perhaps it would be the de-evolution of the American mind which has succumbed almost in whole to processing information, not by engaging critical thought, but by accepting as read, information that is downloaded, streamed, or pitched on television. As a sedentary nation bonds more and more with the internet and television, the best we can come up not is the ability to mimic often chapter and verse what TV talking heads and internet bloggers put out there. As a result the American public if often looking the wrong way, at the wrong time. As the mass media defines what we should like, what we should eat, how we should look, and most importantly what we should care about, we abrogate our power to decide our own priorities. The human fragilities of over consumption, living beyond our means, keeping up with the Jones, have been part and parcel of every society in some form or fashion since time immemorial. But the undue influence of the mass media, now accelerates, and spreads the gospel that self worth is tied to owning things, like a deadly virtual wildfire. There was a cellular telephone provider whose commercial that was played during last year’s NCAA Basketball tournament is dispositive on how the media creates neatly ties one’s self esteem to the capacity of his mobile device. In this commercial four friends are communicating by telephone discussing the latest basketball game. As the commercial ended, it was clear that one of those friends, by appearance a well to do young black man, did not have the same capability on his phone, the commercial ended with a close up shot of this man’s down casted face. At a macro level, media images and clever marketing campaigns have helped usher in American consumer debt, a rise in bankruptcy, foreclosures, and the ticking time bomb of sub prime loans that exploded with a viral impact on this nations – as well as other’s economies.
In the 20 so months of the Obama administration the mass media has had us gripped and dialed into the inside the beltway death match that included the President versus the Republicans, as well as the President waging war with his own party. At the same time I often wondered how many of us have made significant lifestyle changes on our own accord? How many of us, realize for example we – not Congress or the President have the ultimate control over our own health? How many of us realize that we – not Congress or the President have control over our personal budgets, and budgetary choices?
How many of us, realize that we – not Congress or the President have the ultimate responsibility for our children’s education, our neighborhoods and communities, and our future? Yet what is most frightening is the manner in which the media though all of it’s outlets continue to frame our political system as functional, how despite the fact that by all accounts our government at the national level – all three branches have been reduced to becoming a wholly owned subsidiary of corporate interests – both domestic and international – yet our system of government is still sustainable.
America is changing; the baby boomers are aging at time when Social Security becoming an unsustainable burden on our national budget. The unresolved plight of twelve million Hispanics threaten the social fabric of several communities, and challenge an impotent national government to respond to them. Millions of middle class white Americans face in their mind, threats both real and imagined as they see this no longer the world of 1959. Large federal and state deficits undercut safety nets, aging infrastructure, school systems, and the capacity of state and local governments to function. Those at the top of the pyramid are hoping American’s addictions, obsession with the lives of others and general slugginess, will allow them to continue their game of smoke and mirrors, as the rich get richer, and on the surface a slumbering nation appears to be ill equip to change the dynamic, and reject at large a failing system, and by any means necessary seek as this countries founding fathers did, a new nation.
Yet in America smoldering is a new fire, a new spirit of 1776, waiting to happen. It may not happen in ten years, or twenty years or even in my lifetime, but it will happen. This is a nation of people, and ultimately they will awaken. Our governments inability to resolve big issues, while at the same time losing lives, and resources in foreign wars, will ultimately force and awakening and with it, a revolution of the spirit. Will there be blood? Consider the history of how the status quo has responded to the awakening of the human spirit. Two thousand years ago, a man was crucified, as his revelations challenged both the Jewish and Roman centers of power. Josef Stalin killed of his own Russian citizens in an attempt to control, power. In the sixties change agents from John F. Kennedy, to Malcolm X, and Martin Luther King were all struck down, in order to pave way for America to assume the mantle of imperialist power from a battered Europe.
In the last year of Dr. King’s life he began to expand his message to connect the explosive dots of poverty in America both black and white, to poverty in third world nations. His death April 4th 1968 came one year to the day after his searing indictment of America and its role in Vietnam. The sixties a decade in America that started with President on the cusp of a new frontier ended on the cusp of revolution. That revolution never happened - primary because of the striking down of its leaders, but more importantly the manner in which the status quo moved to begin to create the illusion of inclusion. Whether by accident or design, many of those whose eyes sparked with revolutionary fervor in the sixties where now brought to the table, off went dashikis and afros, replaced by three piece suits, and low cut hair styles. Hippies ended their “summers of love” and rejoined the corporate world of their parents. Black folks left the inner cities in droves, now armed with college degrees, PHD’s and other advanced degrees. With the smoke of the sixties now in America’s hindsight, seeking a new hero to revitalize an American image that took a hit from both Vietnam, and Watergate, Ronald Wilson Reagan stood astride the Oval office, and behind the toothy smile, the warm benign visage, created massive debt, destabilizing Latin America, and ushered in crack to America's vulnerable urban centers. At the same time, the internet was taking form, which would ultimately usher in both an era of prosperity under the Clinton administration, but cause information to spread at an exponential level.
On January 20th 1993 when William Jefferson Clinton took the oval office, America was now a quarter of a century removed from Martin Luther King’s assassination, and black America was looking ahead – not back. At the same time, a new generation of blacks under the influence of “hip hop” listened to rap music from groups like Public Enemy and Tribe Call Quest, which brought with it a new wave of black awareness. Gangster rap rooted in the South Central LA rap groups like NWA, and Tupac Shakur were now challenging the status quo both black and white with their music.
Other blacks were under the influence of Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan who in October 1996 led a massive “Million Man March” day of "atonement" which promised to bring about a sea change in the attitude of black men, and with it a new sense of personal accountability. A few years earlier young blacks erupted in Los Angelas as a jury acquitted Los Angeles Police officers whose video taped beating of Rodney King, became the first true moment of the video new world. Now almost twenty years since the Million Man March and the Rodney king beating, many young blacks continue to lag behind in almost every category save prison sentences. Many young blacks have become disaffected, and disillusioned even with the presence of a man of color in the White House. Yet as our federal debt grows larger, and predicted budget cuts will impact those on the lower of the economic scale, while the inner cities burn while Washington dithers? The last twenty years conversely have had a different effect on America’s middle class.
On the watch of President Clinton America’s financial institution begun strides to shred some of the regulatory shackles that prevented them for risky misadventures, began to expand their credit portfolios, therefore opening lines of credit to Americans that heretofore would not be eligible for it. In home loans for example the credit – debt ratio of 28:36 was an industry standard. Meaning, your debt prior to the purchase of a home could not be more than 28 percent of your income, and your debt as a percentage of your income could not go above 36 percent after the purchase of the home. Now lenders by expanding that ratio to sometimes 28:40 were opening the floodgates for new home purchases, to buyers that were ill equip to handle the debt – in short subprime loans. These new homeowners then were seduced into using their home as an ATM machine, which fueled an overheated economy fueled on bad debt.
That all came to a crash on September 17, 2008. When the crash came, it took with, it iconic companies like Bear Stearns, Merrill Lynch, and Lehman Brothers, as the Federal Reserve, the Treasury Department, and both Presidential Candidates Obama and McCain were all swept away in the madness. But more importantly the crash depleted pension funds, 401ks, and brought lending almost to a halt. Suddenly Middle Class America had a wake up call, as the economy tottered, many Americans – especially white Americans faced fear on several fronts. Job loss, the specter of an emerging China, and India from the East, 12 million undocumented Hispanics at home, the ongoing war with Islam, and a Black man in the oval office, all gave rise to a political phenomenon called the Tea Party. Funded by conservative extremist like the billionaire Koch brothers, many of these ulber conservative groups challenged both Republican and Democratic incumbents – although their success was mixed, they served notice that gave both parties pause. As anger, disillusion, fears, reaches a critical mass, how will Americans respond? Many will undoubtedly continue to seek a political solution, but what about the rest – when the awakening takes place, will it bring with it the spirit of 1776, or has America become so dumbed down, we will all be asleep as America loses its thorny crown?
Monday, December 27, 2010
I recently spent two weeks in Haiti working on a film Seven Days in Haiti, which will consists of several vignettes on life in Haiti and a feature/segment on the candidacy of popular Haitian musician Michel Martelly aka Sweet Mickey. Mr. Martelly's campaigned inspired many of the Haitian youth, who threatened violence if they felt their candidate was cheated. My film crew consisted of two brilliant and engaging young men, and we met hundreds of people in a variety walks of life.
Haiti or as the Haitians call their nation Ayaiti has first world people living in a third world enviroment. None the less Haiti may erupt tonight because of the election results which Michel Martelly did not make it to the 2nd round of the elections which will pit Jude Celestin - the hand picked successor to President Preval against former Senator and First Lady Mirlande Manigat.
Comeback Kid 5.0
Why does it seem that the only one in Washington that is smiling is Barack Hussein Obama? Perhaps it has something to do with the theme started unbelievably by Washington Post uber conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer, who began a recent column with the remarkable prediction that the tax law legislation may have cemented President Obama’s chances at reelection - a reelection bid that to that point was steady dwindling to the degree that there were some commentators and polls that suggested President Barack Obama was headed to the Presidential category of “one and done”. Yet before the political obituaries begin for Mr. Obama, at some point there needs to be a stepping back from politics and the mind numbing left – right tug of war and acknowledge that there have been remarkable achievements under the 44th President. By the time the Presidential primaries begin in 2012, President Obama can cite salvaging of the once moribund automobile industry, a historical health care overhaul legislation, reform of the financial industry, and in the not so lame duck session of Congress, President Obama garnered, a repeal of don’t ask don’t tell, and a monumental tax bill forged from a willingness to compromise and the passage of a nuclear arms START Treaty.
On the left Progressive mouth piece Keith Olberman read President the riot act basically accusing him of betraying his own base at best and at worse being held hostage to his own short term political desires. On the right, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina accused his Senate GOP caucus members of a capitulation of “dramatic proportions. To be fair, if not balanced, the left went to the mat for the President to get health care passed, casting votes that may have cost them their jobs, so the feeling of betrayal coming from members of the House of Representatives has a level of merit and a sense of righteousness. So now only a few weeks after having his party go down in flames in the mid term election, President Obama now begins the final phase of his first term seemingly adrift from his political base, a shift which may mark a beginning of a freewheeling, high risk, high reward set of initiatives all designed to secure a 2nd term. Little wonder there are smiles at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. The nature of the beast in the nation’s capital is transactions and deal making, President Obama seems to have placed his political future on this capacity to be a transactional President, party loyalty be damned.
As President Obama acknowledged at the signing of the bill tax bill which included Senate Minority leader Mitch McConnell – a first - but not outgoing Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi or Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, there are parts of the bill that he doesn’t like. And there are also parts of the bill that Republican legislators held their nose while supporting. So what about the fear voiced by Keith Olberman and others that in 2012 when the tax legislation nears expiration the GOP will hold President Obama hostage and make the temporary law permanent. The rationale they say is that if President Obama was willing to anger his base in an off year – lame duck session, political expedience may force him to give in again. While I agree with the theory that the best time to go to the mat over taxes would have been prior to the midterm elections. And for the life of me, I can’t understand why the populous message of “us verses them” never took hold, during the fall campaign, but I disagree with the notion that President Obama has set himself up for a similar hostage taking in 2012.
President Obama and the Democrats have been hammered unfairly by seemingly born again Republican fiscal conservatives for the stimulus package, and the bailouts of the auto industry by staying that the spending was unnecessary, ill managed, and failed provide the needed stimuli. Now the Republicans get their way, essentially for the GOP it is put up or shut up. The underlying economic philosophy of the GOP is basically that tax cuts for the wealthy will have a positive impact on the economy, and this tax bill will put their theory to the test. Amazingly this theory was rejected by the country in writ large in 2008, yet the Republicans successfully repackaged a failed policy, and sold it to fearful Americans – the fact that this tax bill takes a potential 8 billion dollars from the American coffers, potentially lowers our debt rating, and raises the interest on our debt – notwithstanding. And, an economic policy that Mr. Obama often attacked in vociferously in stump speeches. So now by allowing a stay of execution for the Bush Tax Cuts of 2001, President Obama has partnered with the GOP which will either be a master political stroke or as Nobel Prize winning economist and The New York Times columnist Paul Krugman suggests, a recipe for disaster.
In either case, President Obama has a potential opportunity in 2012 to hold the Republicans on their own “trickle down” petard. Job creation will be the key agenda item going forward, and the White House and the Democrats have to do a better job in crafting the narrative over jobs than they have on other important issues in the past. For example if the unemployment numbers go down, the President will need to be able to point to his policy initiatives as the prime mover, if not, and the Republicans are allowed to say, “see we told you so” and kicking the high end tax cuts to the curb will be extremely hard to do. With a sardonic smile, and the reminder that the “holiday cheer” prevailing over this compromise will not last forever President Obama set up a predicate that will be useful in 2012. With increasing pressure from America’s Global partners to reduce the deficit, President Obama and his born again GOP Partners will have to make some tough choices, its one thing to talk tough on the campaign trail, it’s another thing to govern. And while the left that often longs for the halcyon days of William Jefferson Clinton, and smarting from a mid term political beat down, they have to recognize that no matter what, President Obama has avoided a destructive and debilitating government shutdown that may have resulted from President Obama’s insistence on holding the line on the tax cuts in a manner that would have pleased his base, but in the words of Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson, it may have been a Pyrrhic victory especially if it would have been a repeat of the 1995 fiasco – while President Clinton seemed to walk away victorious in the aftermath, this is not 1995, and it was a political risk that President Obama was unwilling to take.
Yet while the White House may breathe a sigh of relief as polls continue to have him beating any potential Republican opponent, potential trouble looms in Afghanistan. The left while angry at President Obama, by and large realizes he is still their best horse for 2012, but if Afghanistan goes bad, and the body count continues to rise, and/or new “Wiki leaks” appear which serve to cast more doubt on the prosecution of the war, or Afghan President Karzai continues his dalliance with Iran and the Taliban, will President Barack Obama face a intra party challenge from the left on the basis of anti war? That is the 64,000 question. History shows that sitting presidents who face stiff challenges for the nomination often become damaged nominees, or in the case of Lyndon Johnson in 1968 are forced to stand down. The likelihood of such a challenge is low, but it is something that the Obama White House would be foolish to ignore. Yet a year ago, President Obama was pulling out all stops to get a Christmas Eve vote on Health Care, a year later, with the tea leaves in his favor, the smile is back at the White House as Christmas has come early. Say hello to the Comeback Kid 5.0.
On the left Progressive mouth piece Keith Olberman read President the riot act basically accusing him of betraying his own base at best and at worse being held hostage to his own short term political desires. On the right, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina accused his Senate GOP caucus members of a capitulation of “dramatic proportions. To be fair, if not balanced, the left went to the mat for the President to get health care passed, casting votes that may have cost them their jobs, so the feeling of betrayal coming from members of the House of Representatives has a level of merit and a sense of righteousness. So now only a few weeks after having his party go down in flames in the mid term election, President Obama now begins the final phase of his first term seemingly adrift from his political base, a shift which may mark a beginning of a freewheeling, high risk, high reward set of initiatives all designed to secure a 2nd term. Little wonder there are smiles at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. The nature of the beast in the nation’s capital is transactions and deal making, President Obama seems to have placed his political future on this capacity to be a transactional President, party loyalty be damned.
As President Obama acknowledged at the signing of the bill tax bill which included Senate Minority leader Mitch McConnell – a first - but not outgoing Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi or Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, there are parts of the bill that he doesn’t like. And there are also parts of the bill that Republican legislators held their nose while supporting. So what about the fear voiced by Keith Olberman and others that in 2012 when the tax legislation nears expiration the GOP will hold President Obama hostage and make the temporary law permanent. The rationale they say is that if President Obama was willing to anger his base in an off year – lame duck session, political expedience may force him to give in again. While I agree with the theory that the best time to go to the mat over taxes would have been prior to the midterm elections. And for the life of me, I can’t understand why the populous message of “us verses them” never took hold, during the fall campaign, but I disagree with the notion that President Obama has set himself up for a similar hostage taking in 2012.
President Obama and the Democrats have been hammered unfairly by seemingly born again Republican fiscal conservatives for the stimulus package, and the bailouts of the auto industry by staying that the spending was unnecessary, ill managed, and failed provide the needed stimuli. Now the Republicans get their way, essentially for the GOP it is put up or shut up. The underlying economic philosophy of the GOP is basically that tax cuts for the wealthy will have a positive impact on the economy, and this tax bill will put their theory to the test. Amazingly this theory was rejected by the country in writ large in 2008, yet the Republicans successfully repackaged a failed policy, and sold it to fearful Americans – the fact that this tax bill takes a potential 8 billion dollars from the American coffers, potentially lowers our debt rating, and raises the interest on our debt – notwithstanding. And, an economic policy that Mr. Obama often attacked in vociferously in stump speeches. So now by allowing a stay of execution for the Bush Tax Cuts of 2001, President Obama has partnered with the GOP which will either be a master political stroke or as Nobel Prize winning economist and The New York Times columnist Paul Krugman suggests, a recipe for disaster.
In either case, President Obama has a potential opportunity in 2012 to hold the Republicans on their own “trickle down” petard. Job creation will be the key agenda item going forward, and the White House and the Democrats have to do a better job in crafting the narrative over jobs than they have on other important issues in the past. For example if the unemployment numbers go down, the President will need to be able to point to his policy initiatives as the prime mover, if not, and the Republicans are allowed to say, “see we told you so” and kicking the high end tax cuts to the curb will be extremely hard to do. With a sardonic smile, and the reminder that the “holiday cheer” prevailing over this compromise will not last forever President Obama set up a predicate that will be useful in 2012. With increasing pressure from America’s Global partners to reduce the deficit, President Obama and his born again GOP Partners will have to make some tough choices, its one thing to talk tough on the campaign trail, it’s another thing to govern. And while the left that often longs for the halcyon days of William Jefferson Clinton, and smarting from a mid term political beat down, they have to recognize that no matter what, President Obama has avoided a destructive and debilitating government shutdown that may have resulted from President Obama’s insistence on holding the line on the tax cuts in a manner that would have pleased his base, but in the words of Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson, it may have been a Pyrrhic victory especially if it would have been a repeat of the 1995 fiasco – while President Clinton seemed to walk away victorious in the aftermath, this is not 1995, and it was a political risk that President Obama was unwilling to take.
Yet while the White House may breathe a sigh of relief as polls continue to have him beating any potential Republican opponent, potential trouble looms in Afghanistan. The left while angry at President Obama, by and large realizes he is still their best horse for 2012, but if Afghanistan goes bad, and the body count continues to rise, and/or new “Wiki leaks” appear which serve to cast more doubt on the prosecution of the war, or Afghan President Karzai continues his dalliance with Iran and the Taliban, will President Barack Obama face a intra party challenge from the left on the basis of anti war? That is the 64,000 question. History shows that sitting presidents who face stiff challenges for the nomination often become damaged nominees, or in the case of Lyndon Johnson in 1968 are forced to stand down. The likelihood of such a challenge is low, but it is something that the Obama White House would be foolish to ignore. Yet a year ago, President Obama was pulling out all stops to get a Christmas Eve vote on Health Care, a year later, with the tea leaves in his favor, the smile is back at the White House as Christmas has come early. Say hello to the Comeback Kid 5.0.
Sunday, August 29, 2010
Seven Days in Haiti
On November 21, I along with a crew of 2 others will be traveling to Haiti for nearly two weeks to cover the Haitian elections and the immediate aftermath. Your donations to this effort will cover the production cost of this project. The Documentary that I will produce titled "Seven Days in Haiti" is about the final week of the historic Haitian elections the first test of democracy in a nation devastated by the January earthquake.
UPDATE 9-27-2010
Can Democracy and poverty coexist?
That is one of the questions that my film crew will be asking Haitian candidates for President. The purpose of this email is to make you aware of my film project Seven Days in Haiti. In November I will be taking a film crew to Haiti to cover the last week of the Haitian elections. My plan is to cover the election through the eyes of two Presidential candidates by following them and their events them for the last week of the elections. We will also interview Haitians from all walks of life, NGOs, Haitian Americans, and other interested parties. The finished product will include
* A full length documentary
* A video journal of the making of the film
* daily blogs while in Haiti
* A Photobook based on photos taken during that week
ONCE COMPLETED THIS FILM AND ITS ASSOCIATED PRODUCTS WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE FOR THOSE RAISING MONEY FOR HAITIAN RELIEF EFFORTS
Update
Jean Kim will be joining me as project Cinementographer and Director of Photography
Jean Kim received her MFA in Film Production from the USC School of Cinematic Arts, where she concentrated her studies in cinematography. Prior to film school, Jean attended the University of California, Davis, where she earned a BA in Women and Gender Studies. It was there, as a member of a feminist video production collective, that she developed her interest in filmmaking. She later received the honor of becoming a Film Independent Fellow through their Project:Involve program, receiving mentorship from cinematographer Alexander Gruszynski, ASC.
Jean is experienced in photographing on both film and video, and is capable of producing a variety of styles. Her preferences as a filmmaker go beyond the boundaries of any film genre. The projects she chooses vary in the types of stories told and the directors' visual styles. Ultimately, Jean prefers to shoot projects that have stories she cares about and can invest herself in.
Jean currently resides in Los Angeles California
Sunday, August 8, 2010
This Sunday Morning
Dr. King once called Sunday morning the most segregated time in American Christanity..I would now add, perhaps it is the most brainwashed time in African America thus I wrote in my poem This Aint Prophecy
And it’s uncanny
To say the least
But I don’t get it twisted when I see the beast
Because I know its now no longer men in sheets
That are the sole source of our grief
Our city streets
Are terrorized by red and blue beefs
And 100 thousand saints on Sunday
With their bibles, faith and belief
Don’t bring peace
But get fleeced
Because apparently Salvation ain’t cheap
Even liquor stores, pimps and hustlers find it hard to compete
With a misinterpreted scripture
That keeps a nation asleep
We worship the lamb
But bow down like sheep
I wonder if the objective
Of the pastor’s directives
Is to maintain a slumbering collective
You see
Penitentiary minds
Distorts our perspective
And though its been suggested
But not requested
I wonder if
Our own 9/11 would bring us justice?
Or as Richard Pryor once said
just us
But we have 2 much reverence
And show too much deference
To do any thing that would stress em
Test em
But god bless em
We’ll be brothers and sisters in heaven
Rignt?
But it’s the heaven on earth that we ignore
And it’s uncanny
To say the least
But I don’t get it twisted when I see the beast
Because I know its now no longer men in sheets
That are the sole source of our grief
Our city streets
Are terrorized by red and blue beefs
And 100 thousand saints on Sunday
With their bibles, faith and belief
Don’t bring peace
But get fleeced
Because apparently Salvation ain’t cheap
Even liquor stores, pimps and hustlers find it hard to compete
With a misinterpreted scripture
That keeps a nation asleep
We worship the lamb
But bow down like sheep
I wonder if the objective
Of the pastor’s directives
Is to maintain a slumbering collective
You see
Penitentiary minds
Distorts our perspective
And though its been suggested
But not requested
I wonder if
Our own 9/11 would bring us justice?
Or as Richard Pryor once said
just us
But we have 2 much reverence
And show too much deference
To do any thing that would stress em
Test em
But god bless em
We’ll be brothers and sisters in heaven
Rignt?
But it’s the heaven on earth that we ignore
America, Obama, and What truly is at stake in 2010
The day I was born fifty one years ago, America was in a much different place. The last President born in the 19th century Dwight David Eisenhower was in the White House. The Civil Rights movement that would produce iconic names like Martin Luther King, H. Rap Brown, Medgar Evers, and el-Hajj Malik el-Shabazz was entering a new and more aggressive phase. Five years earlier the Supreme Court delivered its landmark Brown V Topeka ruling effectively dismantling Jim Crow, although it would take marches, deaths, and near civil war to garner federal enforcement. Four earlier a fourteen year old young man from Chicago was brutally murdered in Money Mississippi purportedly for whistling at a white woman. In 1959 while many well known Hollywood actors, were gay, but none “came out”. In 1959 it would be another three years before a biracial child born of a white woman and a Kenyan man would be born in America’s newest state Hawaii. In 1959 the face of America – or at least the face of those in the ruling class was white. The few black faces of note were entertainers or athletes. Yet in 1959 most of the superstars in the three major American team sports were still white, national powers like Alabama, were still several years from recruiting black students. And most importantly on line P5 of the 1960 census Americans were asked: “Is this person - White, Negro, American Indian, Japanese, Chinese, Filipino, Hawaiian, Part Hawaiian, Aleut, Eskimo, (etc.)” notable by its absence were people of Hispanic origin.
As I write this blog, interracial, and gay couples interact with a growing sense of confidence, a man of color is the President of the United States, the most dynamic athletes in baseball “America’s pastime” have the names Pujols, and Rodriguez, the NBA is dominated by African Americans. In short America has become a true melting pot with people of all races, and genders representing America in every field imaginable. I am sure that many of those living in 1959 would vision the America of 2010 through an apocalyptic prism. Yet this where we are, and this is who we are. In 2010, part of the narrative of Barack Obama is an acknowledgement, and acceptance of this new America, an America of tolerance, and appreciation of other cultures. In 1959 the mosaic of America was primary a fusion of two old world cultures, the protestants of England that founded this country, and the catholic immigrants, although the presence and genius of the African American community forced America to embrace the genius of Langston Hughes, W.E.B.Dubois, Jackie Robinson, Duke Ellington, and Paul Robeson. Now in 2010 that mosaic has expanded, into a variety of shades, and hues, to the effect that in the former French creole territory that is now the state of Louisiana, there is a Catholic Governor with Hindu roots, and a Vietnamese congressman. This is who we are, and this what we are.
With all due respect to Barack Obama and his campaign for change which I was a part of, President Obama was a reflection of the change underfoot in America, but not its origin. Those winds of change started over a hundred years ago manifested by the Pan African movement, the growth of labor unions, woman’s suffrage movements and other change oriented organizations. Change also came in the form of demographics. That forging of the new American mosaic was sometimes organic, sometimes ugly, sometimes forced. Greed and poverty and hopes for opportunity were the underpinnings of the Hispanic growth. Wars and foreign misadventures led to the migration of Muslims, Bosnians, and Vietnamese. Asians came to America seeking opportunities and to escape poverty and/or oppression at home. Social change was also produced by sheer force of will as marches, assassinations riots, were the building blocks for change for African Americans, as the Civil Rights Movement became the template for other movements like native America, woman’s, and gay rights. Movies like Guess Who’s coming to Dinner forced America to look at an old and incendiary issue like interracial relationships.
In every case the forces of change brought about strong resistance, as fears, ignorance, and group self loathing often gave rise to violent push backs. Thus bullets felled Martin, and Malcolm, but also social “outliers” like Harvey Milk and John Lennon. Interracial couples would wake up to cross burnings. Abortion doctors were often targets, and unfortunate ones like Dr. George Tiller were brutally murdered. In 1998 Spike Lee’s Do the Right Thang illuminated the ethnic tensions that existed in Brooklyn between Koreans, Italians, and African American as a result of that boroughs changing landscape. In New Orleans, Vietnamese immigrants were shunned by whites and blacks, until the horrors of Katrina forced the Vietnamese to stand and be counted. Change is not pretty, but change is enviable. The question has always been how do we as a culture choose to deal with it, in 2010 it appears the battle lines are drawn, but obfuscated by right wing political fear mongering, so what looks like political choices, is in effect a spiritual war between those embrace the America of 2010, and those who seek to return to 1959.
Where does this leave President Barack Obama as he looks toward his second term? Mr. Obama has to understand that while he was swept into office by an emphatic gust of change, many of his initiatives have been met with strong and savage resistance, undermining his narrative, and his prospects for re-election. Mr. Obama must continue to work on a policy level to energize his base, keeping his promise to withdraw from Afghanistan in July of 2011, continue to push for a strong climate bill, action on immigration, work for energy independence, and seek venture capital to fuel a new green economy all which will have a positive effect on the most important domestic issue – jobs.
Yet Mr. Obama must continue a counter narrative which speaks to the higher angels of this country. In 1960 John F. Kennedy challenged America by saying “ask not what my country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.” In 2010 President Obama must challenge America and ask “what kind of country are you willing to be” are you willing to go hard to assure that we remain a tolerant, open minded society, capable of embracing those from different cultures, with different orientations, and different perspectives, or will we allow those who seek to preserve the status quo to prevail and hurtle us back to a less kind and gentle nation?
Mr. Obama must provide clarity to America so there is little doubt what is at stake. 1959 was a very good year, a historic year in many respects, but 1959 very well may represent the last year of the old world order, and although in 1959 not many of us knew what change would look like fifty years later, many knew change was afoot. Barack Obama must remind us that the America of 1959 no longer exists, and we must now allow those anti change forces to push us back into a world of darkness, intolerance, fear, and hate.
As I write this blog, interracial, and gay couples interact with a growing sense of confidence, a man of color is the President of the United States, the most dynamic athletes in baseball “America’s pastime” have the names Pujols, and Rodriguez, the NBA is dominated by African Americans. In short America has become a true melting pot with people of all races, and genders representing America in every field imaginable. I am sure that many of those living in 1959 would vision the America of 2010 through an apocalyptic prism. Yet this where we are, and this is who we are. In 2010, part of the narrative of Barack Obama is an acknowledgement, and acceptance of this new America, an America of tolerance, and appreciation of other cultures. In 1959 the mosaic of America was primary a fusion of two old world cultures, the protestants of England that founded this country, and the catholic immigrants, although the presence and genius of the African American community forced America to embrace the genius of Langston Hughes, W.E.B.Dubois, Jackie Robinson, Duke Ellington, and Paul Robeson. Now in 2010 that mosaic has expanded, into a variety of shades, and hues, to the effect that in the former French creole territory that is now the state of Louisiana, there is a Catholic Governor with Hindu roots, and a Vietnamese congressman. This is who we are, and this what we are.
With all due respect to Barack Obama and his campaign for change which I was a part of, President Obama was a reflection of the change underfoot in America, but not its origin. Those winds of change started over a hundred years ago manifested by the Pan African movement, the growth of labor unions, woman’s suffrage movements and other change oriented organizations. Change also came in the form of demographics. That forging of the new American mosaic was sometimes organic, sometimes ugly, sometimes forced. Greed and poverty and hopes for opportunity were the underpinnings of the Hispanic growth. Wars and foreign misadventures led to the migration of Muslims, Bosnians, and Vietnamese. Asians came to America seeking opportunities and to escape poverty and/or oppression at home. Social change was also produced by sheer force of will as marches, assassinations riots, were the building blocks for change for African Americans, as the Civil Rights Movement became the template for other movements like native America, woman’s, and gay rights. Movies like Guess Who’s coming to Dinner forced America to look at an old and incendiary issue like interracial relationships.
In every case the forces of change brought about strong resistance, as fears, ignorance, and group self loathing often gave rise to violent push backs. Thus bullets felled Martin, and Malcolm, but also social “outliers” like Harvey Milk and John Lennon. Interracial couples would wake up to cross burnings. Abortion doctors were often targets, and unfortunate ones like Dr. George Tiller were brutally murdered. In 1998 Spike Lee’s Do the Right Thang illuminated the ethnic tensions that existed in Brooklyn between Koreans, Italians, and African American as a result of that boroughs changing landscape. In New Orleans, Vietnamese immigrants were shunned by whites and blacks, until the horrors of Katrina forced the Vietnamese to stand and be counted. Change is not pretty, but change is enviable. The question has always been how do we as a culture choose to deal with it, in 2010 it appears the battle lines are drawn, but obfuscated by right wing political fear mongering, so what looks like political choices, is in effect a spiritual war between those embrace the America of 2010, and those who seek to return to 1959.
Where does this leave President Barack Obama as he looks toward his second term? Mr. Obama has to understand that while he was swept into office by an emphatic gust of change, many of his initiatives have been met with strong and savage resistance, undermining his narrative, and his prospects for re-election. Mr. Obama must continue to work on a policy level to energize his base, keeping his promise to withdraw from Afghanistan in July of 2011, continue to push for a strong climate bill, action on immigration, work for energy independence, and seek venture capital to fuel a new green economy all which will have a positive effect on the most important domestic issue – jobs.
Yet Mr. Obama must continue a counter narrative which speaks to the higher angels of this country. In 1960 John F. Kennedy challenged America by saying “ask not what my country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.” In 2010 President Obama must challenge America and ask “what kind of country are you willing to be” are you willing to go hard to assure that we remain a tolerant, open minded society, capable of embracing those from different cultures, with different orientations, and different perspectives, or will we allow those who seek to preserve the status quo to prevail and hurtle us back to a less kind and gentle nation?
Mr. Obama must provide clarity to America so there is little doubt what is at stake. 1959 was a very good year, a historic year in many respects, but 1959 very well may represent the last year of the old world order, and although in 1959 not many of us knew what change would look like fifty years later, many knew change was afoot. Barack Obama must remind us that the America of 1959 no longer exists, and we must now allow those anti change forces to push us back into a world of darkness, intolerance, fear, and hate.
Saturday, July 31, 2010
GOVERNANCE IN A TIME OF FEAR
In the days that followed the Obama election there was much talk of how Barack Obama was studying Abraham Lincoln to the degree that Doris Kearns Goodwin’s book Team of Rivals was revised. Yet the president and the times that face President Obama truly reflect both President Lincoln and also President Roosevelt. Both presidents were elected in critical times in this countries history. Yet today, as I assess the current state of the Obama Presidency, there is a growing and disconcerting trend. There remains a deep and profound mistrust, and fear of an Obama presidency, and to be clearer about a black man in the white house. In the latter days of the presidential race, conservative commentator Pat Buchanan often reminded viewers that until the September 17th meltdown, the race was a virtual dead heat. Senator McCain’s “fundamental” remarks and Barack Obama’s calm demeanor allowed many voters to basically “hold their nose” and give Obama then nod, believing that they could trust him to manage the economy. It is clear that many voted with their fingers crossed. Yes President Obama is very popular as a president, but it is clear now that the strategy of the Republican Party is to tap in to the visceral and latent fear that many in Americans have. It is almost as if they played back the Palin rallies of last fall, and made a strategic decision that to fear as an organizing principle is the hand that needs to be played.
This is Barack Obama’s three am moment. How to govern, and introduce change in the face of fear. The Republican Party has been very effective in parlaying fear both real and imagined into policy. Often that policy when the cloak of fear has been removed is exposed for fraudulent, anti democratic, and possibly illegal. The democrats to their discredit have never learned the art of the down and dirty welfare. It was many democrats who a year ago feared that the Obama candidacy would crumble under attack in the manner that the Gore and Kerry efforts did, but Denver in a speech labeled “manly” ironically by Pat Buchanan, Barack Obama assuaged such fears. Barack Obama if given truth serum would acknowledge that he underestimated the voracity of the pent up anger that was glossed over in the after math of his election. He hoped that his audacity for hope would be a precursor for the audacity of change. I believe that Barack Obama saw an America weary of divisiveness and fear and would support his agenda. Perhaps he was wrong. Those who support the status quo have never had such illusions of a kinder gentler America, those who support the status quo, bided their time, licked their wounds and now are revitalized.
The pattern is familiar and scary, and it there is nothing to suggest that it will get any better, at the Palin rallies last fall there were cries of “off with his head”, during the health care debate President Obama is seen has been compared to Adolph Hitler, called a socialist, and now the overseer of a “death panel” that will be the final arbiter of life and death for the elderly. Yet in my opinion this is just a test. If we think the passion is turned up on health care, just wait until 2010 when immigration is on the table. For those who have irrational fears, then “noxious” mix of a black president developing policy for Mexicans may be too much to bear. This it the America of 2010. Changer is coming, and the fear is rising. How President Obama governs in this atmosphere will be very interesting. My thoughts are that competence, and commitment, to change is the only course. With very few exceptions Barack Hussein Obama has been steady at the wheel, understanding the nuances, of governance, pushing the right buttons, and doing what is needed rather than what is popular.
October 2009
This is Barack Obama’s three am moment. How to govern, and introduce change in the face of fear. The Republican Party has been very effective in parlaying fear both real and imagined into policy. Often that policy when the cloak of fear has been removed is exposed for fraudulent, anti democratic, and possibly illegal. The democrats to their discredit have never learned the art of the down and dirty welfare. It was many democrats who a year ago feared that the Obama candidacy would crumble under attack in the manner that the Gore and Kerry efforts did, but Denver in a speech labeled “manly” ironically by Pat Buchanan, Barack Obama assuaged such fears. Barack Obama if given truth serum would acknowledge that he underestimated the voracity of the pent up anger that was glossed over in the after math of his election. He hoped that his audacity for hope would be a precursor for the audacity of change. I believe that Barack Obama saw an America weary of divisiveness and fear and would support his agenda. Perhaps he was wrong. Those who support the status quo have never had such illusions of a kinder gentler America, those who support the status quo, bided their time, licked their wounds and now are revitalized.
The pattern is familiar and scary, and it there is nothing to suggest that it will get any better, at the Palin rallies last fall there were cries of “off with his head”, during the health care debate President Obama is seen has been compared to Adolph Hitler, called a socialist, and now the overseer of a “death panel” that will be the final arbiter of life and death for the elderly. Yet in my opinion this is just a test. If we think the passion is turned up on health care, just wait until 2010 when immigration is on the table. For those who have irrational fears, then “noxious” mix of a black president developing policy for Mexicans may be too much to bear. This it the America of 2010. Changer is coming, and the fear is rising. How President Obama governs in this atmosphere will be very interesting. My thoughts are that competence, and commitment, to change is the only course. With very few exceptions Barack Hussein Obama has been steady at the wheel, understanding the nuances, of governance, pushing the right buttons, and doing what is needed rather than what is popular.
October 2009
Saturday, July 24, 2010
Hitting the "Reset" Button the McKee Development Plan
Real Estate Development is a complex animal with many moving and often divergent parts. Despite the inherent complexities, that set each project apart, there are several ingredients that ring true of any development project regardless of their size and scope For example; the developer has to cobble together a financing package that inspires confidence with his bankers. In addition, there is a political dimension that has to be accounted for. As land use, property acquisition, availability of public funds and tax credits all require the support of the political class. In addition to the financial and bureaucratic reality, there has to be community “buy in” which in the best case scenario, starts long before the first loan application is made, or shovel has been planted. And finally as those who envisioned the Ball Park Village to accompany the new Busch Stadium discovered, the state of economy in general and the commercial and retail market in particular always has the potential to wreak havoc with the most grandiose of visions.
And if the economic hurdles weren’t high enough, there are also social and cultural considerations that cannot be ignored. Especially in St Louis where racial polarization and distrust seem to be engrained in our civic DNA, therefore any developer with plans for North St. Louis, but fails to include this communities’ social profile in his planning, is subject to a rude awakening. What that means is that accounting for a long standing feeling that North St Louis has consistently gotten the short end of the stick is for a developer, “job one”. Secondly a developer that does his homework would be aware that many in the African American community hold a general distrust toward “outsiders” who they believe come to their community with a singular drive for profit with little regard for the needs of the community. Because many of these “outliers” gained entrance into the community by first establishing their bonafides with African American leaders, this distrust may also extend those same leaders who paved their way. In either case those concerns will continue to be a factor in how receptive the African American community is toward any major development plan. North city feels it has been burned too often by failed development plans and therefore their desire to impose their will on the development project of West County developer Paul McKee is rooted a history of failed promises. And because Mr. McKee’s failed to gain community support on the front end, his development vision has become the cause célèbre for community activists and residents.
As this billion dollar battle over the future of five hundred acres of prime city real estate grinds forward, there was little doubt that one of the battlegrounds would be the courts. As such, the North side development plan ended up in the court room of circuit judge Robert Dierker. Judge Dierker’s recent ruling which essentially served as a judicial “thumbs down” for the development project has put a huge dent in McKee’s plan. Struck down by judicial gavel was the controversial tax incremental financing or TIF part of the plan that was approved by the Board of Alderman in October. Judge Dierker’s decision was based on his opinion that the statutes that govern TIF applications should not have been applied to the Northside Development Plan. While not as complex as those exotic Wall Street financial instruments like derivatives, and default swaps, TIFs were started in California in the fifties to creatively attract financing to a development. Since the seventies TIFs have increased in usage to compensate for the reduction in federal development funds. The premise of a TIF is the tax revenue of undeveloped parcels will increase once those parcels have been fully developed, and the a portion of those increases can then be used to pay for public improvements that the municipality may see as desirable, but without the TIF would not have the money to pay for without increasing taxes. In making his ruling, Judge McKee smacked down the Board of Alderman for overreach, and therefore sent Paul McKee scurrying back to the drawing board. Whether Mr. McKee can truly deliver on hi vision without the TIFs remain to be seen.
Meanwhile opponents of the development project cheer the ruling but they have also cited the potential for massive housing disruption via eminent domain as a reason to oppose the bill, McKee’s promises of equitable treatment notwithstanding. Others, who opposed the plan, have raised the specter of gentrification, which has been a long standing code word that has provoked fear in depressed communities. Yet as these battle lines were drawn, blurred, and redrawn, the fact remains the status quo i.e. an underdeveloped community with boarded up buildings and vacant lots is not a tenable solution. Which means a “win win” solution will require both sides to revisit their lines in the sand and find some meeting of the minds that will allow something positive to happen.
As I have watched this issue unfold I am reminded of the health care battle that took place last summer. President Obama saw the insurance industry and their supporters as proponents of the status quo, as his health care plan would impact industry profit margins. As a result, opponents of health care adopted a strategy of fear using terms like socialism, and “death panels” to arouse unenlightened passions. President Obama often conceded there were some troublesome aspects of the legislation and often encouraged legitimate debate – on the merits. What President Obama got in return was an almost intractable status quo intent on effectively throwing the baby out with the bath water. Over the past eighteen months, I have seen some interesting parallels in the health care debate and the McKee Development plan. In both cases, those in opposition talked on how they wanted change, and were only opposed to it on merits, yet in both cases they used fear, and scare tactics to rouse support. In both cases the opposition often was framed around the word no, with very little offered as a viable alternative. And ultimately, just as it was in health care, what is needed is for the emotional volume to be turned down, so that real proactive, and solution based discussions can take place.
Is Paul McKee the perfect developer? He would probably be the first to tell you no, and acknowledge that he has made mistakes in the roll out of the plan which have served to undermined his efforts. But then again, recent history of development in North St Louis will reveal a long line of dubious development deals that lacked the type of communal “due diligence” that is taking place now. Which begs the question why some who in the past were avid supporters of development projects that had even more red flags then this one, now are strident in their opposition of this plan? That said, Judge Dierker's decision ultimately provides an opportunity for both sides to hit the proverbial “reset” button. The glare of the spotlight on the plan has revealed some flaws in the project that need to be attended to, yet for those to oppose the plan and refuse to work with Mr. McKee, exposes them in the minds of some as obstructionist with their own axes to grind. In addition to hitting the “reset” button, Judge Dierker’s ruling provides an opportunity for all stakeholders to sit back down at the table and grind out their differences.
As with all multi million dollar ventures, this one has attracted both those who should be at the table as well as those who shouldn’t be there. Unfortunately for the process, what this project has not attracted is an honest broker, one with no “skin in the game” who can galvanize community support, while making sure the communities’ concerns are assuaged. That middle man should have enough gravitas with both sides to remind them that this development project needs to happen. For a city with a damaged psyche, we should be striving to lug a cumbersome, but needed project over the finish line. We need trusted leaders to provide context and perspective and remind this community on where we have been, and were we are going as a community, and how great communities find a way to get hard things done.
Over one hundred years ago, St. Louis hosted both a World’s Fair and the 1904 Olympic Games. One hundred years ago, the “Gateway to the West”, was one of the crown jewel cities of an emerging nation. The twenty century however has not been kind to St Louis as witnessed by the decades of decline which included significant population loss, the exodus of major corporate headquarters, and an overall diminishing of civic pride. Yet, despite all those “negatives” there appears to be a new pulse of revival as evidenced by a more livelier downtown nightlife, emerging neighborhoods like South Grand, the expansion of the Loop, the hosting of the NCAA Men’s Final Four in 2004, and the Baseball All Star Game in 2009. The fact that St. Louis is a major contender for the 2012 Democratic National Convention speaks volumes to the hard work done by many to reverse the trends. This revival would not be possible without a combination of vision, cooperation, and a willingness to work through tough issues.
Yet North St. Louis stands out as a source of derision, and division, due in large measure to a history with dysfunction, poor planning, and a poor political leadership. In addition, this project exacerbates what seems to be an irreconcilable chasm between many in North St. Louis and current Mayor Francis Slay. Mr. McKee’s development project is not a panacea for all that ills this community, and while massive in scope, it does not include other depressed areas like the Ville, Greater Ville or Walnut Park. Ultimately one would hope that Mr. McKee’s project can serve as a template for impactful development and unleash a critical mass of revival that could spread further North to other afflicted areas. Time always is of the essence, although Mr. McKee says Judge Dierker’s ruling notwithstanding, he plans to forge ahead. Hopefully he stays true to his word, as in the Obama Health care plan, we should be mindful that if we miss this opportunity, the legacy may be another generation of neglect in North St. Louis as the rest of the city moves on.
And if the economic hurdles weren’t high enough, there are also social and cultural considerations that cannot be ignored. Especially in St Louis where racial polarization and distrust seem to be engrained in our civic DNA, therefore any developer with plans for North St. Louis, but fails to include this communities’ social profile in his planning, is subject to a rude awakening. What that means is that accounting for a long standing feeling that North St Louis has consistently gotten the short end of the stick is for a developer, “job one”. Secondly a developer that does his homework would be aware that many in the African American community hold a general distrust toward “outsiders” who they believe come to their community with a singular drive for profit with little regard for the needs of the community. Because many of these “outliers” gained entrance into the community by first establishing their bonafides with African American leaders, this distrust may also extend those same leaders who paved their way. In either case those concerns will continue to be a factor in how receptive the African American community is toward any major development plan. North city feels it has been burned too often by failed development plans and therefore their desire to impose their will on the development project of West County developer Paul McKee is rooted a history of failed promises. And because Mr. McKee’s failed to gain community support on the front end, his development vision has become the cause célèbre for community activists and residents.
As this billion dollar battle over the future of five hundred acres of prime city real estate grinds forward, there was little doubt that one of the battlegrounds would be the courts. As such, the North side development plan ended up in the court room of circuit judge Robert Dierker. Judge Dierker’s recent ruling which essentially served as a judicial “thumbs down” for the development project has put a huge dent in McKee’s plan. Struck down by judicial gavel was the controversial tax incremental financing or TIF part of the plan that was approved by the Board of Alderman in October. Judge Dierker’s decision was based on his opinion that the statutes that govern TIF applications should not have been applied to the Northside Development Plan. While not as complex as those exotic Wall Street financial instruments like derivatives, and default swaps, TIFs were started in California in the fifties to creatively attract financing to a development. Since the seventies TIFs have increased in usage to compensate for the reduction in federal development funds. The premise of a TIF is the tax revenue of undeveloped parcels will increase once those parcels have been fully developed, and the a portion of those increases can then be used to pay for public improvements that the municipality may see as desirable, but without the TIF would not have the money to pay for without increasing taxes. In making his ruling, Judge McKee smacked down the Board of Alderman for overreach, and therefore sent Paul McKee scurrying back to the drawing board. Whether Mr. McKee can truly deliver on hi vision without the TIFs remain to be seen.
Meanwhile opponents of the development project cheer the ruling but they have also cited the potential for massive housing disruption via eminent domain as a reason to oppose the bill, McKee’s promises of equitable treatment notwithstanding. Others, who opposed the plan, have raised the specter of gentrification, which has been a long standing code word that has provoked fear in depressed communities. Yet as these battle lines were drawn, blurred, and redrawn, the fact remains the status quo i.e. an underdeveloped community with boarded up buildings and vacant lots is not a tenable solution. Which means a “win win” solution will require both sides to revisit their lines in the sand and find some meeting of the minds that will allow something positive to happen.
As I have watched this issue unfold I am reminded of the health care battle that took place last summer. President Obama saw the insurance industry and their supporters as proponents of the status quo, as his health care plan would impact industry profit margins. As a result, opponents of health care adopted a strategy of fear using terms like socialism, and “death panels” to arouse unenlightened passions. President Obama often conceded there were some troublesome aspects of the legislation and often encouraged legitimate debate – on the merits. What President Obama got in return was an almost intractable status quo intent on effectively throwing the baby out with the bath water. Over the past eighteen months, I have seen some interesting parallels in the health care debate and the McKee Development plan. In both cases, those in opposition talked on how they wanted change, and were only opposed to it on merits, yet in both cases they used fear, and scare tactics to rouse support. In both cases the opposition often was framed around the word no, with very little offered as a viable alternative. And ultimately, just as it was in health care, what is needed is for the emotional volume to be turned down, so that real proactive, and solution based discussions can take place.
Is Paul McKee the perfect developer? He would probably be the first to tell you no, and acknowledge that he has made mistakes in the roll out of the plan which have served to undermined his efforts. But then again, recent history of development in North St Louis will reveal a long line of dubious development deals that lacked the type of communal “due diligence” that is taking place now. Which begs the question why some who in the past were avid supporters of development projects that had even more red flags then this one, now are strident in their opposition of this plan? That said, Judge Dierker's decision ultimately provides an opportunity for both sides to hit the proverbial “reset” button. The glare of the spotlight on the plan has revealed some flaws in the project that need to be attended to, yet for those to oppose the plan and refuse to work with Mr. McKee, exposes them in the minds of some as obstructionist with their own axes to grind. In addition to hitting the “reset” button, Judge Dierker’s ruling provides an opportunity for all stakeholders to sit back down at the table and grind out their differences.
As with all multi million dollar ventures, this one has attracted both those who should be at the table as well as those who shouldn’t be there. Unfortunately for the process, what this project has not attracted is an honest broker, one with no “skin in the game” who can galvanize community support, while making sure the communities’ concerns are assuaged. That middle man should have enough gravitas with both sides to remind them that this development project needs to happen. For a city with a damaged psyche, we should be striving to lug a cumbersome, but needed project over the finish line. We need trusted leaders to provide context and perspective and remind this community on where we have been, and were we are going as a community, and how great communities find a way to get hard things done.
Over one hundred years ago, St. Louis hosted both a World’s Fair and the 1904 Olympic Games. One hundred years ago, the “Gateway to the West”, was one of the crown jewel cities of an emerging nation. The twenty century however has not been kind to St Louis as witnessed by the decades of decline which included significant population loss, the exodus of major corporate headquarters, and an overall diminishing of civic pride. Yet, despite all those “negatives” there appears to be a new pulse of revival as evidenced by a more livelier downtown nightlife, emerging neighborhoods like South Grand, the expansion of the Loop, the hosting of the NCAA Men’s Final Four in 2004, and the Baseball All Star Game in 2009. The fact that St. Louis is a major contender for the 2012 Democratic National Convention speaks volumes to the hard work done by many to reverse the trends. This revival would not be possible without a combination of vision, cooperation, and a willingness to work through tough issues.
Yet North St. Louis stands out as a source of derision, and division, due in large measure to a history with dysfunction, poor planning, and a poor political leadership. In addition, this project exacerbates what seems to be an irreconcilable chasm between many in North St. Louis and current Mayor Francis Slay. Mr. McKee’s development project is not a panacea for all that ills this community, and while massive in scope, it does not include other depressed areas like the Ville, Greater Ville or Walnut Park. Ultimately one would hope that Mr. McKee’s project can serve as a template for impactful development and unleash a critical mass of revival that could spread further North to other afflicted areas. Time always is of the essence, although Mr. McKee says Judge Dierker’s ruling notwithstanding, he plans to forge ahead. Hopefully he stays true to his word, as in the Obama Health care plan, we should be mindful that if we miss this opportunity, the legacy may be another generation of neglect in North St. Louis as the rest of the city moves on.
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Who cries for Latonya Perkins?
From 2000
Who cries for Latonya Perkins?
For the last month so-called “leaders” of the black community have gotten major headlines wringing their hands over the President election, the State Senate replacement for Lacy Clay, or internal workings of the local NAACP. In the past under this same black leadership there have been other headline grabbing protests, internal bickering between newspaper publishers, but strangely there is silence in the recent shooting of Latonya Perkins who was found shot to death December 3rd in North St. Louis.
Ms Perkins was the wife of Harold Richardson who is being held in custody for the shooting this past summer of police officer Robert Stanze in August. Many people in North St. Louis felt that there was more to that shooting that meets the eye.
First Mr. Richardson was stopped in connection with the shooting of a Berkley policeman. Although the officers involved in his August 8th arrest were veteran cops, the manner in which the arrest was handled was curious; especially in light of the crime they suspected him of committed.
Secondly even as Mr. Richardson was being arrested for officer Stanze’s shooting, the police continued looking for someone even though they never acknowledged there was another person at the scene. Now his wife gets gunned down barely a block away in what is called an execution style murder that the police say is ‘not related’. Yet the chronology of events leads many to doubt the official story. While the St. Louis police department may not have the negative reputation as say the Las Angeles Police, recent St. Louis Police history is replete with many questionable shootings and incidents. There has been a lot of talk and a lot of smoke, and where there is smoke there is usually fire. Yet there appears to be a conspiracy of silence by the media, the political leadership, and those who fashion themselves as black leaders.
So, who cries, who marches for Latonya Perkins? Was she just as the police and the media suggest, another black homicide victim? Or was it more? Her husband has alleged through his mother that he has been beaten in jail. Who marches for him? What are we missing here? What is being covered up? Perhaps if the black leaders rolled put as much energy in this incident as they do grabbing headlines about elections that in essence had already been decided, the internal bunglings of the NAACP, and the fumbling of the State Senate seat, maybe the real truth can be uncovered. Until then, all we have is more of what the late poet Tupac Shakur, called “Teardrops and closed caskets.”
Who cries for Latonya Perkins?
For the last month so-called “leaders” of the black community have gotten major headlines wringing their hands over the President election, the State Senate replacement for Lacy Clay, or internal workings of the local NAACP. In the past under this same black leadership there have been other headline grabbing protests, internal bickering between newspaper publishers, but strangely there is silence in the recent shooting of Latonya Perkins who was found shot to death December 3rd in North St. Louis.
Ms Perkins was the wife of Harold Richardson who is being held in custody for the shooting this past summer of police officer Robert Stanze in August. Many people in North St. Louis felt that there was more to that shooting that meets the eye.
First Mr. Richardson was stopped in connection with the shooting of a Berkley policeman. Although the officers involved in his August 8th arrest were veteran cops, the manner in which the arrest was handled was curious; especially in light of the crime they suspected him of committed.
Secondly even as Mr. Richardson was being arrested for officer Stanze’s shooting, the police continued looking for someone even though they never acknowledged there was another person at the scene. Now his wife gets gunned down barely a block away in what is called an execution style murder that the police say is ‘not related’. Yet the chronology of events leads many to doubt the official story. While the St. Louis police department may not have the negative reputation as say the Las Angeles Police, recent St. Louis Police history is replete with many questionable shootings and incidents. There has been a lot of talk and a lot of smoke, and where there is smoke there is usually fire. Yet there appears to be a conspiracy of silence by the media, the political leadership, and those who fashion themselves as black leaders.
So, who cries, who marches for Latonya Perkins? Was she just as the police and the media suggest, another black homicide victim? Or was it more? Her husband has alleged through his mother that he has been beaten in jail. Who marches for him? What are we missing here? What is being covered up? Perhaps if the black leaders rolled put as much energy in this incident as they do grabbing headlines about elections that in essence had already been decided, the internal bunglings of the NAACP, and the fumbling of the State Senate seat, maybe the real truth can be uncovered. Until then, all we have is more of what the late poet Tupac Shakur, called “Teardrops and closed caskets.”
Sunday, July 4, 2010
The Fading Spirit of 1776
In the spring of 1954 Texas Instrument Chief Gordon Teal unveiled the transistors at an industry convention. Yet what happened that spring day would have an impact that would not be understood for another forty years as the introduction of the transistor launched computers into the modern age. Looking back and considering the implications of this new technology, that fact that it was scorned and scoffed at now seems short sighted and silly. But when Texas Instrument introduced the world to the transistor, it completed a journey started by Alexander Graham Bell, which would ultimately lead to the domination of three screens. In 2008, media giants Verizon and AT&T launched their ‘three screen’ strategy designed to lure consumers to their brand by offering a one stop shop for all of your information needs via telephone, television and internet. At the same time another national phenomena was taking place.
The newspaper industry now understood what its industry brethren in the railroads felt over a century before with the advent of air travel. Newspaper readership is down losing a battle with more advanced news information platforms. As a result in the same manner pharmaceutical companies compete for the cure for cancer, or AIDS, communication companies compete for the newer and faster ways to disseminate information. Information is often what separates winners and losers. Before armies go to war they utilize their intelligence resources to gauge enemy strengths and weaknesses. Hence both the capacity to gather and disseminate information is critical - businesses use it so they can effectively market their product, for politicians information gathering helps them to plan their political campaign in the same way that military strategists prepare to prosecute a war.
Lost in this barrage of new technology, and multi platform media outlets, is a dramatic shift of power is underway. A shift so dramatic that in my view it undermines the intent of the original intent of our founding fathers which was to have a government of the people and for the people. What makes this shift dangerous is that most Americans and unaware of the lurking dangers. Therefore for many of us, the power of Washington, Congress, the President, the Supreme Court, is intact and the handiwork of James Madison lives on. Yeah right. Only a well conceived story of fiction would lead one to believe that the President of The United States really runs this country. We all remember the glorious campaign of 2008, the choked up Keith Olberman announcing that Barack Obama would be the 44th President of the United States, and the great speech in Grant Park. Yet, how does the saying go, that was then, and this is now. In the final analysis, Barack Obama’s hold to power is only as strong as the media’s desire to keep him there. But as long as Americans focus on the distilled power conferred by the Constitution to our government leaders and ignore the real power of the media to wage a mind control program that would make Joseph Goebbels blush, our blindness will continue to “energize’ the new world order.
All that to say what? The Obama Administration is a well conceived trick on the American public. Not trickery because of ill intent by President Obama, but the Obama election obscures the the reality of a democracy in decline, and a growing inability of Washington to produce real change. I am not sure if Barack Obama is a dude that understands that at the end of the day, the best he can do is to deliver “change lite’ and hope that what he does sets in motion a critical mass that can open the floodgates for future progressive Presidents.Change agendas that sound so compelling on the campaign trail reach Washington and enter a twilight zone, where the media decides for its non critical thinking viewers and listeners whether this change is socialistic, un-American, good, bad, ugly or indecent. President Obama must feel like a worn out puppet as he continually recalibrate due to the musings of the media. When he first ran for President he was not black enough, then as time moved forward he was too black, and too radical, he was praised by the media for been cool, and nuanced, now blasted for not being angry enough. And before the public can get their arms around which President Obama they should like, they media changes again.
This game is worth billions of dollars to the major networks, their outlets, talking heads, and bloggers. Whether it comes from the right via FOX or from the left via MSNBC, they both need hyperactivity, vitriol, and insecurities to keep fear moving at warp speed. Politicians have always pandered to the media, but now the pandering is so pervasive, that voters can’t keep up with the number of faces a politician may put on from day to day. Furthermore, voter’s perceptions are now crafted not by common sense, or the reality on the ground, but by the pontifications of their favorite talking head. Look no further than the influence of the media on the issue of government spending. During the Bush years, when the Bush Administration fleeced the government coffers blind, with tax cuts to the rich, and wars of choice, the right wing media was silent on the issue of federal debt and therefore the American public many steeped in personal debt, saw our fiscal imbalance as a non story. Now the conservative news media label Barack Obama as a freewheeling spender whose expansive stimulus package was borderline socialism, and therefore now the American public finds our debt as disconcerting and want to rein in spending. President Obama ought to ask them where do they want the ax to fall.
Networks understand their power in crafting perceptions. I recall in the days leading up to President Obama’s Afghanistan review decision, NBC News sent Brian Williams to Kabul ostensibly to garner American sympathy for the plight of the Afghanistan people, and to give the upcoming military buildup decision a soft landing. In addition in the aftermath of the Gulf Crisis, President Obama eschews his “cool hand Luke Persona” to tell The Today Show's Matt Lauer that somebody needs to kick BP’s ass. President Obama went hard only after the media hounded him for not being angry.
On the eve of America’s 234th birthday, the levers of power have shifted far beyond the wildest imaginings of the founding fathers. Now to be sure, the men who met in Philadelphia in 1776 understood in their own time and in their own way the importance of messaging, and image. As evidenced by no other than John Hancock whose imprimatur, was large enough to be viewed across the Atlantic by the British King. Yet the vast influence in today’s media, is unprecedented and in my mind dangerous. Multi platform, media corporations are now under the banner of General Electric – NBC, Viacom – CBS and Disney owns ABC and ESPN. And let’s not forget that Fox News owned by the world’s second largest media conglomerate News Ltd is not American owned. In a world where we zig zag from work to home, to school, to soccer practice, rehab centers, and back again, our dependency on the media has become an unseemly American addiction. News shows like the Today Show have now morphed into a hybrid of a news/gossip show, while other outlets like Fox and MSNBC have become media darlings of the conservative and progressives respectively. But just because Keith Olberman says something, in direct contrast to Glen Beck does that make it so? How much of what is said and done in Washington can truly be trusted or credited as original thought? How much is done merely for “effect”, how much is done for spin?
Over two hundred years ago they wrote, “When in the course of human events it may become necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them”. This is now an unrecognizable America, seemingly incapable of big things, where reality is suspended in favor of noise. The bands that now connect us come in the form of a “3G” network where bandwidth is king. Urban rumors, mindless chatter, gossip, fears, hatred, is now dispensed faster than you can say 1776. At a time of two wars, economic instability, a gathering ecological storm, our political leaders prefer grandstanding than grand vision. When a politician speaks, now the first question that is asked is “what audience” is he or she speaking to, lending a certain amount of two facedness by our leaders.
As Rome burned, Nero fiddled, as America continues to crumble under her own overextended weight, our leaders “mean mug” for the camera. In 1960 John F. Kennedy faced Richard Nixon in the first televised debate, according to historian the late Teddy White, those who saw the debate which pitted the younger and charismatic Kennedy against and older Richard Nixon sporting a five a clock shadow, many who saw the debate on television said Kennedy got the better of it. Those who listened to it on the radio gave the nod to Richard Nixon. All which gave birth to political style over political substance.
Our current leadership now comes with talking points, which often become the sanitized version of what is said in the media, or they make a 180 degree reversal after reading the media driven tea leaves. What we need, and what the spirit of 1776 was based on was leaders having original thought, having a vision, and doing the big things need to run a country. Today those leaders have more strings than Pinocchio, as what they say, do, or produce is done at the behest of their media masters. Today the spirit of 1776 has been replaced by a dark, foreboding media mega power whose power to control minds, takes us closer to Nazi Germany than Philadelphia and the spirit of 1776.
Lost in this barrage of new technology, and multi platform media outlets, is a dramatic shift of power is underway. A shift so dramatic that in my view it undermines the intent of the original intent of our founding fathers which was to have a government of the people and for the people. What makes this shift dangerous is that most Americans and unaware of the lurking dangers. Therefore for many of us, the power of Washington, Congress, the President, the Supreme Court, is intact and the handiwork of James Madison lives on. Yeah right. Only a well conceived story of fiction would lead one to believe that the President of The United States really runs this country. We all remember the glorious campaign of 2008, the choked up Keith Olberman announcing that Barack Obama would be the 44th President of the United States, and the great speech in Grant Park. Yet, how does the saying go, that was then, and this is now. In the final analysis, Barack Obama’s hold to power is only as strong as the media’s desire to keep him there. But as long as Americans focus on the distilled power conferred by the Constitution to our government leaders and ignore the real power of the media to wage a mind control program that would make Joseph Goebbels blush, our blindness will continue to “energize’ the new world order.
All that to say what? The Obama Administration is a well conceived trick on the American public. Not trickery because of ill intent by President Obama, but the Obama election obscures the the reality of a democracy in decline, and a growing inability of Washington to produce real change. I am not sure if Barack Obama is a dude that understands that at the end of the day, the best he can do is to deliver “change lite’ and hope that what he does sets in motion a critical mass that can open the floodgates for future progressive Presidents.Change agendas that sound so compelling on the campaign trail reach Washington and enter a twilight zone, where the media decides for its non critical thinking viewers and listeners whether this change is socialistic, un-American, good, bad, ugly or indecent. President Obama must feel like a worn out puppet as he continually recalibrate due to the musings of the media. When he first ran for President he was not black enough, then as time moved forward he was too black, and too radical, he was praised by the media for been cool, and nuanced, now blasted for not being angry enough. And before the public can get their arms around which President Obama they should like, they media changes again.
This game is worth billions of dollars to the major networks, their outlets, talking heads, and bloggers. Whether it comes from the right via FOX or from the left via MSNBC, they both need hyperactivity, vitriol, and insecurities to keep fear moving at warp speed. Politicians have always pandered to the media, but now the pandering is so pervasive, that voters can’t keep up with the number of faces a politician may put on from day to day. Furthermore, voter’s perceptions are now crafted not by common sense, or the reality on the ground, but by the pontifications of their favorite talking head. Look no further than the influence of the media on the issue of government spending. During the Bush years, when the Bush Administration fleeced the government coffers blind, with tax cuts to the rich, and wars of choice, the right wing media was silent on the issue of federal debt and therefore the American public many steeped in personal debt, saw our fiscal imbalance as a non story. Now the conservative news media label Barack Obama as a freewheeling spender whose expansive stimulus package was borderline socialism, and therefore now the American public finds our debt as disconcerting and want to rein in spending. President Obama ought to ask them where do they want the ax to fall.
Networks understand their power in crafting perceptions. I recall in the days leading up to President Obama’s Afghanistan review decision, NBC News sent Brian Williams to Kabul ostensibly to garner American sympathy for the plight of the Afghanistan people, and to give the upcoming military buildup decision a soft landing. In addition in the aftermath of the Gulf Crisis, President Obama eschews his “cool hand Luke Persona” to tell The Today Show's Matt Lauer that somebody needs to kick BP’s ass. President Obama went hard only after the media hounded him for not being angry.
On the eve of America’s 234th birthday, the levers of power have shifted far beyond the wildest imaginings of the founding fathers. Now to be sure, the men who met in Philadelphia in 1776 understood in their own time and in their own way the importance of messaging, and image. As evidenced by no other than John Hancock whose imprimatur, was large enough to be viewed across the Atlantic by the British King. Yet the vast influence in today’s media, is unprecedented and in my mind dangerous. Multi platform, media corporations are now under the banner of General Electric – NBC, Viacom – CBS and Disney owns ABC and ESPN. And let’s not forget that Fox News owned by the world’s second largest media conglomerate News Ltd is not American owned. In a world where we zig zag from work to home, to school, to soccer practice, rehab centers, and back again, our dependency on the media has become an unseemly American addiction. News shows like the Today Show have now morphed into a hybrid of a news/gossip show, while other outlets like Fox and MSNBC have become media darlings of the conservative and progressives respectively. But just because Keith Olberman says something, in direct contrast to Glen Beck does that make it so? How much of what is said and done in Washington can truly be trusted or credited as original thought? How much is done merely for “effect”, how much is done for spin?
Over two hundred years ago they wrote, “When in the course of human events it may become necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them”. This is now an unrecognizable America, seemingly incapable of big things, where reality is suspended in favor of noise. The bands that now connect us come in the form of a “3G” network where bandwidth is king. Urban rumors, mindless chatter, gossip, fears, hatred, is now dispensed faster than you can say 1776. At a time of two wars, economic instability, a gathering ecological storm, our political leaders prefer grandstanding than grand vision. When a politician speaks, now the first question that is asked is “what audience” is he or she speaking to, lending a certain amount of two facedness by our leaders.As Rome burned, Nero fiddled, as America continues to crumble under her own overextended weight, our leaders “mean mug” for the camera. In 1960 John F. Kennedy faced Richard Nixon in the first televised debate, according to historian the late Teddy White, those who saw the debate which pitted the younger and charismatic Kennedy against and older Richard Nixon sporting a five a clock shadow, many who saw the debate on television said Kennedy got the better of it. Those who listened to it on the radio gave the nod to Richard Nixon. All which gave birth to political style over political substance.
Our current leadership now comes with talking points, which often become the sanitized version of what is said in the media, or they make a 180 degree reversal after reading the media driven tea leaves. What we need, and what the spirit of 1776 was based on was leaders having original thought, having a vision, and doing the big things need to run a country. Today those leaders have more strings than Pinocchio, as what they say, do, or produce is done at the behest of their media masters. Today the spirit of 1776 has been replaced by a dark, foreboding media mega power whose power to control minds, takes us closer to Nazi Germany than Philadelphia and the spirit of 1776.
Thursday, June 24, 2010
THE ORIGINS OF A REVOLUTIONARY MIND
FIRST - My parents – Young Gifted and Black both revolutionaries, one drawn to the light, the other to the dark, but their essence was to make a change. I am reminded of the great quote by Tupac, “I may not change the world, but I will spark the mind of the one that does.” Through their energy the mind of a revolutionary was born.
My evolution was marked and sparked by events that would span a lifetime.
1959
In June of 1959 my mother felt the need to engage a game of badminton in the backyard of her parent’s home. At that time, I decided – a month early I decided to descend into human form. I was born to two brilliant people, my mother who graduated 2nd in her class from high school, and graduated from high school at age 15, and a father who was equally brilliant, but donned a revolutionary fervor. My father’s gift for writing, and chess was well documented, however he turned to crime – urban/family legend has it that he did so in support of either the Panthers the NOI or both. As a result of his crimes, my mother left him, and I had to develop my revolutionary spirit through the prism of my mother’s inherent conservatism, and belief in the American dream of me being a high flying corporate.
1968
Within a stunning, and devastating 60 days - two of the last giants of the 20th century Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert Kennedy were silenced. That summer was the most eventful and personally emotional year of my life. One of the things I remember was that I didn’t cry when Dr. King or Bobby was killed, but I cried that fall when the St. Louis Cardinals blew a 3-1 lead and lost the World Series to the Detroit Tigers. But more than the tears - it was the experiences.
The night King was killed, the television show The Flying Nun interrupted by the first news bulletin, the angry voices outside – almost immediately. The calm march in St. Louis after Dr. King’s assassination which was in a stark contrast to other “chocolate” cities was my first clue that the African American community in my city was quite “different”.
Two months later my mother gets her own “3 am call” the one to announce that Senator Robert Kennedy was shot. Given the importance of those two men in my psyche, it is no secret that a film on Dr. King forty years after his death (with one on RFK to follow) became one of my first films. The summer of 1968 I visited Arlington cemetery clearly over the wishes of my mother to “bless the Kennedy Brothers” my mother’s response was “who does he think he is – the Pope?” later that summer as a nine year I co-wrote my first political poem
“Humphrey Humphrey he’s our man, Nixon belongs in the trash can”.
Perhaps if America had listened to nine year olds, we would have avoided the scandal of Watergate. What was the impact of 1968? A long period of woulda, coulda, shoulda. What would happen in particular if Bobby had lived and continued the Quixotic Kennedy narrative? Did the government really kill great men – and why – for who? I didn’t realize as a nine year old that was my natural path to evolution was to ask the tough questions, say the tough things, and ultimately define myself on my terms – not by societies. But life got in the way, and my journey to evolution took many twists and turns, so that by the time I had reached 30 on June 20th, 1989 – I was oblivious to what direction I should take my life.
1973
On June 25, 1973 my eight grade teacher Elmeda Harris wrote in my class autograph book,
“Since you love history so much, go out and make it”
That summer I lost a battle of wills with my mother who first angered me by cancelling my 8th grade graduation party because I didn’t score in the first tier of the IBS (Iowa Test of Basic Skill). But more importantly, she defied my wished to matriculate to high school at Charles Sumner High School – the oldest African American high school west of the Mississippi river. Sumner High was the school of my family as well as tennis notables that included Comedian Richard “Dick” Gregory, and Tina Turner, and where Arthur Ashe honed his tennis game under the tutelage of Richard Hudlin. Instead I was shipped off to Thomas Jefferson College Prep School one of the most exclusive private boarding schools in the country, where I was introduced to Jackson Browne, Loggins and Messina, Paul McCartney, as well as Homer’s Iliad which I had to translate from Homeric Greek to English.
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος
Sing, O goddess, the anger of Achilles son of Peleus
The net result of my mother’s Pyrrhic victory was a widening of my social horizons, as well as the foundations of a thirty year struggle to define myself on my terms, not hers.
1992
I recall sitting with my grandmother as LA burned during the riots, amazed and yet – removed from “those people”. At the moment of this writing, I am not sure of the origin for my subconscious animus with so much that defined black culture, but I do understand that what I looked outward and saw elements of blackness that I viewed as a reflection of assimilation, and slave mentality, I looked at it with a sense of disdain. In addition, I viewed black displays of emotion mentally “mouthing enough already” unaware of my own slave mentality that created a natural disdain on anything that I viewed as over the top and loud. As a result for a black man to have claimed to have “been there” at the beginning of rap with the release of Rappers Delight in 1979, but by 1989 rap had become too loud too ghetto and I tuned out in favor of The Who, Jackson Browne and the Eagles. By 1980 a person emotionally bonded with the Kennedys cast their first presidential vote for a republican Ronald Wilson Reagan. By 1980 a person who prided himself on his ability to write only wrote resumes. All that changed in the early 90’s.
In 1991 my plan to climb up the banking ladder was obliterated when I was mysteriously fired from then Mercantile Bank. (of course I never mentioned that in job interviews) soon after I worked at call center and was introduced to a new world of young people in their 20’s with a POV world far different from mine. They smoked bud, listened to rap, probably never voted, some were straight “slanging and bangin.”At the same time, Spike Lee’s movie Malcolm X sparked as revived interest in the slain leader, and my reading of his autobiography was a game changer. In 1993 Dr. Dre’s The Cronic as well as the plant that the name comes from, reintroduced me to a sub culture that I had ignored and often dismissed. If that was not enough I was introduced to the music of a twenty three year old prodigy by the name of Tupac Amaru Skakur. He had me at Cradle to the Grave.
2001
By 2001 I had transformed, my nutrition had changed, I was hitting free weights, and writing poetry and I begun to see the world through my own prism. It was during that period that I begin to find my voice as a writer, it was the most prolific writing period of my life, I wrote political commentaries, poems, and screenplays. Then on September 11, 2001 the world changed.
2008
YES WE CAN! Smarting from a failed marriage, unemployed, and sinking fast I ran into a buzz saw called the campaign for change. I always rolled my eyes when many black folks doubted that they would see a black man in the white house because I believed firmly that we have been pacified to the extent that a black person could be trusted by America’s hidden king makers to steer the good ship America. I also felt it would be the “rank and file” average white American that would have issues with a black man. Not an early convert to the Obama mission, I even told my wife at the time, not to worry about putting an Obama sign in the front yard, because he would be history by Super Tuesday. I was wrong. By the summer of 2008, I was knocking on doors, making phone calls, and even ended up on Canadian television late in the campaign. The historic election of Barack Obama reconnected me back to politics, even though I remained at the core an independent political agnostic.
The writings in this book are a reflection a flawed soul on a path to personal evolution, and Liberation. The essays, commentary, and poetry, represent a mere down payment on my spiritual debt that I owe to honor my gifts, my guardian spirits, my ancestors, and the Creator.
My evolution was marked and sparked by events that would span a lifetime.
1959
In June of 1959 my mother felt the need to engage a game of badminton in the backyard of her parent’s home. At that time, I decided – a month early I decided to descend into human form. I was born to two brilliant people, my mother who graduated 2nd in her class from high school, and graduated from high school at age 15, and a father who was equally brilliant, but donned a revolutionary fervor. My father’s gift for writing, and chess was well documented, however he turned to crime – urban/family legend has it that he did so in support of either the Panthers the NOI or both. As a result of his crimes, my mother left him, and I had to develop my revolutionary spirit through the prism of my mother’s inherent conservatism, and belief in the American dream of me being a high flying corporate.
1968
Within a stunning, and devastating 60 days - two of the last giants of the 20th century Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert Kennedy were silenced. That summer was the most eventful and personally emotional year of my life. One of the things I remember was that I didn’t cry when Dr. King or Bobby was killed, but I cried that fall when the St. Louis Cardinals blew a 3-1 lead and lost the World Series to the Detroit Tigers. But more than the tears - it was the experiences.
The night King was killed, the television show The Flying Nun interrupted by the first news bulletin, the angry voices outside – almost immediately. The calm march in St. Louis after Dr. King’s assassination which was in a stark contrast to other “chocolate” cities was my first clue that the African American community in my city was quite “different”.
Two months later my mother gets her own “3 am call” the one to announce that Senator Robert Kennedy was shot. Given the importance of those two men in my psyche, it is no secret that a film on Dr. King forty years after his death (with one on RFK to follow) became one of my first films. The summer of 1968 I visited Arlington cemetery clearly over the wishes of my mother to “bless the Kennedy Brothers” my mother’s response was “who does he think he is – the Pope?” later that summer as a nine year I co-wrote my first political poem
“Humphrey Humphrey he’s our man, Nixon belongs in the trash can”.
Perhaps if America had listened to nine year olds, we would have avoided the scandal of Watergate. What was the impact of 1968? A long period of woulda, coulda, shoulda. What would happen in particular if Bobby had lived and continued the Quixotic Kennedy narrative? Did the government really kill great men – and why – for who? I didn’t realize as a nine year old that was my natural path to evolution was to ask the tough questions, say the tough things, and ultimately define myself on my terms – not by societies. But life got in the way, and my journey to evolution took many twists and turns, so that by the time I had reached 30 on June 20th, 1989 – I was oblivious to what direction I should take my life.
1973
On June 25, 1973 my eight grade teacher Elmeda Harris wrote in my class autograph book,
“Since you love history so much, go out and make it”
That summer I lost a battle of wills with my mother who first angered me by cancelling my 8th grade graduation party because I didn’t score in the first tier of the IBS (Iowa Test of Basic Skill). But more importantly, she defied my wished to matriculate to high school at Charles Sumner High School – the oldest African American high school west of the Mississippi river. Sumner High was the school of my family as well as tennis notables that included Comedian Richard “Dick” Gregory, and Tina Turner, and where Arthur Ashe honed his tennis game under the tutelage of Richard Hudlin. Instead I was shipped off to Thomas Jefferson College Prep School one of the most exclusive private boarding schools in the country, where I was introduced to Jackson Browne, Loggins and Messina, Paul McCartney, as well as Homer’s Iliad which I had to translate from Homeric Greek to English.
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος
Sing, O goddess, the anger of Achilles son of Peleus
The net result of my mother’s Pyrrhic victory was a widening of my social horizons, as well as the foundations of a thirty year struggle to define myself on my terms, not hers.
1992
I recall sitting with my grandmother as LA burned during the riots, amazed and yet – removed from “those people”. At the moment of this writing, I am not sure of the origin for my subconscious animus with so much that defined black culture, but I do understand that what I looked outward and saw elements of blackness that I viewed as a reflection of assimilation, and slave mentality, I looked at it with a sense of disdain. In addition, I viewed black displays of emotion mentally “mouthing enough already” unaware of my own slave mentality that created a natural disdain on anything that I viewed as over the top and loud. As a result for a black man to have claimed to have “been there” at the beginning of rap with the release of Rappers Delight in 1979, but by 1989 rap had become too loud too ghetto and I tuned out in favor of The Who, Jackson Browne and the Eagles. By 1980 a person emotionally bonded with the Kennedys cast their first presidential vote for a republican Ronald Wilson Reagan. By 1980 a person who prided himself on his ability to write only wrote resumes. All that changed in the early 90’s.
In 1991 my plan to climb up the banking ladder was obliterated when I was mysteriously fired from then Mercantile Bank. (of course I never mentioned that in job interviews) soon after I worked at call center and was introduced to a new world of young people in their 20’s with a POV world far different from mine. They smoked bud, listened to rap, probably never voted, some were straight “slanging and bangin.”At the same time, Spike Lee’s movie Malcolm X sparked as revived interest in the slain leader, and my reading of his autobiography was a game changer. In 1993 Dr. Dre’s The Cronic as well as the plant that the name comes from, reintroduced me to a sub culture that I had ignored and often dismissed. If that was not enough I was introduced to the music of a twenty three year old prodigy by the name of Tupac Amaru Skakur. He had me at Cradle to the Grave.
2001
By 2001 I had transformed, my nutrition had changed, I was hitting free weights, and writing poetry and I begun to see the world through my own prism. It was during that period that I begin to find my voice as a writer, it was the most prolific writing period of my life, I wrote political commentaries, poems, and screenplays. Then on September 11, 2001 the world changed.
2008
YES WE CAN! Smarting from a failed marriage, unemployed, and sinking fast I ran into a buzz saw called the campaign for change. I always rolled my eyes when many black folks doubted that they would see a black man in the white house because I believed firmly that we have been pacified to the extent that a black person could be trusted by America’s hidden king makers to steer the good ship America. I also felt it would be the “rank and file” average white American that would have issues with a black man. Not an early convert to the Obama mission, I even told my wife at the time, not to worry about putting an Obama sign in the front yard, because he would be history by Super Tuesday. I was wrong. By the summer of 2008, I was knocking on doors, making phone calls, and even ended up on Canadian television late in the campaign. The historic election of Barack Obama reconnected me back to politics, even though I remained at the core an independent political agnostic.
The writings in this book are a reflection a flawed soul on a path to personal evolution, and Liberation. The essays, commentary, and poetry, represent a mere down payment on my spiritual debt that I owe to honor my gifts, my guardian spirits, my ancestors, and the Creator.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
