The Occupation Will Be Tweeted

Update: Maybe this is why the media hasn’t been covering the story. The police and the politicians won’t let them. Media Can Avoid NYPD Arrest By Getting Press Pass They Can’t Get.

The MSM is beginning to cover the occupation of the United States by many of its own citizens with greater regularity and veracity since police officers in their zest to clear space are providing television and print outlets with gestapo photos of jack-booted policemen pepper spraying and assaulting individuals whose sole offense is sitting in one space too long. Prior to the use of force to arrest people for closing their own bank accounts, the usurpation of public (and some private) spaces in protest of the unequal siphoning of resources was only being detailed by modern journalists without credentials, the bloggers and tweeters and tumblrs, snapping pictures with iPhones and digital elphs and uploading those to the cloud where they shot around the world in a flash thanks to “social” media.

The ability of individuals to broadcast their experiences from tablets and cell phones is remaking journalism, citizenship, and government, from Tahrir Square to Washington, D.C. And though the corridors of power remain hallowed halls tread by elites with the good fortune to have been handed the keys, this new democratization of world citizenship is ushering in a new era of accountability which will transform who is being represented by legislators, and who is giving the orders to the aforementioned jack-boots.

Whether #OccupyWallStreet maintains its momentum remains to be seen. Whether the movement of individuals which has catalyzed the occupation of Los Angeles, Denver, Portland, Seattle, Barcelona, Madrid, London, San Francisco, Athens, Chicago, Atlanta, San Diego, etc. But the power of the people to document and distribute is real and is quickly calling into question the abuses of authority which until the advent of television were incidents isolated by locale. With the advent of television, those images, like the Edmund Pettis Bridge were broadcast, but it was still simply one-way distribution. From Davey D’s live-tweeting of the violence at Occupy Oakland to the video of students being pepper-sprayed at Occupy UCDavis, social media is creating an interactive, quick-response culture which empowers the oppressed, the silenced, the citizens to speak out, to speak truth to power, to shift the very nature of power itself.

As Efrain Nieves’ tweet heard round the world said, “Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.” Yes, he was quoting Dr. King. But the fact that this sentiment has been retweeted across the globe in a matter of hours gives us a glimpse into the changing tide of communication, into the power of social media that is changing the world.

Related articles

• Tracing the Roots of #OccupyWallStreet (greatfinds.icrossing.com)
• #OccupyUCDavis: Police in Riot Gear Use Chemical Agent on Students (crooksandliars.com)
• How the Occupy Wall Street Protesters Can Defeat the Corporate Elite (alternet.org)

I’ve got a horse to sell . . .

Horse trading is, in the original sense, the buying and selling of horses, also called “Horse Dealing”. Due to the great difficulties of evaluating the merits or demerits of a horse offered for sale, the selling of horses offered great opportunities for dishonesty. It was not to be expected that the sellers of horses would fail to capitalize on these opportunities; thus those who dealt in horses have always had a reputation for shady business practices.

There are some people selling thoroughbreds when all they have are nags in the barn.  The leaders of the Republican Party have taken to the floor of the House (and the airwaves), screaming about “backroom deals” and “struck behind closed doors, hidden from the people”, describing processes in which they have themselves participated in pejorative terms to create a frenzy and stall legislation from being enacted by Democrats. The Age of Transparency has become the Age of Whining.  Much like the 2008 presidential campaign, which saw average Americans (read: politically apathetic/ignorant) learning about primaries and caucuses, rules committees and delegate counts, the intense scrutiny of the battle to enact health care reform has raised questions about the legislative process for the uninitiated.

These cries of horse dealing, though, are disingenuous at best, and lies at worst.  The process of compromise is a necessary part of how laws get passed, of how large group decisions are made, of how the representatives of the citizens negotiate legislation which benefits both the larger group and the smaller constituencies within.  Here are four examples which serve to elucidate this point:

1. How was the Declaration of Independence (1776) passed?  Thomas Jefferson deleted a condemnation of slavery from the Declaration so that it would be palatable to the Southern delegates to the Continental Congress.

2. How was the Constitution of the United States (1787) passed at the Constitutional Convention?  Antifederalists refused to accept the Constitution as written until they were guaranteed a bill of rights which enumerated the rights of the citizens in the Republic.  Note: The Constitution was ratified by the populace of the colonies in 1789, and the Bill of Rights was ratified by the first Congress of the United States in 1789, and by the states in 1791.

3. How was the Patient’s Protection and Affordable Care Act (2010) passed? Congressman Bart Stupak (and others) refused to support health care reform until they wrangled an executive order from President Obama which iterated the ban on federal monies for abortions; Senator Ben Nelson “traded” federal economic support for Medicaid in Nebraska (his state) for his support of the health care bill in the Senate.

There are, of course, obvious abuses of power in the House and the Senate.  Both Republican and Democratic members stick “pork” projects into bills as earmarks, which bear no or little scrutiny.  Senator John McCain’s headlong dash to stop earmarks does have some merit.  But the rest of the screeching about trading for votes is pure political melodrama.  As the saying goes, “you have to give something to get something.”  Members of Congress often wrangle with each other to serve their constituencies by arranging for federal projects and monies to be directed to and implemented in their states for the benefit of their constituents.

It is frustrating to hear men and women whose responsibilities are to serve the national interest screaming and yelling while they are serving the interests of a the monied few.  It is even more frustrating to hear poor people screaming and copying those leaders against their own interests, simply because they don’t know that their “leaders” are selling them nags and calling them thoroughbreds.  I’m looking forward to the day when people can tell the difference.

Balancing Priorities

Public health insurance option.  Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.  Defense of Marriage Act.  The presidential selection in Iran.  Nuclear weapons being tested in North Korea.  The turnover of security in Iraq to Iraqis.  Withdrawal of United States’ troops from Iraq.  Deployment of United States’ troops to Afghanistan.  Global Warming.  Clean Energy.  Sonia Sotomayor.  The United States’ Supreme Court.   Being a present father to Sasha and Malia.  The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.  Pirates in the Ocean.  Pirates on Wall Street.  Main Street.  The housing and mortgages crises.  Michael Jackson’s death.  Sixty Democratic Senators obsessed with their own turf and not the people’s business.  Republicants in both houses with the same problem.  President Hugo Chavez.  The (first) military coup in (Latin America) Honduras (since the Cold War “ended”.) The Israeli occupation.  The Palestinian intifada.  Chinese ownership of American debt.  AIG. Swine Flu.  Importing and exporting but not traveling to Cuba.  Bo.  Vice President Joe Biden.  Vice President emeritus Richard Cheney.  Guantanamo Bay.  The war on terror, aka The Patriot Act.  Islamic fundamentalism.  Right to Life murder.  Unhappy liberals.  Gun control that doesn’t.  Campaign pledges.  24-hour “news” cycles.  Government transparency.  National security.  Leading the Democratic Party.  Cross-over dribble.  Quitting cigarettes.  Date night with Michelle.  Running General Motors.  Leading the free world.  Upholding American values.  What are the President’s priorities?

The last six months have been a whirlwind of activity, elation, disappointment, history, frustration, action, words, spirit, and of life.  It seems eons ago I stood with millions of Americans on the mall in Washington, D.C.  to personally witness the inauguration of President Barack Obama.  Simply typing the words, though, raises gooseflesh on my arms when I recollect the moment with gratitude, pride and hope for the better future of this country that my children will inherit.

I am of two minds about the first six months of his administration.

It seems perfect that when I turn on the television, click on to a website, check my twitter account, glance at a magazine cover, listen to the radio or download the weekly podcast from the President that Barack Obama is the face I see, the voice I hear, leading the country.  While I am amazed that we elected a black man to the presidency, I am not surprised to see him there – striding across the lawn at the white house, sparring with the white house press corps during press conferences, meeting with Chilean President Michelle Bachelet in the East Room, boarding Marine One, leading by example instead of secret fiat – he is supposed to be there, handling the business of leading the country.

On the other hand, the arbitrary back and forth, the spin on both sides of the debates, seem absolutely ordinary and business as usual, and the CHANGE we BELIEVE in seems awfully far away.  The sixty democratic senators seem to think that they’re party affiliation and majority aren’t necessary for the President to enact an agenda to help the people of the United States.  Al Franken is joining the Senate proclaiming his allegiance to Minnesota rather than the Democratic agenda for the United States.  His provincial attitude is reflective of Republican Governor Mark Sanford’s denial of stimulus funds for his state because he was “against raising the federal deficit.”  Both men missed the point.  Their priorities are askew.

The President appears to be balancing his priorities pretty well.  Democratic legislators, though, appear uncomfortable with the national validation of their agenda, with having the support throughout the country (reflected in the number of elected officials) to enact a public option on health care, to close Guantanamo, to pass the stimulus bill, to get clean energy going, to get us out of Iraq more quickly, and the list goes on . . .

We (the Democratic majority and its constituents) need to get behind the President, and start balancing Our priorities.  Healthcare, Education, Equal Rights . . . stop letting the vocal minority frame the debate and distract from the purpose of government and governing . . . “to secure these rights . . . for the governed.”  There need to be more Bernie Madoffs going to jail for ripping people off and taking taxpayer monies . . . let’s start with Henry Paulson.  There needs to be a truth commission on torture and prosecutions from the first black Attorney General.  The guilty should be punished, and the general welfare of the country should be promoted.  I’m not about revenge.  That’s not a priority.  I am about justice and responsibility – that is.

We’re Slipping

Update:  California finally passed a budget today – 2/19/09.

California used to have the fifth largest economy in the world.  Now we have the eighth.  Those three places represent billions of dollars that no longer reside in the Golden State.  And the dollars that we do possess collectively are not being used wisely or well.  Governor Schwartzenegger is overseeing yet another all-nighter in the State Senate, where the budget yesterday failed to pass by one vote.  With little brother following big brother, the California budget needed three Republican votes and received only two.  Is this a litmus test in the Gallant Old Party these days?

20,000 pink slips are set to go out today if the $42 million shortfall isn’t somehow negotiated by the end of the day.  All of this occurring as Senator (I want to be Governor of California) Feintstein lays out how the President’s stimulus package will impact California.  Unfortunately, it looks like we have two different fiscal issues going on: 1) things are hard all over, so things are hard in California; and 2) the state government is spending more than it brings in, and has been for a number of years.  Since we can’t use the stimulus monies to fill in the gap left by state government outlays, these two issues seem to be two ships passing in the night.

Oops!  In doing more reading, it seems that the stimulus package will cover part of the shortfall . . . about $11 billion dollars . . . still not sure how, but as I learn, I’ll pass on.

And California isn’t the only state hit.  With the President signing the stimulus package today, states with Democratic and Republican governors are having to make up the cash crunch by crunching people out of jobs.  And my question is simply this:

Why do people who have jobs, like the Republican Representatives and Senators (and Democratic ones, too) stand up and say, “we’re doing this for the people” when the people are losing their jobs?

It’s been argued that tax cuts are stimulative, but that’s only when you have a job.  Until then, the tax cuts that the current GOP keeps harping on will have the same effect as the tax cuts enacted under forty-three –

None if you didn’t have the money to qualify in the first place.

We’re slipping, dog.  We’re slipping.

California budget crisis jeopardizes 20,000 jobs

Senator Feinstein Outlines Funding Details for California

States in financial pinch looking at drastic cost-cutting measures

White House: Stimulus plan will add jobs

California Into The Abyss

No, we can’t go to dinner first

McConnell, Boehner, McCain, Voinovich and the rest of the whiners need to sit down and shut up.  It’s amazing that the rewriting of history continues (note to McConnell: the New Deal worked) and the philosophical bent which states that “government is the problem” that Ronald Reagan invoked and Sarah Palin mimicked while she was shooting wolves from a helicopter and pining for ESPN is still being spun like fairy tales or scary stories to entertain child-like sycophants. Rush, Sean, Ann – are you listening?

Whew!  That was a lot to get off of my chest.

It’s nice to see that thinking representatives of the republic are moving beyond their partisan differences and working to get some stimulus into the economy because people are hurting, those with jobs and without jobs, those with homes, losing homes and without homes, those who are now insured, were insured and need to get insured . . . Update: Here’s a list of items cut from the stimulus package

There are too many problems for us to be listening to horror stories, reprimanded losers or people named after erections.  To Mitch, John, John, George, Rush, Sean and Ann . . . Yeah, yeah, yeah – bend over!

Senators debate stimulus after deal

Deal announced on stimulus; weekend vote likely

McCain blasts Obama

It sorta feels like suspended animation

Does Ann Coulter Have Opposable Thumbs?

Cheney warns of new attacks

Learning the Lessons of Augusto Pinochet

For many years, Augusto Pinochet was the king of all he surveyed.  A brutal tyrant and dictator, he enjoyed the support of the United States and Great Britain, having risen to power with the explicit backing and support of the Central Intelligence Agency as he “battled communism and socialism” in Chile.  On September 11, 1973, he led a military coup of the democratically elected president of Chile, assassinating him in the process of establishing a dictatorship that saw free markets run rampant, thousands of people tortured and murdered, and the world turning a blind eye.

Fast forward twenty-five years, after he’d left power and traveled the world out of medical necessity.  He was arrested in Great Britain on international human rights charges, and lived out his life like a hunted animal, chased from court to court for the sake of justice, for restitution of his crimes and the blood on his hands, for all of the disappeared and the maimed who live with his horrors to this day.

Then there is Manuel Noriega, currently sitting in a US prison as a prisoner of war after his conviction on drug charges.  His usefulness to the United States finished, he is wanted in France to stand trial for crimes under his regime in Panama and is fighting to be “returned to his homeland” to live in some type of luxury predicated on the theft of millions from the country while he was in power.

I hear many people in the United States calling for President-elect Obama to order an investigation into the actions of the Bush administration, even before he is sworn into office.  They’ve mistaken the concept of transparency for immediacy.  Without any authority to do so, they would like President-elect Obama and perhaps Attorney General-designate Holder to signal preemptively that the president and vice president among others will be investigated for the atrocities they’ve committed like Gitmo.  Obviously, though justifiably outraged, these people have never played poker.  The President-elect is not going to tip his hand, like Representative John Conyers has done.

Like Augusto Pinochet, President Bush is under the mistaken impression that simply because he says it is so, what he is doing and has done is legal, and worse, morally right.  He and Dick will undoubtedly end up like Pinochet, arrogant enough to sit in their opulence, their ill-gotten gains, believing that there will be no calling to account for their atrocious acts against humanity, from Iraq to Guantanamo Bay to the 9^th ward in New Orleans.  Like Noriega, they will one day be languishing in a cell with no light at the end of the tunnel but the door to another courtroom.

Pinochet died, hated, alone, a shell in which evil once took up residence, and fled once the shell was used.  George Bush, a C student at best, obviously didn’t learn that lesson.  Dick Cheney, a little more academic intelligence, but less moral sense, didn’t learn those lessons.

But they will.

Bush: I would have done some things differently

Courts try to decide what to do with Manuel Noriega

Detainee tortured, says US official

Bush: President’s priority is preventing attack

Arianna Huffington: Moving forward doesn’t mean you can’t also look back

Sleeper Bill of the Month: Our Own Truth and Reconciliation Commission

Bush to give farewell address

Size does matter – the myth of small government

Ronald Reagan was wrong.  Sarah Palin is wrong.  Saxby Chambliss is wrong.  Nancy Pelosi is wrong.  Arnold Schwartzenegger is wrong.  There is a conservative mythology espoused by Reagan and continued by Palin that government regulation is somehow a bad thing.  But their argument is based on the fact that they’re both white, reasonably well-off citizens of the United States. What both of them failed to realize, and the purveyors of this myth continue to ignore in their quest for a “large government demon,” is that the Constitution of the United States specifically provides in its preamble, in its declaration of purpose, to do many things for the citizens of the United States:

1. form a more perfect union
2. establish justice
3. insure domestic tranquility
4. provide for the common defense
5. promote the general welfare
6. secure the blessings of liberty

This is the framework within which we are working, within which we live.  This is the birthright of all Americans, regardless of ability, economic status, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, age, or condition.  This is the body of promises given to my father-in-law and each naturalized citizen when they raise their right hand and swear an Oath of Allegiance to the United States of America.  And this is the “small government” that they are becoming a part of, through birth or choice, that Reagan and Palin claim “is the problem.”

The grandiose ideals exhorted in the Declaration of Independence by the most famous slaveholder in American history were codified in the Constitution after much debate.  In modern parlance, the debate continues about what our government is responsible for.  I would argue that the government is responsible for the six goals listed above.  While none is more important that the others, the Palins of the country, the Chamblisses argue that promoting the general welfare somehow means protecting citizens from gay marriage.  Ascribing this to their own limited and narrow view of Christianity, they neglect to address the secular nature of our country or the sixth goal of the Constitution, to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.

Smaller government is also a catchphrase used to justify lowering taxes, just as some people use promoting the general welfare as an argument to raise taxes on the wealthy, since “they can afford it.”  While Adam Smith did argue that the wealthy should pay more in taxes, “each according to his station,” I don’t agree with either argument.  The truth of smaller government is that we need to do more with what we have, rather than continue to scramble for more resources to meet our goals.  Smaller government means that government needs to become more efficient, and get more bang for our tax bucks.

We need to insure that all citizens have equal access, though whether they take advantage of those is a personal choice that each and every person makes.  However, assuming that government stripped down to the bones without the flesh is somehow better because they won’t have to pay taxes, and that will force everyone including the disadvantaged, the downtrodden, the mentally and physically challenged, the economically oppressed, the underemployed and others who for one reason or another require assistance in order to participate positively in American society is self-interested, selfish, and more reminiscent of fascism than the great American experiment that is our democratic republic.

Smaller government should actually mean a government that uses tax revenues to “form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity,” not to bail out investment bankers and auto-making CEOs.  And that smaller government still needs to provide the services that citizens require.  It does not, however, mean that people who don’t have an even start line (lack of employment, education, ableness, income, exposure or discrimination based on gender, race, economics, ableness, etc.) are simply out of luck, either.  The inability of states like California and the United States’ Congress to balance budgets because they refuse to spend what they can afford, not try (and fail) to afford what they spend is what causes huge ballooning deficits and “conservatives” like Sarah Palin to call for smaller government.

But they’re wrong.  Smaller isn’t better, and size does matter.

It’s more efficient government that we need.

An American Revolution

I don’t often rail against fate.  I find it useless, and energy unwisely spent.  But today I am breaking my calm, unruffled demeanor because I’m angry, frustrated – frankly, I’m pissed off.

As a student and teacher of history, I know what has happened in the United States over the last two hundred plus years:  Tupac and Biggie got shot, and their murders are “unsolved”; Clarence Thomas got confirmed to the Supreme Court, filling the seat vacated by Thurgood Marshall; King, Malcolm, RFK and JFK were assassinated; Jesse Jackson was “the black candidate” for president, not a candidate; Emmett Till; Rosa Parks; my grandfather got to serve his country but could only serve with other “colored” soldiers; two separate laws (15^th Amendment & Voting Rights Act of 1964) were passed so that my people (black men) could vote; three different laws (15^th & 19^th amendments & VRA) so that black women could vote; Hillary supporters marginalized black women, saying they were traitors to their gender; Leave it to Beaver and Happy Days are “idyllic representations of American life” with one or no black people in them; Denzel Washington doesn’t get an Oscar for portraying Malcom X, but gets one for being a cracked-out lying, thieving stereotype in Training Day; Abraham Lincoln frees the slaves over which he had no authority, but leaves enslaved the ones he could free; Thomas Jefferson writes the Declaration of Independence, then fathers five children with his dead wife’s enslaved half-sister whom he owns; the assassination of Medgar Evers; the Little Rock Nine; Plessy v. Ferguson; Jim Crow; the Ku Klux Klan; people spat on Jackie Robinson because he was good at baseball; white people who get offended when they hear the term white privilege; Bill Clinton notes that “Jesse Jackson won South Carolina, too”; the cover of TIME magazine trumpets “The economy trumps race” like race was an obstacle in the presidential election; John McCain tells his supporter, “No ma’am, he’s not an Arab.  He’s a decent, hardworking, family man.”

For these reasons and more, I am not happy right now.  Five days before Election Day, I am consternated, frustrated, worried, paranoid, tense, exhausted, ecstatic, tearful, anxious, hopeful, euphoric, confused and angry.  The free market philosophy that rose to power with Ronald Reagan, the Milton Friedman “market is god” ideal that George Bush and his henchmen have nearly perfected and ruined the country with is shredded.  The stock market is a roller coaster without seatbelts; white, black, brown, yellow, red and every other color people are losing their homes, their jobs, their teeth, themselves; the United States is fighting a war on an esoteric noun and losing an invasion that shouldn’t have occurred; and still, people are questioning, the polls are tightening in the final four days.

The cable-news beast, jaws slathering and salivating without much meat to chew since the McCain campaign is off the rails, and Obama seems to be pitch-perfect, is manufacturing more doubt by questioning yet again whether race will play a “secret part” in the voting booth.  Their buying the obvious psych-job by McCain’s campaign who claim their “internal polling” shows the race a dead heat.  Here’s the hard, cold fact:

The black man IS going to win this race.

Barack Obama will be the next President of the United States.

And I want to celebrate this, want to hug my children tight because they are helping to make it happen, they are my motivation for helping to make it happen, I want to cry over them because We are one step closer to realizing the vision of the founders, even when they didn’t see what that vision truly was.  I want the liberty to be happy with anticipation, without the dread of seeing it stolen like my ancestors were from Africa and Mexico or like my dignity when I get pulled over for driving while black.

You know what?  That’s exactly what I’m going to do.  I’m going to work each and every day to help get Senator Obama elected.  And I’m going to do it with a smile.  I’m going to do it with joy in my heart.  I’m going to do it with the Obama Inauguration Day Countdown application on my iPhone.  Because being a student and a teacher of history, there’s one more thing I’ve learned:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

This is the new American Revolution.  And we’re going to win it one person, one ballot, one vote at a time.

McCain looks to turn Obama’s Ohio Advantage

Obama’s prospects in Missouri may hinge on the economy — and race