Words, UnLtd
Google
 

                                                                                                                       
Words, Words, Words, Words, Words, Words, Words, Words,     

 
Words, UnLtd.

"Marta Steele is an editor's Editor, a master of language and a passionate advocate of what's right. You won't be disappointed. Click. Link. Enjoy."
-- Danny Schechter

"An excellent, eclectic, erudite read -- every, single month."
-- Laurie Manis

"Wonderfully fun and fascinating!"

-- Betsy Brown

"There is erudition, curiosity and a sense of wonder at work in each issue of Words, UnLtd. The commentaries raise well-reasoned doubts about the Establishment's claims of righteousness. The feature stories answer the longing we have to find beauty in this troubled world. Each issue informs, enriches, deepens and dazzles."

-- Patricia Sammon

Words, UnLtd. is a picaresque assemblage of political commentary, reviews of every description, from books to every category of the arts, personal reflections, poetry, and photography.

WHY THIS PROG BLOG, WITH THE HUGE INFORMATION GLUT STRANGLING THE INTERNET, CHALLENGING THE VERY NOTION OF INFINITY?

READ this page and don't forget the ESSAYS segment on page 2. Your comments, criticisms, and other reactions are always welcome. Please email me. I will be happy to post them and respond and let that be chain-reactive. P.S.: Donations are always welcome. (Google ads on this page do not necessarily represent my own opinions. They vary throughout the day.) I've just put up a new page on my brilliant career as a classicist--it's at the bottom of this page, far right. Here's a link to it also. And remember, whatever you decide to do with your life, from king of the world to king of the road (or queen, in either case, or prince or princess, or etc., the best way to learn humanities is from humanity, just as the best way to learn science is from scientists! See now also my new feature "POEM WHEN POSSIBLE": I am consolidating my opus and will share poems when I can. The latest set is two Boston poems, one sweet, one sour, one summer, the other winter. After the world ends, I'll still be posting, assuming that Western civilization still reigned, or at least existed when the world ended. There's just too much to say, too many contradictions. Most of the time, I'll write, we passed by homeless people, trying to ignore them, even though one of them created the very basis of just about everything we know and love--a dead white man, a homeless one, ironically named Homer.

"Here is the masterpiece on every way that the scoundrel class shred and savage our right to vote."--Greg Palast

     Grassroots, Geeks, Pros, and Pols: How the People Lost and Won, 2000-2008, by Election Integrity (EI) activist Marta Steele, is a history of the Election Integrity movement from 2000 to 2008, highlighting the corrupt practices of that decade, and how the people rallied to control and ultimately overcome them, at least in Election 2008. What happened thereafter will become another book.

     The culprits were highly corruptible and low-quality machines and the machinery that allowed them to proliferate, defying the will of the people in favor of conservative values unconcerned with the exigent issues that drew the people to the polls. Voters turned out in record numbers in 2008. Thirty percent of those who usually sit out elections (a total of about 100 million) showed up. For their will not to have prevailed would have represented the biggest travesty in our nation's history; and yet a week before Election Day both John McCain and Karl Rove were predicting a Republican victory.

     Then Rove changed his mind on the eve of Election Day, predicting that Obama would win. But this occurred after the huge battle, at so many levels, ultimately boiled down to a deposition in Columbus, Ohio, on November 3, 2008, of a Rove IT operative. Once Judge Solomon Oliver found holes in the deposition, the people's will exploded and the people's choice went to Washington.

     Perhaps the day before Election 2008 did not become the major holiday it should have because the machinery of election corruption is up and running again and the people are still fighting. But in Grassroots, Geeks, Pros, and Pols the dramatic victory achieved was a successful revolution and in the long run may be remembered for that.

     The ultimate success will not be a sigh of relief and a cheer for a brief period of time, but the permanent death of anti-American activities.

     Our vote is our sacred right, nothing we need to acquire with a government-issued photo i.d. It is the bottom line of democracy. Without it, there is no democracy, which is not an abstract noun but continuous work. All this our founding fathers knew and passed down to us, a tough legacy and challenge but well worth our necessary efforts.

Grassroots, Geeks, Pros, and Pols has just been published (September 20, 2012) and is on sale here for $20 for the first time to the public. (All sales are final. All information gathered will only be used for the purchase and nothing will be kept on file or used in any other way.)

Some interviews: Live Interview by Danny Schechter, News Dissector Radio, 10/25/12 (scroll down to podcast and advance it to center)

Interview by Rob Kall, Rob Kall's Bottom-Up Radio Show, 2/1/13

Press Kit

My YouTube discussion of book

########################################################################

3 August 2014: The Long Silence

No words by me have appeared since last March. The reason? A car accident followed by an aggressive form of cancer that took my mother, Rose Light Nussbaum Scott's life on June 8 of this year.

      I was her caretaker during that harrowing time and yet treasured and now continue to cherish the quality time we spent together. What does it take to open a window to quality time? A pair of disasters? No, more than that, because Mom slipped and broke her ankle after she'd recovered from the accident injuries.

      The ankle never healed. She caught pneumonia and the revealing X-ray showed more than that--cancer, a mutated form that ironically does respond to a new chemo pill that sells for a mere $7,000 for thirty, a month's supply.

      What's $7,000 compared to a beautiful life?

      We bargained down the price but it took about half a week, which my brother the radiologist and expert said wouldn't have saved her life. She was already too weak, after a month or two, to add a year or more to her days. She was 91. Plenty of time, many say, and a life well lived. But my neighbor said, correctly, that there is no age too old to live to, especially with the functionality my mother had--she was still driving.

      But she had lost her only brother and his first wife, both strong presences in her dwindling circle of loved ones. A cherished neighbor moved away. She couldn't read anymore because of macular degeneration (but watched Public Television to remain vibrantly aware of the outside world), had high blood pressure, wore a "panic button" around her neck whose electronics interfered with telephone reception. She couldn't learn word processing, or started to but became discouraged, a former lightning-fast typist on the passé machines we all use to pound before Microsoft Word kidnapped us into the computer age.

      She came along onto the Internet and email, proudly. Many of her friends remained luddites.

      She sorely missed her closest friends, all of whom had died while she was still middle-aged.

      She sorely missed her activist days, belonging to groups pursuing goals she believed in. All she was welcome to do was stuff envelopes for a peace group. And she was welcomed by her new circle of friends and a book group she had started and a bridge group she still attended weekly and actively. Her "bridge brains" were alive and well.

      Every morning her first newspaper section was the obituaries, where she frequently discovered auld acquaintances' departures--people she knew from her childhood mainly, or from my childhood, and so on. People she knew and would no longer run into at high school or college reunions or in the supermarket.

      But a tipping point was forcing her to move to a senior facility, and she had selected one and was in touch with the management frequently. But she said she should have made the move sooner. She so loved her home, perfectly sized for her, split-level to keep her agile at walking any number of steep stairs when she had to.

      The basement was too crowded with memories too painful, I think. Ninety-one years of her beautiful life.

      I've observed cancer as a solution before. We can get sick when that's the only alternative to an unwanted future or an unbearable crossroads. She couldn't take it, nor could she stand being cared for even by the one who I believed loved her the most of anyone alive. She went quickly, refusing food, though did take some birthday cake when I turned an unspeakable age, a milestone welcome in some ways and dreaded in others.

      Other foods were pudding and jello, a few shrimp and a few McDonald's French fries. She didn't starve herself on purpose. Cancer did.

      Though it is strange that she began to lose her appetite right after the accident. "I'm losing weight," she told me, bewildered. I attributed it to my lousy cooking and withholding of her beloved junk food from her TV watching routine.

      Last week we had the most beautiful memorial service possible, but for me she wasn't there. I have photos of her at home so lifelike I talk to them (cuckoo!). Her eyes follow me. Her subtle smile reassures me that whatever I'm doing does her proud, her darling only daughter who has never stopped trying to impress her as she wrestled with a world she is basically not terribly at home in, perpetually disoriented, perpetually marveling at consciousness, too aware how short a stay these dimensions are.

      I was always a stranger in world that welcomed and loved her--despite all the losses of her later years, more than fifty people attended the memorial service, from toddlers to seniors. She lived to see two of her children become seniors, with the third well on his way, still sporting brown hair as did my father when he died in an accident at age 79.

      She lived to see my brother add a JD to his MD credentials; three grandchildren succeed professionally, two to the tune of six figures a year and the third a PhD. She lived long enough to hold two great grandsons in her slender arms. She lived to see the publication of my first book--way too late but better than never. So much was still on her plate but she bowed out gracefully and gently while I raged as my sister-in-law urged her to go.

      So those precious months occupied my time other than my paid work hours, flexible enough to accompany me wherever our travels led. I have two vibrant videos of her, one lively conversation with her dying brother and the other an ironic interview a week after the accident in which I marveled at her longevity. Will I live that long?

      I want to die in my sleep, in the midst of a beautiful dream. Liza, no guilt allowed.

      Just take the money, scant though it be, and run, to the rest of your beautiful and I hope long and happy life.

(c)

 

27 March 2014: Diary on Elections: Misc.

I voted early in the DC primaries yesterday. The actual election day is April 1. I hope that all of the fools lose. There were so many candidates that I felt as though I were voting in a foreign country.

The polls are open until 7 pm, accommodating working people, and also on Saturdays though not Sundays.

For mayor, I voted for a novice progressive. I am so fed up with pols.

For the rest, I chose as many woman progressives as I could. There are so many Democrats in DC that instructions and sample ballots for Republicans were clumped at the end of the voters' guide as an afterthought.

In DC, when checking in, all you have to do is sign your name and it will be matched with the signature scanned into their database. You have your choice, at least at main headquarters, between ES&S iVotronics and opscans. Yikes, I didn't notice the name brand. My bad. ES&S? The two-sided opscan scanned both side at once. I watched my number, 70, added to the total. I wondered about the large number of machines compared to the small number of voters evident. Five DREs. One scanner and many booths for us. No great expense involved there.

In other news, the New York state legislature, both houses, have finally voted in favor of handing over all of their electoral votes during presidential years to the candidate who amasses the most popular votes. That makes 160 out of the needed total of 270 electoral votes to carry through this improved method of choosing our president. New York's decision awaits Governor Cuomo's signature. He has so far expressed no preferences either way. You go, Empire State and others to change our system the way it needs to go! Onward, hope!

(c)

 

25 March 2014: "Verified Voting" Ambiguated by "Verify the Vote"

On June 28, 2012, when the Supreme Court was deliberating over its final decision on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act, activists thronged on its august outside steps awaiting the decision.

In front of one rapt and enthusiastic group, a man was speaking through a bullhorn, opposing the ratification of the act. Another row of women wearing signature tee shirts, supporting them, specified their concern as anti-choice.

Those in favor of ratification of the act were silent for the most part. I was told that Amy Goodman ofDemocracy Now!was broadcasting in one corner but did not see her. Progressives did not oppose brashness with brashness.

When the decision was announced, a voice immediately responded, "Welcome to Cuba!" Cuba? What about Western Europe, which for the most part had similar, only better health-care programs for its people?

We progressives were discreet in our joy as various suits came up to the Tea Party mike to speak in support of the opposition.

"We do that usually," I thought about the Tea Party methods of expressing their opposition. They've coopted our methodology."

*****

Around 2009, the neo-nascent Tea Party took over many of the formerly Democratic or more moderate Republican seats in the House, now part of the majority. The Senate Democratic majority had lost some seats to less than sixty, so that blocking filibusters was no longer possible.

The Tea Party had taken its name and raison d'etre from the origina [left-wing] rebels who had participated in the Boston Massacre and then the Tea Party. Taxation without representation? The new Tea Party controlled the House. Taxes too high? But they had been lowered in favor of the one percent.

Where are the tyrannical King George and his cohorts? Weren't they voted out in 2008? The tyranny aspect is debatable; certainly NSA's grip over our private lives is tyrannical, but Obama strives in other ways to transcend the DINO etc. accusations hurled against him.

*****

In 2009 also, the Tea Party sprang an offshoot called True the Vote. It in turn was an offshoot of an already-extant "election integrity" oriented group that called itself the King Street Patriots. King Street, in eighteenth-century Boston, was the location of the Boston Massacre and the "routings of the Tea Party." Born in Harris County, Texas, the location of Houston, which was the second largest voting bloc in the state, the Patriots were concerned about the "staggering" shortage of poll workers, which invited fraud, among other concerns.

The group vehemently favored the requirement of voter I.D., which sharply distinguishes them from the original Election Integrity (EI) movement. But we are also concerned about administrative issues at local levels throughout the country. When groups like True the Vote and their offspring advocate for election integrity, the public, by way of Fox News and USA Today, among other mainstream media (MSM) vehicles, can easily become confused.

Who stands for what anyway? The ambiguity is amplified when one considers the name of one of the original EI groups, Verified Voting, strong since 2003 when its founder David Dill organized thousands of fellow computer scientists to oppose electronic voting. These days this same organization still plays a major role in EI (an acronym not yet coopted by True the Vote and its offspring groups), circulating daily news to EI activists daily, an indispensable service.

A newer group allied with True the Vote is named Verify the Vote.

When the principles of the American Revolution are coopted by groups that advocate "carding" of all voters, one wonders. Voting was a sacred right, not a privilege, as declared by the populist Tom Paine and the aristocratic Tom Jefferson. True, this sacred right was reserved for propertied white males back then, but despite numerous roadblocks, the direction of EI's efforts is toward universal voting sans any vestige of Jim Crow, an emblem True the Vote and its followers could use far more accurately than its professed goal of "election integrity."

Democracy is a work in progress, as scholars will affirm. Governments at all levels fluctuate in the levels its principles are perpetuated. But they all lay claim to these principles as motivations. That is a start of something great and an end sometimes achieved.

Democracy entails hard and continuous work. It embraces disparate points of view. The principles of the American Revolution belong to all of us. But they must be applied rigorously and accurately and evolve to the dictates of the times in order to survive.

A public victimized by an undemocratic economy has little time to worry about election integrity. When groups work to confuse them during the small pockets of time they steal to attempt to connect with higher levels of reality than subsistence, the opposite of education occurs: deception and ambiguity. John Adams asserted that an educated public is an important ingredient in a successful democracy.

EI must work hard to dissociate itself from its evil shadow. Strong advocacy of hand counting paper ballots as the only true way to measure the will of the people is one way to achieve this. It flies in the face of those advocating Internet voting, and this emerging battle between the "present" and the past may rise as a prominent concern of the MSM. It took ten years for the voter I.D. controversy to receive its attention.

I never thought I'd emerge on the conservative side of anything, but I am proud to advocate HCPB which, when proper methodologies we have worked out are activated, can provide the same instant gratification that electronic voting does, though it may involve less fun. (But consider the celebratory, folksy ambience of some of the old-fashioned HCPB events on election days in New Hampshire, for instance.)

On a final note, lest my main point about the dangers of an evil shadow confounding the public hopelessly be lost, I offer this recollection from a story published by Rawstory in 2006:

"In a speech to the Republican National Lawyers Association, . . Karl Rove [said to his colleagues] . . .: "I want to thank you for your work on clean elections [italics mine]. I know a lot of you spent time in the 2004 election, the 2002 election, the 2000 election in your communities or in strange counties in Florida, helping make it certain that we had the fair and legitimate outcome of the election.'" 

It may have been in this same speech that he observed that "Elections have become tainted by liberal fraud; America's beginning to have elections that are run by colonels in mirrored sunglasses."

Some of the information for this article comes from my forthcoming book whose working title is "Ballots or Bill$$: The Future of Democracy."

(c)

 

23 March 2014: Ground Operations: Battle Fields to Farm Fields: Happy Earth Day to Returning Vets

When veterans come marching home again, many are hugely traumatized, 50 percent of them suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Some become street people--the current figure is 100,000, currently comprising 25 percent of all in this category; some commit suicide, and some go home to families forever changed. Some get jobs but can't hold them down. Eight hundred thousand veterans are unemployed. All told, two million military have been deployed since the beginning of the Iraq War in 2003.

     But these days some have "beaten their swords into plowshares, their spears into pruning hooks," as if religiously converted. They have crossed a bridge to the opposite of their immediate past: farming, the ultimate peace profession, most needed in a world burgeoning toward nine billion mouths to feed. Nurturing their embattled minds, these veterans work to feed America and ultimately the world with organic produce and meats, another form of nurture, with methods already developed, some drought resistant, that require a fraction of the water needed by conventional if not GMO farming. Soil, a most precious commodity, can be kept moist through combination with mulch, both covered by a layer of dried plants like grass, farmer Colleman Ruiz later told me. A passer-by might wonder how produce can grow out of dry grass.

     These days wheat is even being grown on desert land in Phoenix, Arizona.

     We know more about outer space than we do about soil, said Dulanie Ellis, director and co-producer, with Raymond Singer, of the award-winning documentary Ground Operations: Battle Fields to Farm Fields, from which all of the information in this article is derived. Agriculture takes a huge toll on the environment. Sustainability is of vital importance. "It's about connecting with our roots and our roots are in the soil," she added later. Ground Operations is one of two hundred films being featured at the Environmental Film Festival between March 18 and March 30 in Washington, DC. More information is available at dcenvironmentalfilmfest.org.

     Fifty percent of U.S. farmers are approaching retirement age. They can mentor the next generation, a skill that is also sorely needed. Veterans can comprise their replacements, as can college graduates forced down from the ivory tower into burger flipping. Farming offers the opposite of fast food: wholesome nourishment. One million new farmers are needed in the next ten years.

     And where will the land to farm come from, besides current farmers if somehow they can transmit their legacy to the vets, most of whom can't afford to purchase huge amounts of real estate? Colleman Ruiz, a part-time farmer who grows all of his own produce, found 6-1/2 acres of affordable land south of Annapolis, Maryland. The Bureau of Land Management, through the 2014 Farm Bill, has appropriated one percent of its vast land holdings for farming. It holds 3.3 million acres of land in the far West, mostly desert land that has been proved arable, as mentioned above. Moreover, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) will lend farmland to returning veterans with three years of relevant experience.

     A new venue for farming has become city locations, including Detroit, where defunct factory land is being cultivated. This offers another alternative to those without funding for more conventional venues. Many churches occupy land that might also be cultivated by the public.

     As to the military budget, a grand total of one percent is allocated to veteran-related issues. Vets can wait up to eighteen months to receive benefits even if they come home with PTSD. One out of four are ignored because of administrative errors.

     As far as threats to this thriving new venue of employment, Monsanto won't go after veteran-famers, said Delanie. Why? They will fight back. They've had ample experience and have brought back these skills many don't know what to do with afterward.

     An insightful panel discussion was held after the screening of Ground Operations. Participants included Delanie Ellis; Elizabeth Kucinich, Policy Director, the Center for Food Safety; Calvin Riggs, farmer-veteran and owner of Bigg Rigs Farm; Colleman Ruiz, part-time farmer also employed full-time away from the land; and Ethne Clark, editor of Organic Gardening magazine.

     At the close of the event, a veteran in the audience stood up to propose that the dedicated activists presenting today deserved a Congressional Medal of Honor for their most valuable contributions to the environmentalist movement.

For more on this valuable film and its already remarkable reception and impact, see Meryl Ann Butler's wonderful interview of Dulanie at opednews.com/articles/From-Battlefields-to-Field-by-Maryl-Ann-Butler-Farmers_Farming_Healing_veteran-owned_Business-131110-129.html.

 

Photo above of Dulanie Ellis and Calvin Riggs, an organic farmer.

(c)

 

16 March 2014: New York Times (3/15/14) Blind to Ohio's Electoral Tribulations

Further to my diary yesterday, ("New York Times Blind to Ohio's Electoral Tribulations"), I realized a response was needed, a letter to the editor at least. There were many ways to go about it. This is what I came up with ever several discarded attempts, aware of how few words were possible and how much there was to say:

     "Actual history contradicts your assertion that "Ohio lawmakers know full well that there is no history of electoral fraud in the state and no pattern of abuse by any voters or groups." Why did Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) join Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones (D-OH) on January 6, 2005, to challenge the Ohio electoral delegation's assignment of its votes to Bush? Because of countless instances of corruption at every level of government from municipal to presidential in the Buckeye State in 2004. Consider Cybergate, tip of the iceberg, the event that flooded votes from Kerry's column to Bush's at the eleventh hour on Election Day. President Bush and his aide Karl Rove were seen in Columbus meeting with Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell that same day. As goes Ohio, so presidential elections have gone throughout U.S. history, not one of them without corruption. Ohio was called the Florida of 2004. History is rife with the evidence."

     That said, I will keep an eye open for other reactions to yesterday's editorial and will be very surprised if there are none.

     More than that, just out of curiosity, I checked what records I had in my book Grassroots, Geeks, Pros, and Polls . . . of the New York Times's reactions to the goings-on in Ohio around 2004. There were many, all attributing the problems to administration rather than corruption. It was an eye opener, because I do quote the Times often in my book. It seems as if the Times was relying on the "geek" principle cited by Yale scholar Heather Gerken: "Hamlin's Razor says never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity."

     As I wrote, I'll keep my eyes open for more.

(c)

 

16 February 2014: There Is Life on Mars

My mind is the farthest thing from scientific--so when my thoughts turn to scientific realities, how else can I refer to it than metascience? Surely not metaphysics, which I consider way above my potential.

     Enough with self-effacement. I read an oped by Edward Frenkel, an academic, in today's New York Times suggesting that "the universe is a simulation" created by mathematical formulae: "the possibility of the Platonic nature of mathematical ideas remains -- and may hold the key to understanding our own reality."

     As a humanities person, I know this much: we humans are endowed with very few sense perceptions and there are many more that we've never conceived of.

     Much exists in these dimensions that we can't pick up: like thriving "civilizations" on these planets we perceive as "dead." The miracle is that we are allowed to persist in our so-limited state. Perhaps these communities conceive of us as "dead"--hopelessly nonexistent and steering ourselves into a more dead state than we are now.

     So we send out telescopes and Latin messages to the farthest reaches of what we perceive as reality in search of life when it's right next door, so to speak. Even on the moon.

     It will take much evolution, if the human species persists in the face of natural and cultural decay, before we acquire the additional sense perceptions to see what we are blind to now.

     Does it take a humanities person to perceive this? I'm sure that scientists will have a lot of refutations to offer.

(c)

 

12 February 2014: The Olympics: Disgraceful Negligence

I've been watching the Olympics at prime time when I can and last night the half-pipe snowboarding event wrenched me like fingernails scratching a blackboard.

     The Russians for some reason had been unable to correctly shape the structure of the half-pipe and couldn't get the surface appropriately iced. They had tried everything including rock salt. What athletes confronted was a bump in the center (which quickly became slushy from the successive performances) that severely interfered with their momentum if not tripping them altogether.

     The Americans were favored to medal but all tanked and a Chinese contender was able to ace the course without a hitch.

     I can't help but think that an American venue of excellence received less attention than others at Sochi. Putin has attended figure-skating events where Russians clearly excel. NBC rapturously discussed their Bolshoi-oriented training.

     NBC's coverage of the half-pipe fiasco was objective. They merely supplied the usual descriptions as one American after the next tripped up--Shaun White, predicted to triumph, tripped over the bump.

(c)

 

7 February 2014: Winter Olympics!

Last night, before the opening procession of the Winter Olympics in Sochi, fear was not apparent. One protest was suggested but not corroborated: on the bottom of a snowboard was an advertisement for the Pussy Riot, the group imprisoned and squelched by Comrad Putin recently.

     No mention of terrorism. I marveled at the incredible displays of athleticism: the artistry, the physical perfection of the participants and their amazing so exquisitely and painfully hewn abilities.

     Humans have been competitive since we acquired the ability to "own" territory. Territoriality is a form of competition, as is the battle over the chosen mate. Eras later came more evolved forms of warfare.

     Then we got religion and athletic games emerged as tributes to the gods and were featured at funerals. Perfection had to be the goal (hence Platonic forms?).

     The Olympian games first entered history in ancient Greece. Our modern approximation, highly elaborated and constantly embracing new events, originated in Greece, where else, in 1896. I visited that marble stadium in Athens where these games first took place. The amphitheater at Epidaurus was far more impressive. Lots older, of course.

     Male figure skaters tumbled and spun. Snow boarders flew and whirled, slicing back into the snow through the air so cleanly, gliding downhill in ecstasy, halting their speed in a crunch of challenged physics. One snow boarder fell so hard a knee injury might prevent her return to the hills forever.

     Talking heads at microphones showed off their knowledge, sighed with nostalgia reviewing these improved versions of their turn in front of lenses, the dissection of eyes, the music they loved and trusted to victory.

     Oddly enough I thought for a minute of meeting a New York Times bestselling author doing odd jobs to scrape together pennies.

     Those are the risks, the interstices, life flying into platforms just so, risking death or penury if they miss.

     That's just the preview of life on ice and snow for the next several days. Laughter, tears, heights, and depths will all stand naked before us couch potatoes. Would we trade places with this carnival of sparkling vicissitudes? When the brutally injured young snow boarder was moved into an ambulance bound to a stretcher, she sadly beseeched her parents, "Will I still be an Olympian?"

     Life slices snow with skis, my dear, and whirls us in the air begging for quintuple lutzes. Who will do that first? Einstein's theory is being transcended. What next? Snowboard labyrinths are new, the spirit timeless.

     We're all Olympians.

(c)

 

7 February 2014: Groundhogs' Day Revisited a Week Later

Today is Groundhog's Day, the dead of the winter. It's uphill from here, second halves always more navigable, especially in the case of length of day, which increases our dose of sunlight and hence, via our pituitary endowment, improves moods.

     The fact that, according to "Psychology Today," most suicides are committed in the spring, "probably" because " the rebirth that marks springtime accentuates feelings of hopelessness in those already suffering with it. In contrast, around Christmas time most people with suicidal thoughts are offered some degree of protection by the proximity of their relatives and, at least in the Northern Hemisphere, the prospect of 'things getting better from here'."

     Things getting better from here? That's the mentality I described above.

     But when things get best, out go some lights--around Easter, the time Jesus arose from the dead?

     I'd project that those who commit suicide are way beyond religion.

     I'd need a statistic on that. Here is some research: according to the "American Journal of Psychiatry" in 2004, suicide is more likely among those who are unaffiliated religiously. According to Adherents.com in 2004, in an article based on the above source, the countries with the lowest suicide rates are deeply religious.

     Get religion.

     How much harm does it do as opposed to good? Consider a world without religion. All things are possible.

     Groundhog's Day has pagan roots. Even though other "major" holidays have pagan roots also, February 2 does not mark a major holiday. But if hell is ice and heaven fiery, to extrapolate from a poem I once wrote, then "mankind," "born to suffer," as Job once lamented, stays alive more during winter months than spring months. In other words, we are as gluttonous for punishment as Adam and Eve were way back then.

     In the very, very dead of winter, a creature emerges out of death (read: hibernation) to sniff around and then run back to safety.

     When we have need for neither heat nor cold, read: spring and autumn, especially spring, then the suicide rate escalates. Read: a totally irrational supposition.

     It is perfectly natural to meditate on suicide at this nadir of the year.

     But what follows brings a kind of warmth we all crave any time of the year, the most important holiday of them all (I've written two blogs on this), one with Christian roots that is celebrated by all who love: St. Valentine's Day. We all emerge from caves to celebrate love--those who love, anyway. Those without love have every reason to end it all, methinks.

     Groundhog's Day has nothing to do with love--I attempt to adhere to my supposed theme. But consider that we look to an animal for a most important prediction. And we are just beginning to discover how smart those supposedly lower species are--beyond superstitions.

     Oh, we have so much to learn. Far more can be considered with regard to other events than suicide before we can draw conclusions about our seasons and life/death.

     On February 2, in the depth of winter, the groundhog chooses life.

Photo courtesy of Ryan Hodnett

(c)

 

Palast Investigates II: "Vultures and Vote Rustlers"

Second in the series "Palast Investigates" and seventh DVD chronicling various aspects of the truth we must drink ourselves away from or vomit up or escape to old Disney media. . . "Vultures and Vote Rustlers" is out on the market to assail us again with life beyond our routines: Will Greg Palast's truths set us free? Is that work too hard?

      Diving headfirst into volcanoes again and again, Palast offers what mainstream media withhold: facts rather than coiffeured mannequins crooning canned infotainment. Who wants to know the truth?

      Here it is: The rich one percent torture us ninety-niners not with what they have, which is ours, but what we don't have, which is theirs unethically. Like vultures, they will kill us for it, and do so every day.

      All reports originated as assignments for BBC Television, "Channel 4 DIspatches," and "Democracy Now!"

      In one episode Palast stakes out at the suburban estate of "Goldfinger" Michael Francis Sheehan, king of the vulture capitalists, those who prey on impoverished developing countries by confiscating their debts for nickels and dimes and then charging the victims millions. In this scene Palast catches up with Goldfinger to ask him why he is squeezing the poor nation of Zambia for $40 million. Since the magnate is in litigation, he says, he cannot offer any answers.

      Another segment spins the horrific tale of an unknown predecessor to the Deepwater Horizon disaster that killed eleven people and ruined 600 miles of Gulf coastline in 2010. The cause was poor design--the rig's drilling cement could not withstand the force of a blowout. Oil workers who later suffered imprisonment or disappearance told Palast of a similar event in Azerbaijan where the same design had allowed a similar disaster in 2009 in the Caspian Sea's oil fields. 140 workers had to flee to lifeboats to survive.

      "BP concealed the information that could have saved the lives of the eleven men in the Gulf," recounts Palast. He later reveals evidence from Wikileaks that important officials knew of the Azerbaijani disaster--the country's president knew, as did BP's partners, Chevron and Exxon. Why was nothing done? "Because BP runs the country" was the answer.

      BP had armed a takeover of the government, along with the British intelligence force MI6 and the CIA, according to a double operative who worked for both BP and MI6.

      On the Gulf Coast, as of the filming, 500 yards have been cleaned by laborers and another 600 miles remain; then the process must be repeated.

      Also featured is the saga of the "end-game memo," a code word that appears in the title line of a classified memo written to Larry Summers by his "flunky," Tim Geithner--on the occasion of the 1997 deregulation of the U.S. banking system. A secret meeting was arranged between those two icons along with the CEOs of the five biggest banks in this country, "a conspiracy nut's wet dream."

      J. P. Morgan was creating $88 trillion in derivatives, which had to go somewhere. The solution was to force 155 nations to "accept these toxic assets," to deregulate their markets via the World Trade Organization, which had received "such a warm welcome" in Seattle ten years ago.

      A group of financial speculators known as Hamsa, named for the "the evil eye in an open hand," is another focus. A group of wealthy countries, including Europe, the United Kingdom, and the United States, were about to pay off the crippled developing country Liberia's national debt, as part of the debt forgiveness policy advocated by Nobel Peace Laureate Nelson Mandel, when Hamsa swooped down upon them and carried it off, now suddenly worth $28 million.

      Someone had discovered an old file from the 1980s containing Liberia's debt documents and sold them to these vultures, who compounded them for astronomical profit from Liberians, 80 percent of whom who earn on average $1 a day. Another Nobel Peace laureate, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, president of Liberia, wonders how they can live with themselves. "Have a conscience and give this country a break," she says.

      And the feast goes on. Ohio's early voting Sundays are cut down from four to one, with hours also cut to four, by the benevolent Secretary of State John Husted. Scenes from a rocking African American church service in Toledo, Ohio, precede the one remaining "Souls to the Polls Day," when blacks are bussed to the polls after church services. Some of these hardworking people must encompass two to three jobs a day during the week. Signs tempt these voters to wait for Election Day, which many of them usually don't; meanwhile they are issued not paper ballots but applications for absentee ballots, a category Palast hates because of the many that are rejected--here the figure is given as one to three million--"like playing bingo with your vote." These ballots can be eliminated if even unnecessary blank spaces are not filled in. "A systematic attempt to eliminate the hard core base of the Democratic Party, and they're getting away with it . . . the new Jim Crow," according to elections attorney and professor Bob Fitrakis.

      On a large blackboard in the waiting room where the thousand voters are herded are the words "early voting = "absentee voting." Not the truth.

      Out of a total of eleven chapters, the first anticipates Palast's next DVD, of his latest bestseller "Billionaires and Ballot Busters," on election corruption and the marionetteers maneuvering it, all of whom happen to belong to the beloved one percent. The preview begins by anticipating Sarah Palin's inauguration as president in 2017.

      The end chapter lists credits. Another empowering leitmotif throughout the chapters is lessons in how to be an investigative reporter, narrated as asides as Palast wends his animated way throughout. As careers go, few wide-eyed college grads would be tempted to join Palast. Who wants to jump into volcanoes?

      But some aspire toward those many skillsets, too much education, and excessive droves of brain, versatility, and sang froid, very froid. The protagonist kills hideous monsters, chasing them through impossible terrains littered with the remains of their victims. Palast never loses his dry-as-dust humor, arguably the most essential qualification of them all.

      A skillful interview of Palast, last in the series of "Extras" added after the chapters, is conducted by a journalism school dropout. The two snap swearwords back and forth, the most colorful language on the disk. Other Extras include further interviews of Palast, a discussion of his previous bestseller "Vultures' Picnic," and some video versions of chapters from it.

      A most worthwhile hour will be spent viewing this latest compendium of Palast's many brushes with death and daily death threats.

      Watch him, at the very end, reciting his most stunning achievements, first among them his revelations about the bulldozing of gold miners in Tanzania, now Zaire, carried out by the Bush-family-connected company Barrick Gold Mining--now the largest company of its kind in the world. The gory details were published in his first (2002) bestseller "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy."

      Years and many revelations later, another title for this newest DVD might be "The Worst Democracy Money Has Bought," granted now even more globalized.

(c)

 

 

REVIEW: Madiba A to Z: The Many Faces of Nelson Mandela

"[W]hen he was released from prison, people said "Well now you're free.
And he said, "No, we're free to be free.'"

As one of the world's living icons who has recovered from his latest brush with death, and on the heals of the release of the film Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom, the beloved Nelson Mandela has received another stunning tribute--the twenty-six astonishing reflections in the biographical abcdarium Madiba A to Z: The Many Faces of Nelson Mandela.

     With a forward by the newly released film's producer, Anant Singh, this latest written tribute to the Nobel laureate comes from a firsthand witness of the lifting of the Apartheid, Danny Schechter, whose favorite country in the world is South Africa. This renowned media critic, prolific author, filmmaker, television producer, and radio interviewer knows both Nelson Mandela and former Archbishop Desmond Tutu personally, among many other heroes of this epochal revolution--from the late Nobel laureate Nadine Gordimer to Thabo Mbeki, who succeeded Mandela as president of South Africa. Schechter has spent activist time in South Africa since 1967, from the Apartheid era through its liberation to the present.

     Schechter has written and directed six documentary films on this country, as well as Globalvision's television series South Africa Now for public television that ran for three years, while banned in South Africa. He has read a slew of other biographies of Mandela and quotes freely from them as well.

*****

The only American documentary filmmaker to be allowed into Mandiba's team since his release, Schechter weaves "I" easily in and out of the otherwise third-person narrative--this is a primary, secondary, and picaresque source rife with accounts of Mandela from "Athlete" to "Zuid Africa."

     Trying to bookmark significant passages in Mandiba A to Z, was a project that ended up too "fringed" to help, so that the following summary can't begin to encompass vital information. There's no substitute for reading this book from cover to cover. Not only Mandela (Mandiba is his tribal name) but vitally important issues he and his people confronted come to the fore. The history of South Africa at that explosive time, with important details that explain so much so succinctly, is another A to Z Schechter generously interweaves with a book that reads like a film montage. . . from A to Z, totally absorbing and undemanding, involving all of us in an era that saw the fall of the Berlin Wall, the glasnost that broke up the Soviet Union and hence the Cold War, and finally the fulfillment of an impossible dream with all of its triumphs and pitfalls. Might I call this a culmination, the ultimate cry for peace and transcendence of the war-torn twentieth century?

     The final South African leader Apartheid president, with whom Mandela had established rapport, F. W. de Klerk, told Schechter:

     "Fundamental changes were taking place. . . . In the end, I could not have put together the package . . . if the Berlin Wall did not come down. . . . Suddenly the threat of Communist expansionism in South Africa lost the sting in its tail."

     No biography or analysis offers a complete picture. Each is colored by its source. Coming from Schechter, ,i>Madiba A to Z can also be called a dissection or, more of a stretch, a montage of multiple associations, memories, impressions, histories. Chronology comes as an afterthought after the alphabetical section, for those who need it. It may also be read first, in anticipation of a huge expansion from the deeds to the actor, a "high-energy snack food" consisting of "essentially short essays" from the most to the least personal, from "Bully" or "Forgiveness" to the "Negotiator" reaching beyond himself toward compromise. Section titles range from simple adjectives to nouns to phrases and it may be significant that the final title is a phrase that reaches from "Zuid-Afrika to .za." From the Dutch territory to the twenty-first century Internet domain, "and beyond."

     ".za": back to A, which is for "Athlete," and Schechter defines its significance for Madiba, who said that "sport has the power to change the world." In the prison cell the size of a double bed where he was confined for so many years, Mandela stayed healthy by running in place and doing push-ups and stomach crunches. Boxing was the passion of this peaceful soul who resorted to violence as a solution only when all else had failed.

     ". . . But his talks were met with silence,
So as a last resort he turned to violence . . ." (from a school song)

     The letter N stands for "Negotiator," a skill that went far toward freeing Mandela from what had been a lifelong sentence to Robben Island. He became indispensable as his homeland erupted into violence when the people's requests went unheeded. This most excellent of all the entries (in my opinion) recounts crucial history.

     ANC fellows, who believed that no problem lacked a solution, became a "nation of negotiators" when the Apartheid government had had its fill of unstoppable violence from the huge minority they could not quell. The "negotiated revolution," was led by the formerly "fierce" and "Socratic" law student whom twenty-seven and a half years of prison had refined into this man of so many names and qualities (another passage lists the many names he answered to, pp. 203-4). One of the few photographs in the book, of Mandela giving "his first speech as a freed man in Cape Town, February 11, 1990," is placed within these center pages of the text.

     In the heart of the book, then, occurs the key to the country's peace and well being: Negotiating, domestic diplomacy. Only the "Zuid-Afrika to .za" chapter occupies more pages. When all else failed, those on the other side of the bars had to reach in for salvation. In this context, see also "Diplomat."

     R stands for "Recognition," which Mandela, one of "the most recognized names and faces in the world," desires only in the form of "the changed circumstances of people, in improved lives, in freedom and the ability of people everywhere to enjoy the freedom they have gained." But U is for "Unknown"--"the more that is known about Nelson Mandela, the harder it is to identify the real person behind the different roles and personas," there are so many.

     Many are the essays that obviously encompass parts of Madiba's life story, including "Youth," "Jailed, "Love and Loss," "Militant," and "Onward." Others involve some of the character traits that defined the man ("Forgiveness") and what he was up against ("Kafkaesque"). Twenty-six essays comprise a succinct and at the same time momentous dossier, compressed even more in the back matter as "Chronology" and "Postscript for "Learners.'" There is also a list of recommended readings. In the Postscript ("learners" is the word South Africans use for "students"), among the "Six Lessons from Nelson Mandela" and further to the essay "Diplomat," occurs lesson number four, that one must understand one's enemy in the process of attempting to defeat them: "[Mandela] had to learn to speak Afrikaans, and win over people who feared him."

     We are privileged to have, paired, Madiba A to Z with Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom (which I saw at a sneak preview on Wednesday and very highly recommend) at a time when this last surviving twentieth-century protagonist still shares space with this world (I group Mandiba with Einstein, Gandhi, and MLK).

     Beyond that there are three more words: "Thank you, Danny."

(c)

 

10 November 2013: Review: Andrew Kreig, "Presidential Puppetry: Obama, Romney, and Their Masters"

"We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."--Karl Rove

If you want to understand who Andrew Kreig is and what he does, you'd better have lots of time on your hands, because he cannot be summed up in a few words and his opus is at least cross-disciplinary.

     Profession? Add an -s to that: investigative reporter, attorney, author, business strategist, nonprofit executive, et cetera (lecturer, speaker, academic researcher, radio broadcaster). At home on Capitol Hill and hence reality in all of its dimensions, he is headquartered most lately at the Justice Integrity Project--can there be such a thing in this day and age? Unlike so many hypocritical euphemisms floating around in our culture, the DC-based nonpartisan legal reform group fulfills its promise, investigating and exposing power structures the mainstream media cozy up to and flatter. Most lately you'll find on their front page, www.justice-integrity.org, a column by former Alabama governor Don Siegelman, objecting to the imprisonment and torture of Legal Schnauzer reporter/blogger Roger Shuler for publicizing bad news about the son of an ex-governor of Alabama.

     What is the bad news? Just an illicit affair? Kreig's subject matter shows how such events rarely occur outside of a context, and that context is the subject and theme of his electrifying new book Presidential Puppetry: Obama, Romney, and Their Masters (Washington, DC: Eagle View). Its 345 pages include twenty-two chapters, an Appendix of reform resources, an ample bibliography, and hundreds of notes rife with sources and URLs, so completely up-to-date that Kreig's preface is dated September 10, 2013, the first book about President Obama's lame-duck second term.

     Progressives will find coverage and uncoverage of issues of deepest concern: besides the full history and latest update on Siegelman's continued imprisonment, there is hitherto-unknown and must-read documentation about Obama, Romney, and a genetic chart of interconnected politicians and operatives that all converge at the axis of "How is that possible?"

     Didn't the Abu Ghraib torture occur under extraordinary circumstances that would have driven any compassionate human being to vulgar excesses? What of the abuse of Shuler? The sabotaging of the Boston Marathon by the CIA? The revelation that Romney's religion forbade full participation by African Americans until 1978?

     The first chapter ends with a teaser that will keep readers riveted throughout the remaining, mostly unillustrated pages: Should the Romney-Ryan ticket have triumphed? How can such a projection even occur to such a progressive activist (who does reject specific political labeling)?

     Well, retrospectives on the Obama administration up to today show that the president's puppet strings are wielded by a covey of elite sponsors, so that the following policies assume a logical context: "undermining New Deal safety nets, retaining relatively low taxes and major tax breaks for the super-wealthy, and otherwise accepting . . . austerity for the general public."

     At the top of the genetic chart, above all of the obscenely corrupt, filthy-wealthy, power-sucking, incestuous hierarchy is a huge platinum beacon that guides all of our actions in today's culture, willy-nilly: the dollar sign, star of our Christmas tree.

     We all stand on the shoulders of giant . . . bank accounts.

*****

The book is divided into four sections. The first deep-structures Obama and the Bushes after a brief foray into nothingness (Herman Cain) in the opening chapter that unexpectedly yields the book's leitmotif--the hapless pizza mogul was a puppet of the Koch brothers, poorly groomed to step into any elevator shoes--the first of many puppets to dance onto Kreig's stage, though one of the hastiest retreats of them all. Romney and then Romney-Ryan step in to finish the chapter. Most enigmatic principal within this preliminary text is Romney's religion, which upstages all else.

     The second section explores "Romney Henchmen . . ." Karl Rove, David Petraeus, Michael Leavitt, and others. The third delves more deeply into Romney-Ryan, and the fourth raps up by returning to Obama-Biden and where they and we readers go from . . . right here and now.

     Read this book as soon as you can. It's all about you.

*****

     Did you know that JFK's average at Harvard was C? Bush's entire resume would be lucky to be graded at that level, as open as it was to the public, but Obama's transcripts and associated documentation have never been released to the public and no one knows why. At Harvard Law it must have been stellar if he became head of the prestigious Law Review, but who knows?

     The author introduces his own remarkable mother into the narrative of the first section, in the context of Krieg's research at the National Archives into one of her CIA connections. One of the first women to enlist into the U.S. Marines during World War II, she also authored murder mysteries and articles on crime, medicine, and even drug abuse by teenagers, a novel topic at the time. Her book Green Medicine: The Search for the Plants That Heal discusses LSD and folk remedies. Her Black Market Medicine deals with the dangers involved with mafia distribution of counterfeited prescription drugs.

     In 1967 she was a star witness in one of the first congressional hearings ever to focus on the mafia. But as a result of her deep knowledge of medical topics, she visited "Red" China in 1972, ahead of President Richard Nixon, whose official elevation of the Bamboo Curtain has had such a stunning impact on subsequent history. Krieg's mother briefed the CIA on her visit. Mrs. Kreig's brief forays into the narrative are a tribute from a proud son to a truly remarkable and revolutionary role model.

     Other CIA liaisons follow in the narrative--relevant to Barack Obama, whose first employer after his graduation from Columbia University was a CIA front company. Moreover, according to other Archival records, ten years earlier, young Obama undertook a CIA-related trip to Pakistan from Indonesia, where he was living with his mother and step-father at the time. US citizenship issues kicked in.

     Disallusioned? I'm fascinated. I lived in Warsaw, Poland, for two months as a child and am now searching for my own puppet strings. I'm sure that I rubbed elbows with the CIA, but did they rub elbows with a terrifically skinny, buck-teethed eleven year old with overly thick glasses? I could go on, but who cares?

     The CIA even played a role in bringing together Obama's biological parents in Hawaii--Ann Dunham's father's alleged career as a furniture salesman was also a CIA cover, according to investigative journalist Wayne Madsen. The associations fan out from there.

     But more is missing from the Obama and family records than transcripts.

     Want to find out how Barack met Michelle--as a legal mentor? Questions surrounding Barack's tenure-track position at the University of Chicago--no relevant publications, de rigeueur there, have ben found. Read on.

     Three subsequent chapters summarize the roles, both overt and covert, played by the Bush dynasty. Herein was find not only an overt CIA connection--G.H.W.'s appointment to head the CIA by Gerald Ford, but a possible covert connection with the JFK assassination: someone who resembled "Poppy" was seen standing close to the infamous Dallas book repository shortly before the shooting, an allegation denied with a vehement alibi by the family.

     Be that as it may. By the time you finish this book, nothing will surprise you. Here is the "puppet-string prototype": "secret agendas, elite institutions, greed, and corruption behind the veneer of normal civic life and public service" (p. 87).

     We next read of "America's Machiavelli" (he's been called worse than that, including "Turd Blossom") Karl Rove and his role in the notorious firing of the nine Republican prosecutors in 2006, which led to the forced retirement of both Rove and Antonio Gonzales, among a scandalous number of others. We read of the tragic descent of the hero-for-our-time David Petraeus, of Romney's transition (which never happened) director Mike Leavitt, a fellow Mormon, both of whom wished to "replicate [their religion] throughout the government," a situation Kreig describes would entail "male supremacy, racism, secrecy, dominance of church over state," and more.

     Then there was Election 2012, saved from descent into a Romney "selection" by heroic Ohio attorneys who caught Columbus officials in the act of another network of deceit patching voting machines for "experimental" purposes in the setting of a presidential election. Who experiments with voting machines in a presidential election rather than a school gymnasium? Only those Rove-runners who think they can get away with it.

     They were caught, again by Bob Fitrakis and Cliff Arnebeck at the eleventh hour in another court hearing that convinced the judge that no good was afoot--a tour de force pulled off again by the Ohio heroes who had seen such a ruse succeed in 2004 and quelled it in 2008 but not rested on their laurels, which didn't interest the press anyway. Election integrity is "not sexy enough" after all, in the eyes of the scandal-starved media and the expert academics more interested in grant money to ignore certain realities while dwelling on devoutly centrist issues like which state's machinery will bring it to the top of the list. No one looks twice at ugly voting machines, though going through the motions less and less cynically thanks to such activists who risk so much and influence so much in return for slow results and anonymity.

     "EI" does interest Kreig, though, and it is hoped that through his words THE word may reach more--that more than landslides are denied within the present system. History is changed for the better through human sacrifice. Democracy in action.

*****

The final section, on the 2012 challengers, "killing us softly" Ryan and "prophet of profit" Romney, answers the initial question why even those most liberal among us should question our allegiance to the lesser of evils. It seems that . . .

     Fill in the blank. You'll be surprised. Mr. Kreig will sell more books that way and the words will go farther afield.

     The section on Reform Resources directs us all how to cut the puppet strings and return to life, like Pinocchio, and full awareness of how self-propulsion in positive directions will benefit all of us and not just a flagrant few who know less about governing and more about self-destruction. They are human nature on steroids. Andrew Kreig will detox society with his solutions.

     Put down this review and read the book. And then get to work. That's what democracy is about--remember? Hard work, not cruises to excess by the one percent or envy of them by us ninety-niners.

     Onward.

(c)

 

24 October 2013: Two Repining Justices but No Justice? But the People Spoke!

U.S. Court of Appeals Justice for the Seventh Circuit Richard A. Posner, whose recent regrets over his 2008 decision to uphold the voter ID law in Indiana have made mainstream news, is the second high-level judge this year to make such an admission, now aware of its long-term impact as he wasn't before.

     Posner's regret was expressed in a single sentence in his new book, Reflections on Judging (Harvard University Press, 2013): "I plead guilty to having written the majority opinion (affirmed by the Supreme Court) upholding Indiana's requirement that prospective voters prove their identity with a photo ID--a law now widely regarded as a means of voter suppression rather than fraud prevention."

     He blamed this decision on insufficient evidence supplied by the prosecution. In an interview, he later clarified that the prosecution did not give "strong indications that requiring additional voter identification would actually disfranchise people entitled to vote."

     The prosecutor himself was given a chance to respond. He argued that even if his testimony was said to be inadequate, enough information by other witnesses was certainly critical in proving that voter ID disenfranchises minorities unable to obtain it due to various discriminatory roadblocks, that by and large involve populations most likely to vote Democratic en masse.

     On April 30, 2013, I dissected retired SCOTUS Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's regret over an even more far-reaching decision she made--her decisive vote that put George W. Bush into office as president in 2009. Had she voted with the liberal end of SCOTUS, Al Gore would have been president instead. (He later expressed support for both of Bush's wars, as well as his father's invasion of Kuwait, but that's another story.)

     This decision by a former politician (Arizona state senator) has been said to be politically motivated: at a party her husband said that she had misgivings about retiring if a Democrat won the election. In the same interview cited above, she said that she regretted having retired at all, in light of the arch conservatism of her replacement, Justice Samuel L. Alito.

     Posner's decision at the time was upheld in SCOTUS by no one less than the usually liberal Justice John Paul Stevens. Other states took the decision as justification for initiating voter ID--even though not one documented case of voter fraud--the basis and justification for voter ID--had been discovered in the Hoosier State. Today voter ID is the law in thirty-three states, including bright-blue Rhode Island. Texas and North Carolina are fighting the DoJ to uphold their recent, stringent legislation (which encompasses other restrictions and cutbacks) to join this cadre. Swing state Pennsylvania is vacillating but will not require ID in its upcoming election.

     O'Connor regretted her decision because it renamed SCOTUS, for many of us, after the Motown rock stars the Supremes. In other words, the Court's image plunged in the eyes of the public, probably not as far down as that of Congress these days (5% express confidence; cockroaches have been said to be more popular), but downward--a recent Gallup poll reported that 34 percent of the U.S. population expressed high degrees of confidence in it, and inevitably it's downhill from there.

     However subsequent history judges these justices' crucial admissions, one thing is clear: the people have continuously spoken out against voter ID and its groundless proliferation for years. This group is not even confined to Democrats. Why did court arguments have to determine outcomes?

(c)

 

1 October 2013: Around Capitol Hill the Day It Closed: Photo Essay

 

     Worth a thousand swearwords!


TP spinning

 


a lonely guard


Capitol at 1:30 pm?


Great day to take a tour!


Orthodontia over SCOTUS building


20-year-old objecting to tuition hikes keeping him from higher education


Attended rally against FDA legalization of opioids (see my 10/1 blog)


Homeless guy


TP concedes he deserves medical treatment


Closed by TP

(c)

 

2 October 2013: The Capitol Beat: Two Hundred Some Cups of Tea and Still Brewing

On this exquisitely perfect autumn day, first day of the government shutdown, I headed to Capitol Hill for a rally in support of Obamacare. Instead I came upon one against FDA approval of opioids, with various people telling tragic stories about the consequences of addiction to them. "FED UP!" said their purple and white tee shirts. Representative Jean Schakowsky (D-IL) was their high-profile presence--in case I wondered about the political persuasion of the participants.

     I left the scene, saddened by one story after the next, and explored the comparatively empty area. There were a few government employees milling around, and the expected reduced accessibility of their workplace buildings, with even important-looking suits walking away from locked doors, wondering how to enter the buildings. One inconspicuous basement entrance was open in the Russell Senate building.

     I photographed a homeless person, a tour group, and the deserted area around the capitol building, an armed guard the sole presence on the wide, sprawling stairways. I photographed the SCOTUS building and the Washington Monument imprisoned behind scaffolding similarly--the latter still in progress from the earthquake that hit two years ago. A spire of the National Cathedral is also still scaffolded.

     I've saved the worst for last. On the lawn in front of the capitol, press was evident, CNN and the local DC Channel 8, for starters. I went up to a CNN photographer to find out what was going on but he was whisked away in midsentence to film an interview. A glamorous group clustered in front of me: glamorous platinum blond newscaster and a few ogling suits. I was comfortably seated within hearing distance, anxious for content, but they decided to relocate because the sun was too bright, no offense to the straw-hatted, sunglass-wearing cameo attempting to be inconspicuous.

     Then I began to hear loud chants from isolated individuals on the periphery: one was a twenty-year-old man complaining that he wanted to go to college but couldn't afford it. Then I realized that the older man I had practically collided with as I approached the scene was Sen. Harry Reid, looking feverishly distraught. I met his eyes with sympathy, wondering if he was Harry Reid, but he seemed to have too much hair on his head, blowing in the wind.

     I was assured it was Harry by what followed. A huge clump of suits ascended onto the lawn where a lectern had been positioned. Oh, my God, who were they? Rand Paul? Ted Cruz? I joined a crowd that had swiftly assembled in front of the clump. The Tea Party!

     One after another, they complained self-righteously about Obama and Reid's refusal to sit down and talk when they were doing just that with each other and, moreover, continuing to consider other vitally important issues. Without pay, I was later reassured. Reid's name was disparaged again and again for refusing to give way to these enlightened and reasonable icons of democracy.

     Why, they had the perfect solution. The twenty year old continued to rotate around the clump of us with his audible chant. Other kindred spirits kept saying, "Wake up! Wake up! Do your job!The people hate you! Do what you were hired to do!" One woman from the sidelines called out that Obama had been reelected after the ACA was passed. They were going against the will of the people.

     Oh, but there were answers. They were going to cut up Obamacare and address it item by item. Do allocate to veteran medical care, for instance. The lines are far too long. I muttered something about their popularity level, at 10 percent, being lower than that of cockroaches (which was confirmed by a newscast a few days ago--no joke). The people surrounding me oozed contempt . . . at me.

     Oh, how they spun. The audience was largely silent beyond the few vocal objections clearly heard and largely ignored, except for one suit who affirmed that they had the right to express themselves.

     But get this, there was no applause and no supportive cheering. Press conferences are press conferences, I guess, but this was a hybrid group.

     Then a few members of the press, all standing in the front row, did chime in with questions, few if any challenging and all challenges spun around effortlessly. Soon after, the suits dispersed and I joined one small clump surrounding Louisiana Rep. John Fleming. What were the two tony young reporters asking him? I swear that they were saying nothing. I do believe that at one point he reassured them that he had the support of his constituents. One of the reporters, a platinum blond, gushed how famous they were and how great it was to meet them before she walked off clumsily.

     I was poker-faced, eager to hear something, anything that made sense. I to conjure up a question that might have been answered sincerely. "Are you idiots?" No, that wouldn't have done it. I looked around at the suits in despair.

     Then I walked off without looking back.

(c)

 

28 September 2013: Film Review: Inequality for All,
Directed by Jacob Kornbluth, Narrated by Robert Reich

"[T]his is the same Robert Reich who along with his crony and fellow international banker waterboy Bill Clinton set up the modern era of Reign by Central Banks which first the Bushes and next Obama have extended so grandly into the world's daily bloodletting in middle eastern drone wars. I know, I know, this review awaits moderation but you guys sitting like schoolchildren at the knees of this arch criminal Reich . . ."--comment from New York Times reader on the paper's preliminary, unenthused review (9/27/13)

This film comes across as an upbeat version of Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth, upbeat because one of former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich's personae in the film is the energetic and sanguine Berkeley professor addressing a rapt, filled-to-overflowing audience of students who claims to be an optimist about the future. We must return to the heyday of the American middle class that lasted from post-World War II to the mid-seventies, he responds when asked for a cure for our infested economy.

     Another persona is Reich himself benignly and reassuringly addressing viewers. Then there are a few "suspension bridge" graphs (of the economy and distribution of wealth in 1928 and 2007) and other witty illustrations and animation.

     In college I took econ 101 to dispense with a distribution requirement and only began to realize its importance as well as enigmas, after becoming a progressive and running into so many experts. As a result of this and ingestion of so many excellent prog websites, OEN not the least among them, I learned very little from the film and recommend it heartily to those in need of it, wherever they are--the Tea Party in particular.

     One of the main points is that the four hundred richest people (the "job creators"), who hold as much wealth as the entire poorer half of the rest of the U.S. population, would fare far better if the middle class wasn't tanking so badly, we whose spending comprises h70 percent of the economy. [Remember how well Dick Cheney fared during the Clinton administration as head of Halliburton.] The looming threat of baby boomers aging into social security collectors (we've earned it!) is also foreseen as a burden the economy will have to struggle with.

     There is the token presence of a few one percenters, Seattle-based venture capitalist Nick Hanauer in particular, whose view is that "the most pro-business thing you can do is to help middle-class people thrive." His federal income tax is only 11 percent of his seven-figure salary, which he thinks is unfair.

     The American dream has become exactly that, a ghost of the past--the fifties through the seventies when the middle class thrived in all of its dimensions. We have the highest degree of income inequality of all wealthy nations in the world--"so there, Ivory Coast and Yemen," or some words to that effect, injects a cameo of Jon Stewart, referring to countries that immediately follow America's dismal position on a relevant list. Forty-two percent of Americans born into poverty will never make it out, as opposed to 30 percent of Britons and 25 percent of Danes.

     Reich criticizes his former boss Bill Clinton's revoking of the Glass-Steagel act and deregulation of derivatives, as seeds of the great recession nurtured by the two Bush II administrations that followed. If the world economy doesn't tank as a result of our [justifiably] benighted Congress's decision to allow defaulting on the national debt, the feudalistic greed of the "top four hundred," attempting to devour the country like hot lava, will rock the foundations of democracy. I do believe this has been said before with a great deal more emotionality.

     As I wrote above, most of the film is old news out of the mouth of an amiable icon revered by many. Productivity has never been higher in this country, he emotes, and yet workers' salaries, adjusted for inflation, are lower than they were thirty years ago. The cameo of a haggard, struggling member of the victim class, most lately suffering from a blunt cut into her pathetic wages by her corporate bosses, is most effective, as are brief glimpses of Occupy and Tea Party rallies, implicitly paralleled for having arisen out of the same shameless eruption of the basest extremes of human nature.

     "Except for styles in facial hair, it can be hard to tell the groups apart," writes film critic Kenneth Turan, whose take on the film in the Los Angeles Times is far more positive than the Gray Lady's.

     Most poignant is the persona of humorous self-effacement. The four-foot-ten Reich suffered from bullying as a child--he has always been shorter than the rest of us. Ingenious then as now, he sought protectors among older students. One of them turned out to be Michael Schwerner, one of three martyrs of the civil rights movement murdered while registering black voters.

     As an adult, says Reich, he is fighting back against the bullying one percent. The regret the Times reviewer notes, that the protagonist didn't accomplish more as Clinton's labor secretary, escaped me. I admit that I dozed off and on throughout the film, "Econ post-mid-seventies" or something like that. As an undergraduate, I never slept during my economics classes. But the best one all term was held in the evening when my nice professor came to dine on our soggy overbaked dormitory food. When we sat around afterward chatting, the field briefly came alive for me.

(Above illustration, "Money Crisis," by One Way Stock)

(c)

 

11 September 2013: "Attack on America"

It's been twelve years since 9/11 occurred, cutting away at the naive trust that was a baseline of our system and replacing it with fear, including Islamophobia. I've gotten used to airport ordeals, new forms of hatred, conspiracy theories and greedily grabbed for that life preserver, hope, offered to us by Barack Obama during campaign 2008.

     Is it any coincidence that 9/11 occurred soon after G. W. Bush took office? What darkness he had already cast over society. How glumly the twenty-first century commenced once the president born in Hope, Arkansas stepped down, warning of the threat posed by Al Qaeda and recommending that it be prioritized instead of thrown to the bottom of the barrel, as it was by the ascending administration. Al Qaeda became an issue for the new administration at the beginning of September 2001, around the time that the visiting Mexican president Vicente Fox was treated to a nocturnal fireworks display that woke up disgruntled residents of Georgetown, among others. Scarcely a week later the whole world was paralyzed by 9/11.

     "Attack on America," the first reference to that holocaust, wasn't catchy enough for the press, so 9/11, a reference to the numbers we dial for emergency, took over and stuck. "Attack" referenced what had happened. 9/11 warned of its results as the Earth sank and we all struggled for balance.

     I joined the conspiracy theorists. There were just too many coincidences coalescing on that hideous day.

     Most authorities agree that since 1998 members of the Carlyle Group and other hawks wanted to invade Iraq and, at the least, seized upon 9/11 as a window of opportunity for their goal.

     But first came the invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001. Two years later, founded on a transparent heap of lies, the Iraq invasion followed. The Iraq war was ended with the country still in shambles and the president promises that all troops will be removed from Afghanistan, locus of this country's longest war in history, by next year.

     And so, with the Syria crisis looming, I couldn't help but reflect on my theory that our economy depends on war and another one was needed to keep our weapons industry afloat. Then Vladimir Putin, of all people, rescued our Nobel Peace prize laureate with a solution that I hope will stick: remove all chemical WMD from Syria, pretext for the next war that may not happen.

     So what happens next? What will we fear next? Where's the red line? Right here. We are so educationally challenged compared to other developed countries. Beggars of every description line our streets while the money goes overseas to fight useless wars.

     We can keep our huge military as teeth if need be, and continue to research new ways to destroy the world, and still have billions left over to be spent at home for a change if we abstain from war. All that funding devoured by NSA could be put to far better use. All that wealth spent on multiple residences in fashionable resorts could instead go far to improve things for everybody, something that the one percent can't get through their damaged brains. The countries that fare the best in this world boast thriving middle classes and often free higher education. They tax and spend. *****

After 9/11 we feared going to events that involved crowded space. I still feel 9/11's shadow each time I board public transportation or a plane. Extremist threats target sites abroad, but I inhabit one of 9/11's two targets, Washington, DC. We also learned from 9/11 that no one anywhere is safe. The happiest people, according to a recent study, inhabit Scandinavia and Switzerland--how can they be so happy, the Scands, when they are forced to spend at least half of each year in the dark, freezing to death? Because they've avoided war?

     Switzerland, consistently neutral, is really safe as the terrorists' piggy bank, people say. I was just there and experienced the joy of safety and exquisite otherworldliness.

     Despite hijackings, we felt that safe, I recall, before 9/11. It was a joyous, cloudless day. Lower Manhattan was its usual milling jumble of middle-class routines bathed in early-morning, cloudless sunlight.

     I remember that black smoke being sucked into that azure sky that wouldn't cloud. I remember being phoned by my daughter, a sophomore at Columbia, asking what she should do. Her boyfriend stood atop a building somewhere between West 30th and 40th Streets watching the holocaust, people choosing death by falling scores of stories to violent collisions with cement, over burning alive.

     Who really stood to gain from 9/11? Al Qaeda? Bin Laden? The Carlyle Group that included one of bin Laden's relatives?

     We all lost. This has yet to dawn on the one percent. 9/11 was an attack on the American middle class that worked. It took a while. But parasites die once their hosts have been devoured.

     "Once Christians become really Christian, they'll realize that we're all Jews," I thought to myself the other day. What happens after that? I have no idea. But, despite that defiant obelisk that rises above the ruins of 9/11, and despite the successful discovery of bin Laden after a prolonged search that cost countless lives and livelihoods, we have lots to learn about it. To me 9/11 remains an enigma.

Photo by Elvert Barnes

(c)

 

22 August 2013: Coalition in DC Fracks Fracking Today

When the sun shines down on Washington, DC, in summer from an even partly cloudy sky, you can feel the energy being wasted on sunburn when it can be cheaply and cleanly diverted to saving the planet. Instead, our president has opted to prioritize natural gas development, a.k.a. fracking, despite tangible and widespread evidence of the lethal harm it reeks on human lives and natural landscapes.

     And so, as Mr. Obama tours "shale country" (upstate New York and a stop in PA) today, August 22, and tomorrow, to sell his plan to ease college debt burdens on students whose lives are being ruined by education instead of enriched and elevated, though we cheer the effort, we wonder why he chose such fractured or soon-to-be fragmented venues.

     The answer is that the cost of higher education has grown exponentially in the Empire State in the last few years. The president even plans a side trip to neighboring Pennsylvania--already fracked and oozing scars. The city of Pittsburgh has forcefully announced its opposition to this method of extracting natural gas from its terrain.

     What a mixed bag. Fodder for the progs combined with acid in the face of this land of ours. Our students' futures are certainly important, but so is the planet they will inhabit in the years to come. Educate them, Mr. President, so that they can resort to the right energy sources and frack the whole idea of fracking.

     If that's what you want deep down inside, it's certainly a sinuous way to go, with the EPA backing down on its opposition to fracking recently.

     A small group of activists led by Progressives for Democratic Action (PDA) and Moveon, both represented by the organizer of the rally and march, Mike Hersh, protested fracking today at Lafayette Park in Washington, DC, which borders the back of the White House. Mr. Obama's chosen venues today provided a perfect backdrop.

     Not only did we chant against fracking and listen to the highly articulate and well-informed words of Hersh and colleagues David Braun of Americans against Fracking, Drew Hudson of Environmental Action, Jason Kowalksi of 350.org, and several others; we materialized our demands with 650,000 supportive comments uploaded to CDs we delivered to the Department of the Interior, which was the endpoint of the fifteen-minute march from Lafayette Square. These demands were symbolized by "banking boxes" carried by most of the marchers--hundreds of boxes would have been required had we conveyed them in hard copy--we carried empty boxes and were told to look as weary as we should have because the burdens being imposed on the people and their planet would weigh down a squadron of jumbo jets at least.

     Once we got to the steps of the DOI and handed over the CDs to DOI representatives designated to meet us, a few protesters diligently dismantled the boxes for easy and environmentally efficient disposal. After the informal ceremony, actress Daryl Hannah, who led the march, thanked us for our efforts even as representatives of the coalition of protestors thanked her for interrupting her glitzy schedule to fly here. Excuse my skepticism. Celebrities add glitz to causes, and the impact should not be belittled. The harder they work, the more we all benefit.

     From Hannah to the voiceless who will suffer the most from fracking, get the word out. Continue to beseech our President to add teeth to his commitment to the environment rather than allowing the one percent to chew us to bits.

(c)

 

4 August 2013: Sunday Sermon on Vanquishing Religious Hypocrisy to Save the World: How to Transcend It

And who among you say that the Tea Party are hypocrites for attending church every Sunday and discriminating against the poor by voting against every measure, at every level of government, that benefits them?

      All four Gospels quote Jesus' words that "the poor we will always have among us," in answer to his apostles' condemnation of his acceptance of anointment with expensive perfumes. The anointment is preparation for his burial, answers Jesus, and the poor they will always have among them while he will not always be there.

      For all of his predictions of blessings for the poor in the afterlife, and misery for the rich, who have less chance of reaching heaven than a camel to be threaded through a needle's eye, Jesus' prophecy is borne out by the Tea Party and vultures capitalists' discrimination against the poor, bleeding them to the level of the poor women in the New Testament who gives her last pennies to the poor.

      Well, they'll happily help themselves to those pennies. I don't know whether such magnanimity toward the rich will be rewarded, though Jesus says that their suffering in poverty will be.

      The poor we will always have with us and will always be discriminated against, despite Jesus' predictions. Granted, some of the vultures are Jewish, but so are most of those warned by the Son of God to be more compassionate.

      One specific arena in which conservatives make sure that we'll always have poor people among us is voting rights, a huge issue since the late June, 5-4 decision by the Supreme Court striking down section 4 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act (VRA), which badly cripples section 5. Together they assure that regions most likely to discriminate against the poor will be answerable to the Justice Department (DoJ) each time they attempt to implement discriminatory measures.

      Discrimination against the poor of every description has thus been assured: indigent senior citizens, Native Americans, African Americans, and college students likely to vote liberal, at least some of them indigent, especially with the college loan debts that cripple their futures so heavily. Unless section 3 can be put to good use--the difficult "opting in" provision that will be far more troublesome to enforce because it requires proof of intentional discrimination, which culprits can rationalize to their hearts' content.

      And proposed legislation is attempting to double the interest rates of these college loans.

      Something is very rotten when the proportion of SCOTUS ideologies do not reflect those of the country they purport to represent at the judicial level. I'm not talking violations of the Constitution, which is being treated like toilet paper these days. I'm talking hypocrisy at a higher level. Since the conservatives are also violating the precepts of Jesus, a mortal sin, shouldn't they be (a) barred from attending church or (b) forced to obey the precepts of the Son of God they profess to worship and follow?

      If they are mingling church and state so freely, we can certainly justify such measures.

      The next question is whether vulture capitalists attend church. I know that at least some of them do. Tea Party members presumably do, as do a large proportion of others who are antichoice.

      What good is religion otherwise? As a vehicle for vulture capitalists to thank God for the bounty they enjoy while others line the streets shaking paper cups filled with nickels and dimes?

      There is condoned segregation in religious houses of worship also.

      But adherence to biblical precepts invites other unsolvable issues, even when we attempt to update principles to the twenty-first century, this polluted era ushered in by a shotgun presidential election.

      It can be argued that this stolen election, which straddles both years claimed to herald the twenty-first century, was the agent of the most heinous policies in history, resulting in the most global-level death and ruin ever within the brief span of ten years? And then some?

      This postulate assumes that an accurate election might have saved countless lives and livelihoods, which is reasonable. Certainly the environment would have been better off, but that's another issue.

      I'm rambling, taking up far too much space to claim that discrimination against underprivileged populations is wrong according to every standard we know except rationalizations--Mrs. Paul Singer offered to explain to her neighbors in her high-end section in Brooklyn exactly what it is that her husband does, apropos of demonstrators lining the posh concrete outside her house, incited by Greg Palast's reports, Palast a Tom Paine treated like the insightful soothsayer Cassandra, whom no one heeded.

      And I narrowed the principle of ubiquitous, wrongheadededness down to the level of electoral discrimination. And then I cited election 2000 as a catalyst of the most bloodshed and tragedy ever accomplished within the space of a decade, and if I'm wrong, I'll say instead that it served as an ominous kickstart to a century that will involve huge struggles to right the many wrongs ushered in by the stolen election.

      Then I bring in the raped values of Western religions, realizing that the most apt invocation of Jesus' name is in such settings as "Jesus Christ, I don't believe what's happening to this country and the world it purports to lead!".

      Jesus knew why we'd have the poor among us always and treat them like used toilet paper. He might as well have given up on the spot and told his Dad to try again some other way to reward sinners with a kingdom of heaven.

      Has religion accomplished more evil than good? I've convinced myself today that it has. I used to consider it a 50-50 agent of some good, some evil.

      But as Arctic glaciers melt, the foundations of civilization are also sinking to the level of no return. We've carried hypocrisy too far and soon it will be the sole survivor, the victor.

      I fight for human rights for all, not just the underprivileged populations. The rich will lose their rights, too, when their children's underground bunkers cave in to huge flooding.

      They know not what they do. We must go beyond religion for solutions to overthrow that statue, hypocrisy.

      I ask too much, and I'll never stop.

(c)

 

31 July 2013: Obama Goes Progressive: Renaissance or Red Herring?

"The progressives are always ten years ahead of the rest of the Dems"--those that remain Dems," I told Danny Schechter in an interview last year about my book.

      In the wake of Edward Snowden's shocking revelations about NSA surveillance over data and metadata, our president has suddenly remembered his huge ex-(?) constituency of Progs who were more than horrified, more than paralyzed by his reaction in this case and Bradley Manning's.

      But in the wake of the hair-raising excision of Section 4 and, by extension, a good part of Section 5 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act (VRA) by SCOTUS late last month, the Progs are again in shock that both AG Eric Holder and Mr. Obama are facing down the amputators and vowing to fight back against the proliferation of racist legislation throughout red states--North Carolina and Texas most egregiously and compulsively--the latest water let loose from the dike.

      Pow!

      In case SCOTUS and Mr. Roberts in particular had any doubts at all that since the passage of the VRA so much progress has been accomplished by the former Confederate states (+2), let them witness the explosive and metastasizing retrogression back to Jim Crow. What are they thinking now?

      Mr. Obama promises to put together legislation to counteract the infamous Shelby County v Holder decision, but tell me how on Earth it will get past the Tea Party, which will no doubt boil it. The battle will rather be one-on-one with each outrageous attempt to revive molecules of Jim Crow. Court systems throughout the South will overflow with lawsuits that may--get this--graduate back to SCOTUS. Then what?

      Executive orders? Is there one to undo the Shelby decision? They can't be hiccoughed with each Jim Crow retrogression.

      We're headed toward the midterm elections in 2014. How many voters will be turned away? How quickly will a new civil war rear its ugly head--SCOTUS v POTUS?

      And will all of this become a red herring while Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden are flayed backstage?

      With globalization, if not throughout history, a few martyrs have stood up to preserve civilization rather than its opposite, which masquerades as national defense. As nationalistic borders dissolve, with the attendant advantages as well as disadvantages, we are becoming citizens of the world and must fight to maintain the principles of international law, which protect human rights.

      We profess if not strive to meander toward God and/or the Good even as the Earth and its values seem to rush toward the inverse: power and greed blind our rulers to the needs of the vast majority. Vast. Like infinity versus zero.

      A small piece of what has, deo gratias, become a battle toward human rights at all levels, is emerging in the wake of its diametric opposite, torture of others attempting to globalize these same values.

      Once again the Progressives stand for conservative values: stand up for hand-counted paper ballots (HCPB) and human rights at every level from two martyrs to the entire third world.

      You see, creationism and the anti-choice movement are passé in another sense. With a reasonably good educational system, one outgrows them once having learned how to think. Education is no good, reasoned Powell and then Nixon, contagiously. Look what happened with the proliferation of human rights activism and realization in the sixties.

      Reprehensible. Drop out, take off your glasses, and stop thinking and idealizing. Stretch religious principles to our needs.

      Earth, gape. Well, it is following that right-wing fantasy.

      As I said, it all boils down to human rights. Consistency is paramount. What's right for our electoral system, human rights, must apply to other areas so recently violated, and to all other events and settings.

      Shall Mr. Obama win us back before then? It's an important handful of seed he's throwing. Let the wind blow it wherever it needs to be sown.

(c)

 

20 July 2013: DINNER WITH HELEN THOMAS

It must have been two years ago that I had the privilege of dining with Helen Thomas, courtesy of a mutual friend who came along with us and talked nonstop the entire time, worried that I might broach the subject of the Middle East crisis.

      If I had, I would have let her know that when people ask me which side I favor, I always answer "peace."

      But again, maybe if I were as close a friend to her as was my friend, I would have spoken nonstop also. There is so much to say. We both listened, entranced. I might have wanted to hear more from her, but my friend's conversation was, as always, riveting--what I can relate to, anyway; this friend's knowledge and insightfulness know no bounds.

     We did clear the air first, after I had found a parking place in the crowded neighborhood of Adams Morgan on a Friday night--that horrendous senior moment that forced her to resign from journalism. She claimed her right to free speech. Are journalists supposed to be objective? Is there such a thing as pure objectivity?

     Her apology had been most eloquent, a wish for peace in the Middle East acceptable to and accommodating of both sides. I never knew that she had Syrian (Lebanese these days) roots, until my friend told me. Funny, she didn't look Syrian, I thought, but when I looked at her closely, I did see Middle Eastern features. Any relation to the Lebanese Danny Thomas? I didn't ask her.

     She had been attended by a health care professional while we sat and chatted in the lobby of her building. She seemed relieved when I stood up from my seat that was hidden from her line of vision and sat down next to my friend. I felt so insignificant.

     But when her driver took us to her favorite restaurant, the lady with the stethoscope retired to Helen's condo. The cuisine was Palestinian. Everyone in the restaurant knew her and exuded esteem and affection. On our brief trip from the condo to her car, people greeted her with deep respect.

     I asked her to recommend an entrée and she directed me toward the boned chicken. It was delicious. I did tell her that but I don't remember saying much else.

     My friend's subject matter skirted the Middle East, as I recall. There was such respect between them. She listened with such esteem.

     I am so grateful for this encounter. She knew I was a local and had this to say when we parted: "Let me know if there's any fun around, Marta." I should have asked her what she meant. She was already so disabled that I couldn't picture her at the rallies I attended. I considered her before going to them as well as the panel discussions at the Center for American Progress that I attend from time to time. She might have transformed such a stimulating event into a once-in-a-lifetime experience for many.

     And so I never contacted her, beyond emailing her to thank her for such a wonderful encounter and delicious meal.

     I forgot to remind her, and she wouldn't have remembered anyway, that years ago I had somehow come upon her email address and contacted her to ask what she thought would be the outcome of some Rove-related scandal--I forget which one.

     She responded! "Wait and see," was her patient and indulgent message back. I treasured it. Little did I know that one day I'd be dining with her.

     This pioneering, gutsy, front-role journalist persisted at work into her eighties, with her incisive questions so cherished and at the same time so dreaded by the president or his press secretary. She paved so many ways for women journalists to follow.

     I am deeply grateful for the encounter and mourn her passing, at the same time marveling that she survived as long as she did, given her tenuous condition that evening when we met.

     Who goes through life without many self-revealing slips of the tongue? Who am I to forgive or not forgive her? I forgave her for many reasons, one of them that far more forgiveness will be necessary for peace in the Middle East to progress beyond Secretary of State John Kerry's rendezvous with Israeli and Palestinian leaders next week in Washington.

     Some will say that the enmity extends back to early biblical times. Others will recall the days of peaceful coexistence between Jews and Muslims. Peace is always possible, but forgiveness plays a strong role often.

     Who on this day will not forgive Helen Thomas for a senior moment in her eighties when she contributed so much to her field and to feminism with such gusto and joy? Who will not revere her and mourn her passing?

(c)

 

18 July 2013: Reply to New York Times "Opinionator" blog, wondering about comparisons between classical and other genres of music, specifically the Beatles vs. Mozart

Just for the record:Paul McCartney wrote a piece of classical music that was performed in York City a few years ago; and the Beatle song "Because," sung in a cappella, has been compared to medieval compositions.

     The review I read about the Beatles went on to highlight other skills of the Fab Four.

     As much as I love classical music these days, I have never picked up a cd and embraced it the way, as an eight grader, I picked up my radio and hugged it passionately when a Beatle song came on that melted me to slop.

     I love any music, except for rap, played by the highest-quality musicians. Ironic that, given that the spontaneous poetry that medium draws on hearkens back to the spontaneous generation of Homeric verses in some ways, and I was a Homerist as a graduate student.

     Fetuses have no taste in music that I know of, but the rhythmic heartbeat we hear while gestating is said to explain our love of percussion at the base of so much music of every description.

     I have a slight heart murmur--does my daughter love syncopation as a result? Does salsa music have syncopation? If so, my heartbeat may be the reason.

     Music is the heartbeat, which knows no nationalities or ethnicities, of our world--every inch of it.

(c)

 

4 July 2013: An Irreverent Redaction

It's been 237 years since Thomas Jefferson drafted the Declaration of Independence. So many people look back and lament, imagining what the founding fathers might construe of this compost heap that is our present tense. But I think they might gloat, the United Kingdom become our willing poodle as our military forces occupy most of this poor old world.

     It took us a while, and in that process we learned that power is a prostitute, drooling over its Himalayas of lucre. One cannot exist without the other. Somehow British power was so tasteful by comparison. The British thought they were educating their subjects, disdainful though they were, while we corrupt ours at best.

     If power was married to money, the couple now lives in sin. Eve Marie Saint and Peter O'Toole have given way to Lady Gaga and P. Diddy.

     So we're far from independent, far from those wild horses still allowed to gallop over the plains. I've said before that "all men are created equal" was to be read literally, with women, slaves, Native Americans (the real citizens), and unpropertied men of whatever color barred from the polls, which were corrupt. The Indians were "those savages" after all.

     Who pursued happiness back then? Locke's perception that life and liberty were associated rather with property was far more accurate. Is happiness the warm gun all the colonists had to own back then? Happiness was and is, you guessed it, Himalayas of lucre. I had a schoolmate who literally grinned all of the time as a trust-fund baby. I bit my nails as the daughter and granddaughter of immigrants, gifted as I was by comparison. Nothing is uglier than bitten-down nails stained with the grime of singing for your life.

     What's happiness, Tom Jefferson, one of the few happy people who's graced civilization with the erudition he had time to pursue? And when, Tom Paine, my favorite founder, have times not tried men's souls--you left out us women and ethnics though you probably encompassed men without property, as a precocious democrat. The twentieth century and its parodic follower, "nowadays," have certainly tried many souls.

     Governments are "deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed"? Maybe in socialist Europe, where they have some inkling of that notion, that the people deserve some aspirin and chicken soup in return for their taxes.

     "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it"? Well, the lower two or three classes don't have the money or leisure to do that. There was and is a Tea Party, one mocking Native Americans and the other hating them and aiding "the enemy." Who's HE these days, Mr. President?

     More foresightful are the words that follow: ". . . all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed." How long will government's evils be sufferable, what with unemployment compensation now a memory and the unemployed considered lazy and shiftless? Double their percentages to get the truth, Nate Silver. Without Headstart and WIC, where goes our future? ("He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people"): Not enough Exeter and Andover preppies to encompass it, not even with the token inner-city kids they take in.

     And who says that Harvard grads must run what's left of this country? What a mess. Give Slippery Rock a chance to teach us something. Abe Lincoln's formal education " consisted approximately of a year's worth of classes from several itinerant teachers," according to Wikipedia. Most of it was self-taught. How many of our Harvard grad leaders were on scholarship? Wisdom, not happiness, is needed these days. What would honest Abe say were he to return "nowadays"? "A zombie's mirage"? "Give me the grave any day"?

     King George III (Jeb Bush eschews this title) " has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good. . . . He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance . . ." Did you read that insurance from employers was postponed by Obamacare as too complex to implement sooner? Surely you read about George II calling the Constitution a piece of paper? It was and is written on linen rags, Stupid, not trees.

     "He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people." Who's invading the rights of people these days, if not soaking teabags?

     " . . . the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within"? Not!! How's come? Too much teargas and too many tears? When we rally, it's the police they send to meet us, kids's daddies, not anyone in a position to do more than defend their own persons.

     " . . . refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands?"

     Shall I continue? The best is yet to come--where Mr. Jefferson (he lacked a PhD) calls the Indians savages. And what of Wikileaks?

     "In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people."

     Shall I continue? Read this document we celebrate today yourselves, and laugh or cry, depending on how drunk you are, and drown your emotions in fireworks, whose source is gunpowder set off by the government. Pretty, isn't it? Remember the fireworks set off by the George W. Bushes after a dinner of buffalo steaks when President Vicente Fox was visiting . . . a week before 9/11?

     Hence, loathed conspiracy theorists, you savages!

     " . . . that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown?" Not!! They're our best friends, though they didn't need to help redirect Evo Morales's plane to Vienna yesterday. " . . . and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved . . ."

     I'm getting sick of all of these ellipsis points. " . . . with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor."

     All I can say is "hunh?" Hence, dear God. "Nor in this house of death abide."

     OK, OK, fireworks, as defined above, are still appropriate for this day. Sometimes they remind me of varicose veins. And what are ellipsis points? According to Wikipedia again, they " usually indicate an intentional omission . . . , are not necessary for comprehension . . . , [And] can also be used to indicate an unfinished thought or, at the end of a sentence, a trailing off into silence. . . ."

     Enjoy July 4 anyway. Don't let me ruin it with premeditated inductive logic, and dream of independence [from tyranny] at every level short of anarchy.

     What of our Declaration, Mr. Gandhi (he didn't have a PhD either)? "It's a nice idea, . . . [most of it]."

(c)

 

25 June 2013: VRA Section 4 Struck Down: What Happens Next?

The decision Election Integrity activists have awaited for months was published this morning by the New York Times, revealing that SCOTUS has outrageously betrayed the people again. But where Citizens United ruled against the 99 percent, the Shelby County v Holder decision is blatantly racist, ruling against the 12 percent of this country that is African American.

      Was Jim Crow reborn this morning? No. Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act specified [generically] which states required preclearance from the Department of Justice before enacting any changes to election practices at every municipal as well as state level. That is the part of the VRA struck down, not Section 5, which requires preclearance. It may as well have been struck down, though. Without the specifications in Section 4, it is toothless.

      Crow never died. VRA fought back, but leading EI activists have pointed out outrageous instances of electoral racism repeatedly--in Election 2000 in Florida and 2004 in Ohio (of which preclearance is not even required), for example. Florida is one of sixteen states, nine of them Southern, which up until today, partly or fully, were subject to preclearance. Ohio is not but should be (more on this below).

      Moreover, relevant to Election 2012, courts referred to the VRA to justify block- ing voter identification requirements and cutbacks on early voting, both of which--you guessed it--work against the poorest segments of the 99 percent.

      A New York Times blog published on February 20, 2013 reminded that "Congress has repeatedly extended the [Section 5] requirement: for 5 years in 1970, 7 years in 1975, and 25 years in 1982. Congress renewed the act in 2006 [by a huge margin] after holding extensive hearings on the persistence of racial discrimination at the polls, again extending the preclearance requirement for 25 years."

      SCOTUS supported the congressional mandate in 2009, but made the public aware that the issue would be revisited.

      Most telling is a letter to the editor of the Times from a resident of Shelby County, Alabama [the plaintiff that won this morning in SCOTUS], testifying to the persistence of Jim Crow despite the opposition's view that the election of a black president in 2008 killed Crow, as did a new poll revealing that the number of African Americans voting has increased. A section of this LTE follows:

      "Born and raised in Alabama, I can assure you that Alabama is a poster child for why voters still need the protections from Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, which Shelby county is now trying to gut for the whole nation.

      "There have been countless examples of politicians in Alabama trying to take away or diminish the right to vote for African-Americans.

      "In 2008, my city, Calera, Ala., tried to eliminate the only black councilman's district. The lines were redrawn so that the number of African-American voters was cut by more than half. Thanks to Section 5, the discriminatory plan was tossed out."

      Further according to the blog cited above, "in 1965 Congress based the VRA on two Reconstruction-era Constitutional amendments that protect fundamental rights of citizenship: equal protection (the 14th) and the right to vote (the 15th).

      "Both amendments explicitly give Congress the power to enforce their guarantees 'by appropriate legislation,' and both had the central purpose of giving Congress enforcement power to keep the states in line. That would seem an adequate answer to the Texas and Alabama complain[t] that Section 5 tramples on the sovereignty and dignity of the states, while other covered states, Mississippi and North Carolina, have joined a brief by New York's solicitor general, Barbara D. Underwood (several New York counties are covered, including Manhattan and Brooklyn!), asserting that Section 5 has provided 'significant and measurable benefits' in helping covered jurisdictions 'move toward their goal of eliminating racial discrimination and inequities in voting' and continues to do so."

     So I threw in my own two cents to the Times, in a comment attached to the tragic news it publicized this morning:

     "The correct step Congress should now undertake is to study racist-trending patterns throughout the country and redesignate states that require preclearance. Ohio, among other states, should require preclearance, along with the other states designated already, including the Southern ones.

     "I wouldn't mind if all states in the union were required to preclear any election-related changes they make.

     "Too much federalism? Should Kennedy and Johnson not have intervened in the sixties? Perhaps a HAVA should have been written, but not the one we have now. Elections among the states by 2002 were in shambles and required federal intervention.

      Quixotic, perhaps, as the blog affirmed: "[T]he chance that Congress would overcome sectional and partisan tensions in order to produce a new formula is even smaller than the prospect of Congress raising judicial salaries."

      The public thinks little of Congress for a good reason. Where are the DoJ and President Obama when we need them? An executive order might work to curb Jim Crow again.

      Mr. President, as you said in your 2012 acceptance speech in reference to the too-long lines of underprivileged voters, "We've got to do something about that."

(c)

 

27 May 2013: ???What Shall We Do for Memorial Day???

Back in third grade, when we kids used to sing songs without thinking much about the words, we were taught one song called "What Shall We Do for Memorial Day?" It ends, "God bless our heroic dead."

     I just sang along. Would God hearken to us and bless those fallen patriots? Just American ones? The song suggests red, white, and blue flowers, so evidently so. We always pronounced "an iris, too" as "irish stew," which could, but didn't imply that other patriots, whether enemy or ally, probably deserved similar homage.

     What shall we do for Memorial Day to make a difference, whether or not the dead consciously receive our homage? Eliminate the source of hideous PTSD and the hideous deaths that cause it? Well, of course.

     So we should honor Memorial Day by seeking peace.

     But people have been doing this since time immemorial, though one wonders about the really ancient chronicles of war--those condoned by God in the Old Testament and even older ones--made-up chronicles of ancient kings' outstanding victories on battlefields. Those who stayed home were chicken. Wait a minute. Both Odysseus and Achilles tried to avoid conscription into the Trojan War, one by cross-dressing, I believe. But once there, you had to partake of blood and guts either by killing or falling, and each was described by Homer in rapturous detail.

     But each victim's past and lineage were also described with rustic, nostalgic detail, invoking the tears that adorned the leafy trees of their homelands and the grief of families left behind, for example. So clearly the Poet had mixed feelings and I call the "Iliad" the greatest antiwar poet of all time, not because he championed peace or heroic values per se, but because he portrayed all sides of the issue in lurid detail, triumph and tragedy simultaneously. "Why follow Agamemnon, king of another place, to avenge his brother's domestic problems?" asked more than one hero. "Why miss the joy of watching my son come of age and why not be there to teach him what's right [heroic values?]?

     So the question remains how to wage eternal peace. The Messiah may or may not come, and now would be a perfect venue for his arrival, as would any that involved war. There are amazing, isolated stories where peace prevailed, but they stand out in history. "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God." Not always. Tom Paine inveighed against the Quakers for their pacifism during the American Revolution.

     I must be so predictable, ending so many of my articles with "How?" and so I won't this time, leaving the impossible answers to my readers.

     This Memorial Day, I will answer my own question the way my twelfth-grade history teacher answered my question, Down South no less, about how to eliminate racism.

     "Marta," she said, "one night there has to be a rain over all the Earth, and when we wake up, we'll all be gray."

     Good answer, Miss Prim. Truly a wonderful teacher. But can this answer apply to peace? It can reign, when it does, but can it rain over us?

     Try again. This is important. Though many would disagree, I believe, the best way to honor our heroic dead is to eliminate the equation between heroism and blood&guts.

     We're all God's children, blessed Jesus, as the Bible elsewhere tells us. 1 John, for instance, has " Dear friends, now we are children of God . . ."

     If this is becoming tiresome, you may stop reading here, because my conclusion probably won't satisfy you all, because even on OEN it's impossible to preach to such a diverse choir.

     Peace starts within us all. But peace meaning not only the absence of war but the absence of war as a permanent solution. I've suggested before that evolution to a higher level is an answer. Human nature is fifty-fifty, and that's that.

     But I must offer a solution for today, not a questionable tomorrow. Isaiah suggests farming as a solution. "Beat our swords into plowshares" etc. The blood of our fallen military will nurture organic (one hopes) nutrition for all. It's not a matter of feeding just the poor, obviously. We must be fed with new values.

     During the American Revolution, many soldiers in militias had to go home seasonally to attend to their farms, so there's another antithesis.

     Put down those weapons and farm. Use those weapons to farm, and dispose of those that are inappropriate to farming. Beat them, the last violent act to perform before peace.

     Here the spirit of Kurt Vonnegut might nod cynically, R.I.P. The answer is one word, one of the really oldest professions in history. Forage (violent) away from home and farm (peaceful) at home. We must all become vegans. And then take it from there if it is decisively proven that plant life is sentient. Has this been proven? The Jains allow themselves even less to eat, but some vegetables are acceptable.

     And so farming is my solution.We must all drop everything and travel throughout the world with seeds of peace until the whole world farms and perhaps hunger will no longer exist. Is hunger, in one form or another, the root of violent solutions?

     No, I won't end with a question.

     Farm.

(c)

 

26 May 2013: Scatter My Ashes on Bergdorf Goodman's?

One brief clip in this fluffy, boring film I saw today, just out of masochism for however materialistic I am, implies that my ashes would be swept up more quickly than you can say "pig" and disposed of in Bergdorf Goodman's tony garbage receptacles.

     In that clip, the boss leaves a message for an employee that there's a dead fly on one of the window seats, which is disposed of by the employee's underling more quickly than you can say any four-letter word.

     Bergdorf's was actually purchased by the Neiman Marcus group some time ago and is considered their crown jewel. I wondered to myself whether I could afford the very cheapest item in the store, whatever that was--an ostrich feather perhaps?

     The history of the store is so boring I couldn't concentrate, except that I think they said that the block-long building used to be the Vanderbilt palace. A photo of their young son bringing some friends home to play after school is offered, accompanied by totally banal commentary--something like "Wow, can you imagine being one of those friends?"

     To give you an idea about those $6,000 red glittery spikes, my friend the jewelry designer, who exhibits at Bloomingdale's, is told to jack up the price(s) she wants three times, and she'll get it if she makes any sales and invoices for them. Bloomie's gets the dough first. Therefore, those spikes actually cost at least $2,000, so don't be so aghast the next time you find them at TJ's for that price and are horrified. Shall we think fair trade? Not for the source of the shoes, a middleman. You can be sure that if they were made in China, no more than one penny will get back to the real source.

     Where are those glitzy spikes actually manufactured? Who cares? Somebody gets ripped off hugely. Us. Didn't you read about Apple keeping its money in Ireland to avoid paying taxes to the homeland? You need pay no taxes on your billions as long as you keep them out of the country. Does that make any sense? Another behemoth avoided paying a cent in taxes back in 2010. Who pays those taxes? Us.

     Because the government has to keep going somehow. So some states guarantee that the poorest of the poor will not benefit from ACA by refusing to add to the funding they allocate to Medicaid. Looks like nothing will be left to trickle down. Instead of "bottom-up," it's "vomit-up" whatever we've got. Dig deeper into those pockets with holes in them.

     Back to the film, that documentary about the top one percent paying $50,000 for a Bergdorf's pillbox. I mean real pillbox, not the hat they sold to Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis, which she was wearing--from Bergdorf's--the day JFK was shot.

     Then there is the anecdote about Yoko Ono telling Bergdorf's fur department to send someone over on Christmas Eve because John Lennon wants to buy her some furs. That's puzzling even for Snobs UnLtd., but they manage and, after waiting two hours for John to come home, surprise, forty pieces are purchased for the happy couple and their friends and relatives. Bergdorf's is happy, too, so Merry Christmas, even considering the huge overhead of paying staff to hang out there (overtime?).

     Then, the day Elizabeth Taylor stops in for some furs, she asks if they have any mink earmuffs. When they say yes despondently, she orders four hundred pairs, perhaps for each day she was married to Richard Burton before he dropped dead from so many one-night stands. Sorry. Very bad joke based on something he said once. She actually was buying Christmas gifts too.

     Actually, I believe that the couple was together longer than four hundred nights but am too lazy and bored to Google for this information.

     There is lengthy footage on Bergdorf's windows, those tableaux vivants that coat their mannequins with Swarovski crystals, inter alia, small units of them in droves. The cost of one of those windows, which are changed several times during the year, would feed several developing countries for God knows how long--these statistics were not provided in the film.

     You need window designers, who charge a lot since they are crême-de-la crême, and props, which are purchased from only the highest-end emporiums (emporia?), not from the Internet. And what they do creatively with those props is wallet-boggling.

     Our favorite designers, most of whom I never heard of, are interviewed amid their "lines." If, like Isaac Mizrahi, you condescend to work with someplace like Target, forget it. My favorites, Ralph Lauren and Jones New York, are not even mentioned. So much for my taste in clothing and my budget; I only buy on sale. One designer made it to Bergdorf's shelves by flaunting Saks's interest in her wares. Presto! Bingo! The Valhalla's doors open.

     Remember that the next time you contemplate selling there. And multiply the amount you want by God-knows-how-much. I don't. The film doesn't say.

     I justified my one trip into that place once when I was in Manhattan, as a museum of alienation if not art because, you see, designers are not sadists or misogynists and those anorexic models are not masochists but easels.

     So when I walked in--the cosmetic departments always greets you first in places like this--curious sales staff smiled when I told them I was just visiting one of Manhattan's museums. I went upstairs to the salon of a designer I'd never heard of and found some pink denim hooded jackets in one corner. The price point was more than $900. This was about twenty years ago, so imagine what they'd charge now. I asked if I might try one on, clarifying that I couldn't purchase it, and the sales associate smiled and said yes. It fit oh, so perfectly and looked great. But, to tell you the truth, I didn't need a piece of pink outerwear so wasn't even tempted to call my Mom and receive a resounding no, next to be told to wait for our ship to come in. Believe me, it won't.

     I think you need to be a billionaire to shop there and actually buy something.

     And if my ship does come in, no one will know. Last thing I'd do is hang out at high-end places.

     Though there is an anecdote about a bag lady who went to the fur department--they did let her into the store--and showed deep interest in an ermine coat spotlighted on a mannequin. The sales staff told her it was a bit on the pricey side. So she lingered there for a few minutes and then began to pull bills out of one of her bags--thousands of them--and bought the coat.

     "You can't tell a book by its cover" is the creative commentary offered.

     I've read that you should be extremely choosy about which panhandlers you donate to, in Manhattan in particular. A New York Times article tracked any number of Manhattan panhandlers commuting via the Long Island Railroad to mansions, if not palaces, where they are not staff.

     Funny, why does everyone in the film have large eyes? I wonder if the bag lady did.

(c)

 

   

23 May 2013: Friedan Turns Fifty: Some Very Unfinished Business

Dearest Betty, Gloria, Hillary, Madeleine, and even Elizabeth Warren:

      I went to a panel celebrating the fiftieth anniversary of the publication of Betty's The Feminine Mystique. You know, the book that launched a zillion desperate white housewives out of suburbia (the poorer classes of women were already working at menial jobs) into the workplace because they wanted jobs. A domestic professional (housewife?!) herself, Betty had other fish to fry when she skewered women's magazines, for which she was writing at the time, and consumerism in general.

      And women visited psychiatrists far more often than men back in those days, I remember reading.

      It came out more recently that Friedan was in an abusive marriage when she wrote the book. Beyond that, in the 1997 edition, she turned to the masculine persuasion and realized what confined closets they inhabited: work and exhaustion and little else. This needed to change, too, despite advances already made that had obliged some higher-educated dads to pitch in and get to know their kids and so on. It frees up the joy of parenting for men, too, and they deserve it--all levels of society and not just the tippy-tops.

      The panel, which filled the small auditorium to standing-room capacity, was held by DC's Center for American Progress and starred two icons, Gail Collins, the well-known New York Times op-ed columnist, and Anna Quindlen, the popular and prolific writer of both fiction and nonfiction. Both have published numerous books and both had much to say about "where we are now," us girls (oops).

      The Civil Rights Act of 1964 showed us how and before we knew it, record numbers of desperate housewives were happily (?) working and two-thirds of families included women wage earners.

      Today, the United States is behind the rest of the world in women's involvement in both the workplace and society at large, the only developed nation that does not grant family leave. Our agenda for the twenty-first century is paid leave and other forms of improved treatment of women.

      Anna Quindlen recalled the frown on her mother's face as she watched her reading The Feminine Mystique with deep absorption. Collins also looked back, to the period after World War II, when "anything was possible" for both sexes. Her mother regretted not having lived Collins's life.

      Today women are living a "synthesis," said Quindlen. Collins praised the millennial generation as "ahead of us" (but under what circumstances did we live, FCOL?); this "kickass group" is asking more questions about the work-life balance and therefore "won't make the same mistakes that we did." They are the true synthesis people.

      Though today's women lawyers don't face the sexism that confronted Sandra Day O'Connor when she graduated from law school and sought employment, there are still far more women associates than partners in firms.

      And where do we go from here?

      Said Collins, early childhood education is most relevant to upward mobility for all.

      And what is today's "point of rage"? Said Quindlen, inequality sparks rage; she quoted an associate who expressed this notion as "comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable."

      Collins located the rage in the more than $1 trillion students owe for college loans, hoodwinked by the promise that they could easily pay them off after graduation, but today stuck in jobs they can't relate to, paying installments on these loans and accrued interest for life.

      We also need to do something about the enemies military women face outside of active combat, their male colleagues.

*****

After that, the subject turned to women's colleges and how they empowered women far more than did coeducational settings. It is no coincidence, for example, that both Friedan and Steinem are Smith College graduates.

      It was no coincidence, either, that I walked out of the room in a clump of Seven Sisters types. I hadn't dress stylishly for the occasion, so had to proclaim my Wellesley College affiliation before I got any attention--that's where our next president, maybe, went to college, not to mention Madeleine Albright.

*****

I was disappointed. During the Q&A period, I raised my hand tentatively, wanting the distinguished guests to address other issues, including the fate of whistleblowers like me who have dared to complain about sexual harassment in the workplace and have been jettisoned therefrom more than once and today no one wants to hire me. I'm too old anyway, though fit and hyperactive as someone half my age. They, too, are out of work in large numbers, though.

      Computer scientist Clint Curtis got fired for reporting election-related political finagling back in the early 2000s and ended up working as a clerk for a Dollar Store (today he practices law). Bradley Manning spoke out and is being hanged for it, even as he moves into the court martial phase next week.

      The best supervisor I ever had asked me if I was crazy when I complained to her that the new department head was stalking me outside of the workplace. I asked her how she would feel in a similar situation. She admitted she'd be upset, but I forgot to ask her what she'd do about it, I was so upset.

      That issue in itself, a subset of whistle blowing, is moot, as is whistle blowing, which simply attempts to apply the principles we worship in church on Sunday to the other six days of the week.

      Nor have I exhausted the list of issues confronting women's rights and the human rights that they entail.

      Ladies, my offense rests. Get back to work.

Yours with only the deepest reverence and esteem,

Marta Steele

      PS: Sorry about the low-quality photos. I could have downloaded better ones from the Internet, but the facial expressions were priceless.

(c)

 

19 May 2013: All This Mangling of a Once-Beloved Historical Event: Why the Tea Party?

I wanted to write an op-ed attributing the rise of the Tea Party to the "the skills-based gap [. . .] because they [the Democrats] don't want to tell the working classes that they're losing ground because they didn't study hard enough."

      In other words, I wanted to say that the progressive [not in the political sense] declining emphasis on higher education was an outgrowth of the Powell Manifesto, which spawned a slew of conservative think tanks to counteract the creeping socialism brought on by the overeducated late-sixties college students trying to activate the values they were learning in school.

      "The poor we will always have with us," the far right might have responded, Romney's 47 percent--you know, those people who need help because all of the wealth was being sucked into the top one percent. I keep saying that destruction of the lower classes isn't the answer, because the host will eventually die out--no secretaries or janitors. And then what will happen to those CEOs helpless without them, the ones who take invisible "business trips" on their yachts for weeks at a time, unmissed?

      One day without the 99 percent cleaning up and pushing papers around will do more damage than the bursting of the real estate bubble. Or maybe a week without them anyway.

      But we can't afford to take time off from work. Too few unions survive to carry us through such unpaid furloughs, which could result in lockouts because the unemployment rate is so high--much higher than Obama's toothy stats inform us.

      I wanted to say that as early as 1984, twelve years after the Powell Manifesto was slipped to the right/right people, a report came out, "A Nation at Risk," decrying the deterioration of our educational systems that were graduating students unqualified to take on the responsibilities for which they were supposedly qualified. I taught some of them back then. Some were good, but others plagiarized. Others didn't want to have to put together a sentence, saying that they'd leave it to their secretaries. But my late father said that in the eighties he had to rewrite and correct letters written by his secretary on his behalf. As an immigrant who came here in his twenties, he spoke better English than the rest of his American-born family combined.

      I wanted to say that because students were so burdened by debt from heavy loans they have to take out to put themselves through our institutions of higher learning, they can't even afford to take the jobs they studied toward, even if they're qualified for them. So there's a massive surge toward Wall Street jobs, and science suffers as that small segment of New York City geography sucks physicists away from the creative research that so much more concerns our future than financial greed.

      I wanted to say that the decline in values is associated with the decline in the quality of our public educational system--producing the Sarah Palins and Michelle Bachmanns of this country, who don't know U.S. history from a hole in the ground. The latter announced that the American Revolution began in New Hampshire and that there was no slavery during the era that followed.

      I wanted to blame the decline in the quality of public school educators on the decline in the quality of public education and that both were producing boobs like Palin and Bachmann. An informed citizenry is necessary to keep democracy alive, said founding father John Adams, who might have added that slavery was indeed in motion in his day. George Washington was far less kind to his slaves than was Thomas Jefferson, who had a long-term romance with one of his, resulting in generations of black and mulatto Jeffersons. The Washington legacy is probably similar, though his only ["illegitimate"] descendants I have met were whiter than white, blond hair scarcely darker than their fair skin.

      In other words, I wanted to blame this whole mess on the Powell Manifesto, which indirectly, at least subtly anyway, downgraded the quality of education so that only the upper classes, educated privately, would be qualified to own the country, as many ignorant conservatives if not Tea Party people blatantly betrayed ignorance undetected by semiliterate audiences.

      The "man on the street," interviewed impromptu, doesn't know that Columbus discovered America, let alone the damage done to the indigenous peoples upon his arrival.

      All this I wanted to say until I read that the majority of the Tea Party, excluding the African Americans beginning to take on their values--move over, Clarence Thomas and Herman Cain--are white males, well educated, and affluent.

      Turns out that the "tea party" movement sweeping the nation is disproportionately composed of individuals who have higher-than-average incomes. It's also disproportionately composed of men. And disproportionately composed of white people. . . . "but not necessarily older or just from the South."

      According to a Bloomberg poll, "[f]orty percent are age 55 and over, compared with 32 percent of all poll respondents; just 22 percent are under the age of 35, 79 percent are white, and 61 percent are men. Many are also Christian fundamentalists, with 44 percent identifying themselves as 'born-again' compared with 33 percent of all respondents."

      Keep in mind, all the above stats were taken in 2010.

      Statistics are powerful but sometimes we don't do the math. What we can also glean from the above is that 60 percent of the Tea Party are under age 55; 21 percent are people of color, and 39 percent are women.

      Some earlier stats collected by a University of Toronto professor (reported with caution, though, since samples were small) reveal that "there's a relationship between the amount of education one has and the strength of their religious beliefs. Getting an education tends to drive you away from the most fundamentalist religions. That's probably why there's a smaller percentage of college educated fundamentalists (27%) compared to moderates (39%) and liberals (51%)."

      Then there are fundamentalists who earned bachelor degrees from "Bible colleges," which are more likely to teach creationism than are mainstream schools and universities.

      According to the Bloomberg poll, again, more than 44 percent of the Tea Party are "born-agains" or other categories of fundamentalist Christian.

      CNN, Bloomberg, the University of Toronto professor? Two out of three, at least, are mainstream sources. I don't know enough about statistics to modernize these stats on the basis of mathematical probabilities, nor was I able to access more up-to-date figures.

      There are many more conclusions possible from the above figures. I choose to draw the conclusion I wanted to draw: that a substantial percentage, maybe as high as 50 percent of Tea Party members, are not as steeped in the Enlightenment culture that is still the theoretical basis of our democracy as are others of us, classified by the University of Toronto professor as moderates or liberals.

      Add the above considerations to all of the election corruption that interfered with an accurate vote count in 2010 (the most corrupt election in U.S. history up until then) and acquire at least an idea why the Tea Party gained so many seats in Congress and are running the show even though a million more votes were gleaned by non-Tea Party candidates who somehow were not seated in offices they would have won had it not been for redistricting that clumps inner-city minorities into fewer and fewer electoral units, paving the road for more GOP victories, and the beat goes on, with the Electoral College another target.

      The ruling "winner take all" will acquire a new denotation. The GOP will take all through ingenuity. Whither the informed public? Many minds will indeed be filled with misinformation.

      Whither higher-level thinking? Get this: McDonald's or Exeter/Harvard, no oxymoron in this topsy-turvy, progressively (not in the political sense) less rational twenty-first century.

      Prove me wrong. I will be vastly relieved.

      After all, according to today's New York Times "Opinionator," Conservatives believe that the cause of the "skills-based gap" is "educational failure." Liberals agree. The gap "offers an opportunity to criticize our government-run system of public education and especially . . . [you don't want to read the rest]."

      These same conservatives also support withdrawing federal funding from sources of higher education that persist in raising tuition.

      Remember, the New York Times is studying conservatives without mentioning fundamentalists or Tea Party people at all. The conservatives include George F. Will and Jon M. Huntsman Jr., who might think twice when reading that "[s]ince 1979 the income gap between people with college or graduate degrees and people whose education ended in high school has grown." So there seems to be some hope, though the rest of the Times blog advocates the revival of unions as a fundamental step toward righting (in the nonpolitical sense) the economy, with which these same conservatives would likely take issue. But conservatives are coming out against "educational failure." Is it too late? According to a 2010 Gallup poll, "Conservative Republicans outnumber moderate/liberal Republicans in the general population by about a 2-to-1 margin; among Tea Party supporters, the ratio is well more than 3 to 1." The "Opinionator" seems to define conservative as moderate/liberal or at least moderate. But who knows? The definition should have been clearer.

      Nonetheless, as I've written before, my faith in the post-boomer generations persists. They must channel all of their brilliance and creativity away from Wall Street to the sciences. Because science holds answers that will save the world--the environment, that is.

      I conclude with a one-word question: "How?"

(c)

 

30 April 2013: Justice O'Connor "summons up remembrance of things past"

Well, dear ex-Justice, it took you only thirteen years to "summon up" regrets about the Supreme Court's decision to take on Bush v Gore that put Mr. Bush in office on 12/12/2000. Do recall that it was you who said you could not retire unless a Republican won the Election, and so you retired and all hell broke loose?

     Are you sure you suffered no such regrets sooner?

     Are you really that glad that three woman progressives now use the ladies' room in that august neoclassical building in front of which we have demonstrated so often?

     Admit it, you'd prefer copartisan females in those spots.

     How else has your political perspective changed?

When to the sessions of sweet, silent thought
I summon up remembrance of things past,
I sigh the lack of many a thing I sought,
And with old woes new wail my dear time's waste

--Shakespeare, Sonnet 30

     There's even more to regret than that. You guys chose the correct Constitutional amendment to address but mangled the wrong part of it. Have I said this before? Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg herself said that your interpretation, that the equal protection clause had been applicable, that that unprecedented, non-precedent-setting decision, would nullify all past U.S. elections in history. (I thought of that a year before she said that, but who would listen to me, especially back then?)

     But let's take a look-see at what follows in that amendment right after the "equal protection" clause:

But when the right to vote at any election . . . is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, . . . or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State. . . .

     Even if we count only male citizens who were deprived of the vote in Florida--most of those [all?] on the fake felon lists were men who actually did not commit any crime--94,000 U.S. citizens in this scenario alone, per the latest figures I find were deprived of the vote, and punishment at this level was more than justifiable. So that more than felony was involved. And the "the basis of representation" clause--might it apply to the number of electors, so that Florida's total number of electors would have been reduced?

     Then what might have happened?

     Gosh darn, Bush won by only five electoral votes, where Florida had twenty-five electoral votes to contribute. How many might have been subtracted?

     Here is yet another among the countless ways that the Constitution was violated relevant to the G.W. Bush administration, even before Governor Bush took office.

     Violation of the Constitution (just a "piece of paper"?) is punishable by (fill in the blank).

     Given that the revelation of the fake felons lists was published more than a week before your infamous 12/12 decision, so that the Sunshine state, in allowing a subtraction of so many votes from its poll lists, has violated the Fourteenth Amendment substantively (I mean, other states have used arbitrary lists and it became law that an SoS can arbitrarily reject voter registrations) . . . , well something else is rotten in the state of Florida. Not only so many votes uncounted, but a far more valid application of the Fourteenth Amendment did not even invade the discourse, did it?

     But here's one thing that did: that the Constitution and its amendments nowhere grant the right to vote to citizens of the United States. This was used by the Conservative Five repeatedly. Former U.S. Representative Jesse Jackson Jr. tried to do something about this omission in our sacred document. Various attorneys have argued that this provision is nonetheless implicit. Oh, well.

     What me, criticize a Supreme Court decision?

But something is happening here
But you don't know what it is
Do you, Justice O'Connor?

     (Note how I begin with a Shakespeare quote and end up with one from Bob Dylan--neither of them was/is an attorney.)

(c)

 

13 April 2013: "The Horror, the Horror"

    "All the attention, so far, has gone to the Social Security change.
     Obama has been offering this deal to Republican leaders for ages. . . .
    they [the GOP] walked out expressing amazement
     that he was open to such a thing"
                --Gail Collins, New York Times, 13 April 2013

I thought I was hallucinating when it was announced that our president had put our social security earnings on the table, the "chained cpi," in his budget discussions with the GOP. Was he taking his clue from the bank account skimming in Cyprus? No, perhaps they took their clue from him, chronologically. Our president also skimmed 10 percent off of his salary, as a gesture. Perhaps those saved funds can be added back to our social security stash?

     He did snicker with McCain, I believe, that neither was on welfare during their first debate, didn't he? He certainly snickered with someone who had written a book with a huge up-front and New York Times-bestseller status for weeks. Dreams from his father?

     For the GOP to walk out in amazement that our president, as Collins reported, so betrayed his constituency may make history. It's as if our president walked out on them for taking social security off the table, which they just might have done. Or walked out on them for raising taxes on the rich of their own free will. Did they just walk out when the dinner was over, or abandon their entrees, Ms. Collins?

     Oh, wow, will shockers never cease? And since when are our new extremists so holier than our president?

     Next point: social security is an insurance policy we've paid for all of our working lives. It's not the charity the GOP treats it as. It doesn't come out of their oversized wallets. They collect it too. It's been proposed that all those billionaires refuse it. If so, the rest of us ragtag rabble would not have to worry or storm Washington en masse. And that would be a huge crowd, believe me, and not just doddering seniors.

     But another suggestion by Ms. Collins is a bit off: "I'd trade a dramatic new commitment to funding quality early childhood education for a change in the way cost-of-living increases are computed for Social Security, as long as the oldest and neediest of the recipients are protected."

     What's the cut-off age, Ms. Collins? The expanding cadre of centenarians--now so increased that they no longer earn a small square on front pages?

     Our promising kiddies will someday get old, too. Statistics suggest they won't live as long as this burden on society we are, and education is hideously, frightfully neglected and way past "at risk," but why take money from us beautifully educated elders, banned from the workplace not only because we have this extra income but because we may be talking over the heads of our posterity, not to mention suffering from other forms of ageism?

     Young people are prettier, let's face it, especially when they can write a grammatical sentence. And, let's face it again, soon maybe posterity won't know how to, or even know that they don't.

     Let's lift some sanctions off of food sent to North Koreans--they're already half a head shorter, on average, than their cousins south of the barbed-wire border.

     And let's lift some other sanctions from our own youth, who cannot afford higher education anymore--will our president put Pell grants onto the bargaining table next? Let's throw out some of those nukes sprawling over thousands of acres somewhere in the Midwest and plant food there, if it won't be radioactive. Let's cut the defense budget even more.

     Now that we're living longer, let the government, instead of lowering our soc sec securities, start a hire-a-senior program, so that we won't be such a drain on society. Seems like, when we're forced back to work because of drained portfolios and pensions, we're more often sweeping floors than sitting in offices with windows. I'd take one without windows.

     Have I digressed? Wish I were a loud-mouthed sharpie, or more assertive, so that I could do more than write. Here I am, in front of the 21-1/2-inch screen, writing "You go, guys, and I'll write it up."

     Better than nothing, anyway.

     Because, you see, the "chained cpi" won't stop there any more than Hitler did, once let loose by Chamberlain's appeasement.

(c)

1 April 2013: Culture Vulture's Picnic!: Thoughts on two cultural events I attended in DC last week: Beethoven's only violin concerto and Shakespeare's "Coriolanus."

Two cultural events I attended last week blew my mind: First, Arabella Steinbacher's amazing rendition of Beethoven's violin concerto, such a warhorse I was almost ashamed to go.

     But I could not hold myself away and marveled at the first performance I've attended of a violin concerto with TWO cadenzas, each one magnificently rendered.

     To me playing the violin in a concerto role is such an athletic fete. I also believe that the violin is the most difficult instrument. On the left side you both hold up the instrument by the neck and play the most complicated sets of notes; on the right side you must bow and holding the darned instrument up used to make my arms ache.

     The most beautiful notes emerge when your physics are perfect--are they ever, Maestro Heifetz? And, adds Robert Mann, consecutively no two notes can be played the same way. Each must vary, have its own personality.

*****

Then on Sunday I went to a performance of Shakespeare's "Coriolanus."

     I expected to sleep through it, but eyes were wide open the whole time, even through the lengthy first half, a two-hour "ordeal." Of course I preferred the second half, the denouement.

     Eyes were wide open because of the magnificent performance of the protagonist, played by Patrick Page.

     The play opens militarily enough, with the general's young son proudly imitating his dad, and there is the boast that he does better militarily than in school. The young fascist is reported to have MAMMOCKed a butterfly in a mock battle--this word for slaughter here makes its first appearance in the English language. The description is hideous in its details, ominous of the general's own mass slaughter by his supposed allies, the Volscii, at the end of the play.

     Most awesome is the peace treaty Coriolanus brokers with the Volscii, long-time foes of the Romans. Now this occurs after the protagonist, whose given name, fittingly enough, is Martius, plucked right from the name of the war god Mars--the scion is also named Martius--has been exiled and finds the Volscii, allies with them, and organizes a vendetta, a takeover of Rome.

     Humbled Romans visit the court of the Volscii to beg their general not to attack. But the entreaties of women ultimately soften his heart: his timid wife,his domineering stage door mama (Volumnia, played by Diane D'Aquila), and sister. So the women become instruments of peace.

     Then Coriolanus brokers a peace treaty with the Volscii but, humiliated in this instance (peace is just not "Romanesque" maquismo here) as well as in the past by Romans, the leader of the Volscii comes to Rome, incites his soldiers against Martius-turned-Paxius (my name for the Peaceful One), and they pounce upon him and MAMMOCK him.

     So the war vultures win out and the blessed peacemaker's corpse adorns the ground, truly motionless--how do they do that?

     Finis!

     Reminds me of an ancient cult film "El Topo," in which a Zorro-type womanizer ends up as a saint, Siddhartha-like. So parallels abound.

     And so I had a double culture-vulture feast last week. Washington, DC, might not be the country's cultural capital, but it's good and I wish everyone such delectable performances, whatever your favorite medium happens to be.

(c)

 

1 April 2013: Democratic Doomsday? The Slippery Slope of GOP Election Deceit

Back to the future, 2016, our system is already trying on presidential candidates. I happened to have been in DC's Building Museum for lunch last week in time to witness the lavish white linen-covered tables set up for a something that turned out to be the notorious GOP fundraiser that netted $14.4 million for the RNCC.

     Naturally, the sponsor was a Republican--Paul Ryan, I believe--I say "naturally" because, with their two-year terms, House reps are too busy fundraising to accomplish much else and I do sympathize, though not with Paul Ryan and his fellows.

     And money runs the show, and what can we do about it? asked Green Party activists Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman today on PRN.fm, Progressive Radio, on Harvey's show "Solartopia."

     And what can we do about the near certainty of a 5-4 conservative SCOTUS decision to overturn Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965? Instead of eliminating it, opined Fitrakis, the provision should be extended to all states of the union, not just the Old South plus some heavily urban districts in New York state and a few others, ironically enough.

     More ironic it is, though, that Ohio is not among those states requiring such by Supreme preapproval by the Justice Department (DoJ), given all of the blatant skullduggery there that deprived Kerry of the majority that had elected him to the White House in 2004. Had this requirement been in place in the Buckeye State, the hugely corrupt, two-hatted Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell (two-hatted because he was also co-chair of the Committee to Re-elect Bush in 2004) would have been kept from relocating electoral precincts without informing voters where their votes would be legitimately counted.

     Blackwell did not bother to update his webpage before Election Day, so that mass confusion reigned, because of course, this level of "re-precincting" singled out underprivileged neighborhoods. Seventy to ninety thousand votes were lost by this device alone, among so many others committed by the self-hating Blackwell and his cronies.

     Will they bring back whites-only primaries, too? wondered Fitrakis. Wasserman said that the practice is already alive and well in Indiana.

     Another huge elephant in the room was the insidious attempts in Pennsylvania to alter the winner-take-all Electoral College votes to splitting state votes between presidential candidates according to the partisan affiliation of each congressional district, a practice already active in Nebraska and Maine.

     Because my previous home state's congressional districts are so gerrymandered (Bob compared the shape of one gerrymandered district in Ohio to the cartoon character Jughead with his hat on; another one in Texas is shaped like a stringbean, and so on), even though it has a Democratic majority there are more GOP districts than Democratic ones. The legislature is also dominated by smaller elephants and the governor is a conservative Republican.

     Go figure. The subject quickly turned to the similar situation in Fitrakis and Wasserman's home state Ohio, another Democratic-leaning state dominated by the grasping GOP because the other party is so quick to compromise and move toward the center. That state is contemplating the same sort of exponential gerrymandering of the Electoral votes--the Buckeye State has sixteen congressional districts which, according to partisan distribution, should be divided evenly between the two reigning parties instead of the absurdity of Republican domination in twelve of the districts. The majority party's four districts are concentrated in the heavily African American urban districts of Cleveland-Toledo, Columbus, and Cincinatti.

     Without the winner-take-all system, Romney would have taken Ohio in 2012, ushered into office by sparsely populated rural districts.

     Count the populations so squished together even more than their living situations are? What's in a majority anymore? The blue state of Wisconsin is also considering this change from the winner-take-all system which, admittedly, focuses campaign attention heavily on the swing states, but the alternative mottles the true blue color of the majority even more. Blue states are the target, and thirty state governorships are held by Republicans. Do the arithmetic. As long as voters vote according to the partisanship of their registration, 292 Republican electoral votes are "in the bag" before the elections begin.

     It's out in the open. I've read about it in the New York Times.

     How could this blatant gerrymandering have been accomplished right beneath our feet, placing 232 Republicans in the House even though Democratic candidates collected more than one million more votes? (Wasserman named this miasma the "rotten boro system.")

     Well, in Ohio, the supreme court is also hugely dominated by the GOP. It seems that it was bought out by the US Chamber of Commerce, which, in turn was fined $1,000 but not charged for its legal representation when it was caught in the act. How blind is justice sometimes?

     And it seems that the state apportionment board, which is in charge of gerrymandering--I mean districting in the state--is hugely dominated by the court.

     At this point both Fitrakis and Wasserman denied any direct loyalty to the compromising (and compromised) Democrats, both loyal Green partisans. Their goal, which they work toward so continuously and fiercely, is "justice and stability."

     Toward this end, they have published five books on the electoral dynamics in Ohio and throughout this country, just since 2004.

     Their sixth book, on "Corporate Money and the Theft of the Election Process," is due out soon, focused on election 2012 and specifically how President Obama's publicized victory was actually a "landslide denied." The electronic vote total contradicted exit polls, for example. In Ohio also, I thought I heard (the conversation was so rapid because of time limits on such huge content) that former CIA employees, among other undesirables, were involved in electoral data collection.

     But given all of this type of pollution, seeping over our system the way that oil leaks are ruining land and landscapes throughout the country, might all of the attempted publicity, getting the word out, discourage people from voting? Wasserman said that the solution is to dump ALL electronic voting equipment, as Ireland has, for example, and to follow the majority of countries in the world by voting with paper ballots, all processes completely transparent, all counting done in public.

     It is so ridiculous that private, for-profit corporations provide the systems and in many cases run the elections as well. Cyber-attacks are so rampant. What good is a system that can be compromised by a drive-by remote, one push of a button or touch of a mini-screen? Algorithms can predict results ahead of time.

     So that's the start. No more DREs or scantrons (I've used the term "optical scanners" for years--this term is new to me).

     Beyond that, a four-day period for voting is also needed. So many people simply can't get to the polls because of their work schedules. The origin of Tuesday as Election Day was for the convenience of workers, actually--for farmers bringing in their harvested produce for sale on market day in November. This land of yours and ours was once agrarian. Long time passing.

     College students should be in charge of the voting process, said both Wasserman and Fitrakis, academics themselves.

     Public financing of elections should replace the Citizens' United one-percent-take-all system.

     Then there is the unfortunate possibility of SCOTUS Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg stepping down. Obama's chosen successor will be blocked by the Republicans' beloved filibustering device, as yet unchanged despite some half-hearted Democratic efforts. Something like that. The successful SCOTUS nominee will have to gain sixty-one votes in the Senate. Another hurdle to look forward to and pray about.

     The subject of my new home "state," Washington, DC, next came up, which Fitrakis and Wasserman called a "black state"--at least 50 percent of the population here is black and the population exceeds that of two states, Wyoming and Vermont. Nonetheless, our license plates lament this system of "taxation without representation," that is, except when George W. Bush took these fighting words off of his presidential limousine. He did not have it repainted. Think positive.

     As we all must, in the face of all of these corrupt obstacles dying this country red, this dying country. All we need, Bob and Harvey, now that we have the what, is the "how."

(c)

 

8 March 2013: Werner Herzog's HAPPY PEOPLE: A YEAR IN TAIGA: Details of the Good Life in a Frozen Shangri La

Would you believe that there are areas in the world seemingly untouched as of yet by global warming, and unconcerned about the prospect?

     This portrait of a miniature civilization is structured around an interview of a Siberian (of Russian extraction and Russian-speaking) trapper, Gennady Soloviev, and some of his contemporaries, as well as a cameo of the village's underclass, the Ket people, an indigenous group dying out. Their last moribund dowager will take with her the hereditary technique of making doll-fetishes sacred to her people. Her house even catches fire, so that the dolls burn, but ultimately and slyly she reveals one that somehow survived. (As of 1979, 670 people spoke their language, an "isolate" remaining from a former group called Yenesie-Ostyak. In this film, the Ket comprise a pitiful clump, I believe all male, chopping wood and throwing it onto the back of a dump truck for pitifully low wages).

     But these Asian-looking people are presented only in passing.

     Herzog's focus is the 24/7 subsistence-dominated lifestyle of the totally isolated Russians of the central Siberian village of Bakhtia, all three hundred of them accessible by boat in the summer and helicopters year round, who find contentment in building every element in their lifestyle from scratch--animal traps, canoes, trappers' hovels that shelter them in the -50 degrees Fahrenheit, lengthy winters. Might they have learned these skills from the Ket? One of them is shown constructing a canoe for the "newcomers." Gennady tells the producers that he's been in the Siberian Taiga since 1970.

     Free time is rare; true to the Russian tradition, the people celebrate [a secular brand of] Christmas on what we call Epiphany, the "last day of Christmas," January 6. The children drape themselves in glitter and move with music in a hand-built community room, the only public facility presented. There are no post offices, convenience stores, restaurants, or churches. There is no government except for a campaigner singing off a boat in the summer to solicit votes--of entertainment value to the children, whose parents have better things to do.

     There are no taxes.

     The trappers come home to celebrate the New Year--reunions with family are poignant--and leave after Christmas.

     No dogsleds though. The one modern convenience is snowmobiles; the faithful dogs run alongside voyages as lengthy as 75 miles without stopping. I did notice some electric lighting in the hall of the Christmas celebration, which the filmmaker did not emphasize.

     Winter is spent trapping--mainly small furry creatures like the ermine, found frozen and bent in half, whose value, Gennady laments in one of his few allusions to life outside of Bakhtia, has decreased due to excessive, astronomical inflation. Winter is generous to the Bakhtians, with copious supplies of fish, especially large pike, immediately accessible beneath the thick ice of the Yenisei River. Summer is the time for hoarding and preparing winter provisions, which consist mainly of fish and some wild fowl; no gardens are evident. Nor are swimsuits. The people wear some sort of outwear even under sunny skies that last 20 hours a day.

     The English-speaking narrator's voice is plaintiff and condescending--nothing unusual for this film genre. These people probably recapitulate life during the Ice Age (yes, there were humans who weathered this grim era--did they know it was grim?), he says.

     As we take in the joy of a subsistence-dominated lifestyle, I wonder if the producers were more interested in the indigenous, displaced Ket, victims of this microscopic imperialism. I was. The material above about the Ket is taken from a language list I edited for Oxford University Press more than a decade ago. Among these lists that comprise the 6800 languages of the world, some of them have died out since then. There would be dialects or tongues spoken by one survivor, or five, or ten, or one hundred.

     But how did I get to this digression?

     Because, though reviewers call this a beautiful portrait of the simple life amid scenery to die for, the Ket steal the show.

     I like to believe that Herzog and colleagues portrayed them just long enough to break our hearts. Methods and primitive technologies date back centuries and sometimes, the producers note, millennia. The technologies, though mostly wooden--a metal trap I recall from the fifties is modern in this context--came from somewhere, from people used to inhabiting this land.

     Welcome to the thriving purity of life in Bakhtia. Welcome to the good life. As indigenous people have immigrated north from Mexico to reclaim America, their native land, so the displacement of others hits home the hardest, another white man's burden easily, guiltlessly, and proudly displayed to the West by Russian immigrants. It's the American way?

(c)

27 February 2013: Supreme Court Rally to Protect Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act

Hundreds of demonstrators showed up early this morning in front of the U.S. Supreme Court building to participate in a rally protesting the likely Supreme Court decision to overturn Section 5 of the Civil Rights Act of 1965.

      Sponsored by around sixty-two civil rights organizations, including NAACP, the Brennan Center for Justice, the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights under Law, SEIU, the League of Women Voters, and Rainbow Push, the all-day event began with a congressional press conference from 8:30 to 9 that included Reps. Maxine Waters and John Lewis, who were among those who attended the hearing.

      (Section 5 provides for accountability to courts or the Department of Justice among states found in 1965 to be most guilty of minority voter suppression-- Alabama, Alaska, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Virginia, along with parts of Arizona, Hawaii, and Idaho. [initially; a state or smaller municipality may "bail out" by proving that the discrimination charged no longer exists--New Hampshire, among others, successfully opted out]).

      The majority of participants were African Americans, along with Latinos, Asian Americans, LGBTQs, and whites. Many had traveled from as far away as the deep South, including Mississippi and Alabama, said by one speaker to be the two states that had delivered the fewest votes for Obama in 2012 [fewest, with such large black populations?].

      The rally itself, hosted by Joe Madison of Sirius XM Radio, lasted from 9 well into the early afternoon; a post-argument call with NAACP LDF, ACLU, and the Lawyers' Committee; followed by a bus trip to Richmond by the Freedom Riders for Voting Rights, who had come all the way from Selma, Alabama, part of Shelby County, the now-infamous plaintiff in the case argued today, Shelby County v Holder.

      A "post-argument analysis blog with legal experts and Alliance for Justice" will be held at 5:30 this afternoon at http://afijjusticewatch.blogspot.com/search/label/VRAanalysis.

      After three hours of speeches (more on these below), activists, including the Rev. Al Sharpton and Martin Luther King III, who had attended the hearing, emerged with their reports: the "ladies" (Sotomayor, Ginsberg, and Kagan) fought like hell, while one of the plaintiff attorneys argued that Shelby County should not be subject to Section 5 of the VRA because other municipalities have records "just as bad or worse," Sharpton told the spirited crowd. [an already-quoted argument was that Section 5 was no longer needed because of Obama's two consecutive victories; other speakers referred to this monumental event as a stepping stone in a long process rather than achievement of the dream itself, in a climate that remains hugely discriminatory]

      Sharpton continued that Sotomayor, Ginsberg, and Kagan questioned why no statewide officials in the Heart of Dixie state were black, when the argument was presented that the state had indeed elected blacks to political positions.

      Justice Scalia offered his brainstorm, calling Section 5 "racial entitlement."

      But even worse, continued Sharpton, he "loses his soul" when he sees Clarence ("er, Justice Thomas," he quickly added).

      Sharpton offered no conclusive predictions, saying that he didn't know where the Court would go: 5-4 either way. Justice Kennedy is known to be somewhat undecided.

      And if Section 5 is struck down, he continued, "we'll go back to the streets," the way we first got the VRA. Our forebears suffered and died--we won't lose that.

      He reminded his audience of Election 2012: some states reduced the number of early voting days; voter ID laws proliferated; the Sunday Souls to the Polls drive to get church-going blacks to the polls after services was eliminated in several states (litigation in Ohio saved this event at the last minute).

      "Join us in fighting James Crow II, Esquire," Sharpton quipped, referring to the more subtle forms of insidious racism now blocking election integrity. We'll beat you just as our forbears did. "The power of the people will not be denied!"

      MLK III, who had joined Sharpton on the small platform, called this morning's hearing "a serious time in the history of our nation" [said by League of Women Voters president Elizabeth McNamara to be "the most important case to reach the Supreme Court in decades"]. We must find renewed strength in this the fiftieth anniversary of the March on Washington, even as April will mark the forty-fifth anniversary of his father's death in Memphis.

      "I lost a father but the nation gained a movement," he said.

      If the right people were in Congress, we wouldn't be having this rally, King continued. Even if the Court says Section 5 will stand, we still have work [emphasis mine--MNS]. Racism invalidates the process [of democracy].

      King advised the hundred standing before him to "march more, tweet more," use Facebook, and even reach out to the "business folk" on LinkedIn.

      Inclusion is important! he concluded.

*****

      Cruelly ironic it was that on this same day, February 27, a statue of Rosa Parks was being unveiled in the rotunda of the Capitol building.

      Memorable words were spoken by so many of the huge roster of speakers, each given just a few minutes over a three-hour time span. Section 5 has transformed the United States from exclusive to inclusive, said Elizabeth McNamara. The problems exposed by the 2012 election should reinforce the need for Section 5.

      Rep. Hank Thompson (D-GA) took the segregation-integration process farther back than the nineteenth century to the 1607 settlement of Jamestown; black indentured servants who worked on the ship that brought the settlers here were subsequently subjugated to slavery--becoming counted as three-fifths of a person by the time the Constitution was ratified in 1789.

      SCLC president Charles Steele said that if we allow Section 5 to be eliminated from the VRA, "the world will fail." He spoke of his travels around the world; of how former USSR General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev assumed that Obama's consecutive victories indicated that racism was no longer a problem here. Said Steele, "Hell no, we've just begun."

      Reinforcing words were spoken by Melanie Campbell, CEO of the National Coalition on Black Civic Participation: "Injustice anywhere is a threat to those everywhere."

      "It's everyone's issue!" echoed Kendra Brown, national chair of the National Black Law Students' Association.

      Steele called Obama "the downpayment on a dream"; we still have to march; "I'm ready to go to jail!"

      Repeal of Section 5 "will set us back by centuries," said New York Congresswoman Yvette D. Clarke.

      La Raza president Janet Murguia reminded the audience of the august words that adorn the front of the SCOTUS building, just above the columns: EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW (reminiscent of one of the Constitutional amendments, the Fourteenth. which provides for equal protection, in the context of elections, among other venues).

      Popular comedian Dick Gregory said that "we're not pimps--pimps think that they are in control!" and later added a strong suggestion for how to get back at the one percent for their racism: "We'll boycott Christmas!"

      Testimonies to the effectiveness of Section 5 in curbing blatant discrimination were frequent [more enumerated after I left by a roster of lawyers who subsequently addressed the many who remained]. Last-minute precinct-site changes were overruled, for example. First-time Representative Marc Vesey (D-TX) said that Section 5 is essential to his state, where the Latino population is rapidly expanding, but where "hundreds of thousands of minorities" were kept from voting in 2012.

      The Lone Star State's voter ID law, the "harshest" in the nation, was overruled by the provisions of Section 5, according to another speaker.

*****

Among the chants taken up by the crowd were "Let my people vote!" "No vote, no hope!" "Section 5 must stay alive!" "Section 5 must survive and thrive!" and "We're just as strong and can stand just as long!"

      Shelby County v Holder will be decided early this summer (2013).

(c)

 

17 January 2013: "Forward on Climate" Rally and March

The largest citizen march against climate change, more than 35,000 people, was held in Washington, DC, this afternoon. One-hundred fifty busloads and 168 partner organizations contributed to the event, held to protest against the hottest year in U.S. history and the largest hurricane, among other natural disasters suffered in 2012 here and throughout the world--"the worst ever," according to Bill McKibben, president and founder of 350.org. Carbon standards must be specified for polluting industries by the EPA, for the sake of the future of the planet and of all of us, even the "one percent."

     NRDC trustee and president of Rebuild the Dream Van Jones referred to the dire situation as "the biggest game humanity has ever played." Wind power and solar energy were specified to be energy sources above the ground, far preferable to those beneath it.

     The main focus was the construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline, being built to convey tar sands from western Canada to New Orleans and ultimately to other ports throughout this country, at a huge environmental cost. "Tar sands are the dirtiest fuel in the history of the planet," said Van Jones, polluting the air twice as much as does conventional petrol. The refining process is far more complex and the quality of the fuel inferior.

     Steel tunnels, already built by investors, are so poorly constructed that tar sands leak through cracks into the earth and aquifers, and thus to drinking water and natural water formations, with hideous consequences for residents of the affected terrain. The purpose of the tunnels is to convey the toxic substance for import once it is refined into diesel and other products here, profiting a minute percentage of the population--say the one percent, at the risk of the rest of the inhabitants of both the United States and western Canada.

     President Obama can outlaw further construction and implementation of the project by executive order, since he could not get legislation passed in Congress, given the partisan divided in the House of Representatives, which is burdened by a Republican majority that often votes as an extremely right-wing bloc.

     One speaker after another implored the president, echoed by chants and cheers from the huge audience, to honor the commitment he made in his State of the Union speech this year. ("For the sake of our children and our future, we must do more to combat climate change.") The project was referred to as "the most fateful battle in U.S. history" and "the most important job humans have been entrusted with."

     "If you don't fight for what you want, you'll regret what you end up with," warned another speaker.

     A surprising participant in the event was an investor, Tom Steyer, who is also founder of the Center for the Next Generation. Steyer informed his surprised listeners that the pipeline is not a good investment, not "business as usual"; we simply can't afford forty more years of carbon energy.

     "We must dare to say no and invent a cleaner, cheaper energy future," he concluded.

     Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), representing the federal government but critical of its policies, said that his colleagues must wake up to reality and stop calling climate change a hoax. We must help the president to work toward these crucial environmental goals.

     "We were made for this moment," he said. We must be able to say to our posterity, "Yes, we did!" A chant of "Yes, we can!" followed from the huge audience.

     Spokeswomen for Canada's First Nation, welcome additions to the event, said that thirty-five tribes across their country are working together in opposition to the pipeline construction. When asked, one of them told me that actually they were communicating with Native Americans and also indigenous people throughout the Americas. People of the First Nation, though pressured, have refused to assimilate into mainstream Canadian society. The national government refers to these outspoken rebels as enemies of the country and extremists.

     Colorado's Navahos, Hispanics, blacks, and whites were all specified as "relatives." Even the grass and trees are relatives. Disaster doesn't discriminate--we all bleed the same color. Mother Nature could destroy us with the shake of one shoulder; instead she nurtures us, but there are signs aplenty that we are destroying her.

     "Is the economy more important than land and water?" they asked.

     This rally is the beginning of a change. A four-month-old infant was identified as the youngest present today. "Will she be here in fifty years?" asked one speaker. And will the environment be tolerable? Will President Obama get rid of the three hundred coal mines throughout the country that are so violating its ecology? Will he choose to be on the winning side of history?

     An old chant out of my early days as an activist was heard: "The whole world is watching." I've heard it time and again since then, but not recently.

     Some of the world is way ahead of us. I heard one journalist tell another that Germany is 80 percent energy independent. If the whole world were watching, would it make a difference? We are accomplishing something rare: educating "developing" areas about the horrendous devastation wrought by hydrocarbon pollution by our destruction invasion of their pristine domains, be they the Peruvian Amazon; Prince William Sound, Alaska; Greenland, a new treasure trove revealed by melting glaciers, or any number of other age-old wildernesses now being ravaged.

     Sixty-five percent of the American population supports the goals of Forward on Climate. Though the sponsoring organizations were referred to as "most of the progressives," it struck me as odd that Jill Stein, presidential candidate last year representing the Green Party, was not allowed to speak, though she did attend.

     "Left of center, but not by much," I mused about the event as a whole. We all know what's right, especially the Green Party. Steering left, the project endorsed today, involves a sense of direction. An iconic participant in the march that followed the event, from the Washington Monument to the White House, was a paper, [presumably] life-sized replica of a piece of the Keystone XL pipeline. But a colossal rendition of the Statue of Liberty that loomed high above the heads of those carrying it was painted green.

(c)

 

12 February 2013: This Year's SOTU: We Must All Defend Our Freedom

President Obama's State of the Union (SOTU) address this year was lengthy and filled with Democratic priorities. TV's Politico commentators were unimpressed.

      I was happy about the suggestion to raise the minimum wage, the promise to exit Afghanistan, the embrace of women's rights and gay rights, environmental concerns, alternative energy sources, preschool for all, the high school-junior college overlap, and more. But the two issues that most concerned me appeared as crescendos at the end: voting and gun control--especially voting--and they were poetically intertwined: All of those innocent victims of gun violence gone amok deserved a vote. I took this to mean a vote in Congress against gun violence. I hope that's what the president meant.

      Expanding on the new thematic of long lines and chaos at the polls, which "we need to fix," Obama this evening specified voting as "our most fundamental right as citizens." As the military is here to defend us, so it is up to us to defend our right to vote. Onward, Christian soldiers! We've been marching to that tune for a while now, this must recent breed of suffragists, we who arose after election 2000 in shock and horror to protest and fix the hideous problems.

      But you see, as always, as I told an interviewer not too long ago, there's often a ten-year gap between what Progressives militate for and when the liberals [viz., Democrats] catch on. Even smart ones like Barack Obama, who said this evening that he wants to make our government "smarter" rather than "bigger."

      Brad Friedman has just published a caveat to the president's ringing promise to appoint a blue-ribbon, bipartisan commission to fix things. Looking back to about ten years ago, he recalls the [October 2002] birth of the Help America Vote Act, HAVA, influenced to some extent by another blue-ribbon commission composed of former Presidents Jimmy Carter and Gerald Ford, formed by President George W. Bush, and then the Carter-Baker commission appointed September 2005, which also contained some good ideas and some bad ones, like the requirement of voter ID. Anything would do back then to these gentle reformers--a utility bill, for instance.

      Friedman also recalls a House hearing held ironically less than a week after the spontaneous birth of a poor excuse for an activist organization online, the American Center for Voting Rights (ACVR). The [March 21, 2005] timing was exquisite: the hearing concerned what went wrong with election 2004 in Ohio. It was led by Congressman Bob Ney (R-OH), co-sponsor, along with Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD), of HAVA.

      Because ACVR's Mark "Thor" Hearne was one of the chief spokesmen for the issues, naturally the conclusion was that too much voter fraud was committed and hence voter ID was needed across the country to fix this thorny situation.

      Had any of hundreds of real, as opposed to ad hoc, grassroots activist groups been heard, the focus would rather have been on the long lines and the violation of human rights in places like Ohio, where the electoral votes were thus stolen and the wrong candidate kept in office.

      Funny how Ney's March 21, 2005 hearing grew out of a report commissioned by Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) on what went wrong in Ohio 2004. The COnyers report listed atrocities attached to every aspect of the voting process in the Buckeye State. No blue ribbons were awarded.

*****

In other words, EI activists and all others concerned, don't applaud too much or hold hands and jump around in glee too soon, warns Brad wisely. The people deserve the blue ribbon far more than the members of the commission so named. People who lost loved ones to assault weapons in the wrong hands. I will not add that another sort of anaphora--who really deserves to be shot--was not even implied in Obama's speech, though Boehner, McConnell, Cantor, and their ilk looked like personified razor blades without even trying. If I were in front of the TV simply to amuse myself, totally and otherwise cynical, I might have watched the squirming Boehner, opening and shutting his mouth, looking in turn nauseous and sullen--the latter when some word or two from the president was less revolting than most of them. I won't swear to it, but I think he stood up once or maybe twice to applaud during the speech. Once, for sure. He liked the idea of free trade with Western Europe. He liked the idea of diverting troops from Afghanistan to Mali, too.

*****

But it all sounded so good--the SOTU, that is. Even before reading the Tweet from Mr. Friedman, I didn't jump for joy, though, but rather breathed a sigh of relief and made a note to myself to expect more news on this now-somewhat-popularized issue and to watch carefully for it.

      We do "need to fix that," Mr. President. Please no more HAVAs.

(c)

 

12 February 2013: Paper, Plastic, or Both: Must "Integrity" Mean "Consistent"?

I am all for the decision to clean up a system that has wrought havoc on the voting rights of millions--millions of minorities who vote against Republicans and have last names even a few good Republicans don't know what to do with: the exotic first names that are trending among African Americans, the poetic surnames of Latinos and then, oddly enough, the John Jones-type names that belong to so many and as a result create confusion.

     And then there is corruption, the dishonest mistakes.

     All of these issues create havoc at the polls, including endless lines that serve to eliminate even more voters with perfectly comprehensible names (like Marta Steele? Not!!).

     Just as mechanical, and then electronic solutions were invented to combat the epidemic of ballot box stuffing in the late nineteenth century and onward, so now the inefficiency of our system of voter registration is blamed on the reams and reams of paper lists at the polls so rife with errors. Now, if this could all be computerized . . . Presto! Efficiency. Nor more long lines. Just point and click and move the line.

     Alas (frequent cry of exasperation and grief in ancient Greek tragedy). Would that it were so simple. Plastic covering paper, that is.

     Do we need to sit around and spend billions more before we realize that e-reg is as permeable to hacking as is e-voting?

     Or is it possible that e-reg and a voting system converted from plastic to paper (hand-counted paper ballots [HCPB]) can coexist in harmonious efficiency? Must everything be consistent? All or nothing? Plastic or paper?

     That's one for Socrates. The e-experts will undoubtedly squash me into the corner of two converging walls over it. They know so much more than I do about electronics (I'm thinking specifically of the latest findings of NYU's Brennan Center for Justice, supported this morning by a New York Times editorial). I'm not being facetious. Remember: the subject is e-reg. . . .

     Because some EI advocates adamantly advocate for voting with HCPB, meticulously monitored at every stage by we-the-people, in droves, efficient droves so that no one's view is blocked. That's my position, until e-voting systems advance to a point where they are 100 percent uncorruptible. In my dreams and posterity's routines, it is hoped.

     So, ideally, at this point in "our" thinking, e-reg is the ideal, along with HCPB used for early voting and absentee voting and voting at the polls, and we-the-people at every stage of those processes.

     Consistency? Have studies shown that states that use all-of-one-kind of voting systems fare better than the patchworks that dominate our country's map? Ratings of the "consistent" states are inconsistent, as are those of the patchworks, according to a recent study by the Pew Center on the States (see my OEN article of 2/18/13).

     So scratch consistency at this point in time. And scratch Internet voting (which I'd like to name I-voting, but IV may win out, if it doesn't confuse health-care providers too much). The thought of it. Experimental tries in California have bombed.

     Like most of us, especially some EI people, I am looking forward to the president's SOTU this evening and hoping to hear more than passing mention of getting rid of long lines.

     Then I'm wondering how in the world we'll replace our current voting practices with universal HCPB. They are used successfully, and sometimes even cleanly, in many other countries. That's the next hoop-on-fire. Success is to keep the paper intact.

(c)

 


####

 

For blogs published prior to January 4, 2012, see the *ARCHIVES* page. Also note that the link "editing" that was at the bottom of this page has now become a separate webpage, Editingunltd.com.

###

     Published since April 1999, Words, UnLtd. is a labor of love. Editor and contributor Marta Steele has won numerous awards for her editing, writing, and scholarship. She is published at Opednews.com, Newsdissector.org/blog, Gregpalast.com, and Alternet.org, among other sites. She also communicates her thoughts often to the New York Times in its various reader forums; three of her letters to the editor have been published. Her work first appeared online on Votermarch.org in the summer of 2001, a month before 9/11. Additional reprint credits include the London Observer, Unprecedented.org, and the Princeton Peace Network in the News links.

Photo Gallery

40th anniversary, "I Have a Dream" speech, Washington 8/23/03

A Yardley Duck

Photo Gallery

"To think we fancy we eliminated slavery 140 years ago. We merely substituted an analogous phenomenon, employment-at-will. Justice will truly be blind until that heinous indictment on society is reversed. It is just as reprehensible to deprive people of work and livelihood forcibly as to force them to work against their will."
--Words, UnLtd. cover page October 1999

"Is there anything so miraculous in the universe as human consciousness? The more scientists study, the less probable it seems that there is anything else out there in the vastness of space besides complete, impersonal phenomena: seething masses of light and energy, nothing that thinks."
--"Consciousness II: The Miracle Reconsidered," November 1999

"To strive, to seek, to find, but not to yield," is how Tennyson's "Ulysses" chooses to spend his last years, disappointed, after all, at attaining everything he longed for and then quickly becoming bored in his premature retirement. The stillness he strove for those twenty years (see the November 1999 issue of Words) necessitates perpetual motion, it seems. What we really strive after is by definition unattainable because of our human limitations. Perhaps all our striving somehow realizes this even as we never stop. And that is the romance, the tragedy, and the infinite grandeur of the human condition. Be careful what we pray for, indeed. Because in the end we do not and cannot really understand it in its fullest sense."
--"Further Millennium Thoughts," December 1999

"Traveling is the concentrate of life. We become so preoccupied with preserving moments, impressions, and views. Each night after the frenzied activities that preceded and never encompass enough, I take out my notebook and scribble down every detail I can and every image that occurs. I scribble for myself in the future, as writer and rememberer, devouring the present tense that is so illusive always."
--"England I: Psycho-Architecture..." March 2000

"To sketch our ideal leader would be a challenge. What superhumanity this role requires and how few of us can measure up. He must partake of human nature and yet transcend it, for human nature is basically at fault for all the issues she must face: human nature, above all other things, which are, after all, conquerable. The only thing we will never really master is ourselves."
--"Lest We Forget," March 2000

Essays Narcissus Archives ARCHIVES II Editingunltd.com Classics Research

All creative content, including writing and photography, unless otherwise noted, copyright (c) Marta Steele 2003-2012. All rights reserved.