Tuesday, September 29, 2009

GIVING UP ON INNER CITY JUVENILES


I remember the day myself and my colleague Christine Bell got into a huge debate and nearly a fight with two suburban police officers in a juvenile justice class. The two police officers actually believed to a large extent that if juveniles want to commit crime they’re going to do it regardless. Christine and I coming from an “Inner City” background actually begged to differ. We felt as though for the most part juveniles engage in criminal activity due to their environmental influences, whether it is the home or the community. This took place the day after we had visited Hudson County Youth Detention Facility. Sadly, the population was mostly young black males, with no spare of hope in their eyes. Many of them felt as though it was honorary to be there, while a smaller percentage was genuinely afraid and eager to start anew.

I can remember that day in class very clearly. As always Dr. Williams boosted up the debates by asking a simple question, “What did you guys think about the visit? Do you think the process we currently have is helpful?” Of course me being the ultra liberal I am, I had a million bullets to through at the system. HOWEVER, I toned it down and simply asked, “I wonder why they didn’t ask any of the social workers to remain, I would have loved to question them.” The class looked at me as though they were waiting for me to finish my commentary, therefore I continued, “ I mean—if recidivism rates are high amongst the juveniles then we need to know what progs are working and progs aren’t working.” Out of the two cops there was a woman, White and in her mid thirties I suppose. Immediately this woman attacked me and said, “They’re only in there for two weeks how do you suppose they fix these children. If their parents are screwed up then they too will grow up to be screwed, sometimes there just isn’t anything you can do.”

I paused out of disbelief but whether she admits this or not and SHE NEVER DID, she basically just supposed that we give up on juveniles, allow them to become repeat offenders and then graduate into the adult system and become permanent slaves to the industrialized prison complex. Now remember when I walked into that detention facility there were mostly black young males. I have also walked into adult prisons and it is the same exact way. My point here is simple; those who are making the policies regarding the criminal justice system have NO CLUE to the lifestyles and the environments of those whom they claim to be serving, and when they make their racist policy they have TOTAL DISREAGARD to that. Good social behavior to them is based off of their good living lifestyle and their interpretation of what dominant culture and social control should be. This is precisely why we have a disproportionate amount of YOUNG JUVENILE BLACK MALES in the system, because this screwed up system wishes NOT to rectify the problem as it should be.

The reason why I wanted to speak to a Social Worker in that place is because I wanted to know the progs that they’re instituting to help those young children. According to the lady cop they were only in there for two weeks so how could they help? My response to her was, if they weren’t trying to help them in any such form or fashion then social workers would not be present in the building. THEREORE there must be some type of platform upon which the social workers are implementing from even if for two weeks, and therefore if these children are returning, we must begin to investigate the effectiveness of the programs that are being used. This is simple research shit. But even still she just couldn’t seem to understand my viewpoint.

Then my colleague Christine jumped in after listening to this lady’s nonsense and stated that perhaps we should have a gateway program. Whereby the children and their parents can go to classes and counseling to better their life styles and become more productive in our “civilized” society. Which I agree with, because if the children are returning and nothing seems to be getting done then we must implement new progs and possible policies that are going to do the job. Then Dr Williams boosted the debate up some more by saying, “Do you guys think Judges and Prosecutors in juvenile cases have too much power?” Immediately Christine and I agreed by saying YES THEY DO!!

Well guess what?! The Lady Cop came out of pocket again, this time with a partner the other White Male, cop who believed that the judges and prosecutors were doing just fine. The Lady cop said ok how can we fix this then if the judges have too much power are you supposing kid juries? I said of course I am not supposing kid juries!! Here was my response: To have an independent board of criminal justice professionals that are already employed by the state, whether they’re a parole/police/probation/correction officer, a court clerk, public defender, or prosecutor to serve as a jury. You will not have to worry about budgetary matters because the time serving on the independent board would be the equivalent to going to work. A new contract would be generated expressing this new obligation and there would be no changes to wages or anything. The job of this board would be to hear the facts of each case thus giving juveniles some form of due process. Remember there have been many cases of judges being tried for corruption in juvenile courts by wrongfully sentencing juveniles to facilities that in return give them a payoff. With respect to prosecutors, sadly, even in the juvenile sector there is a culture of lock em up lock em up! Being that the due process clause doesn’t apply to juveniles it makes it easier for them to be mistreated the most.

The lady cop went berserk, “Oh it doesn’t matter because if those board members are working for the state they’re going to serve the interest of the state!” My response, “If that were the case we could say the same thing about judges, aren’t judges supposed to be independent, what is the difference with this independent jury board?” SHE HAD NOTHING TO SAY!! The point being made here is simple folks, There are a lot of people out there in America that simply do not care about inner city youth, and they see them as students of adult career criminals, which is quite sad.. What made me write this article was the acts that had just taken place up in Chicago with the boy being beaten to death in the street. This phenomenon of violence is pathetic. But the overall narrative is what are we doing as a “civilized” society to combat this issue. Why haven’t we generated programs that are going to actually work? Where are the social workers, why aren’t they speaking up about what works and what doesn’t? Like I told the lady cop we have already established the fact that the parents have no control so what is the solution! The cop didn’t have any, but do we accept that as a legitimate reason to not continue the search?

If the majority of juveniles in detention facilities are black inner city youth, and we have actual people IN THE SYSTEM who believe they’re inherently criminal and nothing more than problem children, then in my opinion that brings forth a GREAT THREAT to Inner City Youth, which has already started to show itself via statistics. I don’t know about you readers, but it seems that the same disparate treatment that Black adults face within the Criminal Justice System is now spreading over to Black Youth in the juvenile system. How moral of America right? As a so called “civilized” nation, what are we to do about this?

Saturday, September 26, 2009

Birthers Leader Orly Taitz MSNBC Interview - Obama's Kenyan Birth Certificate? - Yeah, Right

RELIGION AND MORALITY


RELIGION AND MORALITY

Ok people this will be a very touchy topic for most. I would like to just let it be known now that I am indeed an Atheist, but I will explain this topic with the utmost logical break down and I will not exhibit any bias, just rational questions as they pertain to the title. Shouts out to Debra Paron & A. London Arrington from off facebook for having inspired me to write this one particulate post, their commentary on my last note was nothing short of excellent.

Now when it comes to religion and morality most people tend to believe that morality did not exist until the orchestration of religion, which is heavily untrue. There is something I call the “Universal General Consensus” that I believe humans have by default. We all know it isn’t right to kill each other, we all know it is not right to Lie, everything written on the 10 commandments is something people generally know because our brains are wired to understand information and emotions. However when it comes to religious doctrines, there seem to be a huge case of indoctrination; a suppressing of freedom of thought, and a knock down to human rights and equality to all. For instance, at one time it was the church that actually validated slavery here in the Americas. It was the religion that set out on jihads, crusades and inquisitions. It was also the church that slaughtered people in Salem MA because they thought innocent people were involved with the occult. The church all seem to believe unanimously that people shouldn’t be calling onto the spirit YET, each religious institution have what they call prophets who calls onto the spirit—a direct contradiction!! You cannot disable that function for everyone else but yet allow it for certain persons who are so called “prophets”.

Religion for the most part just like politics plays on the short comings of the individual, the more down and out the person is the better they’re able to be controlled by religions institutions. This is why most people who go to jail come out religious whether they’re Christian or Muslim. I myself had done loads of studies in N.J prisons and I have seen first handedly how people in the prison system take to certain forms of religion, failing to realize that it is only they who have control of their own destiny. Religion gives some who are unwilling to see harsh realities a shoulder to lean on, and yes there may be nothing wrong with that. HOWEVER, when religion start seeking to control laws and social functions within a society that is when a threat begins to pose itself. I could care less about others who wish to have a BLIND FAITH, but do not impose your thought pattern and values upon me—a non believer. If you choose to believe something that has never shown itself to actually exist then keep that to yourself.

Let’s skip to the logical questions pertaining to religion: What loving god would give free will to his creation if they can use it to commit harmful acts against other innocent god abiding people? Morally speaking that isn’t right. For example, If Janice is living a god abiding live, she goes to church three times a week, she does her best to live by the rules of the bible, why should she be found dead one day because Bob decided to use his “free will” to murder someone due to setbacks in his life? See this notion of “free will” means nothing if people aren’t protected from unjust treatment of “free will”. If God’s rule mattered there would be no Justice System because God would handle them. See back in the day, they actually believed in the spiritualistic format of criminal justice, and the people believed back then that individuals simply will not commit crime out of fear of God’s wrath, BUT they were finding that people still committed crime at very high rates to the point where there were 40 executions a day—but executions in the name of GOD! Where is the morality in that? Luckily for humanity Beccaria came along and tried to make a change, a change that was way before his time, and he brought morality to punishment. This is precisely where many of our bill of rights provisions are stemmed from, particularly protection from cruel and unusual punishment. The bible in particular gives the go ahead for some of the heinous and saddest of ways to execute, yet some believe it is the primary source of morality—I beg to differ! People were executed back in the good ol days for any little thing and it was all based of spiritualistic notions of crime control. If God according to Muslims and Christians were omnipresent and all fixing, we would not have poverty, crime and many of the atrocities that we see present today. Because again free will means nothing if the innocent isn’t protected from injustice by the evil doers. Religion will have one believing that we’d all have to wait until the person die in order for justice to be done. BULLSHIT!! Because of religion most people are restricted of their liberty and right to exist as they are. For example, there are States out there that restrict Atheists from running for public office, how JUST and MORAL is that? It is also unconstitutional but when you have a state full of Jesus freaks that is the ending result.

Now let us jump to religion and politics. Currently, there is a huge debate going on about Gay Marriage. If we trip back to the ancient times, you will see that homosexuality existed and so did marriage. They did not call it marriage back then, but the same implications existed and this is way before modern religion came into existence. Yet today Christianity claims to be the maker of marriage, says who? Just Christians and they have no proof! But this should be no surprise to society, Christianity has done some of the harshest things to humanity throughout its short existence and it promotes out right discrimination upon people who it chooses to condemn for whatever reason. Now here comes a logical question, if homosexuality is against God, and he made everyone and knows everyone before he makes them, then why the hell does homosexuality even exist? You cannot say free will because then God can be viewed as a person who sets people up to only send them to hell, or he can be considered a selective God who has favorites and therefore he doesn’t love everyone. Why would God outright punish some and not others? That doesn’t sound logical to me AT ALL!! All religious institutions have bias against women as well. Women are suppressed in every form of way, Islam being the worst offender; it wasn’t until recent until women were actually able to be pastors. Some religious folk even protest against Abortion, but I would beg to ask why then does God allow some kids to be born dead? Logically it is the same thing isn't it? Whether the child is medically removed and then "killed" or naturally born dead, the ending result is that the child is now dead! Now what says you religious folk on that? Oh well some will say well it wasn't the child's time to be born, then why would God allow that female to be pregnant then, why couldn't God save all of that time and trouble?Politics and religion should not mix. Religion is something people should choose to be apart of, not forced. Gay marriage has nothing to do with religion, in fact most homosexuals wouldn’t even prefer to have the church involved, they just simply want the legal benefits that come along with it.

The lesson in this note is simple. Morality should be simple, but sadly in this day and age it isn’t because of other sophisticated mechanisms that were designed to control the human population. Those who sit at the top of this mechanism can ultimately control the fate of partitions of people and even whole countries, just as it was historically designed to do in the first place. So the fight today is against institutions that try to limit free thought. People should be able to ask questions regarding God or Religion and not be told to go to hell. People should not change who they are to fit in with religion, just to be accepted by the masses. Atheists should be able to run for office in the Bible belt without being discriminated against. Women should be able to have the same benefits as men without being told to keep shut in church. Disparities should not have to exist in today’s age when there is so much to pass around that everyone should live comfortable lives. I am very passionate about this topic because I understand clearly how religion actively tries to take humanistic traits that we all have and say it invented these traits on its own and thus taught us how to behave in context of morality, when that is a huge lie!! Now I do not knock anyone’s belief system but when people try to impose their belief system onto others I think we need not sit back quiet and allow it to happen. Morality comes from the human brain not a book called the Bible, Torah, or Qur'an. Morality is based in a “Universal General Consensus” these feelings and emotions were long connected to us way before notions of religion came about. Let us also not forget that other forms of religion existed before the modern day religions came about. In fact there are over dozens upon dozens of religions that we now call myths today that Christianity and Islam has stolen info from and is now calling it their own. In short, religions and mythology go through evolutions that are somewhat designed to keep up with the time. But in context of the writings as well as FACUALLY they’re all nothing more than made up stories by another human making a buck and trying to control! People FREE THOUGHT is the target of these religions and they will stop at nothing to denounce it.

The only way for humanity to fix itself, is for us all to realize that we’re all connected, and that only we can save ourselves. What says you on this matter and don’t be afraid to comment?!

CONTROLLED INFORMATION


CONTROLLED INFORMATION

This is definitely some food for thought folks. People tend to feel almost all the time that the information they know is indeed the right information. As I sat today pondering the accuracy of some of the news that is proliferating throughout the news networks, I came to see that much of that information is nothing more than controlled information. However, I also looked at academic submitions or accounts on different topics as well and thus concluded that even those can be potentially controlled information. I guess the overall question is, are there such ways upon which we can prove whether or not information is indeed accurate or just plain outright controlled. Sadly, I think that it is impossible to a large extent, BUT I suppose we can try. But then again can’t logical thinking combat controlled information?

Everyone wants their input or side of the story to be right. For instance, democratic views v. republican views v. independent views. How in the world do you scan those points for validity? Is there even such a way to do it? Like I tell many on my blog: The best thing to do is to simply research, verify the sources of that information and come up with your own INDEPENDENT thought, because to a large extent everyone’s input is valid at the end of the day. Because clearly in this world anything is possible, the phenomena just never seem to end. People just simply need not to believe all they’re told, because you never know when information is controlled or not. Too bad those poor protestors cannot see this FACT when it comes to health care. Lack of education and understanding is a terrible status to have. Sheesh!! Are you thinking on your own?

Thursday, September 24, 2009

Teabaggers Exposed: Meet The Anti-Obama Group! (These People Have No Idea What They Are Protesting Against)

THE AMERICAN CITIZENRY ARE AFRAID OF THEIR GOVERNNMENT!


The other day I had watched a youtube video with former Congressman Traficant, speaking about the government becoming more powerful than we the people, which as a result have now instilled fear into the people against government. When we look at the tea parties that are taking place today is there any thought that comes to mind as to the totality of why they’re there? YES we know some are possibly there out of hatred and disdain towards anything Obama does, HOWEVER, if we look at the condition of our government as it stands today, shouldn’t we all be out there tea partying’ against our government and all political parties?

Something seems fundamentally wrong about our government when innocent poor people can be shot down by the cops and yet their families receive neither closure nor justice. Police get away with these things due to their so called procedural guidelines, which in most cases gives them the right to kill on site. Why are these hypocritical monsters protected by the same force that is said to be under the same command of those whom they serve? The founder of policing Sir Robert Peel believed strongly in being able to weed out the bad apples and replace them with honorary persons. Yet today we’re far away from that founding principle of police administration. Today there is a strenuous process on proving an officer unfit to practice.

I just think we as a society need to think firm and wide about the status of we the people v. the government. The founders, although they too were bigots, never believed in seeing government having the power to push the people into fear. People should not have to walk around in fear of the police. Police who have a general bias or hate towards any ethnicity in the population should not be hired, or expunged if they’re employed. Police should be fit and not overweight. Congress should be held heavily accountable to the populace and not to the corporations. The president should not be following shadow govt plans but rather his/her own genuine plans. People should be able to be treated fairly by the judicial system. There should not be a literal racist criminal justice system that practices selective charging on a daily basis. People should be presumed innocent until proven guilty not guilty until proven innocent.

Furthermore, a culture of just convicting should not exist in our prosecutors offices’, for that is our greatest threat against liberty and that which our constitution guarantees. This culture exists primarily to set up the future careers of those who are cut throat enough to take advantage of it. Very few prosecutors have a conscious—greed takes over, yet they’re supposed to be defenders of our rights. I think not! Defense attorneys these days are the actual persons preserving the rights of others. Where is justice in the State being able to have scientific evidence presented but not the indigent defendant who has a Public Defender without the funds to test the validity of that scientific evidence? The Public Defender in itself is even a relatively new concept developed by the Supreme Court. Despite the due process clause and the equal protection clause, there was a time when we the people were left to our own ruins when it came to justice and if you could not afford a defense then that was your ass, BUT is there any real difference in that today? Plea bargains are another method, which the govt uses to convict people under false pretenses. Oftentimes the govt doesn’t even have enough evidence to convict if there were a trial; I guess there is no surprise that 95% of all convictions are through copping pleas. The psychological trauma plea bargains place on people is sadly inhumane, and the fact that prosecutors oftentimes play games and even lie is even more gut bubbling. So before I continue to rant, I guess my ending line is: Why the hell are we so afraid of our government people?!

Wednesday, September 23, 2009

Traficant on Hardball: "This Is Hardball"

WHY DOES AMERICA FEAR AHMADINEJAD??



WHY DOES AMERICA FEAR AHMADINEJAD??

As an American it is quite liberal/radical of me to actually say I support the speech that Ahmadinejad had given on 9/23/09 on the General Assembly at the U.N. HOWEVER, when I look at the exactness of his words, nothing seems to be FALSE. He spoke against injustice, imperialism, and democratic bigotry that has been long exhibited by the U.S and other Nation States that are within its alliance. He spoke about the frivolous U.N mission statement that clearly hasn’t accomplished anything, especially due to the secret alliances that are in effect as a result of imperialism and corporate greed.

He also spoke about the culture of violations upon various International Conventions, which seems to be non-existent in the eyes of most countries with the ability to bully and bring forth policy through the use of extreme brute force to avoid culpability. In an irregular manner, Ahmandinejad basically laid out the blueprint upon which our next possible world war will be based. In a tone of desperation he warned us about the wrongdoings that are going on, and then followed up with the inevitable response to those wrongdoings, as he pressed a reality that we’re now in a season where people and Nations will stand up against imperialism and bully-hood.

Capitalism is the base upon which the evil that currently exist is birthed from, according to Ahmadinejad. It has given Nations and Corporate Crooks legal authority not only within their own soil but abroad to usurp resources and call it their own. He expresses his notion that Marxism is clearly gone, primarily due to the trauma that has been caused by capitalism. In a brief manner he spoke on Israel’s handling of Palestine, which he was critiqued for being an “anti Semitic” by various “pundits” HOWEVER, how can this man be anti-Semitic, when there are currently dozens of blockades that disallows basic necessity aid to float through to the estranged Palestinians, whom Cynthia McKinney support and was jailed for by the Israelis.

There seems to be an extreme take over of U.S Media by those who have the MOST to gain out of this so called war in the Middle East. Immediately after his speech the man was labeled just as Rev Wright was WITHOUT anyone ever questioning the validity of his overall message. The essence of that which he has stated was that world peace is needed. Greed must be ended and humanity must be brought back to standards equivalent to universal morality

Now most are quick to say Ahmadinejad stole the elections over in Iran, BUT if your Nation has a history of the same thing who are you to judge? I agree with Amadinejad it is time for all Nations to practice what they preach. Stop lying and predicating nation building off of the guise of extending democracy. Stop assassinating real foreign leaders to only replace them with puppet govts that will of course serve the needs of a foreign corrupted regime. Stop the spreading and using of the term capitalism to legalize the economic trauamtization that has been placed upon so many victims here in the U.S and other nations. I challenge all around the world to start thinking extremely critically about the actions their govts’ partake in and to investigate those actions vigorously, for that is the only way to bring some form of justice to the world as Ahmadinejad sworn to support in his speech. People must stop allowing the American Media and Political Rhetoric to control their thoughts on foreign affairs, instead do your own research and build up your own technique of verification. Justice is the only forum we have to hold people accountable to humanity and if we allow it to fall short of us, then when the darkness falls, it will be righteously deserved.

Ahmadinejad's speech at General Assembly.

Ed Shultz on Health Care....

Monday, September 21, 2009

THERE IS SOMETHING FUNDAMENTALLY WRONG ABOUT THIS SOCIETY!


THERE IS SOMETHING FUNDAMENTALLY WRONG ABOUT THIS SOCIETY!


The American society is one based off of artificial flavor. For some reason it cannot seem to have a grip on reality v. fantasy. Political Correctness for the most part seems to be the huge cause for the stupidity that has now become customary in our society. People who are filled with nothing but bigotry and hate seem more credible than those who are on the extreme opposite. Intellectualized justifications FOR oppression actually still have a voice in this society although on a constant basis everyone gives praise to MLK. Something is highly hypocritical about this society.

Certain people believe their experiences are much more valid than others who may be deconstructed from the mainstream experience. It is as though those who cannot share in the goodness and prosperity of America are thereby forced to put up with their second classed citizenship and told to, “Like the little bit you have”. Radicalism is the new terrorism, even though extremist conservatism can ultimately invade our society’s morality and render us non-existent. The larger question is how do we solve such a debacle? Do we sit back and allow the non-sense to continue, or do we stand up and speak out in truth of the hypocrisy of those who do not welcome change?

Do we take to the streets? Do we demand equal education and working wages? Do we demand justice for all, not only domestically but also abroad? Do we finally incorporate plans or agendas to finally award those beneath the top 5% for all of their hard work, sweat, and tears? When will those at the lower level in society finally realize that the power resides in the individual? When will the uneducated southerners who march in the name of capitalism realize that they’re against their own interest? Or is it their hate that restricts them from seeing the truth?

Has America really changed since the old days? Did the Civil Rights Acts actually make a difference? Some will say, “Hey everyone has equal access” but I OBJECT!! WHY!? Because Equal Access without Equal Results equals NOTHING!! In terms of healthcare, why do we have a President who CLAIMS to want to pass healthcare but YET isn’t using reconciliation to push it through? He claims to want the help of the opposition, yet on a daily basis they show contempt for he and every plan he has tried to date. Does this society deserve to sit at bay, while the two party system play ping pongs back and forth with their shit load of special interest? One word: CORRUPTION!!!

I don’t know people, something is clearly wrong with this society. This is a society unwilling to use critical thinking, incapable of rational thought, not friendly with moral policy, and it hates its past even though without it you cannot fix issues of today. YET we’re the beacon of hope upon which all nations look up to for leadership. America has more issues than most third world nations yet they dare to look up to the beast for direction.

Shall we touch on RELIGION?? For America to be a god fearing nation it commits more sins than the “lord” allows. One word: PHONY! Not that I believe in the phrase “WWJD” but why aren’t Christians following it? Ok they’ll say God gave us “free will” but then my rational mind will ask, “What is the use of free will if a person can do harm with it? Why must innocent people be affected by another’s wrongdoing?” Usually there is no answer to my highly rationalized question. However, still something is completely utterly dementedly wrong. Oh and America wasn’t founded on Christian values either. In fact America was founded on RELIGIOUS FREEDOM… Morality has been around LONG before the Bible came about. Christianity doesn’t have a patent on what morality is. Wow just look at its past. SORRY TO TELL YA!! But again, folks what the hell is wrong with this society? Because when I look at it, it appears to be ass backwards!! Therefore the only thing I can say is the title, “There is something fundamentally wrong about this society!”

Nuff sed!!

Hunt Chris Brown (Run this Town Spoof) by Affion Crockett

John Legend Says Barack's Opponents Want This To Be A Race War

Rush Limbaugh Says White Kids Getting Beat Up On School Bus Is Obama's America! (Keith Olbermann Saying He Needs To Watch His Words)

Sunday, September 13, 2009

Harsh words aimed at president. Tim Wise gives commetnary on CNN

Joe Wilson Voted to Provide Taxpayer Money for Illegal Immigrants' Healthcare



ARTICLE BELOW IS FROM {OPENCONGRESS.ORG}


Joe Wilson Voted to Provide Taxpayer Money for Illegal Immigrants' Healthcare
September 11, 2009 - by Donny Shaw

On Wednesday night, Rep. Joe Wilson [R, SC-2], shouted “You lie!” at President Obama when he said that the healthcare bill would not cover illegal immigrants. “The supporters of the government takeover of healthcare and liberals who want to give healthcare to illegals are using my opposition as an excuse to distract from the critical questions being raised about this poorly conceived plan,” Wilson said the next day in a campaign fundraising video.

However, in 2003, Wilson voted to provide federal funds for illegal immigrants’ healthcare. The vote came on the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003, which contained Sec. 1011 authorizing $250,000 annually between 2003 and 2008 for government reimbursements to hospitals who provide treatment for uninsured illegal immigrants. The program has been extended through 2009 and there is currently a bipartisan bill in Congress to make it permanent.

Hospitals have a legal obligation to treat everyone who comes in seeking care, regardless of citizenship status, insurance or other characteristics. This means that hospitals treat millions of people every year who don’t have the means to pay. Obviously, this drives up the nation’s healthcare costs overall. Section 1011 helps cushion the costs for hospitals, but it’s not nearly enough to cover the actual costs in most areas.

To be fair, Section 1011 is just a small part of a much larger bill that contained many Republican priorities. Still, Wilson’s protest against the current healthcare reform proposal giving coverage to illegal immigrants (which is false), is in direct contradiction to his 2003 vote. Allowing illegal immigrants to purchase unsubsidized healthcare through the Exchange that would be set up under the current proposal wouldn’t cost taxpayers a cent, and it would be a step towards fixing the problem that Section 1011 was designed to throw federal money at.

source: http://www.opencongress.org/articles/view/1219-Joe-Wilson-Voted-to-Provide-Taxpayer-Money-for-Illegal-Immigrants-Healthcare

REPUBLICANS LACK TRUTH IN THEIR THOUGHT PROCESS!

Monday, September 7, 2009

Conservative Protests Are Stupid

VAN JONES RESIGNS!!! ESSAY BY TIM WISE!



BENEATH THIS VID IS AN ESSAY BY TIM WISE::::

The Afrikaaner Party Draws First Blood:
Van Jones, Barack Obama and the Audacity of Capitulation
By Tim Wise
September 6, 2009

Van Jones, special advisor to the President’s Council on Environmental Quality, has resigned from the administration. To be honest, he was forced out. Oh, perhaps not directly, but if not, then by the stunning silence of his employer. An employer more concerned about appeasing the right-wing bullies who sought to make Jones a liability for him, than about standing up for a brilliant thinker on both economics and ecological issues, and confronting the conservative talk-show hosts who have libeled and slandered Jones (literally) over the past month.

The right has shown no shame in their relentless pursuit of Jones’s political scalp. They havefabricated from whole cloth details of his life, calling him a convicted felon and instigator of the 1992 Los Angeles riots. This, in spite of the fact that he has no criminal record whatsoever and wasn’t even in Los Angeles when those riots were happening. His arrest at that time was part of a sweep of dozens of peaceful marchers in San Francisco, involved in a protest at the time of the riots. He was released, charges were dropped, and he was paid damages by the city. This is not what happens to criminals, but rather, innocent people who have done nothing wrong. Jones should sue the living shit out of Beck, his employers at Fox News, and every other prominent liar who has repeated the baseless allegations of his criminal record in recent weeks. He should wipe them out, take their money, leave them penniless and begging on the streets, without health care. They would deserve it. Perhaps Beck's AA sponsor or the Mormons who he credits with "saving" his wretched soul can then take care of he and his family. Since surely he wouldn't want the government to lend a hand.

They have twisted other aspects of Jones's past, suggesting his brief stint with a pseudo-Maoist group makes him a secret communist in the heart of government, this despite his more recent break with such groups and philosophies, in favor of a commitment to eco-friendly, sustainable capitalism. They have called him a black nationalist, which he admits to having been for a virtual political minute in his youth, and have suggested he’s a “truther” (one who believes George W. Bush masterminded the 9/11 attacks as an “inside job”). As for this last charge, their evidence consists of Jones’s signature on a petition, which originally called merely for more openness about the pre-9/11 intelligence available to the former administration, but which was later altered to reflect the conspiratorial lunacy of its creators. Jones, and many others who reject the truthers' nonsense, were tricked into signing and were appalled by the final product. But none of this matters to the right. Because after all, none of it was ever the point.

This is not about convicted felons. The right loves convicted felons, as long as their names are Oliver North and G. Gordon Liddy. The former of these (whose convictions were eventually vacated on a technicality) helped direct an illegal war from the Reagan White House, which claimed the lives of tens of thousands of innocent Nicaraguans. And the latter helped plan the Watergate break-in, advocated political assassination during his time in the Nixon White House, and even advised folks on how to kill federal agents several years ago, from his radio show perch (“head shots” he roared). But none of his friends on the right ever suggested that such talk put him beyond the pale, or should result in him being silenced.

This is not about having an arrest record. After all, there are many anti-abortion zealots with arrest records, hauled in and then ultimately released after blocking access to family planning clinics. But Glenn Beck doesn’t make them public enemy number one. Nor would he, or any of his political soulmates, seek to prevent such persons from having roles in a future Presidential administration. Indeed, they would likely consider such a record a bonafide qualification for higher office.

This is not about believing in conspiracy theories. Surely not. Beck of all people can hardly condemn anyone for that--even if Jones did subscribe to such things, which he doesn’t--for it is he who believes, among other things that Obama is planning on a mandatory civilian defense corps, which will be like Hitler’s SS, that Obama “hates white people” and has a “deep seated hatred for white culture,” that Obama is pushing health care merely as a way to get reparations for black people, and that he secretly wants to bankrupt the economy to force everyone to work for ACORN. It is Beck who is among the leading voices suggesting that the President’s upcoming speech to schoolchildren--in which he will implore them to study hard--is really just an attempt to indoctrinate them into a new version of the Hitler Youth. No, these people love to push nonsensical conspiracy theories. It is their bread and butter. It is all they have, in fact.

Nor is this about Jones’s remarks in a speech, given prior to becoming part of the administration, to the effect that the reason Republicans get things done is that they’re willing to be “assholes,” while many Democrats, including Obama, aren’t. Conservatives don’t mind that kind of talk. They loved it when Dick Cheney said go "fuck yourself" to Senator Patrick Leahy in 2004. Not to mention, right-wingers say far more offensive things than that, on a regular basis, but remain in good standing, and are surely never condemned by their fellow reactionaries. What’s worse: Jones calling Republicans assholes, or Rush Limbaugh saying that most liberals should be killed, but that we should “leave enough so we can have two on every campus--living fossils--so we will never forget what these people stood for?”**

What’s worse, Jones’s asshole remark, or Anne Coulter saying, among the many venomous syllable strings that have toppled from her lips, that the only thing Tim McVeigh did wrong was choosing to blow up the Federal Building in Oklahoma City, rather than the New York Times building?

This is not about socialism, as Jones is not a socialist. Oh sure, he's associated with some, and might still be friends with several to this day. And so what? Martin Luther King Jr. associated with socialists and communists because they supported the civil rights struggle and the black freedom movement at a time when the rabid anti-communists were at the forefront of attempts to maintain formal white supremacy. Which is to say that the socialists and the communists were on the right side, and the red-baiters were on the wrong one. Which was also true about the fight for the 40-hour work week, the 8-hour day, the end of child labor, the right of women to vote, and every other advance for freedom and justice in this nation in the past 100 years. But of course, Glenn Beck explained on the radio this past July 4th that he “hates the last 100 years of American history,” so I guess we know what side he would have been on in all those battles.

Let’s be clear, this is about one thing only: namely, the attempt by the right to exploit white reactionary fears about black militancy. It is the same tactic they tried with Rev. Jeremiah Wright in 2008. They did not confront Wright’s narrative--the accuracy of which was far stronger than they would like to admit--nor do they actually grapple with Jones’s ideas (it is doubtful that Beck has even read Jones’s best-selling book, for instance). Rather, they present a caricature, a bogey man with black skin, an occasional scowl, and an attitude. Angry, confrontational, "uppity," and too close to the President. Which means that Wright=Obama=Jones=Malcolm X. It’s a trope the right has banked on for years: using racial memes and symbols to scare Jim and Susie Suburb. Put the face of black anger out there and watch your devotees respond like Pavlov’s dog.

It’s something I first saw up close and personal in 1992. The woman I was dating at the time was an interior designer and had scored a contract to decorate the VIP lounges at the Houston Astrodome for the GOP National Convention. I viewed it as a great opportunity to do some enemy reconnaissance, so I lurked around the literature tables and took in the imagery beamed from the jumbotrons to the assembled conventioneers. One afternoon, we arrived before the main hall was opened to the delegates, and as I looked up at the screens above the floor, I saw the image that would be there to greet them as they entered a half-hour later: a massive, pixillated image of hip-hop artist Ice-T, whose speed metal band Bodycount had recently gotten in trouble for their song, “Cop Killer.” The Republicans wanted their delegates to know who the enemy was. Not just Ice-T, but anyone who listened to his music, anyone who looked like him.

And that is what the attack on Van Jones is about: exploiting white fears and anxieties. Anxieties about a black President, anxieties about a basket-case economy (which they’re trying to blame on the black President even though it was well in the crapper before he came along), anxieties about a changing demographic balance in the nation (which animates their fear and anger over immigration), anxieties about a popular culture whose icons look less and less like them as the years go by. And so they play up the militant black guy image, turning a low-level bureaucrat into a “Green Jobs Czar,” (the latter of which term they have sought to spin into a communist thing, despite the fact that the Russian Czars were actually the royalist pigs who were thrown out by the Russian left, a small historical detail which doesn’t matter to illiterate people of course), and making him the bad guy who’s running the Obama administration from behind the scenes.

No, it’s not only about race. But if you think it’s merely a coincidence that the right has sought to make Jones such an issue--rather than some of the other administration officials they are now threatening to “expose” (two of whom are white)--then you haven’t been paying attention to Republican and conservative politics for the past forty years. This is what they do. It’s the only language they speak, at least fluently. Which is why when John McCain--to his credit--tried to move away from this method a bit, and refused to push the Jeremiah Wright theme during the general election campaign, so many on the hard-right criticized him. They didn’t want him to talk about Bill Ayers: they wanted him to talk about Wright. Even though Ayers was the one with the criminal record and the links to political violence, while Wright was the military veteran and preacher with a storied history of community contributions. Why? Because they knew that Wright would be the better image. To link Obama to a white radical is one thing. But to link him to a black one? Oh, much, much better.

This is, it appears, the emerging political agenda of the Republican Party, and certainly its right-wing: a group that has decided, apparently, to go all in as a party of angry white people (and the few folks of color willing to look past their incessant race-baiting). They have circled the wagons, all but given up on reaching out to black and brown voters, and are putting all of their chips on white.

And everything they are saying about Van Jones was what people like them said about civil rights leaders in the 50s and 60s: about Dr. King and Ralph Abernathy, and John Lewis, and Fannie Lou Hamer. They were communists, and revolutionaries, and a danger to the republic. Make no mistake, had they been old enough in those days, Beck and every modern-day movement conservative would have stood with the segregationists, with the bigots, with the mobs who burned the buses carrying freedom riders. They would have stood with the police in Philadelphia, Mississippi, even as they orchestrated the killing of Andrew Goodman, James Chaney and Mickey Schwerner. They would have stood with Bull Connor in Birmingham. How do we know? Easy. Because not one prominent conservative spokesperson of that time did the opposite. Not one. That's who they are. And the minute you forget that, the minute you insist on treating them better than they would treat you, the minute you insist on playing by rules that they refuse to as much as acknowledge, all is lost. They do not believe in democracy. They believe in power. White power. They believe in the past. They are Afrikaaners, and it's about time we started calling them that.

(**) This quote, which appears in David Neiwert's book The Eliminationists was reported originally in the Denver Post, December 29, 1995.

Tim Wise is the author of four books on race. His latest is Between Barack and a Hard Place: Racism and White Denial in the Age of Obama(City Lights: 2009).