Post-racial America? Are you sure about that

Do you remember that once President Obama was elected how every major news media source was proclaiming, or at least inferring, that America had become post-racial. That the election proved America had moved beyond race and was now the fruition of the dream of Dr. Martin Luther King.

For me such lunacy ended on January 1st of 2009 when 2 young Black men were murdered by police while unarmed without provocation, and another was severely wounded. But for much of the nation the media ads of "change" ruled the airwaves and internet. I recall fanciful commercials on BET portraying Dr. King looking up to President Obama and smiling amid a crowd of mixed Americans. Obviously Harry Reid was not in that crowd.

The AP has found, and Sen. Harry Reid has apologized for, comments made about then-candidate and Senator Obama. They seemed to be meant as a positive much in the way VP Biden (then a Senator as well) described President Obama as "clean". Sen. Reid said

"light skinned" and "with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one."

Wow.

It brings up a memory from roughly the same time of a joke that was made by Chris Rock. It was about former General Colin Powell, who at the time was considered a potential candidate, and went along the lines of



It would seem that Senate Majoity Leader Harry Reid did in fact expect then-Senator Obama to be something like the joke from Rock. Which makes me wonder who else in Nevada might share that thought. Who else in Congress shares those thoughts. Who eles in the Democrat Party and leadership shares those views.

I look at this from a systemic viewpoint because the 2010 census also reverberates that theme to an extent. Question 9 on the census, when asking for the racial background of the public includes the description "Black, African Am., or Negro".

Negro? A term only slightly less repugnant than the N-word. A term firmly isolated to the 1950's pre-Civil Rights Movement view of Blacks as seperate, inferior, second-class citizens. A term that only 50,000 people used in the 2000 census and will be considered for removal in the 2020 census.

When I look at the reality of the situation, things like the murder of Sean Bell, the murder of Oscar Grant, the kidnapping and torture of Megan Williams, the persecution of Mauricia Grant by NASCAR, and then add the census and Senator Harry Reid, I don't get post-racial. When I listen to President Carter and President Clinton (with his famous dream comments and denial to recognize then-Senator Obama), along with other prominent Democrats, flinging around the term racist on ANYONE that disagrees with them - I don't see post-racial.

If we are to be honest, America is no more in a post-racial phase of it's existence than it is in an economic boom. Some can see improvement on the horizon, but for far too many people that horizon is too far away to matter. It's a concept most of us want to believe, to live. But reality reminds us that right now it is still only a concept.

I have long disagreed with Democrats and Liberals on policy and economics. But I had hoped that at least on the concept of equality, respect, and recognition there was some degree of common ground. Sen. Harry Reid, among so many others, seems intent on dashing even that thought. Not that a slew of Republicans are much better.

So is America post-racial? Has President Obama ushered in a new era, filled with the fulfillment of Dr. King's dream? I didn't think so in 2007. I said it wasn't in Novemebr 2008. And it seems that I am being proven correct in 2010.

I really wished I was going to be proven wrong. I really did.

"Because I may suddenly feel the need to."

With all the closed door meetings in Congress, the idea of Universal Voter Registration, and now the C-SPAN deal I was reminded of one of the better monologues I've seen in movies.

It's made by Dennis Leary - whom I think is a great comedian - from the mediocre movie Demolition Man starring Sylvester Stallone.



You can substitute various politician's names in, depending on your political view. But ultimately I think you have to agree with the point made.

C-SPAN Health Care Reform - would you watch?

While not exactly being entertaining television, C-SPAN is a network all the same. So I thought to include this, but you can respond at the more politically oriented VASS if you prefer.

The questions at hand are transparency, health care, and the word of the President. All of these are issues that cause the politically tunnel-visioned to fume. But the issues still remain.

President Obama campaigned on a pledge to pass Health Care Reform, and to do so while the public was watching on C-SPAN. Now, there is a final Bill being worked on and Bill Lamb, CEO of C-SPAN, has requested to place the entire debate on the final Bill live on television.

"C-SPAN CEO Brian Lamb wrote [in part], ``Now that the process moves to the critical stage of reconciliation between the chambers, we respectfully request that you allow the public full access, through television, to legislation that will affect the lives of every single American."

The response from the White House has been



I don't feel that was an answer. In fact I beleive that at 1:00 - 1:12 on the video the reporter was threatened.

So the questions come down to these 2 things:

Has the Obama Administration lived up to it's promise of transparency?

If C-SPAN was allowed to provide live coverage (assuming Nancy pelosi and Harry Reid took the Bill from closed door meetings) would you watch it?

What can you get in 8 years?

8 years, that's 2922 days. In the space of a life here in America it's not that long. But for some it is more than a lifetime.

8 years ago the Darfur genocide in the Sudan started. Since that time there has been 2 movies, enough activist A-list Hollywood entertainers involved to almost create an awards show, a new President, 2 elections, and 4 Congressional elections. With all of that, and the numerous bloggers that I am proud to count myself among, the American government has succeeded in discussing the genocide everyone in the world knows is happening.

Congress has discussed HR 180 for several sessions now. They haven't moved forward to do anything, but they did talk about it a couple of times over the years. But to give our Government some credit, President Bush did send some funds to the region and President Obama mentioned it in 1 campaign speech.

Yet there is one company that has finally taken an actions that might get a result. It might even start a trend.

TIAA-CREF is the first, and as I am aware, the only major fund to divest from Asian energy companies that are involved with the Sudan. The companies they removed from thier portfolio are:

China's PetroChina Co Ltd
CNPC Hong Kong
Sinopec
Oil and Natural Gas Corp of New Delhi

Each of these companies values profits over the hundreds of thousands of lives their financial support allows to be killed. In fact the position of these companies can be understood from their response to the sale of a combined $60 million of their stocks.

"This will not impact our investment decision in Sudan," ONGC Chairman R.S. Sharma"

and

"[A] Sinopec spokesperson said: "Investors make rational judgments based on value. If some sell, others will buy."

Isn't that something. The lives of African men women and children has no impact on the business these men will continue to do. Because they are sure that more investors could care less about an African child's life than stepping on a piece of gum.

When anyone in the world equates a life to so many pennies a share, something wrong has happened. Imagine if it was your father, or sister, or family member. And someone said that if you buy a share of my stock it will make up for them being raped, mutilated, and then sometimes killed. Such a way of thinking makes me sick.

TIAA-CREFF deserves to be applauded. They spoke with these companies and asked them to put pressure on the Sudanese government to change what is happening. All but one company (Petronas Dagangan) did anything. Because, I assume, the other companies are taking their cue from world Governments including the U.S. Congress can't even pass one law in 8 years saying that this genocide is wrong, and U.S. companies won't contribute to this with their funds.

Still if one fund is willing to forgo the profit of these companies, others can too. Because there is always another energy company stock that's worth buying. In a country that isn't killing it's people, it's children.

Now if only Congress and the Obama Administration could step up and learn from TIAA-CREFF. If only they would listen to Don Cheadle and George Clooney (who I know has been to the White House).

Let's not wait another 8 years. Because if the people of Darfur are all killed before the Government does something, if you made money off the deaths of these people, imagine how you will be judged.

What connects Congress and college football?

Football (American style) is a bedrock of our nation. From peewee leagues up to the pros in the NFL, America loves the sport.

On the other side of things, Americans have never had much love for Congress. In my 40+ years of life I have heard multiple generations decry how miserable Congress is at doing ANYTHING. The most recent iteration of Congress is arguably at least as bad as average, if not worse.

Now the question you might have is what do the 2 have to do with each other?

Congress is now debating on being involved in college football. Yes, while there is 10% unemployment in the nation, while President Obama is seeking to create another stimulus to do what the first did not, while American troops are under fire in Iraq and Afghanistan, Congress is debating football.

The shock I have on this is beyond that I had for the claims of creating or "saving" jobs while unemployment levels rose for months in a row. I was more amazed than when Congress claimed they could create a program that does not spend more than it costs (ie Health Care Reform). This is about the worst idea, and timing yet.

Can you imagine this? The Government, particularly Congress, can't balance a budget, can't manage anything, can't even read laws they are enacting yet they want to be involved in college football? Can you imagine how convoluted college football will become once Congress gets their hands on this.

Texas Representative Joe Barton is the one behind this disaster waiting to happen. Considering all the things in front of the House of Representatives right now, I would think that his constituents in Texas would want him focused on many other things beside college Bowl match-ups.

HR 390 - The College Football Playoffs Act - is the bill in question. If you are represented by Rep. Barton in Texas I suggest you go to his contact page - found at this link - and tell him to forget about a Government controlled college football and focus on jobs, the economy, health care reform, the deficit, Iraq, Afghanistan, or any of a dozen other far more serious and responsible issues.

**for more political information see VASS
For great gift ideas check out Alchemy at World of Vass and/or World of Vass **

Darfur - the genocide is not over United Nations

Have you ever wondered what is more important, politics or people? You may not, but the United Nations certainly has. And they picked politics, or so it seems.

I have long been an advocate of helping the people of Darfur from the genocide that has been ongoing from the Sudanese government. For years I have tried to add my voice to that of Don Cheadle, George Clooney, Matt Damon, Brad Pitt and hundreds of other non-celebrities. We all have asked the U.S. Government to get involved and to do something, while we have all acted directly. But all the U.S. Government has done is talk about HR 180 IH.

Hundreds of thousands have died since 2003. Millions have lost their homes and now live in refugee camps fearful of Sudanese government attacks. Government-allied militias - janjaweed - burned down villages, government planes dropped bombs on populated areas and reports of rape by the gunmen were rampant. And the U.S. Government was not concerned.

Yet today, the U.N. did something even worse.

“We can no longer talk of a big conflict, of a war in Darfur. I think now everybody understands it. We can no longer speak of this issue. It is over." Rodolphe Adada told The Associated Press this week before stepping down as head of the joint United Nations-African Union peacekeeping mission in Darfur, or UNAMID.

Yet somehow I tend to believe this statement more

''There are no more people on their land to kill,'' said Abdelwahid Elnur, exiled leader of one of the oldest rebel groups, the Sudan Liberation Army

In America politicians have been waiting for this day. Their inaction and the major media’s failure to discuss what has been called the worst humanitarian crisis has been astounding. 6 years of what the U.S. Government described as genocide equated to so much paper shuffling. And now the U.N. wants to have the world’s businesses and governments reigniting financial support of a government that is headed by a leader wanted for war crimes and has a warrant for his arrest since March of 2009.

The U.N. might as well say that the Sudanese people, especially those in Darfur, are not important enough to care about. Because their statements via Adada, and the inaction of America, seems to have said that loud in clear politically.

A genocide does not end because you can’t find as many people to kill as you did 6 years prior. A nation that actively killed people for no reason other than they existed is not something the world should ignore. And were this in Europe I guarantee we would not – World War II proved that. The people of Darfur deserve no less respect.

Congress, President Obama, and Secretary of State Clinton don’t have the combined balls of a mouse on this issue. But that does not mean we, the American people and those reading this around the world, are equally as impotent. We can still do something.

I again urge those that can do something to help Not On Our Watch and other aide organizations that seek to help those suffering in Darfur. Together we can make a difference, we can help children, mothers and fathers. Because if we don’t neither the U.N. nor the U.S. Government seems willing to.

“Change you can believe in” shouldn’t just be an empty American political slogan.

Captain America returns!

When I was growing up, there were a few things that you could always count on. Death, taxes, the fact that every President was a descendant of a European, the only time you would hear about Black history was in February – and that was mostly just Dr. Martin Luther King, Superman was the ultimate boy scout and Capitan America loved and defended our nation. But as I have grown some of these things have changed. Some for the better, some worse, and a few we are still wondering about.

Death though never changes, and it even hits fictional characters. First to Superman, and more recently to Captain America. In both cases there was an outrage among comic book fans. In fact some people were upset that had never read a single comic issue of either character.

Superman was of course brought back. The whole death was a big gimmick to stir up cash at DC Comics, and thoroughly confused fans with not one version of the boy scout but a half-dozen or so. This has eventually been straightened out. But it must have inspired someone at Marvel.

In a move that I can only call idiocy, Captain America was killed. Not fighting for America, or defending our nation overseas. But by the cowardly bullet of a hidden lunatic. It was a chilling moment.

The fictional living embodiment of all the virtute and Freedoms that is America was struck down. In a post-9/11 world where sacrifices of Rights and lives are all too common, this one symbol of how the nation endures and overcomes every challenge was gone. It was a bleak message reflecting, as comic books often do, the strife and turmoil within our society. In my view too bleak.



But 2 years after the fact, Marvel Comics has re-thought its actions. Either that, or they are preparing for another movie converting Captain America from ink to flesh and bone. (In fact movies starring and featuring Capitan America are planned in the next 3 years) Thus the word is out that Captain America will be back. Yes, on July 1st of 2009, the living American ideal will enrich the pages of comic books again, and thus the minds and hearts of us all – if just subliminally.

If this turns out to just be a marketing gimmick, Marvel will lose. Just as DC crushed its fanbase and had to resort to revisioning Batman (who is no longer around either) and Superman in film, Marvel will lose its fanbase. In fact I think that the films will not recover some of the older fans, or those they influence.

Because you cannot sell freedom, nor equate the Rights of the American people to dollars and cents. For all the negatives of international thought, and the dislike of capitalism, the differences of religion or the seemingly eternal issues with race relations, America is unified in our belief that we are a great nation. Great because of the ideals we live and, many, die by.

If this whole fiasco has been designed with a thought of evaluating what is America today, of what are the true strengths of the nation, then this was a great plan. If the re-born Capitan America is redoubled in his belief in our nation and what it stands for, and thus imparts that message to our youth, then it was time well spent. If this iconic symbol of America, that men and women of all ages and backgrounds know of, is the rebirth of true heroes and the best of America – Marvel will have earned every dollar that this can bring them.

But if this is just about money, if it lowers the ideals of the nation, if it cheapens what it means to be American, I will be more angry and insulted than when they killed Captain America. Some things are worth more than money. Some things have a far greater impact than just the form and style they are thought to convey. To me, it would be the equivalent of burning the flag in Congress.

If this sounds too harsh, too serious a discussion because it’s just a comic book character remember one thing. His name is Captain America, not joe blow superhero. In ways that affect us like our other national symbols, he is more than just a comic book character. He is grander, like our nation. To sully that is to sully us all.

Hip Hop and Washington DC – going back to the beginning

Rap and Hip Hop today has taken a huge leap backwards, which is actually a great thing to happen. When I say backwards I mean to the beginning of the entire genre of music. Back before there was the current mainstream of gangsta rap there were the diversified and influential styles of rap music.

From Grand Master Flash introducing the first serious rap song in 1982, The Message, there was a growth in the music that spoke to serious issues. This culminated in perhaps the strongest voice for political involvement and criticism from the rap hip-hop industry ever: Public Enemy.

They might not have been the most loved rap group among White America, or even people of color, but they were vocal. They took the entrenched political status quo and shouted for them to be accountable. They looked at African Americans and demanded we do better. That we become involved rather than be directed. And they had an effect.

In fact Public Enemy, along with serveral other rappers and groups, became such a force for change that the music industry stood up and paid attention. Their reaction has been denied for decades, excused and deflected. They found, pushed, and manipulated gangsta rap.

In the over a decade since 1992, gangsta rap has become the standard rather than a sub-genre it started as. It has almost entirely avoided any serious involvement in politics or political action. It has promoted violence, drug use, abuse of women, and crime. It has distracted the masses with illusions of wealth and giggling of female anatomy. The music executives did their job so well that even when leaders in the rap and hip hop industry tried to get serious about politics (2004) no one listened. And they were undercut from within with actions like that of Kanye West during the Hurricane Katrina Fund Raising efforts.

But then came President Obama. And the rap and hip hop industry rallied. Because President Obama is relatively young, a Democrat, full of promises, and most importantly (if we are honest) he is Black. And they jumped in with both feet, in an election more defined by a national breaking of the ultimate glass ceiling than most anything else.

Now I do not fault rappers or hip hop for this. I in fact am happy to see they have finally gone back to their roots and suddenly realized the power that was thrown away (or bought off) 17 years ago. The latest attempt to regain the past impact on politics is the Hip Hop Caucus.

The Hip Hop Caucus is a lobby group made up of rap artists, guided by the Congressional Black Caucus and supported in some issues by members of Congress. As of this moment they are seeking to have a bill introduced, with the support of Sen. Barbara Boxer and Rep. Ed Markey. Their goals – green reform, education, re-entry legislation for prisoners, lessons on the Constitution in schools and funding for voter registration.

These are all good ideas (to varying degrees). The big question though is if Hip Hop is capable of making the transition back to where it started. Especially as the music genre continues on its path of glorification of violence, drugs, and abuse of women. Can it make money for music executives focused squarely on distraction of the masses, while encouraging the youth to become involved in the politics that shapes their lives?

I think not. To me only one master can be served at a time. Which means either Rap cleans up, potentially causing another backlash from the music industry, or the Hip Hop Caucus and other such groups fail.

“The decisions that we make now politically will affect the next generation and the generation after that. So we have to be involved. By speaking out, I end up speaking for poor people and a larger group all over the country.” – David Banner, rapper

The quote is a true statement. But as long as we affect the next generations with thoughts and images of exclusion from the mainstream of America, of living in a manner that is counterproductive to society in this nation, then all of the speaking out will be little more than static in the air.

Richard Branson joins Mia Farrow's Darfur hunger strike

In less noted news over the weekend, further developments came about in Mia Farrow’s hunger strike. Farrow started the water only strike to highlight and draw attention to the deplorable state of the Darfur region. It was perhaps one of the more dramatic endeavours made by a celebrity to try to garner public attention to the millions that have continued to suffer over the last 6 years and still counting.

12 days into the hunger strike Mia Farrow was told to end the strike by her doctors. Mia Farrow is 61, and continuing the hunger strike would have endangered her life. To which she stated

“I am fortunate. The women, children, and men I am fasting for do not have that option.”

To date over 300,000 Darfuri people have been murdered and died since 2003. 2.7 million people are homeless and seeking shelter. Since the start of the genocide (a term the American Government has officially used to describe the ethnic war since shortly after its inception) the United States Congress has done nothing. Every Congress since the start of this genocide has had HR 180 IH before them, which would place financial pressure on the Sudan and help to end this outrage. Each Congress (Democrat or Republican run) has failed to even take the issue out of committee. Effectively America is helping to fund the genocide of women and children.

Thus the work of Don Cheadle, George Clooney, Mia Farrow, and many many others deserves to reach the public. I am an advocate of the work to end the genocide and help the people of Darfur. And I again commend Mia Farrow for what she did.

It should also be noted the Sir Richard Branson, the mega-billionaire businessman and adventurer, took up the hunger strike in place of Mia Farrow. Again I believe he sought to keep attention in the media on this issue (which it seems the media wants to ignore). Branson stated he will be on the strike for 3 days.

I expect that other entertainers and celebrities will take up this cause. I hope that celebrities of note will join in on this hunger strike to drive media attention to this. Perhaps Snoop Dogg could be of some real help (for once) if he were to join in the hunger strike, and even convince other rappers to do so.

Too much is at stake not to be involved. And we as Americans can do so much more.

The first 100 days of President Obama

** This post is political. It covers the first 100 days of President Obama. As such I believes it deserves to be discussed. Some thigs are too important to avoid. Thank you for bearing with me.**

So we have made it thru the first 100 days under President Obama. The nation is still called America. This is still a democracy. The public, and more importantly the major media, still love President Obama. But this is no longer the nation that I grew up in.

There have been many changes under the Obama Administration, some due to the President and other due to the Democrat-led Congress. All of the changes have been based in the goals of the far-left and selected campaign promises.

Let's start with the appointees. There are many critical Cabinet positions that have yet to be filled. Several have had a revolving door of nominees, leaving some of the most critical positions that effect the economy open. Worse yet, there has been an undeniable consistency that virtually every Democratic nominee has failed to pay taxes, in some cases for multiple years, until nominated. Which is troubling in a "Do as I say, not as I do" kind of way.

But beyond the appointees are other troubles.

President Obama has failed to live up to many of his campaign promises. The Guantanamo Bay Detention will be closed, eventually, though there is mass confusion on what to do with the detainees. Will some be imprisoned in American jails. If so at what higher cost than normal. If not in America then to where? So far only France has accepted exactly 1 detainee. So much for international support and their belief in President Obama.

President Obama has failed to increase transparency on 7 of 9 major laws since taking the Oval Office. This too was a campaign promise that was broken. The most notable case of this was the $787 billion stimulus bill. A stimulus package that does not spend all the money now, that limits the income level of those that can use it, that applies only to citizens that RECEIVE a paycheck, and is primarily a tool of social change.

There are numerous examples of millions being spent on projects like artwalks, skate parks, and non-existent homeless projects in cities without homeless problems. All of these are attributable to the stimulus package, and the fact that to this date almost none of the members of any level of the Government has read the full law. In fact almost no member of Congress or the White House read the entire bill before it was voted on and approved by Democrats. Nor did the public get a chance to read it before President Obama passed it into law. The reverberations of this are still being felt now.

Moving on, President Obama has enforced the ability to gain an abortion, even in later term pregnancies. Which is in line with his long-standing political beliefs, though not exactly the beliefs of the nation at large.

President Obama has approved the use of embryonic stem cells, another issue that flies in the face of overall public opinion.

President Obama allowed Congress to break the Constitution by retro-actively penalizing American citizens. This was in the form of specific and non-grandfathered taxes to the executives at AIG. These taxes were on bonuses that the executives received as part of their contract, that the Government did not renegotiate when they had the chance, and in fact guaranteed in the stimulus package that no one read. The Congressman that guaranteed the money? Senator Chris Dodd, a Democrat and in charge of the Banking Committee.

Also, while violating the Constitution - which President Obama taught at one point - the concepts of all contracts were broken. In violating the contracts that the Government itself assured, all contracts are theoretically void. Because if the Government can break one it can break them all.

Plus the Government asserted its ability to control private business. First in taxing the AIG executive, thus stating the Government can retro-actively dictate pay. Then in forcing the removal of the CEO of a major auto company, while demanding changes to the operations of that company along lines that only the Government desired.

All this before the Government requested the expansion of power to allow the Treasury Secretary, an un-elected position, the ability to take over any company that it deems is significant to the nation based on undefined criteria. Which if passes will allow the Government to theoretically take control of any and all companies it chooses to.

But President Obama has done more. He has ended the Iraq War, by removing troops (a campaign promise) in an extended timeframe with the exception of 50,000 troops (both violations of the same campaign promise).

President Obama has also proposed his new budget. This is separate of the $410 billion continuation bill that was passed, also funding 9,000 pork-barrel projects. It was passed the same day that President Obama made a public outcry to stop wasteful spending by the Government. And it violated a campaign promise to end pork-barrel spending.

But the $3.6 trillion dollar budget of President Obama does not include the continuation bill or the stimulus package. It does include some $600 billion for a nationalized healthcare plan, that does not exist today nor have any plans of how it might be implemented. And this budget, going by President Obama's own best case figures will reduce the budget by 50% in 4 years. This part has been highly publicized. What has not been publicized is the rest of the budget plan.

President Obama's budget goes on after year 4 for a total of 10 years. By the end of that time, according to the President himself, the deficit will have increased by 250%. Few in the major media discuss this outcome, nor question how any plan that creates a larger deficit than it starts with can be called positive or effective.

But like every Administration, there have been bumps in the road. Besides the appearance that no appointee in the Obama Cabinet pays their taxes, while demanding that citizens must do so in greater numbers, there have been other gaffes. Like the recent decision to fly a plane over New York City without notification of the Mayor or any public notification - creating a panic based on the 9/11 events. There has also been the bow that President Obama bestowed - which has been described as everything but what your eyes will see in the video. There is the publicly friendly, and privately harsh, discussion with Hugo Chavez. There was the embarrassing gifts to our strongest ally's leadership and monarchy.

Yes the Obama Administration has had a hit parade. And these are only the most public and notable points. There are many other quieter, even less publicized actions affecting law and governance, and the appearance of the nation.

Like the now unspoken manner in which North Korea essentially turned it's nose up to the U.S. and fired a rocket that in one move threatened our ally Japan, and our nation itself. This cemented the fact that America has less respect and instills less fear than ever before on the world stage. An idea confirmed as our Secretary of State, and President, issued apologies for the existence of America and our actions to continue to exist.

Yet on the domestic side of the table things are even more unstable. America now fights terrorists, and the ideal of terrorism, by giving it a new name. The idea must be that there cannot be a terrorist act if the Government cannot call anyone a terrorist. That is except of Americans themselves.

Yes, because the Government - in the guise of Napalitano - has sought to isolate those that disagree with the governance of the land. Those that hold ideologies separate of the Administration, that have vowed to defend this nation with their life, and/or those that believe a religion strongly have been placed at the top of the list of dangers to America. Quietly, and without public scrutiny. The Amish and bloggers like myself be warned.

This is but the briefest coverage of the first 100 days of the Obama Administration. Likely each point will be something ignored by the major media. Yet it is these things that define where America is truly going. And doing so with smiles. President Obama's approval rating is over 60%.

So though this has been used to describe President Bush, I think it more directly applies to the America that President Obama is shaping

"So this is how Democracy ends. With thunderous applause." - Princess Amidala in Star Wars Episode 3

But if the poll on my sites are correct, Democrats had best watch the clock carefully. Because their time in the sun may well be short. My poll results state that since the inauguration the total outlook by my readers that responded are

39% feel President Obama has kept his promises and is doing a great job
38% feel President Obama has BROKEN his promises and is doing a horrible job
16% feel they need more time to decide
13% feel President Obama is the same as any other President

My poll may be small, but I believe that my readers are some of the most informed, intelligent in the blogosphere (well overwhemingly most are minus the ones that shout profanities), and those from America are real representations of America. Thus I would state that this is the real view middle America holds.

So in summary, President Obama promised change. He never clarified what that meant or what he would change. After 100 days we now have an indication. It is a change indeed. Though none I know would have voted for this.

Thankfully we will have the mid-term elections soon, and might be able to reverse or hold off the worst of that change.

Mia Farrow's hunger strike

There is nothing in the world quite like the feeling of standing by your convictions. It is a reward upon itself. Even better is when those convictions insist upon or cause to happen the improvement in the lives of another person. That is something worthy of discussing.

Such is the case with Mia Farrow. While the actress may not be the biggest name ever, and she is still remembered by her connection to Woody Allen, there is a better reason to remember her name. She is a human being that puts her money where her mouth is. Or in this case refuses to put food to her mouth.

Mia Farrow is about to embark on a hunger strike starting Monday the 27th. She will eat no food, only taking in water. The purpose of the hunger strike is to draw attention to the cessation of aid to the people of Darfur in the Sudan. Like millions that are now in danger of losing their lives, Farrow will share some of that risk.

This is a serious matter for Farrow. She is 64 years old. She’s not an athlete, just an ordinary woman with the ability to make the public aware of an issue the media seems more than willing to ignore. Just like Congress has done for 4 years now. That means Republicans and Democrats alike.

I commend Mia Farrow for being true to her convictions, and taking a potentially dangerous task in hand. Few people, celebrities and entertainers or anyone else, are brave enough to make such an endeavor. And if she is successful, hundreds of thousands if not millions will benefit.

If only Congress, and/or President Obama, had the resolve – even half the resolve – of people like Don Cheadle, Cynthia Basinet, Mia Farrow and others then perhaps there would be no genocide in Darfur. If bills like HR 180 IH can pass Congress, then maybe we could see world leaders create change in the troubled regions of the world.

I hope that Farrow draws the fickle attention of the news media. I hope that average Americans are motivated by her selfless act, causing them to write to Congress or to President Obama and force them to act. Because more of the polispeak shuffle that has continued for years will result in only one thing, hundreds of thousands of more children, mothers and fathers will die.

And we can do something to stop it.

HR 180 IH may not be the best answer, and it is not the only answer, but it is an action. Only in action are there results. The time has long since come that America do more than turn a blind eye.

AIG bonuses, and the change in the American Way

**This is a post that normally would appear at VASS, my political blog. At this moment VASS is undergoing site renovation and technical issues, so it appears here. This change is temporary.**

Executive pay and bonuses. Everyone is screaming about the $165 million in bonuses that AIG executives were paid. Congress went so far as to break the law to take back the bonuses paid. All of this to avoid noting that about $20 billion dollars of the over $100 billion given to AIG so far, went to overseas banks and companies.

Polispeak is one thing, but this should be an outrage.

Senator Chris Dodd knew that AIG was going to pay bonuses. He in fact made a provision just so they could do so. Treasury Secretary Geithner knew of this, in fact he knew back when he was still working in the Fed. So all the surprise they are feigning is obviously for a different reason.

The public is being distracted from the real problems. That our money went to foreign countries as opposed to helping our own. And it is advancing the ability of the Liberal Democrats to control exactly how much an American citizen makes.

$165 million in bonuses sounds like a lot. And to the average person it is. But then again this was a contractual agreement made by AIG long before the bailouts. Basically, as long as the company has money it must pay the bonus. Every member of Congress and the Obama Administration knew that. President Obama as a former lawyer had to know it as well (they do teach contract law in law school).

So the outrage is misplaced. Especially when key Democrats were involved in ensuring that the contracts were lived up to. So why all the hype?

Because $20 billion dollars is really a big number and an enormous waste. That’s money that could have saved tens of thousands of U.S. jobs (literally), gone from the nation. That is factually the retirements and college tuition of millions of Americans wiped away for years, maybe decades, to come. All because the Democrats were in a rush to pass legislation without the public, or most of Congress, seeing what the legislation entailed. [You do recall the promise of President Obama to have full transparency and allow the public to review legislation 2 days before it is passed into law – which he has violated several times now]

Because in feigning outrage at actions done willfully, they look like they are concerned. Because it looks like someone is trying to do their job. Because the legal battle that will ensue will have more public passion behind it rather than what it really means.

The fact that Congress has passed a tax on the AIG bonuses now means that ANY company and ANY employee or owner can be taxed if the Government decides they want their money. Besides being a retro-active act, which is expressly forbidden (that’s why there are grand-father laws), it is a means in which we move from a capitalist society to a socialist one.

Win a lottery, and the Democrat-led Congress will pass a law saying that you must be taxed even more than you already would be, because the Government can use the money better than you. Build a business, and the Government will put a new tax out so that you can’t gain the reward of your hard work and risk. Because the Government wants to pay for spending on special interest initiatives. Work for a company in a good job, and have a tax to take away the money you worked hard for all year, just because they can.

Yes it sounds wonderful that people will get things from the Government. That is what they want you to have, not necessarily what you need and definitely not what you want. Because the Liberal Democrats know what is fair - for you.

This is a horrendous step by the Government. Yes the idea of paying AIG executives for failure is distasteful. But not so distasteful as removing the ability of contracts to exist. Not when compared to the end of American life as we know it and have enjoyed it.

These kinds of acts are things that socialist nations like Venezuela, China, and the C.I.S. (former Soviet Union) take. People have fled those nations to come to America because we don’t treat people in such a manner. Or we didn’t until now.

People have complained to me about how they thought President Bush destroyed the law of the land. Yet there is not one thing that has been proven to have affected the American people. Lots of allegations, but not a single fact. And the average person lived as free as a decade ago.

Now we have a Democrat-led Government that is actively breaking the laws that built this nation. We are watching as the structure of the nation is being manipulated. And I hear no outcry about this.

Dark days are ahead of us, if this is the path we are being led down. Do we need to shout? Oh, yes. But it’s not the AIG contracts that upset me. It’s Congress and the Obama Administration.

Jon Stewart vs. Jim Cramer: really missing the point

So Jon Stewart took on Jim Cramer tonight. It was a beat down. It was vicious. It was obvious that Stewart had an ax to grind. And it was wrong on many points, yet true to the feelings of many.

As a former stockbroker I have had many discussions with people about the markets. I’ve written many things about the economy. And from time to time I have noted points in agreement and disagreement with Jim Cramer. But to attack him, and/or CNBC, as if they were the cause of the current economic crisis is both a fallacy and an attempt to find a scapegoat.

To be fair CNBC and Cramer failed in their mission to inform the public. Then again, neither ever truly were supposed to do that. Anyone thinking that either was more than an educated high-brow entertainment probably was sniffing glue (or some other like substance) and likely thought they would be made a millionaire by buying internet stocks they never heard of, or knew what they did, during the late 1990’s.

Is the market a fixed game? No. Is there an unfair advantage for large corporations and wealthy individuals? Absolutely. And are the major brokerage firms the biggest crooks in the industry? I’ve always believed so. Yet not one part of this, or what Stewart was railing about, is any different than it was 50 years ago for the most part.

What has changed is the greed and work done by small investors. If there is anyone to be upset with, it has to be that.

Jon Stewart will without doubt gain huge ratings. Jim Cramer may be looked at with harsh eyes in the near future. And CNBC will get the branding of slipshod reporting that they deserve. But it really doesn’t matter.

I don’t care how many regulations are created to prevent another Bernie Maddoff, or Enron, or Tyco, or AIG, and on an on. Given time there will be another scandal. And another ridiculous bubble in some sector of investing, with a crash that has to happen as well. Because the greed of everyone, at each level of the game, necessitates it.

I listened tonight as Stewart and Cramer went back and forth saying ‘You seemed to know’, ‘Did you know’, ‘Why weren’t we told’, ‘I was lied to’, and so on. Its wonderful posturing, but you don’t need to be an economist to have seen what was happening. Without following more than the politics of the day, occasional glances at the Dow Jones Index, and reading bits of news over the internet I foresaw the problems of the mortgage crisis. It was blatant, and there was plenty of time to act before the hammers started falling. And while I’m smart, I’m not so smart as to have been the only one to recognize what was going to happen.

Don’t believe me? Check out what I wrote back in October 2006

“The economy is better, things have improved. Barring events like 9/11, or Enron, the markets will continue to grow. But hype will never help mom & pop investors. It does help some institutions though, like LEH which was 15.68 around Feb 14, 2000 and continued HIGHER to 78.70 on Oct 16, 2006.

Just keep this stuff in mind as you watch the talking heads spout how great things are in the market. Or you see that ad saying that you should invest on your own.”

or on December 2007

“The fact that the mortgage crisis is far closer to its beginning than end. I expect that there are far more homes in danger than has been seen to date. Even with the highly selective mortgage bailout stated by President Bush, many are going to be at risk. Credit card debt can only float for so long. With the added pressure of oil at or above $100 per barrel, which I expect mid-January as I stated above, more will fail even if rates are lowered (less than 2 points).”

or even January 2008

“Those that are in trouble, or will be, with their mortgages will not be helped by lower rates as that will not cap increased heating and gasoline prices. Small businesses are not going to be able to get new loans as easily even with lower rates as financials scramble to find cash to absorb the losses they are experiencing. Effectively some degree of pain must happen and is not preventable.

I say all this for one reason. So that you my readers can be prepared. If I am correct even in part, then this nation will encounter times we have not seen for quite a while. I doubt that we will see the inflation and unemployment that existed in the 1970’s (when I was a child) but I am sure that we will see levels that those under 30 have never experienced.”

My point is that the current crisis was very visible, if anyone was not bothering to be distracted by hype from the likes of Representative Barney Frank and other Government “watchdogs”, or being entertained by CNBC. All you had to do was read and do the math. Investments are no different than your home, if you don’t keep up with it then don’t be surprised if it falls apart one day.

But there has to be a bad guy. In America we are conditioned to look out for someone in a black hat if something goes wrong. And today that guy gets to be Jim Cramer with Jon Stewart as our hero. Bull.

The bad guy is in equal parts the Government, for creating an environment over a decade ago that was little better than a Ponzi scheme. Then there are the corporations, that jumped in on the game looking to ride the wave for as much short-term profit as possible. Add to this mix speculators who looked for ever faster gains with commensurate risk. Throw in cable networks whose goal is ratings above reporting, and then put in a public that didn’t care as long as the paper investments looked better than the Jones’ 15 minutes ago.

And this complete recipe is virtually exactly what happened with the internet bubble, except this one was bigger and not quite as exhuberant. No one learned then, because no one cared. All that mattered was the immediate gratification being reported on our instantaneous communication devices. But the risk of instant gain is the environment we find ourselves in today.

It will happen again. No matter the regulations – because most of the factors that caused this meltdown were all legal if not bad business decisions which can’t be regulated. No matter the protests of Government – because their lack of understanding (or overall disdain) feeds these kinds of bubbles and crashes. Without regard to who reports what facts in whatever manner – because most don’t care or bother to pay attention to the details anyway. No matter the pain for the public – because everyone wants to be a millionaire tomorrow without doing the work required, and many believe they deserve such rewards just because they breathe air in America.

So the indignation of Jon Stewart amuses me. Yes, Cramer and CNBC could have done a better job of reporting. Yes, Congress could have done a far better job of enacting realistic regulations and understanding how those regulations are affecting the market. And a big YES, the public could have paid attention to the facts at hand and did some math. But none of them did these things. Nor do I believe they ever will, to any large or useful degree.

So I won’t score the big points with the blogosphere with this post. My past comments about the economy and markets went without much fanfare as well. Such is the fate of being right consistently. But let me ask you this…

Do you really want to feel smug and righteous because some comedian beat up on a quasi-entertainer/commentator, while politicians throw your future earnings down a drain and your retirement funds evaporate?

Do you know what the Government is doing with trillions of dollars, and how that will affect investments today and in 5 years – with even a slight bit of educated estimates?

Do you get to save your house, or retire, or pay for whatever any easier because a liberal leaning comdey show host got serious for a minute while you still don’t know how to read a corporate 10Q, understand why a second stimulus plan is already being worked out and how badly that will affect your savings and jobs, and re-elect Congressional leaders that can’t figure out their responsibilities even after 20+ years on the job?

I’m sure that many of my long-time readers do get all these things. Perhaps even more than a few of my first-time readers will. But for those that don’t, ignore the hype this one program will raise and start paying attention. Your money will depend on it.

I will now go back to the entertainment news Black Entertainment USA is normally dedicated to.

President Obama proposes action in Darfur

Finally it seems that America will be taking a stance on Darfur. After over 5 years of genocide, President Obma has given indications that he is willing to do something more than Congress or the prior Administration has ever bothered to do. And it's about time.

In the past 4 years, as some 400,000 people have died and 3 million have become refugees fleeing the violence, Congress has ignored the situation. In both Democrat and Republican led Congresses HR 180 IH - an Act to prevent American businesses from working with the Sudan and thus funding the murder of women and children - has never made it out of committee once. Effectively, America has shown the world that we don't care about those African lives.

But This should change, based on the comments of President Obama

"It is not acceptable to put that many people's lives at risk. We need to be able to get those humanitarian organizations back on the ground."

This comes as the President of the Sudan, recently charged with war crimes and acts against humanity by the International Criminal Court, has thrown out 13 humanitarian organization. This further places lives in the region at risk.

Sadly the U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon seems to be willing to dilute this immediate need for a bit of polispeak and U.S. press coverage. Rather than focusing directly on the issue at hand, Ban slipped in the desire to see international support of global warming issues. Seriously, he thinks that is equivalent or superior a threat to humanity.

I suppose the Secretary-General had to bring up the issue of global warming. It may be the only way that America will pick up 1/4th the tab of the nearly $5 billion budget that the U.N. has. Since global warming is an issue that liberals like President Obama love (given that there is no proof that it is not a natural occurring effect, there is evidence that global cooling may be starting, and the whole argument is arbitrary since India and China are increasing their CO2 emissions as they become more industrial) his discussing it helps provide reasons why the U.S. needs to waste money on this issue rather than focusing on the banking and credit sectors.

Now as long as the global warming issue is a far second to helping the people of Darfur, I really don't care. There have been hundreds of thousands of lives that have been lost as Congress and America turned a blind eye. The rest of the world followed our lead, as they usually do. So if President Obama is serious, this could help turn the tide.

Polispeak and scientific debate are fun occupations, when lives are not at stake. America has allowed the media and it's own disdain to cover it's eyes for far too long. Hopefully this meeting and the words of President Obama will finally get a result from Congress and the world. The lives of children are counting on it.

A Night to End Violence Against Women in Darfur

Recently I have been in contact with Cynthia Basinet, an accomplished woman of multiple talents. She might be best known to some for her 2005 cover of Eartha Kitt's Santa Baby (which was included in my tribute to Kitt after her death). But she is also a Nobel Peace Prize nominee and an advocate for women and Africa.

Cynthia Basinet sent me something that I am happy to pass on to you my readers. On February 11, 2009 there will be a nation-wide effort on behalf of the women in Darfur, as well as to end the over 5 year long suffering in that region of Africa. There has been an on-going genocide there, as acknowledged by Congress and the U.N., that too little is being done about. I have spoken about Darfur several times. And I look forward to the day I no long have a need to do so because it has ended.

But until that day I encourage all my readers to be involved, with donations and/or contacting your Congressional representatives to pass the laws we have sitting in Congress doing nothing. And part of that involvement can include A Night to End Violence Against Women in Darfur.

In communities across the nation there will be a viewing of Violence Against Women and the Darfur Genocide, a movie discussing the horrific violence that is happening right now. A terrible blight on humanity that the American news media seems to feel secure in ignoring. And afterwards there will be an online discussion with communities just like yours being involved.

You can make a difference in Darfur. You can help the hundreds of thousands that are suffering even as you read this now. I recommend that all my readers find out more about this event, learn about Darfur, and if you can host this event in your community. Because America is a great country, once we get our asses in motion. And the news media is sitting on its ass when it comes to Darfur.

But we don't need to wait for CNN, MSNBC, FOX, or any other news to have a slow day to cover this. We can act today, and on February 11th, and every other day we choose.

To find our more about how you can help the women, children, and families in Darfur on February 11th just click on this link.

We can make a difference here. And we should make a difference. I hope that you agree.

Tiger Woods and GM, Citigroup and the Mets

Today all eyes are pointing towards Citigroup and what they have been doing, or failing to do. Thousands have lost their jobs, tens of billions of dollars are being poured into the company. And unlike AIG, Citigroup is not sending their employees to luxury spas for a breather. Nor are they giving up on celebrity endorsements like GM with Tiger Woods. No, they are putting their name on the Mets baseball stadium for $400 million of your tax dollars.

Wow.

I mean what else can be said here. Citigroup is going forward with putting their name on a stadium (a policy I dislike in all stadiums) with your money as 401k’s and taxes are used to fund it. No wonder they ran through the intial $25 billion the Government gave them. And Congress is asking AIG and the auto industry for reforms and guarantees. For over a year now, no one thought this expenditure was worth noting? Hey Barney Frank, you didn’t get a memo on this – Mr. Head of the Banking Committee.

I mean GM has bailed out of their deal with Tiger Woods. They bought themselves out of their deal a year early. I’m sure it cost them more than a bit to do so, but at least they did something to save a few bucks. And I’m sure Tiger was more than happy to let them do it.

Tiger Woods is too big a brand to be tied to the failure of the auto industry. The last thing he needs is the media tying him to a huge payout funded by an auto bailout. That would be bad for his image, bad for PGA golf, and America. Nobody wins in that scenario. And I doubt he is hurting for the money.

Of course GM is losing the worst. Tiger looks like a hero for saving the company money. He can easily say that he does not want to be paid at the price of workers jobs, or taxpayer debt increases. And that would be true. But GM looks like an idiot for not moving forward sooner. And losing Tiger, the Super Bowl ads, and who knows what other advertising means fewer cars sold.

But at least this looks a little bit better for them after their luxury corporate jet trip to ask Congress for billions of dollars.

Citigroup on the other hand could care less. At least that’s what it looks like. They are spending more useless money than Tiger’s endorsement (the full 5 year deal), buying a new corporate jet, all the Super Bowl ads, and the AIG spa trips put together and multiplied by 10. At the very least will shareholders get a discount to go to Mets’ games in 2009. Even 1 game in the baseball season? I doubt it.

The big question is will this reflect badly on the Mets. They are getting paid a stupid amount of money, as is New York City, to have the field given this dumb name. There are thousands of employees of Citigroup that work in the corporate headquarters in NYC. How will they feel watching the Mets play, knowing that the field’s name cost them their job. Or anyone who invested in Citigroup. They might have lost the ability to go to games, or even to live in their home, because of the stock devaluation due to the mismanagement and they have to watch this team play in a place that sucked their money away.

Mets fans always have had it rough, being in the same city as the Yankees. But this is a new thing that really doesn’t have anything to do with baseball, yet it may well have a massive impact on the game.

And if you are wondering why Citigroup didn’t do something back in January (at the latest) when they knew things were getting bad? Its because they were sure of one thing. They are too big to fail. They can waste money like a drunk pissing on the side of a building. It is wrong, but they don’t care. And the Government knows it.

But let me ask you which you think is worse. Is it worse to lose Tiger Woods’ endorsement, and ads during the Super Bowl and ask for money, or to spend money on the name of a baseball field and demand the public pay for it? Then let me know why you think Congress (especially Chris Dodd and Barney Frank) seems to think GM is the bigger bad guy.

Which is right - keep campaigning or fixing the economy?

This is a repost from my political blog, VASS, but I think it's an important question.

So the news has now been reported that Senator Obama does not plan to accept Senator McCain’s offer to go back to D.C. and work on the bailout.

Senator Obama believes that he can both work out the problems with the bailout and step before the nation for a debate on Friday. He believes that he can focus on both issues equally.

Senator McCain has already stated that he believes that the political debate can wait until the financial future of America is resolved.

I feel that Obama is placing politics above the nation, and his constituents that elected him to office. Both of these men are Senators, as is Joe Biden. They have a responsibility to the voters that put them in office up until they are elected by voters for a different office.

The polispeak will fly today. Some will laud one or the other Presidential candidate. I can clearly see the benefit to the nation of the actions of McCain, I do not see that benefit from Senator Obama. Obama is choosing to hold a speech about how great he will be for the economy once he is elected, while McCain will be speaking with Democrats, Republicans, and the President about keeping the economy going up to and through the election. Which makes more sense.

How well will Senator Obama be able to review documents on the bailout, and shake hands with undecided voters? How well will he be able to speak with Congress, while he is kissing babies and approving attack ads? How well will he be able to confer with economic experts while he is practicing his debate points.

Yes a President must do more than one thing at a time. But if Warren Buffett is correct, and this is the financial equivalent of Pearl Harbor, Senator Obama is saying he would rather go overseas for a meeting than deal directly with the situation.

Was the fear of following McCain’s lead on this potentially devastating financial fiasco so great as to refuse to do his job. Is his desire to be President so great that he would rather lead America in a depression, with millions unemployed and/or homeless than serve as the Senator he has been elected to be in relative economic stability?

Perhaps this, more than the debates themselves, will be the turning point in the election. And I have to wonder what most Americans will prefer. I for one agree that the debates for the election (which can be rescheduled for another day out of the 41 remaining) are not as important as my work, and as a consequence my house.

President Bush and Darfur now - not the movie - 2.19.2008.2

In 2005 a category 5 hurricane named Katrina struck New Orleans and devastated the city. The United States government, lead by FEMA, failed the city and its citizens in a catastrophic manner. This is fact and there can be no dispute of it.

Some have argued that the failure of the government was in part because of the personal beliefs of President Bush in regard to African Americans. It is not the purpose or goal of this blog or me to delve into the heart of the President, but I will state that as the Commander-and Chief and highest elected official of the nation he ultimately is responsible for those that died and suffered. That being said, this failure should not have been a surprise since 2 years prior, and continuing to date, America allowed the deaths of hundreds of thousands.

Today, President Bush was visiting Rwanda. During this visit he went to the site where thousands were buried from the atrocity that occurred in that nation. It was obvious that when questions were asked the foremost would be why America, under his leadership, has allowed genocide to occur that will one day create a similar site. The answer was polispeak and paltry, in my opinion.

“I still believe it was the right decision,” Mr. Bush said. “But, having done that, if you’re a problem solver, you put yourself at the mercy of the decisions of others, in this case the United Nations. And I’m well known to have spoken out by the slowness of the United Nations. It is — seems very bureaucratic to me, particularly with people suffering.”

America has become a policeman of the world in my lifetime. We have entered multiple nations as a peacekeeping force and in wars. Yet, for some reason America has turned its back while the equivalent of Orlando, Florida (or possibly Cleveland, Ohio – the exact number is unknown) have been killed since 2003. Let me make this clear, that’s between 200,000 to 400,000 men women and children that have been killed and counting.

If you are wondering where this is happening, the place is called Darfur and it’s in the Sudan.

Today President Bush stated that he supports African nations taking care of African problems. That is a first, since America and Europe have meddled and created problems in Africa for millennia. President Bush has stated

“White soldiers are a target for both sides of a conflict [in Africa] and are counter-productive to resolution.” – as stated on Fox News via news clip

While that may well be true, this has never prevented America from doing anything before. Such an answer is paltry in my opinion. It leads me to believe that if this mass murder of children was occurring in Europe or affecting Whites, America would be there in gangbusters.

And lest anyone think that President Bush is alone in this decision, I refer you to HR 180 IH. Congress has failed to act on this matter for multiple years, and has facilitated the blind eye America and the major news media have given this genocide. Republicans and Democrats share equally in this failure. The President may be responsible for his actions as the Chief Executive, but Congress is no less complicit.

President Bush went on to say,

“We are cooperating to address violence and genocide in Darfur.”

To that end the President has pledged $100 million dollars to those African nations that will help to end the 5 year long conflict in Darfur. Rwanda is to receive $17 million with Ethiopia, Ghana, Senegal, Tanzania, Burkina Faso and Malawi also to receive funds. Yet American businesses continue to do business (and thus fund the murder of women and children) with Sudan unabated. And Congress seems too busy with holding meetings about steroids with baseball entertainers or investigating why individuals that are employed at the pleasure of the President were fired (a situation that was never illegal and known to have violated no laws).

America has acted too late and far to hands off in this matter. The major news media have ignored the issue though individuals like George Clooney and more prominently Don Cheadle have tried to being it to the spotlight. I mean Mr. Cheadle even was involved in a movie (Darfur Now) specifically to draw attention here. Yet none of the media paid attention, or the elected officials of the nation.

Thus I must ask why. When the action in Kosovo draw immediate attention and comment, and the problems in Israel are in our headlines. When the politics of Russia and the various nations of the CIS (many of which are only slightly less chaotic) are fodder for pundits. What is the difference?

I can tell you what Kanye West thinks (stated inappropriately in a format that deserved better)



Considering the actions of America about Darfur over the past 5 years I would have to say that his claim has merit. And the Congress along with the major news media is no better.

If you’d like to prove me wrong, write to President Bush and demand more action at:

The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

FAX: 202-456-2461
comments@whitehouse.gov

president@whitehouse.gov
vice_president@whitehouse.gov

You can write to Congress to request action in preserving the lives of thousands of women and children via your local Senator or Congressman:

http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

https://forms.house.gov/wyr/welcome.shtml

Or

http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/

Don Cheadle movie coming out in November - 10.30.2007.1

**This can also be seen at All American Blog, where I am a contributing author.**

In the list of things that many may not see in movie theaters there is one movie coming out that deserves more attention. This one movie needs to be seen in wide release. This one movie needs to get publicity and critical commentary. This one movie deserves the media hype and sales pitch given to forgettable films like 30 Days of Night or Transformers, but it won’t get it.

The movie is Darfur Now. A simple title and statement. And I would ask, do you even know where Darfur is or what has been happening there for years? Are you aware of what our government is doing about Darfur? If not, why?

But as for the movie, it details 6 lives that are trying to make an impact and those that work with them in this endeavor. In my humble opinion, all those fighting to bring attention and resolution in Darfur deserved the Nobel Peace Prize far more than Mr. Al Gore and his questionable movie. That’s the real intent of the Prize I always thought. The Nobel goes to people like Mother Theresa, Gandhi, Dr. Martin Luther King and such. Not an overly politicized, overly glorified, politician that has not, to my knowledge, even publicly acknowledged Darfur.

Over a million people have been allowed to die without more than a glance by the major news media. Even with the attention major stars like Mr. Don Cheadle (who is featured in the movie), Mr. George Clooney, Mr. Brad Pitt and several others the media and Congress placed this story on the back burner.

For all the movies and news out about wars and conflicts in the world, most discuss the past. This movie discusses the on-going genocide of a people in Darfur. I say that again, on-going. Yet the major news media feels that Ellen Degeneres crying about a puppy deserves 2 day+ of news coverage. Years of murders, with approximately 1 million dead and a puppy going to a different family than where Ms. Degeneres wanted gets 2 days of coverage.

This movie deserves a wide release. It needs coverage. It’s a story that should be told in a big way, even if the studios don’t make a ton of money. Underdog was a complete flop, but they put that out nationally and made a big deal of it. If they could right of that loss, why not take a loss for something that matters and could have an effect of saving hundreds of thousands of lives, literally.

Suffice to say, I suggest seeing the movie. There are plenty of other films coming out by the end of the year to get you into the holiday spirit (not that I think Fred Claus is going to do well or be a good movie) or just thrill you (Mr. Will Smith has a remake that should be quite good out in December). Why not take one day [actually slightly more than 1 ½ hours of one day] to see what is happening in the world, which the major media seems to think you aren’t adult or mature enough to handle.

Nas insults every Black American with one word Part 2 - 10.16.2007.3

Continued from Nas insults every Black American with one word Part 1...

Recent Congressional hearings have gone virtually unreported, with entertainers, media corporations, and radio stations all denying any culpability for the content that is made or any negative effects it my encourage/create. With no one to blame, and pressure from the media seeking to blame someone, individuals like Nas are perfect targets. I can’t say I’m sorry when he chooses to adorn album covers with language depicting the worst insult known in the English language.

Nor can I feel pity for a genre of individuals that appear virtually incapable of avoiding legal difficulties. Take the most recent act of idiocy, the arrest of TI (Clifford Harris Jr) for illegal gun possession. Now that may not be a big deal, virtually every rapper has been arrested on a similar charge, Mr. Harris took it to the next level with an attempt to buy machine guns and ownership of multiple assault rifles and handguns. Can anyone explain why he would need this? And how many other rappers have been arrested this year alone? 2 dozen or so? And how many repeatedly, perhaps a dozen? Or am I low-balling the numbers?

The lack of discipline and personal responsibility displayed by the gangsta rap genre is bewildering. The use of the N-word, multiple arrests for crimes ranging from assault to drugs and more are just too much. Some may disagree on whether my argument of their being sell-outs is accurate, but I cannot see how any might dispute that in the current form and the exclusion of any other format, rap is hurting the Black community.

Mr. Creekmur is correct that 1 bad act does not invalidate 1 or 2 good acts. But when we look at the balance, I see dozens of bad acts and barely a handful of good.

We need change. Not by Congress, or from some corporation. We need to take action ourselves; because that is the only way we will see things improve in a meaningful way. If not, I fear that in 15 or 20 years we will wish for the respective charm of what we have today.

So when Nas releases his new album with a title that blatantly insults every living and dead African American, I would suggest not buying it or getting the bootleg or download. Or is that too much to ask?

Congress discusses gangsta rap music Part 3 - 9.26.2007.5

Continued from Congress discusses gangsta rap music Part 2...

So the net result of the Congressional hearings seems to be that the executives claim they aren’t responsible for the poor portrayal of African Americans. Rappers say they aren’t responsible for the content they produce and they are simply reflecting the neighborhood some of them used to live in. Record companies aren’t responsible for figuring out what is good or bad, and to do so is censorship. Basically most disavow any responsibility in any aspect of what they do. But no one wants the government to step in. That would be censorship – plus it will destroy profits. But how can the government not step in if no one else will be responsible?

I believe in the First Amendment, even when I disagree on how it’s used. I also believe in personal responsibility. If rappers want to sell-out (and I think they have), and corporate executives want to continue to profit, they should at least be honest that that’s why they continue to put massive amounts of garbage out targeting African Americans. Drug dealers are honest about what they do and why, for the money. Gangsta rappers and those that nearly exclusively promote them should be at least as honest. It would be the manly thing to do, and they all want to be men right?

Net net, nothing changes. Lots of talk, everyone gets to say they did their thing, and no one changes the flow of money. Unless you do something. Write a letter, a blog, or don’t buy a record or watch a channel and program. Stop the flow of money, and I guarantee there will be swift change. Until then sell-outs will keep cursing while using drugs and using their fame to shield them from being thrown (back) in jail. Corporations will continue to suck up money for letting someone curse you out and saying words they would get prosecuted for saying. And the youth will be drawn down the vortex just a bit more.

This is what I think, what do you think?

America debates while the U.N. acts on Darfur - 7.31.2007.1

Repost from Vass

Finally we see the start of some action. Finally leadership has arisen and taken a stand. Sadly it was not the United States that has been the bold leader that our nation can be, and often is. Even so, I am happy to spread this news.

The United Nations has announced that it will be sending 26,000 peacekeeping troops to stop, or at least stem, the mass murder in Darfur that has claimed some 400,000 lives and left 2,500,000 homeless. I have been speaking about Darfur for a little while now, inspired by the words and actions of Mr. Don Cheadle.

Still the resolution has its flaws. Since the troops will be comprised of African Union and U.N. troops it will take months to organize and implement. Additionally there is no sanction component that can cause a dampening effect on the ruling government, slowing its efforts to commit genocide. This sanctioning is a needed component as is food aid for the area. It is an abysmal fact that the major industrialized nations of the world, including America, have sat on their collective asses in this matter.

As I mentioned previously HR 180 IH, has sat in Congress without action all year. In 2005 the members of the G8 summit sought to address the issue, and after few words that hold as much impact as the soundbites politicians use for most every situation these days, did nothing. So I have mixed emotions right now.

There is the start of actions to improve the lives of millions of Africans, a start but that is all. American businesses continue to support and by their inaction fund a genocide that has been on-going since 2003. Politicians have failed to act on resolutions presented to them. The news media has virtually ignored the situation. This is insulting.

I place myself along with the major media, up until recently. We can all do better and more. The stories on the vapid and imbecilic Paris Hilton can wait a bit. The comments on the rantings of Ms. Rosie O’Donnell will still be there later. BET will still provide the second-rate, debateably exploitative programming which can be protested against while they ignore their obligation to provide news and substance to the very target group the cable news channel is named for.

Fox News, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS et al. need to forget that this is happening in Africa and treat this matter like it was in Europe. I strongly feel that were this happening on a separate continent, with people of a different color, more would be done. Well it is happening and they are human beings and we can do more.

And politicians can take the simple amount of time it takes to act on HR 180 IH, Darfur Accountability and Divestment Act of 2007, forcing companies to admit if they are supporting the regime that is murdering women and children for no reason beyond the fact they exist. I dare even one politician to provide a reason that is logical that explains why this has not passed yet. To explain why this simple act has yet to be passed after 7 months seems inplausible to me. That only 151 Representaives have backed this is sad. How many lives will it take to move forward and act?

America is a great nation, I believe that without hesitation. We have helped and defended millions across the globe for decades. We stand for freedoms and rights that no other nation can claim to give so completely. Because of these reasons we cannot fail to act when the need is so dire.

This is what I think, what do you think?

HR 180 IH, what does that mean? - Repost - 6.28.2007.2

This is a repost from my Vass ...

Here is something annoying. You have not heard a single Presidential candidate speak about this. I don’t recall any news media coverage of this. Were it not for the efforts of Mr. Don Cheadle, and several other prominent actors, and the humanitarian award he received I might not have heard about this. Not that there was any significant attention made about Mr. Cheadle getting the award or why.

The point is that the United States government has reacted pitifully in regard to Darfur. So far 3 sessions of Congress have been discussing this and still nothing has been done. And here is the proof. On January 4th Representative Lee introduced HR 180 IH. If you wonder what that means it’s the Darfur Accountability and Divestment Act of 2007 (Introduced in House). So far any attempt at accountability has gone out the window.

As of my writing this now, as Congress prepares to go on July 4th celebration seven months after introducing this bill the best thing that can be said is that it only took 3 months for a subcommittee meeting on this. In virtually seven months there has been no movement on this bill since March 20th. Perhaps if the members of Congress were in danger of losing loved ones there might be more action on the matter.

Now some of you may be saying, ‘Hold on, we don’t need to start another war.’ Others may be saying, ‘What is HR 180 IH?’

The answer to the first is that the bill doesn’t require the United States to put a single solider anywhere they aren’t already. The answer to the second is

“To require the identification of companies that conduct business operations in Sudan, to prohibit United States Government contracts with such companies, and for other purposes.”

Basically this bill cuts off money that goes to support what the 108th Congress

“declares that the atrocities unfolding in the Darfur region of Sudan, are genocide.”

That was almost 3 years ago to the day. How many have died since that time do you think? The GENOCIDE was unfolding according to Congress, it still exists, and we barely hear anything about it.

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell told Congress there was a genocide, President Bush told the U.N. that there as a genocide, yet only 4 states have passed laws requiring that no company doing business with the Sudan can do business with their state. Odds are it’s not your state. I can guarantee that it’s not New York State, home of Wall Street, and where the big six brokerage houses invest millions of dollars in mutual funds that could be doing business with [thus supporting] the Sudan and genocide.

I bet that 99% of those reading this now, that have a pension or mutual fund, have no idea what that mutual fund is invested in. I would bet that 99.5% have no idea what businesses might be supporting the Sudan government. Yet I am sure that, of those over 30 [which is maybe 50% of my readers] everyone was for and supported the bans against South Africa and Apartheid back in 1986.

To my knowledge, virtually every member of Congress is old enough to have at least heard about the 1986 bans. They have no excuse.

Of the 24 colleges mentioned in this bill there is not one that I am aware of that is a Black college. That could be simply an oversite of Representative Lee, or that they are doing matters separate of this bill. But I recall that back in ’86, there was more than one black college that was invested in South Africa.

Perhaps Congress can sleep at night without doing more than speaking about this terrible situation. Perhaps they have more to do in preparing their particular candidate for the 2008 election, or raising funds for that candidate. Perhaps every candidate for President right now can’t spend any time to come up with a 30 second soundbite for Darfur, as there isn’t enough time after explaining the resolution to Iraq, taxes, terrorism, social security, and why they are so great and warm people. Each of those points explained in 30 second soundbites. Perhaps the moderators of the debates are too overwhelmed with questions on when America will be out of Iraq, that question can be and has been asked in each debate maybe 20 different ways, to find one on Darfur.

I know that I was too busy writing to 6 blogs, and growing my company to stop and get into this issue. But at some point you have to stop and say, I can do more.

Well here I am doing more. I’ve raised the bar. Now you know. What will you do? Will you get in touch with you Congressional representative and ask them what they did over the 4th of July while people died and a simple resolution sat on the congressional floor? Will you take a moment to read HR 180 IH, the Darfur Accountability and Divestment Act of 2007?

This is what I think, what do you think?