Tuesday, February 26, 2013

What I Learned While Vacuuming

I like to vacuum. And wash dishes. But I hate drying them. Why do I find the soapy water and the wintertime dried hands it brings OK, while simply toweling off the dishes a quick path to tedium? Even when they’re dry I hate putting dishes away. I manage this challenge by designing every more creative ways to stack dishes mountain-high in the rack (we use the dishwasher for a bread box and pan cabinet).  I’m sort of the same on laundry as dishes. I like the separating, washing and drying, but I find the folding and putting away torture. My wife denies it, but I suspect she is not always thrilled with my performance on laundry. I take towels and sheets, but bow to her superior skills on the actual clothes most weeks. So that works out pretty well.

I work in an office from our home, and our few employees gather here as needed for review or coordination. With people coming and going a sink full of breakfast dishes can’t linger till noon, so they need to be gone every morning. The work clutter does get to be a pretty big problem, but I like whisking through the house, clearing loose ends like stranded shoes, and homework materials which seem to never seem to be put away. Many women I’m sure are much more meticulous than I, my wife for example, but some days I just have to clear all the loose and stranded things gathering here and there, and I am just so satisfied when it is all done. I get even more delight, when I exert the extra effort to wipe down the mirror, basin and commode in our three baths, so that everything sparkles. Every once in while I like to light candles here and there to give the house an added touch of warm ambience.  

I have been working from home for the past year and a half. Circumstances are such that I don’t know how much longer I’ll be able to do it, but I have found picking up the ownership share of household chores has brought me great joy, and something more: serenity. I prepare the evening meal for my wife and son, fix my wife’s lunch, and often fix breakfast for the boy as well. His favorite morning meals are blender smoothies with a bagel and melted cheddar cheese, chocolate chip pancakes, or crepes with ricotta, jam and fresh fruit. Recently I’ve added a holiday treat, eggs benedict, which is nice on a random Wednesday morning if you know what I mean.

I spoil my son and my wife has to deal with that on the rare occasions I am not here to do it.  I try to spoil her a little too. Her lunches consist of leftovers from previous dinners, or sandwiches and fresh fruit or granola bar. She eats like a bird, but I try to make the little morsels special for her. We have leftovers two or three times a week now, part of a menu planned each week before grocery shopping, but we have a freshly prepared meal four or five times a week. We eat fish and chicken, beef and pork, but the diet is well balanced with lots of fresh, crispy-crunchy, bright green vegetables. Mom ruined me for most things frozen except corn and spinach. Vegetables should not be grey or brown after cooking. When we do have leftovers I try to only plan that for things the family really enjoys the second time around.

I have been cooking most of the meals, but it took some time to learn to manage portion control in a way where everyone was satisfied, and the extra was only on things that went down well. Still it is not unusual for me to make one main course for our son, and another for my wife and I. Sometimes I make an extra side for the wife when I have a taste for spinach which she dislikes. Even though we have become fairly meticulous about excess, managing the leftovers got a lot easier when Lexi joined our family. The dog eats everything. Roughly once a week, we scrape all the remnants, including vegetables, from the Tupperware in the fridge into a single bowl of gruel, which forms the basis for the “wet” part of the dog’s diet for the following week.

For those of you used to the polemical essays I post on Faith and Magic, many must be wondering now where is he going with this? I guess the truth is, well, I don’t know. Maybe, nowhere. I just wanted to savor for a moment the enjoyment I have received in doing these tasks, most especially doing them for my family. For the first time in either of my kid’s lives I have been here to see one of my children off in the morning and pick him up after school at the bus. My wife and I split the homework, but I am deeply engaged, know the name of all the teachers, maintain the homework log, and know his grade level in all his classes.  I do World History and Comp and Lit, and especially during the week make sure everything gets done. Mom does Science. He’s on his own in math. The work is beyond us both. We split the rest of the classes, often alternating as our schedules require, even in our “assigned” classes.  Most importantly I have been here, at home, with him. I have heard the stories about what’s going on in school, what boy did this, and oh my, a teacher was fired. During the summer I was the soccer-dad-chauffer of sorts, driving our scooter crazy son and his boys here and there several days a week, sometimes every day of the week. As a result I know the boys pretty well. This will never be the hangout house my parents wisely wanted our home to be, but I can carry their quirkiness and remember my own. One never takes off his hat, even when sleeping. Another wears shorts even when its 10 degrees outside. These will be joyful memories for me.  

I read about all of this, the slavery of housework, in Simone de Beauvoir’s ground breaking work, The Second Sex, a book I still consider one of the most important I ever read.  I read most of it during a long weekend at my cousin’s house in Pennsylvania when I was in my 20’s. I pictured myself quite a radical in those days (yawn) and my reading material often veered back and forth between African American history and Feminist theory. The African American history came easier to me.

Truth be told—it has been lot of years—I think my interest in feminism may have in part had something to do with a woman I was pursuing at the time, so maybe my motivation was misplaced.  I’m grateful now that that particular woman slipped my grasp, though I’m sure I didn’t feel it at the time. For a little while I was working hard to keep up I think, and I poured through a variety of materials including the Mary Daly book, Gyn/Ecology: The Metaethics of Radical Feminism. Even today there is ominous picture of… wait for it… a medieval ax [!] on the reprinting covers of Daly’s book. Gyn/Ecology left me with lessons and ideas on language, etymology, and the nature of patriarchal society that are still with me today, but Daly’s book felt extreme and isolating. The Second Sex, addressed language and culturally learned behavior. It was written in 1949, decades before Gyn/ Ecology. Even though it has been 30 years since I read both books, de Beauvoir’s work still feels more generous and challenging. It has been so many years now, but in imaginary arguments I had in my head, I remember thinking de Beauvoir’s masterpiece was in some ways an excellent response to Gyn/ Ecology.

The Second Sex made me think about my mother’s life, and the limit of her choices, and how those choices were in ways ordained and predetermined by hundreds, no thousands of years of male-centric human evolution. This is not to say my mother was an unhappy woman. It is all so much more complex than that.

Both books made me think about religious institutions, the power they exert, and the distortions in human interaction that resulted. This was particularly true for the religion I was raised in, Catholicism, which I have never seen in the same way since. Though all of the mono-theistic religions, including and especially Judaism and Islam, have much to answer to in terms of their fear and revulsion of women which in many ways is just hatred of their own male hierarchal being, recent events have shown the deep self-hatred at the core of Catholic theology and the ugliness into which it has metastasized.

It seems abundantly clear that a church built on patriarchal values has now toppled any sense of morality, particularly and especially in the area of sexual ethics, be it contraception, abortion or homosexuality, in a vain attempt to hide the sins of its leaders. A church hierarchy that hides such heinous crimes has been exposed. Fear of the “other” and of themselves and who they were caused many to race for the shield of the church only to find once there that the sanctuary did not quiet their urges. It is most obvious now, that the Church structure distorted and perhaps perverted them. Tens of thousands of young victims are the progeny of the senseless evil which grew out of abundant fear. Other churches have fared no better recently. The entire patriarchal structure is under assault from the weakness of its own propagandists. Watching the extremes of the religious and the political during this last election cycle one is hard pressed not to see the deep fear of women, the absolute desire to control, which is at the root of much of conservative dogma.

The experience of the two books and many others I read in that period, including Toni Morisson’s sublime Tar Baby, affect the way I see my daughter and inspires the fight in me to see that her opportunities know no limit beyond her aspirations, ambition, and desire to work. 

But until these past 18 months or so, when I have been home to care for my family, I think I all too often lived a life that hewed more closely to the traditional roles for husband and wife than I’d like to think or even admit to myself. While both my wife and I worked, the schedule of my committed time outside the home often meant that my wife carried an unequal burden around the house. I often felt I acted as and was seen as a father more at Christmas than almost any other time of the year.  I was just gone too much. These past 18 months, have shown me not only what my family missed, but what I missed as well. The vacuum cleaner tethered me back to that part of me I discovered in the Second Sex and Gyn/ Ecology. I do not fool myself to call it liberation. I recognize the quality of our earnings and the circumstances of our experience are unique and that up until now we have been beyond fortunate. Many will never have this choice and choice is really what liberation is all about.

But I will say that while I have been home, sometimes not venturing further than the bus stop for days, something inside me has been released.  This person is truly the person I want to be, and perhaps wanted to be for a really long time, satisfied to wash the dishes, take out the trash, walk the dog five times a day, make the meals, clean the baths, and do my work, and maybe write a little. The vacuum is tethered to the electrical outlet. Our vacuum is pretty powerful. I just love when I am done, to empty that container to see what we have captured. For all intents and purposes our no-shed mutt ought to be bald by now. While the machine is powerful, it has a short cord, and with no connection-- no power. Disconnect the plug from the socket and the machine can go places. It just can’t do anything. That’s how I feel now.

This is dedicated with supreme love to my loving wife, Devi, who never once complained even when she had every right to, and to my loving children, who made me carry on even when I didn’t want to.  I was untethered for a long time, but now that I have (re)discovered this power I intend to never let it go. Love to all. MH

Friday, February 8, 2013

Lawless Drones


I actually heard Hannity summarize the drone issue yesterday. Leaving the Benghazi hysteria aside, he said it exactly the way I see it. The President is a hypocrite. Obama has the all the moral authority of Captain Renault in Casablanca “I'm shocked, shocked to find that [fill in the blank] is going on”. What defensible position does the President occupy on torture as cruel and inhuman when he then goes ten steps further and orders the killing of suspected terrorists without trial or due process rights?  I acknowledge that these rights are not Universal and the idea that America ought to stand or something is sort of quaint, but this is completely unprincipled, lacking of safeguards and oversight in any way.  

The Republicans – suspiciously motivated as they may be—have every right to criticize, every right to call the President’s policy on drones hypocritical. Notwithstanding the utter absurdity of their handwringing over the death of four Americans in Benghazi, with neither mention or consequence to the death of 4,000 in a needless war Iraq, it looks like Republicans, furious over the hypocrisy of the moment, may be the only ones that call the drone policy out for any real and extended criticism. Liberals would have gone crazy if this was Bush. It really shows at the moral center how sometimes people on both sides of the spectrum let their politics get in the way of their ethics.  

Even though some of the detainees clearly ought to be released, I tend to give the President a bit of a pass on Guantanamo. The torture inflicted on the real, real bad guys might make fair trials in civilian courts nearly impossible, and Congress has largely prevented the movement of these people to the US. Moreover, a guy’s right against self-incrimination sort of goes out the window when he’s on the downhill side of a water board. That was a result of Bush/ Cheney’s lawless stupidity.  

This one, though, is completely on the President.

As matter of National Security I side with those who question how making millions of Pakistanis & Yemenis, the parents, aunts, uncles, and cousins of these children America’s enemy. Some have called yesterday a proud day for America, as these complicated issues, and they are that, were aired in a small “d” democratic fashion in the halls of Congress by our elected representatives during Brennan’s confirmation hearing. Give me a minute to muffle the snickers. Assuming yesterday was the last we’ll hear about this—only Ron Widen (D-OR) raised any pointed questions—there was nothing to be proud of in what was heard yesterday. This policy is the definition of out of control. I acknowledge the conflict that some feel because of the sincerity and probity they ascribe the President. In matters of War and Peace this president has been a model of restraint and cautiousness. That said this is as much about America as it is about the President. We can choose to be a country of laws, or we can allow ourselves to be ruled by monarchs. Allowing the Commander in Chief to ignore basic Constitutional principles brings us steps closer to the latter, while preserving powers for future Presidents that will be disastrous for America and the World.   

There have been over 400 drone strikes in the Obama presidency, about one a day. 173 children have been killed.  The faces of many of these children are available on Google images. Like every other American many of the events over these last ten, fiteen, years have shocked and saddened me.  I will never, ever forget the day I spent in New York on 9-11, and the horrific images and events in the days that followed. But when I look in the eyes of some of these kids, I cannot be proud or certain about what we do in response. Is this is the price for our freedom?

 List of Children Killed by Drone Strikes in Pakistan and Yemen

PAKISTAN

 Name | Age | Gender

 Noor Aziz | 8 | male

 Abdul Wasit | 17 | male

 Noor Syed | 8 | male

 Wajid Noor | 9 | male

 Syed Wali Shah | 7 | male

 Ayeesha | 3 | female

 Qari Alamzeb | 14| male

 Shoaib | 8 | male

 Hayatullah KhaMohammad | 16 | male

 Tariq Aziz | 16 | male

 Sanaullah Jan | 17 | male

 Maezol Khan | 8 | female

 Nasir Khan | male

 Naeem Khan | male

 Naeemullah | male

 Mohammad Tahir | 16 | male

 Azizul Wahab | 15 | male

 Fazal Wahab | 16 | male

 Ziauddin | 16 | male

 Mohammad Yunus | 16 | male

 Fazal Hakim | 19 | male

 Ilyas | 13 | male

 Sohail | 7 | male

 Asadullah | 9 | male

 khalilullah | 9 | male

 Noor Mohammad | 8 | male

 Khalid | 12 | male

 Saifullah | 9 | male

 Mashooq Jan | 15 | male

 Nawab | 17 | male

 Sultanat Khan | 16 | male

 Ziaur Rahman | 13 | male

 Noor Mohammad | 15 | male

 Mohammad Yaas Khan | 16 | male

 Qari Alamzeb | 14 | male

 Ziaur Rahman | 17 | male

 Abdullah | 18 | male

 Ikramullah Zada | 17 | male

 Inayatur Rehman | 16 | male

 Shahbuddin | 15 | male

 Yahya Khan | 16 |male

 Rahatullah |17 | male

 Mohammad Salim | 11 | male

 Shahjehan | 15 | male

 Gul Sher Khan | 15 | male

 Bakht Muneer | 14 | male

 Numair | 14 | male

 Mashooq Khan | 16 | male

 Ihsanullah | 16 | male

 Luqman | 12 | male

 Jannatullah | 13 | male

 Ismail | 12 | male

 Taseel Khan | 18 | male

 Zaheeruddin | 16 | male

 Qari Ishaq | 19 | male

 Jamshed Khan | 14 | male

 Alam Nabi | 11 | male

 Qari Abdul Karim | 19 | male

 Rahmatullah | 14 | male

 Abdus Samad | 17 | male

 Siraj | 16 | male

 Saeedullah | 17 | male

 Abdul Waris | 16 | male

 Darvesh | 13 | male

 Ameer Said | 15 | male

 Shaukat | 14 | male

 Inayatur Rahman | 17 | male

 Salman | 12 | male

 Fazal Wahab | 18 | male

 Baacha Rahman | 13 | male

 Wali-ur-Rahman | 17 | male

 Iftikhar | 17 | male

 Inayatullah | 15 | male

 Mashooq Khan | 16 | male

 Ihsanullah | 16 | male

 Luqman | 12 | male

 Jannatullah | 13 | male

 Ismail | 12 | male

 Abdul Waris | 16 | male

 Darvesh | 13 | male

 Ameer Said | 15 | male

 Shaukat | 14 | male

 Inayatur Rahman | 17 | male

 Adnan | 16 | male

 Najibullah | 13 | male

 Naeemullah | 17 | male

 Hizbullah | 10 | male

 Kitab Gul | 12 | male

 Wilayat Khan | 11 | male

 Zabihullah | 16 | male

 Shehzad Gul | 11 | male

 Shabir | 15 | male

 Qari Sharifullah | 17 | male

 Shafiullah | 16 | male

 Nimatullah | 14 | male

 Shakirullah | 16 | male

 Talha | 8 | male

 

YEMEN

 Afrah Ali Mohammed Nasser | 9 | female

 Zayda Ali Mohammed Nasser | 7 | female

 Hoda Ali Mohammed Nasser | 5 | female

 Sheikha Ali Mohammed Nasser | 4 | female

 Ibrahim Abdullah Mokbel Salem Louqye | 13 | male

 Asmaa Abdullah Mokbel Salem Louqye | 9 | male

 Salma Abdullah Mokbel Salem Louqye | 4 | female

 Fatima Abdullah Mokbel Salem Louqye | 3 | female

 Khadije Ali Mokbel Louqye | 1 | female

 Hanaa Ali Mokbel Louqye | 6 | female

 Mohammed Ali Mokbel Salem Louqye | 4 | male

 Jawass Mokbel Salem Louqye | 15 | female

 Maryam Hussein Abdullah Awad | 2 | female

 Shafiq Hussein Abdullah Awad | 1 | female

 Sheikha Nasser Mahdi Ahmad Bouh | 3 | female

 Maha Mohammed Saleh Mohammed | 12 | male

 Soumaya Mohammed Saleh Mohammed | 9 | female

 Shafika Mohammed Saleh Mohammed | 4 | female

 Shafiq Mohammed Saleh Mohammed | 2 | male

 Mabrook Mouqbal Al Qadari | 13 | male

 Daolah Nasser 10 years | 10 | female

 AbedalGhani Mohammed Mabkhout | 12 | male

 Abdel- Rahman Anwar al Awlaki | 16 | male

 Abdel-Rahman al-Awlaki | 17 | male

 Nasser Salim | 19

Wednesday, January 16, 2013

Baby Steps Towards Gun Safety Sanity


For days right wing radio has been apocalyptic in its response to the fact that the Obama administration would propose dozens of Gun Safety Initiatives by executive order thus bypassing Congress.  I heard Hannity yesterday for a few minutes. I thought he would burst a blood vessel.

But a look at the list does not indicate anything too radical. From a policy standpoint, I might not have had much issue with Executive Authority. Politically though, with tensions high, it is eminently clear that Congress must initiate and pass legislation for anything dramatic to have credibility. It seems to me Obama has done that. The Executive Authority List could not be more innocuous.

This it seems is typical and par for the course. The president makes his moderate suggestions and proposals. Then the Radio Right goes batsh**, starts screaming Socialism and Marxism, and “He wants to take your guns away” and “Obama is doing an unconstitutional end around because he can’t get done what he wants to do in Congress”, just a complete, fat-pack of lies.

Those who are screaming that this is an unconstitutional usurpation of powers are lying to the public. That is unless you consider the Justice Department sending a letter to gun dealers with precise instructions on how to complete background checks a wild-eyed Neo-Nazi National Socialistic proposal. Judging from some of what we have heard these past few weeks there is no shortage of those that do.

The only item that seems even mildly controversial regards Obamacare regulations which prohibit doctors from talking to their patients about guns in the home. First of all, this is stupid policy. Press reports attribute the prohibition to Harry Reid, the Senate Democratic leader and a former Pro-NRA guy, and the president who did not want the NRA effing up Obamacare. It seems like Obama may want to  nullify through Executive order part of a law that he passed and signed. The right will go bat-sh** over that. Beyond that? Nothing. Even there the language “clarify” seems to leave plenty of wiggle room to do precisely nothing regulation-wise. If Wall Street reform is any guide, those hoping for strict regulation not specifically spelled out in the legislation should not be surprised if that one goes away quietly.

·        Clarify that the health-care law does not prohibit doctors from asking their patients about guns in their homes.

In the larger sense the atmosphere is poisonous. I continue to be amazed that a Right Wing cadre of survivalists, ideologues, and radio hucksters, continue with each passing day to veer closer and closer to rhetoric which is openly hostile to American ideals of Democratic process, without paying any penalty in the court of public opinion.

 The last two weeks has seen a litany of veiled death threats, calls for insurrection, succession, and literal calls to arms, with nary a voice being raised to condemn those that would threaten with violence and insurrection that which cannot be legislated. Liberals and leftists, who call for Massive Civil Disobedience Actions in response to this policy or that, are quite often quite loudly condemned. I remember a host of complaints from moderates and even a few faux-liberals condemning the mess that the Occupy protestors left in the parks. Never mind that catastrophe that the banks unleashed with the perverse  greed, “Look at the mess in Zuccotti.” Oh my, they’re so dirty. In response it’s good to remind people of Don Rumsfeld’s famously arrogant remark regarding the looting and rioting in Iraq after the fall of Saddam: “Democracy is Messy.” Where are all those people now? At what point might we hear Brian Williams echo his condemnation of Trump—“He has driven well past the last exit To relevance”—in response to some of what is out there?

As the rhetoric gets increasingly hot, and the radio right fans the flames, up to and including explaining and justifying the secessionists all we here is crickets in response.  This is not to say there are not strong, vociferous even, voices in support of gun safety measures. There are. But the response to the attacks on small-d democratic principles, however the gun policies shake out, has been largely muted.

Not in terms of his first amendment rights which are absolute, but in terms of shared rules of decency and dialogue what are the limits to what  is being said? By Ted Nugent? Alex Jones? And perhaps most obscenely Larry Ward who suggested that “…Martin Luther King, Jr. would agree with me if he were alive today that if African Americans had been given the right to keep and bear arms from day one of the country's founding, perhaps slavery might not have been a chapter in our history.” Mr. Ward no student of history might be interested to know that learn that Bayard Rustin and Dr. Kings biographies tell similar stories about how Mr. Rustin worked on Dr. King to get him make his commitment to Non-Violence complete and dispose of the guns he once kept in his home. Daddy King, Martin’s father, opposed the idea fervently because King was in such danger after Montgomery.

Perhaps it is unfair to condemn the masses for the rhetorical craziness of the fringe, but moderates on the gun issue have been largely silent. The stage has been turned over to the fringe, and their establishment spokesman, Wayne LaPierre who offered nothing, and who himself seems little disconnected from reality.

The radio right’s effort to cast today’s announcement as a usurpation of Constitutional Powers by the President is designed specifically to feed the anger of the ill-informed and to add to the climate of misinformation. This will not calm the wing-nuts, even though some of them have had to back off their initial statements when publicized in the press, or visited by law enforcement, NRA Board Member Ted Nugent, for example.

People have Free Speech Rights to make their statements, but we are veering into dangerous territory. Those opposed to gun control have only heard hotter and crazier rhetoric swirling in their echo chamber. There is no calm, no explanation of the legislative process. Comprehensive background checks for the 40% of purchases that slip through the cracks through gun shows and private sales and so forth have been branded an un-Constitutional attack on the Second Amendment.

On Mental Health, with two exceptions I think the plan is swing and a miss. At the Federal level, programs which are funded in the millions of dollars cannot be taken seriously, and must be considered what they are: Test or Pilot Programs. That said, perhaps the most critical contribution would be the commitment to complete the Obamacare regs which require Health Insurance to cover Mental Health, as well as considering Mental Health a Medicaid covered illness. Outside of these two proposals I fail to see anything bold or comprehensive on Mental Health. The increasing shortage of spaces for those suffering for mental health challenges will continue to shrink.

Following is the list of the Executive Authority Actions. All of the big stuff—Background checks, Re-defining and banning Assault Weapons and High Capacity Magazines, are reserved for Congressional action.

·        Send a letter to licensed dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers.

·        Direct U.S. attorney general to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun and make recommendations to ensure dangerous people aren't slipping through the cracks.

·        Clarify that the health-care law does not prohibit doctors from asking their patients about guns in their homes.

·        Invest $20 million in fiscal year 2013 to give states stronger incentives to share background data.

·        Hold federal agencies accountable for sharing reliable data with background check system.

·        Require all federal law enforcement agencies to trace all firearms they recover and keep in custody.

·        Propose regulations to ensure law enforcement has access to the database needed for complete background checks to avoid unknowingly returning a gun to an individual who is prohibited from having it.

·        Direct attorney general to work with all U.S. attorneys to ensure adequate resources are focused on preventing gun violence.

·        Publish an annual report on lost and stolen guns.

·        Direct the Centers for Disease Control and scientific agencies to conduct research into the causes and prevention of gun violence.

·        Launch a national responsible gun ownership campaign to promote common-sense safety measures.

·        Review and enhance safety standards for gun locks and gun safes.

·        Direct attorney general to review gun safety technologies.

·        Challenge private sector to develop gun safety technology.

·        Provide incentives for police departments to hire school resource officers through COPS hiring grants.

·        Give schools and other institutions a model for how to develop and implement emergency plans.

·        Share best practices on school discipline.

·        Launch a national dialogue about mental illness.

·        Finalize requirements for private health insurance plans to cover mental health services.

·        Ensure that Medicaid recipients get quality mental health coverage.

Thursday, January 10, 2013

Race and Guns In America


Stewart made an excellent point on the Daily Show last night. If you think nothing can be done to curb gun violence, that there are just too many guns, and too many committed Alex Joneses, working in willing collaboration with too many NRA bought and paid for politicians like Harry Reid & Tom Cotton, think again. In the 32 years of its existence when MADD was started by a group of young mothers "with a mission to stop drunk driving", from its tiny beginning in 1980 until today, the rate of drunk driving deaths has declined by nearly 2/3, from 27,000 per year to around 10,000. That is still obviously too many, but what a difference. Drunk driving still accounts for one in three traffic fatalities, but among young people the drop off has been even steeper. That is a stunning (and hopeful) record of success. America did not become a police state to solve this problem, but as Stewart said (paraphrasing here), a thirty year campaign of committed effort to change public attitudes and pass saner, more reasonable, legislation at the Federal, State and Local levels has saved tens of thousands of lives.

By an ironic twist of fate, there are currently about 30,000 deaths every year in the US as a result of gun violence. This is a few thousand more deaths by guns than the number of alcohol deaths at the time MADD launched, but it does seem to frame the problem in similar terms. Tragically, about 2/3 of deaths by guns are suicides. Though the heinous nature of the mass murders by assault rifles catches the world’s attention, FBI statistics show that in 2009 there were 9,146 gun murders. Only a fraction, 348, were the result of shootings with a rifle. Handguns, cheap, easily concealed and trafficked, cause far more death, and scar far more families. They accounted for 2/3 of all gun homicides.   

Gun advocates would have us believe that this shows the fallacy of gun safety efforts. They argue that banning large magazines and assault weapons would barely dent the gun death statistics. The killings in Newtown, they suggest must be tolerated for the joy of their sport, their hobby. This seems to me to be nearly criminally insane (see Alex Jones), but let’s set that aside for a moment.

The same groups continually point to what everyone agrees is an obscene level of gun violence and death in the cities, Chicago in particular, where laws are quite strict. They say, “See? What have your guns laws accomplished there?” They raise a fair point with two qualifications. The first I saw Buzz Bissinger make yesterday. I have been screaming it at my TV for weeks. For all the outrage over Newtown, (the savage and cowardly acts committed there deserve every bit of that outrage), the real horror, the real scandal, committed by the NRA and gun manufacturers, and tolerated by America is the genocide going on in the black community at the hands of cheap handguns.  The second and critical challenge that the NRA comments on Chicago and other urban centers indicates is thatthe killings there show is the crying, literally, need for Federal legislation. We can actually agree with The NRA here. Local laws are inadequate to stop the carnage. But we cannot agree that creates an argument against local legislation. No, No. It actually makes the case for federal legislation. Chicago shows that municipalities and states, even those committed to gun safety, cannot go it alone. NYC mayor Bloomberg has shown through undercover operations and the NYC police department’s  own statistics, that most of the homicides in the city are caused by guns trafficked from states with lenient gun purchases regulations, especially multiple gun purchases and porous background check systems. Gun shows are a big part of the equation that Bloomberg has exposed as a cause of real and specific acts of gun violence in New York.

Forget the spurious arguments about how more people are killed with hammers and ball bats then rifles. True enough, but in both cases the numbers are miniscule. About 500 people are killed a year by rifles, and another 600 year by attack by blunt object. By comparison The FBI says in 2009 there were over 6,000 murders by pistols. But this is a far important statistic, of all the gun deaths, over half the destruction is visited on the homes of African American families.


And that is the real obscenity and the insane irony of the moment. The face of gun ownership and 2nd amendment fervor in America is a white middle aged man supposedly protecting his family from the criminal element, and as Stewart said the threat of a dystopian America under a tyrannical government.  Alex Jones could fairly be described as their poster boy. Gun makers have increased both sales and profits by marketing this image for decades. It is a lie. There are far more pistols in circulation, and they are killing young African Americans at a shocking rate. But to do something about gun violence that will require a much more concerted effort than the palliative act of passing an assault weapons ban. To do something about that violence, America would have to face up to the failure to address race as a root of poverty in our midst. America would have to confront the tragic performance of kids in schools where poverty is a reality and hope is rationed in the smallest of portions. To do something to stop thousands of young black boys being killed every year by guns, America would have to have a confrontation with honesty. Tough one, maybe we ought to just pass the assault weapons ban, background checks, and ban large magazines.

Americans truly committed to ending gun violence might ask where in all this talk about the fiscal cliff and tax breaks for millionaires is there any dialogue about the need to improve the performance of children in districts with high degrees of poverty, or to do something to cut joblessness in the African community which runs twice that of whites. America truly committed to ending gun violence might want to challenge their own deep seated—but never mentioned in polite society beliefs—that “those people just don’t want to help themselves” and so mostly deserve what they get. What they get and America gets is a genocidal epidemic of African American gun violence deaths all out of proportion to their demographic place in America.

Martin Luther King famously said, “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice.” The effective 30-year campaign that Mothers Against Drunk Driving has waged resulted in a stunning and in many ways hopeful decline in driving fatalities caused by alcohol. MADD;s efforts are proof positive that Dr. King was right. Will it take 30 more years for America to take sane and necessary steps to curb gun violence?

Tuesday, January 8, 2013

Club for Growth's Personal Congressman: Tom Cotton

Politico ran a story this morning (The ‘Hell No’ Caucus) and focused on the newly minted Republican Congressman from the Arkansas’ 4th CD, Harvard graduate Tom Cotton.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/behind-the-curtain-the-hell-no-caucus-85872.html
Cotton was down 40% in the polls before the unregulated Superpac, Club for Growth, decided to make him a star with $300,000 in donations. The article focuses on process issues such as the fact that this is the way these groups work now, picking candidates early in the primaries and riding them to electoral victory. It goes onto explain this is where the tires hit pavement when it comes to getting anything through this recently installed (elected is perhaps too strong a word) Congress. Nowhere do they address the absurdity of the election, or why a small group of billionaires would chose to anoint and elect their very own congressman, legally and on the up and up of course.

The Club for Growth was started by WSJ Economist Stephen Moore, and a couple of Wall Street bankers.  PayPal founder, Facebook investment billionaire, and Hedge Fund Manager, Peter Theil,  is the Club’s biggest contributor this year. The gay and socially liberal philanthropist plucked down nearly $1 million of the $20 million raised in this election cycle to support a raft of conservative candidates including Ted Cruz, Richard Mourdock, and Steven King who famously said that “Gays wouldn’t face discrimination if they didn’t wear their sexuality on their sleeves” and “Gay Marriage is Socialism”. The story in Politico and its subsequent coverage on Morning Joe piqued my interest because both stated that Mr. Cotton was down 40% in the polls before Club for Growth came along. In electoral terms that's sort of non-existent. Surprisingly missing was any context or understanding about where Club for Growth got its money and why they would want to fund such an obscure candidate. Nor did MJ or Politico mention that the gay rainmaker-- through Club for Growth-- supported a slew of homophobic candidates, who nonetheless align with his desire to keep more of his money.
I thought how nice? Mr. Thiel has a personal butler, maid, masseuse, and Congressman. 27% of the children in Mr. Cotton’s CD are living lives of poverty. We can only assume that their families share Mr. Thiel’s main concerns and those of his rich friends for lower taxes (especially and specifically for the rich), smaller government (which provides services on which the poor survive), and a shrinking deficit. Mr. Cotton has stated he would have voted against Plan B, Boehner’s ill-conceived plan to raise taxes on billionaires like Thiel. Cotton, we are told, stands four-square against gun control of any kind. In fairness it was reported so does 90% of his district. He wants the path to citizenship for undocumented immigrant workers to stretch as many miles as possible, and plans to vote against the debt ceiling increase unless there is adequate evidence that substantial numbers of poor people in his district will lose their healthcare, food support & school lunches, and Pell Grant access to college. There are 70 Congressional districts, out of 435, with a higher percentage of people in Poverty than the Arkansas 4th, but his election really did makes me wonder, anew, why poor people in the South so consistently vote against their economic interest.  Enter Mr. Thiel, the Club for Growth, and now Citizen’s United. Hooray for democracy!

The twitterverse is awash in comments regarding the over-the-top-finger-pointing-in-your-face-threatening-batshit-crazy interview gun nut and conspiracy theorist Alex Jones gave to Piers Morgan.


 It was inescapable and mesmerizing. But that is just carnival distraction. The real action is the Arkansas 4th where a couple of billionaire’s invested lunch money in buying a congressman who will actually see that the crazy conspiracies espoused by wing-nut Jones find a voice in what John Boehner called in his Speaker’s acceptance speech, “The People’s House”. What a hoot! He cries all the time. How did he deliver that line without laughing? It’s all sort of depressing, the money talk as backdrop as to whether the president should be taking millions from private donors and large corporations to fund the people’s inauguration of the President. There is a lot of buying and selling going on and neither side is clean or even close.

Then my friend, Pete, brought this little nugget to my attention. Tom Cotton is of that particular right wing “club” that still will not accept that Iraq was NOT the cause of 9-11, a fact so well documented as being false it's amazing it still warrants a ¼” of type face.  Here’s the exchange… From Monday [!]:

BLITZER: But you don’t believe that Iraq had anything to do with al Qaeda or the attack on 9/11?

 COTTON: The evidence is inconclusive there, but I know that Saddam Hussein was widely believed by all western intelligence agencies, not just the United States, but western European countries not in a rush to war, to have weapons of mass destruction. Our sanctions regime was beginning to crumble and we couldn’t be able to contain Saddam Hussein if we hadn’t confronted him at the time.
Cotton is an Iraqi vet (Support the Troops!) and described in the Politico piece as one of the new freshman who sees compromise as dirty word and he has the financial wherewithal to believe that despite what those in his district may think, all thanks to Mr. Thiel and his rich friends.  

Do you have to be a friggin' moron to line up for that hard right money? Herman “999, and what was the question?” Cain, Rick  (Snobs want college for their children) Santorum, Murdock (rape theologian), Akin (rape scientist), West (80 congressman are commies), the unfortunately named Joe Walsh, Steve King, this fool??? The list goes on and on and on and on. Even Dick Armey is not right enough for the group he founded, Freedomworks. Then beyond that the papers and net are filled with stories about how all these right wing talkers are living off the skim. That includes Beck, Limbaugh, Dick Morris, and that is before you get to the rest who just live off the books, radio and TV shows they market to a fearful angry white male mass audience that follows them and which would be utterly destroyed if any shred of truth reached them.

If this is what democracy looks like, holy shit are we in trouble! Holy shit are we in trouble!!!