Break It Down!

"The Food Stamp President"

2011-05-18T01:15:00.001-04:00

It's time to Break It Down!

“President Obama is the most successful Food Stamp President in American History” – So saith NewtGingrich, during his 2012 Presidential Campaign Kick-off at the Georgia Republican Party Annual Convention in Macon Georgia, May 13, 2011.

Newt Gingrich is famous, or infamous if you prefer, for crafting & turning the quintessential catch phrase. So it is no surprise that his FoodStamp quote is not his only, or even his most recent stroke of profundity and verbalized genius. After all, that was way back on Friday. On Sunday, May 15^th, the GOP savant, speaking to NBC Meet the Press interviewer, David Gregory, characterized Paul Ryan’s Medicare proposal as Right-Wing Social Engineering. Ryan, the Wisconsin Congressman who has been accorded near cult hero status among GOP-TParty circles for his widely acclaimed bold budgetary initiative was not amused. He noted that his proposal was not radical, and wondered why Gingrich was joining Democratic critics attacking the GOP Budget Plan.

In classic SMH (Scratch My Head) fashion, Ryan quipped, during an interview on Laura Ingraham’s radio show, "With allies like that, who needs the left?"

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/05/16/rep-ryan-fires-gingrich-medicare-plan-criticism/#ixzz1Mez2Ddbh

So sage and wily Newt skewers Obama, and sucker punches Ryan, all within 48 hours after announcing his candidacy for President. While that may sound like an auspicious start for just about anyone else, no one else is Newt.

To put a cherry on top of the ice cream sundae, so to speak, Mr. Gingrich weighed-in with his unique GOP-T Party anti-establishmentarianism by invoking an Obamaesque declaration that surprised a number of detractors and surely dismayed hordes of supporters. In the same Meet the Press interview cited earlier, he told David Gregory he believes that all Americans should purchase health insurance. Translation; Mr. Gingrich admitted he supports the highly controversial, especially among conservatives, insurance mandate that Republicans, except perhaps Mitt Romney, have made so much noise roundly repudiating.

In taking the high level view of the Food Stamp President question, it is important to make note of certain specific and important details. Let’s start with the name of the program. The proper title is Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. That has been the case since 1998, which to be clear, dates all the way back to the time Mr. Gingrich was in Congress. That means the then Congressman was directly involved with vetting and approving the new name.

With that stipulation, it is clear Mr. Gingrich’s choice to use the term Food Stamp President in connection with Mr. Obama was not accidental, or due to lack of knowledge, but a purposeful tactic. Some have defaulted to the position of accusing Candidate Gingrich of racism; a charge he vigorously denies. In fact, not only does he deny it, he aggressively attacks those who would suggest such a thing.

Having taken an historical look at the Gingrich School of Political Thought, I am going to surprise some regular readers of this space. I submit, to refer to Newt as a racist is unfair. In fact, it understates the pernicious nature of what is best described as an attack strategy. To view the practices as a function of racism fails to do justice to the nuanced and wide-ranging modes used to denounce, denigrate, malign and otherwise cast aspersions on political opponents. During the period that most observers suppose will always be thought of as his heyday, Mr. Gingrich crafted a memo (in 1994) entitled, “Language: A Key Mechanism ofControl.”

The objectives of the memo appear to be three-fold:

Create and apply the most negative descriptive monikers possible to political opponents and their proposals
Contrast that by assigning the most positive descriptors possible to political allies and their positions
Repeat both processes as often as possible, especially in the media

Hence, Newt describes Mr. Obama as the most successful Food Stamp President ever, and counters that with the assertion he would be the most successful Pay Check President ever. This snarky device, is obviously not new, but does explain a lot. Gingrich has, at various times, attacked President Obama by calling him:

Food Stamp President

Kenyan anti-colonial con man

Socialist

The new Jimmy Carter

A man with a less robust resume than Sarah Palin

Willfully blind

A President who refuses to retaliate against enemies who attack America

A President who smiled and shook hands with Hugo Chavez

A President who is creating a dictatorship

The most radical President in American History

The list above does not profess to comprise the Top 10 screeds or attacks Mr. Gingrich has hurled at President Obama, rather, just an interesting recitation of 10 examples of him exercising the philosophy encapsulated in the Polemic, “Language: A Key Mechanism of Control.” And just think, nine of those acerbic insults were made (some repeatedly) before Mr. Gingrich announced his candidacy for the office President Obama holds.

Get used to it. I am sure “The Food Stamp President” has come to terms with both the message and the messenger. Of course, one, apparently non-essential (in his perspective) detail excluded from Mr. Gingrich’s characterization is, Mr. Obama has presided over a nation embroiled in the most trenchant economic downturn since the Great Depression. So just maybe, there is a justifiable reason for there to be more Americans receiving benefits from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program than at any point in our country’s history. Alas, why allow a good insult to be tempered by the facts?

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com. A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newt_Gingrich

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/gingrich-promises-to-slash-taxes-calls-obama-food-stamp-president/2011/05/13/AF9Q602G_story.html?nl_headlines

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-WfXCDhWsA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PF-admCcqP8

http://www.poconorecord.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110514/NEWS90/110519784/-1/NEWS

http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20110514/cm_huffpost/861977

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/05/14/gingrich-was-big-spender/

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1103349

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/05/13/gingrich-predicts-2012-win-over-obamas-chicago-style-presidency/

http://carloz.newsvine.com/_news/2011/05/14/6644962-gingrich-one-of-congress-biggest-spenders-calls-obama-a-food-stamp-president

http://politicore.wordpress.com/2011/05/14/flashback-as-gingrich-calls-obama-a-%E2%80%98food-stamp-president%E2%80%99-he-was-one-of-biggest-spenders-in-congress/

http://politics.rawsignal.com/news/Story.aspx?mode=0&id=13518480&aId=3654667&d=110514

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/05/16/gingrich-calls-gop-medicare-plan-right-wing-social-engineering/

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2720484/posts

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/15/newt-gingrich-paul-ryan-medicare_n_862133.html

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/05/newt-gingrich-blasts-gop-budget-as-right-wing-social-engineering.php

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703509104576325350084379360.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CYsCr95ysY

http://www.massdevice.com/news/gingrich-gops-medicare-plan-right-wing-social-engineering

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsHw92j9P0Q

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNNFcIRzyZg

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/gingrich-supports-variation-obamacare-ty

http://southernnationalist.com/blog/2011/05/16/gingrich-supports-obama-style-health-insurance-mandate/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4NrECZ9a2U

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Gregory_(journalist)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laura_Ingraham

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitt_Romney

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1276

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpG-F2cmXlQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESG9IrOjX7c

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXq_t3LR170&feature=fvwrel

The New Normal: NBA Style

2011-05-11T01:16:00.003-04:00

It's time to Break It Down!

Basketball, on its face is a simple game; much more checkers than chess. The core aims are clear, unchanging, and most important, few. Put the ball in the basket when on offense; prevent your opponent from doing so, if on defense.

Yes myriad concepts and intricacies are sometimes overlaid on top of these aims. Moreover, depending upon the talent level involved, the game can unfold in an almost blindingly crisp, beautifully symmetrical fashion. When played at the highest level, one can watch some of the most amazing athletes on the planet run, jump, pivot, and shoot a spheroid, 29.5 inches in circumference, 9.39 inches in diameter through an 18 inch diameter hoop with a net 15” to 18” in length, suspended 10 feet above the court. Oh did I forget to mention, they play defense too.

From time to time, I compose a post about basketball, my favorite sport. Occasionally, I have even reference my favorite teams. In the National Basketball Association (NBA), that is and has always been the Los Angeles Lakers; a storied franchise. The NBA has had 64 Championship Series; the Lakers have appeared in 31 of them. That’s 10 more than the team that has appeared the second most times; the dreaded Boston Celtics. The Celts have won 17 Championships, while the Lakers have won 16. Their combined 33 NBA Titles account for more than half of the previous 64 NBA Championships. No other team has appeared in more than 9 Title Series (Philadelphia 76’ers), nor won more than 6 (ChicagoBulls).

By now, if you take note of sports at all, you must know the Lakers were swept dismissively from the playoffs…with extreme prejudice! Obviously, a team that joined the NBA in 1948 has had its share of high points as well as low moments. However, last week’s four-game sweep by the Dallas Mavericks has to rate as a prime candidate for the nadir of the proud and highly successful franchise.

As sports fans know, getting swept, in any round of the playoffs is a humbling, if not humiliating experience. In the Lakers’ case, they entered this year’s playoffs as defending Champions, and tied (with the Dallas Mavericks) for the 4^th best record in the League. The Mavericks are a fine team. Losing to them may have surprised some, but it was not in and of itself shocking. But the way they lost, particularly in the close-out game, was unarguably stunning.

I am reminded of my beloved North Carolina Tar Heels (my favorite college basketball team), and their most recent post-Championship season. Without going into details, it was ugly; one of their worst seasons ever. The Lakers’ season was not so horrific, but their season-ending performance was a different story. The entire Series was disappointing; the finale was simply embarrassing. In fact, while it is cathartic to confront head-on this sad episode in Lakers history, the term embarrassing hardly does justice to their season-ending performance.

Athletic competition, like any test, is fraught with challenges. At the end of most contests, there is a winner and a loser. More often than not, the better team prevails. In this instance, the Mavs not only won, but left no doubt as to which team deserved the distinction, better team. The Lakers dropped four consecutive games, and in doing so, lost the series, via sweep, and with it, any chance to complete their second Three-peat. That was disappointing. But in far greater indictments, they failed to maintain their composure, gave up with a quarter to play, and lost, at least for that day, anything remotely resembling their dignity. Add to that, the Mavs' reserves scored 86 of their 122 points, which matched the total for the Lakers' entire team in a 122-86 beat down. In route to the rout, Jason Terry shot 90% (9 of 10) from behind the 3-point line, while Peja Stojakovic shot 100% (6 of 6).

Over the course of the series, these failures were particulaly evident in the cases of Ron Artest, Lamar Odom, and Andrew Bynum, all of who earned Flagrant Fouls and ejections during the series. But it's a team sport; no free passes. This was a collapse that left no Laker without something for which to atone. Kobe Bryant, the team's resident super star was never consistently super; missed big shots when the team needed the magic only stars provide. Pau Gasol, Robin to Kobe's Batman, was effectively rendered the Invisible Man. Derek Fisher, the wily and historically dependable veteran couldn't make a shot the entire series. Finally, Phil Jackson, the Zen-master coach made uncharacteristically inexplicable calls. In 20 years as an NBA Coach, Jackson's teams reached the playoffs every year. He won 11 Titles as a coach (most ever), 6 with the Chicago Bulls, 5 with the Los Angeles Lakers, and 1 as a player with the New York Knicks. This is expected to be Jackson's last year coaching; too bad. There I said it. Oh yeah, another thing; GO HEAT!

It may be too early to say with certainty, but it appears we may be witnessing a changing of the guard as far as the NBA status quo is concerned. The Lakers, two-time defending Champions and three consecutive time Finalists are, as the TNT Crew, Kenny, Charles, and Ernie say, “Gone Fishing,” or in other words, done for the season.

The dreaded Celtics, Finalists last year, and Atlantic Division Champions this year are down 3-1 to Miami, which has home court advantage. Dallas, which has never won an NBA Championship, is at home resting, in preparation for the WesternConference Finals, in which they will meet the Oklahoma City Thunder or the MemphisGrizzlies, currently tied at 2 games a piece. The Chicago Bulls, a non-factor since Michael Jordan retired, finished the Regular Season with the League’s best record, and leads the Atlanta Hawks 3-2. The winner will meet the Miami-Boston winner in the Eastern Conference Finals. Yes, it looks as is we are about to usher in “The New Normal: NBA Style!”

I’m done; holla back!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basketball

http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/basketball1.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Basketball_Association

http://www.nba.com/standings/team_record_comparison/conferenceNew_Std_Div.html

http://www.nba.com/standings/team_record_comparison/conferenceNew_Mrg_Div.html

http://www.basketball-goals.com/basketball%20court%20dimensions.htm

http://www.ultimate-youth-basketball-guide.com/basketball-dimensions.html

http://www.nba.com/playoffs/2011/index.html

http://www.youth-basketball-tips.com/bhdimension.html

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_diameter_circumference_or_radius_of_a_basketball

http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/1504

http://www.google.com/search?q=basketball+shape&hl=en&rlz=1G1GGLQ_ENUS390&prmd=ivns&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=ntzJTbCzGs650QHtkvTXBw&ved=0CG0QsAQ&biw=1341&bih=515

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_Lakers

http://www.nba.com/lakers/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kobe_Bryant

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derek_Fisher

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Jackson

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_Finals

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Celtics

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philadelphia_76ers

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Bulls

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Mavericks

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miami_Heat

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City_Thunder

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memphis_Grizzlies

http://www.sportro.org/news/los-angeles-lakers-defeated-by-dallas-mavericks-with-the-score-of-122-86-odom-and-bynum-ejected-in-the-fourth-quarter.php

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/basketball/nba/2011-05-08-mavericks-lakers_N.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pau_Gasol

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_Terry

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peja_Stojakovi%C4%87

http://tarheelblue.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/unc-m-baskbl-body.html

Geronimo-E KIA

2011-05-04T00:54:00.002-04:00

It's time to Break It Down!

It is safe to say President Obama had a busy week. This time last week, he released his long-form Birth Certificate. At the time, it seemed fairly significant to the millions who followed the issue, having been consistently, loudly, & enthusiastically sought by The Donald. In fact, even going into the weekend, it seemed like a signature moment.

Mr. Trump, a masterful media manipulator of the first magnitude, had attempted to jump ahead of the parade that could/should have run him out of town. He proudly took full credit for forcing the President to do something no one else was able to do; release his real Birth Certificate. The only problem with that fanciful spin is the previously released Short Form is the real document. The Long Form is no longer used as an official document in Hawaii. All business requiring Birth Certificates is now conducted using the so-called Short Form.

President Obama, for his part played along. At the Annual White House Correspondents’Dinner, Mr. Obama spoofed the Birth Certificate brouhaha, and gently chided Mr. Trump, insinuating that a Trump White House would look like a cheesy Casino Resort. For his part, The Donald seemed to take the President’s comments all in stride, even though he did challenge the President’s educational qualifications and credentials, earlier, when he was forced to abandon the Birther issue.

But that was Saturday; what a difference a day makes! Sunday evening around 10:15 p.m., television networks interrupted regular programming to proclaim that Osama bin Laden had been killed during an American covert military operation that lasted a mere 38 minutes. At its conclusion, the operation was dubbed Geronimo-E KIA. In developing a shorthand method of referring to bin Laden, the terrorist became known as Geronimo. The E KIA implies Enemy, Killed in Action. After 10 years that spanned the serious pursuit of two American Presidents, that pretty much says it all.

In 2007, early in the Presidential campaign, candidate Obama stated that targeting al-Qaeda should be an American priority, and we should shift our military focus from Iraq to Afghanistan and

Pakistan

. He took a lot of heat for that from Democrats and Republicans alike. Refusing to renounce his position, he instead doubled down during the 2008 Presidential debates pledging that if bin Laden were determined to be in

Pakistan

, and if the Pakistani government were unable or unwilling to act, he would unilaterally pursue and kill the perpetrator of the 9-11 Massacre. On Sunday evening, he fulfilled that commitment.

Over the course of the 2008 Campaign, and frequently during the nearly 2 and a half years of the Obama Presidency, Republicans have frequently attacked President Obama for his lack of strength, resolve, and experience in navigating American’s foreign policy landscape. Weak was an oft repeated refrain. In the soft afterglow of the release of the long-form Birth Certificate and the long-awaited resolution of the Osama bin Laden question, is there any doubt the Obama detractors will now finally begin to craft more cogent arguments that relate to the central and more pressing domestic issues of adding jobs, reducing unemployment, eliminating the deficit, and balancing the budget?

The notion that this President can be cast as the quintessential ‘fraidy cat is continuing to lose currency. In March 2009, Mr. Obama said:

"So I want the American people to understand that we have a clear and focused goal: to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future."

Over the past two years, Mr. Obama has:

Initiated the Iraq troop drawdown

Ordered Navy Seals to kill 3 Somali Pirates on the Indian Ocean, while they were holding American hostages

Upgraded and increased the number of American troops in Afghanistan

Authorized a mission that led to the execution of Osama bin Laden, Public Enemy #1.

In retrospect, when considering the Cowardly Lion myth of President Obama, in the parlance of the Old South, “That dog don’t hunt!” When pressed, he has directed; not dithered.

Let’s be clear; killing bin Laden doesn’t end the War on Terror. Even now there is a full-throated debate on whether to release photographs of bin Laden’s slain body. One argument in support of the release is that there are those in al-Qaeda who question whether their leader is actually dead. Without photo evidence, some will no doubt contend there is no proof. Alternately, opponents of releasing photos argue that pictures would only serve to further agitate Islamist extremists, who will then threaten the safety of members of the U.S. Armed Forces, and the security of Americans everywhere.

It’s a conundrum with no apparent right answer. Most indications suggest some photos will be released. The expectation is they would eventually be tweeted or leaked in some manner anyway. It is prudent to take proactive measures, rather than to be forced to react.

There are a number of developing elements that relate to this matter. Two reasonably interesting discussions include:

· The role of Enhanced Interrogation Techniques (aka Waterboarding)

· Who gets credit for this operation; Bush, Obama, or both?

There are disparate accounts of just what methods were used to get the information necessary to formulate and carry out Geronimo-E KIA. It has been both asserted and denied that waterboarding played a role in gathering the information necessary to find bin Laden.

New York Representative, Peter King, Republican, said in a report that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was the source who identified bin Laden’s courier, Abu Ahmad. Sheikh Mohammed is alleged to have been waterboarded repeatedly while detained by George W. Bush Administration officials. In a separate account, Donald Rumsfeld, who served as Secretary of Defense under George W. Bush maintained that the Defense Department did not use the technique during his tenure. Is this plausible deniability epitomized? You make the call!

President Obama will visit 9-11 Ground Zero tomorrow. He asked President George W. Bush to accompany him, in a move designed to symbolize the combined and continuous efforts made by the last two American Administrations. President Bush declined. A spokesperson said Mr. Bush would observe from afar with other Americans, while he continues to live life outside the spotlight. Some analysts are citing a political undertow, and note that many Republicans have lambasted President Obama for not crediting President Bush during his Sunday evening speech.

Again, I leave you to your own opinion about assigning credit. There is no question, President Bush pursued bin Laden with ardor. But while you form your opinion, the question that occurs to me is, would the discussion center on Mr. Bush if the mission had failed and American soldiers had been killed? You make the call.

Ultimately, it is increasingly clear that the American people want their national political leaders to rescue the nation from a different kind of terror; that of unemployment, job compression, unaffordable health care, unstable Social Security benefits, and a burgeoning budget deficit. With the elimination of many of the previous issues, faux and fair, there will be more opportunities to focus on bolstering domestic tranquility and prosperity.

It is safe to say, we have a distance to travel before we arrive at place in terms of our public policy debates. Might I suggest, then, the sooner we get started, the quicker we can get there.

I’m done; holla back!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geronimo

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Osama_bin_Laden

http://live.washingtonpost.com/osama-bin-laden-death-navy-seal.html

http://blogs.forbes.com/abigailesman/2011/05/03/obama-and-staff-watched-operation-geronimo-live/

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/osama-bin-laden-dead-president-obama-full-remarks/story?id=13506069

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/osama-bin-laden-operation-code-geronimo/story?id=13507836

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/mission-osama-executed-by-operation-geronimo/785137/

http://rjrnewsonline.com/news/local/operation-%E2%80%98geronimo%E2%80%99-tracking-bin-laden

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZZwHHDQXSw

http://www.floridatoday.com/article/20110503/BREAKINGNEWS/110503002/Operation-Geronimo-How-we-got-bin-Laden

http://www.tripline.net/trip/Map_of_the_Bin_Laden_Raid%3A_Operation_Geronimo-1566654170501003BC91C1F902FE5C9B

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5226/5680724572_d4696d593d_z.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.flickr.com/photos/whitehouse/5680724572/&h=427&w=640&sz=261&tbnid=Z3EFngsEn6_3RM:&tbnh=91&tbnw=137&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dbin%2Bladen%2Bsituation%2Broom%2Bphoto%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=bin+laden+situation+room+photo&hl=en&usg=__GUGWnFGVV5v79_26Rzg4lqtS6M8=&sa=X&ei=xYjATaOLDanm0QH599WqBQ&ved=0CCgQ9QEwAg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/03/27/politics/100days/iraqafghanistan/main4896631.shtml

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110502/ap_on_re_us/us_bin_laden_politics_1

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/04/27/president-obamas-long-form-birth-certificate

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/28/us/politics/28obama.html

http://youtube-trends.blogspot.com/2011/05/obamas-2011-correspondents-dinner.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9mzJhvC-8E

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterboarding

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_Sheikh_Mohammed

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2011/05/03/rep-king-waterboarded-ksm-gave-up-bin-ladens-courier/

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/05/03/bin.laden.courier/index.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Rumsfeld

Regal Fixation: An American Obsession

2011-04-27T03:22:00.001-04:00

It's time to Break It Down!

This is a really short post. In the past, I have often lightened up the discussion around holidays. While I didn’t do that last week for Easter, I have decided to ease up a bit and take a step or two back this week. There is a holiday in

England

to commemorate the Royal Wedding; might as well give my little corner of the blogosphere a break too.

As the “Wedding of the Century” approaches, it has been frequently noted during the last several days that the pending Royal Nuptials have received more coverage in the United States than in England. Of course the concept of coverage, in and of itself, connotes the involvement of the media in influencing the formation of opinions. But there must be more to it than that. What accounts for the insatiable desire for the seemingly never-ending pomp and prose about Americans’ newest favorite couple?

Although we in America revel in having declared independence from England and from King George III, and in the fact we fought (and won) a War ofIndependence to punctuate that historic separation, there is still, I submit, a deep-seated association with what many Americans consider their roots. And those roots, quiet as it is kept, sprung directly from the Monarchy that that so stifled the early patriots, their forbearers, and descendents that many of them risked “it all” to fight to the death to secede from tyranny and taxation.

Now it goes without saying, the Monarchy it not what it used to be. Still, there is more than a hint of irony in all this overly pretentious fanfare. On one hand, America long ago asserted its independence from the erstwhile all consuming tentacles of what was then an overreaching system of government. Alternately, today, in an admittedly different environment, one in which we consider Great

Britain

our closest ally, we eat sleep and dream Royal Wedding. What a reversal in our posture. As boxing impresario Don King says, “Only in America!”

I suppose Royal Watching is harmless enough as a sport. After all, it is a pursuit centered on activities based on another continent, played out, in large measure by people whose lives we cannot eve imagine living. In other words, it is not that different than passionately following your favorite NBA player, or tuning in to see if your favorite team’s quarterback can lead the squad to the Super Bowl. Bottom line; for most of us, all of the above fits fairly in the same category…fantasy.

Of course, there are at least a couple of points worth mentioning. First, it is highly unlikely a Lakers-Celtics Final will ever be more popular in London than in Los Angeles. The degree to which Americans have invested in following this European Made for TV Special is unique. Second, while the fascination is both off the chain, and for the most part, viewed positively, imagine if you will a wedding in

America

, any wedding, at a cost of $32 million. Then consider that tax payers pick up the tab. I can see all that flowery media spin now, still spinning, of course, but with a decidedly negative slant.

Two days from now, the phenomenon that is the Royal Wedding will have come and gone. The media will move on to “The next big thing,” and we will return to the mundane matters of budgets, battles, and birthers. Reflecting for a moment on that reality, perhaps Royal Wedding mania is not such a bad diversion after all. “Regal Fixation: An American Obsession,” run with it…at least for the rest of the week.

I’m done; holla back!

http://dailycaller.com/2011/04/25/royal-wedding-receives-more-coverage-in-u-s-than-in-u-k/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_III_of_the_United_Kingdom

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/parody

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/satire

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/irony

http://www.williamkate.com/

http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2011/04/26/down-for-the-count-americas-fascination-with-royalty/

http://www.officialroyalwedding2011.org/

http://www.nydailynews.com/lifestyle/royalwedding/2011/04/26/2011-04-26_prince_william_and_kate_middleton_royal_wedding_granny_guen_murray_among_first_i.html

http://www.people.com/people/package/article/0,,20395222_20467910,00.html

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/royal-wedding-watch/2011/03/royal_wedding_web_site.html

http://articles.cnn.com/2011-03-02/world/uk.royal.wedding_1_kate-middleton-wedding-dress-website?_s=PM:WORLD

http://erhj.blogspot.com/2011/03/americas-obsession-with-royal-wedding.html

http://newyork.citypudding.com/entertainment/entertainment-gossip/why-americans-are-so-obsessed-with-william-kates-royal-wedding

http://www.watchtheroyalwedding.com/20265/us-televisions-obsession-with-the-royal-wedding/

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2011/royal.wedding/

http://www.sheknows.com/entertainment/articles/829395/royal-wedding-will-cost-around-32-million

"Birther Madness: Brewer, No; Jindal, Yes, If!"

2011-04-20T00:26:00.000-04:00

It's time to Break It Down!

In what on some level can only be seen as an unexpected development, Arizona Republican Governor Jan Brewer vetoed Arizona’s so-called Birther Bill; legislation that passed easily in both houses of the Arizona Legislature. If enacted into law, the bill would have required Presidential candidates to prove their citizenship before being cleared to appear on the State’s ballot.

Arizona would have been the first State to invoke such requirements. Most observers viewed this bill as another effort to question President Obama’s birthplace. Proponents ardently denied such a connection; an amusing side step not even taken seriously by most Republicans. In fact, the effort seemed to be among the most transparent attempts to throw a stone and hide ones hand. In a word, sad; really!

The State has fielded a number of controversial issues in recent years, many having to do will Illegal Aliens. The Governor has found herself at the center of some of the more notable debates. Several months ago, she alleged that headless bodies had been found in the border region of the State. When called upon to verify this assertion, Mrs. Brewer was unable to do so. Several pols close to the situation had worried out loud that the law, if approved, would simply serve to give Arizona yet another black eye.

Still, there was ample anticipation that the Governor would sign the legislation, if it reached her desk. That she did not reflects a dialing back of sorts. Reigning speculation revolves around whether the decision was strategic, designed to eliminate unintended consequences, such as subjecting Republican candidates to a new level of scrutiny related to their place of birth, or perhaps, having a Democrat in the Arizona Secretary of State’s position making a deciding call on whether a Republican could be on the ballot…or rather a call made based on heightened sensitivity to trending intensity of rhetoric and vitriol in political campaigns.

On January 8^th of this year, Representative Gabby Giffords, who is serving her 3^rd term in the U.S. Congress, from Arizona’s 8^th District, was shot and critically wounded while talking to constituents at a Safeway supermarket near Tucson. Since that incident there have been repeated calls for a more civil public debate, led by President Obama. Governor Brewer noted in comments following the veto that the measure did not contribute anything worthwhile to Arizona, and stated further that, there were many other issues of higher importance and deserving attention that a bill that would require. She also added:

"I do not support designating one person as the gatekeeper to the ballot for a candidate, which could lead to politically motivated decisions.”

“In addition, I never imagined being presented with a bill that could require candidates for President of the greatest and most powerful nation on earth to submit their ‘early baptismal circumcision certificates’ among other records to the Arizona Secretary of State. This is a bridge too far.”

“House Bill 2177 “creates significant new problems while failing to do anything constructive for Arizona”

Mrs. Brewer, who served as the State’s Secretary of State, before ascending to the Governorship when President Obama selected Janet Napolitano as Secretary of Homeland Security, seemed intent on steering the State of Arizona around, rather than right into the middle of this potential quagmire. Perhaps she is benefitting from her On-the-Job Training.

Technically, as in most situations such as this, the Arizona House and Senate could override the Governor’s veto. However, when asked about that possibility, Speaker of the House, Kirk Adams noted that legislative researchers found that it had been 50 years since an Arizona Governor’s veto had been overridden. The bill’s sponsor, Representative Carl Seel, Republican, Phoenix, conceded pursuing an override would involve defying the (Republican) Governor, as much as standing up for and supporting the bill. With that backdrop, it appears Governor Brewer’s veto will stick.

As if to prove there is never a shortage of bad ideas, just as Governor Brewer struck a blow for sensible pursuit of germane issues, Governor Bobby Jindal, Louisiana, opted for the “Road more traveled.” Two Republicans introduced a Birther Bill last week in the Louisiana Legislature. According to Kyle Plotkin, Governor Jindal’s Press Secretary, the Governor will sign the bill if it reaches his desk.

As with the sponsors of the Arizona bill, Representative Alan Seabaugh, co-sponsor of the Louisiana legislation, denies he is a Birther. Instead, he contends the bill would clear up an area of the law where there appears to be a gap. For his part, Governor Jindal, through his spokesman, says he believes the President is a citizen.

These backdoor tactics underscore the kind of Machiavellian, win at all cost design, that submits that if you can’t beat President Obama at the ballot box, which they were unable to do in 2008, see if you can prevent him from getting that far by “un-qualifying” him. It is too funny to be sad, and too bizarre to be funny; I guess I may as well call it what it is; desperate. I think about these efforts at disinformation and subterfuge, and all I can see is a vision of multiple Wizards; each standing behind a curtain, frantically (and pointlessly) operating a set of controls, hoping to erase reality, change facts, and ultimately re-write history.

It’s too late…this is not Oz! No matter what the results of the 2012 election turn out to be, 2008 is in the books; it already happened people!

So the saga continues. “Birther madness; Brewer No; Jindal, Yes, If” given a chance. As Frost so eloquently and poetically framed it, “Two roads diverged in a yellow wood.” As is always the case when faced with forks in the road, some will choose the well-worn path, while others will take “The Road Not Taken.” For whatever it’s worth, in this instance, Governor Brewer has chosen the latter; Governor Jindal the former, if given the chance. So much for the New (Old) South; can you say oxymoronic?

I’m done; holla back!

http://www.aolnews.com/2011/04/18/arizona-gov-jan-brewer-vetoes-presidential-birther-bill/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Brewer

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2011/04/19/20110419xgr-birthveto0419.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/18/jan-brewer-birther-bill_n_850803.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gabrielle_Giffords

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_Napolitano

http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/04/19/arizona.president.bill.veto/

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0411/53419.html

http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/dpp/news/politics/state_politics/brewer-vetoes-birther-bill-guns-on-campus-4-18-2011

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/04/arizona_gov_jan_brehttp://www.myfoxphoenix.com/dpp/news/politics/state_politics/brewer-vetoes-birther-bill-guns-on-campus-4-18-2011wer_vetoes.html

http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2011/04/gov_jindal_will_sign_birther_b.html

http://nation.foxnews.com/gov-bobby-jindal/2011/04/19/gov-bobby-jindal-says-hell-sign-birther-bill-if-it-reaches-his-desk

http://www.wwltv.com/news/Jindal-will-sign-birther-bill-if-it-reaches-his-desk-120198749.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Frost

http://www.bartleby.com/119/1.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_citizenship_conspiracy_theories

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machiavellianism

The Donald Trumps The Field

2011-04-13T03:33:00.000-04:00

It's time to Break It Down!

Tonight, President Obama will deliver a speech in which he will, depending upon whom you ask, detail his own budget proposal, or provide a sketchy outline rift with generalities, mixed messages, and of course a scary concept to “I am every man" Republicans; profundities. Which will it be? Well, because future-telling is beyond my pay grade, I will wait until a later date to pursue that debate…or not.

In the interim, there is a matter I want to spend a few minutes with this week. A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released yesterday indicates Donald Trump tied Mike Huckabee for the lead when Republicans were asked who they support for the GOP Presidential Nomination. It is important to say, “It’s early.” Another obvious caveat is Donald Trump injects an enormous name recognition factor into the conversation. Having noted those points, here are the poll results in there entirety:

Huckabee 19%

Trump 19%

Palin 12%

Gingrich 11%

Romney 11%

Paul 7%

Bachmann 5%

Daniels 3%

Pawlenty 2%

Santorum 2%

Barbour * (Less than 1%)

Someone else (vol.) 3%

None/ No one (vol.) 4%

No opinion 1%

Both The Donald and Huckabee garnered 19% of the votes, while Sarah Palin captured 12%, Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney, collected 11% each. That adds up to 72%, or slightly less than three-quarters of the 824 people polled. No other candidate mentioned cracked double-figure polling. In fact, the sum of the totals for Someone else, None/No one, and No opinion exceeded every other named candidate’s share of the votes.

Though mentioned above, it should be repeated, it is very early. Candidates are still in the process of forming Exploratory Committees, and few if any have formally announced their intentions (to run), though Tim Pawlenty came close to doing so yesterday on CNN, in a conversation with Piers Morgan.

Those facts notwithstanding, it is interesting that the two highest polling candidates have embraced the Birther Movement (though Mr. Huckabee has been known to denounce that point of view) ideology, which holds that President Obama was not “Born in the USA.” Moreover, the candidate polling 3^rd, Sarah Palin, has endorsed Mr. Trump’s position of calling into question whether President Obama was born in Hawaii.

Did I say it is early? The temptation is to say the results of this recent CNN Poll provide incontrovertible evidence that regardless of the calendar, we are fully immersed in the Silly Season. It is enticing to believe we will wake up in a month or two or three and the zaniness will have subsided; replaced by adults responding to survey questions instead of their kindergarteners, and a sense of sobriety will rule, once again. Hold on to that thought!

It is an absolute truth that polls and surveys taken today may be inconsequential, in relation to actual 2012 results. Consider that at this time in 2007, the Polls, most Republicans, virtually all Democrats who were not running, and conventional wisdom, to be sure, held that Hillary Clinton would be the Democratic Party’s nominee for President. So, “it is early, really!”

I have addressed the Birther debate in an earlier blog, and so, will not revisit it again, per se, in this post. However, it is worth noting that CNN reported yesterday that Mr. Trump said he has hired a team of investigators to go to Hawaii and research Mr. Obama. Mr. Trump is a billionaire, of course. So it stands to reason he can afford to hire the best private investigators/researchers on the planet. The thinking on this matter must go something like this:

Clinton investigators – Rank amateurs

McCain researchers – Totally incompetent

State of Hawaii (and it’s Republican Governor) – Nitwits all

CIA, FBI, Secret Service – Government workers

Other Democratic candidates – Losers

Other Republican candidates – Duped

New York Times, Washington Post, other media – Co-opted

Yes, this is clearly a job for The Donald, or at least his minions. If this view point is the outlook necessary to score with Republican voters, we are in for quite a 2012 Campaign Season. But let’s face it, this scurrilous tack, while a low blow, is nothing new. In the 2008 Campaign, Senator Obama’s opponents embraced a variety of substitutes for issues, including:

Community Organizer

Socialist

Muslim

Elitist

Terrorist consort

Jeremiah Wright protégé

Kenyan

There were others of course, but the list above is more than adequate to make the point. Although most of his opponents claim Mr. Obama is weak on the issues, it is incredibly fascinating why so many of them prefer to trade these proxies for issues, rather than choosing to debate the issues themselves. It is almost as though they have conceded they cannot win a head-to-head battle focused on the issues they all claim really matter to Americans. Hmmm!

Be all that as it may; it is almost surreal to confront the current reality: “The Donald Trumps the Field!” That, sadly, pretty much says it all. To wit, I’m done; holla back!

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/04/12/rel6c.pdf

http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/264503/words-i-never-thought-i-would-write-trump-leads-gop-2012-poll

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/chatter/2011/04/donald-trump-ties-mike-huckabee-in-cnn-poll-of-republicans.html?cid=6a00d8341c630a53ef014e60c6ba72970c

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/04/12/cnn-poll-trump-tied-for-first-in-gop-horserace/

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/155495-poll-has-trump-tied-for-first-in-race-for-gop-nomination

http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/trump-ties-huck-lead-cnn-poll-gop-vo

http://www.seattlepi.com/default/article/Trump-and-Huck-hold-private-pow-wow-1333380.php

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/264499/poll-trump-huck-tie-first-place-gop-primary-katrina-trinko

http://onespot.wsj.com/politics/2011/04/12/643c2/poll-trump-huck-tie-for-first-place-in

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/04/cnn-poll-donald-trump-ties-huckabee-for-lead-in-gop-primary.php

http://www.newser.com/story/116234/donald-trump-ties-mike-huckabee-for-first-in-gop-primary-poll-from-cnn.html

http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheat-sheet/item/trump-leads-gop-poll/wingnuts/#

http://nation.foxnews.com/mitt-romney/2011/04/12/romney-trump-obama-doesn-t-need-birth-certificate

Shut It Down: Act II

2011-04-06T04:10:00.000-04:00

It's time to Break It Down!

As I was growing up in agrarian North Carolina, adults, who thought they had a corner on the smarts and common sense markets (and who probably did), repeatedly assured me and others of my tender age that one of the principal defining qualities separating men (and women) from animals was the capacity to learn from our mistakes. This meant more than the ability to avoid taking an action that previously led to getting hit with a newspaper, or acting in a way that had resulted in earning a treat. No, this was about developing and using ones considerable mental prowess to think, critically analyze, and solve complex problems.

For most of my life, I have accepted that conventional wisdom as writ. But I concede there are a number of poignant examples that give me pause. To use a prominent baseball metaphor, another case is waiting on deck. For the last couple of months I have been a casual observer to what appears destined to become the next American governmental docudrama. If the Godfathers of Government don’t start exhibiting some of that agile, problem-solving skill, post-haste, the Federal Government will Shut Down Friday.

Now, I realize that there are a number of anti-government activists who are convinced that’s a good thing. Suffice it to say, I disagree. But that, in and of itself, is not the point of this post. Rather, I’d like to remind gentle readers of the most recent precedent for this approach to resolving the compelling questions about the federal budget, and consider briefly the lessons drawn from that 1995 misadventure.

The main actors, in what I shall refer to as Shut Down I, were President Bill Clinton, and Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich. The Cliff Notes version of this misapplied act of machismo was Mr. Gingrich, even now considered a stout intellectual dynamo in GOP circles, acting at the behest of the Republican majority in Congress, attempted to extract more budget cuts than President Clinton would accept. Mr. Gingrich, certain that the President would blink, miscalculated, and persuaded Congress to refuse to raise the debt ceiling.

The end result of this ill-conceived game of Chicken was played out between November 14, 1995 and January 6, 1996. The Federal Government was shut down twice, for a total of 4 weeks; so-called non-essential government workers were furloughed, and the corresponding non-essential services those workers provided were suspended. The economic consequences of a government shutdown, then, as now, include a loss of investor confidence, which in turn means it costs more for the government to borrow money.

Not surprisingly, active finger-pointing ensued. The President blamed the Speaker; the Speaker blamed the President…and the people were left to “eat cake,” figuratively, of course. Ultimately Republican resolve melted. This occurred in part because of factions tied to Presidential politics, and in part due to an untimely gaffe by one of the key players.

Both Speaker Gingrich and Senator Bob Dole harbored ambitions of running for President. As a result, Senator Dole favored “ending the hostilities” sooner rather than later. Gingrich, on the other hand, having devised the idea, and served as the face of the movement, was content to not only to shut it down, but to nail it up, indefinitely.

The Senator's position would prevail. A couple of days after the shutdown ended, Mr. Gingrich was quoted citing a Clinton snub as the basis for his doggedness on the issue. His complaint was widely reported, and almost instantly, he and more important, Republicans lost any semblance of moral high ground on the issue. The sequence of events would later be considered significant in a classic double-whammy sort of way. If deflated Republican energy and momentum in advance of the 1996 Presidential Election; alternately, President Clinton’s ratings soared, and he went on to secure reelection.

Fast-forward to the here and now of the 21^st Century. Another Republican Speaker and another Democrat President; at odds over budget matters. Democrats have moved significantly from their original position; Republicans are vowing to remain steadfast, citing their mandate as the cause to which they must be true. In fact after reach a tentative agreement on budget cuts, they subsequently increased their demands. There is much to differentiate the current and past Speakers, starting with Speaker Boehner’s Trademark ultra-tan, and Speaker Gingrich’s ascribed intellect. Mr. Gingrich flew hard-charging into the 1995 Shut Down. Mr. Boehner spoke against the idea, consistently, until recently. Few would confuse the savvy populism of President Clinton with the reserved professorial demeanor of President Obama. Once again, active finger-pointing is the order of the day. As a result, not surprisingly, here we are, poised to for a Shut Down redux.

When reflecting back to 1995, one may have a temptation to cast one side as the protagonists, and the other as either the sympathetic victim(s), or more ominously, the bad guys. I do none of the above. Looking in the rear view mirror that shut down looks the same now as it did then; like a lame idea, the repercussions of which threatened to punish the masses in general, and the poor in particular. Looking ahead, nothing about Friday’s potential Shut Down scenario has changed. In an already tenuous economy:

Hundreds of thousands of employees will be sent home
The masses will be denied the benefits and services those employees provide

Markets will react badly due to increased uncertainty

Borrowing money will cost the government more

Consumers will find borrowing more difficult

Without public sector demand, the private sector & entrepreneurs will compress

Unemployment up; benefits down

And so it goes! If there is no agreement by Friday, it’s hard to say who will win, but the losers are already evident. It was a bad idea in 1995; if political operatives decide take a walk down Memory Lane and in effect, “Shut It Down: Act II,” it will further erode my confidence in the elders who taught me to believe our species was special, adaptive, and inclined not only to learn from our mistakes, but to put that new insight into practice when faced again with similar obstacles. It is not too late, but, reports suggest both sides have taken steps to put all concerned on alert that a shutdown is imminent. Definitely not a good sign, as omens go.

As in 1995, it is impossible to miss the implications for the coming Presidential campaign. On one hand, the scorched earth, “cede this President no victories” strategy resides at the center of this madness. Meanwhile, this malicious tack is countered by an equally injurious effort, intended to show the people how detached the Republican leadership is from the day-to-day struggles of the working class who rely on the jobs and services that will be lost…during the most challenging period of economic distress the nation has seen since the Great Depression. All the while, as the professional politicians hone and refine their moves, like manipulating pieces on a Chess Board, the people wait…and prepare to suffer. It is hard for me to imagine that supporters of the Left, Right, or Center view this as a desirable outcome. Instead, I believe, paraphrasing the patriot, Patrick Henry, "Now is the time for all good men to use their considerable mental prowess to think, critically analyze, and solve complex budget problems. What do you believe?

I’m done; holla back!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_government_shutdown_of_1995

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/sns-rt-politics-us-usa-budtre7321p1-20110403,0,1005874.story

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/06/us-usa-budget-idUSTRE7321P120110406?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110405/bs_nm/us_usa_budget

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110405/ap_on_re_us/us_spending_showdown

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/04/05/house-senate-leaders-head-white-house-ditch-dealing-budget/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/post/obama-administration-moving-forward-with-government-shutdown-plans/2011/04/04/AFodFdfC_blog.html

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0411/52615.html

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_7742.shtml

http://www.huliq.com/12079/government-shut-down-obama-calls-boehner-irs-plan-take-not-give

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Henry

The Obama Doctrine: Redefining A Call To Arms

2011-03-30T05:00:00.000-04:00

It's time to Break It Down!

For weeks now the crisis in Libya has hovered near the top of America’s headline news. The conflict, a civil war by most assessments, frequently leads regular news casts, and is featured consistently in crawls on 24-Hour news stations such as CNN.

For the past 10 days, since the initiation of the no-fly zone,” the great hue and cry has been for President Obama to explain himself, and to define and defend his actions and America’s role. Republicans, have demanded an accounting, several Democrats have expressed concerns, and much of the media has served as an enormous echo chamber, repeating the talking points of the various bases for dissatisfaction.

At the crux of this growing debate the central issue for many seems to be, “Why are we not taking unilateral control of the situation, by whatever means necessary?”

In short, our nation has a history of policing the globe. Many of our current political leaders are clearly invested in the notion of “Act now; ask questions later…if at all.” As a result, many of the nations of the world expect us, and to be honest, when their vital interests are on the line, want us, to continue to do so. At the same time, many of our leaders, accustomed as they are to this role, can fathom no other way.

Therefore, when this President insists on gathering information, coalescing allies, and structuring a role for the United States commensurate with our less than vital interests, he and his efforts are met with utter disparagement and outright disdain.

With that preamble serving as a backdrop, President Obama took the stage and spoke to the nation on Monday evening. From the National Defense University in Washington, DC, the President talked Libya. In outlining what he would achieve through his comments, he committed to explain:

What he said we would do
What we have done

What we will do now

Why this matters (or should, to Americans)

President Obama framed in the clearest way possible, what was a stake; the ruthless slaughter of Libyan citizens by 40-year dictator, Muammar Gaddafi, intent on remaining in power. Given this impending annihilation, the President articulated our moral obligation this way:

"To brush aside America’s responsibility as a leader and — more profoundly — our responsibilities to our fellow human beings under such circumstances would have been a betrayal of who we are. Some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries. The United States of America is different. And as President, I refused to wait for the images of slaughter and mass graves before taking action.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/52107.html#ixzz1I3CljS9a

With so much at stake, the President and his Administration began to put in place the key elements that have come to define America’s approach to this conflict. While his approach has certainly been controversial, it has also been thoughtfully conceived, and methodically executed. It entails a number of measures, including:

Evacuated the American embassy
Facilitated the exit of all Americans who sought American assistance.
Froze more than $33 billion of the Gaddafi regime’s assets.
Joined with other nations at the United Nations Security Council, we broadened sanctions
Imposed an arms embargo
Created a framework for Gaddafi and those around him to be held accountable for their crimes
Made it clear that Gaddafi had lost the confidence of his people and the legitimacy to lead, and said that he needed to step down from power.
Ordered warships into the Mediterranean
Led an effort with our allies at the United Nations Security Council to pass an historic resolution to authorize a no-fly zone to stop the regime’s attacks from the air
Authorized all necessary measures to protect the Libyan people, including military action to stop the killing and enforce U.N Resolution 1973

What have these actions led to? In effect, the pivotal moment starts now. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (familiarly NATO) takes command of enforcement of the arms embargo and the no-fly zone today. This means our allies and partners are scheduled to assume the lead responsibility for maintaining pressure on Gaddafi’s remaining forces.

If this transition comes to pass, the US will engage in maintaining a supporting role. In this capacity, the US would provide:

Intelligence
Logistical support
Search & rescue assistance
Capabilities to jam communications
Provide assistance to Libyans who need food and medical care
Safeguard the $33 billion in frozen assets so that it is available to the Libyan people.

Significant by-products of this reduced involvement is tamps down the risks to American soldiers, and the costs to our taxpayers. This fact reflects the President’s effort to craft an effective, but balanced strategy to deal with the conflict in Libya.

Since America’s vital interests are not at stake in Libya, why is American involvement critical to Operation Odyssey Dawn? The President detailed several reasons that compelled America to act. They include:

America has an important strategic interest in preventing Gaddafi from overrunning those who oppose him.
A massacre would have driven thousands of additional refugees across Libya’s borders, putting enormous strains on the peaceful –- yet fragile -– transitions in Egypt and Tunisia.
The democratic impulses that are dawning across the region would be eclipsed by the darkest form of dictatorship, as repressive leaders concluded that violence is the best strategy to cling to power.
The writ of the United Nations Security Council would have been shown to be little more than empty words, crippling that institution’s future credibility to uphold global peace and security.
While I will never minimize the costs involved in military action, I am convinced that a failure to act in Libya would have carried a far greater price for America.

The overarching debate questioning the President’s approach to resolving this war has unfolded on two antithetical tracks; one arguing against intervention in Libya; the other, proposing that we broaden our military mission to include deposing Gaddafi. Mr. Obama defended his tack, and noted that his assignment of US forces carries both a United Nations (U.N.) mandate as well as international support. In addition, the Libyan opposition requested our involvement on the current scale. If we were to attempt to overthrow Gaddafi by force:

Our coalition would splinter

We would likely have to put troops on the ground

We would increase the risk of killing many civilians from the air

The dangers faced by our troops would be far greater

Our share of the costs would spiral

The President reminded Americans that the scenario of moving to oust a despot is a precise replica of our Iraq experience; an outcome we cannot afford to repeat in Libya.

In placing the matter in perspective the President reminded that in just one month, the United States has:

Worked with our international partners to mobilize a broad coalition
Secured an international mandate to protect civilians
Stopped an advancing army
Prevented a massacre
Established a no-fly zone with our allies and partners.

By comparison, this rapid military and diplomatic response was compared to the Bosnian brutality of the 1990’s, when it took the international community more than a year to intervene. The

took the above steps in 31 days. This contrast sheds a most informative light on the bogus handwringing and second-guessing about how long it took the Obama Administration to act.

In further clarifying the Administration's actions, the President underscored that the US accomplished these objectives consistent with his initial pledge to the American people at the outset of military operations, that:

America’s role would be limited
We would not put ground troops into Libya
We would focus our unique capabilities on the front end of the operation
We would transfer responsibility to our allies and partners.

In response to claims and suggestions that Mr. Obama has shown a lack of resolve in dealing with this matter, he demonstrated again his unwillingness to be bullied into moving hastily and irrationally to make war. At the same time, as Commander-in-Chief of the most advanced military power the world has ever known, the President stated, in unequivocal terms, his position on deploying our armed forces:

“I’ve made it clear that I will never hesitate to use our military swiftly, decisively, and unilaterally when necessary to defend our people, our homeland, our allies and our core interests.”

The whole idea of an Obama Doctrine is a media contrivance; often as not a synonym for lazy journalism. The world is far too complex for any one statement of even any single group of statements to define the views of the POTUS. But for the purpose of this post, and from a military slant, Monday night’s speech serves as an exemplar of "The Obama Doctrine: Redefining A Call To Arms!” One can conclude that while Mr. Obama is a President who views force as a last resort, he will use it, but only after deep reflection and only under circumstances that he feels give him no other choice. He distanced himself from both Bill Clinton’s Bosnia and George W. Bush’s

Iraq

; he charted his own course. Ultimately, that is a good thing. Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/52107.html#ixzz1I3G8VPq7

I’m done; holla back!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Defense_University

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/03/28/remarks-president-address-nation-libya

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdHSlFt14xU

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/the-obama-doctrine/2011/03/29/AFbqHqtB_blog.html

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20110328/obama-libya-110328/

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4612624/obama-addresses-nation-on-libya/

http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/video?id=8039979

http://www.wtvy.com/home/headlines/President_Obama_Addresses_Nation_on_Libya_118816814.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/28/obama-libya-speech-_n_841311.html

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2011/03/did-barack-obama-channel-george-w-bush-in-his-libya-speech.html

Operation Odessey Dawn: No American Boots on the Ground...Yet!

2011-03-23T04:05:00.000-04:00

It's time to Break It Down!

Two weeks ago I wrote a post about America’s Next War. Though cynics may have casually labeled that assertion alarmist hyperbole then, welcome to the future! The United Nations (U.N.) Security Council approved a resolution last Thursday, designed to achieve several objectives, including:

• Protect civilians

• Ban travel

• Freeze assets

• Embargo arms

• Invoke a no-fly zone

The rebels in Libya solicited support to aid their efforts to overthrow Colonel Muammar Gaddafi and his Regime, for several weeks. The League of Arab States and the African Union, two regional alliances, were among numerous groups advocating direct involvement by the United States, specifically and especially in creating a no-fly zone, which would prevent the Gaddafi Regime from bombing the people of Libya.

A number of factions in American also lobbied intently for President Obama to intervene. There was a particularly keen and persistent castigation of the Administration by several prominent, prospective candidates for the 2012 GOP Presidential nomination. I will leave you to draw your own inferences about whether this was a self-serving tactic, designed to enhance their individual profiles, or a mere coincidence, based on their otherwise legitimate ideological differences with the President.

Be that as it may, when the U.N. Security Council approved Resolution 1973 (2011), it represented a fundamental shift in America’s role in what many have characterized as Libya’s Civil War. The resolution passed on a 10-0 vote, with five members abstaining. The members voting in favor of the resolution were:

• Bosnia & Herzegovina

• Colombia

• France (Permanent)

• Gabon

• Lebanon

• Nigeria

• Portugal

• South Africa

• United Kingdom (Permanent)

• United States (Permanent)

Those members abstaining were:

• Brazil

• China (Permanent)

• Germany

• India

• Russian Federation (Permanent)

In effect, Operation Odyssey Dawn was born with that vote. While the most talked about feature of the resolution, before and after its adoption is the inimitable “no-fly zone,” the action includes several other elements, as enumerated earlier. Of course, the main purpose of this post is to point out the logic vacuum that exists in some corners, pertaining to the Operation. The concept of the no-fly zone was frequently bandied about as though it were a cure-all, and as if it were a kind of discreet action that could be implemented without preceding steps, or subsequent outcomes. It is neither.

In simplistic terms, invoking and enforcing a no-fly zone over Libya means Coalition air craft fly overhead and ensure that Libyan planes can no longer take off and initiate raids on Libyan rebels. The concept sounds simple enough, when framed that way. There is a basic problem with that description; it leaves out key information. In order for Coalition forces to fly over Libya in relative safety, the Allies had to first disable Libyan artillery and air craft. This entailed executing precision bombing strikes in areas where munitions and planes were maintained. Naturally, the odds that this equipment is stored in isolation of people are slim and none.

Put another way, we are at war! You don’t think so? Turn the tables; think of Pearl Harbor. When a nation or nations use military implements to attack another nation, it is war, regardless of whether it’s called that.

There have been reports that the Arab League, whose members emphatically urged the US to join the fray, recoiled at the attacks which cleared the way for the no-fly zone. Not surprisingly, whereas much of the negative internal political dissonance revolved around concerns that President Obama should have acted more swiftly and decisively to aid the rebels, in the aftermath of America assisting Coalition efforts to stage the no-fly zone over Libya, dissent persists from both sides of the Aisle.

GOP Senators Rick Santorum, PA, Marco Rubio, FL, and John McCain, AZ, have all expressed their opposition to the way President Obama and his Administration have responded to events in Libya. No to be outdone by his Republican colleagues, Democratic Congressman Dennis Kucinich, OH, went so far in panning Mr. Obama's actions, as to suggest the President may be culpable of an “impeachable offense.”

Mr. Kucinich, of course, opposed the action from the start. While I don’t view his current position as tenable, it is at least consistent. On the other hand, some of the Republicans who complained about America’s lack of involvement are now adroitly repositioning their arguments to find fault with actions they previously supported. Self-serving political opportunism; you decide! As for the members of the Arab League, they seem to have revisited and tweaked their shrill notes of opposition. Still, it needs to be reiterated, all of this seeming inconsistency and confusion is part of the dysfunction inherent in real life war. This is not video gaming, and there are no do-overs.

Death and casualties are both unavoidable and irrevocable aspects of war. That line should become the recurring refrain of every leader and legislative body considering initiating acts of war, much as Dorothy repeated “No place like home,” as she transitioned form Oz, back to Kansas. It may never prevent a war; but then again, it just might.

Finally, General Carter Ham, top Commander of American forces in the Libyan conflict insists that the impetus of this mission is to protect civilians. He pronounced the initial phase of the Operation, disabling Libya’s ability to effectively attack Coalition forces, successful. “Operation Odyssey Dawn: No American Boots on the Ground…Yet!” Yet is the operative word here. President Obama has expressed confidence that America will be able to hand over responsibility for maintaining the Coalition effort in days; not weeks, or longer.

At this juncture, that sounds overly optimistic. Colonel Gaddafi has remained openly defiant, and promises not to submit. With a mission aimed neither at Regime Change, nor targeting The Leader, continuing to protect civilians successfully sounds like a protracted engagement. We will see.

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com. A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WY02a_E3sw

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Politics/Video-Libya-UN-Security-Council-Votes-In-Favour-Of-A-No-Fly-Zone/Article/201103315954268

http://www.un.org/sc/members.asp

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRScYQ_BLIs

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7360170n

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZLkwbeROa0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOMHvdZE5G0&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlUdvYyr7ok&feature=watch_response

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12562504

http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/03/22/obama.libya.policy.defense/

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2014572662_apltobamawarandpeace.html

http://www.timesunion.com/local/article/Gibson-opposes-Obama-on-Libya-1246505.php

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Santorum

http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/65740/will-opposition-to-libya-attacks-hurt-obamas-2012-campaign/

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/03/15/mccain-lieberman-urge-obama-to-recognize-libyan-opposition/

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-22/obama-has-no-doubt-u-s-can-hand-libyan-command-to-international-force.html

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2011/sc10200.doc.htm#Resolution

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_League

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Union

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member_states_of_the_African_Union

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/03/17/seeks-resolution-authorizing-wide-range-strikes-libya/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carter_Ham

America's Game: Locked & Loaded!

2011-03-16T02:09:00.000-04:00

It's time to Break It Down!

The 2011 Super Bowl; in the vault, this year’s Pro Bowl; history; the National Football League (NFL) Draft, source for new talent; right around the corner, yet, for now, the topic uppermost on the minds of football fans across the nation and around the world is “The Lockout.” While college Basketball owns the rights to the term March Madness, Trademarked, I’m sure, NFL owners and players may want to at least borrow the moniker until they can resolve their current impasse. Talk about killing the goose that laid the golden egg, nothing screams insanity more than a work stoppage in America’s Game.

In full disclosure, it is important for me to say, I am neither an avid, nor knowledgeable football fan. Having put that in the forefront, please know that it’s possible my opinion will be devoid of what you may consider fundamental understanding of the game and its infrastructure. I own that caveat and invite you, as always, to feel free to share you own point of view in the comments section of the blog.

At the core, this is a disagreement between NFL owners and NFL players. The source of the disagreement is revenue sharing. Briefly stated, there is a $9 Billion pool of money that will be split, ultimately, between the 32 Franchise owners and the players.

There are two basic premises that punctuate the respective positions of each side. The owners, citing reduced profitability, have asked the players to accept a decrease in their share of the revenue pot, dropping back to 2009 levels. The players, in turn, have asked the owners to open their books...completely.

Now there are certainly other points of contention, but those represent the stakes in the ground. The owners contend they have offered compromises that would permit the players to see records for the past 5 years, and argue that the players have declined, refused to compromise, and have not bargained in good faith. The players counter the owners have been planning a Lockout all along, and have borrowed and/or saved to ensure that they have a contingency fund that will sustain their organizations through a 2011 Work Stoppage.

In their finer moments, both the owners and players have accused the other side of lying. It goes down hill after that. This past Friday, the National Football League Players’ Association (NFLPA) decertified. That action resulted in the organization ceasing to operate as a union, and enabled players to sue the owners. The current Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) expired midnight Friday; the owners locked out the players Saturday, marking the first NFL work stoppage since 1987. The players have asked for an injunction against the lockout. A hearing to consider this request has been scheduled for April 6th in Minneapolis. It is anticipated injunctive relief will be granted, which means the doors would be opened, and teams would operate by 2010 rules.

In the interim, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is investigating a charge by the NFL that the NFLPA decertification is a sham, merely designed to delay negotiations. If the NLRB finds for the NFL, it could still take action against the NFLPA, despite its decertification.

Meanwhile, in addition to the compromise on opening the teams’ books, the owners’ offer included:

• Maintaining the 16 regular-season games and four preseason games for at least two years, with any switch to 18 games down the road being negotiable.

• Instituting a rookie wage scale through which money saved would be paid to veterans and retired players.

• Creating new year-round health and safety rules.

• Establishing a fund for retired players, with $82 million contributed by the owners over the next two years.

• Financial disclosure of audited profitability information that is not even shared with NFL clubs. That was proposed by the NFL last week, and rejected by the union, which began insisting in May 2009 on a complete look at the books of each of the 32 clubs.

Many fans and a multitude of casual observers have characterized this tête-à-tête as a classic battle between billionaires and millionaires. Particularly in the midst of an environment dominated by employee dislocation, and economic turmoil, it is difficult to muster the energy or emotional traction to take sides in this seemingly senseless battle. Fans are hard pressed to stay engaged, while the non-vested have already embraced firmly the Rhett Butler position; “Frankly, my dear, I don’t…”

I don’t know any NFL owners, and only a few players and former players. I have not had the occasion to discuss the state of the game recently, with any of the players I know. However, in formulating my best estimation, I believe there will be football in 2011. It’s a shame it appears litigation rather than negotiation will be required to make that assessment a reality. Why has it come to this? In my humble opinion, “America’s Game: Locked & Loaded,” is the scenario we are faced with because:

1. The owners are so loaded, they can afford a season without football, and absorb the economic consequences

2. The players are so locked into their position, they are willing to go all out to make their points, which seem to be:

a. the owners are so loaded, they can afford a season without football, and absorb the economic consequences

b. If the owners are that well off, they do not need the money they are trying to take off the table

In summary, this is a clash of Titans. The interests, investment, and enjoyment of fans appear to be secondary considerations…if that high. Fans should take stock; not just fans of the grid iron. It is worth noting that 2011 has the potential to be the year of the CBA Triple Crown, as the Agreements for Basketball and Baseball also expire this year. You may want to consider installing seat belts on your couch; it could be a bumpy sports year.

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com. A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NFL_franchise_owners

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Football_League_Players_Association

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/financial/2011/03/21/110321ta_talk_surowiecki

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=6215282

http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/11/n-f-l-lockout-q-a/

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=6215317

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/nfl-lockout-new-collective-bargaining-agreement-players-league-031211

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/nfl-lockout-new-collective-bargaining-agreement-players-league-031211

http://www.nfllockout.com/

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/nfl_housing_plan_owners_get_the_keys_fans_get_the_bills/2011/03/15/ABVOyCY_story.html?wprss=rss_homepage

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/11/nfl-lockout-nearly-certain-union-decertifies_n_834772.html

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/03/11/2131076/nfl-players-face-expiration-of.html

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=6205936

America's Next War?

2011-03-09T03:57:00.001-05:00

It's time to Break It Down!

The year was 1969 and the Vietnam War roiled, and spilled its carnage daily on our TV screens during the Evening and Nightly News reports. With that rough and tumble backdrop, Norman Whitfield and Barrett Strong wrote a song for the Temptations called “War.” The song, really written for the ages, would later be covered by Edwin Starr. His version was heavily promoted instead of the Tempts’, because Motown was reluctant to agitate their more conservative audience/fans. The song would become Starr’s greatest hit and one of the most powerful protest songs ever, eventually being covered by a host of artists, including:

• Bruce "The Boss" Springsteen

• Tom Jones

• The Jam

• D.O.A.

• Frankie Goes to Hollywood

• Lyre Lyre Hearts on Fire

• Bone Thugs-N-Harmony

• Laibach

• Ugly Rumors

• Pearl Jam

• Maria Muldaur

• Jackie Chan & Chris Tucker in Rush Hour 1, 2, and 3

• Jack Black

The plot thickens. Over the past two years we have heard a range of divergent voices posit that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are now rightly the province of President Obama. At the same time these voices consistently deliver searing commentary in response to Mr. Obama’s suggestion that America’s involvement in military actions should have defined limits, including pre-established start and end dates, these usually angry, always loud voices maintain the administration has no overarching vision for ending the two wars that serve as budget busters in a time of great economic distress in America.

Fast forward to and consider the contemporary Libyan conflict. As much as Liberals and Conservatives alike have characterized the current state as undesirable, for patently different reasons, it seems, almost inexplicably, that proponents of both ideologies are all but baiting President Obama to initiate unilateral military action in Libya. In other words, they are prompting him to pronounce a Declaration of War!

This much is clear; as much as some scape-goating, blame shifting, fact bending types assign responsibility for Iraq and Afghanistan to Mr. Obama, if and when he decides to order a No-Fly Zone over Libyan Air Space, President Obama will become indelibly linked to “The War in Libya.” After all, if the President unilaterally issues such an edict, it will mean, in effect, American planes will patrol the skies over Libya and shoot down Libyan Fighter Jets, should they take flight. As I write, let me be clear, it is not to oppose assisting Libyan citizens being set upon by a ruthless dictator. Rather it is to remind the nattering nabobs just how America the Beautiful; Home of the Free and Land of the Brave, continues to find itself knee deep in foreign conflict.

American citizens, politicians, commentators, and ideologues, as well as some segments of various aggrieved nations frequently and fervently call for our intervention. Unfortunately, after we acquiesce and comply, as a result of apparent popular demand, an amazingly widespread case of chronic amnesia seems to ensue.

President Obama is wise to act in a thoughtful and measured way. In the first week of the conflict, American citizens were still in Libya. With the 1979 American hostage conflict in Iran serving as a compelling object lesson, it was appropriate for the United States to negotiate the exit of most Americans before taking action that was sure to be deemed by Muammar Gaddafi and his Regime as hostile. If you followed the script, you know, once Americans were flown and ferried away, the President invoked a tougher stand, immediately freezing Libyan assets.

Another popular tactic supported by a host of Obama critics is arming the opposition. Of course Afghanistan stands out as the historical stake in the ground symbolizing the fallacy of this move. America and its allies are still sorting out just who comprises the Libyan rebels. What they know is, after we armed Afghani rebels, we ended up getting fired on by the very arms we provided.

A key element of the Administration’s tack is to ensure that the United States is not seen by the Arab World as bullying another Arab State, and carrying out business as usual. The President, the U.N., and our allies may yet coalesce and jointly support a No-Fly Zone, arming the rebels, and other measures to oust General Gaddafi. But until then, it would be helpful for the members of the erstwhile Loyal Opposition, read that the GOP-Tea Party, to act, or at least speak more responsibly about the Libyan conflict.

In some cases, it is pure political flackery and opportunism; in others, simple irresponsibility. As one potential Republican Presidential Candidate, Mike Huckabee, former Arkasas Governor, noted, in the same interview in which he had just flayed the President, “You have to be careful” and base decisions based on good intelligence, which he conceded he did not have as a private citizen. What an interesting dichotomy.

In stark contrast, to the din attacking President Obama's position, GOP Senator Richard Lugar, Indiana, argued this week that the cinflict in Libya has devolved into a Civil War, and as such is a local conflict in which the United States has no place. This is by no means the most popular opinion in the prevailing marketplace of ideas. It does however present clear evidence not every segment ofthe American political spectrum has bought into the idea that the United States needs to lead the way in putting down the Libyan conflict.

In an ideal world, it would be as likely that an influential leader would invoke, and fully execute a Confirmation of Peace as it is that one will issue “A Declaration of War!” Of course, as we know, all too well, this is not that world. Still, each of us has a vital part to play in being the change we want to see in the world in which we live. Just remember; when American pilots enforce a No-Fly Zone, it will not be the neatly scripted scenario of a Video game sequence. It will be a gruesome act of War in which people will die; possible, perhaps even likely, some Americans. That is how war unfolds. Edwin Starr sang a powerful song protesting a conflict that took place more than 40 years ago. Yet, Whitfield and Strong’s poignant lyrics are as keenly resonant today as they were in 1969. Are you ready for “America’s Next War?”

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com. A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Whitfield

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barrett_Strong

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Temptations

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwin_Starr

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bX7V6FAoTLc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b82Czp2suqM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_(Edwin_Starr_song)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War

http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2011/03/07/sen-lugar-on-libya-i-believe-its-a-civil-war/

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/08/world/middleeast/08policy.html

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/02/27/senators-criticize-obama-over-libya/

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-turn/2011/03/if_not_in_libya_when_would_oba.html

http://www.npr.org/2011/03/07/134322475/libyan-rebels-try-to-regroup-after-setback

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2011/02/26/gop-white-house-hopefuls-need-to-get-real-about-libya-egypt-and/

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503543_162-20040583-503543.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+CBSNewsPolls+(CBS+News%3A+Opinion%3A+CBS+News+Polls)

Birtherhood: The Big Lie That Just Will Not Die

2011-03-02T03:56:00.000-05:00

It's time to Break It Down!

It is not unusual for a fringe element to catch the imagination of the uninformed, the lazy, and/or those with a malevolent agenda. In fact, it is to be expected. Consequently, when a group of individual clearly fits into one of the preceding categories, what often sounds like lunacy can be dismissed…easily! However, when an erstwhile responsible party puts forth some variation of the fallacious notions commonly held by questionable sources, one is apt to be left to wonder, what is the point; where did that come from?

This past Monday, former Arkansas Governor, GOP Presidential hopeful, and Fox News commentator, Mike Huckabee entered this arena. While being interviewed by WOR radio host Steve Malzberg, Governor Huckabee, in responding to a question about where he stood on the Birther Movement, delivered an extensive, layered, and nuanced response that indicated he believed President was raised in Kenya. In a recent Fox News Poll, Huckabee was cited as the front-runner among Republican hopefuls for the 2012 Presidential Campaign.

Like Bill Clinton, one of his predecessors as Arkansas Governor, Mike Huckabee was born in Hope, Arkansas. He was The Natural State’s 44th Governor; the same enumeration as President Obama in the Oval Office. Mr. Huckabee, an alumnus of Ouachita Baptist University is an ordained minister, and was a candidate for the GOP Nomination in 2008. In his interview with Mr. Malzberg, Governor Huckabee stated that he disagreed with virtually position President Obama has taken.

In an interesting twist on Birtherhood, Mr. Huckabee’s response to Malzberg, who framed the question like a dyed-in-the-wool Birther, seemed to be a concession that he believed Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii. He added that if he had not been the Clintons, whom he knows, and whom he knows thoroughly researched the question, would have revealed it. Then he went on to say of President Obama:

“I would love to know more, but what I know is troubling enough. And one thing that I do know is his having grown up in Kenya, his view of the Brits, for example’s very different than the average American.

The Governor continued by noting that President Obama’s perspective was shaped by being raised in Kenya, by Kenyans.

In adding depth to his response, the Governor underscored his points by explaining that President Obama’s 2009 decision to remove a bust of former Prime Minister Winston Churchill from the Oval Office was an affront to the citizens of Britain.

“The bust of Winston Churchill, a great insult to the British, but then if you think about it, his perspective as growing up in Kenya with a Kenyan father and grandfather; he probably grew up hearing that the British were a bunch of imperialists who persecuted his grandfather.”

In one final flourish, in a reference to Hussein Onyango Obama, the President’s paternal grandfather, who was detained in a 1952 uprising against British rule, Governor Huckabee said childhood stories of the Mau Mau rebellion would lead President Obama to want to remove from the Oval Office the bust of Churchill, who ordered a crackdown against that uprising.

In an inexplicable fit of coincidence, he did not note that President Obama replaced the Oval Office fixture with a bust of one of his American hero’s, President Abraham Lincoln, or that the Churchill bust was relocated to the White House residence.

Of course, conventional wisdom, as well as the historical record both quite clearly enunciate the facts associated with the key questions here. Responsible media and a plethora of fact checking apparatuses have stated, frequently and consistently, Barack Obama:

• Was born in Hawaii in 1961

• Is an American citizen

• Met his father, Barack Obama, Sr., only once, briefly; hardly knew him

• Never met his Kenyan grandfather, Hussein Onyango Obama

• Did not visit Kenya until 1987; 8 years after his grandfather’s death

• Was raised by his Kansas-born mother, Ann Dunham, Ph.D., and his maternal grandparents, Stanley and Madelyn Dunham, principally in Hawaii

• Spend 5 years (from age 5-10) in Indonesia while growing up his mother, Ann Dunham, and stepfather Lolo Soetoro

• Is Christian; not Muslim

• Has never subscribed to Islam

• Posted a copy of his birth certificate on his website during his Presidential Campaign

All in all, Governor Huckabee’s newly acquired take sounds eerily similar to an old take by former Speaker of the House of Representatives, Newt Gingrich. In September, 2010, Mr. Gingrich, also thought to be a prospective 2012 GOP Presidential candidate, accused President Obama of operating with from a Kenyan, Anti-Colonial Worldview (which I blogged about at the time). As I noted 6 months ago, the genesis of Mr. Gingrich’s ruminations seemed to be a postulation put forth by conservative author and speaker, D’nesh D’Souza.

So why ascribe newly acquired to Governor Huckabee’s position? In the past, the Governor has consistently asserted that the Birther argument is a waste of time, and moreover, the province of the fringe element. That he now seems poised to join the movement is interesting to say the least. What could account for such an about-face?

At the outset, I offered 3 typical bases for spreading ridiculously mythical misinformation, such as this:

1. To be uninformed

2. Laziness

3. Malevolence

Mr. Huckabee, by most assessments qualifies as a reasonably educated and intelligent man. He has spent the last several years navigating the American political stratosphere, and is currently considered among the Republican Party’s Most Likely to Succeed in the quest for the 2012 GOP Presidential Nomination. Uninformed? I don't think so.

The Governor has worked tirelessly and smartly to earn his early front-runner status. His position is one almost impossible to come by without an energetic, if not tireless work ethic. Lazy? No way.

It has often been said, “Politics makes strange bed fellows.” Another oft repeated truism is “All is fair in love and war;” politics is a blood sport that many equate with war. From this vantage point, it appears Mr. Huckabee has decided if he is going to compete with the Republican field, which may include the likes of Mr. Gingrich, and have a chance to win, he must resort to a wider array of devices, including bending, misstating, and omitting facts. Malevolence; check; we have a winner!

In an attempt to walk-back the statements, Hogan Gidley, director of Mr. Huckabee’s political action committee, said, “Governor Huckabee simply “misspoke;” he meant to say the president was raised in Indonesia, and he believes the Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii. Of course, none of that explained the Governor’s allusion to Mr. Obama’s grandfather and the Mau Mau uprising.

The 2012 Campaign season is in its infancy. However, one thing is already crystal clear; tricknology is alive, well, and sure to be in full-force. It will be incumbent upon all truth-seekers to remain vigilant. Today, thinking people are confronted by Birtherhood: The Big Lie That Just Will Not Die! Rest assured, tomorrow, next week, and for the coming 21 months, the proverbial “Hits will keep on coming.”

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com. A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Huckabee

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ouachita_Baptist_University

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arkansas

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Malzberg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WOR_(AM)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_theticket/20110301/ts_yblog_theticket/huckabee-falsely-claims-obama-was-raised-in-kenya

http://www.wor710.com/topic/play_window.php?audioType=Episode&audioId=5190131

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/021111_2012_election_web.pdf

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2011/mar/01/us-huckabee-obama/

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/01/huckabee-questions-obama-birth-certificate-claims-he-was-raised-in-kenya/

http://www.examiner.com/pop-culture-in-hartford/huckabee-questions-obama-s-birth-certificate-and-says-he-was-raised-kenya

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newt_Gingrich

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinesh_D'Souza

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2011/03/mike-huckabee-falsely-suggests-obama-grew-up-in-kenya.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winston_Churchill

"The Revolution Will Be Televised!"

2011-02-23T03:56:00.000-05:00

It's time to Break It Down!

With apologies to Gil Scott-Heron, by all appearances, in the 21st Century, “The Revolution Will Be Televised,” and re-aired on a frequent basis…in different locations. Tunisia and Egypt are headliners for this discussion of course, since their leaders, Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, and Hosni Mubarak, respectively, have actually been deposed. Libya and strongman dictator Muammar Gaddafi are on deck, having experienced several days of unrest. For his part, Gaddafi has announced, defiantly, he is not leaving, and also ominously, that he will be a martyr. In issuing a statement clarifying his intentions, he said:

“I am a fighter, a revolutionary from tents ... I will die as a martyr at the end,' he said, vowing to fight 'to my last drop of blood.”

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1358972/Libya-protests-Gaddafi-blames-world-leaders-violence-rambling-TV-address.html#ixzz1El80uIaW

But while these three nations may be front and center on the Revolution Watch Meter, at least 10 other Middle Eastern countries are experiencing significant unrest, including:

• Algeria

• Bahrain

• Iran

• Iraq

• Jordan

• Morocco

• Saudi Arabia

• Sudan

• Syria

• Yemen

There is a clear and present connect-the-dots chain reaction afoot in the Middle East. Civil unrest is both palpable and spreading through the region. This new Middle East Democratization Movement has caught the United States flat-footed, and directly relates to a number of pre-existing and strategically important relationships. Many observers put forth negative critiques on President Obama’s responses to the crisis in Egypt. The POTUS seemed to vacillate in the early stages of the confrontation, first assuming a stance supportive of Mr. Mubarak, a long-time U.S. ally. He would later pivot, and reframe his message to offer support for the protesters, while encouraging President Mubarak to resign.

Did he realign his position quickly and seamlessly enough to maintain a high-level alliance with what will be a new Egyptian Regime? Or was his adaptation slow; too little, too late?

The Middle East is the home of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, familiarly known as OPEC. Given our reliance on fossil fuels, America is deeply invested in the stability of the Region. As a nation, we are committed to taking whatever steps may be necessary to ensure that key oil producing and exporting nations work collaboratively with the United States keep the price of oil from skyrocketing.

In that regard, the U.S. sits in a precarious position. With a great deal at stake, America must discern how to artfully circumnavigate the discord gripping the Middle East, which includes Western Asia and Northern Africa, while neither abandoning historic allies, nor appearing to influence the outcome of the numerous nationalistic internal debates.

Briefly, in Libya, Muammar Gaddafi has ruled for 41 years, since a 1969 coup. He is the longest serving of all current non-royal leaders, and the longest–serving ruler of Libya since Tripoli (which would become known as Libya) became a member of the Ottoman Empire in 1551. His rein may be in jeopardy however. There have been reports of widespread carnage and killing of protesters. As the violence against citizens continues to escalate, several top-level government aides have resigned, at least two fighter pilots have sought asylum in Malta, and one cleric has urged someone to shoot Gaddafi, and end the scourge.

Conflicting reports have emerged regarding whether Gaddafi has fled Tripoli, Currently the name of the Libyan Capital. In response to reports that he had, The Colonel issued a statement of denial, saying, “I have not fled Libya.” The Libyan leader, who has been accorded honorifics, “Guide of the First of September Great Revolution of the Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya" and ironically, "Leader and Guide of the Revolution," castigated international news channels for telecasting inaccurate news about Libya.

Presumably, Gaddafi never met Gil Scott-Heron, though he may very well pine for the TV-free revolution Scott-Heron described just a year after Gaddafi took over in Libya. Mr. Scott-Heron’s 1970 advisory, "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised," applied to the Black Liberation Movement of the ‘60’s. As he has described it, in that period, the seeds of revolution were born in the minds of the patriots who conceived the pathway to freedom for a group of people from whom that precious commodity had been systematically denied. In that light, their ruminations avoided the white-hot glare of the Klieg lights.

But let’s just say things are different in the 21st Century. Forty-plus years since Scott-Heron's famous admonition, in the here and now, we are in the age of the WorldWideWeb, Twitter, Facebook, MySpace and other Social Networking portals. In the texting era, the world of CNN, and the epoch of the explosion of global media outlets, Gaddafi and the rest of us can count on it: the revolution will be trending and tweeted on Twitter, posted on Facebook and MySpace, texted on BlackBerry and iPhones, captured on the WorldWideWeb and the Blogosphere, and yes America, “The Revolution Will Be Televised!”

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com/. A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gil_Scott-Heron

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZvWt29OG0s&feature=fvwrel

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGaoXAwl9kw&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGaRtqrlGy8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XaD-FKIfYgk

http://www.truth-out.org/unrest-algeria-put-down-police67691

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/interactive/2011/feb/17/arab-world-protests-bahrain-map

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/16/world/middleeast/16diplomacy.html

http://healingiraq.blogspot.com/2011/02/unrest-in-iraq.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/05/world/middleeast/05jordan.html

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/114344/20110220/morocco.htm

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2665220/posts

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12320534

http://signalfire.org/?p=6844

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/27/AR2011012702082.html

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-01-15/ben-ali-s-tunisian-ouster-reverberates-through-middle-east.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klieg_light

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_social_networking_websites

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muammar_al-Gaddafi

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/5/20110221/twl-libya-violent-protests-paralyse-trip-3fd0ae9.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zine_El_Abidine_Ben_Ali

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosni_Mubarak

The Beam In Our Own Eye

2011-02-16T04:03:00.001-05:00

It's time to Break It Down!

I have been asked a number of times whether I will write about the recent turmoil in Egypt?

The short answer is I don’t know. The clash between the people of Egypt and the, by all accounts, ruthlessly oppressive 30-year Regime of President Hosni Mubarak, which ended February 11th, after 18 days of sometimes violent protests, was headline news here in America and around the world. Moreover, the Egyptian military’s decision to invoke martial law until elections are held in September ensures that Egypt will be an important story for the foreseeable future. With that said, “It could happen; but not today!”

The story that piqued my interest involves the Mississippi Division of Sons of Confederate Veterans and its efforts to persuade the Mississippi state legislature to enact a proposal to issue a license plate honoring Confederate General Nathan Bedford Forrest. The General, infamous in some circles, was also alleged to be a founder and first Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan. Known as a brilliant military strategist, Forrest is also cited as having led, or at least with condoning the Massacre at Fort Pillow, April 12 and 13, 1864. Most accounts submit that after an intense battle, the Union army surrendered, which left Rebel soldiers in complete and unchallenged control of the Fort. It is at that point the cold reality of war escalated from merely brutal to savage.

Fort Pillow was located on the Mississippi River, about 40 miles from Memphis, Tennessee. The Union soldiers manning the Fort consisted of 295 white troops, and 262 “Colored” troops. General Forrest attacked the Fort with a cavalry division of about 2,500 men. While the particulars are still subject to debate, the version most authorities support is that General Forrest and his Rebel troops slaughtered the remaining Union soldiers once they surrendered, dropped their weapons, and could no longer offer armed resistance. Nearly half of Union forces were blacks who were deemed runaway slaves, but there was no apparent bonus for being a white Union soldier. As one surviving Union army soldier, already badly wounded, reported, he asked a Rebel soldier who was firing at him to spare his life.

“No: damn you! You fight with niggers!”

The Rebel commenced to shoot him two more times.

General Forrest, a native Tennessean, built quite a legacy. It is understandable why some Americans would want to honor him. His litany of accolades includes:

• Confederate General

• Brilliant military strategist and tactician

• Founder and Original Grand Wizard, Ku Klux Klan

• Slave trader and owner

• Real Estate investor

• Wealthy planter (no doubt built upon the highly profitable fruits of his very low cost/therefore immensely lucrative Slaving business)

• Self-educated

• One of the few men in either of the Civil War armies to enlist as a private and be promoted to General

Mississippi gave us Trent Lott, who not too many years ago, lamented our nation’s failure to heed the segregationist message of Strom Thurmond. It is also the state where Haley Barbour, Mississippi’s 63rd Governor, noted, within the last 6 months, race relations in the South was not such a big deal when he was growing up. So, is it any surprise really, that in its efforts to commemorate the 150th Anniversary of the Civil War, which it refers to as “The War Between The States,” the Mississippi Division of the Sons of Confederate Veterans has chosen a man who merits cult status by white separatists, white nationalists, and segregationists everywhere?

I know a few Mississippians, some of whom would flatly reject this proposal; and who would say so. I do not know Governor Barbour, but apparently, he does not fall into that category. He has found it inconsistent with his way of doing things to repudiate this initiative. The Governor is listed by numerous observers as a prospective candidate for the 2012 GOP Nomination for President. Already it seems he is devising a uniquely telling line of campaign strategy. No doubt his would-be supporters are taking note. Are you?

Although he would not denounce the initiative to promote a license plate for General Forrest, he did predict the measure would never pass the Mississippi legislature. Whether that is his earnest opinion, or simply a coded rallying cry for those who support the idea is anyone’s guess.

Since I am not from Mississippi, and do not expect to live there in the future, I do not anticipate dwelling on this matter. However, as long as we are content to invest our collective righteous indignation in concern, dismay and disgust about the events that unfold in other nations around the globe…and I do that as much as the next person, it is fair to say I believe, lest we aim to be hypocrites, we should endeavor to focus on removing "The Beam From Our Own Eye” before we fixate on the mote in someone else’s. This initiative is the sort of thing that makes it completely understandable if those who study our culture wonder, "Is this yet another shining manifestation of that halcyon, but elusive concept, American Exceptionalism? Hope not; I’m just say’n!

I’m done; y’all holla back now!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com. A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosni_Mubarak

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathan_Bedford_Forrest

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haley_Barbour

http://www.scv.org/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/burns-strider/license-plates-heritage-a_b_823825.html

http://www.gazettenet.com/2011/02/11/trouble-stirs-miss-effort-honor-kkk-leader

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/02/will-haley-barbour-condemn-effort-to-honor-kkk-founder/71235/

http://michaelbenjamin2012.wordpress.com/2011/02/16/state-of-mississippi-to-honor-confederate-general-and-kkk-founder/

http://jonathanturley.org/2011/02/13/mississippi-sons-of-confederate-veterans-propose-license-plate-to-honor-civil-war-general-who-was-once-a-member-of-the-ku-klux-klan/

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110210/ap_on_re_us/us_confederate_license_plates

http://www.twincities.com/ci_17395242?nclick_check=1

http://www.myfoxatlanta.com/dpp/news/miss-gov-wont-denounce-confederate-license-plate-021511

http://www2.wnct.com/news/2011/feb/15/us-gov-wont-denounce-confederate-license-plate-ar-786509/

http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/2011/02/15/1461517/barbour-wont-denounce-confederate.html

http://www.coax.net/people/lwf/CW_FP.HTM

http://www.civilwarhome.com/ftpillow.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trent_Lott

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strom_Thurmond

Why Budget and Save? Because There Are No Money Fairies!

2011-02-09T03:52:00.000-05:00

It's time to Break It Down!

A few months ago a cousin asked me to blog about the value of budgeting, and its relation to wealth building. While it has taken me three months to get around to it, the topic never fell off my radar. Budgeting and saving are naturally interrelated and should be though of in tandem.

First off, I must begin with the unvarnished truth. For most people, saving alone, no matter how expertly or disciplined, will not create what we have come to think of in this Country as wealth. Let’s be clear, neither Bill Gates, nor Warren Buffett attained their spot in the Multi-Billionaires Club on the power of compound interest. For that matter, neither Henry Louis Gates, nor Jimmy Buffett landed where they are, fueled by interest income either.

But, let me not digress. This is not a discussion about the enterprising nature of the world’s wealthiest, most well-educated, or most musically gifted men; rather it is a brief, direct and simple advisory about steps almost anyone can take to improve their financial prospects for the future. I write, not from the perspective of a financial Guru, or even someone who claims to have it all figured out. These are just practical, common-sense observations and suggestions that have been cultivated by other sources, and that I believe warrant sharing.

America may be the Land of the free, and the home of the brave, but it is not an oasis of free-flowing milk and honey (emphasis on free), or even Universal Health Care. To wit, if you plan to eat regularly, and you want to be prepared for unforeseen catastrophes, be they health-related, or other-sourced, you may need to have budgeted and saved a few coins. It has been said that budgeting is a roadmap. An effective budget, which includes a disciplined savings plan, can ensure that you are able to better manage your expenses, both daily, and long-term.

It should be noted, that in order to devise a comprehensive budget, one must have a handle on regular, recurring expenses. One of the most frequent aversions to instituting and sticking to a budget is it is thought of as constraining confining, and constricting. Quite simply, budgets are often viewed as “Impediments that prevent me from acquiring that thing I want; whatever it might be.” This really is a case of needing an attitude adjustment…or perhaps more appropriately, re-thinking the matter. A more apropos reckoning about budgets is they are “Tools that enable me to acquire that thing I want…when I can afford it.”

That simple recasting of life’s panorama, changes ones outlook, instantly, from a powerless, woe-is-me victim, to, an empowered, in-control, master of your fate and Captain of your soul, man or woman. As New Age as it sounds, that simple transmutation of outlook reshapes both how one views the world, as well as how one is viewed by the world.

Did you ever contemplate why it is that people with money can almost always get a loan, while those who don’t find getting a loan a challenging endeavor? Somewhere in the hierarchy of Capitalism and Free Enterprise, a person charged with the authority/responsibility to make a lending decision is reviewing two loan applications and concluding:

• Person A has demonstrated they know how to budget, save, and manage money. If I approve this loan, based on this person’s history, my investment is likely to be safe, and will probably be returned to me with interest. Therefore, I will approve this loan request.

• Person B has not shown that they know how to manage money. It is clear they need a loan. However, even though I am authorized to approve their loan request, I am also responsible if they default. Therefore, I will not take that risk.

In reality, there is probably more to it than that; but not much more, most of the time, anyway. It behooves you to be Person A, rather than Person B; not just because you would be more likely to get a loan. You may also be less likely to need one in the first place. God bless the child who has his own.

It should be reasonably clear by now why it is important to devise a budget and initiate a savings plan. What could be more important? Sticking to the budget you devised, and the plan you initiated! The only way you reach you desired goals is to maintain, steadfastly, your budget and savings plan. Of course there will be temptations and emergencies. There may even be setbacks resulting from falling off the savings plan wagon. But none of these issues has to be completely disruptive.

The key to winning the ultimate prize, which should be debt-free living, or at least financial independence, is to never lose sight of your budget and savings planning commitment. Emergencies happen; deal with them. Beat back temptation, but when you decide you must yield, try and minimize the damage. In both cases, continue to save some, even if you are unable to set aside your full commitment. This is definitely a case where some is better than none. If you fall off the wagon and stop saving altogether, set a time in the future (the sooner the better) to re-start your plan. Finally, in all three cases, treat the amount you fell behind by as a loan, and make every effort to repay it. After all, you will be re-paying yourself!

The world is a very different place than it was just a few short decades ago. Generations X and Y are better educated, more mobile, and less interested in working on one job, or even in the same career for decades (which is good because jobs are changing more rapidly...or being eliminated). There are many consequences to this dynamic of change. One of the most critical, as it relates to the erstwhile Golden Years of Gen X and Y is the concept of pensions will likely be a thing of the past. They will be like Edsels (definitely a Boomer reference), or typewriters, or home-based telephone landlines; relics all. Pensions will be found only in reference books, or on whatever e-intelligence platform that replaces Google.

The offshoot of that development is it will be even more important to develop a passion and commitment for budgeting and saving. The importance of this endeavor as a stratagem to help prepare for the future cannot be over-emphasized. A catch phrase I heard throughout my career was, “It’s never too late to start saving.” While that notion may have had some truth to it, I would like to revise that sentiment for 21st Century Generations. My advice to you is, “It’s never too early to start saving.” You can bank on that!

So, “Why Budget and Save? Because There Are No Money Fairies!” I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com. A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://keep-your-cash.com/budgeting-is-your-roadmap-to-achieve-a-debt-free-life/

http://keep-your-cash.com/the-importance-of-budgeting/

http://keep-your-cash.com/how-to-stick-to-budget/

http://keep-your-cash.com/the-personal-daily-budget/

http://save-money-tips.net/

http://keep-your-cash.com/stick-to-it-to-save/

http://keep-your-cash.com/let-the-bad-press-on-the-economy-work-in-your-favor/

http://keep-your-cash.com/create-a-budget-%e2%80%93-keep-your-financial-house-in-order/

http://keep-your-cash.com/tips-for-buying-a-new-car/

http://keep-your-cash.com/budgeting-on-an-unknown-income/

http://keep-your-cash.com/budgeting-myths-and-reality/

http://keep-your-cash.com/top-six-factors-your-budgeting-success-depends-on/

http://keep-your-cash.com/tips-to-set-up-a-successful-budget/

http://keep-your-cash.com/four-steps-to-create-a-guilt-free-budget/

http://keep-your-cash.com/dont-waste-money-gambling/

And The Winner Is...Charlotte!

2011-02-02T03:31:00.000-05:00

It's time to Break It Down!

Roughly nineteen months, or about five hundred eighty days; that’s how long Charlotte and its boosters have to prepare to host the 2012 Democratic National Convention, the week of September 3, 2012 (Labor Day Week). Tim Kaine, Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chairman, and First Lady Michelle Obama made the announcement yesterday. Congratulations to Charlotte Mayor, Anthony Foxx and Duke Energy CEO, Jim Rogers, who Co-Chaired the City’s winning bid. The other three Finalists were Minneapolis, Cleveland, and St. Louis. Charlotte and St. Louis had been rumored to be the final pair for at least a couple of weeks.

There is a lot of excitement in and around the city, stemming from what is expected to be an economic boon to the community. Of course there are also detractors of the event. Some question the projected cost tag for putting on the event, which estimates have placed at $40 million. Most of that money will be raised privately, but you wouldn’t glean that if you read some of the feedback in the newspaper. You would also miss the projection that the Convention and related activities are expected to generate $150 million to $200 million in revenue.

Others have expressed more partisan concerns; it is after all a Political Party’s Convention, so there is a cadre of people who are naturally opposed to the convention, its prospective/eventual Nominees, and everything it stands for. That’s politics, American style.

In full disclosure, I should also add that as I read a few of the blogs and reader comments that follow lead stories in the local newspaper, I saw more than a few racially tinged zingers among the negative comments. It is way past time we stopped pretending that kind of thing no longer exits. No need to expand it beyond its rightful proportion, but, that brand of hatred and spitefulness still lives and thrives, and it does so in Charlotte.

Frankly, I view the decision as a huge win for the City and the community at large. For several days, the spotlight will shine on Charlotte, and that light will be not just regional, or even national, but global in its scope and focus. Journalists from around the world will flock to Charlotte to cover the Convention. The President and Vice President of the United States will be here, as will their wives and families. A myriad of other public officials will attend as 30,000 to 35,000 Delegates will conduct and execute the Party’s business, culminating with the Nomination Process, which is expected to result in choosing President Obama and Vice President Biden to seek re-election.

It is difficult to imagine Charlotte has ever had a single event that garnered more attention, nationally and internationally, than the Convention will. The round the clock media attention will elevate the City’s profile and stature, at least for the duration of the event. It is a unique opportunity for the Charlotte community to host and execute a truly World Class event. And, in the classic can-do spirit usually associated with the community, I expect “Our Town” will come through with flying colors.

Even though there will be inter-Party dissonance between now and the Convention, and the Convention is likely to ratchet up the noise to some degree, itself (The GOP Convention convenes in Tampa, August 27, 2012, a week earlier), several prominent local Republicans backed the initiative to bring the Convention to Charlotte. Jim Martin, a former Republican North Carolina Governor, and Richard Vinroot, a previous Charlotte Mayor, both promoted the Convention as good for the community.

They wrote in a Charlotte Observer opinion column, “We are proud Republicans. But we are also proud advocates of Charlotte and North Carolina, and believe that bringing the 2012 Democratic Convention to Charlotte represents an unprecedented economic development opportunity.”

In closing, no thorough discussion of the particulars surrounding the selection of Charlotte for the Convention could omit mention of the strategic impetus for the decision. The fact of the matter is President Obama won the State of North Carolina in 2008. He and Democratic leaders have made a calculated decision to compete for North Carolina and other Southern states in the 2012 Presidential Election. Ultimately, the President’s Southern Strategy factored heavily in the calculus that led the Committee to choose Charlotte. In other words, the votes are in, “And the Winner Is…Charlotte!”

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com. A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Democratic_National_Convention

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/02/01/2027540/charlotte-wins-2012-dem-convention.html

http://charlottein2012.com/2011/02/01/charlotte-to-host-2012-democratic-national-convention/

http://www.indyweek.com/citizen/archives/2011/02/01/its-charlotte-2012-democratic-national-convention-coming-to-nc

http://www.bizjournals.com/triangle/blog/2011/02/reports-dnc-headed-to-charlotte.html

http://www2.independenttribune.com/news/2011/feb/01/charlotte-lands-2012-democratic-national-conventio-ar-744158/

http://www.wcnc.com/news/local/Mayor-relationship-with-President-helped-land-convention-115048139.html

http://www.ksdk.com/news/article/241642/3/Charlotte-lands-2012-DNC

http://my927charlotte.com/national/my927info/charlotte-lands-dnc-2012-convention

http://www.wral.com/news/local/politics/story/9037269/

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2011/02/democratic-national-convention-2012-to-be-held-in-charlotte-nc.html

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0211/48588.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Kaine

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Foxx

http://www.duke-energy.com/about-us/leaders/jim-rogers.asp

http://www.wbtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=13950892

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Biden

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelle_Obama

http://www.zimbio.com/Malia+Obama/pictures/pro

http://www.baltimoresun.com/topic/politics/sasha-obama-PECLB004381.topic

http://www.wcnc.com/news/local/Charlotte-to-host-2012-Democratic-National-Convention-115011824.html

"The Future is Ours to Win!"

2011-01-26T04:20:00.003-05:00

It's time to Break It Down!

So, did you tune out an hour or two of your regular TV viewing to catch the State of the Union (SOTU) Address last night? Chances are, unless you are a die-hard political junkie, a zealously committed Democrat, or an African American fighting the good fight to give POTUS the respect and support you believe lots of Americans decline to provide him, probably not. In fact I know individuals who fall into one, two, and in a few cases, all three of those categories, who opted out.

Many feel the soaring rhetoric never equates to practical application, execution, and follow-through; moreover, they believe they can catch one of the myriad recapitulations and get as much from the digest form as they would have gleaned from the roughly 90-minute investment of the processional, the speech, and the recessing. And then of course, there was the matter of the Republican rebuttal. Forgive me, I mean Response. And this year, one would also have needed to factor in the (GOP) Tea Party Response, which as Representative Bachmann, Minnesota, insisted, was not meant to compete with the GOP Response, which was delivered by Representative Paul Ryan, Wisconsin.

Since I did watch all three, in fact, the SOTU Address became today’s subject by default. I have included a link to the Transcript below; in the event you want to review some portion of it, or in case you missed it altogether, but hanker for your own personal copy. I have also provided a link to Representative Ryan’s Response, as well as one for that of Representative Bachmann. Feel free to thrill and amaze your friends with impromptu, pointed, comparative analyses of the three addresses. That is not what I will be doing. In fact, I will not mention the Responses again.

Having included a link for the SOTU Address, I will attempt to summarize a few major points, in a much more concise fashion than usual. President Obama proclaimed, “The future is ours to win!” He then spent the next hour detailing just how to go about prevailing. In answer to the question, “How do we get there,” he declared, the roadmap is, “Out innovate, out educate, and out build our competitors.”

In a metaphor that a number of news analysts have had fun with, President Obama referenced a period, near the end of the first decade of the Cold War Era, when the Soviet Union launched Sputnik, the first satellite to orbit the earth. In his bold response to that challenge, President Kennedy announced that we would be the first nation to land on the moon. Eight years later, July 20, 1969, the crew of Apollo 11, Astronauts Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin, and Michael Collins orbited the noon. Armstrong and Aldrin landed, while Collins remained in orbit. President Obama suggested that we view our current position as the equivalent of a Sputnik Moment; saying, in effect, we may be behind, but the race is not over…and when it is, we will win.

As you may be aware, Mr. Obama and his Party endured what he personally called, “a shellacking,” in the November Elections. The GOP-T Party added 63 seats in the House of Representatives, a turnabout of historic proportions. They also significantly closed the margin in the Senate. Since November, the President has spent a great deal of time and energy re-casting himself, and to an extent the Democratic Party. As analysts note, he has pivoted to the Center. In doing so, he has managed to engender a substantial rebound in poll numbers, moving from a low Approval Rating of 41% to a current number of 55%.

His speech last night continued his repositioning. He argued repeatedly that in order to move the Country forward, Democrats and Republicans must work together. In the wake of recent events, including the tragic shootings in Tucson, Arizona that killed six, and wounded Representative Gabrielle Giffords, and others, the President and Congress have largely promoted toning down the decibel level, and the derisiveness of the rhetoric. In an effort to promote movement in this direction, many Senators and Representatives eschewed their normal pattern of seating, divided by Party, and intentionally sat next to a member(s) of the opposing Party. For his part, the President did not raise the issue of the shooting as a talking point.

In citing examples of what he proposed, or would do in the coming year, President Obama called for a 5-Year freeze on domestic spending, and continued by recommending that we:

• Eliminate oil subsidies

• Use the savings to invest in clean energy

• Win the race to educate our kids (currently 9th in proportion of young people w/college degrees)

• Replace No Child Left Behind with Race to the Top

• Encourage Youth to become teachers; your Country needs you

• Make higher education available to every American

• Stop expelling talented young people who could help rebuild America

• Invest in high speed rail

• Simplify the tax code

• Eliminate regulations that unfairly burden business

• Let’s make government live within its means, but not on the backs of those most vulnerable

• Insisted we cannot make permanent the tax cuts for the wealthy

• Make government not just more affordable, but more competent; more efficient

• Draft a bill to merge, consolidate, & reorganize the Federal Government

• Proposed transparency & openness in government, Congress, & the White House

• Promised to veto bills with earmarks

In closing, the President maintained our destiny is our choice, & said we will win the future by doing big things. CNN, which often conducts snap polling after the President speaks, did so last night, and reported several numbers.

Of Americans who watched the speech:

• 77% said they were more optimistic

• 19% said they were more pessimistic

• 52% had a very positive response

• 32% had a somewhat positive response

• 15% had a negative response

• 68% said President Obama will succeed in improving the economy

• 61% said President Obama will reduce the deficit

• 57% said President Obama will succeed in creating jobs

• 61% thought President Obama would move the Country in the right direction before the speech

• 77% thought President Obama moved the Country in the right direction after the speech

• 61% said President Obama will succeed in increasing cooperation between the Parties

• 70% said President Obama’s speech was about right

• 23% said President Obama’s speech was too liberal

• 5% said President Obama’s speech was not liberal enough

• 90% said it was a good idea for Democrats and Republicans to sit together

• 7% said it was a bad idea for Democrats and Republicans to sit together

I identified likely viewers at the outset, but for those who prefer a more sober, analytical depiction, the survey included a sample of 475 viewers; 39% of whom were Democrats, 19% Republicans. As such, the sample was nine to ten points more Democratic than the population as a whole. A similar CNN Poll assessing last year's SOTU Address was comprised by 38% Democrats and 25% Republicans. The poll does not purport to be scientific; rather, merely a reflection of the opinions of those who viewed the speech. This skewing is a common occurrence, depending upon the President's Party. President Bush’s SOTU Addresses produced similar relatively high favorable responses for the same reason; a higher percentage of Republican viewers.

There you have it; the play-by-play, and the numbers behind the SOTU Address. President Obama has declared, “The Future is Ours to Win!” My closest Republican confidante has conceded the speech was “A++, but like most grand plans, the Devil is in the details.” I agreed; what do you think?

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com. A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/State_of_the_Union/state-of-the-union-2011-full-transcript/story?id=12759395

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJDDxO5rIv0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcHgpVyA6_Q

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Biden

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Boehner

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Ryan_(politician)

http://www.npr.org/2011/01/25/133227396/transcript-gop-response-from-rep-paul-ryan

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kA4H88lk0Yk

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michele_Bachmann

http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/01/25/sotu.response.bachmann/

http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/01/25/sotu.response.bachmann/index.html

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2011/01/cnn_justifies_airing_bachmann.html

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/01/25/cnn-poll-more-than-half-of-speech-watchers-have-very-positive-reaction/

"WWMD?"

2011-01-19T05:54:00.000-05:00

It's time to Break It Down!

Monday was the 25th Anniversary of the initial observance of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Holiday (MLK DAY). After a quarter century of inculcation into the very fabric of our society, it may be largely forgotten that the conceptualization, submission and continual resubmission of the idea, the enactment, and the gradual national observance, was not the product of universal acceptance of a grand and enlightened concept, but rather, was emblematic of the civil rights struggle itself; steeped in controversy, and the eventual victory of a relentless movement to achieve richly deserved, and long overdue social justice.

Several members of Congress, and a number of states, and even a President, using a host of creative means, sought to undermine, outmaneuver, sabotage, subvert, and otherwise derail the efforts of the measure’s proponents. Ultimately, the movement was consolidated, snowballed, and would simply not be denied.

The effort to create a King Holiday was started by U.S. Representative John Conyers, Michigan, shortly after Dr. King’s death, in the spring of 1968. It was first introduced in the House of Representatives in 1979, but fell 5 votes short of the number for passage in the Lower Chamber.

High profile opponents to the measure included Senator Jesse Helms, NC, Senator John McCain, AZ, and President Ronald Reagan. Both Senators voted against the bill, and Senator McCain publicly supported Arizona Governor Evan Mecham for his rescission of MLK Day as a State Holiday in Arizona. The campaign however, reached a critical mass in the early 1980’s. Spurred on by Stevie Wonder penning a song in King’s honor called, “Happy Birthday,” a petition drive to support the campaign would attract over 6 million signatures. It has been called the largest petition in favor of an issue in U.S. History.

Buttressed by what had become a wildly successful public campaign, Congress soon followed suit. The proposal passed in the House by a vote of 338-90, and in the Upper Chamber by a vote of 78-22. Given the dimensions of this overwhelming support, in the form of bicameral veto-proof votes, President Reagan signed the provision November 2, 1983, and it became Federal Law. The first observance under the new law took place January 20, 1983, rather than on January 15th, Dr. King’s birthday. A compromise in the legislation specified that the observance take place on the Third Monday in January.

Of course, that was not the end of the story. It would actually take more than 30 after Dr. King’s death before the Holiday was fully adopted and observed in all 50 states. Illinois holds the distinction of being the first State to adopt MLK Day as a State Holiday, having done so in 1973. Twenty years later, in 1993, for the first time, some form of MLK Day was held in each of the 50 States. It was not until 2000 that South Carolina Governor Jim Hodges signed a bill to make MLK Day a paid holiday for State employees; giving the Palmetto State the dubious distinction of being the last of the 50 States to do so. However, Mississippi also sets itself apart by designating the Third Monday in January as a shared Holiday the honors the memory of Robert E. Lee and Dr. King…two fine southern gentlemen.

So with that extensive preamble, I give you the issue of the day. This year, the convergence of a series of perfect winter storm systems bludgeoned the South and Eastern United States during the weeks leading up to the King Holiday. Part of the collateral damage emanating from these storms was wide-spread school closings, especially in the South, including parts of Georgia, Tennessee, South Carolina, and North Carolina.

In an effort to reformat the remainder of the school year, while minimizing over all disruption to School Calendars, a number of School Administrators discussed, and/or chose to eliminate the MLK Holiday, and program the day as a “Make-up Day.” These conversations, especially those leading to decisions to cancel the Holiday, proved to be controversial, and highly charged. It does not help that in many Southern school districts, there has been a level of retrenchment that many parents, families, and human rights organizations believe is tantamount to re-segregating the districts.

So I ask you, “What Would Martin Do?” (WWMD?)

I am not going to indulge in intellectual hubris, and pretend I know the answer to the aforementioned query. Instead, I will apply a couple of basic pragmatic considerations, and share my version of common sense. First, it is no secret; the efficacy of the American Education System is in question. By most accounts, American students, our children, are in trouble. A Google search of “Shortcomings of the American Educational System” produces 28, 400,000 results. Do not worry I am not about to recount them for you.

The point is from the White House, to the State House, to the School House, the calls for reforming the American System of Education resound clearly, loudly, and incessantly. Almost every depiction of what is required for America to regain its mojo and reach its potential includes some version of enhancing the level and quality of education that we provide to our students.

In that light, I believe we are missing, not only the larger point, but we are also missing a unique opportunity, if we allow ourselves to get “stuck,” quibbling over the alleged unfairness, inequality, or racial bias of administrators having declared MLK Day a school day. Even “if,” any or all of those notions were accurate, and I am not certain they were, our forbears prided themselves in rising above those challenges, and excelling in spite of them. Given all of our advantages, relative to our ancestors, it is incumbent upon us to do the same…and more!

We should have leveraged the construct of MLK Day as a Day of Service, and enhanced it to make it a Day of Service and Education. There are many studies that suggest the longer students stay away from their regular studies and study habits, the more ground they lose. Has it not occurred to anyone that is the last thing we or they need? It was both important, and apropos to have school on MLK Day because that was the next “First Day Available” to conduct the Make-up Day. By taking advantage of that option, the students, for whom education is designed for, and whom should derive the greatest direct benefit, receive the highest and best use from a necessary evil; the inclusion of a Make-up Day. Naturally, all of society reaps the rewards of their immediate increased potential.

Now, I am not a medium or a spiritualist, so I do not profess to have conducted a séance with Dr. King; nor am I an educator, and I have not polled teachers or administrators. I am just a guy who is a perpetual student…of life, and that is how I see it. So if you were to ask me, “WWMD?” My answer is, in his most Reverend voice, Dr. King would implore us not to get “stuck,” quibbling over the alleged unfairness, inequality, or racial bias of administrators having declared MLK Day a school day. He would add, “I Have A Dream" that one day, down in Georgia, Tennessee, South Carolina, and North Carolina, black boys and black girls will join with white boys and white girls, and with Latino boys and Latina girls, and with Asian boys and Asian girls, and they will all get the quality education that they deserve, irrespective of their color, or their culture, or whether January 17th is a School “Make-up Day.”

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com. A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King,_Jr.

http://www.infoplease.com/spot/mlkhistory1.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King,_Jr._Day

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/01/12/1973425/schools-get-flak-for-makeup-day.html

http://www.wbtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=13839930

http://www.wbtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=13815722

http://www.wistv.com/Global/story.asp?S=13839930

http://www.foxcharlotte.com/news/top-stories/Controversy-over-Classes-on-MLK-Day-113857594.html

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2011/01/15/Weather-creates-ML-King-Day-controversy/UPI-51471295116770/

http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/7889649-snowday-makeup-in-tennessee-causes-controversy-should-schools-open-on-mlk-holiday

http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-national/martin-luther-king-jr-holiday-cancelled-at-some-schools

http://www.polijam.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=50864:weather-creates-ml-king-day-controversy&catid=:us

http://coastal.news14.com/content/top_stories/635270/mlk-day-used-as-snow-make-up-day-sparks-controversy/

http://www.allvoices.com/partner/ap/news/7917530-obamas-mark-king-holiday-with-service-at-dc-school

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelle_Obama

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_of_Barack_Obama

http://www.baltimoresun.com/topic/politics/malia-obama-PECLB004380.topic

http://www.baltimoresun.com/topic/politics/sasha-obama-PECLB004381.topic

Traumatic Terror in Tucson

2011-01-12T05:46:00.000-05:00

It's time to Break It Down!

President Obama will visit Tucson today. In preparation for his visit, I can only assume he spent at least a portion of last night reading Dickens. To satisfy any portion of the Left, Right, and/or Center, his speech, at the University of Arizona, will avail, if nothing else, an unforgiving test of “Great Expectations.” The tragic events that transpired last weekend in Tucson, which resulted in a gunman shooting 19 people, killing 6 of them, and seriously wounding U.S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords, serve as the horrific backdrop for Mr. Obama’s next big speech.

Critics and pundits alike have already identified what he must do to be successful. It is quite clear, unless all sides agree to concede ground; the principals will all come away mouthing the famous Jagger lyrics, “I Can’t Get No Satisfaction.” Of course, as is the norm in contemporary American society, some have already declared his effort a failure. But really, this is not the President’s story. Rather, it is about the pain, suffering, and in 6 cases, the untimely demise of the victims.

There has been an active debate, and the usual finger-pointing with the intent to identify who is responsible for the senseless acts of violence put upon unsuspecting victims attending a “Congress on the Corner” event. Citizens came out to meet, greet, and engage their local District Congresswoman. It was a simple Saturday in Tucson; or so they thought. In fact, nothing could be further from the truth. It was, instead, a life altering, and in some cases, a life ending outing.

The dispute revolves around the immediate assertion by the Left that Sarah Palin, the Tea Party Movement, and Conservative Republicans have so toxically infused contemporary political discourse that it led to Saturday’s massacre. The Right, in turn has accused the Left of politicizing the tragedy, and quite naturally, of falsely attributing to Ms. Palin, and the GOP-T Party, any responsibility whatsoever, for the shootings.

There is more, not surprisingly. Gun Control supporters insist that Arizona’s lax gun laws contributed to the tragedy. The gun lobby, the NRA, and extollers of the Second Amendment above all others, have responded on cue; not only do guns not kill people, the only logical antidote to gun violence is more guns. In other words, as one spokesperson put it, if Representative Giffords’ staff had been armed, and/or if members of the crowd had been carrying guns, it is unlikely that 19 people would have been shot before the gunman was brought down. Draw your own inferences!

Another tapestry unfolding in the backdrop is the ongoing Immigration controversy that is roiling the State of Arizona. It is clear that some citizens of this border state feel threatened by the assimilation of “too many” of their neighbors form the South. Arizona, one of only 3 States, along with Alaska, and Vermont, permits anyone over the age of 21 to carry a concealed weapon without a background check. To them a gun is the ultimate “great equalizer;” the one thing that enables a person to feel safe.

Finally, there is one other dynamic that may be difficult for some to fathom. Arizona is a part of the historic “Old Wild West.” Representative Giffords’ District, specifically, includes the town of Tombstone, the O.K. Corral, and Cochise County. So the legacy of gun fights and the ghosts of Virgil, Morgan, and Wyatt Earp evoke proud memories. Representative Giffords, who owns a Glock 9mm, has incorporated references to this heritage in her stump speeches. She also opposed tighter controls on owning weapons, and on renewing a ban on assault weapons.

So how did Sarah Palin and the GOP-T Party even enter this conversation? The question, though an apt one, has a tortuous answer. Ms. Giffords, considered a moderate Democrat, supported the Health Care Reform initiative. In response, Ms. Palin placed a map on her website showing 20 Congressional Districts, denoted by gun sights, which she called bulls’ eyes. Below the map appeared 20 corresponding names, including that of Representative Giffords. Those who defend Ms. Palin say the graphic was strictly metaphoric…and perhaps it was. Who knows?

Media reports note this is not the first time that Representative Giffords has been threatened. Her local office was ransacked shortly after the Health Care vote. Moreover, during a gathering in the summer of 2009, similar to Saturday’s, an attendee dropped a gun on the floor. The Congresswoman reported later, “At no point did I ever feel in danger, and at no point did I ever feel there was a problem.” With that outlook, it was probably even more difficult for her to envision what unfolded four days ago.

What authorities do know is:

• A young man named Jared Lee Loughner shot the Representative in the head from point blank range with a Glock 19 9mm

• He continued shooting others

• His shots resulted killing 6 persons (including, a Chief aid to the Representative, a Federal Judge, and, ironically as it turns out, a 9-year old girl who was born September 11, 2001)

• Representative Giffords seems likely to survive; which under the circumstances should probably be deemed a miracle

• Mr. Loughner’s background has been scrutinized thoroughly, and he is characterized as troubled

• Reports suggest he is likely mentally unstable, and may have drug issues

• Authorities say Judy Clarke will represent Loughner; she has represented or counseled: 911 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui, Oklahoma City bombing conspirator Timothy McVeigh, Unabomber Theodore Kaczynski, Atlanta Olympic Bomber Eric Rudolph, and South Carolina murderer of her own toddlers, Susan Smith

In reality, there is a substantial amount of damning evidence that suggests Sarah Palin and her associates’ rhetoric influenced on the events that unfolded in Tucson last weekend. However, it is circumstantial, and far from conclusive.

It is my opinion that Ms. Palin has contributed her fair share to the deterioration of civility in the exchange of political ideas. But let’s not pretend that politics has ever been anything other than a rough and tumble sport. Recall that Vice President Alexander Hamilton’s death resulted from dueling former Secretary of the Treasury, Aaron Burr, on Jul 11, 1804. Today’s incendiary talk, while lacking in grace and tact, absolutely does not constitute an all time low; far from it. So, let’s not over reach, and in so doing, give Ms. Palin more credit…or blame, than she is due.

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com/. A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gabrielle_Giffords

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_E._Kelly

http://judgepedia.org/index.php/John_Roll

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/01/report-giffords-staffer-gabe-zimmerman-among-the-dead.php

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/us-politics/8249178/Arizona-shooting-dead-Dorwan-Stoddard.html

http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/7832686-rip-christina-taylor-green-born-on-911-died-today-by-a-gunmans-hand

http://www.legacy.com/ns/obituary.aspx?n=dorothy-morris&pid=147730607&ua=snuxgqk%2Btjuw2mfaoloemq%3D%3D

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jan/09/nation/la-na-phyllis-schneck-20110110

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jared_Lee_Loughner

http://www.remtek.com/arms/glock/model/9/19/

http://ashleyfmiller.wordpress.com/2011/01/08/sarah-palins-target-list-and-the-assassination-of-gabrielle-giffords/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/11/obama-arizona-speech-to-h_n_807694.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-powell/arizona-is-america_b_806449.html

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2011/01/09/2011-01-09_palin_put_a_target_on_her_she_should_have_known_the_dangers.html

http://ashleyfmiller.wordpress.com/2011/01/08/sarah-palins-target-list-and-the-assassination-of-gabrielle-giffords/

http://www.npr.org/2011/01/10/132764367/congresswoman-shot-in-arizona

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_congresswoman_shot

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40978517/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/08/arizona-congresswoman-reportedly-shot-public-event/

http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheat-sheet/item/arizona-congresswoman-gabrielle-giffords-shot-in-arizona/developing/

http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/politics&id=7887034

http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/2011/01/08/breaking-rep-gabrielle-giffords-d-az-shot-at-public-event/

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/09/us/politics/09giffords.html

http://www.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/01/11/photos.az.shooting.victims/index.html?hpt=T2

http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/01/11/political.rhetoric/index.html?hpt=T2

http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2011/01/11/how-can-pres-obama-use-tucson-shootings-to-unite-country/?hpt=T2

http://www.startribune.com/politics/113158859.html

http://www.aolnews.com/2011/01/10/judy-clarke-who-defended-the-unabomber-will-represent-jared/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zacarias_Moussaoui

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_McVeigh

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Kaczynski

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Robert_Rudolph

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_Smith

"Truth, Crushed to Earth, Shall Rise Again!"

2011-01-05T04:15:00.000-05:00

It's time to Break It Down!

As one popular saying goes, “Everything is big in Texas.” Apparently, that includes the list of persons convicted of crimes they did not commit, who have later been exonerated, based on DNA evidence that proves their innocence. That list grew larger by one yesterday, when district court Judge Don Adams told Cornelius Dupree, Jr., “You’re free to go.”

Mr. Dupree was imprisoned in 1980 as a result of his conviction on rape and robbery charges in 1979, and served 30 years of a 75-year sentence. He had at least two opportunities to have his sentence reduced and to make parole, had he admitted to being a sex offender. He consistently refused to do so.

When asked about his refusal to act to speed up his release by admitting guilt, he said, “Whatever your truth is, you have to stick with it.” His clear-eyed resoluteness spoke volumes. It principally underscored, that regardless of the verdict, he knew he was innocent; but also showed a dispassionate understanding that had he admitted guilt for a crime he did not commit, the quest to prove his innocence would instantly and irreversibly lose its righteous fervor. Those who believed in him and his cause would have reason to doubt. As Mohandas (Mahatma = Great Soul) Gandhi said, “Truth stands, even if there be no public support. It is self-sustained.” Fortunately, Mr. Dupree embraced that construct.

The State of Texas has freed 41 inmates since 2001 because DNA evidence proved their innocence; more such exonerations than in any other state. Of the 41 inmates freed, 21 have come from Dallas County. That is an amazing, almost stupefying statistic, at least until the underlying reasons are revealed. Dallas County, unlike jurisdictions virtually anywhere else in the nation, has maintained DNA evidence dating back decades after convictions. The exoneration process has been aided further because current Dallas County District Attorney (D.A.) Craig Watkins, the first black D.A. in Texas history, has cooperated with Innocence Projects to reopen cases to facilitate review of relevant DNA evidence.

Dupree’s 30 years served give him the distinction of having done more time for a crime that was proved later he did not commit, than anyone in Texas. In fact, only two inmates in the Country have served longer before being exonerated due to DNA evidence; James Bain spent 35 years in a Florida prison, and Lawrence McKinney spent 31 years in a Tennessee penitentiary.

In 2009, after dozens of wrongly convicted inmates were related during the decade, the Texas Legislature enacted a law to compensate those wrongly imprisoned, that is the most generous in the nation. Under the provisions of the law, Mr. Dupree is eligible to receive $80,000 for each year he was jailed, plus a lifetime annuity. The $2.4 million dollar lump sum payment would not be subject to federal income tax. On its face, that sounds like a huge windfall. Yet, who among those who have never been imprisoned would trade a year of freedom for $80K? Multiply that by 30 years; if you could turn back the clock, assuming you are 22 or older, would you agree to go to prison, with the understanding that if you lived 30 years, at the end of that period you would receive $2.4 million with no federal tax, plus an annuity? Mr. Dupree had no such assurances of course, but suppose you did; deal or no deal? I am curious. Please feel free to write your response and rationale in the comment section if your answer is yes.

The cases of Cornelius Dupree, Jr., James Bain, and Lawrence McKinney are troubling, individually, and collectively. That the American system of jurisprudence is subject to such egregious errors is problematic, in and of itself. This post centers on Texas, but Mr. Bain, and Mr. McKinney were from Florida, and Tennessee, respectively, so as big and bodacious as the great State of Texas is, this is not an issue unique to The Long Horn State.

Beyond the fact that such cases of mistaken identity, rush to judgment, and convict at all costs occur at all, the fact that the individuals who have served the three longest wrongly convicted sentences in America, happen to all be black men, is abhorrent, and provocative. It is another of those damning statistics that suggest blacks in this Country often fail to receive equal treatment under the law. But I digress. It would take several posts to adequately address that topic.

Moreover, in keeping with my 2011 Mantra, “Less is more,” this is where I put a pin in today’s conversation. In his poem, The Battle-Field, William Cullen Bryant asserted, “Truth, crushed to the earth, shall rise again!” Cornelius Dupree spoke truth to power, saw it crushed, waited, prayed, and litigated; 30 years later, it rose again.

The good news is he lived to hear Judge Adams utter the phrase, “You’re free to go.” I am happy that Mr. Dupree will receive a measure of compensation for the injustice that was wrought upon him. Still, it is hard to imagine the emotional pain and suffering he endured, and equally challenging to fathom the resultant scarring that he will carry for the duration of his life. Nevertheless, “it is what it is.” My hope is that Cornelius Dupree takes a page from (Karl Paul) Reinhold Niebuhr’s Serenity Prayer: “May God grant him the serenity to accept the things he cannot change, the courage to change the things he can, and the wisdom to know the difference.” From all indications, he is way ahead of me on that.

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com/. A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Cullen_Bryant

http://www.bartleby.com/102/23.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Scheck

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innocence_Project

http://www.innocenceproject.org/know/Browse-Profiles.php

http://www.dallascourts.com/forms/frmCtsCrimCDC.asp?court=2

http://www.dallasda.com/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Craig_Watkins

http://blogs.dallasobserver.com/unfairpark/2011/01/dallas_court_officially_declar.php

http://blackmeninamerica.blogspot.com/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/04/cornelius-dupree-jr-prove_n_804010.html

http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=1G1GGLQ_ENUS390&=&q=cornelius+dupree&aq=f&oq=#q=cornelius+dupree&hl=en&rlz=1G1GGLQ_ENUS390&prmd=ivnsuo&source=univ&tbs=nws:1&tbo=u&ei=Tu0jTaWGNMWclgfDrLyTDA&sa=X&oi=news_group&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CCEQqAIwAA&fp=402f87a5aaec04db

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/01/04/132650399/dna-evidence-clears-texas-man-who-spent-30-years-in-prison

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40909822/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/

http://www.tampabay.com/news/courts/dna-evidence-frees-james-bain-from-prison-after-35-years/1059473

http://www.newschannel5.com/story/11403184/dna-results-prove-innocence-for-man-behind-bars?redirected=true

"Times Gone By!"

2010-12-29T02:46:00.001-05:00

It's time to Break It Down!

Happy New Year; Auld Lang Syne, my friends!

Since we are still in the Sweet Spot of the holidays, once again I shall practice minimalism. For your purposes, that means the blog should be available, but not intrusive. To that end, I am taking a page from last week, but going a step further. Instead of a concert, I give you a song…of reflection.

Robert Burns, a Scot, wrote a poem (Auld Lang Syne) in 1788 that has come to symbolize the spirit of mass contemplation that people around the world invoke as the clock strikes midnight, signaling not just the dawn of a new day, but of a new year. Undoubtedly, you have been somewhere, at sometime, when you joined those assembled to sing Auld Lang Syne, which loosely translated means, Times gone by.

Once again, that time is upon us. After thoughtful reflection on my 2010, I have had no choice but to conclude, my travails have been few and small, especially when compared to my blessings, which have been both abundant and vast! All praises to the one true, omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient God; a mighty fortress is He.

No need to thank me for my inherent thoughtfulness. But, by all means, “Drink a cup of kindness,” or eggnog, or Champagne, or “name your favorite adult beverage,” for me. And, if you are a teetotaler, water will do nicely, thank-you!

As I complete my last post for this year, and, prayerfully and faithfully prepare to embrace 2011, I leave with you this familiar Irish Toast:

May the road rise up to meet you.
May the wind always be at your back.
May the sun shine warm upon your face,
and rains fall soft upon your fields.
And until we meet again,
may God hold you in the palm of His hand.

I invite you to click on the link below, which leads to a Smooth Jazz interpretation of Auld Lang Syne, arranged and performed by Donnie Thomas (and listen to the remainder of this week’s edition of Break It Down:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bffBdmlf0Wo

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com. A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bffBdmlf0Wo

http://tlc.howstuffworks.com/family/question279.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auld_Lang_Syne

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweet_spot