Young Politics...what do young Americans think?

Politics of life

2009-06-09T10:11:00.002-04:00

I have been thinking a lot lately about life. In particular, I have been thinking a lot about people and the type of people that I want in my life. Its funny how political all of this stuff is. From the very beginning of this blog I have firmly believed that politics is in everything that we do and experience. I don't mean the same kind of politics that a politician uses to get elected in office, but I mean politics in a more decision-outcome kind of way.

For a long time now, I been people watching. In my watching I have come to some conclusions about people and their actions. This in turn led me to think more critically about the politics of life. What are the politics of life?

In short, I think the politics of life are a set of behaviors, outcomes and experiences that define a person's existence. We all are governed by our likes and dislikes. We decide to do what we like, enjoy, understand etc. In that way of governance we often consider options, and choices since we have free will to do so. When we consider options and choices we play the political game. Which outcome will give me the most bang for my buck. Which lifestyle choice will give me the most bang for my buck. Which person or people in my life will give me the most bang for my buck. The thing that changes for many people is what exactly is the bang? For some it may be happiness, others it may be money and fame.

This is where all of the politics comes in. The politics that I have been thinking about the most is people. Who really matters when "it" matters. Do people really only like to receive and just use giving as another way to position themselves to receive? As you play your politics of life, really consider the people you surround yourself with. There are a number of people in my life I am slowly weeding out. The constant negativity and hate really is poison to the mind.

I am at a real watershed moment in my life. I think now more than ever, it is time to let some people go. I feel good about letting them go. Sometimes dead weight is not worth carrying anymore. Here goes my people politics and for me, at this moment, its about being happy and walking the right path.

Inauguration Times

2009-01-16T17:53:00.003-05:00

Washington, DC--the political epicenter of the United States is about to be hit hard with literally millions of people itching to catch a glimpse of Obama's right hand over his heart and left hand raised repeating the words "I do so solemnly swear...". With the expected frigid temperature, long lines, crowded streets, and heavy traffic citizens and their euphorics have descended onto the nations capital with the mere hopes of simply being apart of history.

It means more to people to actually say that they were there, than to remain comfortable and safe within the confinements of their own home. One thing is for sure, Washington, DC will not be the same after this Tuesday January 20, 2009. It is indeed a remarkable coming that the history of this nation has yet to experience. I am certain that this will go beyond the boundaries of the US but become a salient force across the world.

At this point DC locals like myself have began to prepare to either reap a heavy harvest from the millions of people coming into the district, or lock themselves within their homes to avoid all of the commotion caused by the influx. Most have given up their homes for large amounts of money, set up businesses, or among the many selling Obama relics. I don't think Obama really knows how much his face is worth on the street. At least we know his real human face is worth 4 million people, packed hotels, booked flights, and parties every night.

Enjoy these days in Washington, DC, be ready to spend money, live in the moment don't let the moment pass with out taking one for the "yes we can". As you find your way around the city, spend loads of money in a recession, and yell at the guy for cutting you off, remember that this experience sets the tone for the rest of the year. Be here and be beautiful!

A new year...A new politics

2008-12-26T00:29:00.004-05:00

It is interesting to notice how with a new year comes new personalities, new thoughts, new goals and what do ya know....new politics. The inspiring, new year's resolutions, often help people to set the tone for how they will begin the year. You don't often hear of new year's resolutions centered around politics. If I had to come up with a new years political resolution it would be: To begin, maintain, refine a consistent political standard.

What do i mean by this? Well, most poltical pundits play the political game. The game entails making strategic moves that are not always consistent but yield the desired results. Democrat and republican pundits are not consistent in their moves or their strategy. They move to win. What scares most outsiders away from politics all together is the common theme that "politics is soured". I propose that by establishing a consistent political standard then people would fear it less. The standard, ideally would be positive, transparent and honorable. Of course there are ways to protect the political moves seeing as how most people decide not to reveal their next move. It the behind the scenes cowardly, unsophisticated, aloof thinking that worries most. This can be dealt with by setting a standard.

One of the greatest lines in a recent movie came from Tyler Perry's the family that preys. Kathy Bates, arguably one of the best actresses to hit the stage, said the following line to her son during a conversation "It's not you I don't trust, darling. It's your private thoughts that give me pause."

This line conveys the true sentiments that most people share with politicians. The inner thoughts that make people pause. Politcs was never meant to be so secretive, so furtive. It was not until post cold war era in the US that people began to realize the power of hidden politics. Now they have become irritating.

This new politics will assert the very notion that secret politics will not always win. Barack Obama set a political standard, albeit a very high one...a political standard nonetheless. It must be consistent. So as you begin to renew your prior year's vows to live a better life or whether you make new ones, just remember to set a standard, refine what standards you already hold, and seek untainted, consistent politics.

Normalcy never again part 2

2008-11-06T23:37:00.004-05:00

On August 28, 1963 a speech that rang loud in the hearts and minds of many Americans told a story of hope. This story was one that idealized the power of man to believe in the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things unseen.

The power of one man to believe that Jim Crow's relentless choke hold would weaken due to mere words, was something unforeseen in this, civil rights era. Today mere words have become an anthem that elected the first ever African American to the seat of what one could argue is the most powerful nation in the world.

The hour of victory is upon us. This marks the moment of reckoning. Today in history your belief in hope helped to elect Barack Obama president of these United States of America. It was not by happenstance that you, the voter, sacrificed, committed, and sought out a real faith; a faith that had been so distant for so long; a faith that was held hostage by the pessimism that confronted our scarce belief in change. This faith came as a great beacon light of hope to millions of Americans seared by the flames of withering injustice, inequity, long suffering, and deceit. It came as a joyous day break to end this long 8 years of captivity. Yet we must understand that this long night of captivity has a cousin. This cousin will place us at odds, ask us to give more than we receive, and commit itself to more uncontrollable occurrence. To this end, we must maintain belief in the doctrine of hope, the doctrine of everlasting change, and the doctrine of America that asks that each of us love one another despite our differences.

Tonight marked a new way…a new path; an uncharted ideal that we as a United Community must never relinquish. We will be asked to give in, we will be asked to give up and most certainly we will be asked to forget. We must not do these things. We have been encouraged to always remember that change cometh as day break peaks over the horizon to diminish the night’s fearful rage. For in darkness we remain meek but upon the light we are empowered.

As an African American, as a citizen, as an American who so earnestly believes in Obama; I believe that he can, he did and he will. This unyielding faith of America has spoken loud and clear. We will not stand for more of the same. We will demand something more, something new, and something filled with promise. The audacity of hope is so near, so clear and so contagious. Believe in our President Elect Barack Obama, for God himself has a plan greater than anything we can ever imagine. America, get ready, for our time to regain what ground we have lost is here. We shall overcome, not someday but TO-DAY.

God bless America and God bless change!

Life as a means (politically?)

2008-10-27T00:10:00.001-04:00

The most irrefutable life lesson that one can give is to simply, just live. As succinct as this moral may be it duly calls about the simplicity it takes to think and therefore be. Furthermore, this lesson is one that unwittingly gets overlooked and blinded by the natural gaze of human individual drive and success. Most think that we live for ourselves, by ourselves. This could not be further from the truth, yet the very basis for this proclamation stems from the rugged ideals that outline the law of reciprocity in that it wholeheartedly states “YOU shall reap what YOU sow”; the communal archetypes that so earnestly ask us to work as we and reap as we are unknown or perhaps ignored. Life should be seen as a means for after living. This Means comes from not simply defining the platitudes of inequality and inequity but from embracing the successes of the collective while defining what fasces help to bind us.

The reaping comes historically from laborious duty that places us out of our comfort zones, our normative thought processes and asks us to endure and painstakingly overcome what obstacles may hinder our progression. I’d openly ask today, in this moment…do we so painstakingly overcome or do we simply find ways around our obstacles, call it hard work and reap the benefits that sanctimoniously help to taut our own individual merits? Perhaps this is why our generation’s problems stem from foolish pride that places us against each other. Or rather they stem from furtive tactics that undermine the often preached “I am because We are” philosophy. It comes as no surprise that our conscious does make cowards of us all; for our conscious tells us to think alone, because we feel and interpret alone. This natural self-righteous way of interpretation is forgone to nothing because it’s how we think. We do not individually think collectively. Therein lays our problem. Are we as natural beings suppose to think collectively all the time? Or do we find times to think collectively to allay our external desires and pressures to help others because we simply feel its right?

This is an important time in our history. Not because new ground is being broken but because each moment in our lives goes from future to present to past providing us with a real time interpretation of our living conditions. These moments impart upon us our true desires and thoughts, which I argue are not collective but individual. They do not call for collective action or sacrifice. They call for “do me” and get what is mine. We just don’t say it. If only thoughts could be shown visibly, the world would die in a day. Therefore, thoughts remain hidden, our doings remain political, and our desires remain individual.

For when we all stand before God for due judgment we will be asked, I surmise, what have you done for others. We will begin to answer with what things we have done not knowing that most of what we do is self gratification and self indulgence. Quite simply, we will tell him what things made us feel good.

I say all of this not to confuse you, which I may have, but to present what a stream of conscious writing can produce. Try sitting down and writing what comes to mind, you may find that what you often preach…you don’t consciously believe.

Blogging about Blogs

2008-10-07T23:42:00.002-04:00

Blogs are the quintessential technique by which citizens can provide reflection on the state of affairs whether in the US or around the world. It is not by happenstance that blogging grew ever more popular under the Bush administration. People wanted to say something. And since the media did not reflect the concerns of the most ordinary citizen, blogs emerged and took political discourse by storm..rightfully so.

Ross Douthat says that at their best blogs expose the weaknesses of the traditional opt-ed page. He says that on the net, the issues that most often gets overlooked have a forum for discussion. Even when you are dead wrong! On the other hand he calls blogging the enemy of literary craft and intellectual depth.

Ross' first point I can agree with, however his last point draws some cause for concern. Perhaps anyone with a mind can begin a blog and say what ever they want, yet I don't think I would go so far as to say that they were the enemy of literary craft and intellectual depth. If anything blogs enhance the depth of intellect. I would not put all my eggs in one basket so to speak with the selection that comes across the post or the times. I can get just as much insight from Joe Blow by reading his blog.

Blogs create the opportunity for casual non politically correct voice. You don't have an editor, a proof reader or anyone checking your work but you. You simply write what you think and place it out for the world to read. Perhaps trying to be so PC is what has pushed for the emergence even more so of Blogs. You can say what you want how you want. This is a cut throat, in your face, type of presentation. It hits the gut, asks the hard questions, and quite frankly says what people are truly thinking. Freedom of the press is given justice via blogs.

When I read the post, or watch CNN I have expectations that are typically met. If they are not I'll be sure to read about them in the next day's post. With Blogs however, you may not have any expectations except the ones painted by the blogger at that moment. Sometimes I like to write in poetic prose while other times I simply write in a stream of consciousness and hope that the reader finds it logical. If not I have lost nothing. So for people who are risk loving blogging is the way to go.

A More Ethical Politics

2008-09-16T16:35:00.003-04:00

Objectivists believe that politics is grounded in ethics. Even those who would not be considered objectivists would believe that political theory, as we understand it, is based on some ethical premises. For example, the welfare state is dependent on egalitarianism. Communism is dependent on altruism, collectivism, and materialism. Is that enough of a connection?

The explicit connection between politics and ethics is an insufficient one. If ethics were the basis of politics, then we should be able to tie the two more closely together. Major themes in ethics should have very specific implications in politics. The most fundamental issue in ethics, I believe, is the living of life. We attempt to live our lives the best we can, try and live the ‘Good Life’. To that end, life is the ultimate value. It is also the standard of value and the measurement by which we judge morality. If that is the case, we should also be able to judge politics by that standard. At this moment, we cannot. The connection between the two should be strengthened.

Despite the lack thereof of ethics in politics, it is quite easy to judge those who play in politics- politicians, by standards of morality and ethics. Politicians are generally considered to be the least trustworthy professionals. This is a long and widely held view expressed in numerous aphorisms.

Jonathan Swift, the author of Gulliver’s Travels, said: “Politicks, as the Word

is commonly understood, are nothing but Corruptions.”

George Orwell said: “Political language … is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.”

The American essayist, H.L. Mencken said: “If experience teaches us anything at all, it teaches us that a good politician, under democracy, is quite as unthinkable as an honest burglar.”

This literary conviction suggest that politics and its players are innately corrupt. Perhaps this corruption comes from a marred sense of where ethics and politics have been able to merge. Sometimes the distinction between the two is a matter of scale. “If one guy robs you, its ethics, but when 435 people rob you, it's politics--or the House of Representatives is in session.” But of course the deliberations of that body are subject to ethical analysis. Often the only way to achieve an individual ethical goal is through group endeavors--i.e., politics. These groups, by virtue of our type of government are elected officials of the people. We have entrusted these people with the ability to decide what is right, or what would enhance our attempts at living the good life. If this form of government is placing corrupt individuals in our seats of power and decision making then the question becomes is democracy inherently unethical? Is it just?

Plato's Republic centers on this simple question: is it always better to be just than unjust? Socrates argues that a good city would be just and that defining justice as a virtue of a city would help to define justice as a virtue of a human being. Furthermore, arguing that the just city and the just human being as he has sketched them are in fact good and are in principle possible. He suggests that it is just, if we surmise that being ethical is being just.

Socrates supports the idea that the interface of politics and ethics should be strengthened. He does not state that the connection is not there he merely questions how one would look at this interface, how one would interpret what a city and its politics would look like. Even in a virtuous city with just people could the players overcome what potential dirty politics could arise? Does a city not contain people who are unjust and unethical?

In Michael Walzer’s piece on the problem with dirty hands he suggests that even the best of those who avoid dirty hands cannot govern innocently, but it does not mean that you cannot do the right thing while governing. He indicates that somehow, someway, in politics you must get your hands dirty yet still be able to do the right thing. You don’t have to do as Machiavelli suggests and learn to be not good. You can be honest, virtuous, and moral but yet realize that getting your hands dirty may come with the job. Walzer says implicitly, don’t abandon moral fortitude, find ways to put it into the political ends in which you seek. In addition, doing dirty in politics as Walzer says discloses the moral dilemma inherent in the convention. If he were a moral man and nothing else then his hands would not be dirty, if he were a politician and nothing else then he would pretend that his hands are clean. Walzer criticizes Machiavelli in his analysis on how to be a bad person by saying that Machiavelli never tells us how the person actually should feel about being bad. Walzer’s approach suggests that politics and ethics would be better off together as long as the politician is ethical and wants to do the right thing.

In a contrasting opinion, Max Weber in Politics as a vocation says that politics is a vocation and not a calling; therefore the politician cannot be justified by God. His vocation is his own choice. It seems as if Weber believes that politics is not ordained by God and therefore should not be held accountable. He argues against there being ethics in politics. Similar to what Weber espouses, Machiavelli suggests that one who is not learned to be bad will not sufficiently rule his kingdom and that being good and virtuous would make one seem weak and unfit to rule.

Even then, philosophers questioned the role that being moral had in serving the people. Today we find that without ethics in politics and policy design it is impossible to serve the people. The people, based upon their own convictions, which I argue come from what is just or unjust, elect our leaders and create our politics. Politics create policy. The people create politics; therefore the syllogism suggests that the people create policy. If the policies are unjust then perhaps people are unjust and unethical, at least in numbers. This claim does not denigrate the individual’s desire to be ethical; it questions the scale in which people as a collective desire to be ethical. I would argue that people as a whole do not desire ethical politics, they desire politics that work to provide what people feel is owed to them, by any means necessary.

The syndicated press believes the al-Qaeda attacks of September 11th 2001 are presented as the official reason for the campaign against terrorism and presumably the war in Iraq. This campaign was presented by Bush as the struggle between the forces of good and evil, with his own side obviously being the good one. This has introduced an ethical dimension into the political scene. For many Americans today, the trouble is that Bush’s ethics seem to be at variance with those held by most people of good will. But at the same time, when the attack hit, the people were eager for revenge in what ever fashion. We were hurt by the loss suffered and confused by the beliefs of those we felt constructed this heinous crime. Collectively we wanted revenge, we wanted politics that would suffice this hunger and not provide ethical reason. If asked whether the people wanted an ethical response to 9-11, the resounding answer would be no. For they knew the ethical response would not have been to go to war and pay back but to unite, support the loss and act according to what clear evidence we had. As it later surfaced, the evidence we thought we had were pushed on by dirty politics because this is what we the people desired. We wanted a reason to fight back. We desired a reason to not be good.

Whether politics and ethics are truly desired by the masses is up for a Gallup poll. To have a more ethically based political thinking sounds like it would provide more of a good life yet the truth becomes that life is only good when people are good, when people are just. Life is the ultimate value and if we value life then we must value politics, for politics is life and life is politics. Therefore since we place value on living a just life then we must place more value on having a just and ethical politics.

USG and Africa

2008-08-06T11:39:00.006-04:00

For this summer I have been working in the U.S State Department. My official titile is diplomatic desk officer. I work in the Bureau of African Affairs in the office of West African Affairs. Much of what comes across my desk are information dealing with U.S embassies and political and economic development in Africa. It is facinating to have learned so much about bureaucratic work, Africa, and the programs that the USG is putting forth for the continual development of the continent.

Without having done this internship I would not have learned so much about MCC, TFAs, the failures of Africom and other emerging events happening on this great continent. It is so easy to get caught up in the mystic hype that people place on Africa. It is easy to forget how far these countries have come. It is indeed a breath of fresh air to see things work.

Just recently the USG signed a multi billion dollar deal to provide more AIDS releif to Africa. This deal came after a long haul where much of the monies pertaining to AIDS in Africa were being used insufficiently or inefficiently. Now the deal works with existing NGO's and agencies and places more in the hands of groups already doing the work.

The Assistant Secretary Jendayi Frazer is exicted about the steps that her administration in African Affairs have made in recent years. She firmly believes that with the right attention African peoples can take care of themselves. She, similar to myself believe in the African peoples. We believe that they can and will emerge as world leaders. Their respective countries will prosper, end violence, establish free and fair elections, provide for their people, and most importantly instill pride within the hearts of the multitudes on African continential soil to believe in themselves and protect their beliefs and values.

This is important in diplomacy. How can you supoprt the existing positive structures in certain countries? How do you perform diplomacy between feuding African nations? How then do you help what tattered parts of their society have been torn down by in fighting and foreign intrusion? It is all a science that I think we all still must work on improving. So as you all read and hear about Africa! Just know that on the inside its not as mucked up as one may think, some good is actually happening.

until next time..........

Liberation Theology vs. Obama

2008-05-01T00:52:00.002-04:00

Whew! Ladies and gentlemen it has been a while but I am back with more in-ya-face, nail biting, conclusions about life and politics that hopefully will get you to thinking. Glad to be back...now right to the straight talk (I feel like McCain)

This 2008 election has surely been one to remember. We have an African American, a woman and a war vet, all of them are senators. We have not had a senator as president since Kennedy. Despite the 'newness' of the diversity, there is still a lot of politics going on that I am sure some people do not understand. Quite frankly, the media is now bringing things to light that have been around but have not been talked about. LIBERATION THEOLOGY!

Liberation Theology is a school of thought within Christianity, particularly in the Roman Catholic Church. Liberation theology focuses on Jesus Christ as not only the Redeemer but also the Liberator of the oppressed. It emphasizes the Christian mission to bring justice to the poor and oppressed, particularly through political activism. This school of thought is now being looked at with much scrutiny after Rev. Jeremiah Wright's comments about American values hit the screens. His much noted connection with Barack Obama has gotten him much stardom, or perhaps its not stardom but maybe just some unwanted attention.

Barack Obama has found it rather hard to pull himself out of the slump that Rev Wright placed him in with his comments....that is until now. Just recently Rev. Wright said some really aloof, off the wall things, things that most certainly Barack Obama would not ever support. Many people are looking at this media blitz as a death wish to the Obama campaign. Not quite...what a better way to get people to say "clearly Obama is not supporting this clown" than to have Rev Wright go on tv and say some really flagrant things about America and the American people. It worked! Critiques are now seeing that Obama could not possibly believe this stuff, in fact, many bloggers are looking to give Obama the benefit of the doubt when it comes to Rev. Wrights unashamedly Christian views.

Rev Wright is a very accomplished and intelligent guy who speaks more than 5 different languages. His words penetrate thousands of followers. In essence, even Obama. But in this time, right now, Rev. Wright's words should be taken with a grain of salt for Obama. Especially if he wants this presidential office. Even the most uneducated of people can see that rhetoric like this can cause rifts in the administration, American people and also allies.

The battle ensues. The media is playing both sides with their targets on Obama and what he does in retaliation. Watch what CNN and MSNBC does next. This black man ain't falling for it.

Who will win this battle of ideologies...the neo black liberation theology movement or the Obama team..I got my bet on the Obama team. Yes he Can!

50 For Change Campaign

2008-01-20T13:38:00.000-05:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE!! SPREAD FAR AND WIDE!!!!!

January 20, 2008

Dear Student Citizens,

During this primary season, one thing has become absolutely clear: The American population wants change and, for many Americans, Barack Obama represents that possibility. Described as a "movement" and a "uniter" Senator Obama has the desire and capacity to employ bi-partisanship tactics to improve the status of Americans both domestically and internationally. Senator Obama and his message of change have swept America. We URGE you to be a part of this movement.

The 50 FOR CHANGE campaign represents college students and their desire to effect change in their own communities. As supporters of Senator Obama, we are asking you to donate $50 to Senator Obama's campaign. Not only will this fundraising add invaluable momentum to Senator Obama's campaign, it will aid in distributing Senator Obama's message of change while educating citizens about the issues plaguing America and Senator Obama's plans to address them. As the upcoming leaders of this country it is up to us to take a stand and hold our current leaders accountable. We ask that you stand with us as we stand for Senator Obama. We ask that you participate in our campaign and help put an end to divisive politics.

At the end of this campaign, our goal is to present Senator Obama with an aggregated amount of money. This financial gift will say, in a loud voice, "WE WANT CHANGE." More importantly, this check will speak volumes to the American community about our commitment as students and desire for change and Barack Obama's vision. To those who can not give $50 but still want to be a part of this great movement for change, we ask that you give what you can! We must act fast; Super Tuesday is just around the corner.

Please visit www.50ForChange.com and donate $50! Spread the word! Tell your friends! Help change America! YES WE CAN!

Sincerely,

The 50 for change campaign team

Justin Davis jed55@cornell.edu

Max Aggrey mra65@cornell.edu

Javeste Dulcio jsd37@cornell.edu

Raymond McGill Jr. ram86@cornell.edu

Ending it in style

2007-12-05T17:08:00.000-05:00

Finals season is upon us. When I say "us" mean the millions of students out there who are, at the present moment sitting in front of you tube pretending to study. This time of the year is quite a busy one. People working extra hours to compensate for the high amounts of debt they will get into come the holidays. People are finishing papers, studying for finals, and finishing up group projects that you never thought would end. If I did not know any better I would say that this time of the year was full of more hell than any other time. In fact, this time of the year is when the most Americans show signs of depression.

So then why is this the "most wonderful time of the year?" If I had to guess I would say primary time for presidential candidates, good deeds, and possibly a freebie every now and then. But I do get confused at how people suddenly change their disposition to fit the times. its sort of a fake attitude.

Did you also know that most politicians also do the most service this time of the year. They commit to holiday service projects, clean up, and helping people to keep warm. For many politicians this time of the year is when they try and wipe the slate clean. Look at how Romney fired his contracting company for his house because he found evidence that they were hiring unauthorized migrants. What a relief for Romney who had been lambasted by the other candidates for his contradictory actions when it came to immigration.

I digress. I am a student and I am now in the midst of my final exams. It seems like the days go by quicker when you know you need more time. The weather just turned to snow here in our nations capital, but it does not look like it will last. For me, final time is a relaxing time. I know that I am almost finish and I only have certain things that I need to focus on. It allows me to budget my time enough to do the right amount of studying. Something I learned while at Cornell. Finals time is also a happy time for me. I can watch our president fight Iran single handedly, I can watch the candidates fight for those last primaries in Iowa and Vermont, I can also watch how Oj just won't get out of the spot light. Man, I this is bliss. I kinda wish it was finals time all the time. Plus you also have an excuse to avoid people, you can just say "hey I got finals, I am busy" it works. (lol) I hope none of my friends read this one.

I wish all the students out there the best on exams and a safe travel home. I will prob do one more blog before I head home myself. Until next time, watch CNN.

The great 'You Tube' Debate

2007-11-28T23:31:00.000-05:00

Today, November 28, 2007 the Republican candidates squared up in the second youtube sponsored presidential debate. The tensions were high, hands were sweaty, heart beats were racing and the crowd was pumped. I have never seen the crowd so involved in the debate. When they did not agree with something someone said they booed. If they did they erupted in cheers. People may not realize it, but the crowd's participation made certain candidates more nervous than others.

Needless to say, Mayor Guiliani did not have the best night. If he and Gov. Romney were not arguing over immigration and their own personal experiences with it, then he was boasting about how he single handedly changed NYC and triumphed over 9-11. Other than that, Rudy did not have many substantive things to say. He lacked compassion, strength to out due his opponents and lacked poise. Mayor G, unlike NYC crime--I guess, he lost this battle.

The true victor of the night was Mike Huckabee, the rev. Huckabee is a great debater. He used his "I am a nice Christian guy" disposition to win this debate. He was clear, compassionate and made the crowd and America love what he had to say. I am not a big supporter of republicans, esp. the morally inconsistent ones, but Huckabee got the vote of many Americans tonight. Despite his holier than thou character, he overcame the intense, almost diabolic, rhetoric of the night that was espoused by the other candidates.

Ron Paul, some how has in his head that there is a secret super highway being built leading from Mexico to Canada, going through the U.S. After that comment and the crowds reaction, he shut up. Thompson had a mediocre night, but still charmed people with his actor like qualities. Don't know how long Law and Order will keep him on top, just like Guiliani's 9-11 wave, it all has to end.

For the most part, the questions posed by the youtubers were good. They were unique and addressed some heavy issues, like gun control, abortion, the bible, spending, taxes, waterboating, but they did not address the main issues, of this election....education, healthcare, the penal system, the environment and energy conservation. How could they miss those.

As tempting as it is, I cannot blame the candidates. They did not pick the questions, the organizers and sponsors did. Boo to them for not giving republican candidates the opportunity to answer questions democrats battle with everyday.

The most unique questions of the night for me were.

1. Do you believe everything in the bible?
2. Why don't black people vote for republicans?
3. What do you plan to do about Black on Black crime in inner cities?
4. An openly gay 42 year army vet asked them 'why they did not support gays in the military?

Those questions are ones that I have never heard openly asked to republican presidential candidates. They are new and innovative but still did not get the responses the framers of the questions wanted. Nice try though.

Overall, the debate was interesting but lacking. I think this youtube debate has started something new and instilled a new form of debating. A form that allows ordinary people to pose questions to the candidates. Hats off to youtube for a nice debate, but hats cut to the organizers for avoiding important questions.

Turkey Day

2007-11-20T23:49:00.000-05:00

Thursday will mark yet another day for giving thanks. Thanksgiving has become that all encompassing holiday that many families look forward to regardless of religion, creed etc. Thanksgiving is the one American holiday that the most people celebrate with their families.

You meet with family that you may not have seen before, you eat until you can't walk and you may occasionally find out some dirt, if you listen hard enough. Despite the love that comes with the day...you know I have to ask...what about the politics?

Thanksgiving began with a group of undocumented immigrants coming to America from England after being persecuted. They did something along the lines of eating with Native Americans at a big table, although there is surprisingly not that much evidence that it actually happened that way. After the Native Americans died from the plague and diseases brought over by the pilgrims and after their dead were buried from the countless killings of NA by many pilgrims there could not have been too many willing to sit down and enjoy a meal. So if it did actually happen that way, then Thanksgiving was about immigrants and natives coming together to enjoy a meal. Last time I checked immigrants and natives did not want to have anything to do with each other.

This leads me to believe one thing about Turkey day. Could it be a government created holiday to increase economic boom despite the cold weather? Maybe, especially since just after turkey day more people shop than any day during the year. Its all about making money. The more money the better and happier people will be. Prices go down with limited items, people fight, cheat, break in line, wait outside, get up early and will do anything that is necessary to get that item for little Becky. We have turned a time of thanks to a time of banks.

How many people actually give thanks during Thanksgiving anyway. Don't get me wrong, I love Thanksgiving, but I make it my mission to give thanks to those who deserve it. As you indulge yourself in endless pumpkin pie, turkey and stuffing, be sure to actually thanks someone before you head out to the stores. Be sure that your government is thanking you for every penny you spend, before, on and the day after turkey day.

Have a blessed holiday!

Blues, Love and Politics

2007-11-14T21:36:00.001-05:00

This blog will be a bit different from the rest in that I will attempt to tackle two very complicated things all in one blog. Love and Politics, are two very different institutions, in that they provide solutions, problems and feelings that are different in almost every regard from any thing else people face in an everyday world. First I will talk about each and then show you how they merge.

Love. Love, according to Forrest Gump, is like a box of chocolates, you never know what you are gonna get. In some sense it's true, love can hit you without any moments notice. It can creep up on you from any direction. Its power is enough to make you change directions/ paths. Its power is also strong enough to make you act in ways you never believed.

But in some ways I think the Gump theory does not hold. For some population of people, when it comes to love, you know exactly what you are getting your self into. Even when you are confused about love, you know what you are getting yourself into and you know what type of chocolate you are taking. The label on the outside now tells you so. Just like chocolate, love comes with a desire and expected taste and leaves an after taste in your mouth. Sometimes you can't even get rid of the after taste, it sort of lingers there reminding you of how good it tasted, while also reminding you of how much it cost to get. Sometimes you get lucky and find love in a unique way. That unique way being with almost no hidden costs and taxes.

Love can also be seen as a social construct. A construct that is pushed by how people think they are suppose to love. Since when was there ever a model for how to love the right way? Everyone seems to have that model without even really knowing it. But they would swear to you it was a case by case basis. Love is the same, people are the variables.

Politics. Politics is an action, language, thought process on how to make people do what you want. Its is a power construct. It does not have to be a negative one, unless you make it that way and become manipulative. But with the right politics, ordinary people with ordinary ideas can come out on top. The access to power is there. You have to be willing to take it before others do. And once you get that power, how will you make others do what you do and believe what you believe.

In America, politics are in everything that we do. Even religion. Which is why I don't have a religion. I follow a savior. In everything that we do here in America, you always have to ask, why? What were the motives? The political world is a complicated one, full of dogs looking for food. Once the food is gone, you go elsewhere looking for it. Everyone wants to be the best at what they do. Some willing to work at it and others not. But they all still want it. Politics helps us to conceptualize what we want and how we want to get it. Politics is complex but can be rewarding if done the right way.

How are love and politics alike. Do me a favor and re-read this article and place politics/politic where there is the word love and love where there is the word politics. Then you will see how they merge.

Also both of them can cause a severe case of the blues. Hence the title Blues, love and politics.

Have a great weekend.

Cop Vigilanteism

2007-11-07T12:01:00.000-05:00

Vigilanteism has reared its head against gangs and increased violence in the state of Florida this week. Many members of Florida's police department have equipped themselves with high power AR-15 rifles to protect the streets, or to protect themselves. Police officers are saying that since the last cop was killed in Florida and today's events of a deputy being killed, they need to equip themselves with stronger weapons and more fierce tactics.

Across the country, at least 62 police officers have been gunned down this year -- a record pace, said Robert Tessaro, the associate director for law enforcement relations for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. As a result, the Brady organization supports police officers arming themselves with high-powered weapons "to protect themselves and their communities," he said.

Police officers are being trained with semiautomatic weapons, despite the gun lobbies attempts to stop in the intense weaponry being given to common police officers. Gun lobbies are saying that giving police officers these types of weapons makes them more intimidating and gives them more implied powers to control and harshly put people at odds. They also suggest that giving officers more guns would make it easy for would be cop killers to get those guns from the officers and shoot them with it.

Today, in fact another officer was killed in Florida. He was a deputy. His gun was taken from him and he was killed. These incidents, many police officers say, are what gives them the right to have more high power efficient, accurate guns.

It seems as if the tactics used by our military in the middle east are being used here in our country. Are we at war in our own country? It seems so, the officers are on one side and people on the other. I think the trends of police killings across the nation speak about the direction that our justice system is taking to provide safer streets....more guns. These killings, as bad as they are could be a result of giving more police more jurisdiction. I think it is something to be said when police administration moves to vigilanteism. It becomes an all out war against police officers. Leaving innocent people dead and a seemingly harsher environment that calls for more guns. With more guns comes more violence, that correlation is an inevitable one.

Waterboarding and Mukasey

2007-11-04T14:54:00.000-05:00

After former Attny. General Alberto Gonzalez left his post in September after being accused of foul play when some federal attorneys were fired, Bush then put his cards on former New York State Judge Michael Mukasey. Mukasey has a reputable history and for the most part, democrats are saying that this is the best that they will get at this time from the Bush administration.

Republican members of the Senate, for the most part like Mukasey but do hold some hesitation on his views on waterboarding. Waterboarding was a technique used during the Spanish Inquisition and WWII to torture enemies into giving away information or before killing them. The technique, as it was performed then, used water to simulate the drowning effect. Mukasey, will not come out formally and say that this is torture. Namely because America is using this same tactic in its dealing to hunt down terror regimes. Senator Leahy D- Vermont, initially supported Bush's new appointment, but after finding out Mukasey's hesitation on coming out against waterboarding, Leahy stated that he would not support Mukasey for the Attny. General position and that he would vote against him.

This has caused some unnecessary roughage in the government's appointments. Many politicians are questioning Bush's process at making his appointments. At this point, the Bush administration has demonstrated that they do not care about certain appointments, being so close to the end of his administration. At a press conference at the heritage foundation, a conservative think tank in Washington, Bush demanded that the Senate judiciary committee elect Mukasey for Attny. General. As it stands now, it looks as if Muksaey will be the next Attny. Genreal whether he believes waterboarding is torture or not.

I think this is a great example at how politicians and politics have become worn out. The Bush administration has worn the American people out. Enough already! We are just tired and quite frankly what more can Bush and his goons do to America. The next president has a lot of work to do, to 'clean house' . Washington is full of lethargic people who have been pushed to wits end. Politics does have its breaking points. There comes a time when people just do not want to deal with it. The sad things though...is that it is in everything.

NAACP Declares State of Emergency!

2007-10-30T20:00:00.000-04:00

The increase in reports of violence and overly aggressive prosecution against African American youth led the NAACP to declare a State of Emergency. It is about time something is done about these unjust handling's done by police officers. It seems that the color of crime in this country today is that of blue. Not the color that some people turn when they hold their breath for too long but I am talking about the ladies and gentlemen in those blue uniforms that are suppose to be upholding the law and protecting our streets from the violence that plagues us. Instead, they are causing the uproar.

Please visit the following link and read the story. I think this write up captures exactly what I would want to say in this blog. After reading it, come back and make some comment on the following questions.

http://www.naacp.org/news/press/2007-10-23/index.htm

-this article hits on some cases that I think many of you may not have even heard of.

1. What is our first step?
2. How can we hold police officers accountable for these acts?

I think there needs to be a clear platform for civil rights litigation in this country. There must be some consistency on how we approach these cases, at least on the underlying levels. What defines civil rights litigation in this country nowadays? What does it look like?

The media has done a great job at sweeping these issues under the rug. Free speech is a great thing to have but you must ask yourself who has the power to freedom of speech. That would prove the political and social posturing that the media has. Think about who calls the shots at CNN, FOX and MSNBC.

The final thing that I will say is, there is a growing police culture in America that is anti-'of color' anti gay and anti anything that is not purely wealthy and white. This culture is a growing concern for many civil rights activists. The power that the men and women in blue have may be a bit overreaching. Remember absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Let's hear what yall have to say about the article. My friend frits says that the end of the world is near. May be so. If that is the case what side are you on?

peace

Genarlow Wilson Free!

2007-10-27T01:42:00.001-04:00

This evening, our justice system has shown itself to work, on some level, by granting the release of Genarlow Wilson. This decision has come about by the hard work of many individuals who saw this case, from the very beginning, as being one of cruel and unusual punishment. The Georgia state prosecutors ruled earlier that, with no prima facie fault, the decision to appeal the ruling that the Monore County judge held in support of Mr. Wilson was an accurate one, furthermore stating that his case would not be looked at retroactively due to the law change. With this decision came about much action by Civil Rights groups, students and Georgia citizens to see that justice in this case was served, duly to Genarlow and his family. This case was taken to the Georgia State Supreme Court, who ruled in a 4-3 decision that they would uphold the Monroe County judge that this was in fact cruel and unusual punishment. This decision came about by the swift and diligent leadership of one of Cornell's own, CHIEF JUSTICE of the Georgia State Supreme Court, the honorable Leah Ward Sears.

Chief Justice Sears received her B.S. from Cornell University in 1976, her J.D. from Emory University in 1980 and an LL.M from the University of Virginia School of Law in 1995. At Cornell, she was a member of the Quill and Dagger honor society (of which I am a proud member) and she is an active member of Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority Inc. Prior to becoming a Superior Court Judge in 1988 (the first African-American woman to hold that position in the state), she was a trial attorney with law firm Alston & Bird and a judge in the City of Atlanta Traffic Court, to which she was appointed by then Mayor Andrew Young.

As a Cornell Alum from the class of 2007, I am proud to call her a fellow Cornellian and fellow acquaintance. Being from Georgia never felt any better during this landmark case in which the state of Georgia changed its law due to the archaic nature of the penalty that unjustly placed Genarlow Wilson at odds and in prison. As a fellow High School classmate of Genarlow, I can tell you how proud his mother and sister are for his release as am I. His Lawyer, BJ Bernstein is also a true trailblazer in this case having worked long and hard to see her client and now friend released from prison.

Take this lesson as a way to look at how Cornellians are shaping the world we live in. Work hard, smart and above all, remain dedicated to success. Hats off to Cornell University and Bj Bernstein for another job well-done!

Below you will find some comments that a few other Cornellians and I were having about the case:

*********************

I am very excited! I hope he can just have his life back. I was reading some of the comments and it's just so sad how ignorant people are. Some actually believe that he should be in jail. Also, the logic in the Georgia Supreme Court's dissenting opinion was the most ridiculous thing I had ever heard of. The majority argued that since Georgia changed the law it was obvious they themselves no longer agreed with the idea that consensual oral sex should be punished with 10 years in prison. That seems like a logical reaction to me. The dissent replies....Yeah, they changed their mind on the acceptable punishment for consensual sex but they didn't change their mind on GENARLOW. And it's kind of like well.....if they changed their mind in general then why should Genarlow be the exception? I don't think they provided any evidence that should be treated as the exception other than the fact that the prosecutors wanted him to be.

-Javeste Dulcio

*****************************

Wait, hold up... I don't think the dissent's argument was faulty prima facie. The dissent argued that the majority is callously disregarding the General Assembly's constitutional authority in that the legislature specifically amended the law explicitly delineating that it will not be applied retroactively. The legislature is perfectly within its constitutional authority to do this. It might be stupid and wrong, but that's what it is. The role of the courts is to interpret the law where there is ambiguity in its application and meaning, not to legislate or override wherein the legislature has expressly outlined the law and its application. On the other hand, the courts can rule a law to be unconstitutional - and I think that's where the majority's strength lies in this case, in that it declared the punishment de jure unconstitutional because it was cruel and unusual punishment - I mean 10 years of imprisonment without chance of probation or parole for oral sex? Albeit a social ill for teenagers to be sexually active premaritally, I would think anyone in this day and age would consider this punishment a "gross miscarriage of justice" for a 17 year old to be imprisoned for 10 years because he got oral sex (forgive my crudity) from some 15 year old.

-Funmi Ojetayo

**************************

I think we are saying the same thing. The legislature had had the RIGHT to make it un-retroactive (if that is a word) but in doing so they made it easier for the Court to argue that it was cruel and unusual punishmet because the legislature themselves think those standards of punishment are no longer just and appropriate. Thus, the dissent saying "Well, the Courts intended to exclude Genarlow from the new legislation" does nothing to address the majoirty's point. In fact, it further proves the majority's point that Genarlow suffered clear and unusual punishment because no one else would suffer such punishment and the legislature no longer supported such punishment as appropriate. Hence, my rationale for saying the dissent't logic ws a bit irrational.

-Javeste Dulcio

*************************

True that I do not think that the dissent's argument was faulty prima
facie due to the legislative power the law held when it was passed; however, because the change in law was brought on, not by the volition of the General Assembly, but by legal pressure from the convicted's counsel, the law has the aptitude to be applied retroactively to the convicted party regardless of the constraints on the law as it is passed. In this case, I think the state prosecutors were influenced by mitigating circumstances, that is, circumstances not constituting justification or excuse for the offense in question (Coker v. Georgia), the color of his skin for instance and the disproportionately large amount of cases where Black men have been sentenced harsher penalties in the past for doing similar acts are among those circumstances. The State of Georgia was using a rule of past precedence to make the decision about Genarlow. The State found its past precedents to be archaic in nature and unjust towards people of color, thus a change in law had to ensue with the decision, being as it was, to be applied to Genarlow's case, without consideration of changing all cases prior to Genarlow. The fact that they considered to not apply this to his case, assuming that he was fighting this to set new precedent and not pro bono work, that he would not benefit from, in my mind, is unconstitutional ~ DUE PROCESS. It would be similar to a United States v. Wong Kim Ark where it was held that it was unconstitutional to deny citizenship on the basis that Wong Kim Ark was Chinese in ancestry and him not being able to reap the benefit of this case for his own merit. Genarlow's case is a showing, albeit a weak one, that the courts work with the right counsel and right law in place to help. Cruel and unusual punishment cases are laden in GA's history. I am glad that his case set a new ground and changed law despite a difference in color of counsel, being he was black and his
lawyer white --- ( similar to A Time To Kill)

-Justin Davis

Not the Hurricane, but the Fire this time...

2007-10-23T20:15:00.000-04:00

I think mother nature has finally gotten fed up with Americans and our utter disregard to protect her most precious work of art...Human Life. Her wrath has come, over the past several years, guised as a hurricane, tsunami, earthquake and now a ferocious fire willing to stop for nothing burning everything in its path. San Diego County, CA is at odds. The odds are very much against them in trying to survive this fire that is slowly eating away at their livelihood. More than 513,000 people have been asked to leave their homes and take only what they can. Many of them have been placed in QualCom stadium, home to the San Diego Chargers and once home to the Padres.

This fire has taken the lives of two people, wounding countless others. And burned more than 164,000 acres of land...in counting. In other words, this fire is going and going. Firefighters and local politicians have called this the worst catastrophe in San Diego's history and quite possibly the state. There is no doubt that this fire is a devastation to the homes and beauty of what is/was San Diego. I cannot help but to parallel this case with Hurricane Katrina.

As I stated earlier more than 513,000 people have been asked to leave their homes and some to take refuge in QualCom stadium. There they are getting free medical services, protection, food, water, blankets if they need them, sanitary bathrooms, and electricity. The evacuees are also receiving counseling on some levels. This is all with only two deaths, God bless their souls, and no where close to the damage of property due to Hurricane Katrina. While in the super dome, Hurricane Katrina victims received the following items: pain, death, starvation, emotional distress, unsanitary conditions, no water, and no protection from the powers that be. Granted Hurricane Katrina was a worst natural disaster, at least at this point, this still does not warrant a government to treat a class and color of people any different than in San Diego, CA, where there is quite a different demographic.

What citizens in San Diego are going through is a small taste, an undesired one of course, of what citizens in New Orleans faced in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. Our utter disregard for human life will continuously bemoan mother nature. We have come to the point as a country in saying that some lives are worth more than others. We have placed a price on human life. Our economics have spilled beyond our moral obligations to give us nothing short of how much return will we get with blacks compared to whites, or latinos compared to asians. Our support for each other are only politically driven not spiritually or emotionally guided. We have moved from a nation founded on holy principles which spoke of "all men created equal" to a nation driven by greed and pestilence towards certain groups where we espouse "some created equal and others must suffer to save those who are most important". As you watch the news and learn more about these issues please use history as a marker and tool for change. As you could one day be faced with the undesired fact that your live has taken a turn for the worst, asking you to leave something behind, lets just hope its not your life.

Political Intellectualism

2007-10-19T13:15:00.000-04:00

This blog will be about my own thoughts, not so much of what this newspaper or that newspaper has been saying, or even the syndicated network news. I figure every now and then I can throw in my own politics and quote myself sometimes.

This time I am choosing to write about political intellectualism. Something the man to your left does not have. I think the corn should get more praise. Anyway, political intellectualism is what drives capital hill, anyone running for any office and anyone trying to make a deal. I argue that most people use political intellectualism in their everyday dealings as consumers, producers and free riders. Intellectualism is the development and use of the ability to think, reason, and understand. Political intellectualism is the development and use of the ability to think politically, reason politically and understand politically. With the basis of politics being seeking more power, understanding and control over one's own environment, it is hard to remove yourself from using your intellect to do it. Behind every decision and every deal, are alternatives that were entertained. When you decide to choose a school for example, you think about ratings, prestige, money and location. All of those are using the vices society has given us to make a logical decision about how to better our own lives. As I always say, every person wants to better their own condition. In bettering that condition you toy with alternatives and consequences.

This notion of political intellectualism is growing ever more prevalent in us young people. Especially with all of these rock the vote campaigns, and media coverage that is pushing more and more young people to grow up faster and become more conscious about what is going on in the world. A friend told me his younger brother, age 9, was beginning to read the NY Times! I guess its never to old to start. But I do question whether or not this political intellectualism causes people to become more power hungry and less compassionate. Sometimes in our seeking of better things and more control we become landlocked in this mode of thinking that no matter how diminishing our returns, more is always better. In that logic, it causes people to use scamming politics and sneaky ways of getting around the truth. Vice-President Chaney at one point, to have more control over the affairs of the government decided that he was no longer apart of the executive branch of the government. Which is do able, because he is not governed or checked and balanced so to speak like the president. Chaney did that until congress members threatened to take away his money from the executive budget and place him on the legislative one, thus causing a significant decrease in his salary. In any regard, Chaney has used back door politics to always have his way. He has a great amount of political intellectualism but it is the case where it has began to control his life and tattered his compassion for helping America to just "be better".

As I study here at Georgetown in our nation's capital, one thing I always see is people using what they got to get what they want. In other words, people wear their resumes on their foreheads. I guess its apart of the culture to compete. This is where I use my Cornell wit to quietly move beyond asking endless questions to get ahead but to asking for their business card and leaving to then follow up later. My political intellectualism is quiet.

Back Door politics

2007-10-16T22:55:00.000-04:00

A swelling number of Israelis are flying into the United States armed with tattered birth certificates, ID's and marriage licenses to try and tap into a clause, or better yet a back door in the U.S immigration law that enables some grandparents to pass citizenship to their grandchildren. For many years U.S citizenship could only be given to a child by a parent. But 1994 section 322 of immigration law has provided another way into the United States. For many Israeli citizens, this has proved to be a golden opportunity, considering they are heavily utilizing this loop hole. Being born in the U.S or having U.S citizenship does not automatically qualify parents to pass on citizenship to their children overseas, according to the Wall Street Journal. A parent must have lived in the U.S for five years after the age of 14 to transmit citizenship to a child. The clause allows U.S citizen grandparents who satisfy this requirement to pass on citizenship to children whose parents didn't live in the U.S long enough.

For many immigrants who seek citizenship into the U.S the process can be a nightmare. This clause found within the law is proclaiming to make a process that is designed for families to make a one stop visit to the U.S. More than 90% of the people benefiting from this loop hole is solely Jewish families, some say, seeking refuge from a hectic time.

For other immigrants who are constantly getting the shaft, why don't they know about this clause? Is this something that only a certain group of people know about or were made privy to? Perhaps, a white group? Jewish people are clearly optimizing on this, I do not fault them for this. But this a case of America creating a loop hole, telling only a certain group of people about it and then punishing everyone else that seek the safe haven and opportunity that America has. This is the quintessential back door that has remained open for many years to help certain people. While many Mexican Americans are told to stay out, in fact they get a giant wall telling them to stay out, other groups get snuck [sic] in the back door. If this is American policy regarding immigration then I wonder what "the man" is doing in prisons, hospitals and detention centers. I wonder why we can't get a decent education. Dick Gregory, acclaimed civil rights activist, says that America is full of conspiracies. Conspiracies that only people on the inside would really know. Everyone else, I suppose, is a mushroom, in the dark with no information about how to get ahead. It seems like the American dream, save the house, is not for everyone. Our country places barriers on people being able to better their condition. It is human nature to want more and want better, no matter what the profession, cost or consequence. Why does crime exist? One reason is a lack of education about properly and legally bettering one's condition, instead people are forced to find other means to get what they want.

If you keep hiding the back door way in, then people will go around, until one day you are met at the back door with adversity.

Driver's License Please

2007-10-12T21:51:00.001-04:00

Does the guy to the left look like an illegal immigrant? Well, he's white, has a name like Alan Dixon and lives in Downer's Grove Illinois, probably not. But then again isn't it our duty as American citizens to point out who is illegal and who is legal? Most neocons think so, as well as our trusted, handy dandy local police officers. Everyone but the right people, are monitoring immigration into the United States. But then again, aren't we all immigrants? Did we all not come from other countries, some forced and some willingly? I think we should re-evaluate our stances on immigration in this country. But that is, I must admit a bit hard to do when you have such a competitive economy and everybody wants more than they can chew plus your share. Whether people want to admit it, this country is changing in color. From the times of the Puritan ethic to now, the color of this country has gone from brown (Native American) to white to Brown, Yellow, Black and all of the above. Many people migrate to the U.S in search of better opportunity, refuge from a feuding land or because they even could have been exiled. Many of them awe in the fact that their children once born here in the U.S are then citizens but the parents are not, as interpreted from the 14th amendment by the Supreme Court in the 1898 case United States v Kim Wong Ark.

Now immigration has taken on a new face, one that you may find on the front of a drivers license, if Governor Elliott Spitzer (NY) has his way. Gov. Spitzer has been pushing for a provision that will grant driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. Of course his plan has been met with much criticism. Critics of the policy suggest that the policy will shield illegal immigrants from scrutiny by law enforcement and airport security personnel and make them appear to be in the United States legally.

According to the New York Times, the governor’s policy is drawing support from some terrorism and security experts, who, like Mr. Spitzer, regard it as a way of bringing a hidden population into the open and ultimately making the system more secure, not to mention getting more drivers on the road licensed and insured. The success of the policy, they say, will rest on the reliability of new technology that Mr. Spitzer wants installed in Department of Motor Vehicles offices to verify the authenticity of passports and other documents that the illegal immigrants will be required to submit when applying for licenses.

The way I see it, many people are driving on the streets anyway, why not make provisions such that they can legally drive. If they can't be legal citizens then the least people could do is make them legal drivers. Besides, the highway patrol should not be looking for illegal immigrants hoarding away in our country, and neither should you. Some act as if many of those citizens who are deemed illegal are going anywhere. Spitzer stated “We are not talking about letting more people into this country,” he said, “we are talking about being practical about those who are already here.” . It is about time someone stopped yelling about why they are here, or glorifying Ann Coulter as she states "we should load them all on a truck and ship them back to Mexico", and do something practical with people who already live in the U.S. If people are so worried about these so called illegal immigrants to board planes and mimic 9-11, heads up people Airports will take foreign passports, as ID to fly to and within the U.S. What will a driver's license do for many people seeking rest in the U.S? It sure as hell won't help them get the piss poor social welfare programs we have, neither will it help them to attend Stuyvesant in NYC.

We have to be practical about practical issues. Yes immigration is a problem in the U.S, but instead of pointing fingers and calling people illegal, or blaming our social ills on the influx of Black and Brown people to this country, we have to face practical problems with practical solutions. Capital Hill has not gotten that down yet, look at our war.

Medicare Part D, the D stands for Disaster!

2007-10-10T18:45:00.000-04:00

As you can see, Health care is big on my plate. Hence my three postings so far about healthcare. Bear with me though this one is a kicker.

In an effort to provide prescription drug coverage to its citizens, the U.S. government rolled out a plan it called Medicare Part D. Of the seven million people eligible for the coverage, which began January 1, 2006, only 661,000 were signed up by mid-December 2006, and now not much more than that, according to the U.S. Social Security Administration. The reason for this low participation rate and the many problems associated with Medicare Part D can be summed up in a single phrase: The plan is far too complicated. There are several factors that need to be changed when thinking about this plan. Those factors are too much research, too many choices, too little coverage and too many changes, and too many expenses.

There is too much research about Medicare Part D, so much; it creates a hassle for people trying to understand the benefit. Upon signing up, the beneficiary receives a 92 page booklet that explains the plan. Despite the fierce 92 pages, the complexity of the language places people who do not understand the medical jargon in an uncompromising position. The booklet itself provides the beneficiary with no information about plan specific coverage, often leaving them with little to no information about choosing the right plan based upon how one already receives his/her health coverage.

There are too many choices available to consumers. Regardless of your current prescription drug coverage, you are encouraged to review the full range of choices that may be available to you. It is a daunting task requiring hours of research. The choices are conditional on states, towns and location of coverage. Sometimes within a small town there may be more than 50 firms offering prescription plans.

There is too little coverage and too many changes necessary. Each plan has a "formulary" - otherwise known as a "list of drugs". There is no guarantee that the drugs you need are on the list, so you must check each list. Of course, these lists can change every year, so the drug coverage and co-pay that you have now may change in 2007 and 2008. Therefore, you may need to reevaluate your coverage every year to determine whether or not your plan is still the best choice for your needs.¹

There are too many expenses involved with the plan. Under the standard Part D program, enrollees pay a $250 deductible, and then 25% of prescription drug costs until annual out-of-pocket costs reach $2,250. Any costs over that figure, up to $5,100, are paid 100% by the Part D enrollee. Anything above the $5,100 out of pocket expenses the coverage will pay. This gap is known as a "doughnut hole", since you get something on each side, but nothing in the middle. If you require a large number of prescriptions, or a small number of expensive prescriptions, the costs can devastate your finances.

Like Medicare Part B, Part D has some built-in penalties for signing up after the initial enrollment period. It is essential for consumers of the plan to know when they would like to sign up, what plan they want, and the costs of each plan. The current policies in place for the Medicare Part D drug benefit create finite issues that, in the long run, will be worse off for consumers. Yes they are able to now get some kind of drug benefit when before they could not afford them before, but in order to make sure that all beneficiaries are getting the most efficient drugs for the best prices there needs to be an easier process of looking at costs and analyzing what works best for each person. It seems that the constructers of the plan have committed an ecological fallacy, whereby they have assumed that what works for some will work for all.

The plan should be altered to accommodate better efficiency models that make using the plan easier and less of a cost to subscribers. The plan, as it stands now, is not helping the people it set out to help but only those who actually understand, can afford the costs, and have the time. Healthcare should be a timely, economical, and understandable benefit to all American citizens.

[1] McWinney, Jim. “Getting through the Medicare Part D wave”. Investopedia. January 9^th 2006.

Come hell or high water part deux

2007-10-09T19:00:00.001-04:00

Try walking outside of your living space and see if the ground is wet. Better yet see if you can still see the minivans driving by and the kids still playing in the streets. You may be surprised to know that in parts of Africa many people can no longer do that. Since Hurricane Katrina 'Mother Nature' has taken her vengeance. Enough with the exploitation of our nature's beauty, enough of killing our nature's resources to assuage our tainted thirst for more and better. The world cannot take our ignorance.

Across Africa, torrential downpours and flash floods have submerged whole towns and washed away bridges, farms and schools. More than a million people have been affected by the rains since the summer, according to the United Nations. At least 200 people have been killed, and hundreds of thousands displaced in 17 countries. In Uganda, one of the hardest-hit, humanitarian workers were trying to reach villages that have been cut off by water amid warnings of food crises and a rising risk of disease outbreaks. On the other side of the continent, Ghana has also been heavily hit. Three regions in the north, the country's traditional breadbasket, have been declared an official disaster zone after whole towns and villages were submerged. Torrential rains between July and August killed at least 32 people and displaced a quarter of a million.

These floods and rainfalls have prevented harvesting of some country's key exports, as well as prevented the local peace keeping efforts from preventing more insurgency that has corrupted many parts of Africa. Insurgencies might I add, that may not have been induced by Africans. What have we been doing to quell the cries for help, the long nights with no shelter, food or source of economic power? Not much. Then you ask is it our duty to help? Of course. America has many stake holds on the continent. In a sheer economic sense, it is in our best interest to work with the governments within those effected countries to provide relief or at best our prayers. There are many American based organizations, like the one campaign, who have been working tirelessly to provide relief to those countries. As conscious Americans and even more specifically as conscious Black Americans it is essential that we commit ourselves or align ourselves, rather, to knowing more about the issues going on in Africa as well as the ways in which we can help, even financially to bring many countries back above water.

One way to do that, if you don't like getting dirty, is to begin to think about investing in global markets. Africa open for business was put together to explore the economic benefits that investing in African markets can bring.

One of the fastest growth areas is telecommunications. From 1999 to 2004, cell phone use in Africa grew at an annual rate of 58%, whereas in Asia, the region with the next highest growth, cell phone use grew at a relatively paltry 35%. Africa is of increasing strategic interest to the global economy. The continent is expected to soon provide the US with more petroleum than the Middle East. The top supplier of oil to China is Angola. China and India are rapidly increasing their business dealings with Africa. These new power-houses are often beating out American and European firms. Africa offers a consumer base of more than 900 million people. While more than half of Africa is estimated to live on a dollar or less a day, the other half does not, and they are hungry for products and services. Even among the poor, there are surprising opportunities.

In the end maybe investing in African markets will not stop mother nature, what it will do is provide a structure by which many countries in Africa can attain resources such that they can build plans, evacuation techniques, formalized relief efforts that may save many African countries from being ravaged by any and every natural disaster as well as the not so natural ones that seems to keep people on capital hill hiding behind their staffers.

Think about where your dollar goes...spending can at times reflect what you value

No health care for kids?

2007-10-03T17:08:00.001-04:00

George W. Bush vetoed a bill today that would have expanded the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) that would have provided health coverage for more poor children than what it has done in the past. The program provides health insurance for children whose families earn too much money to qualify for Medicaid but cannot afford their own health insurance. The vetoed measure would expand the $5 billion-a-year program by an average of $7 billion a year over the next five years, for total funding of $60 billion over the period. That would be enough to boost enrollment to 10 million, up from 6.6 million, and dramatically reduce the number of uninsured children in the country, currently about 9 million.

Bush stated just after he vetoed the bill sent to him, that by accepting this bill it would have provided health coverage for families who make more than 80,000 dollars a year, plus it would create more federal control over the health care system, something that Bush and some republicans certainly do not want. At this point Bush has placed himself on a high horse, proclaiming that bills like this one will never pass his desk while in office. Unfortunately for him, Bush stands alone in this fight. The bill conjured up much negativity in the house as both republicans and democrats support the bill. However, Bush still has just enough support to get away with vetoing it.

The bill would have raised taxes on tobacco products by $0.61 and would not have added to the already bulging deficit that this country faces. Instead, Bush would rather spends billions a day for the war in Iraq, when the amount that goes towards the war for one day could provide health insurance for more than 5 million children in America. Bush is anti- social medicine and would not accept anything that remotely looks like it. Bush is thriving on the fact that America should focus more on private health care and making it affordable for everyone (Saying Bush is a reference to his administration not just him). What Bush does not realize, is that in a private market people are able to set their own prices that are indexed to GDP and inflation, not to mention that its a competitive market, so just when you make health care affordable for people, the excess usage of the health care on certain firms, with competition, it will drive prices up, making health care once again not affordable. Without federal regulatory provisions like SCHIP and entitlements, health care will never be affordable for everyone. You simply cannot have health care for all in a mixed market economy. Some people will win and others will lose. Raising taxes that most people do not pay because they are unemployed, creating tax breaks for wealthy people to make them more wealthy and cutting out health care for children are very backwards politics in my opinion. Take the example where they privatized the airline industry. At one point you could fly with any airline and pay the exact same price to fly anywhere. Since it was deregulated prices shot up, efficiency went down, waiting for flights to take off became unbearable, and comfort level went down. That is exactly how health care is now.

I am a firm believer that states should have their rights and be able to set laws and mandates that govern their residents. But in terms of health care it is the duty of our federal government to protect our livelihoods. This goes back as far as John Locke's theories. The government should be created to protect the people. Having good health is a protection of the people. Having education about health related issues and sexually transmitted infections are protecting the people. Not just military insurgency and ethnocentric idealism. Lets be real. No one really wants to help the poor. If they did they would have already done so. They say that you can judge a society by how it treats those who are worst off. But is it also true that you can judge a society by how it treats its best? Its Heroes? Ask workers who sacrificed their efforts to help in 9-11 if they even have health care. Many of them have died not being able to afford better medical treatment. In fact, they have been forgotten about now that the war is in full swing.

Uncle Clarence 'Tom'as

2007-10-02T10:42:00.000-04:00

Thank you George Bush Senior for your wonderful contributions to our famed judicial system. It was the first Bush who appointed Yale Law graduate, one year experience, self aggrandizing and self hating at the same time, Clarence Thomas.

Aside from the Anita Hill issues, Clarence Thomas has been much of a quiet voice on the bench. Besides his recently released book entitled 'Supreme Discomfort: The Divided Soul of Clarence Thomas' Thomas has not written much for the eye, scrutiny of the press and fierce black opposition. He relishes his time up there on the highest bench and holding the heaviest gavel in the land.

Clarence Thomas is quite the quagmire. He is black yet he almost singlehandedly fights everyday and in every ruling to disenfranchise the very program that places black people at a near starting point given our history of house cleaning, field tilling and driving Miss Daisey. The program I am referring to got him his job and his law degree from Yale, it's Affirmative Action. Now don't get me wrong, Affirmative action has its flaws, as does most legislation. Yet people often mis-interpret the reasoning for the sweeping legislation that has given blacks, handicapped and women, yes women the opportunity to advance in profession and education.

In its tumultuous 45-year history, AA has been both praised and pilloried as an answer to racial inequality. The term "affirmative action" was first introduced by President Kennedy in 1961 as a method of redressing discrimination that had persisted in spite of civil rights laws and constitutional guarantees. It was developed and enforced for the first time by President Johnson. "This is the next and more profound stage of the battle for civil rights," Johnson asserted. "We seek… not just equality as a right and a theory, but equality as a fact and as a result."- NY Times.

Focusing in particular on education and jobs, affirmative action policies required that active measures be taken to ensure that, women, blacks and other minorities enjoyed the same opportunities for promotions, salary increases, career advancement, school admissions, scholarships, and financial aid that had been the nearly exclusive province of whites. From the outset, affirmative action was envisioned as a temporary remedy that would end once there was a "level playing field" for all Americans. What most people do not realize about AA is that it is a program than many white women benefit from. In fact, white women are the main beneficiaries of AA. The question remains though...is there a level playing field yet?

Clarence Thomas recently appeared on 60mins in which he was berated with questions about his political leanings and his recent actions regarding abortion and Affirmative Action. In this interview he revealed that he felt as though black people were a monolith and that he did not want to think a certain way because of his color. Furthermore, he stated that you should not create a box and put people in it. His interview was noted as a peek inside the mind of one of the most revered and hated black men in history, I am not taking about Oj.

I understand that no one should think their color. I also understand that this is a free country and that people should be allowed to think for themselves and make rational decisions about life. The question that I have for Justice Thomas is that why take away programs that helped you get where you are? What judicial right does he have to steal the opportunity and the little leeway black people have in this country and replace it with the "pull yourself up by your boot straps ideology", that many black Americans do not have and will not have because of the glass ceiling that has replaced, in some cases, outward employment discrimination. He certainly does not have to think black, and we don't want him too, but realizing programs that help disadvantaged people need to be preserved and made better is a human interest, not just a black one. You don't have to think or be black to realize this or benefit from it. In fact, HBCU's have affirmative action programs for Hispanics and whites. The bottom line is this...don't profess with your mouth to want to help the poor and disadvantaged and then support legislation that sweeps it away from the poor and disadvantaged. You live an oxymoronic life.

I accept all Affirmative action program that are willing to hire me, admit me or whatever, because the way I see it is if you give me an inch I will take a yard, if you crack the door I will kick it in, just like if you give me the job I will do better and be better than anyone there, why? not to prove anything to anybody, but because hard work and the willingness to want to excel are not contingent on money, power, whiteness or any program but on personal drive and motivation.

Lets see how much personal drive Justice Thomas has when we look past that muddy pressure his conservative counterparts place on him.

PLEASE SEE THE COMMENTS BELOW TO GET MORE INFORMATION ON THIS ISSUE.

Till Kingdom Come........

2007-09-30T00:51:00.001-04:00

From as far back as the years of FDR, America has been involved in the affairs one way or another of the Middle East. At times we have been on the helping end of the unique cultural world and other times we have been on the, not surprising, damaging end of relations. Regardless of what end we are on, one thing has been a common denominator, the only prized BLACK person or thing ever in history that white people will willingly die over to protect......OIL--- Texas tea. America has been invested within the procurement and usage of oil in that part of the world since it was discovered and used, among other things, to help run our $50,000 hummers and porsches.

Saudi Arabia produces the most oil out of any area on the face of the earth and consequently America uses the most oil out of any country on the face of the earth. Hence the conflict of power. Who has it, the producer or the consumer? That is what we are, excuse me, George Bush is trying to find out. Of course we have to spend billions, kill hundreds and place our dear country at the pinnacles of disentrancement and soured hope.

This Friday, a movie hit and smashed the box office. 'The Kingdom' starring Jamie Foxx, Chris Cooper and Jennifer Garner, as a group of FBI agents going on an unsupported suicide mission in Saudi Arabia to uncover terrorism after a believed group of Muslim extremists bombed a camp of Americans killing some FBI agents and innocent men, women and children. For the record, Peter Berg did a great job at capturing the cinematic potential the war in Iraq has caused. The movie was an on your seat, heart pounding drama and action all in one. Simply..it was a great movie, one that will be remembered. Another thing Peter Berg may have done quite easily and quite politically is paint the picture of what terrorism looks like in the 21st century...ANYONE WHO IS MUSLIM. Anyone who wears a burka, has a long beard, speaks Arabic, or lives in that part of the modern world. I don't know if Berg knew that people would look past the great scenes and acting and see that what he did was extremely politically charged and on purpose. What this movie has done is singlehandedly placed all Muslim and Arab Americans in now an even more negative scene that says [sic] 'we come to kill all Americans".

The fact that this movie came out just before the primaries is key, especially for those candidates who are espousing ideals that support the war, even at its basic underlying missions...to get those terrorists. The political posturing of movies has become a very good and unique way of reaching audiences who may not watch CNN or read the Washington Post. Just when you think going to the movies was free of politics...think again.

We have now moved, as a society, into immersing our politics within our religion, moral value and entertainment. POLITICS IS IN EVERYTHING. This is why I am studying it. Understanding politics and how people think to make decisions is something micro econ cannot do alone. We make choices a lot in America, as do other places, but my point is this...we make more choices for ourselves to gain power and prestige within our own affiliations than we do to better our utility or maximize our benefit. It used to be-- lets maximize our benefits and minimize our costs, now it has come to-- lets maximize our power at the cost of everything and everyone. America for this reason is a true dictatorship as its defined as.. absolute, imperious, or overbearing power or control.

The movie, 'The Kingdom' displays our power of speech. This speech however is protected internally by our constitution but externally by our fierce and expensive military control. While the movie is a piece of art, I am afraid that this art is going to disenfranchised Arab Americans more than before and indoctrinate citizens into thinking that the face of terror is brown and citizens who vote (they are two different groups) to believe that this next election must have someone yet again who is tough on terror and willing to spend billions killing off what they think it looks like. Bush is certainly an idiot but is surrounded by some of the best minds in politics that have ever led these United States.

Take it in and tell me what you think?

The Political University

2007-09-28T01:52:00.000-04:00

Nowadays many college campuses are increasingly getting more political. Until I became a government major I never really understood how the political environment somehow penetrated many American vices. It seemed such a fleeting ideology upon my going to college, but then quickly grew to become a central piece to surviving at many of our country's top tier institutions.

One of the main reasons why I began this blog was to begin to bring to light many of the issues that young people and young professionals are facing as we attempt our round at getting the 'American Dream' . Little did we know that the American dream we speak of is laden with all types of political jargon and red/blue tape. The university setting is now one of the most political institutions that we can evoke. I don't know whether bastions of educations seek to mimic capital hill and the trends of metro D.C but it sure seems that you can hardly get an education without getting stuck in the political university. This idea of the political university came to me as I began to travel and see other schools and how the same issues and desires are not indigenous to one place or one sect of people. Even lonely Cornell located in Ithaca, NY (pictured) has got its own taste of political strife and demonstrative desires.

The students of today thrive off of seeking to better their own affiliated condition. Usually one would want to better his or her own individual condition whereas now, many seek to better the condition of the institution they claim allegiance to. Take for instance the College Republicans and the College Democrats; two organizations that seek to mimic the rhetoric espoused by their national parties. They live to serve faithful republicanism and democratic ideas; sometimes at the expense of the individuals own reputation. However well intended they may be, much of what they claim to support is taken with a grain of salt by the men and women on capital hill. In fact, Congressman Charles B. Rangel of NY stated that college political parties were key in addressing on campus issues but were behind and outdated when it came to national issues. Where he did not denounce the on campus parties, he did make a clear point. That point being that political demagogues are those who live and breath by the legislation, not by the chemistry book or by softened on campus bids for office within the SGA, SA etc. If political parties on college campuses are to move past their lock in-step cannons then they will need to become more connected with people in their own areas. For instance, Hanover NH, home to Dartmouth College..strong in the political games, but do they connect with people from the town of Hanover who identify with their party lines? According to a student who shall remain anonymous, NO. Politicians are saying that the on campus political world is a nice prep for the real games but more of their times should be spent connecting with people near by and rallying local groups, not traveling to D.C to lobby for issues that have lame duck power and have already been placed on the back burners of congress.

I like the on campus political atmosphere when the people are right. The people make the politics, the more dynamic they are the more interesting the debates. Pay close attention to your campus newspapers to see their political leanings, check out your SGA, your umbrella groups and whet alliances they make. Its all political. Make the right move and be praised, make or say the wrong thing and watch the pitch forks fly and the torches light up. The political university is alive and kicking. The question is...how do we kick back?

thoughts?

Hip Hop vs. America

2007-09-26T13:33:00.001-04:00

Last night on BET the first of a two part series entitled Hip Hop vs. America premiered attracting thousands of viewers and gaining the support of many dynamic African American cultural critiques and Artists. Among many of the panelists, moderated by Jeff Johnson and Toure; Micheal Eric Dyson, T.I., Nelly, Rev. Al Sharpton, and Percy Miller (Master P) were very vocal in their ideologies surrounding Hip Hop Culture and some defending the claims at how it has so called corrupted our youth and jaded our values to be more morally disjunct and harmoniously inept.

As much of what the panelists said were very intelligent and clear regarding their opinions on hip hop culture, I do have my own interpretations of these claims and how often people overlook the true levels of hip hop culture. My views stem from a realism and an often back seated approach, having not been a rapper nor having the ability to spit lyrical confabulations. Instead, I pull my opinion from the current pragmatic state of affairs within black culture.

Hip Hop at its best eschews reactionary emotions about the state of affairs that many young black men and women are facing in society. You don't have to be from the hood to face many of the issues that black people face in our sub-standard housing projects, or more aptly known as the 'hood'. In fact, being black and living in the suburbs comes with its own lyrical renditions that often are not vocalized in the main stream culture. I am living in Georgetown right now. I may not be faced with guns and violence, but the psychological ramifications that I often experience having a minimal black surrounding and support system or lack there of, is somewhat similar. My point is, hip hop can stem from all facets of society. If we continue to blame hip hoper's who come from the hood for the ills of our environment then we are doing just what No Child Left Behind is doing to our schools--asking features of our society to clean up the mess that our social inadequacies have created. Violence and negativity are everywhere no matter where you live. So is Hip Hop culture, which bring me to my next point.

On the panel last night, I had not heard anyone speak of the different levels of Hip Hop culture. I would not dare say that the rap industry and the capital gains it has accrued, is a true representation of Hip Hop culture. On some levels I would not even call it Hip Hop. How can we compare Khia's my neck my back song or the Whisper song to Dear Mama by Tupac or Common's I have a dream? It is absurd to think that all of rap music is true Hip Hop. You have mainstream Hip Hop, conscious Hip Hop, underground Hip Hop, the elements dj-graffiti-break dancing- lyrics etc, and international Hip Hop. In fact some of the best Hip Hop is coming from France, Senegal and Brazil. Places we don't think about when we talk about Hip Hop. We have to make that point before we begin to point fingers at our entertainers whom might I add we listen to at parties, in our rooms and in our cars.

Do some parts of the rap industry send the wrong message? Of course it does. Regardless of whether or not you give thousands to cancer research all people see is your music and videos on the air. No one knows or pays money to know that the Ying Yang Twins give money to fund health research, all people see is the songs that don't speak of times in the hood or are not reactionary voices to overcome hardships. You cannot argue that the Twins are not voicing filth and negativity in its objectification of women and its utter disregard for the young men who are listening who then call their female counterparts bitches and hoes. It's a fallacy that we as a community should begin to stop. Blaming Ying Yang for the corruption of our youth is not enough. Since these media icons and their words are so salient across society do they have an obligation to be mindful of their lyrics? No, its a free and open market. But in the spirit of Ubuntu "I am because we are" of course they do. But not everyone lives in a village where it takes more than the family to raise a child.

I think accountability is where we need to begin. If any black person in America is conscious enough to see that black people are dying everyday, abusing drugs, killing each other and being denied healthcare, proper education and protection then it should be easy to see that power and money can help to alleviate some of these ills. If you are all about making money then disregard helping black people because you may be of my color but not of my kind and you may be of my kind and not of my color, but for the upcoming lyricists out there don't speak uplift and love of being black and deny our history and current state of affairs by putting out junk that only helps you to make money and exploit our culture as a result, then don't complain when you got MLK on the boondocks saying that he is moving to Canada. As faith without works is dead black and brown people.

The fact of the matter is this, I listen to hip hop music, I also dance when I hear hip hop music. But I don't dance unless I hear music and I don't scratch my head unless it itches, I will not be taken back and made a fool of by many people who don't understand hip hop and it influences on society. But I can listen to hip hop and not follow some of the trend setting rhetoric coming out in rap music, but understand people that most or about 90% of our community is without the knowledge to understand that it is just music. Master P said it best in this panel, "we have to have knowledge before we can make wise decisions to overcome or at best help ourselves". If you about making money then do you...but don't say you're simultaneously trying to help black people in this country and rapping bad rhymes. It like you are giving us money and placing us forward and then with "let me be your outside dick" by Young Money, take us back 10 years. Or better with Soul Plane taking us back 50 years. It don't work Black people.

Let us also, just as we are now pointing fingers at our entertainers, point fingers at Congress and the President for not making the lives of Black Americans much better. That is ultimately what David Banner said on Cspan2, "better our communities and maybe we will stop talking about it, because the words are not as overtaking as the lives these words describe."

Let's hear it folks...what do you think?

More money ...no problems!

2007-09-25T11:05:00.002-04:00

A movement gaining momentum in Congress and some school systems in the Washington region and beyond would boost pay for exceptional teachers in high-poverty schools, a departure from salary schedules based on seniority and professional degrees that have kept pay in lockstep for decades.

Many lawmakers are debating this month on whether or not to enact the pay for performance system through grants in the No Child Left Behind act that would reward teachers up to 12,500 for their above par performance in the classroom. As good as this may be for many young scholars who would not normally look at teaching as a career because of the hard labor and low pay, for the teacher's unions this new plan to them is a complete undermining of their credibility. They are saying that it would undermine their ability to negotiate contracts as well as it would grade teachers based upon their student's test scores; which to them are an unreliable way of measuring success.

Debate over the proposal has exposed unusual fissures between the unions and longtime Democratic allies. Some education experts say the unions are out of sync with parents and voters who support the business-oriented idea of providing financial incentives for excellent work. Furthermore, many democrats are contesting that this way of increasing teacher pay would come with no easy handouts but with incentives to work better and harder for the students.

Barak Obama, the democratic hopeful is in support of teacher pay for performance. In a recent debate, he stated that he was for this pay for performance model as long as those who are proposing it were allowing teachers to help create it. In other words, teachers would be in the process of working to create the pay for performance system that would be helping them out in the long run. Another aspect of this debate is whether or not teachers, along with NCLB are actually making strides in the classroom to close the achievement gap. The NCLB is up for renewal this year and the National Assessment of Education Progress or NAEP just today released its new findings about gaps in education as well as math and reading scores for a variety of different age groups.

The report shows that overall, students have done better and that the gap is closing. This alone will warrant a renewal regardless of how NCLB is doing according to most teachers and students who believe that NCLB could stand some scrutiny. I think with the renewal of NCLB this year, this idea of teacher pay for performance will become closer to being a reality; as lawmakers will now believe that teachers have the necessary tools in the classroom to close the gap amongst many students of color and their white counterparts as well as students who are going to public schools compared to those in private or parochial schools.

This new method of paying teachers as they do better has its flaws and successes. On one hand, teachers who are able to develop a plan for pay for performance could protect their autonomy and bargaining rights as well as get more money. On the other hand, this legislation may disregard merit or tenure and education levels of the teachers. This could, in fact, cause problems in schools that have a long standing tradition of hiring master's level teachers and keeping teachers around for many years and allowing them to acquire tenure. Teacher's unions are a conundrum in itself. As I do expect them and understand their purpose, I think more attention should be paid to the children and not the rights of the teachers. The fact that a teachers union in PA was planning on going on strike is baffling to me, who would teach our kids? This is nothing like the NYC transit strike where employees just did not work, thus people could not get to work, we are talking about our education system. The bottom line is that teachers need more money, kids need more instruction and schools need more money. Hows about we just pass the collection plate around...starting with you.

2007-09-23T02:01:00.000-04:00

As conscious voters it is important to know what candidates support. To be as informed as possible helps to label you as a critical and important voter. For years voting has been denied to the minority, taken for granted by the majority and not taken seriously by all. This election is critical to the advancement of our nation, post Bush's tyrannical reign of power. As young people, we have been criticized over and over again for not knowing who we vote for. In this blog I will lay out clearly each candidate and their stance on very critical issues that face Americans everyday....Abortion, Taxes, Same sex marriage, Social security, Immigration, and Iraq.

Pro Abortion: Biden, Clinton, Dodd, Edwards, Gravel, Kucinich, Obama Richards, Giuliani
Anti-Abortion: Brownback, Hukabee, Paul, Tancredo, Thompson, Gilmore, Hunter
Opposes Abortion on in cases of rape, incest and to protect the right of mother: McCain, Romney

Opposed Bush's Tax cuts in 2001 and 2003: Biden, Clinton, Dodd, Edwards, Kucinich, Obama, McCain
Supported Bush's Tax cuts in 2001 and 2003: Brownback, Gilmore, Giuliani, Thompson, Tancredo, Romney, Paul
Supports other tax plans like fair tax etc.: Huckabee

Supported Bush-Backed Immigration reform: All except Romney and Gilmore wanted some kind of immigration reform for a pathway to citizenship. Romney and Gilmore just really does not like immigrants. They don't want any money going to help better the lives of immigrants

Voted for military use in Iraq: All except, Gravel, Kucinich, Obama, Paul

Opposes same sex marriage: All except, Gravel, Kucinich

Opposes Bush plan allowing workers to divert some Social Security payroll taxes into private retirement accounts: Biden, Clinton, Dodd, Edwards, Kucinich, Obama, Richardson, Paul
N/A or other on social security: Gravel, Gilmore, Thompson

This should give you all a small view at who these people are that are running for the next commander in chief of this country. What is important to remember also is that you must choose for yourself who you'd think also make decisions for this country as issues arise. Who has the intelligence and creativity to think on their toes in times of crises and who has the balls to back up international devastations. This next president will also be in charge of cleaning up the mess that Bush has made of the economy and our international reputation. Who have to do some serious housecleaning in this race, as that is what is needed to place America back to where it was pre-Bush.

Travel the internet to also check out what some of these candidates are saying about smaller issues that are large in impact but coming up slowly on the radar: gun control, welfare, competitive education, state's rights, energy and capital punishment. Presidents can appoint new judges; so this is also a reflection of law in this country and ultimately where it could go. Check out further down the blog to find quick links to some of these other issues.

What are the issues most effecting young people that has not been touched on?

Thousands Rally in Jena, LA

2007-09-21T01:56:00.001-04:00

Today, September 21, 2007, marks the national day of demonstration for the young black men in Jena, LA known now as the Jena Six. Thousands crowded the streets in this small town about 200 miles north of New Orleans. Reporters say that the town administrators were letting in buses every 12 min, as buses lined the highways coming into the area of protest. From students, to professionals to all types of races people marched in response to the actions of the Jena justice system, in their soured and callus treatment of several young black men for beating up a young white boy who apparently taunted some black students some days before. All across the country people were holding signs and wearing black to show solidarity in what has been called the largest demonstration in over a decade.

Civil rights leaders Jesse Jackson, Maxine Waters, Rev. Al Sharpton and many others who have spoken out against the injustices in our country were there in attendance holding signs and chanting "free the Jena Six", and "no justice no peace". This incident has now set the stage for a modern civil rights movement. What this has done is this has shown even the young people in this country that the days of Jim Crow still live on, but now in his son's name...James Crow.

The State of Louisiana and Gov. Blanco has had her hands full since Katrina and now this. I guess we can now call the state of Louisiana as the new shot heard around the world that sparked a new American renaissance of hopeful change and understanding. What I do hope that we all realize is that these demonstrations are not suppose end with the blowing out of a candle or the bus ride back home, but they are suppose to continue on and help the moral arc of our universe continue to bend towards freedom, as Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. said in 1965 in Alabama.

What needs to happen next? What are our modern solutions to this archaic conundrum that has been plaguing our people for more than 400 years? I think our next step is a re-examining of our values as a community. The South African word Ubuntu, which means "I am because we are" should symbolically reflect our next step....accountability. Accountability for our actions, words, imagery, personal presentation, and our lives are now what we need to work towards. Once we as a people can be more accountable for each other's lives we can truly inherit the richness that is owed to us and our posterity. No longer can we just rally in hopes to turn heads, or write passively to spark debate, we have to move. MLK stated that--

"Social action without education is a weak expression of pure energy. Deeds uninformed by educated thought can take false directions. When we go into action and confront our adversaries, we must be as armed with knowledge as they. Our policies should have the strength and deep analysis beneath them to be able to challenge the clever sophistries of our opponents"

In it he states that we must be armed. He also talks about our policies. Young people we must create policy such that they reflect the true reflection of our society. Policy and Law are two ways in which we as a people can penetrate the flaws of systematic inadequacy, the prejudice of our many educational and health systems, the lack of understanding that we have about many facets of our society. I will end with a quote from my source of inspiration...

Hosea 4 verse 6 says that "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge...."

What knowledge do you seek? FREE THE JENA SIX!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Obama Girl revolutionizes political campaigning

2007-09-19T00:24:00.000-04:00

Symbols have always been an integral component to political campaigns. Today those symbols can designate a party (elephant or donkey) or they could symbolize progression and opportunity. But never in history have they been so key to the progress of a political candidate than now. This presidential race, in my opinion is about popularity much more than about the substantive issues that these candidate evoke. The simple fact that you have an African-American running who has a great shot at the seat and a woman running who also has a great shot is symbolism in itself.
Today marks a new age of you tube and its effects on the run for the big white house that sits on Pennsylvania avenue. Today is the day of Obama girl. Ladies and gentlemen children of all ages, or at least some ages, I proudly present to you Obama girl. The latest in campaigning that is sure to knock your socks off, or give you a headache at the money and time spent on these adds. I implore you that before you finish reading you click the following link to view a piece of history. You would be remiss not to watch this video.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=wKsoXHYICqU

Had enough, well there are many more videos that these people have done. Check out the one where there is actually a debate between Obama girl and Guiliani girl.

Had enough..I figured you would. Lets think about these adds. What they are sure to do is draw national attention from many young people who decide to spend countless hours on youtube every day searching for that relief of entertainment. It will also push the candidates themselves to check out the musical renditions. In fact, what if I told you that the candidates themselves had these videos made and placed on youtube on purpose? It may be true. There have been several presidential debates that have been sponsored in one way or another by youtube. By doing this, youtube has successfully brought the candidates to observe what goes on on the video space as well as placed them in a position to utilize its services. Just as I said above, if a candidate would like to win this election they will have to throw down the played out political jargon and speeches on the podium and jump onto youtube and facebook for the young vote.

I think this is a revolutionary way to begin to get the word out. Technology has become the main avenue of communication and publicity. If Hilary was smart she would get a guy to do her a video. Maybe jack black would be worth a laugh or the chocolate rain guy. Nonetheless, let's just sit back enjoy the show and see what else comes next.

Young people...do you think youtube, my space, facebook can get our attention well enough to make it worth it? Or do you think the fun will deter their vote else where? Speak up!

Health care for all? Clinton...round two

2007-09-17T23:47:00.001-04:00

In 1994 Hilary Clinton put on her fighting heels and stormed on to capital hill demanding universal health care for all Americans. She said that it's a shame that we are the only industrialized nation in the western hemisphere without some safety net protecting the health and well-being of many Americans. She called it a calamity that the US has no way of insuring more than 3o million people at the time, now more than 46 million people. That is...until she was paid off and called a socialist. Seemed like the criticism was too much for the first lady hopeful. She quickly learned about path dependency and coalition building in politics. Something we all learn as young budding policy makers and public servants in graduate school. She then abandoned her plans and hid low until her time for office arose. Now she is at it again, but with a less socialist agenda according to conservative political pundits.

Her new plan calls for more choices. She unveiled her American Health Choices plan just yesterday. According to the latest CNN story.. in her plan, Clinton said families would receive tax credits to help pay for coverage. The tax credit would be designed to limit the premiums to a percentage of a family's income. Federal subsidies would be provided for those who are not able to afford insurance, and large businesses would be expected to provide or help pay for their employees' insurance. Clinton said her plan would not require small businesses to take part, but will offer tax credits to encourage them to do so.

Clinton is now third in her unveiling a new tax plan, just after Barak Obama and John Edwards which call for similar things but offer different tax incentives to big businesses. The most shocking was Edwards' plan which called for the estoppal of the presidents and congress' health insurance if a universal health care plan is not passed soon. Think what George Bush would do were he to not get his weekly psych treatments for his political ineptness paid for by the government and tax payer's money. It would be chaotic. Also think of former house member Tom Delay of Texas not getting his anti-depressant drugs.

In any regard, I think Hilary's plan calls for some great things. I just hope that longer waiting periods for health-care don't ensue and larger governmental subsidies don't harm its ability to offer federal funding in our educational sector and social welfare activity.

If I were running for office I would enact a triple threat or E^3, which focuses on Education, Environment, and Easy access to health care. I would introduce this in the form of capital investments by service providers like teachers, environmental conservationists, and health care workers where increases in federal funding would go toward salaries to then a very small portion of it to be invested back into our economy. That way big business would shut up and get its money and the increase in salaries would pay teachers more. And with pay for performance and better teacher quality, and more real world curricula in schools would help bolster education and alleviate the gap further caused by NCLB that asks our schools to fix issues caused by our social inadequacies. More health care workers like nurses and a health advocacy workers would also come out of the increase in federal funding. This would create better waiting times and along with some universal health care plans proposed help health care in America become more easily accessible. The more funding for the environment would go to enact some kind of tangible energy conservation plan. ---my plan is still in the works though, but we will see come time for me to run for something if I run for something. ;)

thoughts?

GOP candidates don't like minorities

2007-09-16T19:56:00.001-04:00

The critically acclaimed hip hop artist Kanye West stated on national television that George Bush hated Black people. Since then, many Americans have aligned Bush's actions with those then considered taboo statements. Would it be an ecological fallacy to then state that the sentiments of George Bush reflect the ideas and thoughts that the Good Ol Party has about people of color in this country? Tavis Smiley seems to think not.

Tavis Smiley successfully organized the first of two presidential debates at historically Black Colleges and Universities. The first took place this past summer at Howard University where all of the Democratic candidates came out to debate on national television about issues that effect Black people in this country. The debate, in large part, was a success, because it was there that we were able to see the candidates' stance on some issues that have been and are foreseen to effect people of color in this country. Although the debate could have been a bit more pointed, in the end, at least, it happened and they showed. The Dems have often been criticized for taking the Black vote for granted, this time they are able to move ever so slightly forward on the infinite spectrum of Black consciousness in this country.

Unlike the Dems, the GOP has not had the same luck. For a party that tries to convince people of color in this country that they are more inline with our views, they sure are doing a poor job of persuasion. The next debate was for the republican candidates. It is to be held at the historical, Morgan State University. Some of the key GOP candidates have successfully declined the offer. Why? Other campaign obligations. Mayor Giuliani, Governor Mitt Romney and long time senator John McCain have all opted out of the debate. What does this say about the GOP? Do they all hate Black people or is that something only attributed to Bush? At this point its hard to say. The fact that this forum has been planned for quite some time, the candidates knew well in advance about the dates of the forum, or at least that it would be in September. Smiley, in one appearance on TV, called this a classic case of "mis-management of priority". According to Smiley, if you want to be president of all America you have to speak with all Americans. Hmm.. George Bush did it without talking with all Americans, in fact Bush did it without the endorsement of all Americans. Is that democracy? So to think that his party has changed is of no fault of Smiley or the political pundits who ramp race based politics, lets blame it on the horrendous job Bush did as president.. he is an easy scape goat.

The national debates serve as great ways for Americans to learn the platforms of the candidates. They also serve as a good way of measuring feasibility of programs, and are a good radar of stupidity. The fact that many GOP candidates have informally declined to hear questions that pertain to the colored side of America speaks highly (not!) about their commitment to creating this vast opportunistic society where no one pays taxes, abortion is illegal, national defense is more important than education and health care, and that capital punishment is just. With all of that, why do we actually want to hear them speak? They will say the same things just in a more indirect way. Lets just send them all postcards from Cuba, because at the rate that we are going with conservative leadership that seems like the best place to go.

thoughts?

For the Love of Money!

2007-09-15T20:10:00.001-04:00

Just when you thought Bush had done enough damage to himself, the republican party and to the world he ceases to amaze many higher ups on the flounder of a president he really is. Money has been said to be the root of all evil. Of course being a realist, I disagree. I think the severe love and greed for money is the root of all evil. Bush has violated this unspoken law, then again would you have believed me if I said he didn't?

Our economy revolves around money and the fact that just like matter money is neither created nor destroyed in a free and open market, unless its dead weight loss which is just consumer and producer surplus gone awry. Money economics allow us to monitor spending and revenue. Alan Greenspan, now 81 years old just retired from being the chairman of the federal reserve. Appointed by Ronald Reagan, Greenspan heralds around the idea of strict conservative spending and critical monitoring of government spending. Greenspan is arguably the most important man in the world, even more so than Bush. One slip up from Greenspan; set the interest rates too high... market crash, set them too low... market crash, no indexing of wages and funds... market crash. We don't want another great depression now do we?

Greenspan was a supporter of the Clinton administrations risk taking initiatives, (no I am not talking about Monica) by saying that he loved Clinton's tough anti-deficit policies, calling the former president's 1993 economic plan "an act of political courage." Greenspan on the other hand criticizes the Bush administration of being too eager to tolerate excessive federal spending in exchange for political opportunity. The Republicans, he says, deserved to lose control of the Senate and House in last year's elections. He also criticizes the Bush administration for Dick Chaney's word of "deficits don't matter". Greenspan say that they do because if they are not controlled then government spending and borrowing can produce high inflation and economic devastation.

"He says, Little value was placed on rigorous economic policy debate or the weighing of long-term consequences. The large, anticipated federal budget surpluses that were the basis for Bush's initial $1.35 trillion tax cut were gone six to nine months after George W. Bush took office. So Bush's goals were no longer entirely appropriate. He continued to pursue his presidential campaign promises nonetheless." -Washington Post

All in all people here you have it. Bush spent most of his tax cut money while in office for only a few shorts months, or what seemed like a few long months to many small businesses and government aid agencies who lost money. Let's just take all relieve the most wealthy of taxes and leave programs that use the tax money to support federal grant in aids that better our schools and better our livelihood. This it the type of president that should be seen as one who loves money and does not know how to use it. He should be thrown in jail for using the people's money so wrong. There are many great public finance classes out there that would love to enroll him. The politics of money folks, it can be dangerous if you get too greedy.

What are your thoughts on gov. spending? Lets here it!

Oj at it again

2007-09-15T00:29:00.002-04:00

For many of us who swore OJ did not do it he is not doing much of a job to help place the blame elsewhere. This past couple of days many supporters and non supporters of the football icon have had to relive the days of old when OJ was caught in the justice system.

He recently was believed to be involved in a robbery in a hotel just off the strip in Las Vegas, NV. The victim, a sports memorabilia auctioneer, stated that Mr. Simpson was present at the scene of the crime and that someone had a gun. The victim said that Mr. Simpson and his entourage came into room and took off with some sports memorabilia. When asked whether or not he was involved, OJ said that he was involved and that he was coming back to reclaim his stolen items. He also told the Las Vegas police that he was doing a sting operation to get his items. If in fact OJ Simpson did have a gun in his presence he could be facing jail time, according to Nevada State prosecutors.

Particularly what I do not understand is why OJ thought it was necessary to use his own vices to retrieve his items. If they were in fact his and he could prove it, then why not go through the proper procedures to get his stuff? Probably because the police in America see this man as a murderer and would not support his aloof claims that this stuff was his. I don't think OJ was thinking that such a high profile person like himself would not be noticed in Las Vegas, even in the wee hours of the night...no one in Las Vegas sleeps. I think there must have been some serious and personal items there that would push him to do this so haphazardly. I guess its true what they say...you don't always want to include the state in your affairs. For OJ this has always been the case, even in his early career as a football player.

On another note, it just so happens that this incident went down yesterday, the same day as the release of his book If I did it; which was not released by Simpson but by the Goldman family as a way to somehow gain compensation on the deaths of their family members. What amount of money to the Goldman family would pay back for the death of their family members? Seems like the Goldman family will be gaining money from something OJ wrote. Initially the book was pulled off the shelves by the judge who gave the rights to the Goldman family. They then changed the name from If I did it to If I did it: the confessions of a killer. So far the book is selling as number two on Amazon.com.

Why do you think OJ would write such a piece of literature? If I did It. C'mon OJ you let Johnny Cochran R.I.P work himself into a grave literally fighting for your innocence and then you write a book about how you would have killed them were you to have done so. Hmmm...this begins to tip the boat for me OJ. I have never been a fan of yours in the Athletic realm but even then you played smarter than you are now. What is the politics behind this you ask? The politics comes here from the white victim to the black so called culprit and how his life has become a camera.. OJ will forever be remembered not for football so much but by being involved in a crime. People are still bitter and they will do anything to get him locked away. The politics of race and crime...now theres a quagmire for you.

thoughts?

Manhunt? or Black Male hunt in Miami?

2007-09-13T19:25:00.000-04:00

This week in Miami has been hell for one young black man who lives in Miami. Fortunate for him he is not the man to the left; at least not anymore he is not. A man Kevin Wehner, who lives in Florida was said to have killed one and wounded three Miami police officers. His picture was also placed at the top of all headlines across the country. The Miami police sited the wrong man as having done these heinous crimes. Mr. Wehner, after having seen his picture and heard his name ring with despite across the American airways quickly called Tallahassee police and told them that he in fact ha not done these acts.

Miami- Dade Police quickly learned what they had done and without hold fixed the problem. The new kid on the block 25-year-old Shawn Sherwin Labeet is the guy you see to the left who is accused of having done these things. Now, more than 200 police across the district are looking for this one man. But do you think they will find the right guy? So far the police are 0-2 for picking the right Black man. Fortunate for them they have his picture and his 411 unfortunate for people like Mr. Wahner and any black young male in Miami-Dade county this will haunt them and cause twisted looks from many Anglo citizens across the state of Florida. I guess it true that all black men look alike, at least this is the case for all of Miami-Dade county police dept.

What does it say to have a big picture like that circulating the airways all across the country. This red flags any young rough looking black male figure in society. This face will haunt the minds of many fellow police officers who think they see crime already when they look at black men. I am not advocating or justifying what this young man did, he took a life of another person, but I do have to ask why such a big national promotion when a white cop gets killed as opposed to any other person or more specifically any other black person. In 2001 an African American officer was killed in a raid in Atlanta but do you remember this story? I did not until I searched the CNN database extensively to see one small story on the AA Atlantan police officer who was killed in the line of duty. Once again politics rears its head to shoe that white life in America may be taken a bit more seriously than black life. What do you think? What is the politics behind it all young people? Does race seep into all politics or is this an isolated incident of happenstance?

Clinton or Obama? Who has Iraq's best interest?

2007-09-12T22:01:00.000-04:00

Barack Obama returned to Iowa today to lay out his newest plan to end the war in Iraq -- and to step up his sparring with Hillary Clinton. The question is whether the new policy adds up to a surge strategy for his campaign.

Hilary told Bush that a plan to reduce U.S. force levels by 30,000 a year from now -- which Bush is expected to announce Thursday night -- is "too little too late, and unacceptable to this Congress, and to the American people who have made clear their strong desire to bring our troops home, and end this war." She also urged an accelerated timetable for withdrawal.

Obama's new plan contains four elements, the most significant of which is a timetable that would result in the withdrawal of all combat forces by the end of 2008. Obama also calls for a new constitutional convention for Iraq designed to force political reconciliation on the competing factions there. His plan further includes initiatives aimed at ensuring regional security and preventing humanitarian disaster after the withdrawal.

All in all Obama blames conventional thinking as the reason why so many people signed onto the call for war in Iraq. He goes on further to say that there needs to be a change in what is conventional wisdom on capital hill and in the white house. He says that Hilary was and still is apart of that archaic conventionality and thus will not serve America well.

However the sentiments and praise Obama is getting he is still trailing Clinton in the polls. Clinton gets just as much support from those who feel that we should pull out as she does from those who claim we should remain. Clinton has the ear of the public and according to the washington post is like more for her politics. I can't say that Obama is like more for his politics or for his poise and charm with the masses. We shall see as times gets closer.

Welcome

2007-09-04T23:08:00.000-04:00

Hello all,

This is a new blog spot for young Americans interested in politics. Feel free to post as you like about the current political environment, hot topic issues in the media, policies, and general thoughts on politics in America.

I hope to spark an open environment for all who would like to share, do realize that because I am liberal I will take a certain political leaning. This does not mean that others who post will have to have that same political leaning. I do not claim to be non-political in this blog.

Lets be respectful, engaging and humorous about politics in America, besides...it is in everything we do.

Click on the Welcome link under blog archives to the right to see what questions have been posed.