Idol Chatter

I can't believe that I am writing about American Idol, but I think I have to this one time. Last night, Fox Network broadcast an extended, star studded version of its weekly showcase of some genuine talent and America's truly bad taste (evidenced by the longevity of Sanjaya Malakar). Its purpose was to entertain and to fund raise for charitable causes such as fighting AIDS in Africa, helping Katrina survivors and providing better education to those in poorer parts of America to end illiteracy. All fine causes to donate to and, given the viewer-ship draw Idol has, a rather expedient cash cow for the respective charities.

All well and good. I was flipping to other things and just catching it on the breaks. While it was on, however, it did strike me that they were covering their African component of the evening quite a bit more than the others. Its a big continent with a lot of problems. If they were allotting time as to be proportional to geographic size, wouldn't that be cleaver of them?

Some of the footage they aired was really compelling. Well, not the bits where Ryan Seacrest and Simon Cowell were sitting in various shantytown dwellings with umpteen number of orphaned children, patting them all on the back and giving half hugs telling them everything was going to be OK. That was crap. It felt like wasted air time. It made aforementioned presenters seem impotent and hollow. That they were profoundly affected by the suffering they saw was not in question. They were. And who wouldn't be? So the Idol machine was not providing us with anything more in that respect than we could have found in any other TV based fund raiser. Que Sally Struthers entrance.

Then it hit me. There was no useful information being given. There was some talk of "You," the viewing audience, having the power to change the world. And how is it that we make this great change for the betterment of those who are suffering? Money? Give them your money and everything is going to be alright. I am not sure if this is a uniquely American phenomenon or not, but the gist of most of these fund raisers seems to be geared towards cultivating pity and then relieving your visceral grief and empathy by throwing money at the problem. Then you've done your part and can go on with your life.

You might be saying "How dare you belittle the chartable spirit of America." Or something like it. I am doing no such thing. What I am doing is illuminating the fact that we are being given the short shrift from fund raisers like the one that Idol put on last night. At no time did any of the vignettes on Africa or the other causes say why things were the way they are. This is not so much a question for the illiteracy in poorer areas of the country, but its still relatively valid. The spread of AIDS in Africa is terrible and we all know that a person gets infected with it via intercourse with another infected person. Mostly, previously infected men will infect healthy women infecting and impregnating them all at once. This is why there are so many orphans in impoverished African nations. Its a cycle. A cycle that isn't widely discussed here or there. What they also do not mention is that a big reason HIV/AIDS is so pervasive in African countries is that many men are promiscuous and it is socially acceptable for them to be so. Their wives may know this but if they refuse their husbands advances, it is not uncommon at all for the man to beat her. Its also not uncommon for these beatings to result in her death. So there are massive cultural problems that aggravating the spread of HIV to such a degree that it begs the question of why aren't we hearing more about this side of it?

Another sub-issue worth mentioning is where the money goes. How much goes to bureaucracy and management on this end? How much makes it overseas? From there, how much gets absorbed by the governments? How much gets taken by corruption, gangs, militias, etc...? I bring this up not to be cynical. Its just the reality of the world that we and they live in. So, is it more efficacious to donate money or affect change by some other means?

On last night's Idol, poverty was the leitmotif of the evening. That and a whole lot of feel good music and celebrity hyjinx. The three go hand in hand, don't they? And, in the end, things like this do more good than harm. My concern is that people will think that this is enough when its really not nearly enough. Its good to give to charity. You help a cause and get a tax write off. But you should also, provided you're able, give of your time and energy. You can be a mentor, you can work at a soup kitchen, you can tutor, you can join projects like Habitat for Humanity and a great many more things. What no one really talks about, especially in commercialized venues like Idol, is that you can also vote with your dollar. You can send a message to the marketplace by buying certain goods over others. You can purchase products generated by women's cooperatives, you can go to farmer's markets, you can not buy gas from certain vendors because they obtain their product from nations that have bad human rights records. This list, like the lists of charitable causes and philanthropies, is endless.

One last time; Idol Celebrity Fund Raiser and other such things like it = Good. Well, rather, they're trying to do good and that's better than doing nothing at all. Just don't get to thinking thats all there is to it. You're not even scratching the surface.

By the way, if Melinda Doolittle doesn't win, America really has no good taste.

Blue Sky-ing

Ye olde blog content hasn’t been flowing too freely of late for a myriad of reasons. Firstly, there has been a lot going on. Secondly, there has been a great deal to chew on, what with the flatlands yanking what should be a basic human right from women (in this blogger’s opinion) and the President of the United States being caught in a lie (and not for the first time) with respects to Katrina and its levees. The list goes on and on and since we are gravely prone to distraction, what little focus I could muster was put towards keeping up with developing a passable chess game and assembling parcels of play-lists for B3.

(Side note: I am still soliciting suggestions for what songs to play B3. Send me an email or Skype/IM me or just reply to whatever relevant entry with the preface of “B3 play-list suggestion”)

With so much to write about and comparatively little time, it is difficult to know where to begin. Seeing as the Nebraska abortion ban is in the fore-brain and several of my blogging compatriots have commented extensively on it, I will only give it quick rumination here. DCeiver and others have hashed out an extremely rational and calculated reaction and plan of action in response to the ruling. It is worth the time spent to read the entry and the following thread. While I completely agree that keeping the issue out of the courts and taking aim at dethroning the conservative establishment that brought this fell state into legal ruling at the elected level, I don’t think it likely or realistic in any honest estimate of the future.

This reflects my complete lack of faith (pardon the pun) in the rationality of the middle states to see past their ideologies (be they evangelical, neo-conservative, anti-liberal or just plain stupid). This jaded-ness stems partially from the electoral dividing line in the last election, i.e. blue states vs. Jesus-land. Basically, it’s the correct way to go about it, but given that the decline of Western Civilization is ever more manifest, it would be nearly futile from an expenditure of energy standpoint. Briefly, here’s why: The baseline of education and awareness of people in the United States of America is, for the most part, a joke. In a country where well over 40% of the electorate are sure to fairly sure that the Rapture will happen in their lifetime (nods to Sam Harris), fact is nearly irrelevant. Blame the decline of America’s educational system. Thank the Reagan years. IOKIYAR my ass!

So, after venting a bit there, I continued to read my fellow bloggers takes on the abortion sitch, natch. This uncovered a rather clever and logical point of reason that would be very hard to argue against. Over at TSOTU, el Checkypantz makes a brilliant point regarding the dichotomy of states rights vs. federal law. If you don’t follow the link, Pantz simply states that the religious conservatives cannot have their cake and eat it too. If you get a law on a moral issue (abortion) passed in a state on the premise of it being a state right and federal law has no jurisdiction, it leaves the door wide open for other such “moral issue” legislation to be brought to bare. Namely gay marriage.

So, blue sky-ing into the future and heaven forbid, say abortion is illegal in forty-six of fifty states. The same justification that allowed abortion to be banned at the state level potentially, state rulings providing, allows gay marriage to be fully legal. Without projecting how many states it would be legal in (blue states from ’04?), those giving their unwanted child up for adoption or state agencies no doubt burdened, because that’s the only option, have a much broader field from which to select adoptive parents! It is idealistic, unlikely and containing bullshit at its base, but philosophically it makes the best of a really bad situation.

So, using the Checkypantz logic and the DCeiver tactics, what should really be happening is pro-abortion activists and organizations should be teaming up, immediately, with the Equal Rights Campaign to flank the religious right and sympathetically aligned conservative base do everything they can to push the gay marriage initiative as far as they can within the bounds of the law and no desist from it until abortion ceases to be threatened. Mind you, all the while others should be fighting tooth and nail to protect a woman’s right to choose what happens to her body.

This is important

I think this is an important reference for anyone seeking information or wishing to make informed commentary regarding Hurricane Katrina and the events around it.

The Race Line and the Magic Bullet

It certainly has been a big Labor Day weekend in the news cycle. To try and encapsulate all of its events would be nearly futile as my day job efforts continue to distract me from this outlet; however, I do have some thoughts to share.

Kanye West gave voice to the subtext nearly everyone who is either a minority or liberal was thinking, at least a little. The man has a point, sort of. However, I will be contrary here and say that Bush cares, but only to the extent that his privileged upbringing and executive bubble existence allow him to. The man and probably a majority of this administration plebes more than likely have no clue how to begin to appreciate the magnitude and gravity of what has happened. Nor do they have any real concept of what life is truly like for most people of color in this country. That the poor have been the most affected by the devastation of Katrina is no surprise. That the poor are mostly black and minority is not so much a surprise, but is more telling of the racial problems still saturating American society.

I think the Civil Rights movement in the United States accomplished a Herculean feat in its efforts to break down the walls of racial division, achieving equal rights and considerations under the law for minorities. However, using Katrina’s devastation as evidence, it is more than clear that the progress made by Dr. King and President Johnson and those that followed either did not take root or those roots are still shallow. To the point, inequality in this country has only grown and more often than not, the economic spread is greatest between white and black. Legislation was only the beginning. More needs to be done.

To say that legislation was not enough to overcome a racially divided America is pretty easy. To hear that coming from a white guy like me may be a bit unconventional. More unorthodoxy like this is needed from many more people. I had some friends run for President back in 2000. The Brown/Milner platform was certainly eccentric. However, in its eccentricity, there was a brilliant, if not cartoonish jewel within it. One of their platform items was a proposition for mandatory interracial marriage. This allusion is not an endorsement as much as it is just a rehashing of a cool radical idea. It is always better to deal in facts, but to get outside the box, what if something like mandatory interracial marriage came to pass? Moreover, consider what could be learned about the similarities and differences between people.

At the end of the day, love is going to do what it will and you can’t legislate it one way or the other *cough*. The learning is what is important here. Education is the magic bullet that can solve this problem better and faster than any law ever could. For those of us who had the good fortune to ever partake of a study abroad program or join the Peace Corps or like outfit, how much did it teach you? What did you learn and how much of that still influences you today? It was profound and you couldn’t get it from a book. Right? Experience is the ultimate educator regardless of who you are.

LBJ said, upon signing the Civil Rights Act, that it would kill the Democratic Party in the South for the next several decades, and he was largely right. In the 2004 election, I can’t remember there being any blue states south of Maryland. This cannot flatly be construed as the LBJ prophecy manifest, but it colors the observation. Having technically grown up in the South (shout out to NoVa and Band Camp) I can attest, that with some exception, there is still a color line in the country. Tour around North West DC and take it in, then go to South or North East and tell me if you think there is a color line. I can safely guess that it is similar or more pronounced further south of the Mason Dixon line.

Like love, you can’t legislate culture. Some have tried, but barring something glaring that I am overlooking because of mindless busy work here in corporate America, all have failed. What does have impact on culture, to point out the obvious, is prevailing thought and trends as dictated by art, literature and events on a broad scale. The rift between the races and the economic classes has been somewhat breeched by these things, but not as much as it should or can be. Again, more needs to be done. Certainly we can say again that there are two Americas. Making one America is essential to get back to what the country once was. A place where the streets are paved with gold and the average person can expect that with hard work and tenacity, they can earn the American dream.

So, with mandatory interracial marriage not being a realistic or viable option, what do we do? How do we get the kids from Laguna Beach to realize that their lives aren’t realistic? How do we get kids from the slums of Akron Ohio to see that there is a way out and up? How do we get a welfare kid from South East DC to be friends with a millionaire kid from Potomac, Maryland? How do we get that kid from Potomac, Maryland to realize that he isn’t all that different from the South East, DC kid? How do we get an elected executive that grew up privileged with no cares in the world to see that his life is just as valuable as that of a garbage collector that lost everything he owned and loved in a storm?

These are all highly idealistic questions, but they need to be asked and more weight needs to be given to that kind of idealism. That weight was once there and can be again if our kids are taught to think, question and be a part the community and world around them. If all that starts with Kanye West speaking subtext to power, I am all for it.

Off Topic: Is it just me or is the BBC kicking the b'jesus out of American network news coverage of the Katrina aftermath? Also, has anyone picked up on the incongruity of newscasters, i.e. Katie Couric, broadcasting from these storm pummeled places and the dome in Houston and they are looking flawless? Makeup and clothes are perfect? Does anyone else thing that this aesthetic hurts the credibility of their newscast?

Lastly, if you haven’t read Maureen Dowd today, you should. (TB)

Katrina, the Poor and Security

After reading this post from The American Scene, I was left with a couple of burrs in my saddle about the way that America is set up. It has long been my opinion that the social structure and economy of this country are far too reliant on the automobile. And yes, fossil fuels as well. I am sure there are those out there will say “Yeah, so?” So, seeing that so many people decided to stay in their homes or in their towns/cities despite grave warnings warrants an examination of their decision making process. The post from TAS looks into that and determines that many people were living paycheck to paycheck or were so precarious in their living situations, i.e. they would rather stay and guard what they have lest their belongings be taken by looters and risk life and limb rather than just forfeit it all and leave it to fate to decide how they end up. As Reihan states, if your means only provide a paycheck to paycheck lifestyle, you are “always one paycheck away from disaster.”

So, many of these people were simply unable to leave. They didn’t have cars. They couldn’t afford cabs. And, indirectly because of the social conditions that often accompany poor neighborhoods; they lacked a community to fall back upon that could bear them. The option to rely on family was not their either because of economic status or simply sheer lack of kin. They couldn’t afford to save themselves.

But this is all peripheral to the point I want to make.

My borrowing the phrase from John Edwards is by no means an endorsement of him, but the fallout from Katrina has clearly illustrated beyond any doubt that there are truly two Americas. Oversimplifying it for the sake of this argument, the “Haves” own cars and/or are able to do things to insure themselves against harm, which in this case was to get out of New Orleans. The “Have Nots” were unable to do much and, either out of desperation or inability to find (and pay for) transportation, stayed and forced to endure what came. Many paid for that choice, if you can call it that, with their lives. I am nauseous at the prospect of whatever the final death toll may be.

The point is, this country is out of balance in so many ways and we have to do something about it. The best way to address a huge problem is to start looking for simple ways to solve it, or at least part of it. What if those people who didn’t have cars did have access to trains buses, or other mass transit? This one element would not have solved the problem of getting people out of Katrina’s path, but it certainly would have helped.

What I would love to do now is shoot off on a tangent that imparts my loathing of car culture and the status that it carries and how the automobile industry has been the single largest malignancy in this country since World War II. However, that will be for another post. What I will say is that it is America’s dependence on the car, abetted by the oil business has been, in the long run, at the very least, partially responsible for the class divide in the United States today. Granted, the greed of the American consumer goes hand in hand with them. How many SUVs and luxury lines of automobiles do you need? Did you notice who stayed or was left behind in New Orleans?

Follow me in this leap. What if we broadened the idea of security beyond protection from religious fundamentalists trying to kill us? (Note that I left out the word Islamic) What if security applied to the overall strength and resiliency of our society? You could even include the notion of sustainability in defining security. So, to beat a dead horse, our fuel supply is not secure because we are at the mercy of foreign powers who set the price and as a result, have undue influence on our economic security.

Just watch the United States in the coming weeks call on OPEC to increase its production in efforts to help our recovery from this cataclysm. Sure it will be in the spirit of charity, but truly, it will be just like the dealer giving a junkie a bigger hit to tide him over until he gets through this rough patch.

As with 9/11, the toll will be great and the recovery will take years. What concerns me now is how we will recover. Will state and local leaders be able to see the problems that led to this for what they really were and are? Will our national leaders be able to see past politics and give the affected region what it needs in order to recover and make things better than they were before? Will the American people be able to recognize that there was a bold dividing line in race and class when observing who was affected by this? It will take leadership and vision. Again, as sad as this all of this is, it represents a tremendous opportunity for change in a positive direction that can serve as a glowing example to the rest of the country, if not the world.

Then again, we could just let it all go, as Dennis Hastert thinks.

Chock-Full of Lambast!

These 10 steps for Iraq are just what the doctor ordered. Thanks to TPM for the tip. If you look at Juan Cole’s entry, you think to yourself, “Self. Bush is polling at less than 40% in some/most polls. He can’t go down much further.” So, if the guy has nothing to lose, (except American soldiers lives, obviously) why doesn’t he option to get the job done and done the best way possible? I loathe the idea of more troops being sent into a region where they are targets on multiple levels and have to put their lives on the line for a huge mistake. However it needs to be done now.

I hate to be the one to admit it, but I caught myself in a flip flop. For the first few months of the Iraq War, I was solidly against it. As time passed, but my moderate side got the better of me and swayed my opinion to ambivalence in that now that there are troops on the ground, we have an obligation to finish the job. Then, a few weeks ago I lost patience and began to think a swift pullout letting the Iraqis fend for themselves was the way to go. I mean, they hate the infidel anyway. Why not abide by their wishes and get out of dodge? After reading this 10 step plan, I realize that this is not the good or even feasible option.

If we were to pull out of Iraq tomorrow, we would be opening the door to a Pandora’s Box of nastiness that we, America, would be either directly or indirectly responsible for. Firstly, civil war is assured. History gives us many lessons of how awful that can be. And our exit would be the excuse to let it happen. An offshoot of civil war would be genocide. Iraq is ripe for it.

Sunni, Shia and Kurds have been chomping at the bit to clench power and screw the other group(s) over since Saddam was toppled. We all decried the genocides in Rowanda and Bosnia. Darfur is not officially genocide yet, but it might as well be. And, we did little or nothing about those, save for Bosnia and that was bit late.

These atrocities are the SAME as the Jewish Holocaust. Yes, different lands, peoples and all that, but single groups, ethnic or religious were singled out and eradication was what they faced. You can argue over numbers, but then you are asking that nasty question of what a human life is worth. I am not game for it. We just need to do the right thing.

So, obviously there is wavering support for this war effort. Of course! With something so poorly run and with casualties for America’s sons and daughters rising daily, why wouldn’t there be? But again, getting the job done and done effectively would change things slightly. It is one thing to report marked, quantifiable and verifiable progress that all agree on. It is quite another to sling propaganda, rhetoric and inappropriate analogies around just to get people to cheer for a similarity that does not exist. I mean, when our nation’s President has the temerity to equate the moral imperative of Iraq to that of World War II, that is stretching things beyond tolerance. Are Nazi fascism and Japanese imperialism analogous to the Islamic insurgency? Methinks not. However, it is worth it to note that the Islamic insurgents and al Queda may consider us moral equivalents to the Japanese Imperialists. That comparison would certainly be fairer than the one Bush is making.

That being said let me also offer that if the perspective were shifted a little, Bush might not be as open for criticism as he is now. If he told us that we had the moral imperative to “stay the course” (I loathe that phrase) because we have destabilized things so greatly that horrific things (i.e. genocide and a ripe breeding ground for further and more stable terrorist activity) would happen that blood would be on our already bloody hands. However, admission of fault, guilt and contrition are not within Bush’s power, it would seem. Chalk it up to life in the bubble.

And again, the Bush spin machine is feeding the American people false ideas. He is saying that “They (terrorists, etc…) believe that democracies are inherently weak and corrupt and can be brought to their knees.” Uh, IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH DEMOCRACY! However, it doesn’t help when the President turns around and does this. So, even if these statements are bold face lies, he is making them manifest behind the scenes and providing the false arguments with ample fodder. It is, at the very least, exasperating. When are we going to get a chief executive that is transparent and clearly on our side?

Which brings me to a less retch worthy topic: Even when things are really dark, there are always the voices of reason. Jon Stewart rocks! We are so lucky to have him. Dig this:

Jon Stewart: The people who say we shouldn't fight in Iraq aren't saying it's our fault. . . That is the conflation that is the most disturbing. . .

Christopher Hitchens: Don't you hear people saying. . .

Stewart: You hear people saying a lot of stupid [shit]. . . But there are reasonable disagreements in this country about the way this war has been conducted, that has nothing to do with people believing we should cut and run from the terrorists, or we should show weakness in the face of terrorism, or that we believe that we have in some way brought this upon ourselves.
. .
Hitch: [Sputter]

Stewart: They believe that this war is being conducted without transparency, without credibility, and without competence.
..
Hitch: I'm sorry, sunshine... I just watched you ridicule the president for saying he wouldn't give.
. .
Stewart: No, you misunderstood why. . . . That's not why I ridiculed the president. He refuses to answer questions from adults as though we were adults and falls back upon platitudes and phrases and talking points that does a disservice to the goals that he himself shares with the very people needs to convince.

Hitch: You want me to believe you're really secretly on the side of the Bush administration. . .

Stewart: I secretly need to believe he's on my side. He's too important and powerful a man not to be.

Hitch: [Sputter]

If in the highly unlikely event that someone reads this and that someone happens to know Jon Stewart well enough to do so, please hug the man for me. Do so weeping tears of gratitude and thank him vociferously from me. (And thanks to Wonkette for hipping me to it.) And if the FCC tries any funny stuff with him, I’m coming out of the booth!

Aside: In the earlier speech where Bush likens Iraq to World War II, Bush also criticized President Clinton for not being tougher on fighting terrorism. That is a big load of hooey. From reading Richard Clark’s Against All Enemies, I remember Clark mentioning at least once that Clinton was very much for the use of force in retaliation for various terrorist attacks. He was met with opposition from the military establishment not wishing to put their troops in harms way for fear of further entanglement. Also, he was advised against it by political aids for fear of criticism from the Republican majority that was dogging him continually anyway. So again, a weak leader is one who tries to pass the blame on. The buck should stop with you, Mr. President. Way to lower the bar yet again and bring further disgrace to the office.

For red staters who still think Bush is on their side, they got a hefty strike against that notion the other day. Poverty is up to 12.7%! This is the fourth consecutive year for the statistic’s rise. The only racial demographic that was inverse were the Asians. A Republican President that is good for business? Maybe not. A Republican President that is good for impoverished Asians? Maybe.

One other little ray of light amidst all this darkness is that Ann Coulter got the boot from the Arizona Daily Star. Here is a media publication that just raised the bar! Now if all the other papers that carry her column would just follow suit.

A quick shout out to the DCeiver for getting the nod from Wonkett on a slick little playlet. Kudos.

I think Cintra Wilson is cool.

As are these images, though not for the faint of stomach.

And, I find this amusing, but it suffers from the same lack of class as the subjects it chooses to berate. Sort of. (Thanks to Tom for hipping me to it.)

And what kind of careless blogger would I be if I didn’t mention Katrina? Talk about FUBAR! The Big Easy is not even the Big Soggy. Its more like the new Atlantis. Need I mention that all of this would be still as catastrophic but slightly more in hand if we had some more National Guard troops to lend a hand? I heard somewhere that Governor Nagin made a comment to the effect that if we weren’t so committed in Iraq, we would have more help with this colossal tragedy. If anyone has a link, please hook me up!

Wait… I see it now! Our misunderstood President has the gift of foresight. One of the things our gulf coast areas need most now is sand! And our National Guardsmen and women happen to have superb access to that raw material. Genius! New Orleans is saved! (And no, that wasn’t me that came up with that. Chalk it up to my prior source.)

Now, I promise this is the last bit. I just read this on CNN: “Gov. Haley Barbour compared the devastation to a nuclear blast Tuesday after touring the coast. "I can only imagine that this is what Hiroshima looked like 60 years ago," he said.” [TPM] I’m sorry, but NO! I don’t mean to belittle the enormity of this tragic event, but without knowing a great deal about the dynamics of a nuclear blast, I can safely guess that flooding is nowhere near as close or accurate as a description. Maybe it could analogize the economic toll. So, here again, we see that is all about the money. Can you guess what party Barbour is?