I Want My Country Back

Tea Party Protestor, Staten Island, NY - April 15, 2009, originally uploaded by indigo_belle.

I'm not sure which America she's talking about either.

To be honest, I find these town hall meetings distressing. Grown ass people are practically throwing tantrums over a social reform agenda that they'd in all likelihood would benefit from. Most of these folks appear to be part of a socio-economic class that gives them health care, but still would lack adequate coverage if they were inflicted with a serious illness.

Rachel Maddow did an excellent account of the strategy or, strategery behind these town hall disruptions. Reasonable people can see through the menagerie and recognize that this is in fact, a politically orchestrated effort.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

These details notwithstanding, it's still important to parse out language here.

This rally cry of 'I Want My Country Back', 'I Want My America Back' or some of my other favorite invocations, 'socialism', the Obama/Hitler analogies, ---the 'birthers', and good lord, the 'deathers'--- just drips with racism. I don't say this flippantly, but the supposed fringe parts of the conservative movement have invented so many ways to say nigger it's ridiculous. The language is loaded is white racism that it would be disingenuous of me not to acknowledge it.

However, in acknowledging racism in language is dangerous territory. When you're trying to coax people to the middle ground, acknowledging racism shuts down communication. People get tongue-tied and lock-jawed on old narratives. They get angry, hurt and defensive. They feel guilty. They stop listening. They act out. No one wants to be seen as a bad person. I think what I'm getting at is that intent behind words like socialist in relation to the Obama Administration's policies doesn't sit well. I'm not sure if these folks know what socialism is. I think these words get tossed around and sits on tips of tongues without full awareness of the historic implications behind them.

I'm not sold on health care reform as it stands either. I'm in desperate need of concrete details from Congress and the White House. But I live in a democracy. I understand that the point of town hall meetings provides me with access to my elected representatives to listen to differing points of view that may ultimately (or so I hope) influence public policy to the benefit of my community. Shouting down anyone to the point that nothing is discussed isn't free speech or democratic. It's stupid. It's selfish.

The left or anyone who was opposed to the Bush Administration certainly felt put out about the direction of the American experiment. I certainly felt that we were falling in a pattern that didn't represent the values that our nation purported to uphold. I protested the Iraq War, and I could look to the left and right of me and see a broad based coalition of like minded people who felt as I did. I don't imagine if town halls were held to levy support for the war six years ago, the left would be shouting down those who supported it. I don't think we'd burn Bush in effigy.

While I can appreciate opposition to health care reform and that the extremes of the opposition may very well constitute a minority of the total population, I cannot ignore the pejorative nature of their critique. There's bloodlust behind those words.

I want my country to find the middle ground.

Pastime Paradise

Tea Party in New Dorp Staten Island, NY. April 15, 2009, originally uploaded by indigo_belle.

I posting this as a stub.



As I was reading this post by TNC, my iTunes DJ randomly landed on this classic track. I don't believe in coincidences. As the summer presses on, and our national debate centers around flash point issues of health care reform and race. Within those two issues are layered complexities of class and the shadow side of our American heritage.

I can't remember who said it last year during the campaign, if it was a pundit, an analyst or Michelle Obama, but with advent of Candidate and President Obama, someone said, 'Now we'll find out how racist this country really is.' That sentiment loops through my head as I try to sort through the barrage information and misinformation.







If you haven't watched Alexandra Pelosi's documentary, I think it's worth at least a once over. I don't feel that she necessarily presented these folks in the most objective light, but given the growing populist right resentment towards a reform agenda government complicated by their racial animus, maybe she wasn't so far off.

There's a fine line between discourse and disruption. A fine line between civil disobedience and sociopathy.

More later.

What's On My Mind

At least according to Wordle:

'Teachable Moment'

I think it was Malcolm X who had once said, 'You got to make them laugh in order to make them think.'

Last night, the Colbert Report tried to disambiguate the furor over Gates-gate.

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
The Word - He Who Smelt It, Dealt It
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor Tasers

The Word (flatulence, aside) picked apart why this drama struck nerves. The media frenzy over Obama, Gates and Crowley meeting for a beer, is frankly annoying. And to borrow, POTUS's word (sans modifier), stupid. The amount of minutes devoted to trying to pick apart what racism and racist means in our culture in lieu of real reporting time to present useful details about the health care reform bill is the real tragedy.

You can't cure cancer with a coke and a smile.

Public Option Now

Health Care Reform Rally - Washington, DC. June 25, 2009, originally uploaded by indigo_belle.

It should be restated again. We need health care reform now.

For one, like MSM, I got distracted by the Gates-gate episode. Following this very complex conversation or rather deconstruction about race, class, authority, law, free speech, and frankly, a story of two 'reasonable' men clashed which escalated about who's member is bigger than the other, was riveting.

It's already been said by many more wiser writers and minds than me; that Obama's presser last week that the real message of the urgency of the need for reform was buried in the MSM coverage of a seemingly gaffe by POTUS.

I've been trying to synthesize my thoughts about the bubbling race in America today question for weeks now. I had a rather random post that was only to function as a primer for me to redress late. I felt something was coming. I just wasn't expecting it to come in the form of segregated pools, excessive force/abuse of power cases, and the death of a pop icon.

Again, I digress.

I also started to draft a post about my recent trip to DC to lobby for reform. Particularly, I wanted highlight the people I met and why they were willing to bake in the late June heat, to push for reform and a public option. A few real life things happened that got in the way of that for me. And then my uncle died. I don't meant to make him out to be some sort of martyr, but the significance of his passing and the health care debate cross hairs for me. He was diagnosed with stage four cancer in March. He didn't have health insurance. It wasn't provided to him through his job. I can't help but wonder if there were a public option, would he have been able to seek medical attention months, years ago for a stomach problem that he could have easily dismissed as indigestion. He stopped treatment in June. Apparently he lived an expectantly longer life than any doctor would have conceived. He had a pre-existing condition that complicated his treatment with chemo. As my mother explained to me this past weekend, he had a childhood disease that should have been terminal. And it's apparently genetic. The irony, if you want to call it that, is that my uncle may have saved the life of his children with the discovery of this disease that was responsible for the complicating treatment that would've prolonged his life. I'm still trying to wrap my head around that.

The other story that seems to get lost is the face of the uninsured. It's an issue beyond black, white and class. 43 million Americans do not have health insurance. I've heard reported (trying to verify) that the number of uninsured Americans under the age of 30 constitute the large part of that number. A detail that I don't find too surprising. The low skilled worker, or the recent college graduate who have entry level jobs often are, for lack of a better word, shafted. Ask any bright, young thing who's employed by a publishing house, magazine, or advertising company to someone who's working as a janitor, security guard, or retail clerk. Do they have adequate health coverage, if any? Would a public option help small businesses who factor fringe benefits in employee compensation? Would small businesses be able to expand and hire more workers? Would that aid in our economic recovery?

I think Obama failed to explain these facts in a way that can incite urgency among everyone. MSM failed in deconstructing the argument in digestible bits that would push the conversation beyond what polls supposedly say about what Americans want: deficit reduction.

I'm biased of course. I'm part of a Venn Diagram of constituencies that's affected by this. I want a public option. I'm a bright, young, African American, thirtysomething that would love the independence of not relying on an employer to provide health care coverage. I'd also love a system that would make it affordable so that people like my uncle can seek and receive care in instances where their employer can't afford to provide them coverage. I'd also like for the forces that claim to read tea leaves through polls realize that my biggest care in the world is not the growth of the American deficit. I do care about it. But I'm a member of the generation that will carry the burden of many debts. I'm still researching the data, but my impression is that the national debt will increase with reform and without reform. I'd like to hear a sound debate about the rate of that growth if we don't reform our entitlement programs now.

It's food for thought.

MJ Legacy, Ctd.

For those of you aren't aware, Jay Smooth's Illdoctrine video blog often offers the most insightful discourse on issues and themes in the hip hop world as well as pop culture.

His most recent post about MJ offers a deconstruction I haven't heard too many places except in the comfort of my circle of friends, artists, writers.



It seems to me that mainstream media and its pundits, missed an opportunity to examine this hyper-reality that has manifested in our culture over the past 25 years or so. We watched Michael for nearly four generations in my family. You can't say that about many pop stars. And I don't think any of us thought about the kind of spiritual and emotional toll that takes on a person who is constantly watched, living in a meta-reality, between worlds, personal and public.

Disambiguation, Redux

Toni Morrison shared some wisdom about language, culture, and writing at a talk about a month or so ago. I've watched it a few times. She hit some nerves for me that have been swimming in my head for years. Blogs, Twitter, SMS text messages, hyperlinks... all of these things that allow us to move and share information faster, regardless of quality is unprecedented.

Watching some of the opening statements for the Sotomayor confirmation hearings, I found myself returning again to this video:



The key point? There's a difference between discourse and information. Literature, more specifically the novel, in this age will still act as a vehicle to organize information and human emotion. As Morrison says, 'the novel can be a body of knowledge.'

I'm still processing, sorting, filtering, organizing...

Mad World

Huge Rally in Support Of Mousavi, Tehran, originally uploaded by mousavi1388.

I feel their sense of urgency. And I'm hopeful for their success in achieving self determination as a society. The people deciding who represents them. It's not so much about the who's the best leader for the Islamic Republic of Iran. It's about respect for the process, the structure of the civil society itself. Mousavi is symbol now. I don't think we'll ever come to know what kind of leader he would be. But these protests do show that the people were seeking an alternative to Ahmadinejad, a leader that could be a vehicle for reform within their society. And the system failed them.

Remember 1989? There's a weird symmetry in history. Deja vu all over again. I remember feeling the same desperate sense of urgency and hope and dread for the students in Tiananmen Square in June 1989. I was a tween then, but I understood the longing of an oppressed people challenging the system. Later when we started high school that same year, two German tourists spoke to my world history class and talked about the shifts they were feeling then in their own country. I asked them a question that I felt in bones. I asked them if they thought the Wall would come down. I still remember his facel, and he said, 'I hope so. I sure hope so.' It could not have been more than two weeks later and the unthinkable happened. I remember Jeremy running to class the next morning saying to me, 'Syreeta! How'd you do that? How'd you know? You called it!'

All I can say is that people dream in a common language. If you heard those German tourists in my history class in 1989, you could feel the urgency for change. And I don't think it's a stretch that young Germans felt a kinship with the students in Tiananmen Square. In the wake of that tragedy, they might have found their courage to challenge the old order in their nation.

The poignant part of the President's Cairo speech two weeks ago sort of reads now as a prophetic allusion to events that are now manifesting. Pundits have found fault with the connection with Civil Rights Movement and resistance movements -fringe to moderate- of some Arab communities to regimes. I felt that it struck a very raw nerve. Something that we all had to acknowledge. African Americans learned from the Indian struggle against British rule during the first half of the twentieth century. In 1947, India became a sovereign nation again. Our own history shows how civil disobedience can affect change. It ended injustices my forebearers suffered through. It gave me the right to vote without fear. It seems clear to me now that the Iranian kids heard him. Still, Obama can't engage them directly. That's not his purpose at this time. A statesman engages governments. This is a populist movement. And all we can do is watch, support, and hope that human rights are respected.

My color scheme is green so that they know that I'm with them.

Catch A Fire

, originally uploaded by mousavi1388.

I don't know about you, but I'm riveted by the events in Iran since the weekend. If you've been living under a rock, Twitter has emerged as the critical source for following the events in Tehran. The Atlantic's Andrew Sullivan has masterful coverage. A must read. Print media as it lives online has in-depth accounts, images, and analysis. Television has failed. Perhaps today we'll see a difference in the type of coverage that the cable news and major networks will show than the pallid interest it had displayed over the weekend.

I can't help but think if we had Twitter in 2003 during the height of the antiwar protests, would we have had a larger impact on the mainstream media coverage? Would that have stopped the invasion of Iraq? Hindsight remains fuzzy. But now? We have this technological infrastructure to support digital communication. And that communication supports civic engagement and action. Perhaps a revolution.

I'm watching these events very closely. We're getting information in real time. This is the future of journalism. The future is now.

Greene Avenue between Washington and St. James

© syreeta mcfadden 2009

A More Perfect Union 2.0

This is simply brilliant.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

If you don't have time to watch the video, please read the transcript. I can't think of another person who has the moral authority to deliver this speech. I felt the same way about his speech on race last year. There's a maturity beyond the words. There's clarity and acknowledgment that he gets it. And so do we. He doesn't insult our intelligence or talk down to us about it. He's embracing it full on. There's honesty in balancing our fixed perceptions and opposites, naming them and then challenging us to transcend.

I don't even need to glean what the Right will say about this. But in embracing this 'third rail' of sorts, he's taking the road I don't think any of the candidates last year ever could. The opportunity here is to challenge the world community to be the change we wish to seek in the world.

The middle ground is something close to freedom.

Funkin' Lesson

I don't know what's going on in my brain today. But it began with a question that I woke up with this morning: what is black?

And then I remembered the jam from back in the day.



Still thinking about where I'm going with this question. But right now, I'm shakin' my ass to early '90s hip hop.

Disambiguation

In the ongoing debate about torture versus the rule of law, constitutional values, and American identity and values, the media seemed to miss the mark, not surprisingly again.

Jon Stewart still wins.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	M - Th 11p / 10c
American Idealogues
thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Economic Crisis Political Humor

Validation

H/T to Crucial Minutiae blogger Jennifer Gandin Le for this one. If you have time to watch this short film featuring TJ Thyne of 'Bones' fame, please do. And if you're not smiling by the end, then there must be no love left in your heart.



Happy Friday.

Not In Our Name

'Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.' - Martin Luther King

I'm not sure if enough people are talking about this.

I've been avoiding it myself. Looking at the issue straight in the eye. See the character of the American people through the actions of our leaders. Honestly, I don't want to. But much like that nagging small voice inside your head, you must relent and deal with it.

Part of the strategery in releasing these memos is that it forces us to talk about it. Everyday people, beyond the mainstream media. Some would like to frame this debate as 'leftwing' issue. Some have even attempted to phrase the conversation in this way:

It’s hard for me to look at a great nation issuing these documents and sending them out to the world and thinking, ‘Oh, much good will come of that.’ Sometimes in life you want to keep walking… Some of life has to be mysterious.

- Peggy Noonan

On the interwebs, populist outrage seems to be simmering. Andrew Sullivan and Ta'hesi Coates for the Atlantic Monthly have written about it.And again, we have Shepard Smith, with his flashes of outrage. This guy's done a song about it, Jon Stewart reported it satirically on the Daily Show, Nick Flynn wrote a brilliant essay about it in Tin House last year, George Saunders wrote satirical story about it for the New Yorker, and yet, I sort of get the feeling that we're not angry enough.

We are avoiding talking about it. It's ugly. It's ugly like lynchings, serial killers, interning Japanese American citizens, rape, police brutality, eugenics projects, and slavery. It's the dark side of the force that everyone tries to forget.

For what good is this great republic if we can't be honest and be held accountable for our crimes? How dare we say that we're the moral compass to the world when we're unwilling to prosecute crimes committed by our leaders? When did we let our fear forfeit the rule of law?

The most damning realization in my reading these memos, the Red Cross Report, the Senate Arms Services Committee Report, and other sources to deconstruct the issue is this: Torture became policy. Torture suborned confessions to support the invasion of Iraq. Torture was policy and vehicle to support a political and agenda.

And that realization sends chills down my spine. It makes me weep. I hope I'm not alone.

Torture is wrong. Waterboarding is torture. There, I said it. And I will say it again and again. We all should. And we can't stop until officials of the previous administration are brought to justice and are held accountable for their crimes against humanity and the republic.

photo: © syreeta mcfadden 2009

Race Talk

Toni Morrison wrote an essay about language and its uses that I think many people didn't get on first read.

And then there's this nonsense.

A lot of people have sounded off about this already. But here's my concern: this Bruce woman, Glenn Beck, Fox News, "Joe the Plumber" among many others,is that their rhetoric and language can provoke action. Dangerous action. It's also distracting. Like our obsession with the AIG bonuses (1% of the bailout money). Please. That's not nearly as distressing as trying to unravel the plan to nationalize Citigroup and Bank of America. Because we really, really need to pay attention to that. It's inevitable. And it's going to take a shift in our thinking, patience and work to define our shared existence in this nation going forward. So I'm not sure what significance a culture war has right now when people just want to find balance, maintain a decent quality of life, and pursue happiness.

Someone wrote in my high school yearbook this quote: "You have the freedom of speech, just watch what you say." I still have mixed feelings about that statement. Maybe I'm just asking for discernment, common sense, or just words that expand awareness rather than contract it. Words that create, rather than destroy. And the wisdom to know the difference.

The Black Swan

Hindsight is said to be 20/20. But sometimes, it's blurry.

The thing I learned from the "Brawl Street" confrontation between Jon Stewart and Jim Cramer is the latter.

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

Jim Cramer Unedited Interview Pt. 3

Daily Show Full Episodes
Important Things w/ Demetri Martin

Political Humor
Jim Cramer

The crux and larger message in the interview however, shouldn't get buried and should be repeated over and over. That message is that American investigative journalism has failed us in reportage on the financial crisis.

There's truth to that, however, hindsight remains fuzzy. In 2006 and 2007, business reporters from the Wall Street Journal, Financial Times, and Business Week reported signs of distress in the mortgage market. By mid-2007, there were mortgage foreclosures and were growing at a rate that was anticipated to exceed the amount during the Great Depression. Alan Greenspan cautioned in late 2007 and 2008 that it was unclear if this problem could be isolated and not contaminate other areas of the financial markets.

In August 2007, the global financial markets went into defibrillation. And a few months after, This American Life did a brilliant show, "The Giant Pool of Money", that unpacked the crisis to glean deeper meaning from it. In 2008, Vanity Fair did another brilliant article that deconstructed the Bear Stearns acquisition.

And then there's CNBC. The bigger question that comes to play is who is CNBC's audience? Investors, consumers, or corporations? The Daily Show put a spotlight on the fundamental problem that I think we already know. CNBC isn't journalism. Jim Cramer isn't a reporter. He's a commentator. He's a man who's worked in the industry for years, built relationships with people that became leaders in the industry, and creators of financial products that grew money, real and most likely, imagined. Then the bottom fell out and things fell apart fast. And we learned that the financial market was made of widgets worth two trillion dollars more than the GDP.

Hmmmmm.

CNBC's credibility was compromised. And that tagline, In Cramer We Trust? How can he continue to be a reliable source for commentary on market conditions when his own contacts have become unreliable? If the economy is a function of confidence, and confidence is supported by value of accurate information or simply insight that comes from trusted sources, then our confidence is shaken. But that's if you were only relying on CNBC to provide you an accurate picture of the crisis. And if you were really paying attention, you would've been able to see how these things were connected. Maybe the reporting wasn't loud enough, or maybe it's hard to explain a system that requires insider knowledge of how concepts lead to wealth accumulation. Perhaps we needed the major news networks to have done a series of primetime specials noting how regulatory agencies didn't do their due diligence, or risk management departments were understaffed within major financial institutions, or worse ignored, or better, explain why you need risk management, and that we were borrowing beyond our means from the Chinese that accelerated growth of our national debt. Or even how all our institutions over leveraged and borrowed while we obsessed (rightfully so) about Iraq, Afghanistan and the 2008 Election.

Did CNBC see this meltdown coming to report it accurately? Hindsight is a funny thing. I'm a layman at best, and worked in the real estate industry, and I can tell you one thing: I did see it coming. A lot of us did. Some may not have expected it to be so toxic that it would cause a system shut down. But there were signs of distress everywhere. It seemed to me that people were reluctant to connect the dots and prepare everyone that a correction was on the horizon. CNBC is a network in collusion with financial industry. It's an offshoot of a larger conglomerate that relies on advertising dollars to support its programming and operations, and let's be honest; it restricts what truth they can say. NBC could have reported these signs of distress, but they would've lost money and we wouldn't have another Celebrity Apprentice.

Some of the conservative talking heads also are dismissive of the demographic that watches the Daily Show. It presumes that young people aren't paying attention to the news and only get news from the Daily Show. That's inaccurate. They're paying attention, they're twittering links, posting links on Facebook, reading Huffpo, NYT. The jokes wouldn't be funny or make sense if you weren't paying attention. And if you are paying attention, you must be resourceful enough to find news sources out there that you can trust and restore your confidence in the system.

An Open Letter to the Rational Conservative

Dear Rational Conservative,

I’ve given this some thought, and I think the Republican Party should find a white guy.

These new faces of the party that your strategists have been pushing as of late aren’t working. It’s embarrassing –for them and for me. At this point, a rational sounding white guy might be the change you can believe in. I know that the defeat in November to the Democratic Party, let along that the leader of the party as an African American, still burns but your strategists struggling to parade a 'minority' is cheapening the effort to demonstrate inclusion in your ranks. The Democrats didn't just find a black guy, they found someone who is intelligent, pragmatic and just plain gets it.

I feel for you. I really do. It seems to me that your party acts under the presumption that you are stupid. I'm insulted for you. I know that you’re smarter than that. And if some of you are persons of color or women, then it’s my belief that your party has been a disservice to you. You’re entitled to be intelligent, conservative and woman. Or African American. Or Mexican American. These voices that we’ve seen on the national stage cannot be representative of your whole constituency. I know that your constituency isn't all white, and Rush Limbaugh as a mouthpiece for your party may make you cringe, but your silence has been deafening. If you're a party that engages in ideas and solutions, then it's ok to disagree with Limbaugh. You have that freedom of speech. It's in the constitution. If you disagree with Rove, know that you live in a democracy that protects your right to do so publicly. Not all democrats agree with everything Obama says and does. And surprisingly, he respects a differing point of view. Go figure.

I think it’s my job as an American that skews liberal and progressive to cajole some you rational thinking conservatives from your hiding places. You can’t possibly continue as the silent majority of a party whose talking points come exclusively from blowhards like Limbaugh. If you disagree with the policies from the Obama administration, what would you propose as an alternative? I’d like to hear it. I’m not kidding, I really would like to hear them. I don’t mean this to sound combative at all; I want to hear what you have to say in terms of solutions that are rooted in the facts and reality of the situation we face.

I know you’re out there. You can engage in a debate that doesn’t infuriate everyone to the point where we stop talking. I know that there were some of you who didn’t believe in the policies of the previous administration that endangered the very tenets from which our democracy was based. I know that Shepard Smith’s comments are not just slips off "of the Fox News reservation." I know you’re out there, and you feel you got played because your party’s strategists put out Palin, Jindal and this guy Michael Steele, who thinks you need a “hip hop makeover”. That belittles your crisis of existence at the moment.

I can only speak for myself but I don’t have the time to sort through rhetoric and misinformation when the realities of the economy and the wars are staring me in my face. I don’t want a single party system. I like healthy debate. I don’t always skew far left in my views either. I want practical solutions. I want to fight for the safety of the world we live in. Our lives are now, not in the hereafter. I’m happy to meet you, rational conservative, in the middle. Because that’s the spirit of democracy, the place where compromise meets and solutions arise.

Please speak up, I'm listening.


Sincerely,

Syreeta McFadden
Democrat and Pragmatist