WEEKEND EDITION JANUARY 6-8, 2012
Frank Bardacke has written the comprehensive history of the United Farm Workers, a definitive biography of Cesar Chavez and a magnificent guide to the politics and sociology of the 1960s-80s.
In the mid 1960s a nascent union of field workers transformed themselves into moral guideposts for middle class liberals as well as the first media magnet for Mexican Americans. Cesar Chavez became an almost instant icon, able to marshal a variegated supporting cast of politicized farm laborers, civil rights veterans and radical organizers and make communion with elements of the Catholic Church, the AFL-CIO and the Democratic Party.
Together they organized a sector of the middle class: not to buy grapes. Imagine! A group of humble darker skinned poor people requested consumers to postpone their God-given needs for instant grape-ification just to support the cause of a union of those who picked and processed the succulent commodity!
Bardacke chronicles the farm workers’ union’s campaign to convince pre-soccer moms to shun grapes and the organized religious and union-backed march through California’s Central Valley. Together, these campaigns helped pressure major grape growers to recognize the United Farm Workers. Sacrificing consumers and workers rejoiced. But within two decades of its meteoric rise and seemingly solid liberal and political alliances the UFW fell into obscurity.
Bardacke explains the process by which the charismatic Chavez at the helm of a potential labor powerhouse then failed to try to organize the majority of California’s farm laborers. The boycotts and political pacts – especially when Democrats lost – proved insufficient by themselves to sustain a viable union. Without the specter of mass union power, powerful adversaries would – and did — squash the UFW.
Chavez played the key role in the UFW’s rise and then undermined its future. Bardacke examines internal union struggles, and those within Chavez himself, “Trampling” dramatizes the man’s legendary strengths, but also his weaknesses.
From his Arizona boyhood, through military service “Tarmpling” shows how Chavez emerged as a natural leader. Bardacke also provides perceptive critiques of influences on him, from the Catholic Church through the organizing mantras of Saul Alinsky; and how Chavez used these doctrines to shape his own world-view. The book does not debunk Chavez; it brings him from legend to earth.
Like some devout Catholics, Chavez linked penance with justice. The long Central Valley march became a religious journey, a symbol of “the long road we have traveled.. and the long road we have yet to travel, with much penance, in order to bring about the Revolution we need.” Chavez suffered immense physical pain on the pilgrimage, but it offered “an excellent way of training ourselves to endure the long, long struggle.”
“Trampling” also recounts anecdotal biographies of dozens of the countless extraordinary men and women who contributed their energy, brains, and talent – and sacrificed – to make possible the birth and initial successes of the UFW.
Characters like Gilbert Padillia and Epifanio Camacho emerge alongside Dolores Huerta and the white organizers like Marshall Ganz, Catholic priests and the gifted Luis Valdez who helped organize through theater. His now celebrated teatro campesino employed enormously talented field workers and barrio residents to teach lessons through drama and song.
Bardacke paints three-d pictures of the characters to emphasize that history is not just class confrontation, but also dialogue and debate, anger and frustration: the intellectual and emotional components of class struggle.
The author refuses to lump tens of thousands of men and women as “farm workers.” Instead, we meet apieros (celery choppers) and lechugueros (lettuce pickers) with amazing skills and discipline. Those who tended the grapes and dealt with the eccentricities of broccoli, also had full lives. Some could make rousing speeches, or sing and play instruments, plot strategy and become role models.
They didn’t always agree. Indeed, the UFW splintered over the next decade so that most of the thousands of mostly dark skinned people stooping over the crops that feed this nation no longer have a union or even earn a sustenance wage. But they share a legacy that Cesar Chavez helped build. Chavez forged the Chicano identity, but didn’t endure as the labor leader who could lead the working class battle against agri-business and lesser capitalists who reap huge profits from the farm workers’ backs.
The book explores in excruciating detail how Chavez blamed “illegal aliens,” Mexican farm workers for losing strikes. He claimed they weakened the union because they loomed as strike-breakers. Bardacke documents how the UFW actually reported Mexican workers without papers to the INS and how the union forged “an extralegal gang of a couple of hundred people who policed about ten miles of the Arizona-Mexico border, intercepting people attempting to cross it, and, brutalized the captives.”
Chavez leaned toward consumer boycotts over militant organizing. He fasted and indulged in self-sacrifice during tough bargaining. He also exercised ruthless central union control, not allowing organizing initiatives to develop without his approval. Bradacke cites examples of how he actually ousted and even blacklisted some potential leaders who defied his authority. And he also shows Chavez’ virtues: A balanced and just portrait.
(TRAMPLING OUT THE VINTAGE: CESAR CHAVEZ AND THE TWO SOULS OF THE UNITED FARM WORKERS Verso, $54.95, 742 pages) deserves #1 ranking as best labor history of the year. Professors should assign it as a text for labor history, California history, and US history. I suggest it for all book-lovers.
Saul Landau’s WILL THE REAL TERRORIST PLEASE STAND UP is on dvd (cinemalibrestore.com) He’s an Institute for Policy Studies fellow. His BUSH AND BOTOX WORLD was published by CounterPunch.
WEEKEND EDITION JANUARY 6-8, 2012
by MIKE WHITNEY
Even though housing is in terrible shape in the US, it’s not nearly as bad as Ireland. Irish real estate is in freefall. Prices have plunged 60 percent across the country and 65 percent in Dublin. Austerity measures have sent unemployment soaring (18 percent) and housing into the doldrums. According to the Guardian, prices dipped 8 percent in the last quarter alone, “the largest ever quarterly fall in house prices in Ireland.” (“Ireland’s house prices at lowest levels since 2000″, The Guardian)
And things aren’t so hot in neighboring Spain either where housing prices slumped 7.4 percent in the third quarter year-over-year, “the fourteenth straight quarter of falls.” (Reuters) The wreckage from Spain’s housing bubble is visible everywhere, from the dysfunctional, underwater banking system, to the skyhigh unemployment (22 percent), to the droopy state revenues. The
country’s dreary finances have led to the ousting of Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero and his Socialist government to be replaced by rightwing hardliner Mariano Rajoy. (Rajoy promises to slash government spending wherever possible, even if it means rolling back popular social programs.) Here’s more on Spains’ housing bubble from Reuters:
“House prices have dropped around 24 percent in real terms since their peak in 2007 and are expected to decline between 35 and 40 percent over a 10-year period, with demand hit by high unemployment and low population growth.” (“Spain housing prices fall 7.4 pct in long slump”, Reuters)
In the US, homeowners have seen their equity vanish in a matter of a few years. According to the benchmark S&P/Case-Shiller Home Price Index, housing prices have slipped 32 percent from their peak in 2006, wiping out roughly $8 trillion in home equity. The price-reversal has caused a sharp decline in consumer spending as nearly $500 billion per year had been drawn from Home Equity Withdrawals (HEW) during the bubble years.
So, how far will prices fall in the US, and is there any chance that the US follows Ireland’s lead and lobs off another 30 percent or so?
That seems unlikely, mainly because the big banks appear to be working with the Fed to control the amount of supply that comes online. So, for example, (according to Calculated Risk) “Existing home inventory declined 18 percent year-over-year in December” (2011) whereas, the “shadow inventory” of homes barely budged. Here’s how Calculated Risk defines shadow inventory:
Housing inventory “that is currently not on the market, but is expected to be listed in the next few years. Shadow inventory could include bank owned properties (REO: Real Estate Owned), properties in the foreclosure process, other properties with delinquent mortgages (both serious delinquencies of over 90+ days, and less serious), condos that were converted to apartments (and will be converted back), investor owned rental properties, and homeowners “waiting for a better market”, and a few other categories – as long as the properties are not currently listed for sale.”
So, while existing home inventory is back to about 2005 levels (2.5 million units); shadow inventory adds another 3 million to that sum. If that shadow supply was suddenly dumped onto the market, prices would fall precipitously. So, my guess, is that the Big Boys are colluding with our friends at the Fed to maintain pricing by releasing the backlog in dribs and drabs. Even so, the downward pressure on prices is impressive. For example, the banks reduced supply by roughly 18 percent y-o-y, and yet, prices STILL went down nearly 4 percent! Normally, you’d think that if that much supply was kept off the market, prices would rise, but that’s not the case. This just shows that the attitude towards owning a home has changed dramatically. Even with historic low interest rates, people are shunning home ownership in droves.
Readers may have heard rumours in the last few days that the Fed is pushing a program to convert an undisclosed number of foreclosures into rental units. Unfortunately, this just looks like another Ponzi-scam that will have little effect on overall sales. Let me draw your attention to the key passage in the Reuters summary of the proposed program:
“Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, in a letter accompanying the recommendations, said the U.S. central bank was responding to requests for advice about what could be done to halt the spiral of falling home prices and rising foreclosures.
Among the recommendations: allow Fannie Mae (FNMA.OB) and Freddie Mac (FMCC.OB) to refinance loans that they have not guaranteed.” (“Fed says expand Fannie, Freddie role to aid housing”, Reuters)
So what the Fed wants to do is refinance the private-label garbage mortgages that are left on the banks’ balance sheets, that way the taxpayer is left holding the bill. The whole rental thing is just a diversion; just another bailout.
Let’s get back to the meat and potatoes: “CoreLogic reports that shadow inventory as of October 2011 is still at January 2009 levels.”
From Seeking Alpha:
“As of October 2011, shadow inventory remained at 1.6 million units, or five-months’ supply and represented half of the 3 million properties currently seriously delinquent, in foreclosure or in REO.
Of the 1.6 million properties currently in the shadow inventory, 770,000 units are seriously delinquent, …430,000 are in some stage of foreclosure … and 370,000 are already in REO.” (Seeking Alpha)
So, there’s roughly twice as many homes that will eventually come onto the market than we see in the reported current inventory. Does that mean that prices could fall another 32 percent?
Probably not, but they’ll certainly drop another 5 or 10 percent. That’s inevitable. But sticker shock is just small part of a much more serious problem. 1 in 5 homeowners are already underwater on their mortgages. If that number goes up, so too will the foreclosures further devastating working class people who’ve already had the rug pulled out from under them countless times since the crisis began. Unfortunately–on our present trajectory–we’re headed straight for the cliff. If the Obama troupe doesn’t change the present do-nothing policy, and take aggressive steps to keep people in their homes; we could see foreclosures triple before this thing is over. Here’s the scoop from Business Insider:
“A major bear on the housing market, Amherst Securities’ Laurie Goodman has predicted since 2009 another housing crash as banks are forced to liquidate tons of bad loans.
Up to 11 million mortgages are likely to default, according to Goodman. This is a frightening figure, seeing as only several million have been liquidated since the crisis began. When it happens, the market will be flooded with supply.
Goodman reached 11 million by projecting default rates for non-performing loans, re-performing loans, and underwater loans.(Check out the excellent graphs)
Meanwhile banks are refraining from liquidations in hope that bad loans turn good. Thus the shadow inventory keeps growing.” (“Laurie Goodman On Why Another 11 Million Mortgages Will Go Bad”, Business Insider)
For those who think we should “Let the market work this out”; keep in mind the different standard that’s been applied to the banks, who not only perpetrated this crisis, but who’ve also been its main beneficiaries via unlimited public support. (A “blank check”)
Isn’t it about time we gave the victims equal consideration?
MIKE WHITNEY lives in Washington state. He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion, forthcoming from AK Press. He can be reached at fergiewhitney@msn.com
WEEKEND EDITION JANUARY 6-8, 2012
CounterPunch Diary
First up: “sustainable.” It’s been at least a decade since this earnest word was drained of all energy, having become the prime unit of exchange in the argot of purposeful uplift. As the final indication of its degraded status, I found it in President Obama’s “signing statement” which accompanied the whisper of his pen, as on New Year’s Eve – a very quiet day when news editors were all asleep — he signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for 2012 which handed $662 billion to the Pentagon and for good measure ratified by legal statute of the exposure of US citizens to arbitrary arrest without subsequent benefit of counsel, and to possible torture and imprisonment sine die, abolishing habeas corpus. Don’t bother ask what happens to non-US citizens.
As he set his name to this repugnant legislation the president issued a “signing statement” in which I came upon the following passage: “Over the last several years, my Administration has developed an effective, sustainable framework for the detention, interrogation and trial of suspected terrorists…”
So much for “sustainable.” Into the tumbrils with it.
Obama is against signing statements, at the theoretical level. In 2008 he said, “I taught the Constitution for ten years, I believe in the Constitution, and I will obey the Constitution of the United States. We’re not going to use signing statements as a way of doing an end run around Congress.” Whatever Obama may have taught, a signing statement, whether issued by Bush or Obama, doesn’t have the force of law. Obama’s December 31 signing statement was part of a diligent White House campaign to suggest that (a) there is nothing in the NDAA to perturb citizens, but (b) anything perturbing is entirely the fault of Congress, and (c) Obama solemnly swears that so long as he is president he’ll never OK anything bad, whatever the NDAA might be construed as authorizing, and anyway (d) there’s nothing new about the detention provisions because they merely reiterate those of the Authorization for Use of Military Force, signed by Bush in 2001.
Next up: “iconic.” I trip over this golly-gee epithet thirty times a day. No warrant for its arrest is necessary, nor benefit of counsel or trial in a US court. Off to the tumbrils, arm in arm with “narrative.” These days everyone has a narrative, a earnest word originally recruited, I believe, by anthropologists. So we read “according to the Pentagon’s narrative…” Why not use some more energetic formulation, like, “According to the patent nonsense minted by the Pentagon’s press office…” ? Suddenly we’re surrounded by “narratives,” all endowed with equal status. Into the tumbrils with it.
I think “parse” has almost run its course, though occasionally this shooting star of 2011 is to be spotted panting along in some peloton of waffle from the Commentariat. Off with its head , along with “meme,” an exhausted little word that deserves the long dark rest of oblivion.
Back to janitors and the flailing Gingrich’s masterplan for youth. Doug Lummis writes from Okinawa:
“Alex,
You should know that the public schools in Japan do not hire janitors. The kids do it, boys and girls, all of them. Nobody gets paid for it, so it doesn’t have anything to do with rich or poor. It’s just one of the things you do at school. They dust and sweep, and wipe down the floors with damp rags, and clean the toilets. I don’t know if it teaches a ‘work ethic’, but it teaches them some valuable skills, and it also teaches them that that kind of work is not ‘beneath them’, something only poor people do. I suppose some of the kids dislike doing it, but a lot of them seem to enjoy it, and take pride in their skill at wielding the broom, or bending over and laying your wet cloth on the floor, putting your weight on it and running to the end of the hall, leaving a clean damp streak behind. Of course this is utterly different from what Gingrich is proposing which, like the present US system of hiring adults to clean the children’s schools, is bound to teach that certain jobs are only for certain classes. The Japanese system doesn’t produce and egalitarian society, but it does have a good educational effect.
“You might mention that I consider myself qualified to talk about janitoring because when I was in the fifth and sixth grades I was the janitor for the one-room Donner Trail Elementary School at Norden, California. I was chosen not because we were the poorest family but because I was one of the few who didn’t have to take the school bus to get home. They gave me $20 a month, which in those days (1947-48) was very nice money for a kid to get.”
Next, from John Walsh’s letter to Amy Goodman of Democracy Now:
“I have a bone to pick about your coverage of Ron Paul and the five comments that appeared in his newsletter a generation ago.
“First, contrary to what you say, the rest of the MSM does publish the exact words of the statements – in fact they appear ad nauseam in semi-official publications like the NYT.
“Second, as you surely know, Paul has said he did not write those statements, did not read them or know of them at the time and DISAVOWS them. You did not mention that.
“Third Ron Paul is against the death penalty and mandatory minimum sentences in part because they are racist – and he has said so. You did not mention that.
“Fourth, the head of the NAACP in Austin who has known Ron Paul for 20 years says that the man can in no way be considered a racist. You did not mention that.
“Fifth, in an interview with Bill Moyers Ron Paul specifically says that Libertarianism is incompatible with racism. You do not mention that.
“I think you have a duty to tell the whole truth on the matter because a half truth is a full lie – as the saying goes.
“Finally I might ask which is more racist- bombing people of color all around the world as Obama has done, for example in the war on Libya for which your constant guest CIA ‘consultant’ Juan Cole was a cheerleader – or five statements written by someone else a generation ago which have now been repudiated by Paul?
“Have you forgotten that your program is subtitled the War and Peace Report? My friends in NYC have taken to calling it HypocrisyNow! I hope that soon it can reclaim its older tradition of principled and consistent anti-interventionism and report the full truth on antiwar candidates like Ron Paul, the only anti-imperialist and peace candidate in the race.
John V. Walsh, MD
Professor of Microbiology and Physiological Systems
University of Massachusetts Medical School.”
One question Paul should be asked is whether or not the doctor believes, as Lew Rockwell (the imputed author of the memos, though he denies it) and most other southern libertarians do, that plantation owners should have been compensated after the freeing of the slaves for their lost ‘property.’
The So-Called Newspaper of Record: Can’t They Get Anything Right?
Thanks to The Poke for that one.
Long Beach Press-Telegram (CA) - Tuesday, April 11, 2006
Author: Austan Goolsbee
The Internal Revenue Service filing deadline is almost upon us, forcing us once again to fill out exasperating tax forms. Spurred on by the grumbling, Congress will most likely make noises about introducing tax reforms that never come about. Experts will again bemoan the deductions and loopholes of the system and the complexity of the alternative minimum tax .
Rather than rehash the same old debates, though, we would do better to aim at the middle and ask why most Americans have to do their taxes at all.
You see, many people do not have a complex tax situation. They don't itemize. They get income only from simple places -- like wages from their job and interest from their bank. And here's the kicker: this information is already sent directly to the Internal Revenue Service by taxpayers' employers and banks.
Indeed, for many Americans, literally every line they fill out on their tax return is information the IRS already has. (If you don't believe it, try not filling out the ``wages'' line on your tax return next year and see what happens. You'll receive a notice that states your wages -- and assesses a penalty for not reporting them.)
And yet these same people are forced to spend hundreds of millions of hours and several billion dollars each year preparing and filing their taxes .
That expense in time and money is as much a part of the tax burden on Americans as the check that goes to the federal government. And unlike the tax payment, this part of the tax burden doesn't generate any revenue for the government, though part of it goes into H&R Block's pocket. It is, in the words of the econo- mists, pure deadweight loss.
Which is why the IRS should eliminate it. With a small adjustment in processing procedures, the revenue service could send you a tax form already filled out with the information it has for you -- a Simple Return -- rather than a blank tax form.
You would simply check the numbers against your W-2 and 1099 and then sign it. That would be it. If you didn't want to participate, you could just throw the Simple Return away and do your own taxes the old-fashioned way.
A system like this is already used in Denmark and Sweden. Last year, California tried a version for its state income tax . According to the California Franchise Tax Board, the system reduced the time people spent doing their state taxes as much as tenfold; around 95 percent of the people who participated in the pilot project said they would use it again.
Even without fundamentally changing the tax code, plenty of Americans -- as many as 40 percent of taxpayers -- would be able to qualify for a Simple Return.
According to research I did for the Hamilton Project at the Brookings Institution, this could save middle-class Americans up to $2 billion per year in tax preparation fees and 250 million hours of time. At the very least, the program would represent a triumph of common sense over bureaucracy for millions of people.
Here's another way to think about it: A Simple Return would be the equivalent of giving a tax cut to the middle class but at little cost. Indeed, when the Government Accountability Office analyzed this type of tax system in 1996, it claimed that it would save the IRS money because it would reduce the error rate on the tax returns that people file. (California found this to be true in its pilot project.)
For the cost of modernizing the computer matching system within the IRS and the Social Security Administration, we could eliminate the compliance burden for more than one-third of American taxpayers.
Many experts say we should tackle complexity where it is most obvious -- the top income brackets. After all, they argue, nearly 40 percent of taxpayers use the easier forms like the 1040EZ.
But the instruction manual for even the 1040EZ form is 36 pages long. Is it any wonder that almost half of the people filling out the simpler forms still pay a tax preparer to do it for them? Our system is driving people to tax preparers who then get paid for filling out information that the IRS already has.
As we contemplate tax reform in the coming year and beyond, many will ponder grand changes to the tax system like moving us from an income to a consumption tax or eliminating the mortgage interest deduction. But tax revolutions are a tough sell these days.
And we could do a lot worse than relieving Americans of the burden of doing busywork for the IRS.
Austan Goolsbee is a professor of economics at the University of Chicago Graduate School of Business.
New York Observer, The (NY) - Friday, January 6, 2012
Author: Adrianne Jeffries
One kind of Santorum.
Remember when a mischievous sex columnist Google-bombed Rick Santorum in order to associate the then-U.S. Senator with a neologism for an anal sex byproduct in retaliation for Mr. Santorum’s comments against homosexuality? Perhaps you don’t, because it was almost nine years ago. And in that amount of time, the second search result on both Google and Bing is still spreadingsantorum.com, which features a splash page with the definition of the term as “the frothy mixture of lube and fecal matter that is sometimes the by-product of anal sex” and a frequently-updated blog about the man himself.
How did Mr. Santorum’s staff let this public relations crisis go on for so long? How many Santorum supporters have had their heads explode before they could even make a donation?
The campaign isn’t helping itself much, writes search engine guru Danny Sullivan, who notes that the campaign has replaced the homepage of the site with a splash page asking for donations that forces readers to jump to a new page before they can learn anything about the presidential candidate. As a result, his campaign page doesn’t even make the first page of Bing and searches for things like how to volunteer with the campaign redirect to the donation page. Many of the site’s pages redirected to the donation form.
Thanks for the free advice, Mr. Santorum’s campaign responded tacitly; they abolished the redirects only four hours after Mr. Sullivan wrote about them (creating a few errors in the process). Nine years after the Google bombing, and Mr. Santorum hadn’t hired any SEO experts to tell him this kind of stuff?
Of course, blog posts like this one don’t help.
I doubt there is one Republican in the land who gives a damn about this.
New York Observer, The (NY) - Friday, January 6, 2012
Author: Elise Knutsen
The season of St. Nick has left you exhausted. Keeping up the Santa ruse for your little ones has proved terribly tedious: sending letters to the North Pole, stuffing stockings, baking Christmas cookies for Santa’s enjoyment, eating said cookies yourself and pretending to hear the jingle of sleigh bells all seems so laborious now that your children are past kindergarten. Isn’t honesty the best policy, anyway? Today, you’ll shatter the Santa illusion, paving the way for a more civilized gift exchange next year without the exhausting commercial trappings and contrived Christmas lies. The New York Historical Society’s exhibition “The Invention of Santa Claus” postulates that the twinkle-eyed St. Nick we’ve come to associate with the birth of Jesus was, in fact, concocted by scholar Clement Clarke Moore, best known for writing “’Twas the Night Before Christmas.” Tracing the evolution of the red-suited patron saint through the years, you’ll give your children the gift of the truth (P.S. Jimmie, you’re adopted.) and expose them to early New York history. Cheers to a merry, farce-free Christmas next year!
“It Happened Here: The Invention of Santa Claus,” New York Historical Society, 170 Central Park West, 10 a.m. to 8 p.m. Admission is $5
OWS Sympathizers to Protest Outside Mayor Bloomberg’s House…For the Journalists
New York Observer, The (NY) - Friday, January 6, 2012
Author: Drew Grant
Since the holiday season, the Occupy Wall Street movement has seen a drop in media coverage. Some of this may be attributed to the dissemination of the movement after the Zuccotti Park raid last November, while another factor has to do with the fact that reporters covering the protests tend to get treated by the NYPD as part of the demonstration…even if they’re carrying city-accredited press badges.
Today, members of OWS (but not OWS itself, since, as a member of the press team told The New York Observer by phone, the still-existing General Assembly did not pass this motion), citizen journalists, and anyone else who isn’t afraid of getting arrested will be protesting outside of Mayor Bloomberg’s house for the ethical treatment of the press.
Full memo below:
New Yorkers and members of Occupy Wall Street to protest Bloomberg/NYPD attacks on First Amendment rights of journalists.
Street action at billionaire mayor’s mansion – photographers, videographers, livestreamers will bring NYPD misconduct to public attention.
New York, NY—Outraged New Yorkers and Occupy Wall Street (OWS) members will protest ongoing NYPD interference with members of the press including citizen journalists on Friday, January 6. In recent months NYPD has refused to recognize press credentials, summarily seized press credentials, harassed, physically blocked, assaulted, and arrested–without cause–members of the press.
WHAT: Vibrant and visual protest including street performers. Many photographers, videographers, and livestreamers will participate and film.
WHEN: Friday, January 6, 3pm-8pm
WHERE: Bloomberg mansion, 17 East 79th St., NYC - assemble at 5th Ave. and 79th St. Protesters will vigorously assert their first Amendment rights to be within sight and sound of the mayor’s residence.
WHO: Outraged New Yorkers, members of OWS, journalists and media makers who have been subjected to harassment and arrest for covering Occupy Wall Street and other political protests.
The protest will bring this issue to the doorstep of New York City’s billionaire mayor Michael Bloomberg. In recent remarks Bloomberg called the NYPD his “own army.” The mayor, a member of the wealthiest 1% of the country, ordered the forcible removal of Occupy Wall Street from Liberty Square on November 15th. The working press was prevented from covering that police raid – either ejected from the site or prevented from being close enough to do comprehensive reporting. This week a group streaming live video of Occupy Wall Street activities was forcibly evicted from a space in Brooklyn and arrested.
Attacks on the press have gotten so numerous and severe that several journalist organizations have formed the Coalition for the First Amendment. More information and many links to news coverage are on the New York Press Club website: http://www.nypressclub.org/coalition.php . Also see
http://storify.com/jcstearns/tracking-journalist-arrests-during-the-occupy-prot for OWS-related arrests of journalists around the country.
To date the Mayor and Police Commissioner Ray Kelly have failed to stop these attacks or ensure a thorough and untainted investigation.
The working press is essential for holding government and other institutions accountable. No democracy is safe without a free press. NYPD’s shameful behavior against journalists by some rank and file officers and commanders has been going on for years. Letters of protest by journalist organizations have been ignored by police. Attacks on members of the media continue to flourish under the mayor and his police commissioner despite their promises to the contrary.
So…several questions. Will Mayor Bloomberg be home at 3 p.m. on a Friday? Will that fake press secretary be there? And can OW-sympathizers convince journalists that they’re protests are still worth covering if they make said protests about journalists?
Unfortunately, The New York Observer won’t be able to attend due to conflicting schedule appointments, but we’d love to hear how it goes down! Photos and video welcome for submission.
Drew Grant is a Staff Reporter for The New York Observer. Follow Drew on Twitter or via RSS. dgrant@observer.com
New York Observer, The - January 06, 2012New Search
New York Observer, The (NY) - Friday, January 6, 2012
Author: Drew Grant
Don't worry, it's docile. (@TheGoodfella_)
As if child slave labor in China wasn’t bad enough, Footlocker’s reputation took another hit recently when a Twitter used named @Thegoodfella_ tweeted a photo of a five foot rat went viral on the web. Don’t worry though: an animal curator quoted by The Huffington Post, the creature, allegedly found in a Bronx store earlier this year (the photo was uploaded on Facebook earlier this year before it made the Twitter rounds) promised that “no way it’s a common sewer rat.
”
“I’m 90 percent certain that it’s a a Gambian pouched rat,” said Dr. Robert S. Voss, the Curator of Mammals at The American Museum of Natural History in New York. And apparently Gambian rats are pretty docile. So if you trip over one of these horrific fellas while doing inventory, don’t worry! It probably didn’t come crawling out of your toilet. It’s just a freak incident, at least until we find out the whole thing was a hoax to begin with.
Drew Grant is a Staff Reporter for The New York Observer. Follow Drew on Twitter or via RSS. dgrant@observer.com
Caption: Don't worry, it's docile. (@TheGoodfella_)
Liz Cheney Joins Fox News
New York Observer, The (NY) - Friday, January 6, 2012
Author: Kat Stoeffel
Make me proud.
Like Jenna Bush, Meghan McCain and Chelsea Clinton before her, Liz Cheney, daughter of Dubya V.P. Dick Cheney, has secured a paid TV gig. The former State Department employee and Republican Party activist is joining Fox News as a contributor and substitute host, the Times reports.
Ms. Cheneyis no stranger to the network. She has appeared on The O’Reilly Factor and substituted for Sean Hannity and will now add her national security and foreign policy insight “across all platforms,” including primary coverage.
Police: Mother, 13, left baby in trash
Police say a newborn found dead in County Club Hills was placed in a trash bin by his 13-year-old mother.
Authorities say the infant was wrapped in a pair of jeans when he was found Sunday. Police say the girl told officers that she gave birth to her son at home and put him in the trash. She hasn’t been charged.
A spokesman for the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services says child welfare officials are investigating allegations of abuse by the baby’s mother. DCFS spokesman Kendall Marlowe says there’s no record of any problems at the girl’s home.
Kendall Marlowe says "there's no record of any problems at the girl's home?
Umm - gag me with a pitchfork; of COURSE there's no evidence of any problerms at the girl's HOME, the evidence of the problem was wrapped in a pair of jeans in a trash bin in country Club Hills. The evidence of "another aspect of the problem" is also amply demonstrated by this piece of shit DCFS coporate line sprouting tool who fails to acknowledge that a dead baby in a trash bin IS a problem - a problem, minimally, of communication - CLEARLY, this young girl, pregnant, terrified out of her skull, in absolute denial of EVERYTHING, even that the baby was a LIVING HUMAN BEING from the moment it exited the mother's womb, no, she had to dehumanize this baby ... HER BABY ... and I can PROMISE you, this is gonna haunt this poor young girl for the REST OF HER LIFE, until she forgives herself, and then forgives
(1) The ass hole who impregnated her
(2) Her parents for letting her (or being willfully ignorant of her) see this boy-fiend in the first place
(3) HIS parents for letting such a predator on the loose when it should have been kept under lock and key (and I REALLY want to learn about how old IT is ... in fact, IT could easily be the girl's farther, or brother, or uncle, etc,m IT being the predator who raped this minor)
(4) The DCFS for failing to ackonwledge that a man who impregnates a 13-year old child is a child rapist, and that INDEED there was a problem in the home - that the daughter was permitted to date an older person, that the daughter was permitted enough "freedom" to have intercourse with the older predator, that the daughter didn't feel she could communicate to ANY BODY AT ALL about her extremely stressful situation - not famnily, not friends, not church members, not classmates ...
HOUSTON ... WE DO HAVE A PROBLEM!!!!!!!
Quote to Ponder
"We continually set before us the successful rich man
as more typical of what America means than the
student or the philanthropist or the unselfish man
of small income and simple tastes."
- W.E.B. Du Bois
BlackCommentator.com Guest Commentator
As the NAACP State Conference President for New Jersey I am responsible for hearing and addressing all types of concerns. In New Jersey far too many of the complaints I hear relate to deprivation of what should be a basic human right for all, the right to breathe clean air.
The racial disparities in air quality lead to disparities in health and quality of life. An African American making $50,000 per year is more likely to live in an area cited for bad air pollution than a white American making $15,000 per year. Arsenic, dioxins, lead, mercury and other pollutants are spewed daily from various industrial facilities such as incinerators, power plants, factories, etc., putting people at risk across the country. For example, a Clean Air Taskforce report on power plant pollution found that emissions from all power plants in the U.S. are responsible for 30,000 premature deaths, 7,000 asthma-related emergency room visits, and 18,000 cases of chronic bronchitis each year.
When opponents denounce safeguards against pollution, such as the Clean Air Act and associated regulations with labels such as “job killing”, they disregard the high monetary cost of inaction and who is paying those costs. Consumers are already paying for the less-publicized costs of toxic air quality: mounting health expenses, lost days of school to care for sick kids, poor performance for lead exposed kids who have learning challenges, lost days of work due to illness and trips to take children to the doctor, etc.
Currently, regulations under the Clean Air Act, such as the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule and the Mercury and Air Toxics Rule which aim to reduce pollution in our air, are under attack by polluters and certain legislative initiatives in Congress aimed at blocking the functionality of the Clean Air Act. These rules are essential for sensible reductions in air pollution. Supporting these rules would save up to 1200 lives and will prevent heart attacks, hospitalizations, and ER visits in New Jersey every year.
Robert, a resident of Jersey City, NJ recently stated that,
“I think that the community members in the area should be informed and that the media should really take a look at the kinds of emissions that have been happening, because nobody wants to raise their children next to a coal plant like that. The emissions in this community are so off the charts and so astronomically dangerous for human health that I think that once there’s some light shed on what is really going on with the likes of things like this coal plant, I hope that will raise awareness about this, stop these emissions in Jersey, and really do a lot more to clean up our environment.”
In New Jersey, with more Superfund sites than any other state in the country, we vigorously oppose any effort to fight any operations that would increase the already overburdened pollution that would diminish the air quality. It is unfortunate and unjust that so many of the air quality distracters are placed in areas that are overwhelmingly populated by African Americans and other poor populations in New Jersey. We vigorously oppose any operation that would erode the quality of clean air in New Jersey, it is simply unacceptable. We in the New Jersey State Conference will work with any and all collaborators who advocate for cleaner air quality in New Jersey.
Opposing the implementation of the Clean Air Act and its associated regulations would limit the EPA’s ability to enforce clean air standards that protect us from significant amounts of harmful air pollution. Our focus must be on retaining and strengthening safeguards which protect the health and well-being of the people living in communities affected by air pollution, who are over 50% of the US public and disproportionately communities of color and low income communities.
Enough is enough. We must maintain existing safeguards, as well as implement and strengthen standards that protect our communities. The NAACP New Jersey State Conference of Branches strongly urges our Senators and Representatives to support clean air safeguards and oppose proposed measures in Congress that put their constituents at risk.
Let New Jersey lead the way to cleaner air.
BlackCommentator.com Guest Commentator James E. Harris is President of the NAACP New Jersey State Conference. Click here to contact Mr. Harris.
