First Couple Enjoying Fireworks

President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama watch the fireworks over the National Mall from the roof of the White House. July 4, 2010. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

Happy Birthday, Malia Obama

Malia Obama,the daughter of US President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama, makes her way to board Marine One May 27, 2010 on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington, DC. Obama and his family were heading to Chicago to spend the Memorial Day weekend.
----MANDEL NGAN/AFP/Getty Images

First Daughter Malia Ann Obama turns 12 today. She's an All-American Girl.

Happy 4th of July!

Happy 4th of July!

Have a great Holiday with family and friends.

Enjoy a little Ray Charles.

Congratulations Serena Williams on Winning the Women's Single Title at Wimbledon

Serena Williams of the U.S. poses for photographers as she holds the winners trophy after defeating Russia's Vera Zvonareva in the womens' singles final at the 2010 Wimbledon tennis championships in London, July 3, 2010.
----REUTERS/Stefan Wermuth

With her 13th Grand Slam under her belt, Serena passes Billie Jean King on the all-time list of Grand Slam winners.

Michael Steele Caught Lying About Afghanistan - Faces Calls to Resign

This is why I love the idea of Progressives taking their video cameras to Right wing events. I'm not sure if this was the case in this situation, but it shows that such a strategy could yield political treasure. Catching these hucksters in their macaca moments, or when they are telling lies should be an important part of Progressive efforts to get off of defense and take back the PR initiative.

Propaganda and lies are a huge part of the GOP strategy. That goes for the Tea Party as well. They have to lie. So it should be the duty of Progressives to catch them when they do.

Steele made a huge gaffe at a recent Republican event.... his biggest gaffe of all, according to Chris Good of the Atlantic. And the calls for Steele to resign have started to pour in. Steele stuck his foot....and leg in his mouth by making the claim that the war in Afghanistan was a war of Obama's choosing. Of course it was a war perpetrated by George W. Bush in 2002 and heavily supported by Republicans ever since. Steele's attempt to make the invasion Obama's idea now that it's becoming unpopular is amazing.

He went on to slam the war effort. Ironically, in his attempt to lie and mislead, Steele ended up accidentally telling a few truths about how daunting a task Afghanistan is and how the effort to nation build may be unrealistic. OOppps!
But once he was caught...he turned around and released a phony statement that basically said he didn't mean it, and he gave assurances that he supports the troops and the war effort. Hilarious.



Qoute From the Atlantic:

Keep in mind, again, our federal candidates, this was a war of Obama's choosing. This is not, this is not something the United States had actively prosecuted or wanted to engage in. It was one of those, one of those areas of the total [horde?] of foreign policy...that we would be a background sort of shaping the changes that were necessary in afghanistan as opposed to directly engaging troops. But it was the president who tried to be cute by...flipping the script deomonizing iraq while saying the battle really should be in Afghanistan. Well if he's such a student of history, has he not understood that, you know, that's the one thing you don't do is engage in a land war in Afghanistan? All right? Because everyone who has tried over a thousand years of history has failed. And there are reasons for that. There are other ways that we can engage in Afghanistan without committing more troops...
And so now for our candidates, whether they're running, you know for, Congress or the United States Senate, there is a whole text of resources available to them through our office, through the RNC, through the congressional committees, the senatorial congressional committees, and even some of the think tanks that help frame those arguments so that you know you don't get stopped on, 'Well, George Bush--' you know, fill in the blank. I think that that's going to be very helpful...

He also describes the McChyrstal fiasco as "comical".

Read more from CBS.

The Miseducation of NPR

I was perturbed to learn this week that NPR chose rapper/singer Lauryn Hill for their 50 Great Voices Series. This is their list of the 50 greatest singers ever, based in part on suggestions/voting from listeners. Each week, for the rest of this year, NPR will feature a new artist. Are you kidding me?

Lauryn Hill? Really?

I guess this is the point where I should add another disclaimer... I am not a fan of Lauryn Hill. (I'm not going to gain much support from this commentary). I have never cared for her music... and anyone reading this blog long enough should know how I feel about rap and the Hip Hop culture. However, I do respect Hill for being a talented musician. I can recall flipping through the channels several years ago and stumbling upon her unplugged performance. She's talented, there are no ifs ands, or buts about that.

She's a pretty good singer in my humble opinion. But one of the 50 Great voices in the entire world, EVER? Let's stop with the nonsense. Who made this decision at NPR? This is the point where NPR's 50 Greats adventure went from a serious project to more of a joke. This seemed to be more of a PR effort on the part of NPR to reach out to a younger, more Hip Hop oriented demographic... a group that doesn't listen to NPR in great numbers on a regular basis.

One big irony here is that Mary Christine Brockert & Roberta Flack have yet to make the list and may never be chosen. I doubt if NPR will pick both, and chances are slim that even one will be recognized. Yet Hill has borrowed heavily from these two singers during her career....covering their performances, using their riffs, their phrasing, their style and so on. Hill doesn't come close to Brockert or Flack when it comes to the art of singing. They would both blow Hill off stage. Hill's voice has a limited range...and her singing style is much more forced, her delivery more contrived. Her voice may be natural, but she's not a natural singer.

Another issue is the fact that Hill has had a limited career compared to the all-time great singers around the world. There is not that much material to base such a big decision on. Hill has benefited from an era of sampling and technology to enhance her performances and boost her career.

I was lucky enough to have seen Brockert live in concert in St. Louis back in 1994. I was stunned by the performance... to this day I shudder thinking about what I saw and heard that night. How could such a powerful voice come out of such a small package, I thought to myself. THAT is a singer.... I can recall how she held one note for somewhere in the ballpark of 30 seconds...(not hyperbole), just to play with the crowd...which was screaming & throwing roses on stage at that point. Circular breathing perhaps? I'm not sure. But I had never heard a singer like her before or since.

The generations of "singers" who came after Luther Vandross and Whitney Houston (in her prime) just never quite measured up for me. Perhaps it's my old age (only 37 this month). But I have always identified with older generations of artists. That's not to say that the current crop of young singers isn't talented... there are definitely good singers still around...but they are hit & miss.

The list of 50 Great voices were supposed to be the very best in the world...the best ever...the best that some Countries had to offer...the best that some cultures had to offer. On an exclusive list like that, a Lauryn Hill just doesn't measure up in my book. If this were a list of 500 Great voices... then there might be enough room to fit her in. But this is a list of 50 of the best throughout modern human history.... since the introduction of the vinyl record over 100 years ago.

Hill is a folk hero to generations of young Black Americans (those 35 & under), although I don't really understand why. I have never understood this phenomenon. But that folk hero status may have something to do with the admiration her supporters have for her and may ultimately be the reason for the selection. That probably played a bigger role in her selection than her actual impact, voice, or singing prowess.

The cult of Lauryn Hill is one of many things in the "Black Community" that never made any sense to me...someone looking at it objectively from another perspective. Perhaps its that identity thing again... The fact that I don't identify with today's Black culture, and certainly don't identify with Hip Hop culture (which has largely taken the place of a real Black culture), probably has something to do with my bewilderment. But that's not a bad thing... because it allows me to make an unbiased assessment. I have been a connoisseur of good music for a long time...and I think I can say objectively & with confidence that Lauryn Hill doesn't make the cut.

Comments Off

Did Congressman Gutierrez Fail Government 101?

Disclaimer: I fully support immigration reform...and have supported it since this latest debate started (under George W. Bush).

However, I have been extremely annoyed recently by Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez (D-IL) and his verbal attacks aimed at President Obama. Gutierrez and his supporters have been lobbying the President hard to magically make comprehensive immigration reform a reality. But really....what exactly do they want Obama to do? Am I missing something here?

The President can't create and pass legislation. That's the job of the Congress. Obama can't sign into law what doesn't exist. And even if Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer, Harry Reid & others were to craft some sort of legislation...it would barely get through the House, and would be dead on arrival in the Senate. The math simply doesn't work and everyone knows it (at least everyone except for Gutierrez). I wrote several months ago that the part of Obama's agenda that dealt with immigration reform was probably unachievable and would likely have to be dropped from his list of goals. It's a lost cause. I never believed it should have been something that President Obama should even try...especially after seeing what happened to George W. Bush (by his own Party). It would be a huge waste of political capital, after he already wasted vast amounts of political capital in his first year, fighting for what ended up being a bad health care reform bill in my view. Obama could waste another year on immigration reform and be left with nothing to show for it in the end. Meanwhile, he would be so weakened by it that he wouldn't be able to get anything else accomplished. If that's not bad enough, his efforts would simply be used as a basis for Republicans to energize their supporters going into the midterm elections... creating even bigger losses for Democrats than would have been the case otherwise.

A Republican President wasn't able to do it with a Republican Congress... Republicans blocked the effort. They are going to be even more aggressive in blocking Obama. Obviously nothing can be done before the mid-terms, and Gutierrez has to know this. Most members of Congress are worried about re-election and aren't going to touch the taboo subject (made taboo by Republicans/Tea Partiers). It's radioactive. There are just certain political and mathematical realities that cannot be ignored.

On the other side of the midterms, Republicans are expected to win back one, if not both Houses of Congress...making the passage of any legislation on comprehensive immigration reform impossible. Even under assessments friendly to the Democrats, Republicans are expected to gain so many seats...that even if they come up short on regaining the majority in the House or Senate, they will still be able to block legislation. So I just don't understand what Gutierrez, and his supporters, are so upset about. Why are they upset with Obama? Do they really believe he is Superman or some sort of political MacGyver? President Obama cannot make a proclamation and declare something to be law. Congressman Gutierrez and his supporters should be lobbying the other members of Congress.... not just the President (and perhaps they shouldn't be focused on the President at all in this case). Gutierrez should target Congressional Republicans in particular. That's where he should focus his anger. Not at the President.

Republicans Let Their Racism Show in Attack On Thurgood Marshall

I guess Elena Kagan is such a blank slate that Republicans have to find others to attack.... even the dearly departed. They were apparently so desperate this week that they dug up a class paper that Kagan wrote decades ago, before she even entered law school. Of course they failed miserably with that effort.

But what annoyed me most was the way that Republican Senators on the Judiciary Committee used Kagan to attack Thurgood Marshall - a giant and American hero. Listen to the highlights of the hearings from last week, where Marshall is repeatedly brought up, attacked and diminished by Republicans. The effort was led by Senators Lindsey Graham, John Kyl, and Jeff Sessions. Their racism was plain to see and it was clear that they were playing to their base - their white Southern audiences back home. By targeting Marshall, they were attacking civil rights, desegregation, and equal justice...all the things he stood for. In their attacks (in front of at least one Marshall family member) they painted Marshall as a radical...as a judicial "activist". Marshall's opinions as a judge -upholding the idea of fairness, equal rights, etc- were out of the mainstream (although there is no evidence of that whatsoever). What they were really criticizing was Marshall's career before he became a judge. They were basically saying that Brown v. Topeka Board of Education was not decided correctly and was a result of Marshall's work as an attorney & agitator, and a result of an activist Supreme Court which overturned years of segregation. They suggested that since racism, esp. Jim Crow, was the law of the land, and was well established, settled law.... someone like Thurgood Marshall was a radical and activist because he came along and stirred things up by daring to challenge what had been legal precedent prior to May 1954. In other words, these Senators were sending the not-so-subtle message that Plessy v. Ferguson, the 1896 case that upheld segregation in schools, should have been allowed to stand as it was settled law. Racist to the core.

Why has the national corporate media allowed this to go almost unchallenged? I saw the segments on MSNBC...but I have not heard much from any other outlet. Unreal.

Senator Al Franken provided a pretty good rebuttal - see video.
Besides Al Franken.... few Senators/House members have spoken out against this blatant racism.

See Thurgood Marshall Jr's response. Hear an interview with Thurgood Marshall Jr. from NPR.

This comes on top of efforts by racist jackasses like Glenn Beck who want to hijack the anniversary of the 1963 March on Washington as a way to mock Dr. Martin Luther King and the Civil Rights struggle. Beck says he wants to "restore honor" and dignity to America..... as opposed to MLK, advancements in Civil Rights, and that nigra being elected President.

Is the U.S. Headed For a Greek Style Economic Collapse?

Financial Historian Niall Ferguson thinks the U.S. could be headed for a big fall- IF it stays on its current course of spending much more than it collects in revenue. Hear discussion from OnPointRadio. (A Must Listen). He points out what I have been saying here since I started... this business as usual nonsense is unsustainable. Business as usual meaning spending billions (now well over a Trillion) on wars that we don't need, being afraid to talk about a sensible tax policy...because Republicans have turned just the mention of taxes into a "taboo", not working fast enough to build and feed a Green industry- continuing to assume that it will magically blossom on its own, not working hard enough to build small/medium businesses and to create jobs, and not investing in educating future generations (why do I have to go $80,000.00 in debt before I even have a chance to live...just because I want an education? True story....my story). Other countries educate their people at very low cost or for free in some cases. They put a priority on people, rather than huge military industrial complex's or phony corrupt stock markets.

I am not as downbeat as some of the voices of gloom and doom. I don't think that the U.S. is headed for a quick collapse - at least not yet. In my mind, I am keeping my fingers crossed that it doesn't happen. The U.S. came close to this in the Fall of 2008. A collapse of the big banks was narrowly avoided. I am skeptical for the future though. The Obama administration can barely get a financial reform bill approved in the House & Senate - in fact, there are currently not enough votes to get the bill through the Senate. Republicans are blocking any efforts to make Progress on reforming an out of date system. With the prospect of clueless American voters returning these same Republicans to power in November of this year and again in 2012, there is no reason to be hopeful. Republicans are talking from both sides of their mouths. On one hand, Republicans say they are concerned about the debt, the deficit, and want to control spending, yet they blocked the Presidents Debt Commission - a commission tasked with steering the Country clear of complete economic collapse. I realize that this is part of the Republican Party's efforts to weaken Obama's ability to govern, so that he fails. But shouldn't they be more concerned about the Country???? Just a little concerned?

I believe the U.S. may be headed for several months, if not years, of stagnant growth and high unemployment which will only make the debt problems worse. With the lack of revenue from business growth and job creation, the U.S. will have to borrow more to maintain basic services. Cuts...and I mean massive cuts, will be necessary if the U.S. is to avoid a Greek-like crisis. But I just don't see that happening. Politicians from both parties are more concerned with their political careers. David Walker, former comptroller general of the United States, warns that by 2035, the U.S. will only be able to afford to pay the interest on the debt and nothing else. Unreal! Why isn't this issue on the front burner?

Why do I believe (am hopeful anyway....keeping fingers crossed) that the U.S. isn't in immediate danger of a complete meltdown?:

1. For now...the U.S. maintains the advantage of being the biggest economy in the World...and the biggest consumer. This means that other nations (who are now the producers) will be cooperative, for the most part, on trade, monetary policy, and will want to make sure that their chief consumer remains stable....so their economies can stay afloat.

2. The U.S. currency is still....for now... the main reserve currency for the globe..... for now.

3. The U.S. isn't as leveraged (debt as % of GDP) as many other nations in Europe.

So there is hope... but there has to be some action. Right now... no real action is on the horizon. That's what bothers me. The U.S. is stuck on stupid...stuck in some sort of perpetual malaise, thanks to the Republican Party and a stupid electorate that keeps supporting these jackasses.