The African American Political Pundit has a great blog entry on James Browns political clout. He was more than just a performer, especially for Black folks. See story here.
I will be posting more on the subject of James Brown off and on for the next several weeks....
You can't cover this man in one or two blog entries.... the man was a giant.....a giant even among giants.
Thursday, January 04, 2007
Wednesday, January 03, 2007
Mob Lynchings - bye, bye, Obama?
Most American's agree Saddam Hussein was an evil and brutal dictator. However from the outside looking in, it appears Shiite militiamen executed Saddam, not the government.
As reported by the Washington Post, The video triggered outrage, in Iraq and abroad, at the undignified and disorderly moments before Hussein's hanging. Iraq's Sunnis declared the execution an act of Shiite revenge. The Vatican, in its official newspaper, called the images from the hanging "a spectacle" that violated human rights and could harm Iraq's process of reconciliation.
The Italian government, which like all members of the European Union opposes the death penalty, said after the appearance of the video that it would push at the United Nations for a worldwide moratorium on capital punishment.
African American Political Pundit says: This type of mob lynching appears to be George W. Bush's brand of Democracy on the march. The type of Democracy on the March that history will record. Yet, as Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post writes, "Since history is written by those who rule, the annals of the U.S.-supported Iraqi government record that the deposed dictator Saddam Hussein was given a fair trial, sentenced to death for the mass murder of innocent Shiite civilians and duly executed by hanging on Dec. 30, 2006, in accordance with Iraqi law.
A tragic era was brought to an end, according to the official history, opening the way for a brighter tomorrow. But the dark, remorseless, unflinching cellphone video of the execution that quickly surfaced on the Internet tells an alternate history, one that is neither tidy nor hopeful -- and that demonstrates, not just by its content but by its very existence, that forces other than the current beleaguered government intend to be the final authors of Iraqi history. That's because they intend to be the ones in charge." Read more of this insightful article - Here.
P.S. More Democracy on the March Justice to be handed out or should I say " hanged out" Tomorrow
Cocaine is cheap, show me the receipts!
Here is more interesting news from Wapo. They report, Long before the national media spotlight began to shine on every twist and turn of his life's journey, Barack Obama had this to say about himself: "Junkie. Pothead. That's where I'd been headed: the final, fatal role of the young would-be black man. . . . I got high [to] push questions of who I was out of my mind." Link to WaPo article
AAPPundit says: Not another former drug user who wants to be President! Or is this what America is all about anyway. I guess we African Americans should be OK with Obama as a drug user, because he is African American?
Bill Clinton didnot inhale, and George W. became President, as a known boozer and drug user. I mean this is America, and we are in an American drug culture. Or is it a high tech lynching or character assasination via the internet. Or should we always be the people who... settle for less.
But who cares anyway, the Democrats are just as bad as the Republicans. If there not chasing little boy pages, having sex with little girls pages, starting wars they are allowing thousands of our young men and women to die in Iraq. So, maybe "Obama honesty" is better than death and destruction.
What do you think?
AfricanAmericanPoliticalPundit.com is a regular contributor to Mirror On America
New Lobbyists Going To Washington DC
Now that Democrats control Congress, lobbying firms are scrambling to hire new people to try to influence (and eventually pimp) Democrats.
This is the corrupt lobbying system that has hijacked American democracy over the last few decades. And it is the same corrupt system that eventually helped to bring down Republicans in Congress (at least for the time being). It is also the same currupt system that Nancy Pelosi said she would clean up. But I have a feeling that Democrats (like the Republicans) will be seduced by all of the money that Corporations and special interests groups will throw their way. I suspect that the 110th Congress will be business as usual, because K Street has become an integral part of the American political system. Why? Because politicians now rely on the money that they receive from Corporations, mostly through campaign donations, but also from kickbacks for contracts, or through favorable media airtime. Corporations are heavy influences on media, including news media. How do the major news networks stay in business? Through corporate advertising or sponsors. If a major corporation or group of companies wants favorable airtime for "a friend" or they want to prevent unfavorable information from getting out....what do they do? They threaten to pull ads. This is how the American corporate media system has become a State-Run media system by proxy. This is why corporate news cannot be trusted. They do not always have the best interest of the public in mind. I don't see this cycle being broken anytime soon if ever.
If Democrats in Congress really want to do the right thing, they would literally clean up K Street by kicking the lobbyists out and limiting the number of lobbying firms that could operate in the immediate Washington DC area. Lobbyists should also be banned from the Capitol buildings and the immediate area near the Capitol. It should be against the law to accept ANY money, gift, political favor of any kind, or campaign donation from a lobbyist or from a company that is involved with government contracts or any company affected by any upcoming legislation. Former Politicians should also be prevented from accepting jobs as lobbyists for a certain number of years after leaving office (perhaps 10 years). Currently, former members of Congress are quickly going into lobbying positions once they leave office...taking their classified knowledge and access to other members with them into these new roles. If the Democrats are serious about cleaning up corruption and getting the lobbying in check, they would pass that law within the first week of opening the 110th Congress. The current proposal from the Democrats to deal with this problem is just a watered down plan that will only curtail lobbying.
But I say, the only way to cure the lobbying problem is to eliminate the current lobbying system altogether. The Congress was originally intended to be the House of the people....the common people. The original lobbyists (check your history) were ordinary Joe Blow Americans, and this was how the system was originally intended to work. But over the last few decades, corporations and other high powered special interest groups have taken over "lobbying" and made it into a profession. In the process, lobbyists have carved a niche for themselves by blocking others from getting access to Capitol Hill. You now have to pay to play....or in other words, you now have to pay to speak to your member of Congress or to enjoy anything remotely resembling "democracy".
Most Americans now have no access whatsoever to their members of Congress. This in turn has led to the political apathy, malaise, and hopelessness that we see from the American public. Today, the only way to get access to your member of Congress is either through lobbying firms, or via $2000 per plate fundraisers across the country. And some folks wonder why most Americans cannot name their Congressional representatives. What incentive do they have for knowing the names of their members of Congress when it means so little?
Will the Democrats be able to resist the lobbyists? I am skeptical. That's why I will be paying close attention to Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic Party as the 110th Congress gets started.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Previous Blog Entries On This Topic
Watch the Bill Moyers Documentary entitled "Capitol Crimes"
Bill Moyer talking about the Documentary "Capitol Crimes"
This is the corrupt lobbying system that has hijacked American democracy over the last few decades. And it is the same corrupt system that eventually helped to bring down Republicans in Congress (at least for the time being). It is also the same currupt system that Nancy Pelosi said she would clean up. But I have a feeling that Democrats (like the Republicans) will be seduced by all of the money that Corporations and special interests groups will throw their way. I suspect that the 110th Congress will be business as usual, because K Street has become an integral part of the American political system. Why? Because politicians now rely on the money that they receive from Corporations, mostly through campaign donations, but also from kickbacks for contracts, or through favorable media airtime. Corporations are heavy influences on media, including news media. How do the major news networks stay in business? Through corporate advertising or sponsors. If a major corporation or group of companies wants favorable airtime for "a friend" or they want to prevent unfavorable information from getting out....what do they do? They threaten to pull ads. This is how the American corporate media system has become a State-Run media system by proxy. This is why corporate news cannot be trusted. They do not always have the best interest of the public in mind. I don't see this cycle being broken anytime soon if ever.If Democrats in Congress really want to do the right thing, they would literally clean up K Street by kicking the lobbyists out and limiting the number of lobbying firms that could operate in the immediate Washington DC area. Lobbyists should also be banned from the Capitol buildings and the immediate area near the Capitol. It should be against the law to accept ANY money, gift, political favor of any kind, or campaign donation from a lobbyist or from a company that is involved with government contracts or any company affected by any upcoming legislation. Former Politicians should also be prevented from accepting jobs as lobbyists for a certain number of years after leaving office (perhaps 10 years). Currently, former members of Congress are quickly going into lobbying positions once they leave office...taking their classified knowledge and access to other members with them into these new roles. If the Democrats are serious about cleaning up corruption and getting the lobbying in check, they would pass that law within the first week of opening the 110th Congress. The current proposal from the Democrats to deal with this problem is just a watered down plan that will only curtail lobbying.
But I say, the only way to cure the lobbying problem is to eliminate the current lobbying system altogether. The Congress was originally intended to be the House of the people....the common people. The original lobbyists (check your history) were ordinary Joe Blow Americans, and this was how the system was originally intended to work. But over the last few decades, corporations and other high powered special interest groups have taken over "lobbying" and made it into a profession. In the process, lobbyists have carved a niche for themselves by blocking others from getting access to Capitol Hill. You now have to pay to play....or in other words, you now have to pay to speak to your member of Congress or to enjoy anything remotely resembling "democracy".Most Americans now have no access whatsoever to their members of Congress. This in turn has led to the political apathy, malaise, and hopelessness that we see from the American public. Today, the only way to get access to your member of Congress is either through lobbying firms, or via $2000 per plate fundraisers across the country. And some folks wonder why most Americans cannot name their Congressional representatives. What incentive do they have for knowing the names of their members of Congress when it means so little?
Will the Democrats be able to resist the lobbyists? I am skeptical. That's why I will be paying close attention to Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic Party as the 110th Congress gets started.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Previous Blog Entries On This Topic
Watch the Bill Moyers Documentary entitled "Capitol Crimes"
Bill Moyer talking about the Documentary "Capitol Crimes"
U.S. Cities Still Lack Interoperable Emergency Communications
More than 5 years after the September 11th attacks, the U.S. is still not prepared to deal with major catastrophies like another 9/11 or Katrina. Major cities still do not have interoperable communications systems in place. These systems allow first responders from various local agencies to communicate with one another, as well as with State, and Federal authorities....including National Guard units. This is absolutely crucial to mount an effective response to terror attacks, major domestic crimes, major fires, or Natural disasters.
Interoperable communications capability is one of the key recommendations of the 9/11 commission. This recommendation stemmed from the confusion that New York firefighters faced at the World Trade Center on 9/11 due to poor communications, and an overwhelmed system. New York Fire Commanders could not even communicate with some of their own firefighters or with commanders of other agencies within their own city, such as the NYPD or ambulance units. Firefighters had to shuttle messages back and forth on foot.
I completed an extensive report on U.S. disaster preparedness approximately a year ago and I am familiar with many of the deficiencies that still remain in Homeland Security, particularly with disaster response. Once the Democrats take over the Congress this week, hopefully some things can finally get done to deal with this problem.
The U.S. has spent (wasted) more than 350 Billion dollars in Iraq, when that money could have been better spent fulfilling these crucial needs here at home.
Interoperable communications capability is one of the key recommendations of the 9/11 commission. This recommendation stemmed from the confusion that New York firefighters faced at the World Trade Center on 9/11 due to poor communications, and an overwhelmed system. New York Fire Commanders could not even communicate with some of their own firefighters or with commanders of other agencies within their own city, such as the NYPD or ambulance units. Firefighters had to shuttle messages back and forth on foot.
I completed an extensive report on U.S. disaster preparedness approximately a year ago and I am familiar with many of the deficiencies that still remain in Homeland Security, particularly with disaster response. Once the Democrats take over the Congress this week, hopefully some things can finally get done to deal with this problem.
The U.S. has spent (wasted) more than 350 Billion dollars in Iraq, when that money could have been better spent fulfilling these crucial needs here at home.
The Execution of Saddam Hussein Seems To Have Backfired
As was predicted by most sane observers (including myself), the execution of Saddam Hussein at such a fragile time has begun to backfire. Sunni's are now enraged even more than before. Anti-U.S. protests have been going on all week in Iraq.
Hussein has become a Martyr to his people (disenchanted Sunni's) and for Arab militants from outside Iraq. The Bush administration and the Iraqi government have dug themselves a hole with this decision. They irritated an already fragile and volatile situation. It is like adding salt to the wounds of Iraq.
Now there are thousands of Sunnis willing to take up arms (if they were not already involved in the insurgency) to avenge the death of Hussein.
The situation could have been handled better if Hussein were brought before an international UN recognized Court (although that might have eliminated the death penalty). He could have also been held outside of Iraq, eliminating the possibility of a return to power at some later time.
But the Iraqi government had a right to handle it as they saw fit, however, U.S. Soldiers should not pay for the decision.
And what about the U.S. role in Iraq before 1990 (when Iraq invaded Kuwait)? The U.S. and Iraq were allies..... against Iran. The U.S. assisted Hussein with political and economic support (among other things). The U.S. knew that he had chemical weapons, assisted (or turned a blind eye) when he was procuring WMD technology from abroad, etc. The U.S. said nothing when Iraq used chemical weapons (banned by international law) against Iranians, killing thousands. There was not a peep from the White House on that. They made sure Hussein stayed in power. When he was a gangster for the U.S., everything was alright, but when he no longer wanted to be a puppet for the U.S., he had to be eliminated.
_________________________
There is a great roundtable discussion on the Saddam execution from the Democracy Now program. Watch/Listen Here
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
The Moderate Voice has reaction to the Hussein Execution
Hussein has become a Martyr to his people (disenchanted Sunni's) and for Arab militants from outside Iraq. The Bush administration and the Iraqi government have dug themselves a hole with this decision. They irritated an already fragile and volatile situation. It is like adding salt to the wounds of Iraq.
Now there are thousands of Sunnis willing to take up arms (if they were not already involved in the insurgency) to avenge the death of Hussein.
The situation could have been handled better if Hussein were brought before an international UN recognized Court (although that might have eliminated the death penalty). He could have also been held outside of Iraq, eliminating the possibility of a return to power at some later time.
But the Iraqi government had a right to handle it as they saw fit, however, U.S. Soldiers should not pay for the decision.
And what about the U.S. role in Iraq before 1990 (when Iraq invaded Kuwait)? The U.S. and Iraq were allies..... against Iran. The U.S. assisted Hussein with political and economic support (among other things). The U.S. knew that he had chemical weapons, assisted (or turned a blind eye) when he was procuring WMD technology from abroad, etc. The U.S. said nothing when Iraq used chemical weapons (banned by international law) against Iranians, killing thousands. There was not a peep from the White House on that. They made sure Hussein stayed in power. When he was a gangster for the U.S., everything was alright, but when he no longer wanted to be a puppet for the U.S., he had to be eliminated.
_________________________
There is a great roundtable discussion on the Saddam execution from the Democracy Now program. Watch/Listen Here
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
The Moderate Voice has reaction to the Hussein Execution
Monday, January 01, 2007
Bush Losing Support From Soldiers On The Ground
Listen To Report from NPR
Support for President George W. Bush's Iraq policy has fallen among the US armed forces to just 54 percent from 63 percent a year ago, according to a poll by the magazine group Military Times.
In its annual survey of the views of military personnel, the group reported on its website that support for Bush's overall policies dropped over the past year to 60 percent from 71 percent.
While still significantly more supportive of the president than the broad US population, the fall in support by military personnel tracks a similar decline in the president's popularity among the general public.
"Though support both for President Bush and for the war in Iraq remains significantly higher than in the public as a whole, the drop is likely to add further fuel to the heated debate over Iraq policy," Military Times said.
"In 2003 and 2004, supporters of the war in Iraq pointed to high approval ratings in the Military Times poll as a signal that military members were behind ... the president's policy."
However, it said, the new poll "found diminished optimism that US goals in Iraq can be accomplished, and a somewhat smaller drop in support for the decision to go to war in 2003."
Military Times, which publishes popular magazines for each of the US military branches including Army Times and Navy Times, cautioned that its poll, of 1,215 active-duty servicemen, is not necessarily representative of the military as a whole.
The respondents were "on average older, more experienced, more likely to be officers and more career-oriented than the military population."
But the declining numbers for Bush tracked other polls. According to the CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll, support for Bush's performance as president fell from 49 percent to 43 percent over the year to December 22.
The Military Times poll also showed a significant decline in the armed forces' views of US military policy and management.
With 61 percent of respondents saying they had served in Iraq or Afghanistan, only 58 percent believed that Bush had the military's best interests at heart, a sharp decline from 69 percent a year before.
Only 56 percent felt the US should have gone to war in Iraq, compared to 60 percent a year before.
And 64 percent felt the same about the Pentagon leadership, compared to 70 percent a year ago.
Addressing key issues facing the Pentagon, the poll showed that almost two-thirds of the soldiers felt the US military is "stretched too thin to be effective", but the number was less than a year ago.
At the same time, there was a fall in resistance to restoring the draft in the United States. Opposition fell from 75 percent a year ago to 68 percent this year.
Source
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Meanwhile 3000 U.S. Soldiers have now been killed in Iraq. Not to mention the 22,000 + who have been wounded, or the American civilian casualties (which hardly gets a mention in the media). Also, December was the deadliest month of 2006 for the U.S. military in Iraq, with 113 killed.
Many New Yorkers Must Choose Between Food and Rent
New report on Hunger shows that many New Yorkers must choose between food and rent. The gap between haves and have nots is getting wider.
Listen To An Audio Report Here
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Related Blog Entry
Listen To An Audio Report Here
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Related Blog Entry
John Edwards Makes It Official
John Edwards made it official over the Holidays.... He will run for President in 08.
See my previous comments on John Edwards where I state why he is a serious candidate and why Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama are more media bark than bite.
See my previous comments on John Edwards where I state why he is a serious candidate and why Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama are more media bark than bite.
The African American Roundtable, Dec. 29th
Another great African American roundtable from the News and Notes radio program from Friday Dec. 29th, 2006.
Summary
Friday's topics: Former Sen. John Edwards' bid for the presidency; seven police officers are indicted for murder or attempted murder in New Orleans; and New Orleans mayor Ray Nagin says evacuees aren't returning to the city. Guests: Joe Davidson, an editor for The Washington Post; Mary Frances Berry, professor of history at the University of Pennsylvania; and Nat Irvin, professor of future studies at Wake Forest University.
Listen To Program
Summary
Friday's topics: Former Sen. John Edwards' bid for the presidency; seven police officers are indicted for murder or attempted murder in New Orleans; and New Orleans mayor Ray Nagin says evacuees aren't returning to the city. Guests: Joe Davidson, an editor for The Washington Post; Mary Frances Berry, professor of history at the University of Pennsylvania; and Nat Irvin, professor of future studies at Wake Forest University.
Listen To Program
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
