Normally, I'd be overjoyed to have made the Times (which I did in this article), but it would have been nice in this case if they interviewed me before printing their article.
]]>
Normally, I'd be overjoyed to have made the Times (which I did in this article), but it would have been nice in this case if they interviewed me before printing their article.
While The Times accurately calls State Senate candidate David Storobin "a rookie candidate with a sometimes extreme approach to world politics," it gets a few things wrong.
Orthodox Pundit: "Also, Room Eight dug up another possibly-incriminating Storobin article. In the last one he's defending Putin-Russia's agressive positions, and thereatens Jewish groups not to defend a Kosovo's goverment whom he describe as anti-semites, because if they do "Russia and its allies would be fully justified in aiding Hamas in Gaza as payback."
In the same article he also faults "major left-leaning Jewish organizations (who) chose to help the former Nazi SS volunteer who became the Bosnian President" - putting Jews and Nazis in one sentence." Orthodox Pundit: News & Political Analysis orthodoxpundit.blogspot.com
NYC Councilman Erik Martin Dilan: "Actively Considering" Congressional Challenge To Rep. Nydia Velas www.cityandstateny.com
Nearly everything I dislike about Kucinich's arch leftism, especially in foreign policy/defense (with the possible exception of his apologias for Assad), is duplicated in Marcy Kaptur, and on the one issue where I know for sure they differ, I prefer Dennis (Kaptur is not 100% pro-choice, while Kucinich renounced his extremist pro-liferism just about the time he set his eyes on the White House).
So, I can't say I'm losing any sleep over this race, but I'm still rooting for Kaptur. Workhorse vs. showhorse in Ohio's 9th? www.politico.com
Chait: "Romney, I have finally decided after cycling through various analogies, is Big Jim from the Bob Dylan ballad “Lili, Rosemary and the Jack of Hearts”:
Big Jim was no one’s fool, he owned the town’s only diamond mine
He made his usual entrance lookin’ so dandy and so fine
With his bodyguards and silver cane and every hair in place
He took whatever he wanted to and he laid it all to waste
Romney owns the only diamond mine in the Republican race."
Nice, but Chait skips the next line:
“But his bodyguards and silver cane were no match for the Jack of Hearts.”
And let's remember:
"It was known all around that Lily had Jim's ring
And nothing would ever come between Lily and the king
No nothing ever would except maybe the Jack of Hearts."
Eventually, things did not work out as expected:
"The door to the dressing room burst open a Colt revolver clicked
And big Jim was standing there you couldn't say surprised
Rosemary right beside him studying her eyes
She was with big Jim but she was leaning to the Jack of Hearts."
The front runner's luck ran out:
"The next day was hanging day the sky was overcast and black
Big Jim lay covered up killed by a penknife in the back"
My only problem with this theory is the winner is supposed to be the “Jack of,” not the “Jack Off.” Santorum Escapes Mitt’s Moneybags, for Now nymag.com
Why Gary Johnson does not equal Ron Paul. The daylight between Paul and Johnson www.politico.com
Watch the video; she's a Republican, but I defy you not to cry. "I Don't Miss The Sex" andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com
Although I've always been a strong advocate of reasonable religious accommodation (which inevitably sometimes seems like an oxymoron), Frum has a great big point:
"As Republicans go to war over including contraception in health plans, they are repeating to themselves a reassuring mantra:
"This is not a contraception issue. This is not a social issue. This is a constitutional issue."
The idea is that they are not against contraception. They are only against requiring any employer or plan to provide contraception if that employer or plan conscientiously objects to contraception....
...Republicans are not proposing to allow employers and plans to refuse to cover blood transfusions if they conscientiously object to them...Or vaccinations...Or medicines derived from animal experimentation....
No, Marco Rubio's Religious Freedom Restoration bill provides for one conscientious exemption only: contraception and sterilization.
Which means it will be very hard if not impossible to persuade the target audience that this debate is not in fact about contraception." The Contraception Fight www.thedailybeast.com
The most devastating aspect of this devastating critique of the Republican critique of Obama on defense/foreign policy is the name of its author:
George Will. Republicans need more than rhetoric on defense. www.washingtonpost.com
Ben says even Bob Turner has stopped attacking Obama on Israel. Israel hawks warm to Obama - Ben Smith www.politico.com
Life imitates “Spaceballs” with Assad as President Skroob. Some Suggestions for New Assad E-Mail Passwords www.theatlantic.com
Assad is on track to kill more people in a year than have died on all sides in both Palestinian intifadas since 1987, or died on all sides in three decades of Irish troubles.
So how come so many lefties (and others) think Israel is the world's only human rights problem? Syria On Track to Kill More People Than Died in Both Intifadaswww.theatlantic.com
Kinsley opines about writing quality on the web being superfluous.
Oh why, oh why do I bother? On Web No One Cares If You Write Like a Dog: Michael Kinsley www.bloomberg.com
First of all we should consider imposing a loyalty oath on all Republican politicians asking that they swear that they report to We The People and our Constitution or admit that they adhere to the authority of the Pope in Rome.
Second the Catholic Church should stop implying that they speak for all religions. I think the billions of Protestants, Jews, Muslims, Eastern Orthodox, Hindus, Buddhists, Wiccans, and Native religionists out there would object to such a claim and would in fact have a different opinion about the Obama rule.
Third the claim that the government is imposing on the religious freedoms of Catholics is ludicrous. Are laws against Mormon polygamy or animal sacrifice an imposition? I think not. Such prohibitions are allowed if there is a legitimate government interest and contraception is such an interest in that it prevents unwanted births while avoiding abortions and also for protective health reasons.
If the Catholic Church wants to use the pulpit as a political platform then they should surrender their tax exempt status and pay taxes like all political groups do.
Recently, I was part of a small group which met to discuss the 2012 and 2013 election cycles. The discussion did not focus on any singular level or branch of government; nor did it focus on any specific race. After the discussions, I gave a lot of thought to action. You see it’s easy to sit around and pontificate. It’s even cool (somewhat) to gather in esoteric groups and theorize.
Talk is cheap. It’s action that brings about change more so than posturing and the selling of woof-tickets.
What I have done recently is initiate a recruitment process, seeking to get people thinking about challenging many of the district leader spots (both male and female) in Brooklyn. I have started in areas with heavy black populations or pockets; 12 assembly districts have immediately come into view: ADs 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 50, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58 and 59. I hope to eventually accumulate allies on the White and Hispanic sides of the tracks.
So far there are many folks interested in starting this movement based on only three immediate platform planks; namely: (a) that the democrats tackle the implementation of twelve-year term limits in New York, for elected officials at all three levels of government; (b) that elected officials surrender their district leader spots once elected/selected to higher office/positions; and (c) that the party advocate for a non-partisan commission to be set up immediately; so that after this census-cycle(2010), redistricting/reapportionment will be taken out of the hands of self-serving electeds.
Sure there are many other community concerns which many activists involved see as pressing; for example police misconduct, education reform, high-unemployment in communities of color, housing, et al. Right now, however, the focus will be placed on these three platform planks once new leaders are elected. The aim is to pressure the party to do better in terms of day to day political activism. We need to recruit new blood to the political process. We need to get more young people motivated and activated. Democrats haven’t held the NYC mayoralty since 1993. We need to recapture the state senate. We need to help President Obama get re-elected. We need to push back on “Tea-Party” people.
Recently, community activists like Lindiwe Kamau and Delroy Wright have been working with the Obama re-election team, in order to establish and work with Obama support-groups in central Brooklyn. Mundane things like voter-registration exercises have already started. Political education initiatives are amongst the activities planned for the immediate future.
So far I have identified nine people interested in run; six are male and three are female. The objective is to continue recruiting people of high-caliber to challenge the powers that be.
Next Sunday (12th February, 2012) there will be a meeting of Brooklyn activists at Delroy’s café/ restaurant/ bar, to further discuss all this (and more). The address is 14 Duryea Place (near Flatbush Avenue); between Beverley and Tilden. It starts at 6:00 p.m. All interested parties are free to attend; however, one must submit to a pre-clearance/screening process since we are not looking for provocateurs. If you are interested, do contact me (1-347-998-7631); or either Mr. Wright or Ms. Kamau. Ms. Kamau’s phone number is 1-718-774-5466. She is the head of the Nostrand Avenue Merchants Association (Brooklyn). Delroy Wright’s number is 1-516-359-8056. He is head of the Flatbush/Empire Avenues Merchant’s Association; and a potential candidate for City Council in the 2013 election-cycle.
Any change in NY politics must start with the party machinery. District leaders do more than simply select judges; they vet people; they also select emerging leaders and usually fill vacancies. We can all sit around and talk about change, but we will have to fight the powers that be to obtain real change and not be placated with small change. So, in the immortal words of a former head of the DNC (Ed Schultz): “Let’s get to work”.
Stay tuned-in folks.
Rick wins big.
Minnesota, Missouri, and Colorado may not be delegate rich, but Santorum's clean caucus sweep has upended Mitt Romney's aura of inevitability.
Mitt Romney is still the favorite to win the nomination. Romney has the money, the organization, and with Santorum and Newt Gingrich both in the race they will split the anti-Mitt vote, leaving neither with a commanding count of delegates, but Tuesday night might have been a game changer for Santorum.
Santorum, a former U.S. senator from Pennsylvania, will pull in much needed campaign cash, and his win could strengthen conservatives nationally around him. Certainly it gives Santorum grounds for claiming that he -- not Newt Gingrich -- is the strongest conservative alternative to Romney. Santorum did campaign aggressively in all three states. He skipped Florida's primary, and that strategy paid off. Santorum, who was all but on life support, has lived to fight another day.
Poor Mitt Romney. Forget that mantle of the presumptive nominee. The businessman just can't close the deal. Romney wins Florida and Nevada, spending the week as the undisputed front-runner. It appeared history was even on his side.
The former Massachusetts governor even prevailed in both Minnesota and Colorado in 2008, the first time he ran for the nomination, but the Republican Party has become more conservative in both states since then. He campaigned heavily in Colorado this time around, but it was not meant to be.
Let's all chime in together now.
Romney has an enthusiasm problem.
Contrast that with Santorum who has new legitimacy, and finally a new look from the national media.
"Conservatism is alive and well," Santorum said Tuesday night from St. Charles, Mo., as he proclaimed himself the "conservative alternative" to President Obama.
Romney predicted he will eventually become the GOP nominee, and focused his remarks in Denver on Obama. "Under his own definition President Obama has failed. We will succeed," he said.
Perhaps!
Perhaps that's the case. That ultimately Mr. Romney will succeed against President Obama, but he has to get there first, and with these three states there are renewed questions that Team Romney surely doesn't want to face at this stage of the process.
Can Romney appeal to the conservatives at the core of the party's political base?
Are voters still looking for someone else?
Does Romney resonate with Republicans?
Is the race wide open?
Romney showed no sign of disappointment in remarks to supporters, but his momentum is again slowed down. Another question has to be, what happens if after this trifecta, Santorum catches fire with the base? (The same way Newt and Herman Cain did.)
After eight contests in the GOP presidential race, Santorum now has four victories under his belt in Iowa, Missouri, Minnesota and Colorado.
Romney has victories in New Hampshire, Florida and Nevada.
Newt Gingrich won South Carolina.
Making matters worse for Romney, and what had to please the Obama White House, is that Santorum's extreme stance on many social issues will force Romney to stay to the right for a longer period, making Romney less attractive to independent voters that will be needed in the fall.
On the plus side for Romney, he still has the possibility to deliver a knockout blow on Super Tuesday. Ten states vote on March 6. Again, he has the organization and the financial strength. Money can solve a lot of problems for a candidate, but can not deliver true likability from the electorate.
Can Romney get back the momentum?
It's also bitterly ironic that as working-poor they're not eligible for the same programs and/or lifestyles as the non-working poor. Instead, they pay taxes--and don't require our taxes. That these people pay any income tax at all is economic travesty--and moreover, most of these taxes government squeezes out of them are highly regressive. Worse still, and incredibly enough, everybody in the state recently gets a tax cut but them. This isn't Adam Smith, it's Charles Dickens. Or maybe Sisyphus.
So, how to fix this thing? Can it be fixed? Or at least how can it be made less of a rotten deal for the working-poor? The only thing seen remotely appropriate on the public policy milieu is a boost in the minimum wage. Principally because these people could use some help now; they can't wait for the latest round of tax cuts (that they're not getting) to trickle down to them--like they're told is going to happen.
On the bright side, it's my understanding that the State Assembly is working on a bill. Good for them. I haven't heard anything from the Cuomo administration lately, but I can't think there'll be much resistance there because the governor in the past has proposed to do this several times. And even to the extent that it became one of his touchstones as candidate for governor. And he was pretty rhetorically forceful about it too:
Standing in an Associated market on 116th St. in Spanish Harlem, Cuomo said if Pataki is sincere about helping the working class, he would back a bill hiking the $5.15 minimum wage to $6.75."Actions speak louder than words," Cuomo said.
Given these statements I think it's safe to say Cuomo's onboard here.
So maybe most of the resistance will germinate with the State Senate majority and the business community?
But if so, hopefully they'll keep a few things in mind:
First, New York would not be aberrant in this regard. Seven states (both Blue and Red states) have within the past few years already raised their minimum wage, and many others are considering to do so. Consequently, it's unlikely business will flee New York for a place like New Jersey where the minimum wage was increased in 2009 and is in the hopper for getting bumped-up again. In 2008, another neighboring state, Connecticut, increased its minimum wage to $8.25 and hour (overriding a gubernatorial veto in doing so).
So, in search of a better wage did human capital flood out of New York and into either or both neighbor states? Of course not. On the other hand, did businesses leave New Jersey and Connecticut for New York because of the economic inefficiency and resulting economic end of days caused by jacking the minimum wage? Of course not. In fact, my guess is that most business people, and their employees, couldn't even tell you what the wage rates are in these two places right now--so much as when they were last raised. I know I couldn't.
The bottom line is that in these two states nothing really happened except putting a few extra cents in poor workers' pockets.
Second point, it's an economic science cornerstone and article of faith in the business community that a government-set minimum wage distorts the labor market and therein destroys jobs and businesses rather than helping minimum wage recipients. In fact, should you argue against this creed in Dismal Science 101 you'll earn yourself a seat in the back of the class and conical hat. But is this paradigm still true today, or at least is it true in New York State?
Here's what I'm thinking: Classical liberal economic theory, based on free-markets and laissez faire Big Government, may not do such a good modeling job in this day of big-box, government-intervening, state-planned economics--it's a new paradigm where you have presidents, senators, governors, congress members, mayors and ward leaders unabashadly pouring over tax-strategies, IDA filings, business models and Excel spread sheets looking to "create jobs" with government resources with their private-sector "partners."
Doctrinaire doubters should ask themselves how one even begins deriving say, marginal costs of labor and market equilibrum out of this mire. And enough so to confidently extrapolate on the cost/benefit of the minimum wage? (I'd actually love to hear/see if there's any work in this.) I'm not saying this drift towards state-planned economies is a good or bad thing (Although I keep having these visions of huge lines of humanity in Cold War Kiev or Stalingrad waiting for toilet paper and beets). Nor am I saying this new model of ours doesn't work. Only that it's here; and we're stuck with it for the foreseeable future. And we really don't know enough about it to make broad statements like increasing the minimum wage is a bad thing for everybody in this type economy.
But what you can derive from that mire is that someone emptying nursing-home bedpans in Far Rockaway, trying to feed her kids, doesn't really care about the marginal cost of labor and market equilibrium. In other words, they clean toilets, hump concrete block, pay regressive taxes and worry about the next cable bill while the government superintends the state economy (with its private-sector partners), with the working-poor plight on their radar only as some kind of distantly plaintive abstraction. Maybe, like the state's students, Governor Cuomo could even become the working-poor's personal lobbyist.
Ultimately you start drilling down on the totality of this stuff long enough and it really, really makes you wonder what people have against the working-poor. Because any way you figure it they basically get hammered for the mortal sin of holding a lower-skill job among low-skill jobs. And should they or someone else summon the temerity to ask for a few shillings more, the drawbridges go up, ramparts down, and the arrows start flying.
I’ll bet the Santorum is looking and feeling really frothy after that threesome last night.
I’ll bet the Santorum is looking and feeling really frothy after that threesome last night.
I'll admit it; I am utterly clueless about internal GOP politics. I know there are a lot of serious Christians out there, but how many times can there be a resurrection? And while I hesitate to use the words “Santorum” and “second coming” in the same sentence, I wonder if this is supposed to be a precursor to the end of times.
I do wish the righties would pick their guy and unite already. Maybe the fact this would please people like me is why they don't do it.
Same Sex Marriage as the Triumph of the Conservatives (part 97):
"Conservatives should want as many people as possible to live in institutions and social norms that promote stability, faithfulness and compassion. Marriage is an institution at the centre of society. It is because I value it so much that I want it to be extended. ... [It] is civilising, stabilising, a hugely important institution for bringing people together. But if marriage is fossilised and exclusive, that has only limited reach. [David Cameron's] attempt to enlarge and modernise the institution should not be seen as a threat to marriage but as its saviour," - Tim Montgomerie, Tory activist, editor and founder of the ConservativeHome blog and co-founder of the Conservative Christian Fellowship. Quote For The Day andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com
State Senate Republicans all want to take credit for the gravy, while disclaiming accountability for the mess they make; Andrew "Genug" Gounardes says "enough already!"
Kudos. Letter to Golden on Redistricting - 02072012 www.scribd.com
Ed Towns on Hakeem Jeffries spokesperson Lupe Todd: ""Ironically, his spokesperson not long ago defended me against some of the charges she is now leveling. I guess she has no objections to getting paid to play on that level."
He's absolutely right. I would definitely vote for Ed Towns against Lupe Todd Ed Towns gets a jumpstart from PACs, and Hakeem Jeffries' camp pounces | Capital New York www.capitalnewyork.com
Wow, rabid Brooklyn GOP blogger Russ Gallo has followed Gatemouth’s lead in noting that honoring Iraq war vets is more important than honoring the Giants (but why not do both?)
On Monday morning, I wrote: "Does the Meadowland have a canyon of heroes? Do outlet stores count? If we do a ticker tape parade for a Jersey team, can Iran War Veterans at least come and watch?"
On December 29, I wrote: "The War may have been a stupid idea, but Jimmy Oddo is right--why aren't we giving our Iraq veterans a parade?" A councilman wants to know why New York is not having a parade for Iraq veterans | Capital New York www.capitalnewyork.com
I’m Glad Russ is willing to join a cause championed by Rachel Maddow. Hope Russ doesn't get mad that I think the war was a stupid idea; (David Storobin has the same position as me--good luck finding his post though). Brooklyn GOP Radio: Canyon of Faux Heroes brooklyngopradio.blogspot.com
From the Annals of the Gatemouth Facebook Page:
Gate: Despite all his New York bashing, Newt must have taken solace from that last minute victory. On the other hand, the Giants had only been down by two points.
Sam Hudis: Of course the game winning touch down was made accidentally when Ahmad Bradshaw lost his balance and fell on his ass. I'm not sure what the analogy would be there.
Gate: What? You don't think Mitt is capable of losing his balance and falling on his ass ?
There are those who seem to think an Arab-spring can never happen here, since the traditional institutions which are so embedded in the polity, offer some type of protection and buffer from the frustrations of most voters. They are wrong. They also believe that the implied power(s) of the federal, state and city/local governments (security forces, militias, executive branches of government, plus the legal system, etcetera) will always guarantee stability and compliance. They are wrong again.
The Tea-Party movement is about frustration within the political system. The Occupation-Wall-Street movement extends this frustration to the banking/financial system. Dwindling voter-participation all over the country is also about overall frustration with our so-called democratic system; which is in fact an unfinished democracy.
What happened in Seattle, Washington, a few years ago is about anger and frustration from perceived inequities and power-abuses in the international (and national) economic system of capitalism. The emotional outpouring of support for Senator Barack Obama’s 2008 message of “change” was not only about frustration, anger and fear, but it was also about years and years of pent-up frustration, building-up and leading to an outpouring of hope and idealism.
Over the last century republicans and democrats have essentially stifled true democracy with their self-serving laws and rules relative to ballot access, political participation, party-formation, inclusion, empowerment, respect, policy-formation and true opposition to the powers that be.
One of the ways both parties have done this is via the reapportionment process. Every ten years we go through a redistricting process that locks us into certain patterns of control which essentially maintains a two-party system that operates counter to the spirit of the US constitution. There should be a more pluralistic system of party-participation in the process. Minor parties are strangled at every turn because of unfair and cumbersome rules.
In a recent column I wrote about the current debate raging all over the country. It’s the usual ten-year fight over reapportionment (redistricting). In politics this is where the rubber meets the road so to speak. This is where the color-compositions of the national, state and city/local legislatures are determined. This is where race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, geography, history and other socio-politico-economic-cultural determinants come to a head; in negotiations over how and where lines are carved out for political representation in the legislative bodies of this country.
This process is even more important than say money in politics (Citizen’s Union). This process is the beginning of the end so to speak. If the lines aren’t sensitive and responsive to the myriad demands from groups within the polity, we can have resentments that would build up over time. In a state like New York where the population-diversity is overwhelming, and where individual -compartmentalization is as natural as taking a piss; the fight over representation is even more pronounced. And yet, you wouldn’t know this if you had just landed from Mars. You would never see the importance given that the average person tends to ignore it: and elected officials love that. Why else would they not have a non-partisan commission drawing these lines after 235 years of the NY state legislature?
Many people casually assume that the legislative branch of government (on all three levels) arrives at its racial, ethnic, nationalistic, and religious breakdowns (compositions) automatically. They are very very wrong. A lot has to do with how the lines are drawn. A lot has to do with where lines are drawn. A lot has to do with who lives in these districts.
By now, those who faithfully follow my columns know that I have no great love for the “collective” bunch of black elected officials on all three levels of government (city/local, state and federal levels). They leave a lot to be desired. Take the census count for example.
You would assume that every ten years we could expect a strenuous effort by black electeds all over the nation, to ensure and insure that blacks are counted fully by census officials. After all, it’s about monies. It’s about federal programs and funding for things like education, sports and recreation, housing, seniors, pre and post-natal care, recidivism programs, crime protection programs, etcetera, etcetera. After all it’s about representation in the halls and corridors of power. It’s obvious that blacks have been perpetually undercounted. This usually proves itself when black candidates go on voter-registration drives, and find so many people who have been eliminated from official census tracts eager to engage the political process. You would then expect meaningful and significant lawsuits to stop the census count from being adopted, accepted and legitimized by the authorities; no? After all, once this count is accepted as factual, it becomes a precursor and basis for the implementation of many of government’s fiscal, social, cultural, health, educational, and other policies?
I have gone on record consistently defending the right of ANYONE living in a district to run for public office: seeking to represent said district. It doesn’t matter if that person is the only one of that ilk living there; even if more than 300 thousand (NY Senate seat) others are different. And yet, I am realistic enough to know that the more you pack individuals of one ilk (race, ethnicity, religion, nationality, etc.) into a district, the more likely that someone of that ilk will emerge to represent that district: it’s all about numbers and mathematical possibilities. This is where numerology comes in. There will be a higher possibility of this outcome when compared to other options where specific populations are minimalized.
People don’t only vote for someone because of his or her qualifications and experience(s); they more often than not, vote for one because of race, ethnicity, nationality, religion and such. These factors often come into play long before final voting decisions are made.
About five years ago I wrote a column arguing that the Supreme Court should be increased to reflect the population diversity of this country, and it was slammed by one of the regular writers to this site. I still believe that people will be more favorably predisposed to an institution if they see its composition as having someone (or others) who look similar to them relative to race, ethnicity, nationality, socio-cultural background, religion, and such. It is natural. All across this world of ours, we can see where the genesis of many a racial, nationalistic, religious, tribal and/or ethnic conflict, lie in refusal of one group to power-share or include others in the power equations and decision-making process.
In New York the six member panel authorized to draw up the new district lines are all male. Six of them are white; two are Hispanic. There are no women. There are no blacks, Chinese, Koreans, Indians, or others from the Asian diasporas; how come?
Many of those who attended last week’s public hearing on reapportionment (in Brooklyn) came away with the distinct impression that members on the panel weren’t listening. Group after group, after group, pleaded with the members not to draw lines diluting the potential political strength/power of racial, nationalistic and ethnic minorities in this borough. Panel members never asked for ideas around dealing with this to the satisfaction of those pleading. Maybe the answers were implicit within the pleas.
When you break up populations into four and five pieces, instead of having a seat where the majority grouping can increase its chances of electing one of its own, then you are playing politics with the process. Many groups in Brooklyn accuse the panel of doing just this; like the Russians in Sheepshead Bay and immediate environs; like Caribbean-Americans in Brooklyn-central; like Hispanics in Sunset Park and other places; like Afros in general.
Look, I am fully aware that this isn’t an easy process for mapmakers. I do know however that there should be some preliminary expectations/agreements going in as to what should be the ideal final map; and also what would be the ideal final composition of the legislative bodies when elections are over.
I am yet to find in New York state, more than one or two districts (senate or assembly) where the population was at least 50 per cent white, which has elected a non-white person. I have been told of one or two of such districts in the 235 years history of the state legislature. Byron Brown won the 57th SD in 2001 to become the first Afro to ever attain this feat. I am unable to obtain specific clarification: the history, date and demographic-makeup of other said seats. And yet, there have been many times when minorities make up the majority population within a district, where whites have easily won election and re-election, as representatives (42nd AD/Brooklyn, for example). Marty Markowitz held such a minority-majority seat for about 20 years(20th SD/Brooklyn). Is this all just co-incidental?
Last week, Gary Tilzer publisher of the political blog “True News”, stated that the panel at the Brooklyn hearing was nothing but a group of programmed monkeys. To him they are able, ready and willing to rubber stamp the redistricting aims of Shelley Silver (Democrat/assembly speaker), and Dean Skelos (Republican/ senate majority leader). He calls the whole process a sham. To him the republicans and democrats have refused to reform the legislative branch because of the power-sharing arrangement that the redistricting process maintains. “They will never address the idea of an independent commission to draw up objective lines”, said Tilzer in a phone interview. “It’s detrimental to their aims and objectives: maintaining the status quo”.
The problem is this Gary: the sham will be legitimized as soon as the governor signs the redistricting agreement drawn up by this group. The challenge for progressives and people of good faith is to publicize this process as much as possible in order to bring pressure to bear on the powers that be for eventual lines that are much more transparent than in years past. Here again our electeds fail us; especially those representing communities where minorities make up the majority of the population.
Given that one in four city residents is black (and one in five statewide); I am flabbergasted at the fact that the legislature couldn’t find one black person to place on this panel? It’s about respect. It’s about empowerment and inclusion. It’s about power-sharing. It’s about simple political decency. I have written many times before about all these boards, panels, commissions, and such, which never reflect the diversity of this country, its states, cities and localities: it’s 2012 people. And some whites claim to honestly not understand the seething resentment of many blacks in certain quarters; blacks who have had to routinely deal with racism, discrimination, marginalization, exclusion, inequity and the like: all their lives.
Do you mean to tell me that they couldn’t have found one woman for that six member panel? Don’t women make up around 52 per cent of the population? Even if a little less than that, they are still in the majority all over the country; aren’t they?
If all things were equal, the legislatures all over this country would reflect a composition as close to the natural demographics as possible; but we don’t live in a perfect world. Still, when you have a 535- member Congress where there are no blacks in the Senate; and a House of Representatives with under-representation among Hispanics, Blacks, Native Americans, Chinese-Americans, other Asian ethnics and people of mixed races (compared to their overall percentages in the national demographics); then maybe it is time to draw lines in a way that will enhance the chances of electing (and reflecting) such a population-diversity. I want to believe that such an initiative is embedded in the spirit of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
In response to a recent article published on Room Eight New York Politics (www.r8ny.com), Michael Benjamin-the former state assembly member from the South Bronx- intimated that the Voting Rights Act was obsolete. I think Mr. Benjamin needs to clarify his position further since it really shocked quite a few people who called me up on the topic. It came off like New Jersey governor Chris Christie’s ridiculous statement, that there should have been a referendum on the civil rights issue back in the day (since whites felt it was all imposed on them). It was so absurd you couldn’t even consider it funny. Calling for a referendum on rights glaringly spelled out in the constitution, when blacks could hardly vote in most states without encumbrances, made no sense whatsoever. Christie later apologized; maybe Benjamin should too. This is sacred ground. Voting and free/fair elections are the cornerstones of democracy.
It took one hundred and forty years after the adoption of the NY state constitution to elect the first black to the legislature. That was in 1917 when a republican named Edward A. Johnson was elected. Twenty years later, the first Hispanic was elected to the body. His name was Oscar Garcia. In 1955, the first Afro woman was elected to the body. Her name was Bessie A. Buchanan. It took almost 200 years.
As historic as these feats were, they didn’t’ come about without lines being drawn favorably enough to facilitate such specific successes. In Brooklyn, folks like activist/educator Esmeralda Simmons, have been arguing for years, that lines can be drawn up more favorably relative to the aim of aiding the aspirations for minorities to secure larger representations on the legislative bodies (at all three levels of government). She is absolutely correct. It is a matter of the panel responsible for drawing up the new lines, not having the political will and courage to do it.
Let’s look at the reverse. In both Nassau and Suffolk counties of Long Island maps have been consistently drawn to hinder minority representation. I conclude it has been deliberately done. Why else would you split up minority dominated areas into three or four different jurisdictions? It appears that the dominant rationale for redrawing lines has been incumbent-protectionism. This is why the maps are so oddly-shaped for the most part. In all five boroughs of this city, we can find evidence of maps being drawn whereby aims of increased minority-representation are negated or minimized. It also appears to happen around the Buffalo area upstate.
Imagine a panel having the gall to submit preliminary maps calling for the creation of a new (from 62 to 63) senate seat, and placing it upstate in the heart of republican country. This being done after upstate New York has been consistently losing population relative to the rest of the state, for the past fifty years.
Let me reiterate: drawing political maps is no easy feat; but with new and sophisticated computer software now readily available, maps can drawn up in mere hours. These maps can be fine tuned to accomplish almost any objective relative to the demands of varied constituencies.
The proposed lines recently released by the panel, should be immediately rejected offhand. Governor Andrew Cuomo must insist on lines which maximize the potential for increased minority participation in the legislative process. The minority-vote shouldn’t be fragmented in order to maintain white supremacy in the legislative process. This is political-morality at its nadir. This is political-immorality at its zenith.
Stay tuned-in folks.
“The price-earnings ratio for the benchmark gauge of American equities has fallen to 14 times reported income, down from 24 at the end of 2009.” But are those earnings real, or fraudulent, as in the 1990s? And if they are real, how dependent are those earnings on the federal government running a massive budget deficit and the Federal Reserve keeping interest rates artificially low, neither of which is sustainable? And even if the earnings are sustainable, why should investors care if all the money goes to excess executive pay in the form of stock options and awards rather than dividends? The dividend yield is about 2.0%, less than half its historic average. Instead of real investor returns today, the executive class promises investor returns tomorrow, but it has been making the same promise for nearly two decades. Public employee pension funds remain available as a sucker, but even these are starting to get fed up – and to object to small returns in exchange for outsized pay in hedge funds and private equity.
]]>
“The price-earnings ratio for the benchmark gauge of American equities has fallen to 14 times reported income, down from 24 at the end of 2009.” But are those earnings real, or fraudulent, as in the 1990s? And if they are real, how dependent are those earnings on the federal government running a massive budget deficit and the Federal Reserve keeping interest rates artificially low, neither of which is sustainable? And even if the earnings are sustainable, why should investors care if all the money goes to excess executive pay in the form of stock options and awards rather than dividends? The dividend yield is about 2.0%, less than half its historic average. Instead of real investor returns today, the executive class promises investor returns tomorrow, but it has been making the same promise for nearly two decades. Public employee pension funds remain available as a sucker, but even these are starting to get fed up – and to object to small returns in exchange for outsized pay in hedge funds and private equity.
People are beginning to doubt all kinds of things. Work hard and you will get ahead? Younger generations seem to believe that you’ll just be downsized after 20 years. That’s what the history says.
Pay more in taxes to spend on education and the schools will get better? More likely teachers will just get more in retirement and retire earlier.
Pay more in payroll taxes to save Social Security? They’ll just cut the income tax instead.
Take advantage of a chance to buy a house with a subsidy? The subsidy will just inflate the cost of the house, benefitting the older seller, and the price will then fall, leaving you worse off than before.
“The past decade parallels the span between Dec. 31, 1964, and the end of 1981, when the Dow added less than 1 point after surging interest rates diminished the appeal of equities. While the 115-year-old stock gauge ended the period at 875, it ranged between 577.60 and 1,051.70.”
Right, because stock prices were over-inflated at the start of each period. We’ll see about interest rates. Older generations, for the most part, did not save, and now they face retirement. Younger generations are poorer and in no position to save. Unless it is newly printed, where will the money come from?
This situation were are in has several years to go. Only those who benefitted from the debt binge would say otherwise.
Domestic Partner: Can you tell me the name of any famous Giants or Patriots?
Gate: Gulliver and Nathan Hale
Domestic Partner: Can you tell me the name of any famous Giants or Patriots?
Gate: Gulliver and Nathan Hale
Does the Meadowland have a canyon of heroes? Do outlet stores count? If we do a ticker tape parade for a Jersey team, can Iran War Veterans at least come and watch?
Despite all his New York bashing, Newt must have taken solace from that last minute victory. On the other hand, the Giants had only been down by two points.
Ho hum---Romney wins a state full of Mormons.
Other pertinent observation: If Ron Paul can't even place in a state with legalized hookers, it's hard to see where he goes from here (excepting perhaps the Big Easy).
If this were a normal campaign instead of its opposite (a mission from Ayn Rand), Paul would be over.
The Smartest Man In America in America Serves as the GOP's GPS and outlines four alternative routes for the road ahead. Five Paths Forward for G.O.P. Nomination fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com
Chait: "Any attempt to explain why Romneycare is so vastly different than Obamacare really ought to explain why the economist who designed both plans thinks they’re the same fucking bill." Conservatives to Rescue Romney From His Past nymag.com
Frum Should Just Become A Democrat (Part 97): "Because of the Affordable Care Act, near-universal health coverage is coming at last to the United States. That's not a clock that can or should be turned back. The conservative task ahead is to reform that new social commitment so that it is affordable and sustainable, so that it is financed in ways that do not discourage work, saving and investment." For Coulter, Against Levin www.thedailybeast.com
Ron Paul wins Sheldon Adelson's private Havdalah caucus.
This reminds me of all those Jews in Boca who voted for Buchanan; as Bill Maher said:
"All eyes turned to Jewville to sort out the mess,
But Hyman and Hershel and dear old Aunt Bess,
Were too senile to vote for the one that they liked,
They poked the wrong hole and joined the Third Reich." Adelson Sits Helplessly Grim-Faced as Supporters of the Anti-Israel Ron Paul Over-run the NV Jewish. gestetnerupdates.com
As far as I can make out Ron Paul now favors emergency contraception, but only in the case of "Honest Rape," which I guess rules it out in cases of "Rape By Deception.” Is this another slap at Israel? Ron Paul: If It's an 'Honest Rape' a Woman Should Go to the Emergency Room, 'Get a Shot of Estrogen' videocafe.crooksandliars.com
Saletan: "If you want to drive Planned Parenthood out of the abortion business, don’t send them less money. Send them more. Help Planned Parenthood become what it has wanted to be all along: The organization that helps women avoid unwanted pregnancies, so they don’t have to abort them." The Komen fiasco: How to drive Planned Parenthood out of the abortion business. www.slate.com
Republicans are so intent on proving there's voter fraud that they're committing it themselves. Indiana Republican Secretary Of State Found Guilty Of Voter Fraud www.addictinginfo.org
Goldberg: "Boiling wraths! Filthy Zionist entities! Black and dirty microbes! Ahmadinejad is not just an average spewer of anti-Israel invective, he is the Robert Browning of hate. It is not clear why some people won't give him his due." What is At the Root of the Israel-Iran Confrontation? www.theatlantic.com
A guy who runs for office as a victim of religious persecution while simultaneously advocating that other religious minorities be denied the right to have a place to worship now runs a campaign entirely bereft of ideas, which, given his ideas, may actually be for the best. David Storobin’s Game Plan | City and State www.cityandstateny.com
Holocaust denier defends Storobin. To Lew Fidler: Is This The Best You Have To Offer? | Room Eight www.r8ny.com
Fidler likes anything on a rotisserie, even his sport equipment. Still, fantasy sports beats imagining the fantasy that Putin is a great man. Lew Fidler’s Fantasy Sports History www.politicker.com
· Is the resurrection imminent? Maybe we should set the primary for Easter Sunday. Jesus Gonzalez For City Council? | City and State www.cityandstateny.com
Jerry Lewis in "The Jazz Singer" AKA "The Day The Clown Cried Mammy." Jerry’s vids www.nypost.com
I woke up to find this posted on one of my threads.
I woke up to find this posted on one of my threads.
Storobin Responds to Gatemouth: http://gestetnerupdates.com/2012/02/03/video-gop-nys-senate-candidate-david-storobin-interview/. To save 15 minutes of your life, start at 15:00.
Actually, I’d start at 11:00 or 12:00.
First let’s talk about me:
STOROBIN: My articles are still very much available.
GATE: I guess that depends upon what your definition of “very much available” is. Many are very hard to find. I’m pretty sure a few I looked at in December, when I first took up this task (before the two data bases which contained a fully indexed list of what appeared to be most of Storobin’s articles were either wiped or closed), are gone entirely.
Of the articles which still do exist, many were extremely hard to locate. For instance, Storobin’s surprisingly sympathetic article about Russian collaborators with the Nazis, “Pro-Axis Russians: Terrorists ... and Democratic Capitalists,” is seemingly only available in English on the white supremacist hate site; the Vanguard News Network Forum, where I think it belongs.
And Storobin’s full throated defense of Vladimir Putin’s poaching players from the National Hockey League seems to appear only on what seems to be a very strange sports discussion board.
STOROBIN: The person who is doing the main attack dog for the Fidler campaign said he had a year to read them, he’s read all of them, and he found them to be quote “boring.”
STOROBIN: Their person has said, their person has said that he’s read everything and this is all they could find…
GATE: Well. Woof woof. This is a lie almost from whole clothe.
I am not “doing the main attack dog” for the Fidler campaign. As I’ve admitted, I wrote Fidler a couple of check. My family also attended a rally for him on MLK day (in between us buying Dybbuk a Mario game at J&R, and having a dim sum lunch at Jing Fong). I think I may have also emailed Fidler a link of the article where Storobin gives Putin a full “around the world”, including a rim job, but typical of Fidler, he could not open the link, and I had to paste it.
I will also note that I was the first writer to criticize Fidler for going too far when he attacked Storobin (at what he thought was a private party) by linking Storobin to white supremacists, and that I’d also criticized another blogger for doing the same thing a few days before.
As to Storobin’s other assertions.
I first head of Storobin in May, 2011, which is considerably less than a year ago, and noticed almost immediately that his articles attracted links from hate sites, but I did not read any more than one or two at the time. In fact, I probably never would have read Storobin again, had it not been for the fact that a couple of GOP bloggers called me out on a thread for mis-portraying Storobin’s views.
Stung, I went a searchin’ and found the motherload on a blog which Mr. Storobin had founded called Global Politician, where, using the site’s search function, I located dozens of pieces of Mr. Storobin’s writings. There was also an ad from Mr. Storobin’s law firm.
In answer to my critics, I promised to do a full parsing of Mr. Storobin's voluminous published writing.
As I then noted:
“Since I indicated my interest in exploring Storobin’s writings, the ad from his law firm seems to have been taken down. Moreover, a search today using the same search function I used before indicates that Mr. Storobin has published nothing in Global Politician, even though a Google search indicates otherwise. So, I cannot share with you the original postings of part one and part two of Mr. Storobin’s series spotlighting the leaders of The Afrikaner Independence Movement.
Sadly, I’ve done only the most glancing survey of these articles before Mr. Storobin’s articles (and seemingly nothing else on the site), were thoroughly scrubbed.
Luckily, many of Mr. Storobin’s pieces were reprinted elsewhere, including more than one on white supremacist hate sites.”
Then, as luck would have it, I again hit the motherload. About a week before the New Year, I found a site called “International Analyst Network” which contained over 40 pieces of Mr. Storobin’s work.
Not his entire legacy, but a good start. As I then noted.
“I promised myself I would start New Year’s weekend on what promised to be a long and painful slog in order to be able to deeply parse the mysteries which awaited me.
However, to my shock, when I returned to the same site on 12/30/11, this is what I found in their stead.”
Even worse, I tried using the links on the contents page I cached above, only to discover that only one of them worked, and that was the link to Storobin’s law firm.
According to the site, they’re “closing our doors for a little while to make some much needed improvements to our network.
We'll be back in 2012 with a new look, feel and focus.”
Perhaps this is just a coincidence; although it is now 2012 and they are still not back.
But I suspect that they won’t be. As I’ve noted the evidence indicates that Storobin founded this site as well.
At any rate, while I suspect that my rather comprehensive (in scope) but still glancing (when it comes to the matter of actually reading every word) review of Mr. Storobin’s writings means that I know more about Storobin’s writings than anyone but Storobin, it does not mean that I actually gave more than a glance to a small fraction of those pieces, in the very few days I had before those articles disappeared.
However, though I don’t believe I said this in any column (though I may have in a thread), Mr. Storobin is correct that I did find the majority of his work to be a snore.
STOROBIN: He said all I’m discussing is international stuff like the flat tax in Estonia and the tax policy in Hong Kong and some other stuff.
GATE: What I actually said is: “Before anyone says that Storobin’s views on international affairs should not matter, I have to note (1) it is clear that Storobin’s strange views on international affairs are practically the only thing Storobin really cares about (outside of ending progressive taxation), (2) and it is clear that he sees the State Senate only as a stepping stone for Congress, and (3) his views make him unfit for service in Congress; (4) his views on international affairs shed light on his entire political philosophy; and (5) a lot of his constituents care about Russia, and (6) many of them are militantly anti-Putin.”
Never read, or even mentioned the stuff about Estonia or Hong Kong. I’m sure this is my loss.
But it is not only with regard to me that Mr. Storobin obscures the truth.
STOROBIN: I didn’t even interview with them, with the people who are the real hateful people…
GATE: Storobin does not think the “Minuteman” and the white supremacist Afrikaner Independence Movement are hateful. This is the problem.
STOROBIN (answering why his articles have disappeared): That has nothing to do with me, I haven’t been the editor and I haven’t been the editor in years.
GATE: Right, it’s just a happy coincidence that he was entirely deleted from one website he founded, and that the other site he founded just closed down for repairs two minutes later.
Storobin also shamelessly exploits hatred by attacking Fidler for funding LGTB groups, without noting that the funding was to prevent homeless children from freezing to death on the streets.
And he shamelessly lies about what Fidler has said and implied about his articles and his family.
STOROBIN: This is an insult to the Jewish community and to every decent person out there. To abuse, to abuse the memory of murdered Jews including my relatives is really shameful. It does not belong in politics.
GATE: This is a recurring motif in Storobin’s campaign. In a Talking Points Memo Storobin circulated, it notes “If you can’t trust Lew Fidler’s word on David Storobin’s Jewish faith, you can’t trust anything he says.”
I don’t recall Fidler saying anything about Storobin’s Jewish faith. “If you can’t trust David Storobin’s word on Lew Fidler’s statements, you can’t trust anything he says.”
What Lew Fidler did, and should not have done, was what is known as a “Kinsley Gaffe” A Kinsley gaffe is when a politician tells the truth. Not the objective truth (which it surely was not), but the truth about how he sees the world, without regard to how it will play.
Fidler, an experienced immigration lawyer, and longtime supporter of immigrant causes, including Russian Jews, saw Storobin's 2007 interview with Jim Gilchrist of the “Minuteman Project on Immigration, Terror, and Elections, (a group which had been condemned by the Anti Defamation League), which began with Storobin saying “Today I spoke to Jim Gilchrist, the founder of the Minuteman Project. The most striking part of the interview was how mild his views on immigration truly were. The man has been vilified by most of the Left and even much of the Right, including the White House. He’s supposed to be an immigrant-hating vigilante who dreams of dead Mexicans at night. Instead, he’s an intelligent, mild-mannered person with very reasonable proposals..." and Fidler got justifiably repulsed.
Surely Fidler thought "If Lew Fidler had the bad taste and poor judgment to interview a white supremacist not once but twice, is there any question that when he was done it would be clear to all concerned that he found the views to be repugnant?” Surely Fidler thought that such an interview done by Lew Fidler would never be linked on a site like Stormfront.
Fidler was probably not going to emphasize such things in his campaign, because there’s really little to be gained by raising such issues in the heavily white 27th SD. A majority of voters there probably do abhor racism, but even among those who do, it’s not like racism is an issue which would drive them to the polls.
But here was Lew Fidler at a private party at a bar in front of a group of drunk young Democrats, speaking from his heart instead of his head, telling them the truth about what he really thought about David Storobin, and since he was speaking from the heart, he was not accurate with his words. He didn’t say “David Storobin is linked by hate sites because they love what he writes” which would have been factually accurate. Instead he said Storobin has ties to hate groups—something which one might reasonably suspect, but which cannot be proven.
Instead of being an intemperate assertion among friends, cell phone cameras turned the remark into a web-posting.
I should note that some respectable people think Fidler said nothing wrong. I quote from an email saying I was too harsh on Fidler
ERIK ENGQUIST (of Crain’s): A link is not a tie?... Yeah, I think what Lew said is OK. Certainly by the current standards of politics
Besides me, few noticed the video, but Storobin kept beating the drum, so that the remarks which had purportedly so offended him and had purportedly caused him so much anguish, but which no one had noticed, and which were not emerging as a Fidler campaign mantra, eventually became noticed by everyone.
The Fidler campaign’s biggest sin here was to initially refuse to back down from Fidler’s impromptu error, sending out a press release trying to prove their candidate’s error was true.
Stupid political machismo, but not “abus[ing] the memory of murdered Jews.”
Abusing the memory of murdered Jews is what Storobin is doing now. In fact, it the number one “issue” in the Talking Points Memo circulated by the Storobin campaign.
STOROBIN: If I had links to Nazis, they’d kill me. These are the people who wiped out all four of my grandparents’ families.
STOROBIN: It’s an assault on free speech, it’s an assault on media, it’s an assault on reason and it’s an assault on logic, and most of all it’s an assault on the Jewish community, and it’s an assault on all those people who died in concentration camps like my relatives.
GATE: I don’t want to overemphasize this, but Domestic Partner, most of whose family was wiped out in the Holocaust (her mother survived in an attic) insisted that I point out that Storobin’s family was not killed in the Holocaust because they were Jews; they were killed in a war because they were soldiers. As Storobin notes in the family album he released the other day, five of his grandfather’s brothers were killed as soldiers fighting the Nazis, a sadly common experience among Russians of that generation, though hardly a specifically Jewish one. However, this did not stop Storobin’s from writing sympathetically about Russian collaborators with the Nazis, “Russian collaborators with the Nazis.”
STOROBIN: He’s engaged in name-calling and he’s engaged in attacks against my family…
STOROBIN: And to attack my mother, my mother [he’s starting to sound like Montgomery Clift in “Judgment at Nuremberg.”] for giving me a perfectly legal donation and to say “why is your mother giving you money is low gutter politics.
GATE: The Fidler campaign had merely pointed out that 50% of the money Storobin had raised consisted of a personal loan made by Storobin to the campaign and a contribution from his mommy.
STOROBIN: We need to get beyond it; we need to get beyond it. Let’s discuss discuss issues.
GATE: Let us discuss discuss.
As City Hall News notes: “A strategist for Republican Senate candidate David Storobin’s campaign passed along a memo highlighting the four main lines of attack the Republican expects to pursue against Brooklyn Councilman Lew Fidler during the rest of their campaign.
These talking points are expected to show up in flyers, mailers and media messaging up until Election Day on Mar. 20…”
The four talking points are ““Spreading Lies About David Storobin,” “Campaign Finance Misdeeds,” “Parking Perk” and ““Extra Income Problem.”
Obviously Storobin does not want to “discuss discuss” issues. He wants to “attack attack.” Fidler personally.
Which I suppose would be step up from campaigning in favor of children being allowed to freeze to death.
Meanwhile, I suggest the press stop taking so seriously every word from this obviously deranged human being the Republicans have chosen to sneeze upon a voting machine.