The Queen of the Blues, Ms. Koko Taylor, died Wednesday, June 3, 2009 from complications of gastrointestinal surgery, "less than four weeks after her last performance, at the Blues Music Awards in Memphis, Tenn. There she collected her record 29th Blues Music Award, capping an era in which she became the most revered female blues vocalist of her time with signature hits 'Wang Dang Doodle,' 'I'm a Woman' and 'Hey Bartender,'" according to a story by the Chicago Tribune's music writer Greg Kot. The world is a sadly quieter place to live this morning.
From 1967, here is her classic signature tune, "Wang Dang Doodle," featuring Little Walter.
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Vigils for Dr. Tiller
NARAL's Blog For Choice has a continually updated list of vigils being held around the country to honor Dr. Tiller. None in Des Moines yet, but I'll be checking regularly.
Monday, June 1, 2009
More on Right Wing Hate and Violence
As I wrote yesterday's post I had no idea I would be following up on the same topic so soon. But that was before I knew of the murder of Dr. George Tiller (pictured), a Wichita, Kansas based provider of abortion services, including late term abortions.
Dr. Tiller was gunned down in the foyer of Wichita's Reformation Lutheran Church, where he was serving as an usher, according to a story this morning on NPR. Police have a suspect in custody, Scott Roeder, 51, who occasionally attended Dr. Tiller's church.
Where this story fits into the theme of yesterday's post is in the hatred spewed against Dr. Tiller for a number of years. The website Alternet has documented much of these attacks in a recent article:
- The Tiller Women’s Health Clinic clinic was bombed in 1985;
- Dr. Tiller was shot in both arms by abortion protester Rachelle Shannon in 1993;
- And this should come as no surprise, but "Tiller had also long been the target of vicious attacks by conservative pundits like Bill O'Reilly, who often denounced Tiller on his show."
According to the Alternet article, Dr. Tiller leaves behind a wife, four children and 10 grandchildren. In a statement issued several hours after the shooting, Tiller’s family said:
"Our loss is also a loss for the City of Wichita and women across America. George dedicated his life to providing women with high-quality heath care despite frequent threats and violence. We ask that he be remembered as a good husband, father and grandfather and a dedicated servant on behalf of the rights of women everywhere."
Read the full article; it will convince you that the words of former President Bill Clinton that I quoted in the previous post are as relevant today as they were when he first uttered them in 1995. The right wing spews hatred, and then the leaders of the organization sit back and claim it is not their fault when violence results. Hypocrites.
And while you're at it, consider supporting one of the organizations below. It need not be financial support; their websites offer a variety of ways to get involved.
Planned Parenthood;
NARAL Pro Choice America; and
Iowa City's nationally known Emma Goldman Clinic
(Photo credit to Associated Press via NPR's website.)
Sunday, May 31, 2009
Scary Trend: Growing Numbers of Hate Groups
A new editorial posted on the Southern Poverty Law Center's Intelligence Report for Summer, 2009 talks about "a resurgence of right-wing hate groups and radical ideas is spreading across the United States." This bit of news should come as no surprise to anyone who listens to, or reads the hate being spewed by the right on websites like Human Events, and by blowhard radio entertainers (using the term loosely) like Rush Limbaugh.
The SPLC's February Intelligence report, noting a 50 percent increase in hate group numbers since 2000, "attributed that growth mainly to fears about non-white immigration, but pointed out that the rise of a black man to the White House also appears to have contributed. And it said the ongoing economic meltdown, which some have already blamed on racial minorities and undocumented Latino immigrants, could well add to a worsening situation."
Potok's editorial details several recent incidents of violence, and goes on to include the following paragraph on right wing commentators who are contributing to the chilling climate: "MSNBC commentator Pat Buchanan recently said Obama would face a 'bloodbath' if he legalized undocumented workers. U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) fears Obama will set up "re-education camps for young people." U.S. Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-Ala.) warns there are 17 "socialists" in the Congress. FOX News' Glenn Beck calls Obama a fascist, a Nazi and a Marxist, and even refloated militia-era conspiracy theories about secret concentration camps for patriots."
I think it would be a good time to quote (at length) from former President Bill Clinton's 1995 commencement address at Michigan State University:
"It is one thing to believe that the federal government has too much power and to work within the law to reduce it. It is quite another to break the law of the land and threaten to shoot officers of the law if all they do is their duty to uphold it...It is one thing to believe we are over-regulated and to work to lessen the burden of regulation. It is quite another to slander our dedicated public servants, our brave police officers, even our rescue workers who have been called a hostile army of occupation...But there is no right to resort to violence when you don't get your way. There is no right to kill people who are doing their duty, or minding their own business, or children who are innocent in every way...Freedom of political speech will never justify violence--never. Our founding fathers created a system of laws in which reason could prevail over fear. Without respect for this law there is no freedom...So I say this to the militias and all others who believe that the greatest threat to freedom comes from the government instead of from those who would take away our freedom: If you say violence is an acceptable way to make change, you are wrong. If you say that government is in a conspiracy to take your freedom away, you are just plain wrong...If you treat law enforcement officers who put their lives on the line for your safety every day like some kind of enemy army to be suspected, derided and, if they should enforce the law against you, to be shot, you are wrong. If you appropriate our sacred symbols for paranoid purposes and compare yourselves to colonial militias who fought for the democracy you now rail against, you are wrong...How dare you suggest that we in the freest nation on Earth live in tyranny. How dare you call yourselves patriots and heroes."
Indeed. I would encourage you to donate to the Southern Poverty Law Center, which is a great organization, and one that has had my support for a number of years. You can donate by clicking here.
The SPLC's February Intelligence report, noting a 50 percent increase in hate group numbers since 2000, "attributed that growth mainly to fears about non-white immigration, but pointed out that the rise of a black man to the White House also appears to have contributed. And it said the ongoing economic meltdown, which some have already blamed on racial minorities and undocumented Latino immigrants, could well add to a worsening situation."
Potok's editorial details several recent incidents of violence, and goes on to include the following paragraph on right wing commentators who are contributing to the chilling climate: "MSNBC commentator Pat Buchanan recently said Obama would face a 'bloodbath' if he legalized undocumented workers. U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) fears Obama will set up "re-education camps for young people." U.S. Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-Ala.) warns there are 17 "socialists" in the Congress. FOX News' Glenn Beck calls Obama a fascist, a Nazi and a Marxist, and even refloated militia-era conspiracy theories about secret concentration camps for patriots."
I think it would be a good time to quote (at length) from former President Bill Clinton's 1995 commencement address at Michigan State University:
"It is one thing to believe that the federal government has too much power and to work within the law to reduce it. It is quite another to break the law of the land and threaten to shoot officers of the law if all they do is their duty to uphold it...It is one thing to believe we are over-regulated and to work to lessen the burden of regulation. It is quite another to slander our dedicated public servants, our brave police officers, even our rescue workers who have been called a hostile army of occupation...But there is no right to resort to violence when you don't get your way. There is no right to kill people who are doing their duty, or minding their own business, or children who are innocent in every way...Freedom of political speech will never justify violence--never. Our founding fathers created a system of laws in which reason could prevail over fear. Without respect for this law there is no freedom...So I say this to the militias and all others who believe that the greatest threat to freedom comes from the government instead of from those who would take away our freedom: If you say violence is an acceptable way to make change, you are wrong. If you say that government is in a conspiracy to take your freedom away, you are just plain wrong...If you treat law enforcement officers who put their lives on the line for your safety every day like some kind of enemy army to be suspected, derided and, if they should enforce the law against you, to be shot, you are wrong. If you appropriate our sacred symbols for paranoid purposes and compare yourselves to colonial militias who fought for the democracy you now rail against, you are wrong...How dare you suggest that we in the freest nation on Earth live in tyranny. How dare you call yourselves patriots and heroes."
Indeed. I would encourage you to donate to the Southern Poverty Law Center, which is a great organization, and one that has had my support for a number of years. You can donate by clicking here.
What I'm reading on this Sunday morning
The Chicago Tribune is stunned - Stunned, I say! - that students were admitted to The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign based on political clout. Would someone please explain to me how this is so much worse than the legacy system?
In the New York Times...
- Peter Baker writes a thoughtful analysis of the reemergence of "identity politics," with the nomination of judge Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court.
- And Adam Liptak - the Times' excellent legal correspondent - has this piece on "The Waves Minority Judges Always Make."
- It's been up for a couple of days, but Randal Archibold's piece tracing heroin from Mexico to a death in Ohio is a great example of why investigative journalism is too important to let die. If only someone considered the practice "too big to fail."
- What would Sunday be without a Frank Rich column? I'm not sure, but I'm not all that interested in finding out. This week, Rich writes on the apparent "blame game" former Vice President Dick Cheney is currently playing.
- While in the opinion pages, I read four pieces reflecting on the twentieth anniversary of Tiananmen Square, here, here, here, and here.
- And though I'm not in good enough shape to be an avid cyclist, I did enjoy David Byrne's review of Jeff Mapes' "Peddling Revolution." (And yes, THAT David Byrne.)
Finally, in The Washington Post, Richard Clarke has this piece claiming that the former administration's use of the trauma of 9/11 as an excuse for abuses is reprehensible. I agree, though I'm still leery of Richard Clarke; I am just not convinced he is always being truthful.
And that's my Sunday morning read. Enjoy your day.
In the New York Times...
- Peter Baker writes a thoughtful analysis of the reemergence of "identity politics," with the nomination of judge Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court.
- And Adam Liptak - the Times' excellent legal correspondent - has this piece on "The Waves Minority Judges Always Make."
- It's been up for a couple of days, but Randal Archibold's piece tracing heroin from Mexico to a death in Ohio is a great example of why investigative journalism is too important to let die. If only someone considered the practice "too big to fail."
- What would Sunday be without a Frank Rich column? I'm not sure, but I'm not all that interested in finding out. This week, Rich writes on the apparent "blame game" former Vice President Dick Cheney is currently playing.
- While in the opinion pages, I read four pieces reflecting on the twentieth anniversary of Tiananmen Square, here, here, here, and here.
- And though I'm not in good enough shape to be an avid cyclist, I did enjoy David Byrne's review of Jeff Mapes' "Peddling Revolution." (And yes, THAT David Byrne.)
Finally, in The Washington Post, Richard Clarke has this piece claiming that the former administration's use of the trauma of 9/11 as an excuse for abuses is reprehensible. I agree, though I'm still leery of Richard Clarke; I am just not convinced he is always being truthful.
And that's my Sunday morning read. Enjoy your day.
Saturday, May 30, 2009
More Americans Move Left
AlterNet is running a piece by the great Joshua Holland that discusses the latest findings in a new report released by the Campaign for America's Future and the media watchdog Media Matters. (Report here.) Here are some notable findings:
To the question: "In general, would you favor or oppose a program that would increase the federal government's influence over the country's health care system in an attempt to lower costs and provide health care coverage to more Americans?" A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation, Feb. 18-19, 2009 found 72 percent of Americans in favor, with 27 percent opposed.
To the question: "Would you prefer the government to increase, decrease, or not change the financial support and incentives it gives for producing energy from alternative sources such as wind and solar?" A Gallup poll taken March 5-8 of this year found that 77 percent favored an increase in spending, with only 8 percent opposed.
And to the question “Which do you think is more effective in stimulating the nation's economy and creating jobs: An economic agenda focused on returning money to taxpayers through tax cuts, or an economic agenda focused on spending for improvements to the country's infrastructure such as roads, bridges and schools?” an LA Times poll from December of '08 found 54 percent of respondents favored infrastructure spending, with only 33 percent in favor of tax cuts.
The report also discusses several demographic trends that do not bode well for conservative politics, including people under the age of 30 favoring President Obama over Senator McCain by 34 points; 65 percent of Hispanics - the fastest growing voting bloc in America - identifying with or leaning towards the Democrats; and women favoring the President in the last election by 13 points, and more dramatically, unmarried women - who are registering in record numbers, favoring the President over Senator McCain (and Governor Palin) 70 percent to 29 percent - a stunning 41 point margin.
What does this all mean? The report says it well: "The wind is at our backs. It’s safe to push. It’s important that we do. We need to channel the energy of our center-left nation, and achieve the promise, not the compromise. The crisis is great, bold action is needed, and the people are hungry for progressive change."
It is long past time to drive the agenda. We should all be contacting our Senators and Representatives on issues favored by the left from the three questions mentioned above, to marriage equality, to releasing all of the photos of the torture and rape abuses at Abu Ghraib.
It is long past time to give the Republican Party the permanent minority party status it so richly deserves.
To the question: "In general, would you favor or oppose a program that would increase the federal government's influence over the country's health care system in an attempt to lower costs and provide health care coverage to more Americans?" A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation, Feb. 18-19, 2009 found 72 percent of Americans in favor, with 27 percent opposed.
To the question: "Would you prefer the government to increase, decrease, or not change the financial support and incentives it gives for producing energy from alternative sources such as wind and solar?" A Gallup poll taken March 5-8 of this year found that 77 percent favored an increase in spending, with only 8 percent opposed.
And to the question “Which do you think is more effective in stimulating the nation's economy and creating jobs: An economic agenda focused on returning money to taxpayers through tax cuts, or an economic agenda focused on spending for improvements to the country's infrastructure such as roads, bridges and schools?” an LA Times poll from December of '08 found 54 percent of respondents favored infrastructure spending, with only 33 percent in favor of tax cuts.
The report also discusses several demographic trends that do not bode well for conservative politics, including people under the age of 30 favoring President Obama over Senator McCain by 34 points; 65 percent of Hispanics - the fastest growing voting bloc in America - identifying with or leaning towards the Democrats; and women favoring the President in the last election by 13 points, and more dramatically, unmarried women - who are registering in record numbers, favoring the President over Senator McCain (and Governor Palin) 70 percent to 29 percent - a stunning 41 point margin.
What does this all mean? The report says it well: "The wind is at our backs. It’s safe to push. It’s important that we do. We need to channel the energy of our center-left nation, and achieve the promise, not the compromise. The crisis is great, bold action is needed, and the people are hungry for progressive change."
It is long past time to drive the agenda. We should all be contacting our Senators and Representatives on issues favored by the left from the three questions mentioned above, to marriage equality, to releasing all of the photos of the torture and rape abuses at Abu Ghraib.
It is long past time to give the Republican Party the permanent minority party status it so richly deserves.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
