What's All This Then? |
|
|
commentary on the passing parade Agree? Disagree? Tell me
ARCHIVES
|
Friday, January 23, 2009
INAUGURAL POMP AND CIRCUMSTANCE - CRITICIZING AND PRAISING AT THE SAME TIME On December 22, I wrote the following: "There’s no question that the inauguration of a new president is a major event in the life of this country - but does it need to be the super bowl, the academy awards, D-Day, VJ-Day and a royal coronation all wrapped up in a single event? Alerts are being broadcast about the difficulties one might encounter being in Washington on that day as though it is or will be a war zone!! If you’re a mere citizen that is. Not a hotel room to be had. Not a cab to be hailed. Not a public toilet available to relieve your urge to purge. No backpacks, strollers , umbrellas and a host of other items banned from anywhere close to inaugural activities. Very little to indicate that we live in a democracy in which ordinary people have just elected a new government. But everything imaginable to indicate that something akin to the coronation of a King for Life is about to take place.I’m not about to change my mind. If there was an announcement that the Obama inauguration was the last of its kind - that future inaugurations would be stripped of all the pageantry and restricted to a swearing in ceremony and an inaugural speech - I would be pleased. At the same time I have to admit that I watched most of Tuesday’s ceremonies and some of Wednesday’s - and I was moved - teary eyed at times. The pomp and circumstance serves a purpose as a celebration of our nation and the equivalent of a royal family that binds us all together - which I guess would be our constitution. If we didn’t have this ritual, we’d need some other to celebrate who we are. July 4 is O.K. - but not really enough. Only idiots and confirmed bigots would not have been moved by the seminal moment in our history that took place on January 20, 2009. . We have much to be ashamed of when it comes to race relations. We’re still a long way from healing the scars caused by slavery and decades of racial discrimination that followed the emancipation proclamation. But to think that in one lifetime we could move from it being illegal for a black man or woman to vote in some parts of the country - or to drink from the same water fountains or use the same toilets or eat at the same restaurants or stay in the same hotels as white citizens - to having a black American ascend to the highest office in the land and become the most important person in the world - says something important about the United States that we need to be reminded of from time to time. This democratic experiment that began 233years ago is still a work in progress - far from complete - and I have no doubt laden with surprises as the future unfolds. We had an official invitation to attend the inaugural - as I’m sure did many thousands - maybe millions of Obama supporters. There was no way we could go for a multitude of reasons - but we were there in spirit and we joined with those who were there in celebration of this wonderful historic event. Good luck Mr. President - and if there’s the same kind of pomp and circumstance when you swear an oath to begin your second term - this ancient cynic won’t complain too loudly. Monday, January 19, 2009
ISRAEL AND HER ENEMIES - NEVER A CEASE FIRE IN THE PR WAR President Elect Obama says that he’ll have a team working on the Israeli/Palestinian "problem" as soon as he take over officially and the "elect" is dropped. That’ll be tomorrow. Good luck Barack. While you’re at it, see if you can’t refine the system for turning tap water into wine and announce a release date for that dime sized pill that turns a tank full of that same tap water into gasoline. You’ll be wasting valuable time that could be expended elsewhere with at least a slim possibility of success. As I’ve said here many times, the so called "problem" will never be solved until sane people replace the insane people who are currently masquerading as "leaders" of Palestinian Arabs. For example, take a look at the Hamas Covenant and then ask yourself why most of the world condemns Israel for what is going on in Gaza. Take a look at any of the articles and see of they make any sense. Article thirteen is a doozy. That’s the one that starts out saying that "Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement"and towards the end says "There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors." I suppose it’s possible that a new generation of Palestinians will one day arise, look around and come to realize that a philosophy of madness is not the way to achieve anything worth while - certainly not anything resembling a meaningful life. And indeed there are many sane Palestinians already among us - regrettably none of them in a position of power or leadership - and so for the time being, the situation that exists has to be dealt with - which is what the Israelis have been doing in Gaza. Unfortunately, the warring parties have again agreed to a "cease fire" - which will once again mark this period as an Israeli exercise in madness. Within a few days, more rockets will be fired into Israel - to which, presumably, Israel will respond. Unless the great powers - and even Arab states - impose their will on Hamas and send troops to man the borders between Gaza and Israel and Gaza and Egypt and are able to stop the daily rocket attacks on Israel - the loss of life and property that has taken place over the past two weeks will have been an exercise in futility. In the meantime, the never ending PR battle goes on - and again we have nonsense being spread through the Internet and letters to the editor of major newspapers - and of course in the Arab press. There is material that can be found that counters the misinformation being circulated about Gaza. Here’s one rebuttal to some of the nonsense. And here’s another from the Boston Globe. But no matter what is written and said in support of the actions that Israel was forced to take, it is far outweighed by expressions of outrage at the death and destruction - that ignores the cause of all that death and destruction. That kind of reaction - much of it built on ignorance and anti-Semitism - was to be expected. It’s been that way now for decades. But Israel doesn’t help the situation by acting in an amateurish way when it comes to public relations. You would think that with the number of Jews involved in the creative arts - acting, writing, composing - public relations would come as second nature to the Israelis. But, to borrow a memorable line from the movie Erin Brockovich - "they suck at it." Rocket attacks from Gaza began in 2001 while there were still Israeli settlements and military there. They continued up to the time when Israel completed its unilateral withdrawal in 2005 and have rained non-stop since. Eight years of rocket fire - numbering in the thousands and reaching further and further into Israel and closer and closer to major population centers. Israel of course has struck back again and again - but with little effect. The rocket attacks simply increased year after year - finally reaching an intolerable level that precipitated the inevitable massive response that we have just witnessed. But if you read the world press and the blogs and see the protesters marching in the street, you would think that Israel attacked Gaza almost without provocation. That in response to a few harmless slingshots tossed across the border by frustrated peasants - the mighty Israeli air force was bombing Gaza into oblivion. Before some raids, the air force dropped leaflets urging people to move away from Hamas targets - as if here was any place for them to go. That’s humanitarian of them I’m sure - done with the best of intentions - but what they should have done - before any bombing began - was drop thousands of another kind of leaflet. One that said something along the lines of We have nothing against the people of Gaza. We want you to live in peace and prosperity and to be good neighbors to us as we want to be to you. But your leaders do not want peace. Your leaders are launching rockets at Israeli civilians day after day, week after week, month after month and year after year. Thousands of rockets have been launched at Israeli targets and they have reached a level that can no longer be tolerated. If one more rocket is launched at Israeli territory, the Israeli Defense Force will retaliate with massive force. We urge you to urge your leaders to stop launching rockets and avoid the death and destruction that will be caused by a massive military response.At the same time, Israel should have made an announcement to the world that the rocket attacks have reached an intolerable level and that Hamas and the Gaza population have been warned that if they continue, Israel will be forced to respond with massive militarily force. The "world" of course would have reacted by urging Israel not to launch a military campaign - but the PR stakeout position would have been established. Here’s what we’re putting up with. We’ve had enough. If you don’t want us to respond, make them stop. Nothing will stop Hamas and others of the same insane mindset from continuing their endless war other than - as I’ve said - the emergence of sane Arab leaders - but with some creative thinking, Israel might stand half a chance of ending its endless stream of losses in the PR war. Monday, January 12, 2009
A NEW ETCHING FOR THE BURRIS TOMBSTONE. YOU’RE TAINTED SIR  This is the man who wants to serve out the remaining two years of Barack Obama’s Senate term. Or at least a manifestation of his enormous ego. His mausoleum - a work in progress listing all of his accomplishments, to which he proposes to add - Senator from Illinois. He may have been the only politician in Illinois who would have accepted the offer of now impeached Governor Rod Blahojevich to fill Obama’s seat. Testifying before the Illinois House Impeachment Committee last Thursday, he said he had spoken to thousands of people across the country about accepting the appointment - presumably people who encouraged him to go full speed ahead - but couldn’t name a single one of those thousands. This debacle has produced the second disappointing action of President elect Obama. First he leaned on Senators to take Joe Lieberman back into the Democratic club - and now he’s done the same thing to force Majority Leader Harry Reid and Majority Whip Dick Durbin to reverse their previously stated vow not to seat anyone appointed by Blagojevich. You have to wonder how some of these elected officials are able to stand up on the floor of the senate without the help of a backbone. I support Obama and wish him well in his Presidency - but I also support the idea of the equal branches of government - and I see little demonstration of that equality in the senate since the election was decided. I’ve seen only a few news clips of Burris’s appearance before the impeachment committee. I know they asked him if there was any quid pro quo involved in his acceptance of Blago’s offer and of course he said no. What else would anyone expect him to say? It was a silly question. Questions that should have been asked - and I doubt that they were because surely they would have been included in news reports - are these. Q: What is the dollar value of contracts you or companies or other organizations with whom you are associated have received from the State of Illinois since Rod Blagojevich has been governor? Q: How much have you donated to Rod Blagojevich political funds since he has been Governor and how much have you raised for him through fund raisers? Q: Could you provide the following information - the amounts of each state contract awarded to you or companies with whom you are or were associated and the dates of those awards - and the amounts of donations made by you to Rod Blagojevich and fund raisers held by you for Rod Blagojevich and the dates of those donations and fund raisers.? Q: How much did you donate to Rod Blgojevich’s political funds before he was Governor? Q: To what other Illinois politicians have you donated and in what amounts? Truthful answers to these questions would most likely confirm what appears to have been a past quid pro quo arrangement - a play to pay if you will. Burris got major contracts from the state. Burris made major contributions to Blagojevich. And even more information is beginning to trickle out about past associations of these two egomaniacs. As of this date, the Illinois Supreme Court has refused to force Illinois Secretary of State Jesse White to sign any certification of the Burris appointment and White continues to refuse to do so - so if Durbin, Reid et al were to suddenly display even a slim stiffening of the spine, there would still be a chance to delay swearing him in long enough for the impeached Governor to be tried, found guilty and removed from office, automatically elevating Lieutenant Governor Pat Quinn to the office of Governor and allowing him to name a replacement for the Obama seat. What a battle royal that would set off - the humungous ego of Roland Burris versus the moral rectitude of an unsullied appointment. But the rumblings we are hearing out of Washington are that it’s not going to happen. He’ll be sworn in, demonstrating once again that you can never assume that anything a politician says is necessarily true. And that includes name, rank and serial number. What has disturbed me the most since this fiasco began is the injection of race into the discussion - first with (how the hell did he ever become a Congressman) Bobby Rush, comparing images of Burris being barred from entering the Senate floor with Bull Connor setting dogs on civil rights demonstrators in Birmingham, Alabama. As Jon Stewart asked on the Daily Show last week - Is this guy nuts or what? And to think that the people of his district rejected a challenger for his seat named Barack Obama and overwhelmingly reelected the former Black Panther gang member. You have to wonder if there’s some sort of toxin floating in the Illinois air. But it isn’t just Rush or Chicago area black "activists" who are making the fiasco a racial issue. The Congressional Black Caucus jumped into the fray with an expression of support for Burris - and it was pretty clear why. Burris is black. Members of the caucus are black - and so they spoke as a group in support of a fellow black. I’m disturbed by the obvious racial motivation of this group’s action - but I’m also disturbed at the very existence of a "black caucus" at a moment in history when an African American is about to assume the presidency. Are the needs and problems of African American voters so dissimilar from those of the rest of us that the 40 or so black members of Congress have to have their own sub group and to speak with one voice on issue like this one? What’s next? Do we think that here’s a need for a Jewish Caucus? There may be issues that are more important to Jewish voters than non-Jewish voters. Should House and Senate Jewish members form a caucus to address those issues and to speak with one voice? And women. There are lots of women issues. Shouldn’t we have a Woman Caucus? And of course a Gay Caucus. There’s a group that really has special issues. But there is only the Black Caucus as a sub group of Members of Congress - and their very existence and their public stand on the issue of Roland Burris seems as out of place at this moment in time as Aunt Jemimah decorated napkins at the Obamas inaugural dinner. On several occasions Mr. Burris has tried to separate his appointment to the senate from the Blagojevich circus. The appointment is perfectly legal he says, over and over again. The Blagojevich problem has nothing to do with me, he says. And "am I tainted" he asks rhetorically, expecting no one to give him the answer the question deserves. But here it is. Yes Mr. Burris. You are tainted. You’re tainted by your acceptance of a tainted offer by a tainted governor - an offer that no one else who might have been legitimately under consideration to fill out the balance of Barack Obama’s term would have accepted. But your ego and your ambition got in the way of reason and morality. And that’s want should be etched on your tombstone at the bottom of the list of your "achievements." The tainted Senator from Illinois!! Tuesday, January 06, 2009
THE CROOKS AND CLOWNS OF ILLINOIS The next time there’s a competition for a license plate slogan for Illinois, surely Land of Crooks and Clowns would have to win hands down. How sad that at a time when we should be celebrating the elevation of our junior senator to the highest office in the land, we instead are hiding our heads in embarrassment at the antics of our crooked governor and an assorted collection of clowns. Patrick Fitzgerald doesn’t escape unscathed from the mess we find ourselves in. In his rush to prevent Governor Rod Blagojevich from appointing someone to fill out the last two years of Barack Obama’s Senate term on a quid pro quo basis - in other words, from selling the office, presumably to the highest bidder - he laid the groundwork for Blago to do something just as bad - maybe worse - the appointment of a clown who was promptly joined by other clowns, playing a whole stack of racist cards where race was never an issue. Maybe Roland Burris wasn’t always a clown. Maybe not in the days when he was a loyal soldier in the army of Chicago’s south side political boss William Dawson. Maybe not in the days when he was the first black politician to win state wide office and maybe not in the days when he held the offices of Comptroller for 12 years and Attorney General for 4 years. But since 1994, he has come close to rivaling Lar America First Daly in his quest to be elected. To any office. Whatever’s up for grabs. He’s run unsuccessfully for Mayor of Chicago and for the Senate seat that he could never come close to winning but may indeed now be his - and I don’t know how many times for Governor. During his fourteen year quest for more political glory - and perhaps for an increased pension , he was an amiable clown, irritating but not harmful. Now he is a harmful clown, caring nothing about the damage he is doing to the State of Illinois and to the incoming president - but only about himself and the prize handed to him on a stained platter that he could never win on his own merits. At a moment in time when an African American president elect has done more to heal racial divisions than perhaps anyone else in the history of this country, Burris supporters are wallowing in the gutter, defending his selection against those who are appalled by it by accusing them of racism. South side Chicago Congressman Bobby Rush has nothing to do with the appointment of a replacement for Obama’s Senate seat, so why was he the third person at the microphone when Blagojevich made his announcement and introduced his selection - other than to introduce a racial divide that didn’t and doesn’t exist with comments about "hanging" and lynching" when referring to the expressed intention of Senate Democrats to bar Burris from being sworn in as the junior Senator from Illinois? The objection to his selection has nothing to do with race and everyone knows it. The objection was to anyone Blagojevich might have tried to appoint. Before finding a willing accomplice in arrogance and shamelessness in Burris, Blagojevich offered the seat to African American Congressman Danny Davis who wanted it - and, before Blago was arrested, had made it known that he wanted it. But he turned it down for the same reason that anyone with a modicum of integrity would turn it down - because the appointment would be tainted by it being made as a gesture of defiance, intended to disrupt - by a man under the shadow of a criminal indictment. Within a few weeks - perhaps even sooner, Blagojevich would have been forced to step down, either by being impeached or indicted - and a selection could then have been made by the current Lieutenant Governor, Pat Quinn - or perhaps by a special election. In either event, with Blagojevich no longer involved, the selection would not have been tainted - even in the unlikely event that it turned out to be Roland Burris. But it seems the clown act of Burris and Bobby Rush was just the opening act in this disgusting affair. In what I perceive as a direct insult to the next President of the United State and everything he stands for and preached during his two year campaign for the presidency, a group of African American "activists" gathered in front of the broadcast media’s willing microphones to add their insistence that Burris be seated and threatening to work to defeat the re-election of Senator Dick Durbin and (African American) Secretary of State Jesse White if they didn’t support the Burris appointment. Would they have gathered together to make the same kind of statement if Blagojevich had found a non-African American candidate willing to go along with his campaign of defiance and disruption? Of course not . They and Bobby Rush and other Black "activists" are not concerned about Blagojevich’s legal right to make the appointment - only that there are objections by members of the Senate to the seating of his selection and only because the man selected happens to be an African American. The language, the demeanor, the defiant threats of these supporters of Burris are reminiscent of another age - and they are totally out of place in the current era. I keep thinking back to Obama’s Philadelphia speech on racism and his reference to the angry words of his former pastor, Jeremiah Wright The profound mistake of Reverend Wright's sermons is not that he spoke about racism in our society It's that he spoke as if our society was static; as if no progress has been made; as if this country - a country that has made it possible for one of his own members to run for the highest office in the land and build a coalition of white and black; Latino and Asian, rich and poor, young and old -- is still irrevocably bound to a tragic past.It’s a tragedy that some of the people supporting the appointment of Roland Burris are couching their support in terms of racial divisiveness and that Burris himself does nothing to stop it. Before Blagojevich’s arrest, just about everyone agreed that an important criteria for selecting someone to take Obama’s Senate seat was that the person selected would be someone who could run for reelection and win in 2010. In his defiant rejection of that criteria, Blagojevich has opened the door for a Republican to win when Obama’s term expires. It depends on who the Republicans nominate of course - but if it’s a respected Republican with the right credentials running against Burris - he or she will probably get my vote. I’d like to see Obama have a Senate as close as possible to being filibuster proof - but that’s not a sufficient reason to cast a vote for senator. The candidate has to win my vote and there’s nothing that Burris has done or said over the past fourteen years that has come close to convincing me that he’s the right person to represent Illinois in the United States Senate. And his conduct over the past few days have served only to confirm my feelings about the man. Burris will probably be seated eventually. The law, as he has said repeatedly, is on his side. And I doubt that he would agree to a compromise that would remove the objections of the Senate Democrats and allow him to be sworn in without any further delay - that he not run for reelection when the Obama term expires. I predict that he will run and that he will lose - and that the election will be a setback to the improvement in race relations embodied in the election of Barack Obama. The likes of Bobby Rush, who has already termed today’s refusal to allow Burris entry to the Senate an act of racism , will make race a major issue two years from now with the same kind of inflammatory rhetoric. You can add that to the crimes for which Blagojevich may well pay dearly in the future - but it will take more than putting him in jail for a few years to repair the damage that he has done.. Friday, January 02, 2009
MIDDLE EAST INSANITY I haven’t written anything about Israel for a while, mostly because writing about the Jewish state and its 60 year conflict with Palestinian Arabs has been pretty close to an exercise in futility - trying to speak with sanity about a never ending madness. It’s just as insane as ever today - but the comments of many others on the current spurt of violence compels me to add my own. The knee jerk reaction of most of the world was to be expected - though it was mildly encouraging to hear Arabs suggest that the attack on Gaza might have been prevented if the Palestinians spoke with one voice - which I interpret to mean if there was a Palestinian leader or leaders who could speak for the entire Palestinian Arab population - on the West Bank and Gaza - and most importantly were considered to be relatively sane and interested in stopping the decades long impossible goal of overwhelming the Jewish state. But even though the condemnations were expected, it’s still frustrating to read and hear the convoluted reasoning that is used to support those condemnations. I have never been to Israel but I have lived under circumstances similar to those that residents of southern Israel have been subjected to for years. I speak of London during that period of World War ll when we were under attack night and day with the frightening Buzz Bombs - the V1 and V2 rockets which disrupted life and kept us in a constant state of apprehension. It was a nerve wracking period of the war and I can understand how the half million or so people living within range of the Hamas rockets must feel after years of this sort of thing and how much pressure the Israeli government must have felt to do something - anything - to stop the reign of terror. What’s surprising is that it took so long - but what is frustrating is that the air attack - perhaps to be followed by a ground assault - will accomplish nothing other than the destruction of buildings and the death of some terrorists and, regrettably - some innocent civilians. It will be like the 2006 war with Hezbollah. Lots of buildings destroyed. Lots of people killed. And the madmen will still be there with their rockets, ready to launch indiscriminately at the slightest provocation. Actually, madmen don’t need any provocation. They could launch an attack at any time. Unless Israel re-occupies Gaza and determines to stay there and subject the population to military rule, the rockets will continue to be launched. Indeed, they have increased in response to the air attacks currently underway. The only other way to stop the madness is for the international community - including all the Arab states - to come together and put consistent pressure on Hamas. But of course they won’t do that. It’s easier to condemn Israel. What sickens me more than anything is to see young people carrying banners condemning Israel and writing responses on line to news stories about the conflict. It’s as though in the world as they understand it - Israel is this bullying power that occupied the "land of the Palestinians" to subjugate the indigenous population and take over the use of the land. And all for no good reason. Even people who know better - who attempt to write or speak in reasonable terms - pointing out that Israel has few option when it comes to the need to respond to barrages of missiles that terrorize large segments of its population on a daily basis. They somehow feel compelled to add that the response is "disproportionate" as though it should be on a quid pro quo basis. They send over rockets. We send over rockets. They kill one Israeli - Israel kills one Hamas terrorist. Like a children’s version of war. You have to wonder how the critics would react if they were the ones subjected to living under the threat of daily missile attacks. But those are the same critics that have blamed Israel for the conflict ever since the ancient state was reborn under the auspices of the United Nations in 1947 . Take a look at the maps and see the tiny territory that was to be the Jewish state after 80% of the original Palestinian mandate was used to create Jordan. The Israelis of 1947 accepted that sliver of land. The Arabs didn’t and the conflict that we are witnessing today and for which Israel is being blamed by most of the world - began with that Arab non-acceptance and military attack. Some people are now calling for another "cease fire.". The concept of a cease fire between Israel and Hamas is as maniacal as the myth that there is a "peace process" which has been interrupted by this latest clash. Maybe in the wars of ancient times, it was appropriate for opposing sides to agree to a cease fire while they retired for tea and to bind their wounds. But a temporary "cease fire" says that both sides are at war and will continue that war once the agreed time for the cease fire has expired.. The madmen of Hamas might want a cease fire so that they can refurbish their arms before resuming their insane, never ending war - but Israel should never agree to any such arrangement. It should make it clear that as long as the people of Gaza refrain from launching rockets into Israel or committing other acts of violence against Israeli citizens or property, Israel will be a good and peaceful neighbor and do what it can to help the people of Gaza create a peaceful and prosperous society. That’s not a cease fire with a beginning and ending date after which both sides would feel free to continue to wage war against each other. It’s a way to make clear to the Palestinian Arabs and to the rest of the world that there is a sane alternative to the madness that has prevailed for 60 years. Is that a simplification? I think not. Surely if the leaders of both sides in this ridiculous conflict were sane - and had the best interest of the people they represent at heart - it wouldn’t have taken 60 years to settle their differences. So the solution remains what it has always been - having little to do with "peace processes" and "cease fires" but with the need for sanity. I think for the most part it has been there on the Israeli side. I have yet to see it in the leadership of the Palestinian Arabs. The only way to end the conflict is for a Palestinian Arab leader to be elected after proposing a sane end to the conflict to which Israeli leaders have already agreed and to be elected by an overwhelming majority of Palestinian Arabs. And then of course for the madmen to let that leader lead. But I’m not holding my breath. It’s bad for general health. |