Relatives of a Palestinian killed in an Israeli air strike on Oct 30 cry at the al-Shifa hospital in Gaza City (AFP PHOTO / MOHAMMED ABED)
GAZA CITY, Palestinian Territories: Egypt helped broker a fresh ceasefire by militants in Gaza Sunday, after violence left nine Palestinians and one Israeli dead, sources close to the groups said.
The truce with Israel was due to come into effect at 6:00 am (0400 GMT, 12pm Singapore time), said sources close to Hamas and Islamic Jihad, the two main Islamist groups in the Gaza Strip.
The agreement between all the Palestinian factions in Gaza came after the intervention of Egypt, the sources said.
“The efforts and intensive contacts led by senior Egyptian intelligence service officials led to a national consensus to restore calm” with Israel, a leader of one Palestinian group, who asked to remain anonymous, told AFP.
Israeli warplanes raided the Gaza Strip Saturday and early Sunday, killing nine Islamic Jihad militants, while retaliatory rocket fire from Gaza killed one Israeli.
The exchanges were the bloodiest since a tacit ceasefire was agreed between Gaza Palestinian militants and Israel in late August.
From an outsider’s viewpoint, the Amish are known for their food products and beards and cultural simplicity.
Now comes the FBI.
Station WKYC reports that the FBI is investigating crimes in eastern Ohio involving Amish-on-Amish incidents, including beard cutting. WKYC reported that the FBI is looking into whether hate crimes are involved with Amish members of a breakaway sect, who have disagreed with the way some Amish carry out their beliefs.
“We’re looking at any potential federal violations, specifically any civil rights violations, because we take civil rights violations as a very serious matter,” FBI Special Agent Vicki Anderson told WKYC.
“We met with local law enforcement about a week ago and made the decision to enter the case,” she said, according to the station. A number of Northeast and Eastern Ohio sheriffs were involved in that meeting.
CNN reports five men have been arrested and charged with kidnapping and burglary stemming from an October incident. Authorities allege that the group pulled an Amish man out of his home by the beard and cut off portions of it.
CNN reports that Jefferson County Sheriff Fred J. Abdalla said that was among a handful of incidents in several counties carried out by as many as 30 men and woman.
CNN reported that the perpetrators are suspected of being followers of a breakaway Amish group led by Sam Mullet. Three of the five men arrested are sons of Mullet.
CNN reported that “local law enforcement officials and members of the Amish community believe Mullet has created a cult and is single-handedly behind the beard cutting incidents and other crimes in recent years.”
The Raw Story article Olbermann: Oakland mayor must fire police chief or resign provides a little background for the included video below and the transcript I quote below that..
“But if one night a group of peaceable protesters exercising the rights given to them in the Constitution — and not rights made up by the cops, for the cops, like lawful command and imminent threat — if they are attacked with tear gas and rubber bullets, and the mayor’s only comments are to commend the police chief for a ‘generally peaceful resolution to the situation’ and after that claim ‘democracy is messy’ after the unprovoked actions of those police horrify a nation, she is endorsing and assuming for herself the responsibility for whatever havoc the out of control police officers have wrought.”
The Raw Story article Olbermann interviews roommate of Iraq veteran injured in Oakland provided the video below. Notice in the video some description of the “violence” that “provoked” the police.
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran holds an office that Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said could easily be eliminated. Reuters
Iran’s Power Struggle Goes Beyond Personalities to Future of Presidency Itself -- New York Times
WASHINGTON — An unusual proposal by Iran’s supreme leader to eliminate the position of president has highlighted an increasingly bitter struggle within the country’s political elite, as the leader and his allies continue to try to undercut the powers of Iran’s ambitious president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
The supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, told an academic gathering last week that “changing Iran into a parliamentary system” in which voters no longer elected a president would not be a problem. His words were widely seen as the latest blow in a battle that began in April when Mr. Ahmadinejad crossed a line by openly feuding with Ayatollah Khamenei — who has the final word in affairs of state — over cabinet appointments. Read more ....
My Comment: Iran's government is essentially an institution that operates within a theocratic structure. Secularists, reformers, even opponents like Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are bucking up against an institution that now pervades every aspect of Iranian life ... and the best of luck to them if they think they can change it.
Crime Is “Main Source” Of Armed Violence -- Swiss Info
A Swiss-funded international study has found that, contrary to what is commonly thought, crime is a far greater source of armed violence than war.
According to the 2011 Global Burden of Armed Violence report, around 526,000 people die violently every year – more than 1,400 people a day. By comparison, 55,000 die a year as a result of war or terrorism.
The study, which was released in Geneva on Thursday, also found that 396,000 people were murdered outside of armed conflict annually and that another 54,000 people died from unintentional violence, or manslaughter. Police operations were said to account for 21,000 deaths a year.
More
than a month has passed since an assortment of people of different ages and different
backgrounds first gathered in a park in New York City’s Wall Street financial
district because a common concern about America’s disparity in wealth and its
impact on their quality of life.
Since
then, Occupy Wall Street has become a much-discussed and debated topic -- first
on social media pages and eventually by mainstream news outlets. The movement
also has grown with increasing numbers of participants not only in New York,
but all across the nation and even beyond its borders. It also has become
campaign fodder for America’s most powerful politicians.
What
Occupy Wall Street has yet to accomplish, however, is to have a concrete impact
on public policy.
No
political leaders – Democrats or Republicans – have been so moved by the
demonstrations that they have taken bold actions to address the protesters’
concerns. Meanwhile, Wall Street continues to go about its business unaffected
by the constant presence of the Occupy Wall Street crowds. For the financial
executives who earn their livings in lower Manhattan – and for many other
Americans – Occupy Wall Street is just a spectacle; it is not a political
force. Likewise, for the media, much of the coverage has focused on arrests,
violence and poor health conditions at the demonstration sites instead of the
factors that spawned the movement and its growth.
Media
outlets also have drawn comparisons between Occupy Wall Street and the Tea
Party movement, which added a stronger conservative voice to the American
political scene in 2009. But unless Occupy Wall Street impacts public policy,
the protests cannot be equated with the Tea Party.
In
fairness, when the Tea Party was as young as Occupy Wall Street, its influence
on public policy was minimal at best. But that changed over the past two years.
The
Tea Party fielded candidates for Congress and other elective offices in 2010. In
some GOP primaries, its members defeated established candidates who ran with
the party’s official backing. Tea Party candidates experienced less success in the
general election in November, but the base they built moved the Republican
Party further to the right – and those who did win election to Congress have
become a force that cannot be ignored whenever important legislation is in need
of votes.
For
example, Tea Party candidate Anna Little won a hotly contested GOP primary in New
Jersey’s sixth congressional district last year and then waged an aggressive
campaign in the general election against Frank Pallone, a Democrat with more
than 20 years of experience in Congress. When the votes were counted, Pallone
had won by a comfortable margin, but the strong challenge from Little – coming
in a year in which the GOP regained control of the House – most likely forced
him to ramp up his campaign a notch or two.
Tea
Party candidates also made their presence known in New Jersey’s seventh
congressional district, where incumbent Republican Leonard Lance faced
challengers from the right during the GOP primary. Lance emerged victorious in
the primary – in part because his challengers split the vote – and went on to
win re-election in November.
In
addition, the Tea Party figured as an oddity of sorts in the state’s third
district congressional race, where Democratic operatives reportedly backed a
Tea Party candidate in an attempt to draw votes away from the Jon Runyan, the
Republican on the ballot. The strategy failed to work as Runyon defeated
incumbent Democrat John Adler.
A
year from now, will Occupy Wall Street be fielding candidates for Congress and
U.S. Senate as the Tea Party did in 2010? My guess is that such a scenario is
unlikely, but anything can happen in year’s time in politics.
An
Occupy Wall Street presence on the ballot could produce several benefits. It
would give the movement greater credibility and influence, much like the Tea
Party benefited from its involvement in the 2010 campaign. It also would give the
Democratic Party a much-needed wakeup call – just as the Tea Party did for the
GOP.
In
turn, American voters would benefit too. With Occupy Wall Street and Tea Party
candidates on the ballot, voters no longer would have their options limited to
political parties and candidates who largely have become out-of-touch. Instead,
they would have an opportunity to cast votes for people – both on the left and
the right -- who share their issues and concerns, as well as their anger and
frustration.
And
isn’t that the way democracy should work?
# # #
Richard A. Lee
spent more than 30 years as a journalist and government communications professional
in New Jersey. He now is an assistant professor in the Russell J. Jandoli
School of Journalism and Mass Communication at St. Bonaventure University near
Olean, N.Y. Read more of Rich's columns at richleeonline and follow him on Twitter.
You all know better by now than to believe The U.S. News Media, the U.S. State Department, The CIA, The Pentagon, and The President of the U.S.
Libya was not a "dictatorship" in the traditional sense, and Momar Gaddafi was not the evil rogue portrayed by Western propaganda.
If fact, he was a hero. Gaddafi’s Gold Dinar Plan and Libya’s Public Central Bank would have changed the monetary system and freed all of Africa from the Private Central Bank System. Ultimately, it might possibly have freed the NATO host nations from their own parasites – Vampire Private Central Banks.
Gaddafi’s courage and pioneering efforts in trying to restore national sovereignty and making the government responsible to the people instead of to the Global Banking Elites is the reason why he was targeted and killed.
NATO terrorist attacks will not get the Western nations out of debt – only an honest Public Central Bank – like the attempted Bank of Libya – would.
But guess what? With Gaddafi now out-of-the-way, the IMF and The World Bank have moved in to Libya, and have reestablished their control and dominance there. And (black man) Obama was the ringleader in the effort to reassert the impoverishment of Africa.
There will be no independence, and there will be no freedom.
The only way for a Country to be Sovereign is to have sovereign control of its money.
The mind blowing truth and cover up by the government to paint Gaddafi as some sort of bad guy. Gaddafi wanted to switch to a gold standard and like a pack of wolves they went after Gaddafi.
Back in 1976, the Italian automaker Fiat had been badly battered by a global energy crisis and the resulting malaise infecting the global auto industry. In what Time Magazine described at the time as “a devastatingly ironic example of petropower,” Col. Muammar Gaddafi instructed his Libyan Arab Foreign Bank to invest some $415m into the Italian automaker, giving it a stake that would eventually grow to some 14 percent of the firm’s equity.
By 1986, Fiat’s Libyan stakeholders were becoming more trouble than they were worth. In the wake of the Lockerbie bombings, the US introduced sanctions on Libya, and Fiat’s Libyan connection left its attempts to bid for US military contracts (particularly those related to Ronald Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative) dead on arrival. As a result, Fiat and its shareholders bought back the entire 14 percent Libyan stake in the firm, presenting the Libyan Arab Foreign Bank-controlled Banca UBAE with a $3.1b check. And, according to what a Fiat spokesperson told us yesterday, that is where the story ends. But thanks to the now-ubiquitous Wikileaks, we have found that this story may in fact go farther than that. In fact, as the evidence stands right now, either the US State Department is working with bad information (which major news sources have yet to correct), or Fiat is lying about its ties to the embattled Gaddafi regime.
As with so many of the best stories in recent months, the major point of factual conflict in this tale comes from a Wikileaks-sourced US State Department memo. The memo, which does not appear at cablesearch.org, was provided to Reuters by an unnamed third party and was cited in a Reuters piece that focused on Gaddafi’s ownership of Wyndham Hotels. The Fiat connection isn’t made clear until well towards the bottom of the story, when Reuters reports
A 2006 U.S. State Department cable obtained by WikiLeaks and made available to Reuters by a third party describes LFICO/LAFICO [the Libyan Arab Foreign Investment Company]as Libya’s largest government-owned investment company, operating under the auspices of something called the “General People’s Committee” which has served as the Gaddafi government’s Ministry of Trade and Economy…
The State Department cable said that, as of 2006, LFICO’s holdings in Italy included 2 percent of Fiat, 15 percent of the Tamoil energy company, and 7.5 percent of Juventus, where a soccer-playing Gaddafi son, Saadi, once sat on the board. The cable said LFICO also had over $500 million worth of investments in Britain.
If the Gaddafi-controled LAFICO/LFICO held two percent of Fiat as recently as 2006, then the public narrative that had Fiat completely buying out its Libyan backers in 1986 is not completely accurate. In hopes of reconciling the discrepancy between the leaked memo (which presumably reflects the conclusions of the US intelligence community) and the public rejection of Libya’s equity stake in Fiat, we reached out to Fiat’s international media relations staff requesting clarification. The response, from Fiat’s Richard Gadeselli, came as follows:
Dear Mr Niedermeyer,
Further to your email, I would mention that the Reuters report you refer to is incorrect. As too are other similar mentions that have appeared recently in the media concerning the LIA’s holdings in Fiat.
The LIA sold all of its 14% shareholding in Fiat SpA in 1986 – ten years after its initial stake was bought. It no longer has a stake in Fiat SpA.
I trust that this clarifies the matter.
Unfortunately, it doesn’t clarify the matter at all. Either Mr Gadeselli isn’t telling us the whole story (which could be the case for any number of reasons, not all of the nefarious), or the Wikileaks memo cited by Reuters is incorrect, a possibility that is equally likely for a number of reasons. For one thing, we haven’t seen the leaked memo itself, and so we can not verify the exact source of the intelligence reported by Reuters. And even if we could verify that the US State Department and intelligence community had reason to believe that Gaddafi-backed investment funds continued to hold a stake in Fiat as recently as 2006, it’s conceivable that the US government had experienced a failure of intelligence. As a 2001 piece by businesstoday.com reports, Gaddafi’s own money manager Ali El Huwej has admitted that Libya uses a number of techniques to invest in Europe despite US sanctions.
Banca di Roma didn’t violate economic sanctions, because the stake was sold through Libyan companies rather than the Libyan government, Mr Brambilla said.
Though they were sporadically enforced, the sanctions nevertheless limited Libya’s room for manoeuvring in some countries. For example, Libya’s UK bank accounts were frozen and funds such as dividends from the Metropole stake could not be transferred to Libya.
That is why Lafico works to avoid detection when it makes investments, Mr Huwej says, adding that in everything it does, Lafico is aware the US is watching.
As such Mr Huwej sometimes avoids doing business under Lafico’s name. A farming company in Egypt owned by Lafico is registered there as simply Agriculture Investment Co., he says.
Another strategy employed by Libya is to keep stakes small or indirect, particularly in banking companies. Though bank investments are a small slice of Libya’s holdings, they’re among the most scrutinised by the authorities, as access to banks means access to money and the ability to move it around the world.
In any case, either Fiat isn’t telling the truth or the US Government was misinformed about Libyan ownership of a firm that is poised to take over the bailed-out US automaker Chrysler. In the interests of truth, we call on Fiat and Reuters to help resolve this factual discrepancy. If anyone knows where to find the Wikileaks memo in question or has any information regarding this story, we encourage them to send it to our contact form.
The head of the Libyan military council said Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi was killed Thursday as fighters battling the vestiges of his fallen regime took control of his hometown of Surt after a prolonged struggle.
Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, the former Libyan strongman who fled into hiding after rebels toppled his regime two months ago in the Arab Spring’s most violent uprising, was killed Thursday as fighters battling the vestiges of his loyalist forces wrested control of his hometown of Surt, the interim government announced.
Al-Jazeera television showed what it said was Colonel Qaddafi’s corpse as jubilant fighters in Surt fired automatic weapons in the air, punctuating what appeared to be an emphatic and violent ending to his four decades as the self-proclaimed king of kings of Africa.
Libyans rejoiced as news of his death spread. Car horns blared in Tripoli as residents poured into the streets to celebrate.
Mahmoud Shammam, the chief spokesman of the Transitional National Council, the interim government that replaced Colonel Qaddafi’s regime after he fled Tripoli in late August, confirmed that Colonel Qaddafi was killed, though he did not provide other details.
“A new Libya is born today,” he said. “This is the day of real liberation. We were serious about giving him a fair trial. It seems God has some other wish.”
Abdul Hakim Belhaj, the leader of the Tripoli military council, said on Al Jazeera that anti-Qaddafi forces had Colonel Qaddafi’s body.
It was not clear precisely how he died. Some reports, which could not be verified, recounted that Colonel Qaddafi was arrested, wounded by gunshots and died in custody.
Libya’s interim leaders had said they believed that some Qaddafi family members including the colonel himself and some of his sons had been hiding in Surt or in Bani Walid, another loyalist bastion that the anti-Qaddafi forces captured earlier this week.
Tea Party And Libertarian Party representatives To Join Occupy Wall Street Protestors to discuss the common issues between their movements.
Members of the NJ Tea Party, The Libertaritan Party and Occupy Wall Street protestors have announced they will hold a joint discussion between from 1:00pm to 3:00pm on Friday, October 21, 2011 in the Trenton NJ Legislative Building located in the Annex Building at 125 West State Street, in Trenton NJ. The purpose of the discussion is to engage in an open dialogque between the commanalities between the Tea Party movement and the Occupy Wall Street movement to discover the common issues that all participants can agree on.
Author, professor and social activist Cornel West was arrested on the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C. while taking part in a group protest against corporate influence in politics.
A Supreme Court spokeswoman said that 19 demonstrators were arrested Sunday afternoon when they refused to leave the grounds of the court. Ann Wilcox, an attorney and legal adviser to the protesters, said West was among those arrested, according to The Associated Press.
This one is for all the ‘old heads’… The Original 7ven, more widely known as The Time, have gotten back together and have a brand new song! Go inside to watch Morris Day, Jimmy Jam, Terry Lewis, Jerome and the entire crew!
If that’s not enough, on October 18, 2011 The GRAMMY Museum will debut the intriguing new documentary The Original 7ven in the Clive Davis Theater. Chronicling the adventures of seven young musicians; Morris Day, Jesse Johnson, Jimmy Jam & Terry Lewis, Jellybean Johnson, Monte Moir, and Jerome Benton, the 80-minute film illustrates how the group came together in the early 80′s and eventually rewrote music history. Definately required viewing for any fan of the Minneapolis Sound, the documentary is an up-close-and-personal portrait of life as told by the band members themselves. To purchase tickets to this event CLICK HERE.
Their new album, Condensate, will be released the same day.
Watch this interesting debate between Herman Cain and Bill Clinton. It looks like Cain has been trying to be a political player for a long time. It’s also clear in this video that he is a super-duper Republican.
The capitalists and entrepreneurs who built the United States into one of the world's leading economies took full advantage of America's free enterprise culture to launch an industrial revolution of unprecedented scope. With few state or federal laws to hinder them, many used questionable tactics to drive out competitors and establish monopolies or near-monopolies in their respective industries. Along the way they cajoled, bribed, or blackmailed political leaders to facilitate their efforts.
To address such excesses, a diverse group of reformers set about trying to gain political power and public support. Progressivism, as historians have come to label this movement, found its support primarily in urban areas among the middle and upper-middle classes—business executives, professionals, teachers, and government workers. They promoted greater efficiency in the workplace and in government. Their fervent hope was to restore democratic control of the economic and political sectors.
There was no all-encompassing progressive organization, agenda, or motive. The movement cut across both political parties, appeared in every geographic region, and contained many conflicting elements. Some activists were spurred by strong religious convictions while others were animated by secular ideals. Some were earnest humanitarians and others were more concerned with issues of efficiency and productivity. Prominent men such as Robert La Follette, Theodore Roosevelt, and Woodrow Wilson are most often associated with the Progressive movement, yet women were disproportionately involved in the array of "progressive" causes and issues.
While incredibly diverse in motivation and mission, Progressives tended to believe that government should take a more active role in promoting the general welfare. More specifically, this meant the passage of laws breaking up the huge trusts, regulating child and female labor, promoting better working conditions, and conserving the environment. In addition, Progressives supported voluntary associations such as settlement houses and other charitable organizations intended to help immigrants, the poor, and the disabled.
Progressivism changed the social and political landscape of American life by enlarging the sphere of government action. New laws, regulations, and attitudes resulted from the efforts of self-styled progressives to deal with many persistent social ills. The glaring failure of the Progressive movement was its unwillingness to address racial injustice. For the most part, progressivism was for whites only. African Americans in the South were increasingly victims of disfranchisement, Jim Crow laws, vigilante assaults, and poverty.
The Progresives that faild America and the Progressvies that keep failing Trenton!!!!
Many questions still exist surrounding who, exactly, is behind the Occupy Wall Street protests. Sure, we know the basics.
But beyond the few organizational structures we’ve heard about and the public figures who have come out to express their solidarity with the frustrated bunch, who is actually funding this monumental movement?
While a new report from Reuters doesn’t definitively tie billionaire George Soros to the protesters, the news agency speculates that the Occupiers may have benefited indirectly from his generosity. Reuters reports:
There has been much speculation over who is financing the disparate protest, which has spread to cities across America and lasted nearly four weeks. One name that keeps coming up is investor George Soros, who in September debuted in the top 10 list of wealthiest Americans. Conservative critics contend the movement is a Trojan horse for a secret Soros agenda…
…Reuters did find indirect financial links between Soros and Adbusters, an anti-capitalist group in Canada which started the protests with an inventive marketing campaign aimed at sparking an Arab Spring type uprising against Wall Street. Moreover, Soros and the protesters share some ideological ground.
While Soros has denied any connection, he has said that he can “understand [the protesters'] sentiment.” Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh, though, doesn’t buy into this denial. Limbaugh recently said, “George Soros money is behind this.” Here’s more on the potential ties:
According to disclosure documents from 2007-2009, Soros’ Open Society gave grants of $3.5 million to the Tides Center, a San Francisco-based group that acts almost like a clearing house for other donors, directing their contributions to liberal non-profit groups. Among others the Tides Center has partnered with are the Ford Foundation and the Gates Foundation.
Disclosure documents also show Tides, which declined comment, gave Adbusters grants of $185,000 from 2001-2010, including nearly $26,000 between 2007-2009.
TRENTON-- Political activist Daryl Mikell Brooks releases new audio-book, Why Me?,
chronicling his life experiences as a Trenton resident, activist, and
former candidate for US Senate. In the audio-book, the political
firebrand recalls his days growing up in the city's Donnelly Homes along
with his four year stint in prison for a crime he claims he did not
commit.
Brooks was convicted in 1998 on counts of child endangerment, lewdness,
and sexual assault. From day one, he insists he did nothing wrong and
that he was railroaded for his unapologetic, no hold's barred, political
speech exposing corruption in high places.
George Hathaway
Anwar's Reflections-- a Trentonian affiliate-- interviewed individuals
that listened to the audio-book to see what they had to say.
George Hathaway, said the audio-book is a "good and
courageous attempt to present Daryl to the political community. He came
out of the closet, there was a lot of uncertainty regarding his
background. he needed to make it clear to the larger community and many
of the Tea Party. Its a sad story of corruption and victimization, what
goes wrong in the inner city. It shows how a individual can get
victimized and have their lives ruined for a long time.
He went on to say that Why Me? "starts a conversation about what
can happen when you stand up for what you believe in". He went on to say
that Brooks' story illustrates how those who are wielding the power
can come down on an individual, what can happen to an individual that
goes against established power. The story shows that one takes a lot of
risks in their hands when they challenge entrenched power".
Hathaway goes on to say that the audio-book underscores issues that
often go overlooked in the mainstream. Issues like "prisoner rights, its
just a shame, its ruined a large part of his life. The book opens up a
dialogue about these larger issues".
Joe Siano
Joe Siano, said, "I hope it [the audio-book]
vindicates his name, I think that's why he's putting it out there, its a
good effort to head this issue off and to explain it once and for all.
Ultimately, its up to the audience to make their own judgment, listen to
it, I think its up to the court of public opinion whether he will be
able to vindicate himself, I think its a great way to have his story
heard". Siano also thinks Brooks' story highlights issues of abuse of
authority on the part of police department, the prosecutor, and the
mayor's office.
Founder of the blog, Restoring Freedoms, Lou Jacikoff, said that, "Why Me?
raises questions about the criminal justice system, the judicial
system, it shows the reader that the system needs a good looking at, it
needs repair, it can no longer be about the good ol' boy system".
Lou Jacikoff
"Our system is based on who can you hire as an attorney, it shouldn't be
that way. There are two systems of justice: those that have and those
that don't have, I think Daryl's story is a microcosm of what's
happening in our judicial system where people are railroaded because
they have a hard time defending themselves. Its disturbing, but there
have been a lot of people out there that have been imprisoned but turned
out to be innocent because they did not have proper representation.
Daryl's story reveals that". BY ANWAR'S REFLECTIONS?
To get a copy of the audio-book, click the link below:
It’s a heartbreaking, but often understated, reality that America’s
criminal justice system imprisons black folks at astonishingly high
rates. The U.S. Bureau of Justice estimated that as of 2008, there were
over 846,000 black men in prison, making up 40.2 percent of all inmates
in the system. But in a recent talk, noted author Michelle Alexander
put those numbers in grave historical perspective.
“More African American men are in prison or jail, on probation or
parole than were enslaved in 1850, before the Civil War began,”
Alexander, an Ohio State law professor, recently told listeners at the
Pasadena Branch of the American Civil Liberties Union. Alexander’s
seminal book, “The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of
Colorblindness” argues that prisons have become the latest form of
economic and social disenfranchisement for young folks of color,
particularly black men. In it, she grapples with a central question: If
crime rates have fluctuated over the years and are now at historical
lows, then why have rates of incarcerated men of color skyrocketed over
the past 30 years? The answer to that question doesn’t require a lot of
digging. “Most of that increase is due to the War on Drugs, a war
waged almost exclusively in poor communities of color,” she said. LA
Progressive reported that even though studies have proven that whites
use and sell illegal drugs at rates equal to or higher than black, four
of five black youth in some inner-city communities can expect to be
incarcerated in their lifetimes.
HANOVER, N.H. — A comfortable and confident Mitt Romney
solidified his front-runner status on Tuesday night in the battle for
the Republican presidential nomination, navigating 90 minutes of tough
questions on the economy from his rivals and debate moderators.All eight
Republican hopefuls who shared an intimate round table on the debate
stage at Dartmouth College clamored to blame Washington for the
country’s economic ills. In turn, they pointed fingers at President
Obama, the Federal Reserve and the government in general, although they
sparred over the details of their plans to grow the economy.
The participants uniformly criticized Obama and official Washington
for, in their view, not reviving the economy and for stunting its growth
with too many regulations, overreach by the Federal Reserve and
inadequate tax relief.
This time, the candidate with whom Romney had to share the spotlight
was Herman Cain.
Meanwhile, Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who was looking to revive his
struggling campaign, seized few moments. He stayed silent for long
stretches in the debate. When asked how he would fix the nation’s
sputtering economy, he said only that he would develop new energy
resources.
In one exchange, Cain, a former Godfather’s Pizza executive,
challenged Romney to name all 59 points in his 160-page economic plan,
suggesting that it failed Cain’s test to be “simple, transparent,
efficient, fair and neutral” in contrast to Cain’s proposal.
But the former Massachusetts governor did not hesitate to make the
case that the complexity of his plan reflects the complexity of the
nation’s problems, and that he has the depth of experience, business
know-how and ability to deal with those problems.
Mitt Romney had another good debate performance and none of his
rivals really laid a glove on him. His experience really shows. He plays
the game on an entirely different level. In fact, his biggest rival
might be himself. When he rambles answers to questions, he comes off
looking slick and untrustworthy.
Herman Cain proved he’ll be in the top tier for at least a few more
weeks. Much of the debate focused on his 9-9-9 tax plan which was only
good for his profile. He took some heat from his rivals — particularly
from Ron Paul on the Federal Reserve — but handled it well enough. He
doesn’t get rattled easily.
Rick Perry did almost nothing to distinguish himself. Once again, he
seemed tired and incoherent. Perry needed a good performance to turn
around the narrative that his campaign is flailing but didn’t have one.
Of the remaining candidates, only Newt Gingrich seemed to shine. He
frequently put himself into the discussion and made good points. But at
the end of the day, he’s more of a pundit than a presidential candidate.
One other note: Karen Tumulty did a wonderful job asking questions.
She was the best prepared on the entire stage tonight.
–
In one line, here is why Rick Perry is not only done, but why he was
never a serious candidate to begin with: ”We don’t need to be focused on
passing this policy or that policy.”
In a different world, he would not have had to go through the
gauntlet of these past two months of nationally televised debates and
might still be the front runner, writes James Fallows. He is really not
good in “debate format,” and has not gotten better enough fast enough.
–
At a certain level, you can’t blame Newt. His schtick has worked for
so long, why change it now? So you get things like this:
There’s a stream of American thought that really wishes
we would decay and fall apart and that the future would be bleak so that
the government can share the misery. It was captured by Jimmy Carter in
his malaise speech. It’s captured every week by Barack Obama in his
apologias disguised as press conferences.
Mitt Romney won by not losing. He has regained his
frontrunner status and nobody really emerged from the pack to challenge
it. But can he do what he failed to do last time: run the table in the
early states? It’s to his advantage to secure the nomination before the
field winnows to just him and a popular candidate to his right.
Associated
Press: Presidential candidate Mitt Romney took some less staunchly
conservative stands than his rivals in their debate Tuesday night,
declaring he can work with “good” Democrats and positioning himself
closer to the center in line with his claim that he can draw crucial
independent voters in next year’s general election.
He even defended portions of the Wall Street bailout, a particular
sore point with many conservative voters who will play an important role
in choosing the Republican nominee next winter and spring. But the
former Massachusetts governor joined the others in sharply criticizing
numerous aspects of President Barack Obama’s economic policies in a
debate focused on the nation’s frail economy. DiA:
The economy is Romney’s bailiwick and he delivered. It is
becoming increasingly clear that he operates at a higher level than the
other candidates. Perry is toast. If he’s not actually dumb as a stump,
he doesn’t know how to show it. Herman Cain continues to come on strong
as the non-Mormon conservative alternative. Bachmann and Huntsman both
sounded smooth, assured, and smart, but they no longer matter. Ron Paul
continues to dominate the Ron Paul vote.
Mitt Romney won the debate. No one knocked him off his
game. He really is that good of a debater. Herman Cain proved himself a
bit of an unstable number two. He is starting to get the tough questions
on his 999 plan and his responses sound like they were crafted in the
land of unicorns and rainbows …
Is Romney so much better than everyone else because he
has made a serious run before? (On the other hand, so have Newt
Gingrich, Ron Paul, etc). I don’t know, but it’s a huge gap.
Rick Perry, during the half of the debate that I saw,
bordered on invisible. I don’t know whether the pundits who say this was
make or break for Perry are right, but it certainly was not a strong
night for him. One thing that strikes me as odd is how little mileage
Perry gets out of his job creation record in Texas. He mentioned it a
time or two, but, as in prior debates, he didn’t use it effectively as
the foundation of his claim to be the strongest candidate.
Perry says blame Obama for income disparities but non partisan analysis says the gap between the
haves and have-nots has been widening since 1979, when Barack Obama was
18 years old.
The average low-information voter isn’t going to be
exposed to any account of this debate that includes this necessary
corrective: The prescription for economic recovery offered by the
Republican presidential field is completely divorced from reality.
Nate Silver of Five Thirty Eight offers the following grades: Romney
B+, Cain B, Huntsman B-, Gingrich B-, Bachmann C+, Paul C+, Santorum C,
Perry C
Washington
Post: The government is the problem. That was the message Tuesday
night as the eight Republican presidential hopefuls clamored to blame
Washington for the nation’s economic ills. In turn, they pointed fingers
at President Obama, the Federal Reserve and the government generally as
the cause of the nation’s economic collapse.
Together, they were strident in their belief that Obama-era
regulations are stunting growth. Yet although the White House aspirants
largely agreed on their overall visions, the two candidates whose
positions at the top of the field were expected to rise or fall in
Tuesday’s Washington Post-Bloomberg News debate at Dartmouth College —
Texas Gov. Rick Perry and businessman Herman Cain — were short on policy
specifics, even when pressed by the moderators. Weigel:
Why did Romney use his question on Bachmann? Well, there
are ominous signs that she may not last until the Iowa caucuses. If she
drops out, it’s easier for someone like Cain to actually win the state;
she stays in, and Romney can eke something.
Was it the day the mouse roared? When a free people stood up — as did the
people of Iceland recently — and said not just no, but hell no to
more bailouts of banks?
To be certain, the Freedom and Solidarity (SaS) party, which is a
coalition member of the ruling majority there, refuses to support
bailing out European creditors that bet poorly on the debt of socialist
governments like Greece. But the left-wing Smer-Social Democracy
party? It only refuses to offer its support to help out the majority —
unless the majority agrees to new elections.
Prime Minister Iveta Radicova has already lost a vote of confidence,
as she staked her political career on the success of the vote. Left
open is whether her coalition government will agree to early elections —
which could cost them the majority — in return for the Social
Democrats approving the bailout.
Ultimately, a re-do vote is eventually expected to pass, but at the
cost of the current government in Slovakia completely collapsing. In
other words, once the Social Democrats get their piece of the pie.
Get full story here.
