This morning's news talked of 200 protesters in Nashville this weekend demonstrating in the name of Cindy Sheehan against the war in Iraq. Interestingly, a soundbite from one of the protesters mentioned how they were not "just protesting for peace in the middle east, but were also protesting for peace for those in poverty, those affected by the aftermath of the hurricanes." It seems we need more than just war sympathy to pull out protesters these days, needing to pull from empathy for those impoverished and scattered souls who have been displaced in the wake of the devastation of the gulf coast region. But why?
Well, it appears Sheehan's name has fallen out of it's prominent spot in the news by the hurricanes. Here is a piece from an op-ed in the LA Times in case you are not familiar with the typical media portrayal of Sheehan's vigil: "The Times uncritically reported Sheehan's claim that the president had behaved callously in a June 2004 meeting with her and her husband, refusing to look at pictures of Casey or listen to stories about him. The Times claimed without qualification that Sheehan "came away from that meeting dissatisfied and angry."
However, what has not been reported is that Sheehan has changed her story since she initially met with President Bush in 2004. This is also from the same op-ed piece: "According to an interview with her hometown paper, the Vacaville Reporter, Sheehan had said that although she was upset about the war, she decided not to confront the president — who clearly left a favorable impression: "I now know he's sincere about wanting freedom for the Iraqis…. I know he's sorry and feels some pain for our loss. And I know he's a man of faith."Of that trip, Sheehan said: "That was the gift the president gave us, the gift of happiness, of being together."
What we have here is a major discrepancy in her statements, clearly showing she has flip-flopped on her reasoning from after her initial meeting with the president until recently. Yet she still wants to meet with Bush again, lambasting him in the press for not granting a return visit. But I ask, what good can come from an audience to reason with someone who cannot reason herself?
Now that we know how she has changed her reasoning, consider this information, from Bill Hobbs Online (billhobbs.com) on August 22, 2005, which shows just how crazy those who are bandwagoning behind Sheehan are: "One fact you probably haven't heard about Sheehan's son Casey, whose death in Iraq sparked the protest: He re-enlisted after the war started. And he volunteered for the rescue mission in which he was killed. In every possibly way, Casey Sheehan volunteered..."
Now, I hope I never have to experience the loss of a son, but it seems Sheehan is selfishly campaigning on a principle that her lost son never would have stood for. He was the true American Hero, unselfishly giving his life for what was a rescue mission, personifying the principles of courage and loyalty, exactly opposite of that in which she currently protests.
Does that show the shallowness of the belief system in those 200 out protesting this past weekend in Nashville? Or does it show the collective wisdom of the hundreds of thousands that also reside in the area who did not turn out for the protest?
Maybe both.
Monday, September 26, 2005
Monday, September 12, 2005
BLAME BUSH!
Wow- how the media and others in the blogosphere have raged on and on how the problem with the response to Hurricane Katrina lies at the feet of the current president, with even the astute rapper Kanye West saying on national TV that "Bush hates black people." Well, you can read my previous post to hear my points about the racism spin to this disaster, so I won't go into more detail on that. However, there needs to be some points made on who is to blame:
1. There was a period of time that elapsed from the end of the hurricane to the time the flooding began. Want a pictorial view of this? Go to http://www.kodakgallery.com/Slideshow.jsp?mode=fromshare&Uc=r9nmta5.b147fdut&Uy=hbb8p1&Ux=1 Be prepared to sit for a while as there are more than 100 pictures with commentary describing what is happening and when, giving the viewer an understanding of the timeline of events. Since there was a period of time, it appeared that New Orleans was going to survive relatively unscathed- yes, there was damage to structures and trees and such, but there was NO FLOODING. There was no reason to get excited about any rescue operation because there was no need for one! Sure, there was no power, but people in Mississippi had no power for over a week and lo and behold they are still alive. The problem came when the levees broke.
2. Suddenly you had a different situation arise than was previously anticipated. The evacuation and subsequent housing of those that couldn't evacuate to the Superdome were meant for protection from the Hurricane itself, not from onrushing floodwater from broken levees. In fact, the initial floodwater levels in New Orleans after the passing of the storm were less than what was expected in the city. This presented something the city was not prepared for, and the city knew it. In fact, they had tried for years to get upgrades done to the levees, but government bureaucracy at the local, state, and federal level has kept this from happening, quite possibly with the procrastinator attitude of "we'll deal with it tomorrow". Well, the problem made itself evident as "tomorrow" became today.
These problems were present long before Bush was elected, he was just the unlucky one sitting in the Oval Office when it came time to pay the piper for the sins of his presidential predecessors as well as those local and state officials that also did nothing. If the levees had not broken, this certainly would not have been the crisis it is today and we would be moving onto the latest and greatest sensationalized story the media could promote, and the ticking time bomb of the levees would still be sitting there counting down and waiting for the next hurricane to blow through. The man has been the sitting president for 2 of the greatest disasters on American soil in the last 50 years, and they are all his fault? I don't think so.
1. There was a period of time that elapsed from the end of the hurricane to the time the flooding began. Want a pictorial view of this? Go to http://www.kodakgallery.com/Slideshow.jsp?mode=fromshare&Uc=r9nmta5.b147fdut&Uy=hbb8p1&Ux=1 Be prepared to sit for a while as there are more than 100 pictures with commentary describing what is happening and when, giving the viewer an understanding of the timeline of events. Since there was a period of time, it appeared that New Orleans was going to survive relatively unscathed- yes, there was damage to structures and trees and such, but there was NO FLOODING. There was no reason to get excited about any rescue operation because there was no need for one! Sure, there was no power, but people in Mississippi had no power for over a week and lo and behold they are still alive. The problem came when the levees broke.
2. Suddenly you had a different situation arise than was previously anticipated. The evacuation and subsequent housing of those that couldn't evacuate to the Superdome were meant for protection from the Hurricane itself, not from onrushing floodwater from broken levees. In fact, the initial floodwater levels in New Orleans after the passing of the storm were less than what was expected in the city. This presented something the city was not prepared for, and the city knew it. In fact, they had tried for years to get upgrades done to the levees, but government bureaucracy at the local, state, and federal level has kept this from happening, quite possibly with the procrastinator attitude of "we'll deal with it tomorrow". Well, the problem made itself evident as "tomorrow" became today.
These problems were present long before Bush was elected, he was just the unlucky one sitting in the Oval Office when it came time to pay the piper for the sins of his presidential predecessors as well as those local and state officials that also did nothing. If the levees had not broken, this certainly would not have been the crisis it is today and we would be moving onto the latest and greatest sensationalized story the media could promote, and the ticking time bomb of the levees would still be sitting there counting down and waiting for the next hurricane to blow through. The man has been the sitting president for 2 of the greatest disasters on American soil in the last 50 years, and they are all his fault? I don't think so.
Friday, September 02, 2005
True Sadness
Living here in the South it has become apparent to me that racism is not necessarily dead, yet. Talking with people about the aftereffects of hurricane Katrina on New Orleans and the horrible human tragedy that continues to unfold, I have heard many references to "those people" and "returning to their jungle roots." Yes, it is a fact that the majority of those on television are African-American in origin. And because of this, they are most likely the ones toting guns and shooting at helicopters and the police and raping one another. But lets take a step back and eliminate race altogether. Is there something else that could be a common denominator here besides race?
Most who stayed fall into 2 categories- those who were too stubborn to leave or those who had no means or were to frail to leave. This first group is most likely smaller and now and probably very sorry for their decision to stay, and are stuck in a hard place. The second group accounts for more of those who are now causing the trouble, mostly. Surely, those that are too frail are now almost certainly not living any more with the onset of disease and heat slowly picking them off one by one. However, those remaining in this group have a lot of the same characteristics- low education, low socio-economic status, and yes, race. But remember, we are throwing that last characteristic out right now.
So where would you find those in America's society that function with lives based on low-education and low SES? They are typically in high concentration, low quality housing and living from paycheck to paycheck, sometimes working multiple jobs to make ends meet. Most don't own a car, and rely solely on public transportation for what trips they do make. That means, in the case of New Orleans, we had a lot of poor, poorly educated people in a very confined space without the ability to leave in the path of the oncoming hurricane. They were confined in what was supposed to be a safe haven- the Superdome- to weather the storm, and that failed. You add in the breaking of levees and the onrush of rising water, and now you have a lot of poor, poorly educated people worried about their lives. That translates easily into the fight or flight mechanism of emotions, with anger at others (those in authority) who supposedly moved them into a safe location, easily trumping the notion that they did have some control over their circumstances, only that responsibility came many years before when they dropped out of school, either by their choice or by other circumstances. So, it must be the government's fault right? Especially in today's me-first society.
Now, a parallel must be drawn with this population. What if this had happened in Phoenix, where I am originally from? Would the same effect have occurred? Certainly you have a lot of poor, poorly educated people living in high concentration housing in a rather small geographic space. Had they been evacuated to the Bank One Ballpark downtown, only to see a hurricane destroy what they had thought to be safe, would they be creating a mob scene, trying to escape and fearing for their lives? You bet they would. Except they would be mostly Hispanic in origin.
See, it has nothing to do with race. It has everything to do with SES and educational level. We need to worry less about skin color- that includes those who live in colored skin- and start looking at the sociological reasons that Hispanics in Phoenix or African-Americans in New Orleans or Gypsies in EU are living with these circumstances and rectify that sociological barrier. Instead of throwing money at people through welfare and any other federal program, we need to instead instill a shift in thinking such that both education and work are valued by these different cultures (yes cultures, not races, because this is a fiber in the cultural identity that needs to change) such that they can remove themselves from this lifestyle that is slowly but surely perpetuating itself with each iteration of generations.
Most who stayed fall into 2 categories- those who were too stubborn to leave or those who had no means or were to frail to leave. This first group is most likely smaller and now and probably very sorry for their decision to stay, and are stuck in a hard place. The second group accounts for more of those who are now causing the trouble, mostly. Surely, those that are too frail are now almost certainly not living any more with the onset of disease and heat slowly picking them off one by one. However, those remaining in this group have a lot of the same characteristics- low education, low socio-economic status, and yes, race. But remember, we are throwing that last characteristic out right now.
So where would you find those in America's society that function with lives based on low-education and low SES? They are typically in high concentration, low quality housing and living from paycheck to paycheck, sometimes working multiple jobs to make ends meet. Most don't own a car, and rely solely on public transportation for what trips they do make. That means, in the case of New Orleans, we had a lot of poor, poorly educated people in a very confined space without the ability to leave in the path of the oncoming hurricane. They were confined in what was supposed to be a safe haven- the Superdome- to weather the storm, and that failed. You add in the breaking of levees and the onrush of rising water, and now you have a lot of poor, poorly educated people worried about their lives. That translates easily into the fight or flight mechanism of emotions, with anger at others (those in authority) who supposedly moved them into a safe location, easily trumping the notion that they did have some control over their circumstances, only that responsibility came many years before when they dropped out of school, either by their choice or by other circumstances. So, it must be the government's fault right? Especially in today's me-first society.
Now, a parallel must be drawn with this population. What if this had happened in Phoenix, where I am originally from? Would the same effect have occurred? Certainly you have a lot of poor, poorly educated people living in high concentration housing in a rather small geographic space. Had they been evacuated to the Bank One Ballpark downtown, only to see a hurricane destroy what they had thought to be safe, would they be creating a mob scene, trying to escape and fearing for their lives? You bet they would. Except they would be mostly Hispanic in origin.
See, it has nothing to do with race. It has everything to do with SES and educational level. We need to worry less about skin color- that includes those who live in colored skin- and start looking at the sociological reasons that Hispanics in Phoenix or African-Americans in New Orleans or Gypsies in EU are living with these circumstances and rectify that sociological barrier. Instead of throwing money at people through welfare and any other federal program, we need to instead instill a shift in thinking such that both education and work are valued by these different cultures (yes cultures, not races, because this is a fiber in the cultural identity that needs to change) such that they can remove themselves from this lifestyle that is slowly but surely perpetuating itself with each iteration of generations.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)