Jack & Jill Politics

White Privilege wins again. MSNBC gives Willie Geist his own show.

I think Willie actually deserves his own show. He has been put in years as a commentator at MSNBC and generally outshines the hosts. I bet Tucker is kicking himself for introducing both Willie and Rachel to MSNBC.

And there is that really cute young black girl that does the half hour before Willie so all around it is a good hour. I think she has a future because Im starting to see her in the late morning/afternoons as a news reader.

I like Willie too, he's not nearly as jaded as some of his colleagues. He also tries to help them along sometimes.

AFTERNOON OPEN THREAD IS UP

"Bill Kristol admitted to Jon Stewart that the government can provide first-class health care. He said the military have first class health care and they deserve better care that the rest of us- the best care."

Maybe, Kristol meant that the military SHOULD have first class health care? How can he be so dismissive about stories from Walter Reed, Ft. Hood or about undiagnosed TBI, PTSD, and suicides making headlines?. We have untreated soldiers who have returned from the "wars" on killing sprees.

I don't know what Kristol was addressing when he said the military had first-class care.

Edit. I didn't view the vid.

No. This was NOT a 'wise Latina' moment

this was another Kristol acting STUPIDLY moment

What I don't get is if the conservative talking heads can't even say the GOP talking points that they've created with a straight face, what makes their followers continue listening to the crap spewing from their mouths?

Two things:

1) Muzikal203 is taking the bar exam today.....om! good thoughts & energy going out to our fellow traveler!

2) Howard Dean will be guest hosting 'The Rachel Maddow Show' tonight & tomorrow night. See ya there.

There's a reason it's called "The Bar".

guess where we are going on Thursday when it's over?

That's right, a bar! LOL, and the school is paying for the drinks :o)

Ha!...a bunch of sloshed would-be lawyers, making sloppy passes at happy hour.

Good luck...

..though, the best luck of all would be to not be a lawyer.

Nah, we won't be sloshed, they've been giving us alcohol the last three years. LOL! (I'm kidding)

And Lawyers are actually great people, it's just the only ones you hear about are the sheisty ones. All of my professors are lawyers, and I think they are some of the greatest people in the world. :o)

You know I will be watching Howard Dean. I certainly expect the next two nights to be dedicated to Healthcare.

I thought he was guest hosting Countdown.

Well SHIT! I coulda SWORE Rachel said he was guesting on her show.

Lisa's right, though.

http://www.observer.com/2009/media/howard-dean-...

Lawrence O'Donnell will kick things off tonight, and Richard Wolffe will close out the week, anchoring on Thursday and Friday night.

In between, MSNBC will be turning over Mr. Olbermann's usual hour to another famous screamer—namely, former Vermont Governor Howard Dean.

Sending good vibes & energy to Muzikal!

Howard Dean hosting Rachel Maddow show? Hmmmm...

not Rachel he is hosting KO today and tomorrow. Just a typo from Wordsmith.

Ohhh - now, aren't you sweet.

Send out lots of positive energy...and calm mind to excell.

Bill Kristol admitted to Jon Stewart that the government can provide first-class health care. He said the military have first class health care and they deserve better care that the rest of us- the best care. Jon delivers a instantaneous beat down using Kristol's own words right around 11 minutes into the interview.

The full interview runs 15min & is on the web. Healthcare talk begins @ 5:23
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-july-27-2...

can you find this on youtube and give me the link?

Kristol concedes gov't can provide first-class health care

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e76jLDXnjQE

Bill Kristol is a PRICK.

That was so funny. He saw it coming and couldn't stop himself. What an ass.

good looking out spirit55z

From Morning Meeting this morning:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/3218654...

Continuing the discussion on race, Dylan and Toure take a test to find out their inherent biases. I'm sure we can guess the results. But do you think the tone is too casual? Do you think this is the way it should be discussed in the MSM?

I think Dylan is doing a good job bringing up the issues without being to heavy handed. And I do like that he consistently has the most diverse panels on TV for all issues, not just race.

Dylan and Toure and the female had the right tone...that Capehart was a suckbutt as usuall, when Toure gave him a chance to speak, he threw it back to Dylan...what a brown noser!!

I thought they did a great job, until they dismissed Crowleys police report.

I believe it is good to discuss how every single American raised in this racist society does have racial/ethnic PREFERENCES. I disagreed with that Prof who defined racism as INTENTIONAL vs. doing UNINTENTIONAL acts of racism. However, it does explain why whitefolks get their panties all in a knot when they are called racist, cause in their minds it is not INTENTIONAL so therefore they not racist.

Then they proceed to do exactly that, it was unbelievable.

Just like clockwork...Toure raises the inaccuracy of the report...and Ratigan 'downplays' the lies...and Contessa after showing the 911 tape with no mention of race by Whalen...also 'downplays' the report by saying it was written after the incident...well that is not what the report says...Crowley specificallysays caller (whalen) said 2 blackmales/backpacks.

So, in less than a split second...both Ratigan/Contessa...are covering up Crowleys lies cause they do not want to say the officer is racist..so they dismiss it as UNINTENTIONAL!!

WTF?

Well guess what, if you run me down in your car, whether it was intentional or not...my ass is still DEAD.

Gates was STILL falsely arressted!!

I thought an interesting stat that was shown in the background is that 50% of blacks who took this test had a preference for whites. I will be taking the test this morning. If anyone else is interested in learning more about the test or want to take a sample test here is the link:

https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/

Well I thought it was good that the Prof said it measures ANTI-Discrimination vs. Racism.

Which is why black folks have 50% on white preference.

We discriminate against whites far less than they do us.

I took the test, when it was here at the science exhibit on RACE

War Complicates U.S. Aid Efforts for Afghan Women
A U.S. effort on behalf of women in Afghanistan is gearing up, but it comes in tandem with a controversial escalation of the war that some women's rights activists consider a greater threat. The first of two stories on the Afghanistan war and women.
http://www.womensenews.org/article.c...context/...

Where's GreenLadyHere???

following doctor's orders, I hope.

I just miss reading everything (or trying to read) she puts down - and her voice is definitely missed.

And I HOPE she's doing what she's supposed to be doing so she sneak in here .....

Check out "Web Site Story"
http://crooksandliars.com/bluegal/open-thread-213

lol...don't know if this is funny or not. It certainly says a lot about new millenium dating. I thought it was wild how she was worried cause he did not answer her Evites, he replys he hates them cause you have to click through and there is nothing in the email...they in unison they say their pictures were outdated, but each is a doll, and NOW they can't wait to read about each other on their blogs.

Incredible...impersonal and a sign of how obsolete interpersonal is today in relationships.

on the insanity of the birthers this blogger is hilarious...

http://corrente.blogspot.com/

"And don't get me going on what is "real" and what is "natrually real" and so on because that is a whole different thing altogether.

But, nevermind that. What concerns me in all this is not whether or not Barrack Obama is a natural born citizen or a US citizen. I'm convinced he is both. What worries me is that Barrack Obama is not really Barrack Obama!

Look: How do we know that Barrack Obama is really who he says he is? What if Barrack Obama's real name were Tyrone Goldfarb? And what if Tyrone Goldfarb and his mother Ann whose real name - lets just say - was Cindy. Cindy Goldfarb (see photo above circa 1963). How do we know that Cindy Goldfarb, somehow, didn't steal an entire new identity for herself and her son Tyrone sometime back in the early 1960's. Well? It's not impossible you know (identity theft is an old caper). And how'd you like to try to get elected president of the United States with a name like Tyrone Goldfarb!

Obviously there are still more questions that need to be answered with respect to Barrack Obama's... or Tyrone Goldfarb's... or whatever his name is... true identity.

Questions like the whereabouts of Mr. Goldfarb. And what the hell happened to the real Barrack Obama whose identity Tyrone Goldfarb has assumed? It's a big ocean out there, Dano. The ocean holds many secrets.

One day those secrets may come heaving ashore - perhaps in Alaska - where only dead fish stink up the merciless rushing flow and firewood blooms among the frostweed - or whatever it is that goes on up there - and we are reminded that a mother's nature hides many victories.

No?"

Help me here. I see there is a whole lot of angst and outright anger that the Baucus healthcare bill doesn't have a public option. From my understanding of how a bill becomes a law, his bill along with all the others will go to conference where it can be put back in. Where am I wrong?

Yes, every now and then I drift off into my fantasy world wherein I believe that Congress will actually work for the good of the American public, not just corporate America. Also, I'm not fully recovered from POF (persistent outrage fatigue) from the primaries.

What is true is that the healtcare lobbyists and opponents of public option are making that the driving news to discourage proponents of public options and fuel disapproval and the perception of failure by President Obama.

They WANT folks to believe he failed and that he can't do what he promised.

The media knows FULL well that the bill is not final and this is nothing but they fueling political divisiseness.

No, you're right...this bill is spread out among three different committees who will mark it up. The conferences hammer out the differences and produce a final version, which then goes back to the House/Senate to be voted on.

Carl Bernstein Destroys Sarah Palin On MSNBC's Morning


“SHE’S IGNORANT” (BWA HA HA HA HA)

“MCCAIN IS UNPATRIOTIC FOR PICKING HER AS A RUNNING MATE”

(NO SHIT SHERLOCK)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ykghe8gK6jc

Bernstein didn't hold back! Did you hear Pat Buchanan say he didn't understand middle America? That old bigot just doesn't get it! Saaaaaaaaaa>>>lap

AMEN!!!

I didn't watch Palin's full speech on Sunday. I only saw excerpts-- but I take it that the complete speech was awful. It is embarrassing that she is called a major American political figure.

Neither did I...even though the media does not have a blackout on Palin.

I do.

He really did. Yesterday, Andrea Mitchell said that a double standard was being used for Palin. She implied that a male politician would not be allowed to get away with Palin's ignorance.

Sarah Palin is a worthless bimbo. If she looked like Roseanne Barr, Andrea Mitchell or Susan Boyle she wouldn't have gotten past PTA president, much less be seriously considered as a presidential candidate. This trick has shaked, shimmied and winked her way to the top. There's a reason why you don't see Republican women on her bandwagon and it's not because they're "jellus" of her looks. They, as well as most women in the working world, have seen tricks like this get ahead with nothing to offer except their looks. You want to know the REAL reason why Sarah Palin quit her job as governor? Women like Sarah don't "do" hard work --they are much too delicate to do actual work. When they get called out for being a useless blob of nothing, they want to cry, sniffle, put on the tears and the victim act --WHY ERRYBODY PICKIN ON ME --THEY JUST JELLUS --and everyone caves to them because we musn't let Little Miss Delicate Flower feel bad....but the people in the office have NO PROBLEM chewing out Susan Boyle when she does something wrong.

The ONLY people who think Sarah Palin is an intellectual and political wunderkind are horny middle aged white men, racists and intellectually stunted white PTA hockey moms who think "If Sarah can do it, I can too!!"

Wasn't it not too long ago that most Republicans said they didn't have confidence in her if she ran for President? I think there was a real recent survey on that.

BAM!! Straight, No Chaser.

Well of course, accomplished professional women with integrity, DESPISE Palin as she is nothing but a female bimbo stereotype, being held up as some kind of success. It is insulting to them.

Kinda, like when black folks see ClarenceThomas or DLHughley engaging in buffoonery that perpetuates negative black stereotypes.

We HATE that!!

Mitchell and Couric and Walters can't STAND Palin...and wonderful sweet Couric..took Palin DOWN...o did she do a hatchet job on that woman. in the quintessential timehonored way of syrupy kindness, justusgirls velvetglovewithastealtrapmind, kinda way of one female to another...it was a thing of beauty to watch. Couldn't no one say Couric wasn't nice or that she didn't go out of her way to make Palin comfortable, if anything Palin was snippy with Couric....lol

Thank God...all HAIL Couric!!

lol

Country First!

This is probably the one time where I'm compelled to defend Rep. Bachmann:

She objected to the vote due to the fact that a quroum was not present to properly vote on the motion, so a roll call vote needed to be taken.

Not to mention that she voted for the bill.

Personally, I think she did the right thing...because now the birther issue, for whatever it was, is well and truly dead.

Good on her.

Believe you me, she was just trying to put a wringer up in the mix, not adhere to protocol.

Don't defend Bachmann ever. She is my representative & nutso, just like Palin, even if she did give me tixs to the inauguration..


Update:

Score one for DJ to wit:

"In the wake of last night's vote by the House to commemorate the 50th anniversary of Hawaii's statehood -- and its status as the birthplace of President Obama -- the Florida Democrats have put out a statement challenging Rep. Bill Posey (R-FL) to drop his proposed legislation to require birth certificates from presidential candidates.

The Florida Dems' statement cites Posey's own vote in favor of the Hawaii resolution, contrasting that with his being the lead sponsor of the widely-ridiculed "Birther Bill":

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/07/flor...

She's out there, true....but on this one, she doesn't deserve the hammering.

(like THAT matters)

because now the birther issue, for whatever it was, is well and truly dead.

Aww, it is so cute that you actually believe this.

Hatred and fear is at the core of the birther movement and a non binding resolution will do nothing to quell it. At least, rethuglican congresscritters can point out they voted for the resolution when they are asked about it by talking heads or their constituents, or when they're accosted by a camera wielding blogger.

To Bachmann's credit, she hasn't been pushing the whole birther thing. She just thinks Obama, and other members of Congress, should be investigated for their anti-American proclivities.

Damn those bloggers...LOL.

I'll tell you why I think it's important, and why it kills the issue (even though it is non-binding): there were two versions of this resolution, one just saying that he was born there, and one providing the date of his birth.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.RE...

That's fairly significant. Were I a Birther (and it's not difficult for me to think like one), had the one just saying he was born there passed, I'd still question it. Now, I don't think they have a leg to stand on.

Will it still come up? Of course. And I'd probably be willing to guess that a god number of people voted for it without knowing what it actually said (that's the nature of Congress).

The legislators are committed now. So if they step out of line, hammer them (again, not that my permission's needed for that here).

Hell, even Rep. Posey voted for it.

Well the state of Hawaii said he was born there and the birthers STILL don't believe the state of Hawaii.

But the state of Hawaii is just overflowing with all shades of brown folks. Isn't that alone kinda suspect?

Remember Cokie Roberts call the state exotic?Saying that PBO should vacation somewhere in America.So the ignorance is just not limited to the inbreds of the country.

Hell Cokie, had to catch her self, she started with he was out the country..then had to switch it up to an exotic state.

That was incredible to watch.

You right, racism destroys otherwise reasonable minds.

Time for some fun. Ten sexiest vampires w/ videos.
http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts...

Vampires-one of my favorite subjects! Hmm...I don't really agree with this list (no shock) but I must say I LOVED Spike in the Buffy series and Keifer was pretty hot in The Lost Boys. Otherwise I think they did a disservice to Frank Langella for not including him-he really was sexy in 79's Dracula both onstage and screen. Christopher Lee was pretty mesmerizing too though I'm not sure about sexy. I thought Wesley was sexy in the first Blade (anyway).Brad was good in 'Interview with a Vampire' but I thought Antonio Banderas was much sexier. And I thought Aliyah was lovely in Queen of the Damned (though the movie didn't do right by the book).

She looked really pretty in the photos.!

where can I get some info on what exactly is being proposed regarding Healthcare?

what about what's being proposed for "dummies"? =-)

LOL...yeah, THOMAS is a bit much, unless you have no life or need to actually read the whole bill.

I don't have any that aren't slighted to the right...maybe someone else does.

Nigerian-British woman in deal to get out of Laotian prison along w/ father of her child.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/articl...

Male and female prisoners having sexual contact???

The human right to health guarantees “the creation of conditions which would assure to all medical service and medical attention in the event of sickness.” - International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Art. 12

(PDF) Human Right to Health Care

What Are the Key Principles of the Human Right to Health Care?

• Purpose of Health Care: A health care system must be designed to protect health, social well being and dignity.
• Universal Access to Quality Care: Human rights standards require that access to comprehensive, quality health care must be available and affordable for all.
• Equity: A health care system must ensure that resources, including health facilities, goods and services, are equitably and fairly distributed.
• Non-discrimination: A health care system must provide care without discrimination on any basis, including income, immigration status, race, religion, ethnicity, gender, disability, sexual orientation or any other status.
• Private sector accountability: The privatization of the health sector must not constitute a threat to the availability, accessibility, acceptability and quality of health care to all.

What are the Government Obligations to Ensure the Human Right to Health Care?

• Recognize the human right to health care in national and state level legislation;
• Adopt a national health strategy and plan of action based on principles of universality, equity and accountability
• Provide legal and administrative remedies for violations of the right to health care; and
• Hold the private health care industry accountable for ensuring equal access to health care for all.

Do Other Countries Recognize Health Care as a Human Right?

Yes. The right to health care is included in a number of national constitutions and the European Union Charter, and countries around the world have embraced national policies that define the goal of health care to be health protection and a healthy society. Moreover, every other industrialized country,1 and even South Africa, has adopted a national health care plan ensuring access for all.

Can the U.S. Afford Universal Access to Health Care Without Lowering the Quality of Care?

Yes. The United States is already the world’s biggest health care spender, exceeding countries that provide universal access to health care. According to the U.S. government’s General Accounting Office, “If the U.S. were to shift to a system of universal coverage and a single payer, as in Canada, the savings in administrative costs [10 percent of health spending] would be more than enough to offset the expense of universal coverage.”3 Such a shift would not require decreasing the quality or scope of services. Instead, it would require redirecting health care dollars spent on wasteful administrative costs by insurance companies and advertising by pharmaceutical companies, as well as eliminating unjustified and excessive private sector profits.

What Are the Greatest Obstacles to Achieving Universal Quality Care for All?

The greatest obstacles to achieving universal quality care for all include the lack of a national health care plan that ensures that costs and benefits are shared as public good, with everyone contributing according to their means and receiving care based on their needs. The current, fragmented market based system does not set the protection of health as the ultimate and primary goal of a health care system. The private sector is not adequately regulated to ensure that profiteering does not interfere with everyone’s equal access to quality of care.

Artcile 25 (1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states: "Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control."

Interesting that you chose to highlight "medical care" instead of "...standard of living adequate for the heath and well being...."

You have that right. People don't get turned away from the ER in emergency cases because they don't have healthcare or can't afford treatment. That's no different than the inalienable right to life in the Declaration.

Which this document doesn't trump, by the way.

There appear to have been a question raised @JJP yesterday as to whether health care was a right. Just providing information to assist in the dialog.

"You have that right. People don't get turned away from the ER in emergency cases because they don't have healthcare or can't afford treatment."

No, an individual may not be denied, but if you are uninsured the wait is a killer.

edited

There's a wait for emergencies such as childbirth and severe trauma? Didn't know that...

I know I had to sit for a bit with my abscess, but that was no big deal (and it wasn't that long of a wait).

Regrettably, there is lots of print about waiting for care in hospitals.

How are doing? Are you feeling better?

I'm good, thanks...back to the world of campaigning.

Senate micro-minority stabs public option in the back Hotlist
by devtob [Subscribe]
Digg this! Share this on Twitter - Senate micro-minority stabs public option in the backTweet this submit to reddit Share This
Tue Jul 28, 2009 at 07:15:53 AM EST

A small group of Senators on the Senate Finance Committee have evidently decided to do the bidding of health insurance companies, Big Pharma, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce by eviscerating health care reform.

An AP story by David Espo states that six Senators, who have been working secretly for weeks on a "compromise" bill, have decided against the public option and any requirement that businesses offer health insurance or pay a penalty.

Espo writes that the compromise "jettisons ... core Democratic provisions in a reach for bipartisanship on an issue that has so far produced little."

So who are these guys who are now on nyceve's shitlist, and where do they come from?

Undemocratic details, below.

* devtob's diary :: ::
*

The six conspiratorial Senators are three Democrats, Committee Chairman Max Baucus of Montana, Kent Conrad of North Dakota, and Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico; and three Republicans, Chuck Grassley of Iowa, Olympia Snowe of Maine, and Mike Enzi of Wyoming.

Notice anything about this group, besides all white, only one woman, and 50-50 politically, rather than the 3-2 ratio that would accurately reflect the Senate's current membership?

Well, I did -- in total, the six conspirators represent just 2.7 percent of the U.S. population.

The approximate populations of those six states (from the wiki) are: Iowa, 3 million; New Mexico, 2 million; Maine, 1.3 million; Montana, 965,000; North Dakota, 640,000; and Wyoming, 530,000.

Their total population (c. 8.4 million) is roughly equivalent to the population of New York City, which shares its two senators with the other roughly 8.4 million who live in the suburbs and upstate.

How do those states' populations compare to other states'?

Petitely -- their ranks, in the above order, are 30th, 36th, 40th, 44th, 48th and 50th.

And do you think the conspirators care one whit about the health insurance concerns of middle class, working class, and poor people in our cities?

It's a rhetorical question.

The largest city by population represented by any of them is Albuquerque, ranked 34th with about 520,000, the next largest, Des Moines, is ranked 112th with about 200,000. The other states' largest cities are off the wiki list -- Billings, Montana, with about 100,000; Fargo, North Dakota, with about 100,000; Portland, Maine, with about 63,000; and Cheyenne, Wyoming, with about 53,000.

And how sensitive are the white conspirators to the problems that non-whites have in getting, keeping, and/or paying for health insurance?

Another rhetorical question.

About 34 percent of the country is black, Hispanic and Asian (B/H/A). None of these states, except New Mexico obviously, comes within a country mile of that.

Being right next to its namesake, New Mexico is 48 percent B/H/A (44.4 percent of that Hispanic). The percentage of B/H/A in the others is in the single digits -- Wyoming, 8 percent; Iowa, 7.5 percent; Montana, 3.5 percent; and both Maine and North Dakota at 3 percent.

Other undemocratic details are that the three Democrats represent two red and one blue/purple state -- McCain won North Dakota 53-45 and Montana 50-47, Obama won New Mexico 57-42 (but Bush won the state narrowly in 2004, Gore won it narrowly in 2000, ergo blue/purple).

Grassley and Snowe also represent states that voted for Obama, but they are longtime incumbents who apparently feel they can disregard their constituents' wishes with political impunity.

Enzi's littlest state is blood-red, McCain won it by almost 2-1.

So Baucus' cabal was also split 50-50 according to the 2008 state presidential result, which Obama won 28-22. And had only one Democrat from a state Obama won.

True-blue states, where there is overwhelming support for a public option and, generally, a lot more people, had no seat at the conspirators' table.

From Democratic committee members, Baucus could have chosen two women who represent larger blue states (Stabenow of Michigan and Cantwell of Washington) and/or a Hispanic from a larger blue state (Menendez of New Jersey), but he did not. On purpose.

I'm well aware that the Founders originally intended the Senate to be an undemocratic institution, largely as a sop to relatively low-white-male-population slave states.

Senators, in their view, did not represent people, they represented states. The Founders didn't even want people to vote for Senators, they left that to state legislatures, and that was the law of the land until the 17th Amendment was ratified in 1913, within some people's lifetimes.

But this health care reform-killing cabal of six Senators from small states is even more undemocratic than that -- again, they represent a 2.7 percent micro-minority of the country.

And yet these conspirators from little states have the gall, and evidently the power, to deny real health care reform to the other 97.3 percent of the country.

Changing the essentially undemocratic nature of the Senate via Constitutional amendment is politically impossible, because small states now, like slaves states way back when, will not support any change that dilutes their political power. Like, for example, ditching the Electoral College.

So changing the six Senators who intend to screw their few constituents, and the many more American people not represented by a conspirator, by doing the bidding of their health insurance/Big Pharma benefactors is all we can do.

I live in New York, so I can't vote against them. But if this deadly conspiracy succeeds, I will be giving money to and doing remote phone-banking for primary challengers to the three Democrats and for general-election challengers to the three Republicans.

And you all should, too.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/7/28/758573/...

Stimulus creates, saves more jobs in June

The number of jobs created or saved by infrastructure projects funded by the U.S. economic stimulus plan more than doubled in June from May, according to a report released Tuesday by a House of Representatives committee.

At the end of June, 49,377 jobs had been "created or sustained" by water, highway and public transportation projects, compared to slightly more than 21,000 jobs at the end of May.

The Pacific Northwestern state of Washington accounted for the most jobs of any state or territory at 3,481, with the bulk of those concentrated in highway repairs.

According to the Transportation Department, Washington has also been obligated some $627.8 million out of the $22.7 billion the states have requested from the federal government under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idU...

A New York Times feature about unemployment:

It’s bad enough that the unemployment rate has doubled in only a year and a half and one out of six construction workers is out of work. What truly troubles President Obama’s economic advisers is that, even adjusting for the recession, the contraction in employment seems way too high. . . .
The Federal Reserve now expects unemployment to surpass 10 percent . . . The economy has shed 6.5 million jobs . . . Economists fear that even when the economy turns around, the job market will be stagnant.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/26/magazine/26FO...

Even while the media keeps pushing “recovery” talk, the further ahead you look, the scarier it gets:

The global economy may fall back into a recession by late 2010 or 2011 because of rising government debt, higher oil prices and a lack of job growth, said Nouriel Roubini, the New York University economist who predicted the credit crisis. A “perfect storm” of fiscal deficits, rising bond yields, “soaring” oil prices, weak profits and a stagnant labor market could “blow the recovering world economy back into a double-dip recession,” he wrote . . .

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarch...

Did anybody notice that the FDIC took over six banks Friday, bringing the year-to-date total to 64 bank failures? And there’s more trouble on the horizon for the banking industry:

Regional banks can no longer ignore the elephant in the room — their exposure to the commercial real estate bust . . . analysts expect credit problems over the next year to center on commercial real estate — mortgages on office and apartment buildings and shopping malls, as well as construction, development and industrial loans. U.S. banks hold some $1.8 trillion worth of commercial loans, according to Federal Reserve data . . . With financing markets locked up and the economy still mired in recession — unemployment is at a 26-year high while capacity utilization, a key measure of industrial production, recently hit a record low — observers fear a wave of loans will go bad in coming quarters . . .

http://money.cnn.com/2009/07/24/news/economy/ba...

People who read headlines saying the worst is over need to read the fine print in those stories. If the headline says “June New Home Sales Up,” for example, be sure to pay attention to the bad news about the good news:

However, sales are still 28% below the levels of a year ago, when new homes sold in June at an annualized rate of 530,000. Four years ago, during the height of the housing boom, the sales rate for June was 1,374,000, nearly three-and-a-half times higher than last month. . . .

http://money.cnn.com/2009/07/27/real_estate/Jun...

Look at what analysts told the Wall Street Journal:

“[T]he dismal state of the U.S. labor market will continue to cast a long shadow over the prospects for a meaningful recovery in the sector in the near term . . .”
“[T]he report showed a sharp 6% sequential decline in June suggesting that much of the sales activity was concentrated at the lower end of the market . . .”
“The news sounds better than it looks . . . despite the jump in sales in June, new home sales remain at very low levels, and the not seasonally adjusted data show a total of 36,000 homes sold nationwide in June, the lowest sales total for June since 1982.”

Hey, how good can the economy be, if Tim Geithner can’t sell his house? The two-week stock-market surge — which saw the Dow Jones Industrial Average zoom up about 800 points before the rally ended Friday — was fueled in large measure by a constant media drumbeat of “recovery is near” messages. Allen Abelson of Barron’s is getting tired of the happy-talk:

The melancholy fact is that our ink, online and TV colleagues can be too easily snookered by Washington, Wall Street and Corporate America, all of whom are desperately peddling recovery rather than reality.

One of the things that make it hard for people to figure out which way the economy is heading is that analysts shy away from outright predictions:

Like being a weatherman who never gets around to saying firmly, “It’s gonna rain tomorrow,” you’re always 100% accurate.

http://rsmccain.blogspot.com/2009/07/is-rally-p...

Me? I boldly say, “Bring your umbrella.” As I first explained in December at The American Spectator, the most important thing to understand about Obamanomics is It Won’t Work. The neo-Keynesian deficit-spending “stimulus” approach, which began with Henry Paulson and the Bush administration, is the exact opposite of what the economy needs, because The Fundamentals Still Suck.

Obamanomics flunks in terms of the basics. There is nothing in economic history to support the belief that the agenda currently being pursued in Washington will lead to real recovery. Jimmy Carter-style “stagflation” is a much more likely result.

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/07/28/obamanomi...

Conserve unemployment is a LAGGING INDICATOR(google it). Unemployment is going to be the last number to look positive. Look at all the other numbers. (Housing, Dow, Company Earnings). As much as people of your ilk are hoping for a cataclysmic descent of the economy timing is not on your side. In January we were shedding 700,000 plus jobs. What is it now? I'll let you look it up but I'll warn you. It is not going to back your argument. As far as all your analysts are concerned ONLY DUMB PEOPLE STILL LISTEN TO THEM. If they are so brilliant why are we in this mess in the first place?

lolol he really got to you didn't he Conserv? lolol

The President and his team has successfully slowed down the effects of the last 8 years. The DOW has increased, folks are investing again and everyone knows we still have a ways to go (at least 1 year to 1 year and 1/2) to recovery. We ALL expected unemployment to be down until at least the middle of next year but thanks to the stimulus we slowed that process as well. So this "Obamanomics won't work" argument is silly. . . just ask Jindal and the rest of your GOP leaders.

Jindal Tours Louisiana Attacking ‘Washington Spending’ While Handing Out Jumbo-Sized Stimulus Checks
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/07/23/jindal-more...

Let's play a game -- follow the Money!
Red State Socialism and the Politics of the Stimulus

In just their latest posturing for the 2012 Republican presidential race, governors Sarah Palin (R-AK) and Mark Sanford (R-SC) joined Texas' Rick Perry, Mississippi's Haley Barbour and Louisiana's Bobby Jindal in announcing they would reject some of the federal stimulus funds allocated to their states. But as the steady one-way flow of tax dollars and earmarks spreading the wealth from Washington to their states shows, de facto red state socialism is alive and well.
http://www.perrspectives.com/blog/archives/0014... follow the money baby!

:-) Your posts have lifted my spirits Conserv. Carry on!

Actually unemployment is UP. Across the board. As you know it only counts the newly unemployed not the ones currently receiving benefits. Many states are going to be cutting their benefits to try to balance their budgets - like CA.

I was referencing jobloss heartsandflowers. it isn't still going at a rate of 700,000 per month. I said slowed and added that it is expected to be a problem until earliest . . . middle of next year.

Appreciate your input though. Facts are facts.

Speaking of the Dow, notice none of the talking heads and pundits are talking about it anymore? LOL!

According to Hannity, the Dow is up because people don't like Obama anymore.

The reason why the Obama administration officials think the contraction is rather high is because is historically speaking employers usually hold on to their employees because it would cost more money to train people but in this instance, the employer are really too quick to layoff their workers.

Defense Secretary Gates arrives in Iraq

By ANNE GEARAN
The Associated Press
Tuesday, July 28, 2009; 7:29 AM

TALIL, Iraq -- U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates got a firsthand look Tuesday at the future of the U.S. military mission in southern Iraq.

Gates flew from Amman, Jordan, to a command post in southern Iraq where U.S. troops are serving mainly as advisers to Iraqi forces. The advisory unit in Talil is a prototype for U.S. forces as they shift from front-line combat to support roles.

The secretary met with U.S. and Iraqi officers who have patroling together since July 15. And he saw the command center, a room where U.S. and Iraqi commanders meet each morning to go over coordination of patrols.

"What you are doing here is the next phase of our progress in Iraq," Gates told U.S. troops.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ar...

White House meeting set with Henry Louis Gates Jr., Sgt. Jim Crowley

The much-anticipated meeting between Henry Louis Gates Jr. and the officer who arrested him are set for 6 p.m. on Thursday at the White House, a senior administration official said. Sgt. James Crowley will drink Blue Moon, the president will drink Budweiser, and Professor Gates will drink Red Stripe or Beck's. At a press conference Monday, White House Press Secretary Gibbs fielded questions on the beer choices. "What's wrong with Budweiser?" he asked when a reporter questioned the president's beer choice. And, to the question "Pretzel or chips?" Gibbs responded: "We're just going to go straight beer. No sense in diluting it."

Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. and the police officer who arrested him will meet with President Barack Obama at the White House at 6 p.m. Thursday, a senior administration official said.

The White House was anxious to resolve the issue so it would quit dominating the news. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs told “Fox News Sunday” that officials hoped to “get that done in the next several days.”

The charge of disorderly conduct was dropped by the Cambridge, Mass., police amid a national debate over the propriety of the arrest. Obama said at his news conference last week that the policy had acted “stupidly,” although he later said he “could have calibrated those words differently.”

Obama said during his later comments on the matter that at the end of a telephone conversation he had with the officer, Sgt. Jim Crowley, “there was a discussion about he and I and Professor Gates having a beer here in the White House.”

The timing of the meeting was first reported by Jake Tapper of ABC News.

The planned reunion was the subject of light-hearted banter at Gibbs’ briefing on Monday:

Q: Okay. And another subject, Officer Crowley is drinking Blue Moon, we hear Professor Gates is drinking Red Stripe or Becks — what's the President drinking?


MR. GIBBS: The President had a Budweiser at the All-Star Game, so — why are you looking at me like that? That's what he drank.


Q: We're talking Blue Moon, Red Stripe, Becks —


MR. GIBBS: What's wrong with Budweiser? Why do you hate Budweiser? (Laughter.)


Q: Well, he could get —


MR. GIBBS: Why do you hate Budweiser, Wendell? (Laughter.) Wendell, how about this — how about you and I, we'll go pick out the beer, we'll do the beer run. Uh-oh, hold, please. (Laughter.)


Q: I'm happy to do that.


MR. GIBBS: The mortgage services meeting is tomorrow. Apparently this has nothing to do — (laughter) — unclear whether beer will be served at that meeting and what it will be. (Laughter.) So we'll go on the beer run together and pick it up in anticipation of the meeting.


Q: Pretzel or chips?


MR. GIBBS: Say again?


Q: Pretzel or chips?


MR. GIBBS: We're just going to go straight beer. No sense in diluting it.


Yes.


Q: Shifting gears to Afghanistan.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/25506...


http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/25506...

Am I wrong for hoping that one of the WH servers spits in Crowley's beer a la Celie in The Color Purple?

LMBAO!! Sepia, you so wrong, you RIGHT!

Get out of my head!

Sgt. James Crowley will drink Blue Moon, the president will drink Budweiser, and Professor Gates will drink Red Stripe or Beck's. At a press conference Monday, White House Press Secretary Gibbs fielded questions on the beer choices. "What's wrong with Budweiser?" he asked when a reporter questioned the president's beer choice. And, to the question "Pretzel or chips?" Gibbs responded: "We're just going to go straight beer. No sense in diluting it."

Okay, now this is getting absurd (eyeroll).

It is getting absurd...but not to beer drinking males!! This is one of those MANLAW situations for them. What you bet, that PresidentObama would have not said they would settle it over a beer, if the officer was female? Cause unlike Crowley, a female officer, likely would not have suggested a beerdrinking to settle it.

Maybe, females don't know how beerdrinking calms testosterone when men are gathered, so they can talk reasonably and uncompetitively moreso than usual?

Maybe, females don't know how beerdrinking calms testosterone when men are gathered, so they can talk reasonably and uncompetitively moreso than usual?

Really? Huh....I wonder what happened to the calming effects of beer with all the idiots I've radiographed over the years.

Teehee...well you do have to start with a few civilized males in the room or the rest of the heathens will just go wild and descend into potty humor along with hoots over flatulence, and oneuptales about inchesof the power of their external anatomy.

As some TV commentator noted, after the beer..they all head to the john to pee together & then SEE who really has the power.

Y'all are a trip, but on point about the male bonding thing(LOL). Makes me think of this Miller Lite ad.

As some TV commentator noted, after the beer..they all head to the john to pee together & then SEE who really has the power.

Now stop - you'll make me blush....

How come they're not drinking something HEARTY! like Samuel Adams? How much more American can ya get than Samuel Adams beer?

Red Stripe is straight up Jamaican beer. Gates' got good taste, mon.

Well I gueeeess President Obama doesn't need anything 'hearty' for them to know who has the most power when they standing at the urinals?

Ms Kitty,

I agree!

President needs to step of his beer game. Goose Island or leinenkugel wuld be more representive than that dreck he is drinking.

You know he had to say Budweiser.If he would have picked any other beer the cries from the idiots would have railed"see he isnt a American"BTW even though Goose Island is made in Chicago and is a very good beer how much do you want to bet the idiots would have claimed its from France.

I'm cool with Professor Gates burying the hatchet with Crowley. It sends a good message of conciliation. I don't, however, want this Cheers moment to suggest that racial profiling is officially over.

Why does Gates need to be conciliatory when clearly based on all the evidence he was falsely arrested, and that is why President Obama said the police acted stupidly in arresting a man IN HIS HOME after having PROOF he was the homeowner?

That IS stupid!!

While it is a good idea to meet, mr.whiteentitlementCrowley is not trying to backdown nor offering up an apology, yet!

Aren’t their inconsistencies between Cowley’s report and the 911 caller?

Yes! Big ONES! It is a confession of FALSE ARREST...as O'Donnell said and that other woman Lowry Heursser who wrote up the elements of misconduct based on his report.

I believe it is far from over. This issue with Gates and Crowley tied in with the President's response pushed racial profiling into the forefront. The initial public instinct by the media, the police department, GOP and even the American citizens (white and black) to slam the President and then Gates who clearly was the victim in all this actually did us a service. After they kept pushing the story over the last few days it turns out to show what most minorities in America already know.

This was a case of false arrest and police reports were also falsified and this clearly shows to the public the disparity between Americans. Folks may not want to recognize that we still have issues in our country but that is neither here nor there . . . this incident shined the light on ALL of it. I think the focus on this issue is far from over and it is a good thing.

I agree VAL...this simply is now moving to POLICY and our President has not only has experience with moving policy of this type through the STATE legislature but he suceed in doing so, when many others with more tenure in the IL legislature failed to do so.

It is time to move to the next phase of this. Cambridge/Boston as well as Chicago are both know to be one of the most racially polarized metropolis' in the nation, STILL>

I agree, Val. It aint over till WEEZ ALL FREE! :-)))

The more info that comes out about Crowley, shows he's been a NAUGHTY lil cop. The Boston police have a histsory of racial profiling.

The MSM and GOP can scream about Obama and the "stupid" comment al lthey like, but it won't change the facts of America's shameful racist legacy.

Spirit,

http://field-negro.blogspot.com/

CPL stated this on Field Negro last night:

How much you want to bet Rahm the Enforcer has already told Obama to back the hell up off all of this shyt and let Crowley HANG?

And CPL is absolutely right. The LIES are unraveling as we type.

Hey Val& Spirit

Are y'all watching Ratigan/toure and suckup Capehart on Morning Msnbc?

When Toure says the police report is inaccurate, Ratigan says well we can't go by report, switch to Brewer who plays 911 tape and then says well, the report was written after the incident.

I am like WTF...every news and media outlet including many blogs took the report as goespel!!

Now white folks are acting like it was OK for Crowley to LIE on the report!1

I don't watch MSNBC anymore. I just wait and get the clips of interest and
post for discussion.

What did they discuss?

They really, truly do think it was alright that he falsified the report. Because the two men in question are in fact black, they don't see anything wrong with Crowley lying about that woman having told him they were black. They really do think that way.

Jim Crow(ley's) actions are UNACCEPTABLE.
Period.

Lawrence O’Donnell was on this last evening on Countdown. This was a case of false arrest and police reports were also falsified. There are inconsistencies between Cowley’s report and the 911 caller. I’m hearing very little chatter about this.

Now white folks are acting like it was OK for Crowley to LIE on the report!



They're really disappointed that 911 tape didn't bolster Crowley's report. The media wanted to find Gates guilty.

Justice,
That's My WHOLE point their white entitlement drives the story. Tape don't match Crowley story...welll let's make excuses for the lying lies in the lying report?
Arrrrgh!!

No one even gave credence to Gates report...it was all about Crowley as the baseline for truth.

Hrrmph...which is why I want Ogletree to SUE and SUE big!

They had their Ricci...I want our Ogletree to take this ALL the WAY!!

I hate this mess...they get to blow off Crowley's lIES now? wtf

Pique And the Professor

By Eugene Robinson
Tuesday, July 28, 2009

If race were the only issue, there would be much less hyperventilation about Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr.'s unpleasant run-in with the criminal justice system. After all, it would hardly be the first time a black man had unjustly been hauled to jail by a white police officer. The debate -- really more of a shouting match -- is also about power and entitlement.

This is a new twist. Since the triumph of the civil rights movement, minorities have been moving up the ladder in politics, business, academia, just about every field. Only in the past decade, however, has a sizable cohort of African Americans and Latinos broken through to the tiny upper echelons where real power is exercised.

I'm talking about President Obama, obviously, but also Citigroup Chairman Richard Parsons, entertainment mogul Oprah Winfrey, former secretary of state Condoleezza Rice, Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor and many others -- a growing number of minorities with the kind of serious power that used to be reserved for whites only. In academia, the list begins with "Skip" Gates.

He's a superstar, one of the best-known and most highly acclaimed faculty members at the nation's most prestigious university. A few years ago, when he made noises about leaving, Harvard moved heaven and earth to keep him. The incident that led to his arrest occurred as he was coming home from the airport after a trip to China for his latest PBS documentary. Following the traumatic encounter, he repaired to Martha's Vineyard to recuperate. This is how the man rolls.

Obama's choice of words might not have been politic, but he was merely stating the obvious when he said the police behaved "stupidly." Gates is 58, stands maybe 5-feet-7 and weighs about 150 pounds. He has a disability and walks with a cane. By the time Sgt. James Crowley made the arrest, he had already assured himself that Gates was in his own home. Crowley could see that the professor posed no threat to anybody.


But for the sake of argument, let's assume that Crowley's version of the incident is true -- that Gates, from the outset, was accusatory, aggressive and even obnoxious, addressing the officer with an air of highhanded superiority. Let's assume he really recited the Big Cheese mantra: "You have no idea who you're messing with."

I lived in Cambridge for a year, and I can attest that meeting a famous Harvard professor who happens to be arrogant is like meeting a famous basketball player who happens to be tall. It's not exactly a surprise. Crowley wouldn't have lasted a week on the force, much less made sergeant, if he had tried to arrest every member of the Harvard community who treated him as if he belonged to an inferior species. Yet instead of walking away, Crowley arrested Gates as he stepped onto the front porch of his own house.

Apparently, there was something about the power relationship involved -- uppity, jet-setting black professor vs. regular-guy, working-class white cop -- that Crowley couldn't abide. Judging by the overheated commentary that followed, that same something, whatever it might be, also makes conservatives forget that they believe in individual rights and oppose intrusive state power.

There was a similar case of collective amnesia at the Sotomayor hearings. Republican senators, faced with a judge who follows precedent and eschews making new law from the bench, forgot that this is the judicial philosophy they advocate. The odd and inappropriate line of questioning by Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) about Sotomayor's temperament was widely seen as sexist, and indeed it was. But I suspect the racial or ethnic power equation was also a factor -- the idea of a sharp-tongued "wise Latina" making nervous attorneys, some of them white male attorneys, fumble and squirm.

Is a man of Gates's station entitled to puff himself up and remind a police officer that he's dealing with someone who has juice? Is a woman of Sotomayor's accomplishment entitled to humiliate a lawyer who came to court unprepared? No more and no less entitled, surely, than all the Big Cheeses who came before them.

Yet Gates's fit of pique somehow became cause for arrest. I can't prove that if the Big Cheese in question had been a famous, brilliant Harvard professor who happened to be white -- say, presidential adviser Larry Summers, who's on leave from the university -- the outcome would have been different. I'd put money on it, though. Anybody wanna bet?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ar...

It appears, the Gates-Crowley incident has been analyzed by the media from every angle with one exception, there is an environment at Harvard where racial profiling have been a consistent complaint for more than 20 years. Students met with Harvard Racial Profiling team as late as March this year to raise their concerns.

Which is all why Gates needs to unleash Ogletree and LITIGATE this.

Gates is the RosaParks now of racial profiling.

IMO, when Gates goes to the WH it wlll hard for him to become a litigant, however, as you say earlier, there must be "others" who can step forward and carry the torch for racial profiling.

No, you just may be surprised. After that meeting..it will set the stage for litigation. Resolving conflict personally, does not preclude litigation. This is a politic issue. An issue that the President was quick to remind us he has expertise/experience with.

President will have done his job to meet with them. Gates then will be sent forth to LITIGATE vociferously, as he is now the RoseParks of racial profiling. He must do what black males all over this country have been powerless and less affluent could do.He has to carry forth and representive, generations and scores of black males who have been subject to police abuse.

Gates has a job to do after he leaves that meeting.

Remember, Crowley nor the police dept is apolozing.STILL

Gates truly is the best person to put a face on racial profiling and take it to court. With 20+ years of complaints as evidence, it should not be problem.

Crowley and police dept have cause to have developed bunker mentality on this issue. An olive leaf from them will probably help them, but we know that will not likely happen.

When at another board, learn a "new" twist, Crowley didn't file police report, his partner, a Latino officer named Figueroa actually filed.

There are 2 reports. One from Crowley and one from Figueroa. Some sites have brought up that there are discrepancies between the two to disprove what Crowley alleges.

Thanks Spirit...

Robinson is coming into his own, now!! He is mad as a black man who has endured this type of police abuse for decades and like many with brothers, sons, uncles, dads...he is speaking OUT, speaking LOUD and ain't retracting nothing.

Black men SICk and TIRED of this abuse and fear that grips them in their daily lives just trying to live as peaceful lawabiding citizens, only to be treated like trash by police and losing their lives cause they black.

http://www.commondreams.org/video/2009/07/28

Bill Maher at about 6min. 30 seconds discusses Gates arrest, says.....

"I’m not even sure this is a racial situation because I don’t know if this cop is racist. But I have to say it seems to me more like a police situation. I think Henry Louis Gates was arrested for the crime of not kissing the behind of the police officer."

Maher can KISS my shiney blue-black ass.

When the Po Po starts profiling Jews, I still want to hear him say this shit was a "police situation."

Well Maher can kiss my butt...the reason this type of stuff continues to be indEED racist is because, their racial abuse does not impact white communities!

The few white folks who HAVE been falsely arrested...get it!!

Like LawerenceO'Donnelll broke it down last night.

I do not want Gates to drop this case. I want him to have that beer and then I want him to unLEASH Ogletree and sue the shyt out of Crowley and all the folks in blue who backed up his LIES!

Expose this!

Put police across the nation on notice, if you arrest a black male falsely, you will pay in court with fees and public exposure.

Thanks for this, love it!

I am a sucker for good news every once in a while. I think we can remember to acknowledge the positives while discussing the problems. So I maintain a site dedicated to good/ positive news:

www.traditionofexcellence.wordpress.com Check it out when you have a moment.

Here is a story I liked (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/c...)

Alfred Tatum grew up at the Ida B. Wells housing development near 38th Street and Rhodes Avenue, in a three-story walk-up that is long gone. In the early 1980s, Tatum was one of the smart kids in a community overrun with street toughs.

Most black boys didn't concern themselves with reading and writing. And they certainly didn't lament the fact that their community had no bookstores or that the neighborhood library stayed open only until just after dark.

But Tatum did. Though he loved reading, he also loved math, and initially he believed his "way out" was by becoming a numbers cruncher. So he went to Northern Illinois University and majored in math, with an eye toward a career in finance.

Then something happened: In 1990, during his junior year at Northern, he read a news story about the large number of black boys who were failing at reading and how those boys were more likely to land in the criminal justice system than in college.

Tatum decided to change direction and teach, and for a while he did so back in the old neighborhood. But that wasn't enough. He returned to school and got his doctorate and started researching ways to save these boys.

As part of his mission, for the last four weeks, 12 young men have gathered in a basement room on the campus of the University of Illinois at Chicago. They are studying the craft of writing.

When Tatum, now a UIC professor and director of the African American Adolescent Male Summer Literacy Institute, looked at the writing samples of the young men who applied to participate in the workshop, he didn't care whether the guys were the most stellar of students.

All that mattered was that the boys -- who are ages 12 to 17 and come from some of the city's most violent neighborhoods -- showed a love of writing and understood that one can find a safe haven and even a lifeline in the art of storytelling.

How mighty is the pen for kids who dodge bullets? Consider this excerpt from an essay by Levon Bridges, 14, who lives in Englewood: "You can take my life and my mind too. You don't have to take my heart. I'm giving it to you. But the one thing you will never get is my pen because without it I'm nothing. Writing is the only thing I have left."

When I met Bridges, a handsome kid with heavy eyes and a reserved demeanor, he told me that last year he lost two peers to gun violence. "It doesn't start to hit you until they just don't come back no more," he said. "Everything looks the same -- but it's different and it will always be different."

Tatum began the institute last year to expose the teenagers to fiction and non-fiction that is meaningful to their realities.

"They're reading pieces that have nothing to do with their cultural identities, gender identities or their social, community or economic realities," said Tatum, 39.

That's why the students have to keep in mind the institute's "preamble" every time they sit to compose: We, the Brother Authors, will seek to use language to define who we are, build and nurture resilient beings, write for the benefit of others and ourselves, and use language prudently and unapologetically to mark our time and mark our lives. This, we agree to, with a steadfast commitment to the ideals of justice, compassion, and a better humanity for all.

To this end, we write!

On a recent morning, the young men sat at two tables before university laptop computers and amid stacks of books by black authors. They critiqued the work of author James Baldwin and then that of one of their peers, who beamed with pride when a fellow writer said he loved this line: "Softly the words shall appear, dangerous though. As a viper searching for its prey ... "

Said Tatum, like a proud father, to the author: "You can't underestimate what we put down. That's really good, man, and deep."

Tatum's institute is equal parts writing group and book club. But it's also a support group that instructs the boys to re-imagine and redefine themselves. Here, there is no need for the macho affects the boys are too often taught on the streets. They applaud one another and sometimes are unabashedly giddy about the written word.

This is the institute's last week. Tatum will cap the summer by taking his students to Harlem to meet author Walter Dean Myers. But Tatum wants the young men to continue to write long after the institute ends.

"Black men have always written to contribute to a healthy psyche or self-definition or even a better humanity," Tatum said. "Writing provides a road map for becoming and doing."

Indeed it does.

You can read work by the students at aaamsli2.blogspot.com.

Wonderful.

Thanks for the blog link, just bookmarked it. These positive stories are like a cool drink in the desert of craziness we've had to put up with lately.

Thanks MsKitty. These are some of the stories I wish we would promote on our blogs; the ones we say MSM ignores.

I will check out your blog.

Thanks RobM.

10 Questions for Supporters of "ObamaCare"

1. President Barack Obama repeatedly tells us that one reason national health care is needed is that we can no longer afford to pay for Medicare and Medicaid. But if Medicare and Medicaid are fiscally insolvent and gradually bankrupting our society, why is a government takeover of medical care for the rest of society a good idea? What large-scale government program has not eventually spiraled out of control, let alone stayed within its projected budget? Why should anyone believe that nationalizing health care would create the first major government program to "pay for itself," let alone get smaller rather than larger over time? Why not simply see how the Democrats can reform Medicare and Medicaid before nationalizing much of the rest of health care?

2. President Obama reiterated this past week that "no insurance company will be allowed to deny you coverage because of a pre-existing medical condition." This is an oft-repeated goal of the president's and the Democrats' health care plan. But if any individual can buy health insurance at any time, why would anyone buy health insurance while healthy? Why would I not simply wait until I got sick or injured to buy the insurance? If auto insurance were purchasable once one got into an accident, why would anyone purchase auto insurance before an accident? Will the Democrats next demand that life insurance companies sell life insurance to the terminally ill? The whole point of insurance is that the healthy buy it and thereby provide the funds to pay for the sick. Demanding that insurance companies provide insurance to everyone at any time spells the end of the concept of insurance. And if the answer is that the government will now make it illegal not to buy insurance, how will that be enforced? How will the government check on 300 million people?

3. Why do supporters of nationalized medicine so often substitute the word "care" for the word "insurance?" it is patently untrue that millions of Americans do not receive health care. Millions of Americans do not have health insurance but virtually every American (and non-American on American soil) receives health care.

4. No one denies that in order to come close to staying within its budget health care will be rationed. But what is the moral justification of having the state decide what medical care to ration?

5. According to Dr. David Gratzer, health care specialist at the Manhattan Institute, "While 20 years ago pharmaceuticals were largely developed in Europe, European price controls made drug development an American enterprise. Fifteen of the 20 top-selling drugs worldwide this year were birthed in the United States." Given how many lives -- in America and throughout the world - American pharmaceutical companies save, and given how expensive it is to develop any new drug, will the price controls on drugs envisaged in the Democrats' bill improve or impair Americans' health?

6. Do you really believe that private insurance could survive a "public option"? Or is this really a cover for the ideal of single-payer medical care? How could a private insurance company survive a "public option" given that private companies have to show a profit and government agencies do not have to - and given that a private enterprise must raise its own money to be solvent and a government option has access to others'
money -- i.e., taxes?

7. Why will hospitals, doctors, and pharmaceutical companies do nearly as superb a job as they now do if their reimbursement from the government will be severely cut? Haven't the laws of human behavior and common sense been repealed here in arguing that while doctors, hospitals and drug companies will make significantly less money they will continue to provide the same level of uniquely excellent care?

8. Given how many needless procedures are ordered to avoid medical lawsuits and how much money doctors spend on medical malpractice insurance, shouldn't any meaningful "reform" of health care provide some remedy for frivolous malpractice lawsuits?

9. Given how weak the U.S. economy is, given how weak the U.S. dollar is, and given how much in debt the U.S. is in, why would anyone seek to have the U.S. spend another trillion dollars? Even if all the other questions here had legitimate answers, wouldn't the state of the U.S. economy alone argue against national health care at this time?

10. Contrary to the assertion of President Obama -- "we spend much more on health care than any other nation but aren't any healthier for it" -- we are healthier. We wait far less time for procedures and surgeries.

Our life expectancy with virtually any major disease is longer. And if you do not count deaths from violent crime and automobile accidents, we also have the longest life expectancy. Do you think a government takeover of American medicine will enable this medical excellence to continue?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/...

The scripted answers to these "questions" are simply long-winded ways of saying "let the market work it all out".

And that's precisely why were in this mess.

Not so.

For the 85 percent of Americans who already have health insurance, the Obama health plan is bad news. It means higher taxes, less health care and no protection if they lose their current insurance because of unemployment or early retirement.

We should ask our representatives and Senators to clearly define the goal of this legislation and then urge them to thoughtfully craft a bill that is built around a consensus.

Is the goal cost control or coverage for all Americans?

If this debate is confusing it is because the President is promising everything to everyone.

the only people who seems to be remotely confused on this issue Conserv is you and the folks you stubbornly represent regardless of whether the policies are in the best interest of the American people or not.

We want a public option. You don't want to buy into the public option . . . then fine. You have that right. Keep your current coverage. Allow the American citizens to take advantage of our rights in this country to make our own decision to choose.

Dennis Prager?He is a ultra right wing nutjob who again, is never right .What is with you republicans who quote people who are never right.This for you
http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/8611/giveupo...

These are valid questions and I challenge JJP readers to answer them.

This legislation will effect every American and it is our responsibility to make sure we understand what we are urging our elected representatives to support and vote for.

If you think his questions are invalid then by all means, refute the claims and answer the questions.

You would be doing JJP readers and yourself a favor.

There is nothing to discuss.You either want a National plan or you want to keep the status quo.Debating people like Dennis Prager is like listening to Josef Goebbels on the Joys of being Jewish.

I'm not taking a side here, but that analogy's hilarious.....

President Obama's primary goal is to extend formal health insurance to those low-income individuals who are currently uninsured despite the nearly $300-billion-a-year Medicaid program.

Doing so the Obama way would cost more than $1 trillion over the next 10 years. There surely must be better and less costly ways to improve the health and health care of that low-income group.

For the 85 percent of Americans who are happy with their plans but who would like to see the uninsured covered, we need to find a better solution than what is now coming out of Congress.

Wanting to shut down debate and wholeheartedly trusting and embracing the plan without careful review and deliberation is, IMO, irresponsible.

We are talking about legislation that will affect every American and we are taking less time to review and debate this issue than the Obama family took to decide on a puppy.

"We are talking about legislation that will affect every American and we are taking less time to review and debate this issue than the Obama family took to decide on a puppy"

Hogwash. We have been talking about healthcare resolution for OVER 61 years. Ya'll can go ahead and keep talking while the grown folks get the work done.

Not hogwash. Only the staunchest ObamaCare supporters want to see this bill rushed through.

'We'd do well to first obtain more patience, rather than more patients.'

Leave it to Clinton-era Secretary of Health and Human Services Donna Shalala to make the point that creating universal health insurance would not establish universal health access. The Miami Herald spotlighted her comments "The reality is that healthcare reform that focuses on fixing healthcare insurance without dealing with the chronic and growing shortage of physicians is likely to encounter what Massachusetts has encountered, and that is that they don't have enough healthcare providers."

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/5min/story/1158...

Sure, you've got the insurance, but so does everyone else, and the end result is that the wait time for a doctor is measured on a geological time scale.

61 YEARS = Rushed through?

Note to self . . . NEVER ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever allow the rethuglicans to get into power again.

P.S. my gift to you . . . if you want to make a point that would gain traction on this healthcare discussion . . . don' t cite any opinion from the Clinton-era as proof positive of how to establish universal healthcare. That is an oxymoron.

Unlike the Patriot Act or rushing off to attack Iraq.....those kinds of rushing?

good points!

lol WordSmith - they have no interest in facts.

Good Morning.Your Tuesday jam.Enjoy
Harold Melvin & The Bluenotes - Prayin'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crCRwWJh7Q0

thanks dj

Thanks dj!

Thanks for the spiritual upliftment this morning, djchefron.