Sunday, April 19, 2009

Y! Alert: The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Yahoo! Alerts
My Alerts

The latest from The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Aaron Zelinsky: Gay Marriage in Vermont: Three Progressive Lessons Top
The Vermont legislature recently overrode Governor Douglas's veto and added Vermont to the list of states which have legalized gay marriage. This was a momentous occasion for supporters of equal rights. However, as we celebrate, progressives should recognize three larger lessons from Vermont's experience. First, federalism can be progressive. For too long, federalism, the Madisonian concept of shared power between state and federal government, has been an idea monopolized by conservatives. Conservatives have trumpeted the cause of federalism on issues ranging from gun control to abortion. The conservative legal umbrella organization is named the Federalist Society. But federalism should play a critical role in progressive strategy. Justice Brandeis famously declared that "It is one of the happy incidents of the federal system that a single courageous State may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country." ( New State Ice Co. v. Liebmann , 285 U.S. 262). States can act independently and thereby implement progressive policies which lack national consensus. For instance, both Massachusetts and Connecticut have gay marriage (by judicial decision). Their experiences likely provided critical support to Vermont's legislature and to New York's Governor Paterson for his recently introduced legislation. Second, legislatures enforce rights too. For a long time, the equal rights movement has focused on vindicating rights through courts, largely to the neglect of the legislatures. While the courts can play an important role in enunciating principles (most famously in Brown v. Board of Education ), legislatures often do the nitty-gritty of actually crafting the language which enacts policy (for example, the Civil Rights Act and Title IX). Moreover, judicial decisions are more secure when they are ratified by legislative action. While courts have played a pivotal role in furthering the cause of gay marriage, legislatures are critical to the future debate. Progressives should also remember that legislatures can overturn judicial constructions of statutes, as most recently exemplified by the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 , and legislatures are often faster and more effective than judicial action. Third, blocking and tackling counts. Gay marriage was abolished in statewide vote in California by a margin of less than 5%. In Vermont, the legislature's veto override hung on the thread of a single vote in the Vermont House, after failing to achieve the requisite 2/3 on the first go-around. One Representative who switched to vote in favor of the override cited phone calls from 228 of his constituents as the critical factor in his decision. Politics, like baseball, is often a game of inches. Individual can make a difference. Getting people to the polls and on the phones can be the critical difference between victory and success. More on Gay Marriage
 
Reverend Billy: The Reverend Billy Position Paper On Banks Top
Register the bank branches/ATMS with the Center for Disease Control in Atlanta, Georgia! The Reverend will release a new report that shows that there are so many identical bank logos everywhere that New York City children are getting lost walking home! "It's disorienting not to have anything that's different," one mother said to the candidate. "We can't figure out where we ARE anymore." The infection of our neighborhoods is so great that transnational banks must be registered with the Center For Disease Control before the plague us wipes out entirely. The candidate points out: "This is the effort by the banks and corporations to monetize every step of our walk across the city. We must guarantee our citizens a view of the cityscape that is ATM-free, bank logo free, and our children must be free of the message to Spend, Spend, Spend. Consumerism is boring and dumb." "Can we have a Change-a-lujah! Let's zone out the branches, and tax the banks for their real estate expansion. The city subsidizes chain stores with hundreds of millions annually." "New York needs neighborhood credit unions that keep money in the community. If you're not comfortable giving a warm hug to the person behind the counter at your financial institution then GET OUT. Financial wizards talk about an 'ownership society'...well here's one: let's own our banks! They will be too LOCAL to fail." The candidate pledges to campaign in ATM lobbies throughout the five boroughs with neighborhood children as part of an education program on the moral and financial perils of "easy cash." "These services are often loans with pernicious fees, yet, the money is offered in a sea of seductive products on billboards, bus shelters, magazines and magazines. As leader of the "Church of Life After Shopping," Rev Billy has cast the devil out of ATMs across the country in high-profile "Exorcisms." "First, we must de-mystify these things. They are not neutral, these ATM environments. They skew our values and isolate us in our own neighborhoods. And, the money we invest in these banks, as we know, doesn't find its way back to our communities. It stays in mysterious hedge funds, off-shore accounts, and CEO's play money." The Devil! (Photo by TW Collins On Flickr)
 
Carol Hoenig: Women's Rights, Rape and Religion Top
Some here in the West have reacted with shock in response to the new Afghanistan law that gives Shiite men permission to rape their wives, even though President Hamid Karzai claims that we're simply misinterpreting this law. In other words, we've lost something in the translation. I won't pretend to know if that is the case or not, but I don't think it's too big of a stretch to believe that women's rights are once again being compromised. I was struck by Dexter Filkins' piece in a recent New York Times article, Afghan Women Protest New Law on Home Life . In part, he said, Women are mostly illiterate in this impoverished country, and they do not, generally speaking, enjoy anything near the freedom accorded to men. But there they were, most of them young, many in jeans, defying a threatening crowd and calling out slogans heavy with meaning. With the Afghan police keeping the mob at bay, the women walked two miles to Parliament, where they delivered a petition calling for the law's repeal. "Whenever a man wants sex, we cannot refuse," said Fatima Husseini, 26, one of the marchers. "It means a woman is a kind of property, to be used by the man in any way that he wants." To imagine that this injustice goes on in today's world is confounding. However, before we are too quick to feel evolved in comparison, in another part of the world, namely here in the United States, there is an isolated society dominated by men who maintain that a woman's purpose is to have babies, lots of babies. Even though there is a marked difference from the women in Afghanistan, since the LDS women were given permission recently to discuss their lifestyle with Oprah, one wonders how guarded they had to be in order not to disobey the higher order. Both aforementioned societies are extreme in the nature of their beliefs, but one does not have to be a polygamist or live under the Islamic law to be required to live under the authority of one's husband. There are many fundamental Christians who believe in the infallibility of the Bible and the verses are meant to be unchallenged. This is why those following the Bible insist that a woman is to submit to her husband. To justify their stance, they often quote Ephesians 5: 22, 23: "Wives, submit yourselves unto your husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the savior of the body." Long ago, when I was an active member of a Bible-preaching church, this verse got a lot of discussion, leaving many women in a state of confusion, not to mention frustration. After all, to challenge such a notion meant not only subverting their husband's authority, but the authority of their god. This also meant that they were expected to "put out" whenever the husband demanded, in addition to accepting the rules of his household, even if those rules were irrational. When women tried to discuss the possibility that perhaps something was missing in the translation, one of the responses from the pastor was to quote Ephesians 5:25: "Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her." This was determined to mean that if he was ever required, the husband was to die for his wife. On first look, it does seem to be quite a big deal and how can a woman complain about her duty of submission after hearing that? However, how many men are actually called upon to die for their wife? In reality, it's the day-to-day living for her that necessitates more sacrifice. These religious texts, supposedly inspired by a higher authority, were written and interpreted by men. And if one questions this thinking, one is considered a heretic or worse and the ramifications can be dire. For instance, the lives of the Afghanistan women protesting the rape law are in danger because it appears that they are challenging the Koran. Whether here in the United States or in Afghanistan, rape is not necessarily an act of violence. The word "no" should mean just that, but if the husband refuses to honor the wife's wishes and she is then forced to relent, she's been raped and her right to her own body has been forfeited. Once again, it's all because of a belief system that allows one gender to wield power over another. This is not to say that a woman doesn't have the right to follow her beliefs and succumb to the dictates of her religion, if she so chooses--"chooses" being the operative word. Yet, how many of these women were born into a household where they were inculcated and not given an opportunity to entertain other possibilities? The difference between our Afghanistan sisters and those living here in the United States is that escaping from a domineering marriage can mean possible death without punishment for the husband since the government recognizes Islamic law as the law of the land. As for here in the United States, it may not be the government imposing restrictions on women, not yet anyway, but rather it's the weight of imposed guilt gained from a book, inspired or not, written by men. More on Oprah
 
Casey Gane-McCalla: Athletic Blacks vs Smart Whites: Why Sports Stereotypes Are Wrong Top
Before playing the Stanford team in the Final Four, UConn women's coach, Geno Auriemma, said people underestimated Stanford because they think white players are soft . More pointedly, he pointed out that his players, who are predominantly African-American, should be given the same respect for their discipline for which Stanford's team was praised. The coach was simply exposing stereotypes that have been around for a long time. Black athletes are usually given credit for their "natural athleticism," while whites are credited for their "hard work," "discipline" and "knowledge of the game"; as if Black athletes are naturally given the gift of great athleticism, and white people become great athletes through hard work, discipline and intelligence. Every Black athlete who is successful has worked very hard and is knowledgeable of their sport. Every white athlete who is successful has natural athletic ability. The problem with stereotypes in sports is that they often lead to general stereotypes. If you say "white men can't jump," why not "Black men can't read defenses"? And if Black men can't read defenses, maybe they can't read books either? Sports stereotypes have a real effect in the real world. Most employers are not concerned with employees' natural athletic abilities, so stereotypes of African-Americans being athletically superior for the most part do not help Blacks in the real world. However, the stereotypes of whites being hard working, disciplined and smart are helpful to them in finding employment. One of the most prevalent stereotypes in sports is that of the Black quarterback. Both Rush Limbaugh and former sports commentator, Jimmy the Greek, have caught flack for their philosophies on African-American quarterbacks. Jimmy's explanation of how blacks were bred for physical skill but whites were bred for intelligence was blatant racism, but there have been many more subtle ways at insinuating the same point. Former NFL M.V.P. Steve McNair played for a small Black college because every major college recruited him to play defensive back rather than quarterback, his natural position. Many African-Americans are discouraged from playing quarterback and asked to play other positions in high school, college and the professional ranks. How many other black M.V.P.-caliber quarterbacks were forced to play other positions because coaches didn't feel Blacks made good quarterbacks? Biological factors do not compel people from certain races to excel in certain sports. Cultural factors do. China produces a lot of good ping-pong players because ping-pong is part of Chinese culture. Kenya produces a lot of marathon winners because long distance running is part of their culture. Jamaica produces sprinters because track and field has become a strong part of their culture and national identity. Baseball has become a big part of Latin American culture and subsequently several of baseball's top players come from Latin America. Basketball is a big part of African-American culture, so a good deal of players in the NBA are African-American. Sports stereotypes are made to be broken. Athletic basketball players are popping up all over the world from all different backgrounds, from Argentina to Turkey, from Kenya to China. Boxing, once a sport dominated by African-Americans, is now being dominated by boxers of other ethnicities from all around the world. Russians are dominating the heavyweight division, and a Philipino, Manny Pacqiao, will fight an Englishman, Ricky Hatton, for the title of best fighter, pound for pound (at least while Floyd Mayerweather is retired). While no Black quarterback has won a Superbowl since Doug Williams proved Jimmy the Greek wrong in 1988, two of the last three Superbowl winning coaches have been African-American. This goes even further to disprove Jimmy the Greek's theory, given that African-Americans have excelled at coach, the most cerebral position of all. Despite all the stereotypes of Black athlete not being intelligent or caring about their education, an African American, Myron Rolle, has become the first major U.S. athlete to win the Rhodes Scholarship since Bill Bradley. He bypassed a career in the NFL to get an education from Oxford University, one of the world's most prestigious schools. Read a Story on Myron Rolle, Rhodes Scholar When stereotypes begin to insinuate that certain races have certain characteristics, whether they be positive or negative, they fall into the same racist generalizations that are at the root of racism and race-based discrimination. More on Sports
 
Wajahat Ali: Obama's First 100: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly Top
President Barack Obama is flying gracefully and confidently -- albeit experiencing some minor turbulence -- through his first 100 days, having ambitiously donned the uniform of the multicultural Superman of the 21st century. Obama, the bi-racial, Hawaiian-born son of a Kenyan father and a white Kansas mother, adorned with a multisyllabic Arabic name, now emerges as the ideal aesthetic leader -- and much hoped-for redeemer -- of this brave new globalised world fragilely teetering on the edge of calamity. Unfortunately, Obama's hourglass allows only four years to remedy the paralysing economic crisis at home and the smouldering fires of political and religious extremism abroad, primarily fueled by the belligerent tone and myopic policies of George W Bush's trigger-happy administration. Most noticeably, Obama's inclusive and humble rhetoric immediately sets him apart from his arrogant predecessor, whose indignant adherence to right-wing fundamentalism and unilateral aggression were in strong contrast to Obama's professed desire for mutual understanding, engagement and partnership. Unlike the profoundly anti-intellectual Bush, the Ivy League-educated, former law professor Obama can, thankfully, name the 20 countries comprising the G20. Whereas Bush preferred cultural isolation, Obama's Camelot resembles a global playground as he and his family -- including their new dog, Bo -- reach out to diverse citizens at home and spurned friends abroad such as Turkey, which Obama visited during his inaugural world tour. If Bush was our Elmer Fudd, the classic befuddled cartoon character blind to his own ignorance and condemned to foolishly and unsuccessfully hunt "wily wabbits", then Obama is emerging as this generation's Bugs Bunny, a cool, savvy and cocky charmer who always acts as if he is two steps ahead of everyone else, even as he's staring down the barrel of a shotgun. Indeed, that shotgun is loaded as Obama seeks to mend frayed relations with alienated Muslim countries through his new policies to combat terrorism. Obama's interview with Al Arabiya and his recent visit to Turkey highlighted the end of the polarizing "Us vs Them" language and the beginning of dialogue and partnership. "The United States is not and will never be at war with Islam," promised Obama, despite a recent ABC/Washington Post poll showing that 48 per cent of Americans hold an unfavourable opinion of Islam, the highest unfavourablity rating since 2001. Having shunned Muslim American voters like political kryptonite in his campaign, Obama now embraces them by stating: "Many other Americans have Muslims in their family, or have lived in a Muslim-majority country. I know, because I am one of them." Obama now invites American Muslims to become part of his "political family" with his recent appointments of several distinguished Muslims, such as Rashid Hussain, Dalia Mogahed and Eboo Patel, to influential positions in his administration. Perhaps this rhetoric is sincere, but many remain skeptical of Obama's intentions after eight years of the US$3 trillion "war on terror" and the humiliating memories of the Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay detention facilities, which to Obama's credit he condemned and closed with his first executive order. Furthermore, such syrupy sweet words could reflect Obama's realisation that America is currently desperate due to the costly sins of its superiority complex and cannot heal its economic institutions, energy resources and military objectives without international support. His visit to Turkey was akin to a suitor passionately pursuing a jilted maiden in the hope of acquiring a dowry -- in this case access to Turkey's air and land space, ideally neighbouring Iraq, and assistance from its forces, which comprises Nato's second largest army. Regardless, Obama's effort of reaching out to Muslims is a welcome relief from Bush's "you're either with us or against us" adversarial posturing. Most notably, Obama -- unlike Bush -- is wisely seeking limited, cautious and focused relations with Iran, despite the reactionary tendencies of President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad. However, most Muslims and Americans realise diplomatic words require commitment and action in order to produce enlightened policy. As Fatemeh Fakhraie, an Iranian-American editor of the popular website Muslimah Media Watch, told me: "Obama's Norooz message last March was a bright spot in Iran-US relations. But decades of big talking -- from both sides -- leave many Iranians skeptical about whether the US really plans on changing its policies in Iran. If Obama wants to get anywhere with Iran, goodwill actions are worth more than goodwill words." Haroon Moghal, the director of public relations at the Islamic Center of New York University, agrees but adds: "Winning over Pakistan is as important, if not more important, than finding peace with Iran." Inarguably, Central Asia is the epicentre of the war against terrorism as it quickly descends into a chaotic and violent chess game comprising rival warlords, a resurgent Taliban, a corrupt and ineffectual Pakistani military, and remnants of al Qa'eda, all strategically using the land and its people as pawns to cement their respective strongholds. Obama, the harbinger of "hope" and "change", is foolishly following in Bush's footsteps by intensifying the drone attacks near the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, whose success rate of six per cent has killed 14 terrorist leaders, but left behind 687 innocent Pakistani civilian casualties as collateral damage. As Peter Singer, a Brookings scholar and author of Wired for War , told me: "These strikes have also led the Pakistani news to label America Enemy No 1," hardly a win in the so-called war of ideas. Moghal adds: "It's worth noting that for all the positive coverage Obama has received in much of the Muslim world, his attractive personality is dwarfed, in the eyes of many Pakistanis, by the policies he has pursued and intensified." Instead of giving the Taliban more eager recruits through bereaved family members of killed innocents, Obama should pursue a long-term strategy that engages the democratically inclined majority of Pakistan spearheaded by Pakistani lawyers, who defiantly showed their true colours in the recent "long march" protest to reinstate the judiciary sacked by the dictator and former US ally Gen Pervez Musharraf. If Obama continues America's decades-old policy of selfishly befriending Pakistan's dictator and selfish leader du jour for the sake of appeasing a short-term foreign policy objective, while callously turning a blind eye to the festering, pro-Islamist officials corrupting Pakistan's military and ISI, then this war is already lost. However, in the eyes of many, Obama's most glaring failure was his shameful silence over Israel's brutal militarism against Gaza, which left nearly 1,300 civilians dead. At the American Israel Public Affairs Committee's annual conference last summer, Obama promised he would "never compromise when it comes to Israel's security". Meanwhile, incoming secretary of state Hillary Clinton affirmed: "The United States stands with Israel now and forever." Gaza's tragedy clearly shows that US support for Israel remains unconditional, unfair and unbalanced. However, Obama would be shortsighted to continue such unabated favouritism in light of increasingly critical world opinion regarding Israel's right-wing militancy and penchant for unilateral aggression, all the more controversial considering the recent election of Benjamin Netanyahu as prime minister and appointment of Avigdor Lieberman, a hawk, as foreign minister. The festering sore that is the Israel-Palestine conflict will haunt both the US and Israel until an honest and reasonable solution is proposed that will take into account the autonomy, dignity and sovereignty of the Palestinian people, whose continued occupation will only fuel the anger and resentment of Muslims worldwide. Returning home, Obama's most crucial test has been to revive the precariously faltering US economy suffering from its worst bout since the Depression. As American suburbs turn into ghost towns due to an exponential increase in foreclosures, historical US stalwarts such as the car manufacturer GM prepare for a fast "surgical" bankruptcy, and banks and financial institutions such as AIG hang on for dear life at the mercy of federal bailouts and interventionist policies, Obama -- as Superman -- has no slack or learning curve in saving this valuable sinking ship. Although Obama's economic plan includes aggressive measures, such as the nearly $800 billion stimulus package and a new plan to buy up to $1 trillion worth of bad mortgages and other "toxic assets", some, such as Paul Krugman, suggest this isn't the radical "change" that is crucial and necessary; rather, it reflects Obama cosying up to the same bankrupt philosophy and ideals of those reckless Wall Street frat brothers responsible for the fiasco in the first place. Ultimately, only time can tell if Obama's policies will work, but at least as he approaches his first 100 days, the multicultural Superman is still flying high. Let's hope after he's finished soaring, he returns to earth in time to save the day. Wajahat Ali is an American Muslim playwright and journalist, who has contributed to the Washington Post , The Guardian and Huffington Post . He is also associate editor of Altmuslim.com and writes a blog Goatmilk: An Intellectual Playground. More on Guantánamo Bay
 
Kristen Dalton, Miss North Carolina, Crowned Miss USA 2009 Top
LAS VEGAS — Miss North Carolina USA Kristen Dalton was crowned Miss USA 2009 on Sunday, beating out 50 other beauty queens in the live pageant televised from Planet Hollywood Resort & Casino in Las Vegas. The 22-year-old aspiring motivational speaker and entertainer from Wilmington edged out first runner-up Miss California USA Carrie Prejean, of San Diego, and second runner-up Miss Arizona USA Alicia-Monique Blanco, of Phoenix. "It feels really natural," Dalton said of her win. "I've worked so be here and this has been my lifelong dream and it's finally here. And whoever knew you could win in a turquoise gown?" Contestants from all 50 states and the District of Columbia competed in the pageant, aired live on NBC. Contestants were judged by their performance in swimsuit and evening gown modeling contests and their responses to a question asked onstage; unlike the rival Miss America pageant, Miss USA contestants do not perform a talent. The top 15 contestants worked the stage in white string bikinis designed by pop star Jessica Simpson's swimwear line. Rocker Kevin Rudolf performed his song "Let it Rock," followed by The Veronicas, who performed their single "Untouched" as the top 10 beauties showed off their choice of glittering evening gowns. Dalton's was a flowing, blue Grecian number that stood out among a series of white gowns. Her title comes with a year's use of a New York apartment, a public relations team, a two-year scholarship at the New York Film Academy and an undisclosed salary. She also will go to the Bahamas in August to compete in the Miss Universe pageant, where American beauties haven't been lucky in recent years. Both Miss USA 2008 Crystle Stewart and her predecessor, Rachel Smith, wiped out on stage during the evening gown competition, becoming accidental YouTube stars. Asked about the tumble during the show on Sunday, Stewart said it was a lesson in bouncing back from defeat. "I think it was a true test of my character," said the 27-year-old Texan, who worked to raise awareness for breast cancer as she traveled the globe promoting the beauty contest. If there is a YouTube moment from Sunday's show, it may be Miss California's answer to a question about legalizing same-sex marriage. The tall blonde stumbled some before giving an answer that appeared to please the pageant audience. "We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage," Prejean said. "And you know what, I think in my country, in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there, but that's how I was raised." Some in the audience cheered, others booed. The answer sparked a shouting match in the lobby after the show. "It's ugly," said Scott Ihrig, a gay man, who attended the pageant with his partner. "I think it's ridiculous that she got first runner-up. That is not the value of 95 percent of the people in this audience. Look around this audience and tell me how many gay men there are." Charmaine Koonce, the mother of Miss New Mexico USA Bianca Carla, argued back. "In the Bible it says marriage is between Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve!" The pageant had enjoyed a scandal-free year until earlier this month, when Miss Universe 2008 Dayana Mendoza was skewered for a blog posting from a trip to Guantanamo Bay. The entry described having "aloooot of fun" at a base that houses the notorious military prison; it was later deleted from the pageant's Web site. The contest, which is owned by NBC and reality TV mogul Donald Trump, was hosted by "Access Hollywood" co-anchor Billy Bush and Nadine Velazquez of the NBC sitcom "My Name is Earl." This year's judges included "Saturday Night Live" cast member Kenan Thompson, "Dancing with the Stars" winner Kelly Monaco and gossip blogger Perez Hilton. Miss Wyoming USA Cynthia Pate, of Casper, Wyo., was voted Miss Congeniality by her fellow contestants. Jessi Pierson, of Milton, W.Va., was voted Miss Photogenic through an online contest on the Miss Universe Web site. Organizers said Sunday's show kicks off "Green Week" at NBC. As part of the environmental awareness campaign, the Miss USA crown was designed by a jeweler that specializes in conflict-free and eco-friendly jewels. The crown from Diamond Nexus Labs of Franklin, Wis., is worth $202,000.
 
Eyck Freymann: A New Day in South America Top
How Bolivia's Evo Morales is South America's Future, and What America Should Do About It In 2006, Bolivia elected Evo Morales its 80th President. Morales' victory, like Obama's, was historic: after four hundred years of colonial European rule, Morales was the first ever indigenous President. Immediately, the new president went about reversing some of the most pressing injustices in his country by extending government services and enfranchisement to remote native areas. His leadership on issues of natural resources has been hugely influential - though it, like most Latin American news, was barely reported by the American media. Morales' charisma and resonant populist message have revolutionary potential throughout the South American continent. The question is only whether he will be thwarted by foreign governments and corporations. South America since the exit of the Spanish has largely fallen under the umbrella of American dominance. Especially during the Cold War, we propped up fascist regime after fascist regime to undermine the supposedly worse threat of communism. Augusto Pinochet in Chile tortured or killed tens of thousands. Videla in Argentina received our help as he fought the Dirty War, in which tens of thousands more were brutally murdered by Nazi techniques, often by escaped Nazis themselves in the government. In Bolivia too, Hugo Banzer attempted to ethnically cleanse the nation, driving the indigenous peoples off their native lands and slaughtering all who would not move. In country after country, we used the supposed "domino theory" of communist progress to explain away our support of murderers. Needless to say, Hugo Chavez's criticism of the United States is not without historical justification. Beyond indirectly oppressing the people, though, we committed a more straightforward crime. We stole. We stole their gold, their tin, their tropical woods, their lithium, their oil. Using the puppet regimes, we bought up their economies until they became our pawns. Buying up their resources at reduced costs, we ensured that they would never be able to rely on those bounties of their nations to run a government and economy not reliant on American support. But we were wrong. Wrong, primarily, because these countries continued to find minerals buried beneath their land or off their coasts. Brazil discovered huge oil fields, Venezuela discovered more, and Bolivia discovered that it has one third of the world's lithium. And this time, the leaders of these countries are not about to see their resources go straight into the hands of the Americans. Venezuela nationalized its oil, and other countries on the continent have been not-so-quietly expelling companies who exploited them through deals made with puppet dictators or through coercion. I am not proud of this part of my nation's history. I view it as a moral outrage and a long list of crimes against humanity and common decency. Even still, America has a role to play. As South America finds its way into the global financial order, we must do what we can to help them and support legitimate governments. Hugo Chavez, Venezuela's virulently anti-US leader, will never be able to grant his country an international economic presence. This is precisely because of his anti-Americanism: the US economy is too strong, and its interests too powerful, to allow such an antagonistic country become an economic power. Evo Morales, Bolivia's president, has an approach that will work. Rather than blaming the US (rightfully or not), his approach is to use the wealth responsibly to raise his country out of poverty. Bolivia, South America's poorest country, has recently discovered the world's largest reserves of lithium, the element needed in the batteries which power hybrid cars. Morales is carefully using the revenues to raise up the poor rural populations. Although it has made him unpopular among the country's more wealthy, largely European population, he has rezoned land to the indigenes whose territory has been encroached upon for decades without compensation. This approach to the United States, one of cautious tolerance and factual criticism rather than rabid loathing, is the best diplomatic attitude for all involved. While the crimes of the past remain fresh in many South Americans' minds, the best possible future is a symbiotic relation between the two regions. The United States can buy South American goods and commodities at fair prices and provides no-strings-attached, non-ideological, zero-interest loans for community development, infrastructure, and water supply. Rather than forcing countries into default and snatching the collateral -- the usual role of the World Bank -- we need to fairly and honestly help South America get to its feet. If we can do so, it is the surest economic (not to mention most moral) way of securing our supplies of the resources in the long term. When I read that a foreign attempt on Morales' life had been thwarted, I realized that we will not necessarily take the best possible road. According to Al Jazeera , two Hungarian "mercenaries" and a Bolivian fired at police from an assault weapons cache before being killed by retaliatory police fire. Many in the United States and elsewhere believe that the time of exploiting former colonies for their resources will last a few years longer. I disagree: around the world, developing countries are throwing off colonial overlords and nationalizing industries to return some of the profits to the citizens. Neo-Imperialism, the model of de facto economic control over former colonies, is fast dying out. Attempts to take out Morales, beyond demonstrating an international interest in destabilizing Bolivia, are symbolic of the age of puppet dictators and neo-Nazi regimes in South America. There are certainly corporations (especially GM and Chrysler, shaky automakers whose survival depends on manufacturing affordable hybrids with Bolivia's lithium) for which the continued export of Latin American goods is crucial. But it is not reasonable to assume that these Latin American countries will idly remain our economic pawns, especially under the leadership of populists like Morales. It is the immediate responsibility of the Obama administration to extend a hand of friendship to Bolivia and other developing South American countries. President Obama must use his break with the status quo to show Bolivians and others that the United States is eager to engage in fair, honest trade at prices beneficial to both parties. Morales represents the new paradigm (see President Lula in Brazil) of Latin American leader, a charismatic up-by-his-bootstraps populist. Much as we may deny it, we are reliant on these countries for commodities which keep our economy afloat. This new template for the Latin American political leader will become more popular because, come election time, it is the best formula for reelection. How America treats this attempt on the life of Morales will set an important precedent. If we can't control or make peace with this Morales, how can we do so with the next one? This issue is urgent and undiscussed. If we can't subdue them with dictators of neo-Economic Imperialism, we will have to befriend them or look elsewhere. "Elsewhere" happens to be the Middle East and the most war-torn parts of Africa, which won't exactly be a cakewalk either. We're more dependent than we want to know. So if Morales extends a hand, we should keep this in mind: it's his way, or the highway. More on Brazil
 
Dan Dorfman: Bad Time to Search for Paradise Top
You may or may not share George Soros' politics, but the billionaire global investor is dead on with his observation that it's either despair or euphoria on Wall Street. As of now, reflecting a spirited 25% market rally since early March and six straight weeks of rising stock prices, we're seeing a mini-outbreak of euphoria. Soros himself ridicules the sudden, sharp outburst of happy economic talk, which ignited the recent rally. He, in fact, labels it a "bear market rally," given his contention the economy is still in a downturn and that the U.S. could fall prey to a depression. Soros is not alone in questioning the legitimacy of the recent spurt in stock prices. Former Merrill Lynch strategist Bill Rhodes, now head of Boston-based institutional adviser Rhodes Analytics, also has doubts, telling me there remains much to be concerned about. Among other things, he sees several quarters ahead of deteriorating earnings and relatively weak revenues. Likewise, he notes the economy is still contracting, though maybe not as much as before. He also points out the credit markets still remain very stressed, which any would-be bank borrower could easily confirm. Other Rhodes' worries: the likelihood of higher interest rates and a probable move from deflation to inflation. Some economic worry-warts think the stock market's most likely course is to turn flat and go sideways. Rhodes doubts it, saying that's probably the lowest probability. His expectation: "The market will roll over, with the Dow testing its recent March low of around 6500." Such a drop would represent about a 20% decline from the Dow's current level of about 8,100. Meanwhile, repeated assurances and reassurances from one Wall Street pundit after another that the worst of the financial crisis is over and that it's time for the nation's more than 100 million stock owners to jump back into the market -- coming as they do in the face of lingering serious financial and economic risks -- remind me of a memorable film I saw many years ago, Lost Horizon . It was about a group of travelers who discovered a Utopian society, Shangri-La, a paradise in the Himalayan mountains. It would be a great place to live -- no health problems, no need for money, everyone is friendly and you have a life span of several hundred years. The only problem is that Shangri-La was never real, but the creation of a British author, James Hilton. Equally unreal, some market watchers suggest, is a modern day recreation of an economic Shangri-La by Wall Street dreamers. One, crack investment adviser Michael Larson, sums it up in a recent market commentary in which he essentially belittles the growing beliefs that: --The credit crisis is over. --The real estate mess has been fixed, --The economy is rebounding and the worst is behind us. --The markets are headed to infinity and beyond and you better get on board. Though not a nationally known investment celebrity, Larson, associate editor of Safe Money Report , a monthly newsletter out of Jupiter, Fla., is not a fella to be taken lightly. To his credit, he has been right on the money the past couple of years in alerting the letter's subscribers to an eventual bevy of economic, financial and market risks. In effect, he rejects the notion that the skidding economy has hit bottom. Larson suggests investors are simply chasing a good deal of economic hokum pitched by Wall Street hucksters, who have been on a lengthy losing streak. Indeed, many on Wall Street have basically been pitching happy economic talk since early last year. Towards the end of second half of 2008, however, many shoved back their timing for an economic rebound. No longer would it happen in 2008, but for sure in early 2009, they said. Well, we're in early 2009 and now the bullish brigade is signaling yet another extension. In brief, wait until the second half. In arguing his negative economic case, Larson zeroed in on the ongoing and growing risks on several financial and economic fronts. Kicking off with credit, he notes that the International Monetary Fund believes the U.S. has only acknowledged $1.29 trillion of the $4 trillion in total globe credit losses to date. That means, he says, we're not even a third of the way through the process. Addressing housing, Larson observes that while we're seeing some tentative signs of life in several hard-hit markets, it's the distressed "fire sale" stuff that's really moving. Inventory levels remain high and foreclosures show no signs of abating, he points out. In fact, foreclosure filings hit a record high of 341,000 last month--a gain largely driven by rising unemployment and falling home prices. Meanwhile, he notes, commercial real estate is going from bad to worse, with the business in full-scale meltdown mode, prices plunging, vacancies soaring and rents dropping. Indicative of the industry's bloodletting, last week saw a bankruptcy filing -- the biggest in real estate history -- by General Growth Properties, the nation's largest owner of shopping malls. The backbone of the economy is consumer spending (about 70% of our GDP) and the latest news -- a 1.1% decline in March retail sales, a huge swing from an 0.3% gain in February -- is dismal. To Larson, it means the consumer is on the ropes and is in no mood to blow his paycheck at the mall. What's more, he says, this situation is unlikely to change anytime soon, not with jobless claims now running at more than 6 million -- the highest in U.S. history. Adding to the economic woes, many factories are sitting idle, with industrial production in March dropping to 1.5%, the 14th decline in the past 15 months. At the same time, capacity utilization -- the amount of available space actually being used -- has fallen to 69.3%, the lowest level in 42 years. What does it all mean? "At best," says Larson, "the economy will muddle along. Or at worst, it will slip even further down the rabbit hole, and stocks will ultimately head lower." Dandordan@aol.com More on Financial Crisis
 
Tom Hayden: Obama and His Dinosaur in Trinidad Top
It's becoming a pattern: whenever Barack Obama implements a campaign pledge, the dinosaurs used to running things push back. The latest dinosaur to undercut the president's gestures is Jeffrey Davidow, US coordinator of the Trinidad meeting, who claimed that Hugo Chavez wanted a photo with Obama to polish his reputation with Venezuelans. Obama is more popular than Chavez in Venezuela, Davidow added, which explains his rushing photos of their handshake to the Venezuelan government's website. [ ABC News , April 18] He also managed to disparage Chavez's presentation of a book by Eduardo Galleano to Obama as unnecessary since the president already was familiar with Latin American grievances. While Obama was pressing for a new diplomacy, Davidow was practicing the old. He added for good measure that Brazil, Chile, Peru and Colombia are "forward-looking, not backward-looking" Latin American countries, and described the unanimous demand for normalization of US ties to Cuba as "part of the historical baggage that Latin America carried with it and is almost a reflexive suspicion or anti-Americanism." If Davidow was hoping to provoke an unproductive reaction from the Venezuelans, he failed, at least on Saturday. But his spoiler comments were in stark contrast to a president pledged to listening, dialogue and respect. Obama's modest relaxation of restrictions on travel and remittances to Cuba, combined with his Justice Department's prosecution of the anti-Castro terrorist Luis Posades Carrillo, has unleashed a momentum for policy change that may be unstoppable. Who is Jeffrey Davidow? It might be fair to ask, who really knows? He was a political officer at the US embassy in Chile from 1971-74, during the carrying out of the coup and repression against the democratically-elected government of Salvador Allende. In a March 3, 1974 memo, later declassified, Davidow wrote to Chilean officials of a "conspiracy on the part of the enemies of Chile to paint the junta in the worst possible terms." [ Boston Phoenix , Dec. 16-23, 1999] Later Davidow was ambassador to Mexico during the Chiapas crisis, where he told the Mexican media "we don't know of any [right-wing] paramilitary groups in Chiapas." [ Boston Phoenix , Dec. 16-23, 1999]. Davidow was ambassador to Venezuela from 1993 to 1996, defending the social order which fell to the Chavez political revolution two years later. He retired from government in 2003 to head the Institute of the Americas, which describes itself as being "recognized as a leader in promoting regional integration, economic development and efficient government in the western hemisphere." The Institute's board is heavy with energy firms, real estate investors, and San Diego-based research entities, including Chevron, Sempra LNG, Skanska [pipelines], the Barrick Gold Corporation [Canada], J.P. Morgan, Petrobras Energy [Argentina], and the Oil Industry Association of Ecuador. In September 2007, Davidow chaired the regional meeting of the Trilateral Commission in Cancun, where he criticized what he called the "creeping coup" happening through the democratic election of Chavez in Venezuela. It was a strange turn of phrase since Chavez had been the target of an actual coup in earlier years. In moderating a panel, Davidow explained the democratic election of Chavez as a "creeping coup" as follows: "What do other countries do when a country votes itself out of democracy? It's an interesting question. At least it's interesting to me." He also warned of the dangerous threat to future oil supplies from Venezuela resulting from the "creeping coup": "What does it mean when the previous principle providers of petroleum to the US suffer declines in their production levels?" Davidow added the question of what to do with a democratic country which also has become "a major transshipment point for drugs to the US and Europe", a claim meant to insist on the "integration" of American Drug Enforcement Agency operatives on the ground in Venezuela. These were explosive questions, all but suggesting the need for a Cold War against Caracas, if not regime change. Why Obama named Davidow to head the US presence at Trinidad remains to be explored. But it suggests a trademark Obama approach, to reassure the old guard and seek their approval of and participation in his proposed new directions. Seeming defensive about his role, Davidow tried to wrap himself in the pages of the once-liberal Washington Post in an exchange with Steve Clemon of the New America Foundation on April 10: "And lest you think, and I'm sure some of you do, that I am some sort of ideologue on this, take a look at the lead editorial in today's Washington Post . Maybe you think they are a bunch of ideologues as well, but I think they say it much better than I do." [ Talk Left , April 10] TOM HAYDEN is the author of The Long Sixties , From 1960 to Barack Obama [ Paradigm , August 2009] More on Barack Obama
 
Robert S. McElvaine: Keep the Bank Pirates on the Run Top
President Obama seems to be hearing the growing outcry against the big bank pirates' declaration of war on the American people through their outrageous increases in credit card interest rates. On Thursday in this blog I detailed the organized banksters' unleashing of their Weapons of Mass Depression and called on the American people to rise up and demand bold, meaningful action from Congress and the President to force these predators to cease and desist. We have gotten the attention of the government. On Sunday the Administration announced its intention to move the issue. White House economic advisor Larry Summers said the President is "going to be very focused, in a very near term, on a whole set of issues having to do with credit card abuses." It was also announced that Administration officials will meet at the White House on Thursday with leading executives of the credit card companies. But what has been proposed so far in Congress does not go nearly far enough. Nothing short of a retroactive federal usury law with real teeth will solve the problem, and that is what we must demand--loudly, forcefully and frequently. Contact President Obama, Representative Barney Frank, and Senator Chuck Schumer to demand meaningful action now. The bank pirates are on the run, but this battle--let alone the war--is far from won. { Historian Robert S. McElvaine is Elizabeth Chisholm Professor of Arts & Letters at Millsaps College & author of: The Great Depression: America, 1929-1941 (Random House) and Down and Out in the Great Depression: Letters from the "Forgotten Man" (North Carolina). His latest book is Grand Theft Jesus: The Hijacking of Religion in America (Crown). } More on Bankruptcy
 

CREATE MORE ALERTS:

Auctions - Find out when new auctions are posted

Horoscopes - Receive your daily horoscope

Music - Get the newest Album Releases, Playlists and more

News - Only the news you want, delivered!

Stocks - Stay connected to the market with price quotes and more

Weather - Get today's weather conditions




You received this email because you subscribed to Yahoo! Alerts. Use this link to unsubscribe from this alert. To change your communications preferences for other Yahoo! business lines, please visit your Marketing Preferences. To learn more about Yahoo!'s use of personal information, including the use of web beacons in HTML-based email, please read our Privacy Policy. Yahoo! is located at 701 First Avenue, Sunnyvale, CA 94089.
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)