Eyes on the Prize :: A call to action

An open letter to activists:

I will stipulate that racism is something to deal with, to confront, when and as you encounter it. It's far more insidious than the misinformation campaigns being waged against specific legislative proposals.

However, progressive activists would do well to remember that the President has three things atop his agenda: improving Education, moving closer to Energy independence (which overlaps many policy areas, from the environment to national security,) and Health Care/Insurance reform. These are issues we can more readily rectify legislatively than the relatively intractable nature of individual bigotry.

So, consider that on a national level, injecting racism into the dialog may distract your attention and diffuse the effectiveness of activists and progressive politicians by redirecting time and energy away from legislative goals. The new administration took office, as they all do, atop a mandate from the voters.  The opposition writes its own mandate, and adopts tactics meant to impede the will of the majority.

In conversation, partly precipitated by former President Carter, President Obama has made it abundantly clear he's not going to allow racism to alter his focus and priorities.

To rail against those they fear is a tactic of the opposition; witness the actions in DC on Saturday. Distraction is surely another component of that "opposition strategy." I'm not by any means condoning racism; I've written at some length about it, how the once anti-slavery Republican Party of Lincoln became the home of the most closed-minded white racists in the U.S. and how that undermines our lives and our communities, in the U.S. and elsewhere around the world. I know that I'm not going to change the hearts and minds of very many (if any) white racists rapidly, and that conversation isn't the key - proof is.

Do you seek change? Advancing constructive alternatives to create or encourage the change you desire is the important use of our time. Politics, as has been observed by wiser men than I, is the art of the possible; the work of enlightened, committed activists enhances the possibilities for those they support.

The necessary response to individual racism "in the room," in our day-to-day lives, isn't the same as a conversation at a national level.

President Obama's skin color doesn't matter at all; it's no more relevant to how he governs than your hair color is to how you pay your bills. There will always be those who distrust somebody who is "not like me" or "not like us."  They are emotionally attached to that belief - and few on either side of such issues bother listening to anything that's not consistent with their mindset.

Demonstrating that a man who's father is from Kenya is working for the greater good of us all without considering ethnic backgrounds, that a politician isn't just working for the rich or those "like him," but for all Americans, is the way to win the hearts and minds of those open to change. There will always be others disagreeing - and adopting whatever tactics they believe will advance their beliefs (or their ratings.)

Are you going to let those who intend to undermine any progress, those whose goal is not merely to voice their opposition but to dictate the topics and tone of our national debates, take your eyes off the prize?

Work to achieve what you prioritize.  I submit that racism is something to deal with, to confront, when and as you encounter it, but like any other hot-button issue that we react to viscerally, it can be used to distract, to dominate the media, and to chase our work out of people's minds. If you think I'm right, let's get the health care insurance reforms passed so we can turn to the other important issues of the day in a timely way.

Tom Hayes: Fiscal conservatives looking for new dance partners

During the latter part of the 1900s and the Bush years the GOP often seemed one solid, united front of like-minded folks. It's actually nearly as diverse a coalition as the Democratic party, built around a core of old-money, anti-regulation businessmen that, at times, has held its collective fiscally conservative nose to take advantage of voters that just don't feel comfortable with the Democrats (and liked the sound of lower taxes.)

To their great delight at the time, President Lyndon B. Johnson delivered any states that were bastions of white racism in the mid-1960s to the GOP for electoral purposes - largely what we call the "old south." The GOP wielded that sudden influx carefully, and with discipline over the following decades became deft at appealing to this constituency while carefully avoiding any overtly racist public statements.

As Melissa Harris-Lacewell, Professor of Politics and African-American Studies at Princeton University, noted regarding President Carter's recent observations about racism:

"There is something particularly compelling when Southern white men identify, name, and condemn racism. America can never forget what it sounded like..." to hear LBJ say something similar while he was President:

"What happened in Selma is part of a far larger movement which reaches into every section and state of America. It is the effort of American Negroes to secure for themselves the full blessings of American life. Their cause must be our cause too. Because it's not just Negroes, but really it's all of us, who must overcome the crippling legacy of bigotry and injustice.

And we shall overcome."

Nobody noticed more, or denied it more vehemently, than racists themselves. LBJ knowingly drove white racists to abandon the Democratic party en masse, and most turned to the GOP, where many have remained. While there are other factors that lead people to criticize President Obama and/or his initiatives, assuming racism is not a factor for some of Obama's detractors is either naive or self-delusional. For racists to think they've managed to conceal their beliefs from most of the rest of us, that we just plain don't realize what's going on, is hubris so blatant it beggars my descriptive powers.

Where will the GOP go now?

To the consternation of the fiscal conservatives in GOP, the Bush~Cheney administration's actions spending to fund their fruitless hunt for Osama bin Laden and the disingenuous hunt for Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq have driven many moderates out of the party while crippling the financial might of the country, and they are left with the "not ready for TV" tea-baggers and some barely disguised racists as key parts of their voting base in many areas. The various ratings-driven, faux-histrionic "conservative" pundits are not solidifying the GOP power in the coming election cycle any more than the hypocritical shenanigans of Mike "Spanky" Duvall, Larry "Wide Stance" Craig, or Mark "Don't cry for me, Argentina" Sanford, which have yet to fade from the public's memory.

Ironically, fiscal conservatives have to hope for a kindred spirit in President Obama, who is considerably more socially and economically moderate than he is painted by the media. For Obama has no choice but to spend given the state of the U.S. economy as he starts his first term: the impact of the unfunded military spending and the credit and financial crisis will reverberate for years, possibly decades. While Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner takes point in the media limelight, with the President intent on bringing fairness to the Health Insurance industry, the dances taking place off-camera in D.C. must be truly epic.

Are the "Obama's foreign born" folks being racist?

I'm not sure most of the people who are harping on this "birth certificate" issue even believe it's true; I think they're mostly looking for something to badger the winner with. It's amazing what people will do when they're feeling bitter.

Are there racists among them? I assume so, but I'm not sure what fraction it is, let alone if it's the majority. As for the rest of them, logic isn't at issue with most in this situation. It's an emotional response, just as many reactions are in the political arena. There were nut-cases dogging every President in recent memory, forcing them to spend time and attention on trivia - taking their time and energy away from the larger problems facing the people of this country.

Many of them, in this case, have trouble feeling any sort of sense of commonality - or community - with the duly elected former Senator for any number of reasons: some because he's not white, some because he's a Democrat, some because they think he's trying to impose socialized medicine, some simply because they thought we were doing well under the previous administration.

Right or wrong isn't at issue - logic won't change their position; they aren't open to debate, they aren't even listening. Sadly, it's the same sort of "we vs. they" thinking that is so easy to see as problematic in places like the middle east, but when we're caught up in it ourselves we lose our objectivity. It's great in a game of bridge, or as a fan at a sporting event, but inappropriate and counterproductive in this case.

So they pick something to hammer away at, something that doesn't sound - on the surface - like they can't abide a Democrat, or a man who's not another good ol' white guy, or whatever their particular thing is, in the White House. It's a mantle of plausible deniability, distancing their words from their true objection. As such, they're no more objective, or amenable to logical discussion of facts, than the Emperor in the parable that teaches us (or at least tries to) about keeping our perspective.

It doesn't take mental illness, or racism, to account for what's going on. All one of these conspiracy theorists needs is to be a little bit stubborn: pleased to believe that you can't call them anti-black, or anti-Democrat, while they hide behind the story that there's something suspect about a guy who beat out their guy.

In due time some will realize, like the emperor with the "new" clothes, that they've not got even one scrap of evidence to hide behind.

Some few may even expand their view, and decide our President is a lot more like them despite having parents of different colors, and a lot more interested in their welfare than, for instance, a Saudi prince.

But the man's only been in office about 7 months, and that's not a lot of time to win over the opposition while he's busy trying to dig us out of the hole the economy fell into during 2008. He's adopted an ambitious agenda: health care reform alone would be a major task, but he's working international diplomacy, education, and climate reform as well. He's got supporters who think he's not moving fast enough on their own top priority, be it civil rights for gay couples or reforming and regulating Wall Street.

The extreme cases, of course, will remain unswayed no matter how much success Obama has. Like extremists for other points of view elsewhere, they will make a lot of noise because they crave the attention more than anything.

73% of voters want a choice of a private or public health insurance plan.

Have you told your U.S. Representative and/or Senator? It's not about which party somebody identifies with, folks; this idea has incredibly broad support among ALL voters, and it's totally congruent with what the President is trying to achieve.

Broken down by party affiliation, it's:

77% of Democrats
79% of Independents
63% of Republicans

Write 3 letters before the Senate committee meeting on Tuesday to make sure your voice is heard in D.C. before it's all over but the earmarks. Write one to the Representative of your congressional district, and one to each of your Senators (except in Minnesota, of course, where there's only one Senator.) Make sure your elected represenatives realize that this has overwhelming support among voters - all voters.

Special interests are being heard - are you?

"While recent polling has shown consistent broad support for comprehensive health care reform, this poll specifically addressed whether people want a choice of a public health insurance plan. 73% of voters want a choice of a private or public health insurance plan, including Democrats (77%), Independents (79%), and Republicans (63%)"

The firm also tested the insurance industry's message about public health care and paired it with a message supporting it, and found the public to be far more receptive to the pro-public health care message:

"62% of voters believe a public health insurance plan will spend less on
profits and administration and force private insurers to compete while only 28% of voters believe the attack that a public health insurance plan would be a "big, government bureaucracy." 60% believe that if private insurers are really more efficient than government, then they won't have any trouble competing with a public health insurance plan. Only 23% believe a public health insurance plan would have an unfair advantage over private plans."

This polling was conducted for the pro-reform group Health Care for America Now.

But it goes beyond polls. There are hugely authoritative, respected voices pointing out that the system as it's been allowed to evolve is inefficient. It doesn't serve us well even though it does pay CEOs hefty bonuses and keep lobbyists busy. Tell your Senators and Representative what the Chief Economist of the World Bank says:

"...private healthcare insurers do not know how to deliver an efficient way..."

World Bank Chief Economist, Joseph Stiglitz

People who work hard for their money deserve to have a voice in how it's spent. The insurance industry and their lobbyists have been writing rules that boost their profits not protect Americans, and tax-payers are tired of bailing them out while worrying if we'll even have jobs. We need our leaders to take control and look out for our interests, not special interests.

Put it in your words, and write those three emails in the next 24 hours, two or three paragraphs is all it takes, then get three more people to do the same.

Why are doctors for reform? Maybe it's because places such as Duke Medical center need more billing clerks than nurses.

Why are special interests fighting it, donating money to the campaigns of key U.S. Senators such as Baucus and Murray? Maybe it's because they know their extravagant bonuses will come to an end. They're in it for the money, after all.

You've got all the facts you need right here: Make sure D.C. knows that we know the facts, and we're tired of paying for them to ignore what's right for the rest of us.

Ready for those "first 100 days" report cards? - By Tom Hayes

Summary:
Some reports suggest that despite numerous successes and his warm reception at the Summit of the Americas, U.S. President Barack Obama is under pressure to do more about Cuba in particular. Yet Hugo Chavez wants to be our friend, now, and Raul Castro has just made a speech in which he said that Cuba is ready to talk to the U.S. about virtually every topic, explicitly including political prisoners (one of the major sticking points for decades.)
When the inevitable flood of "first 100 days" summaries come out, the marks are going to be better than any in recent memory. There's a lot of work remaining, particularly on the President's big three priorities (Education, financial and economic reform featuring green jobs, and Health Care reform) but the Obama administration is clearly working in high gear. Most of the doom and gloom will come from domestic detractors, and much less from elsewhere in the western hemisphere where we're clearly seeing the result of Obama extending his hand in friendship.

Former harsh critics and foes see it as politically expedient to unclench their fists; cooperation is increasing for the first time in nearly a decade. In a time of unprecdented uncertainty, hope is flourishing abroad and at home.
Read the rest of the article at Democracy for America.

The irony of hope: Obama's not relying on it

To confront the most profound challenges to our financial system the people of the United States have invested their hope in a former lawyer turned community activist, Barack Obama. In his address to the U.S. Congress, watched by much of the nation Tuesday night, Obama offered an insight into what's been happening inside his administration during the first month he's been in office, but it's clear the work began well prior to inauguration day on a wide range of initiatives.

You may argue that the cost of the Iraq war leaves us too far in debt to attain his ambitious goal of halving the national budget deficit in four years, or that the need for money to help homeowners and those losing their jobs is too urgent and will hamper his ability to attain those goals - and that's far from the only challenge the White House faces domestically, let alone on the stage of world affairs.

Still, we must reverse the unacceptable trends in the housing markets and the massive bleeding of the jobs from the workforce in the United States. We cannot simply wait and hope it gets better. Our long range future depends on a realistic assessment of the scope and scale of the problems and addressing not merely the budget deficit, but the deficit that average citizens feel when considering the leadership of our financial institutions and lawmakers that brought us to this critical point.

As the President rolls out the budget today, questions about fiscal policy in particular loom from all sides about more than the numbers. We must move to a system with clearer rules and better oversight to prevent another looting of our savings and investments in ways that benefit only a very few already wealthy individuals while leaving privatized retirement accounts and home values in tatters with echoes of the crisis around the globe.

Fortunately, Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, and their team are neither rookies nor have they been basking in the post-inaugural glow. They've had their sleeves rolled up for months. This administration has brought new vigor and insight to a variety of issues, clearly including the domestic economic crisis. Barack Obama gave an inspirational speech, despite unseemly catcalls from some of the opposition as he described an interlocking, holistic approach that combines controlling costs, retaining/creating job opportunities, and enhancing revenue by targeting three major sectors (energy, education, and health care.)

The man who had hope as a central theme of his campaign is not relying on hope. Obama's laid out a clear foundation for recovery that moves quickly into rebuilding our economy and infrastructure in a way that accounts for our place on the planet, both physically and metaphorically. He's not overlooking the threat from disaffected individuals in Afghanistan and elsewhere around the globe, but Obama his team have brought new energy and creativity to ordering our priorities, in a refreshingly open way.

Obama's asking a lot of people. Even mustering the energy to remain hopeful can be hard when challenges are so ubiquitous. Like the best doctor faced with a critical patient, though, Obama's asking more of himself, though, and his staff - they're not content to hope, they're leading by example. The executive branch of the U.S. is working aggressively on all fronts, using transfusions where appropriate to keep critical systems functioning, while focusing on the goal of stabilizing the U.S. and world economy that are intertwined with our other domestic challenges so that we can heal, and back to the American dream. That's a path I can believe in.

read more | digg story

Obama's visit to Mesa brings hope to fearful AZ home owners

President Obama has people paying attention and engaged -- and Dawn Teo's covering both sides of the story for Huffington Post:

Dueling groups of anti- and countering pro-Obama protesters were setup in several "free speech zones" near the high school, smaller groups were scattered across sidewalks and street corners for several blocks, where former Governor Janet Napolitano's departure to take over as the new United States Secretary of Homeland Security gave Republicans full control of Arizona's state government.

Ms. Teo wrote:
"According to Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan, who spoke to the press before the event, about 6 percent of Arizona mortgages either are in foreclosure or are more than 90 days behind today. Across the country, nearly 10 percent of mortgages are behind, and in December, close to half of home sales across the country were "distressed" sales. Donovan says he expects about 6 million more foreclosures over the next 3 years."

The Obama administration is supporting legislation that, if passed, would allow judges to write down the principle and/or interest of mortgages when mortgage holders file for bankruptcy, and will be releasing new mortgage guidelines, which go into effect in 2 weeks that will standardize the mortgage loan process, including the appraisal process.

"Eyes brimmed with tears, attendees described the bleak outlook of being uprooted from their homes, a common fate in the Valley of the Sun. Besides the obvious transition from pre-election rallies to stately policy talks, today's topic -- the foreclosure crisis -- was sobering for the Mesa crowd."

read more | digg story

read more | digg story