I hope you don't. Otherwise, I would be disappointed in you as a leader.
Here is the problem with trying to disconnect... as with all government policies I am interconnected in a way that makes it hard for me not to pick the lesser of two evils and work as hard as I can to stop the worst of the two...
* As a high school dropout the effects of our defunding of schools has been pretty substantial (in fact I am taking diagnostics for ADHD--would have been helpful way before the age of 28).
*As someone who spent the ages of 14-26 with untreated/under treated bi-polar, someone who very nearly died from it, I can talk about the effects of a defunded system where protection of shareholder profits for pharmaceutical companies, protection of insurance companies over the needs of patients, protection of Doctors from open market competition... throwing people on the streets or in jails. I watched people wither away and die. Ever slept on a bench... I have... ever blacked out and only have vague memories if any at all... I have. Ever looked a homeless person in the streets and saw them talking to themselves and you know in your gut you are amazingly blessed to have found a way back out of the hell of being locked in your head... I have
* My best friend died from Heroin addiction... the tough on drugs tough on crime pathology that has nothing to do with crime prevention or rehabilitation... and everything to do with scared people (due to the conservative economic policies) who will latch onto and lash out at anything and everything that is a threat.
* I hung around people who sold drugs... when they should have been in business school. Runaways, high school dropouts, alcohol and drug abuse... yeah I've seen the shit people live in and around
* As someone who lost their health insurance (crappy economy... crappy job prospects add on no high school degree) in a country that ranks 37th in the world for health care according to the World Health organization... who then has to face over $30,000 in medical costs... and was only saved by the grace of family who was able to some how pull enough money together to get me the treatment I required. As someone who's medical bills fluctuate between 800-2000 dollars in a month because I lack health insurance.
* as someone who is sitting on thousands of dollars in student loans
* as someone who has worked for nonunion workforce.. who has had to fight with all the other part-time employees to get enough hours to get part-time health insurance... who then worked his way up 4 promotions to a supervisor level only to lose it all because it was a choice of going back to school or keeping my job... two and a half years of giving 100%, giving my sweat and tears and they couldn't even find me 24 hours a week to keep my part time health insurance. Pushing carts, running a register... anything...
* as someone who has been a human rights organizer and activist since 2002.
* as someone who gets up at 1:30 in the morning to go load trucks so that he can get off of around 8:30am so that he can go to school and finish his undergraduate degree.
I do get a little passionate...I have my own pathologies I must try to overcome.
I'm happy to go down every single policy position... i'm happy to dig deep into policy discussion... I'm happy to adjust when I'm wrong... I'm happy to point out every single thing I find wrong with the Democrats (a list so long I could never finish writing it)
Yes democrats are the lesser of two evils (although evil is a perjorative term... I agree with some Republicans like Chuck Hegal more than many conservative southern democrats)...
yes there is hypocrisy... yes there is corruption. SHow me any point in history... any government... where this wasn't so. Thats why a Republic is a damn good choice for a governing process... free speech, free travel, free exchange in the marketplace... with the understood protection from destructive individuals who would raid the commons.
There is a difference. You get two choices and lucky for me I can spend all day going through the policy difference (okay not really 1:30am comes oh so quickly..)
I'm passionate in my belief that we make things about policy and not people. I hold others to that... and hold others to the task of point it out when I fall short of that.
But there is a difference--and this year an unbelievably substantial one so if John McCain sneezes the wrong policy I'm going to hit and hit fucking hard. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
It'd be a pleasure to have dialogue(and I appreciate your time and effort so far) since here in the south most people who want to talk politics don't want to talk policy... don't want to do the leg work. They want to talk about online urban legends... they want to talk policy with no bearing on the real world...
so yes i'm passionate but I try to be equitable and conscientious in my efforts to change every single mind between now and when every single person has a basic quality of life deserving of all human beings.
"To the least of these..." to some it was something you just say on Sundays... not me.
Obamania has not struck me yet. It reminds me of the Body Snatchers movie starring Donald Sutherland. If I sleep I will be taken over by the left and wake up with an Obama t-shirt and button.
Politics as a personality competition... as a cult of personality really... is politics as pathology. It is about policy...
But while on the subject... I think its awesome that Obama has inspired people to participate in the process. I was knocking on a door locally with our canvass effort. And this mid-twenties African American woman answered the door. She was so excited that someone with the Obama campaign was at her door... she called to her family watching tv and said "hey [ name ] the Obama campaign is out registering voters... you were talking about registering this morning... and the two others ran to the door with big smiles. The young woman was the mom and ended up assisting him to fill out some info because "he doesn't write very well."
That was an amazing feeling... that young man needs a government that is going to empower him and not leave him behind. These McCain tactics trying to attack obama for bringing in new voters says something about McCain and the supporters throwing about that as a talking point... it leaves the general public talking about Paris Hilton and Obamania... rather than the issues.
So its good you haven't fallen for Obamamania... thats the last thing I'd want of a voter. ANd its unfortunate that its the big issue/agenda in the current discussions...
Before I support anyone I need reasons.came to the right place
I read the data on both McCain and Obama. I cannot discern which is the greater evil. McCain's war stance, or Obama's tendency towards socialism.Issue by Issue McCain is by far the worst of the two on policy. Obama is no shining star... but you work with the world you got not the one you want.
And I don't know what you mean by socialism... you'll have to define that one for me. IF you mean an equitable economy that protects and empowers all people and makes sure that no one gets left behind, civil rights, civil liberties, a strong market system... then i'm a socialist... but thats a hobgoblin term... there are so many meanings that I come to find nearly 95% of the people I speak with are socialist by the definition just postulated... so define socialism and I'll get back with you on if he leans towards it or not.
Yet behind closed doors I am unconvinced he has changed much. After all, it is well known he and Senator Clinton are good friends.I don't care what anyone does behind closed doors or in private... The libertarian in me... its not in my nature.
I care what he does in public as an elected official. I care about his votes... I care about his public comments and leadership... he ability to communicate and bring this country together for a united vision... these are things I care about... it doesn't matter to me any which way what he does in private or what he thinks and believes.
I"m not a mind reader and no talking head, or reporter is either... I'm not too worried about McCain's private life. I'm worried about the decisions he'd make in public that impact people lives all over the globe.
Do you really believe in Obama's rhetoric with regard to change? Is it possible to induce change within the very system our current leaders occupy?I believe that he can inspire people to participate in the process... that he can bring this country back to the center... and away from the divisiveness we've had that has only gotten worse since Bush II got in office.
But the divisiveness has been a part of the conservative revolution... read John Dean's broken Government which gets more into the details of how the conservatives have tried to decrease the ability for compromise and collegiality.
Is reform possible... of coarse... society in the broad sense has become more equitable... quality of life has improved. Far greater struggles have been overcome throughout human history. Sure I believe in reform.
Will there be constructive change behind the scenes of big government? I am not so sure.I don't know what you mean by Big Government. In a highly complex industrial society.. the government is going to be bigger than in agrarian colony in 1770's. Plus the market system depends on pretty substantial infrastructure and modest regulation for it to function and sustain itself (a recognition that Republicans lost after the conservative take-over of their party). So i'm not sure what you mean by big government...
I'm surrounded every day with underfunded and ignored infrastructure... market failures... its hard to make the case that the "small government types" are making things better. I'll make the case its getting worse with the "small government" folks in charge.
McCain will not be more of the same as many assert, except for his foreign policy.economics, protecting women and families... others as well...
He is more prone to supporting an unjust war, despite the Iraqi Prime Minister wanting us out.What about the Iraqi population whom have wanted the US out for almost three years now if memory serves me correct. Like substantially... not 51%... Middle east public opinion as well. Both of those items are important since these numbers on the Arab street help increase terrorist recruitment, empower terrorists networks, flame the conflict over Palestine, hinder the ability of our markets and human rights to get through and erode the fundamentalism we need to moderate. We're going to win with Ipods and coke-a-cola. Thinking you can bomb them back into the stone age... or occupy their country... lacks any historical narratives I've seen or heard. Feel free to make the case on that one... but I haven't found anything substantial from others...
With the exception of the war, McCain is at odds within the Republican Party. Hell, we both know he got the nomination purely on seniority.He got the nomination because Romney is Mormon... which ironically speaks to the bigotries of the fundamentalists hurting their own cause. Romney would have won... moderate Republican... health care reform as Governor...
However, I am more of mind with our forefathers. I prefer neutrality.industrial society in a technologically driven area with weapons that can wipe out the world is a little different than backwater agrarian colony that our founding fathers lived in. No disrespect to my peeps... they did some great things that I applaud... but couldn't disagree more.
There are currently 737 US military bases. This seems a tad much for a strong national defense.I concur...
I'd rather live in a Republic than ant other form of government... so I'd disagree on the idea that the filthy masses are asking too much when they want decent schools, decent jobs, and a quality of life that can provide enjoyment... rather than watching the rich reap all of the benefits of our economy. Plus the markets demand more government to sustain itself... too much would be bad agreed. But don't worry we're no where near the point of destructiveness... granted the government shouldn't stick its nose in everything... but thats the problem with the "small government" policy people... they are talking about something different and using hyperbole to make people think in much broader terms than is justifiable... without major clarification on the terms... your Obama socialist comment comes to mind (since I hear it quite often... and am perplexed by it honestly)
Then again, I prefer limited government, despite the impossibility of such a measure given the magnitude of the people's expectations.
My basic values prevent me from openly supporting either McCain or Obama. Perhaps you can provide some hard data to change my mind. I'm looking forward to it!Everyone has to make their own decisions for themselves... I'd love to work the data... it lets me learn it better--which is never a bad thing. My values say the purpose of government is to protect and empower its citizens. The everyman for themselves mentality of the Republicans has undermined our economy... made neighbors distrustful of one another... increased cynicism and apathy...
My values tell me to get up and work my ass off to help improve the world. But as I tell Democrats locally. If you think winning in November is hard... wait till the day after when you have to work to get affordable health care and quality schools. There is no magic bullet... there is no mystery that only certain politicians have the key to. It takes hard dedicated work... commitment by average people to sacrifice some of their time to build a community and hold their elected officials accountable. But yes stopping McCain would be a step in the right direction. But as Ice Cube said... "life ain't a track meet... its a marathon..."
Changing the world is not going to happen overnight. But you run a marathon one step at a time. So Obama is a step in the right direction...
Hope you stick around this year... I try to keep my passion in check... call me on my invective... also I tend to speak in hyperbolye especially on the fly and the thing about words online is it can sometime comes out more insulting than humorus...
I'll call you on yours. It should be a productive election year...
There are differences... it does matter
--------------
Jim Nichols
A Speculative Fiction
www.JimNichols4.com
5 comments:
Woo Hoo! And I got to read the full post in my RSS reader. Maraming salamat.
Jim,
Each time I read one of your long posts, I am reminded how similar our passions run.
Ah Grasshopper...your pregnant mongoose style is good. My deadly puffer fish is well...deadly.
Let us discuss drugs and crime as our first official debate. The books I reference are Crime and Justice in America, The Honest Politician's Guide to Crime Control and Sense and Nonsense about Crime and Drugs.
We will distinguish between the two political viewpoints "Liberal and Conservative Theology." We will see why both the liberals and conservatives are guilty of peddling nonsense about crime.
Crime Control Theology is a serious problem with faith interfering with solid legal practice. Both progressives and neoconservatives practice policy which border on religious belief. Neither of these beliefs is supported by empirical data.
Conservative Theology envisions a world of discipline and self control. Free will and rational choice reign supreme. They believe people (should) weigh the risks versus the rewards/punishment for an act. Punishment is moral and supposedly a practical element. Belief in family values, etc. However, America is not like a family. We are a fragmented society. We have different values, cultures, social status, etc. An example of this is the “Just say No” campaign. The root cause of crime is “moral poverty” as opposed to material poverty. The reality is in many impoverished neighborhoods incarceration is so prevalent; it no longer has its deterrent edge. Conservatives cannot punish criminals as a parent does a child because the analogy of parent/society to criminal/individual does not work. Instead of accepting empirical evidence, the conservative blames the criminal justice system. “The system is too meek, punishment is not severe enough.” The idea that criminals get off or beat the system is a key ideal of conservative theology. The death penalty and longer sentences does not effectively deter crime. The following information is from http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/John_McCain_Drugs.htm.
Administration is AWOL on the war on drugs
Of the four major candidates, McCain has expressed the most hawkish positions on drug policy. He wants to increase penalties for selling drugs, supports the death penalty for drug kingpins, favors tightening security to stop the flow of drugs into the country, and wants to restrict availability of methadone for heroin addicts. He said the Clinton administration was “AWOL on the war on drugs” and he would push for more money and military assistance to drug-supplying nations such as Colombia.
Source: Boston Globe, p. A21 Mar 5, 2000
Public/private partnerships for drug treatment
McCain indicates that federally sponsored drug education and drug treatment programs should be expanded. He says, “Work to expand public/private partnerships in support of such initiatives, and coordinate them with state and local efforts.”
Source: Vote-Smart.org 2000 NPAT Jan 13, 2000
Prevention & education apply to alcohol as well as marijuana
Q: How do you reconcile the tolerance for alcohol with the intolerance for marijuana?
A: I can’t support the legalization of marijuana. Scientific evidence indicates that the moment that it enters your body, one, it does damage, and second, it can become addictive. It is a gateway drug. There is a problem in American with alcohol abuse, and there’s no doubt about that. We have to do whatever we can to - prevention, education, and that applies to drugs too.
Source: Republican Debate at Dartmouth College Oct 29, 1999
We’re losing drug war - just say no
We’re losing the war on drugs. We ought to say, “It’s not a war anymore,” or we really ought to go after it. And there was a time in our history when we weren’t always losing the war on drugs. It was when Nancy Reagan had a very simple program called “Just Say No.” And young Americans were reducing the usage of drugs in America.
Source: Republican Debate at Dartmouth College Oct 29, 1999
McCain supports the following principles concerning illegal drugs:
• Increase penalties for selling illegal drugs
• Impose mandatory jail sentences for selling illegal drugs
• Impose capital punishment for convicted international drug traffickers
• Strengthen current laws dealing with non-controlled substances, including inhalants and commercially available pills
• Increase funding for border security to stop the flow of illegal drugs into the US
Here is how McCain voted. This information was gathered from http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=53270&type=category&category=25&go.x=10&go.y=8
Date Bill Title Vote Outcome
06/09/1998 Illegal Drug Amendment
S 1415 Y Amendment Adopted - Senate
(52 - 46)
03/20/1997 U.S.- Mexico Drug Trafficking Prevention Amendment
H J Res 58 Y Amendment Adopted - Senate
(94 - 5)
Liberal Theology views crime in a social context. Criminal behavior is largely the result of social influences (family, friends, and the environment). They want to alter such influences. There is a belief in rehabilitation and collective responsibility. Rehabilitative initiatives include reform due to the over zealous nature of the criminal justice system. An overall emphasis upon criminal procedure is at hand. They believe human behavior can be changed through a formal treatment program, although treatment usually doesn’t help. There is less of a focus on individual responsibility. Rehabilitation programs are designed to provide a structured set of influences that will shape the offender’s behavior in a positive direction. “Liberals favor community-based alternatives to imprisonment because they represent a healthier environment than prison. Supervised probation and parole are designed to provide positive external influences. Basic education and vocational training programs, meanwhile, are designed to equip the offender for success in life. Liberals are as guilty of wishful thinking as conservatives.” (Sense and Nonsense about Crime and Drugs p20) The premise is that behavior can be altered by a treatment program. In the 19th century, man invented the prison to reform offenders. This failed. Then reformers invented parole and the intermediate sentence which did not solve the crime issue either. Now reformers try group counseling, intensive supervision, etc. which have no empirical evidence of consistent results in deterring drug-related crime.
Conservatives blame problems on loop holes in the system. However, liberals are guilty of blaming everything on overly harsh punishment. They ignore the individual’s role in the crimes committed.
Here is Obama’s take on the issue of drugs.
According to http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=9490, there are no votes from Obama on the drug issue. I suppose he was not in the Senate long enough to vote on such issues? Ah yes, the smell of the Senatorial newbie. Well, at least he cosponsored some legislation. However, we do have quotes from http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Barack_Obama_Drugs.htm.
Obama co-sponsored requiring chemical resellers to certify against meth use
Sen. FEINSTEIN: This act is designed to address problems that the Drug Enforcement Administration, DEA, has identified in the implementation of the Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act of 2005. The bill that I introduce today would:
• clarify that all retailers, including mail order retailers, who sell products that contain chemicals often used to make methamphetamine--like ephedrine, pseudoepedrine and phenylpropanolamine--must self-certify that they have trained their personnel and will comply with the Combat Meth Act's requirements;
• require distributors to sell these products only to retailers who have certified that they will comply with the law;
• require the DEA to publish the list of all retailers who have filed self-certifications, on the DEA's website;
• and clarify that any retailer who negligently fails to file self-certification as required, may be subject to civil fines and penalties.
The Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act that we passed last year has been a resounding success. The number of methamphetamine labs in the United States has declined dramatically now that the ingredients used to make methamphetamine are harder to get. Fewer meth labs means more than just less illegal drug production. In 2003, 3,663 children were reported exposed to toxic meth labs nationwide--but so far this year, the number of exposed children is only 319.
This is a common-sense bill, designed to strengthen the implementation of the Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act. This bill would create incentives to ensure that the self-certification process of the law is made both effective and enforceable. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
Source: Combat Methamphetamine Enhancement Act (S.2071) 2007-S2071 on Sep 19, 2007
I pose a question. Has this bill done anything OTHER than make it more difficult for citizens to purchase cough medicine? Is there any empirical evidence to support the purpose of this legislation?
Deal with street-level drug dealing as minimum-wage affair
We need to tackle the nexus of unemployment and crime in the inner city. The conventional wisdom is that most unemployed inner-city men could find jobs if they really wanted to work; that they inevitably prefer drug dealing, with its attendant risks but potential profits, to the low-paying jobs that their lack of skill warrants. In fact, economists who've studied the issue--and the young men whose fates are at stake--will tell you that the costs and benefits of the street life don't match the popular mythology: At the bottom or even the middle ranks of the industry, drug dealing is a minimum-wage affair. For many inner-city men, what prevents gainful employment is not simply the absence of motivation to get off the streets but the absence of a job history or any marketable skills--and, increasingly, the stigma of a prison record.
We can assume that with lawful work available for young men now in the drug trade, crime in any community would drop.
Employment alone is not enough Senator. We need programs. We need education. We need public representatives of these districts to step up to the plate.
2001: questions harsh penalties for drug dealing
In 2001, Obama questioned the harsh penalties for drug dealing, noting that selling 15 tablets of Ecstasy was the same class of felony as raping a woman at knifepoint. In 2002, Obama sponsored an unsuccessful measure to create an employment grant program for edx-criminals, who often return to a life of crime because no one will hire them.
THE PROBLEM
• Disparities Continue to Plague Criminal Justice System: African Americans and Hispanics are more than twice as likely as whites to be searched & arrested when stopped by police. Disparities in drug sentencing laws, like the differential treatment of crack as opposed to powder cocaine, are unfair.
OBAMA'S PLAN
• Expand Use of Drug Courts: Obama will give first-time, non-violent offenders a chance to serve their sentence, where appropriate, in the type of drug rehabilitation programs that have proven to work better than a prison term in changing bad behavior.
• Reduce Crime Recidivism by Providing Ex-Offender Support: Obama will provide job training, substance abuse and mental health counseling to ex-offenders, so that they are successfully re-integrated into society.
• Eliminate Sentencing Disparities:The disparity between sentencing crack and powder-based cocaine is wrong and should be completely eliminated.
Obama is on the right track here. It is not going far enough though. Decriminalization is what empirical data suggests will deter crime.
Decriminalization is the first principle in deterring drug crime. Many health and criminal justice experts believe alcohol and drug abuse are psychological and sociological issues which should not be met by the criminal justice system. “We do not have convincing evidence of a program or policy that has been proven effective in reducing drug abuse and crime associated with drugs. Politicians continually restate the same old policies (“longer prison terms,” “more treatment”) without any evidence regarding their effectiveness.” (Sense and Nonsense about Crime and Drugs p.275)
* as someone who has worked for nonunion workforce.. who has had to fight with all the other part-time employees to get enough hours to get part-time health insurance... who then worked his way up 4 promotions to a supervisor level only to lose it all because it was a choice of going back to school or keeping my job... two and a half years of giving 100%, giving my sweat and tears and they couldn't even find me 24 hours a week to keep my part time health insurance. Pushing carts, running a register... anything...
You are without question one of the most brilliant and qualified people I have met. So I must know this......
Why in the hell did you limit yourself to this position? Why do you think you are only "qualified" to do menial work for lousy people? The issue isn't union versus nonunion. The issue is "Jim choosing to work for assholes." I currently work for a small business. I have flex-time, retroactive healthcare (became active my first day on the job), a good salary, etc. How did I get the job? I'm as qualified as you. I'm certainly no smarter than you. I was diagnosed with ADHD and attended a special school during my formative years. However, there was a trend towards tossing young black boys in the "special ed" category in certain schools. My parents fought and got me into regular schools. I do, however, have a slight reading disability. My father is dyslexic and I suppose I inherited it. Regardless, I am not the sum of my limitations. And neither are YOU.
No excuses buddy!
My friend's husband has dyslexia and earns enough to qualify for Obama's tax hike!
I used to work at Office Max. I received various promotions and worked in three departments at once! Things were not that bad. However, I wanted more money for less stress. So I quit. Guess what? I was literally hired in my present job a day later. If I can do it, so can you. Companies are not responsible for you and will not take care of you. In fact, the current trend is to take away benefits such as healthcare, and retirement plans.
Bellum omnium contra omnes
can you post these on your blog and leave a link in the comments... I can't make heads or tails of your comment cause of the formatting... plus the comments page is not conducive to large digressions...
just follow ups, instigations,data to back up or take on a point, and clarifications...
Post a Comment