Life is expensive

While scanning the Columbus Dispatch for news articles about the Cincinnati Reds, I came across an article on public assistance with the very rightwing title "Welfare State Getting Larger." Bracing myself, I clicked on the link and was surprised to find the article balanced. Then again, editors write titles to most articles. A part of the article struck me as worthy of mentioning:

Nia Foster fits the pattern of dependence on government aid. She stopped getting cash welfare payments in the late 1990s and has moved from one clerical job to another. None provided medical benefits.

The 32-year-old mother of two from Cincinnati said she supports her family with help from food stamps and Medicaid.

Foster said she did not get any job training when she left welfare. She earned her high-school equivalency last year at a community college.

"If you want to get educated or want to succeed, the welfare office don’t care," Foster said. "I don’t think they really care what you do once the benefits are gone."

This woman is a fairly typical representative of the lower classes in this country. While rightwing pundits spit out their "Poor people are lazy" b.s., poor people are actually going out and trying to make their lives better.

People who are comfortable just don't realize how difficult it is to make it in today's America.

Now, you'll hear the argument that government has no place providing job training. While I mostly agree with that, I have to ask where the job training is supposed to come from? Corporations don't provide training to lower level staff any more - they use temp agencies and part-timers to do the work that people like Nia Foster can do. As long as the cost of a college education continues to skyrocket, these people are going to struggle to make ends meet without opportunity for advancement.

Until something is done about the cost of college, people will continue to need public assistance. I think it's time Congress sits down and talks about mechanisms to control these costs, because it will save us money in the long run.

Snow and Ice in NYC

Winter in Central Park

New Direction

After an eon of wondering what I was going to do with this blog, what direction I was taking, I finally figured out where to go with it, thanks to the purchase of a good camera. I've always enjoyed photography, though I've never had a high quality camera until now, and I thought "Wow, this would be a good opportunity to practice taking photos and write about them." I can't think of any bloggers who take their own political photos and write about them, so I finally found something different to work on.

I wandered around Manhattan over the long weekend and snapped 250 photos. I plan to write a piece on Times Square and another on the evolution exhibit at the Natural History Museum. I'll also post some photos of Washington on this blog from time to time. In the meantime, check out my photos of winter in Central Park, where I will be posting a lot of non-political photos.

Winter in Central Park

Uzbeki Journalist Arrested

Note: An Uzbeki colleague asked me to spread this message. Please take a minute to take action as well as pass this along. Thanks.

An Urgent Action Appeal:

Umida Niyazova is an Uzbek human rights defender and journalist.

During late 1990s, Umida worked with the international NGOs Internews and Freedom House. She played an active role in many international human rights and social projects.

In ths course of her work Umida wrote a number of critical reports about the worsening social and economic situation in Uzbekistan.

Two hours after we began receiving initial reports that Umida Niyazova had been arrested, one journalist in Uzbekistan sent us an email. To protect this person’s personal security we will not reveal his or her identity. As Umida Niyazova’s arrest once again makes clear, the Uzbek authorities are doing everything they can to silence independent journalists and to restrict access to information about human rights abuses in Uzbekistan.

This email very clearly reflects the attitudes of Uzbekistan’s community of journalists toward Umida's arrest, and toward the repression of the freedom of expression in Uzbekistan.

The text of the e-mail is as follows:

Letter from Uzbekistan

Umida Niyazova has been arrested. From January 22 to January 26, she was kept in the pre-trial detention unit in Andijan city. On January 26, she was tranfered to Tashkent where she is being held at the Office for Prosecution of Transport Offenses.

It appears that Uzbek law enforcement agents have decided that Andijan is the most secure place in Uzbekistan at the moment. Here the regime fought against the truth with gunfire and swords, here they insulted the pride of the people. In May 2005, this Uzbek town showed to the whole world the extent of brutality and repression in Uzbekistan.

In her capacity as a defender of human rights, Umida did a lot for the people who suffered during and after the Andijan massacre. Now she herself needs protection. Her colleagues inside Uzbekistan cannot do much to secure her release, and the fact that their hands are tied makes them furious. I continue to be surprised at the cowardice of this regime. This incident once again showed utter cynicism on the part of the authorities. Umida was tricked into coming to the prosecutor's office by lies; indeed the authorities even fabricated a document saying that previous legal charges against her had been dropped.

Umida had in effect become Enemy Number One in Uzbekistan. She has been accused of absolutely ridiculous charges such as illegal crossing of the border and the smuggling of literature and documents containing extremist material. In December 2006 she traveled to Bishkek. Her flight was delayed for one day due to weather. The customs search was as thorough as ever, and Umida was searched from head to toe before she boarded the plane. Her fellow passengers were surprised by the attention she received. One interesting detail is that her laptop, which contained materials which have more recently “shocked” Uzbek security agents with their extremism, was not even inspected when she exited the country.

This is because they were waiting for her return. The human rights defender had of course returned from rebellious Kyrgyzstan intending to import the concept of the “coloured revolution”! Apparently this is how the authorities believe such infectious ideas are being smuggled into what official propaganda used to call “a country with a great future.”

President Karimov has already stopped talking about “the great future.” On the contrary, it was Umida who has been talking about the future of Uzbekistan with love and hope. She is absolutely opposed to extremism of any sort; she simply believe there should be less pressure against her kind of work. She believed that with some more effort it would become much easier to breathe in Uzbekistan. For about two years Umida received warnings about possible threats against her, and she was many times advised to leave the country. She didn't listen and continued her work for international and local human rights organisations. She didn’t leave perhaps because she knew that she was irreplaceable. Uzbek National Security officers couldn't look her straight in the eyes; one cannot forget a person with such honest eyes.

One cannot call her naïve; she is simply kind, and her kindness was limitless. Many people believed so. I don't trust all of the human rights community of Uzbekistan, but Umida manages to destroy journalistic stereotypes about human rights defenders here. You can see what kind of person she is from the first look. She has natural charm that makes people with different beliefs trust her. Journalists love to gossip and backstab each other, but all of them have enourmous respect for Umida.

Her little son is waiting for her. He is not yet three years old. He misses his mother. She is also missed by many other people who love and respect her.

Umida's arrest is an act of cowardice on the part of the authorities. Once more, the servants of the totalitarian regime, with the blessing of the nation’s “stepfather” Islam Karimov, have showed that there is no respect for human rights in Uzbekistan. Who can help?

Uzbek law enforcement agencies are constantly trying to find or simply falsify compromising materials to use against Umida Niyazova and other Uzbek human rights defenders. Those whose view on the situation in the country differs from the official Uzbek government line are a great irritant to the authorities. Many have faced imprisonment on false charges if they stay in the country. Many have been tortured in prison. The Uzbek government apparently does not see any other way to cover up the evidence of the many witnesses of the Andijan massacre, or any other way to deal with those who critise the political situation in the country.

The negotiations about human rights between the European Union and Uzbekistan have not been very effective in achieving any real objectives. We do not believe that an objective investigation of the Andijan massacre, or any easing of repression, is possible under President Karimov.

Umida Niyazova has been arrested based on the supposed violation of two articles of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan. First is Article 223, which discusses “Illegal exit from the country and illegal entry into the Republic of Uzbekistan.” This charge envisages punishment of between three to ten years in prison. She is also accused of violating Article 246 against smuggling, which envisages punishment of between five to ten years in prison.

These articles are categorized as severe crimes in the country’s Criminal Code. Persons accused under these articles are not subject to amnesty. For this reason there is an increasing tendency to use false accusations of smuggling along with extortion in the state persecution of human rights defenders in Uzbekistan.

According to our information, the materials confiscated from Umida Niyazova do not contain calls for violence or an overthrow of the constitutional regime. Her arrest has only one purpose, to discredit the human rights movement in Uzbekistan. All efforts to make human rights abuses in Uzbekistan continue to be brutally repressed.

WE CALL UPON YOU TO SHOW SOLIDARITY AND SUPPORT TO UMIDA NIYAZOVA!

PLEASE SEND THIS APPEAL URGENTLY!
Addresses:

• President of Uzbekistan, Islam Abduganiyevich Karimov, ul. Uzbekistanskaya 43, Rezidentsia prezidenta, 700163 Tashkent, Republic of Uzbekistan, Fax: +998 71 133 1395325, E-mail: presidents_office@press-service.uz
• Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Elyor Majidovich Ganiev, Respublika Uzbekistan; 700029 g. Tashkent; pl. Mustakillik, 5; Ministerstvo inostrannykh del RU, S.S., Uzbekistan, Fax: + 998 71 139 15 17, E-mail: rnews@mfa.uz
• Parliamentary Commissioner for Human Rights, Sayora Rashidova, ul. Xalqlar Dostligi 1, 700035 Tashkent, Republic of Uzbekistan, Fax: +998 71 139 85 55, E-mail: office@ombudsman.gov.uz
• Chairman of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Uzbekistan, Ubaydulla Mingbaev, Respublika Uzbekistan; 700183 g. Tashkent; ul. Abdulla Kodiri, 1; Verkhovny Sud Respubliki Uzbekistan, Fax: + 998 71 144-62-93
• General Prosecutor of the Republic of Uzbekistan, Rashidjon Hamidovich Kodirov, ul. Gulyamova 66, 700047 Tashkent, Republic of Uzbekistan, Fax: +998 71 133 39 17, E-mail: prokuratura@lawyer.com
• National Centre for Human Rights, Senator Akmal Saidov Natsionalny tsentr po pravam cheloveka, 5/3, Mustakillik Maidoni, g. Tashkent, Respublika Uzbekistan. 700029, Fax: + 998 71 139 13 56 / 45 16, E-mail: office@nchr.uz
• Ambassador of the Republic of Uzbekistan, Permanent Mission of the Republic of Uzbekistan to the United Nations in Geneva, PO Box 1853, 1215 Geneva 15, Switzerland, Fax: +4122 799 43 02, E-mail: uzbekistan@bluewin.ch

Please tell us about your actions in support of Umida Niyazova. Our contact details:

“Human Rights in Central Asia”-Association, which started its activities in 2006.
It is registered in France, № 1458

Address:
Email : asiecentrale@neuf.fr
Tel: + 33 6 13 41 40 70 / 33 2 43 76 72 32
Fax: + 33 2 43 24 00 72

Uzbekistan Initiative-London, a non-profit organisaion based in London.
Address; Flat 8, Carisbrook Court
Weymouth Street
London W1G 8NZ
Email: shahidayakub@uzbekistaninitiative.com

This is going to sound rightwing

But I needed to write something about William Arkin's "mercenary" comment, because it struck a nerve.

The offending quote:

...it is the United States, and the recent NBC report is just an ugly reminder of the price we pay for a mercenary - oops sorry, volunteer - force that thinks it is doing the dirty work.

Does this jerk think that soldiers actually want to be in Iraq? Granted, some of the high school drop outs and forty year olds who have enlisted since the Army's desperate attempts to get people to sign up do want to be there, but a vast majority of soldiers did not sign up to spend months and years in a desert misery.

Why do people sign up? For one thing, it is a way for some people to go to college who otherwise wouldn't get to. For others it is an escape from their small towns, a chance to see the world. There are many reasons to sign up. I did it to get my student loans paid off and to get paid to learn another language. My outrage would swell to unbearable levels if my soul were rotting in the deserts of Babylon right now and contemplating mortality and murder in the name of Government and Religion and Markets and God knows all of the other stupid reasons to fight War, especially considering I don't believe in this war. People volunteer to DEFEND the country, not necessarily to be an occupying force.

The NBC report made it sound like all of the troops believe in this war, but they showed THREE soldiers. (Isn't NBC supposed to be the "liberal" one?) All of the soldiers I knew wondered what they were fighting for. But then again, most of the soldiers I knew who were in the war are no longer in the Army because when it came time to re-up, they did not. A third or fourth tour in Iraq was just not their idea of a good time.

Many of the soldiers in Iraq these days are post-9/11 soldiers, those who followed their blind patriotism into the military to get revenge on an enemy they don't understand. In the NBC report, Specialist Tyler Johnson wasn't even old enough to join the military when 9/11 happened (and wow, it's been that long, hasn't it?) I don't know Specialist Johnson, so I'm not saying he is one of these, but I remember a wave of sheeple that entered the Army back then and flooded the Defense Language Institute with anti-intellectual flagwaving. There were some pretty dim bulbs in that group. Of course, back when I was there, Iraq hadn't started, and it was pretty easy to support what was going on in Afghanistan, given that's where the actual enemy was! Still, even with an unthinking belief in what they are doing, these soldiers are not mercenaries.

Another offending quote:

So, we pay the soldiers a decent wage, take care of their families, provide them with housing and medical care and vast social support systems and ship obscene amenities into the war zone for them, we support them in every possible way, and their attitude is that we should in addition roll over and play dead, defer to the military and the generals and let them fight their war, and give up our rights and responsibilities to speak up because they are above society?

Where does he get the idea that the life of a soldier is so luxurious? Since when is making $17K a year (for a junior enlisted soldier) getting paid a "decent wage?" How about asking the soldiers who are in dire financial situations, whose cars are being repo'd while they're in Iraq, whose 2% annual raises aren't enough to cover inflation? Apparently he missed the countless articles about military families having to get food from food drives for the needy because they couldn't afford to buy enough to feed their families. And the quality of this "health care" he refers to is enough to make one wish s/he could shell out money for a private doctor. And obscene amenities? OBSCENE AMENITIES??? The troops don't even have enough armor, and he thinks just because some people are shipping a few iPods, etc. to make their hell just a tad easier, they are being pampered?

Arkin also shows disrespect by referring to Johnson as "junior enlisted man Tyler Johnson" rather than including his rank of Specialist. Amazing how he condemns the soldiers for exercising their right to speech while at the same time denying that they have that same right.

I disagree with the soldiers who were interviewed, but I would never show the amount of disrespect that Arkin did. They are going through hell. They have a right to say what they did because they don't want to feel like they have been fighting in vain, as one soldier says. That, despite it being pretty close to the harsh truth, would make their lives unbearable. Yeah, soldiers, you can support the troops but not the war. It's called getting you out of there and giving you something real to fight for.

The NBC "report" can be seen here:



I never thought I'd see the day when I shared outrage with the likes of Michelle Malkin and those other flagwaving, bigoted creatures on the right, but this time I have to agree with them. Of course, the sheeple who follow them are using Arkin's comments as proof that "liberals hate America" and "want the terrorists to win" and all of that other non-thinking garbage they spew on a daily basis.
___

Condi Fodder

That's politics

The Dixie Chicks took Album of the Year at the Grammys. The music industry has spoken with its vote - bunch of traitors! Ha! I'm glad they won, even if their music stinks and that Natalie chick is annoying. Take that, wingnuts.

Al Gore was there, too, and got a huge ovation.

A wonderful Grammy memory:

Land of Confusion

One of the most vivid memories of videos on MTV from my childhood is the Genesis video for Land of Confusion. A Phil Collins led Genesis was one of the great political bands of the eighties and early nineties, and Land of Confusion is the greatest of all of their political songs.

The video, as you will see, starts with puppets of Ronald and Nancy Reagan going to bed. Ronnie begins to dream, first of marching boots, then of heads of famous people, including his own. Nancy opens the curtains and starts dancing with a monkey in front of a window. Outside, a bird suddenly blows up and turns into a cooked bird with a price tag. The dream then switches to Reagan pulling on a Superman suit. He goes outside and a dinosaur steps on his cape, and the two of them go to a movie theater and watch television, which Reagan channel surfs. At the end, a bunch of celebrity puppets - Michael Jackson, Mick Jagger, and Dolly Parton among them - are singing, apparently in the spirit of We Are the World. It ends with Reagan hitting the nuke button instead of the nurse button, and the most poignant part of the whole video is when he makes a joke about it, like oops!



The President may have changed, but American political culture has not, unless you say it has gotten worse under the nasty, swinish behavior of Karl Rove. Bush certainly is a puppet in the sphere of neocons that has made a mess of the world. This song is still very relevant to today, given the same dinosaurs from the Cold War era are still running this country, television still dominates, and celebrity worship is a full time hobby for many. Truly one of the great videos - and great songs - of the eighties.

Cross posted at Rox Politix.

Foreign Policy Fodder

Though General David Petraeus, new Commander of forces in Iraq, is the son of Dutch parents, his name is very Greek. In Greek mythology, the name Petraeus comes up in several places. Petraeus is one of the Cen­taurs, half men/half horses, who was at the wedding of Peirithous, who was marrying Hippodameia. Eris and her twin brother Ares were not invited to the wedding, so they decided to get revenge by getting the Centaurs who were at the wedding drunk. The Centaurs subsequently kidnapped the women at the wedding, including the bride, which started a war between the Lapithae and the Centaurs.

Petraeus is also a surname of Poseidon among the Thessalians, because he was believed to have separated the rocks, between which the river Peneius flows into the sea. But David Petraeus is apropos to a third figure in Greek mythology/history - a friend of Philip V., king of Macedonia, who was sent to Sparta in 220BC, to receive the submission of the Lacedaemonians, and confirm them in their allegiance to Macedonia. He later commands a military force in Thessaly, where he successfully repelled the invasion of Thessaly by the Aetolian general Dorimachus.

Or...a friend of Bush, President of the United States, who was sent to Iraq in 2007AD, to receive the submission of the insurgents, and confirm them in their allegiance to a democratic Iraq. He later commands a military force in Baghdad, where he successfully repelled the invasion of the city by the insurgents. Or maybe not.

Barack 2008

It's nice to have three candidates you like in the Presidential race. Yeah, I still like Hillary, but I'm rooting for Obama this time around, unless Gore jumps into the race.

It is going to be a fascinating time in American history - one of those races that actually makes high school textbooks. Not only are we going to fill the vacancy left by arguably the worst President in United States history, but we are going to test the strength and progress of American society. We're at a crossroads, I feel, one that can end the nasty divide that Rovian politics has given us (it's a shame that man will be remembered in history, too.)

I hope the Barack "Hussein" Obama crap dies. I foresee more "macaca" episodes. I also hope that Clinton and Obama don't rip each other to shreds during the primaries so a weak candidate like Biden or Edwards comes out on top. But people have said that if this happens, Gore just might jump in to save the day. And that wouldn't be too bad. Not bad at all.

We all want to change the world

I was sitting at my desk this morning daydreaming about baseball and looking out at the brilliant blue sky and the church steeple that reaches to the clouds not too far from where I live, when Revolution 9 comes on. Normally I'd just skip to the next song, but for some reason, I wanted to listen to it.

It took me awhile to understand the significance of the Beatles. Growing up, when I heard a Beatles song on a watered down classic rock station, it was usually the bubble gum pop stuff from the early days, like Do You Want to Know a Secret? and P.S. I Love You. I later came to appreciate those songs, but it wasn't until I understood that the reason those songs sounded like pop songs is because the Beatles were the first ones to make songs sound like that.

As I was only three years old when John Lennon was killed, a sort of mystique had always enshrouded the band in my mind. Who was this guy John Lennon? Why was he worshiped as some sort of god? Why was his assassination considered to be on the same level of JFK, RFK, or MLK?

The evolution of my knowledge about music was pretty slow and really did not start to develop until U2 released Achtung Baby!, which was about the strangest music I had ever heard at the time. I was in 8th grade. I bought the cassette tape, but it took me about a year before something clicked and I began to understand the significance of rock music. I still didn't get the significance of the Beatles until I was out of college. Then again, I've always been sort of slow to understand how the world works. I don't know if that is a result of bad schooling or being sheltered from the real world while growing up in Southwest Ohio or simply my tendency to produce tangent thoughts instead of focusing on the task at hand, but it really wasn't until I went to Europe during my junior year of college that I woke up and began to notice that the Earth is rather wobbly on its axis and that a lot of people just plain suck. I've been trying to catch up on all that missed knowledge ever since.

With Revolution 9 playing, I did some googling of the song. I found a breakdown by minutes of each part and was amazed to discover the intricate structure of the song - the noise was actually organized! And yeah, it really is a good soundtrack for a violent revolution - it is what I imagine Iraq to sound like right now.

That being said, next time it comes up in the scramble, I'll probably skip it.

___

Supply, Demand, and Increasing Prices Just Because They Can

Well, there you have it. Exxon Mobil not only recorded the highest profits in its history, but in the history of American Capitalism. And this because consumers are paying exorbitant prices for gasoline!

Oil is an example of Economics 101 gone horribly wrong. In 2006, Exxon Mobil had to increase production to maintain supply at a steady level, and American demand remained pretty level even as prices skyrocketed (and excessive demand for oil in this country is a separate issue that I am not addressing here). The issue for me isn't that prices rose, because they'd have to rise on account of the increased production costs. The issue is that prices rose enough for a company to make more money than any other company in the history of American capitalism. The price increase was falsely high, and Exxon Mobil took advantage of oil supply issues and screwed us into paying more for oil than what we should have paid. It's not like oil is a product like detergent or socks or a cheap plastic toy - it's as necessary to American life as milk. If you could go without it, it adversely affects your life.

In addition, the record prices screwed other businesses. While Exxon Mobil was busy making their record profits, thousands of other companies were losing profits because of the cost of oil. They call this type of dependence a master-slave relationship.

Some sort of price control should be enforced over these companies. I'm not advocating for the nationalization of oil as I've heard from some people; I'm simply saying corporate greed is out of control, and companies that process natural resources should be governed much more strictly. As it is now under cronyism, they have free reign to do what they like, and there isn't much we as consumers can do about it. (And no, not buying oil is not an option in this country where public transportation is non-existent everywhere but major cities.)