Effective, not Affective Campaign - Philly

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/23/us/23philadelphia.html?_r=2&th&emc=th&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Newly elected mayor of Philadelphia, Michael Nutter, is making a difference. This article reported on his recent actions to fight crime in Philadelphia, which at 407 homicides this year, has a higher per capita crime rate of any major city, even more than New York, which has six times the population.

What is even more interesting about Mr. Nutter is where he stood 12 months ago.

Just 12 months ago, Mr. Nutter, a 50-year old former city councilman, was a little-known candidate with a controversial plan to reduce crime who was working 20-hour days, handing out Nutter Butter cookies to voters in a desperate effort to climb out of fifth place in a five-man race.

Now, he has been called the Seabiscuit of this year’s urban politics, having beaten two congressmen, a veteran state legislator and a billionaire businessman in the Democratic primary in May before taking the general election on Nov. 6 by a four-to-one ratio, the largest the city has seen since 1931.

His campaign showed clear policies of declaring crime states of emergency in certain neighborhoods in Philadelphia, allowing police to institute curfews and stop and frisk any suspicious characters.

Responding to concerns by opponents about the risk of civil rights abuses and racial profiling, Mr. Nutter said bluntly, “My view is that people also have a civil right not to get shot."

Mr. Nutter is seen as an antidote to the political malaise that plagued the city for many years, and his campaign of effective and assertive policies got the people of Philadelphia behind him.

Where do we see this in the presidential campaign? Not at all, by my watch, and probably not in the future...

Backlog of Immigration

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/23/us/23immig.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin

Thus US Immigration Agency releases a report that they have the biggest backlog of applications for citizenship that they have ever experienced.

n July and August alone, the federal Citizenship and Immigration Services agency received 2.5 million applications, including petitions for naturalization as well as for the entire range of immigrant visas. That was more than double the total applications it received in the same two months in 2006, said a spokesman, Bill Wright.

This backlog is evident that the US is still a place where people want to come for lower wages and better living conditions, and that our appearance and public perception has not been severely negatively impacted by the actions of the Bush administration.

Also, most of these new citizens are Latin Americans, and who will this demographic be voting for in the next election? are a large part of the 20, in the 40-40-20 electorate?

Bush's support of a dictator in a vital region

Gen. Pervez Musharraf has done far too little to drive Al Qaeda and the Taliban from its Pakistani sanctuaries over the last six years, but President Bush still insists on linking America’s interests to the general’s erratic and authoritarian whims.

Musharraf's dictatorship should not be supported, nor should currently under house arrest Benazir Bhutto be receiving such criticism from Bush, as she is the main proponent for democracy in the government.

The problem with our foreign policy is glorifying candidates who strive to serve our interests, even though it may hurt the government and equity of the country.

We promise to help Pakistan with special forces units and other military support even before the country shows that it is effective in fighting terrorism and supporting democracy.

Politcal Stunting, or genuine discourse?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/22/world/middleeast/22diplo.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin

Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice makes another strong stance in defending her promise to establish a peace initiative by the end of 2008, yet at the same time many are critical of how sincere she is in her remarks.

Ms. Rice has encountered a lot of hectoring from critics at home and abroad who say that the administration is engaging too little and too late, or in ways that are ultimately insubstantial.

“We don’t want a conference that only repeats what’s already been said, or a conference where only pictures are taken,” said Muhammad Zolfa, a member of Saudi Arabia’s Shura Council, an advisory body to King Abdullah.

None of the 40 countries that are attending the countries are entering with a statement they can all agree on, so how can Rice be so optimistic? Is she just naive about the political reality of how difficult a peace negotiation is, or is she simply playing dumb, under a mask of ignorance and idealism?

Surge of Diplomacy?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/21/opinion/21friedman.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin

Condoleeza Rice's priorities have become more and more evident over the past couple months and will continue in this trend for until the end of her term next year.

This op-ed piece provides interesting insight into her actions as of late, in putting more attention in achieving piece in a much more stable region, Israel, than in Iraq.

"Watching Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice making repeated trips to Israel to try to broker some kind of deal between Israelis and Palestinians, while Iraq remains politically unresolved, leaves me feeling like my house is burning down and the fire department has decided to stop along the way to get two cats out of a tree."

Clearly, the word 'surge' comes to mind when thinking of suppressing violence in Iraq. But what about 'diplomatic surge'? Where is this in a) our current actions in Iraq b) media coverage of Iraq?

Israel is a valuable ally, with political, military, and economic power, but with Iraq in the total state of political disarray that WE put it in, isn't our responsibility to see that the political situation be restored?

Sweet, sweet Turkey... and irony.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/20/washington/20bush.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin

Once again the president's idealistic rhetoric makes him again appear as a fool. On a national holiday, Thanksgiving, the unfavorable 'leader of the free world' spoke at a historical site about the ideals that Americans live up to.
The president, in his speech, was thankful for:

“farmers and ranchers who provide us with abundant food,” “entrepreneurs who create new jobs” and “devoted teachers who prepare our children for the opportunities of tomorrow.”

Ironically -- as our heavily subsidized corn industry makes our crop essentially worthless, so that farmer's lose money by selling their corn rather than storing it in giant storehouses, and as our economy with failing credit begins to turn towards recession, and as the 'no child left behind' turns its head away from schools in desperate need of help.

Mr. President's 'call to action' was directed at the public, when it is he who truly needs to act on the complacency that America has taken in so many vital foreign policies: global climate change, the crisis in Darfur, monks being prisoned in Burma. So who is it that needs to act?

Death Penalty working?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/18/us/18deter.html?_r=2&th&emc=th&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

New studies out of Louisiana State University attempt to prove that the death penalty is statistically a deterrent for homicides, and that "For each inmate put to death, the studies say, 3 to 18 murders are prevented."
However, the current studies have gone under severe criticism from scholars, economists, sociologists, and political scientists discussing the veritability of the isolated deterrent effect.
Justin Wolfers, an economist at the University of Pennsylvania, wrote in the Stanford Law Review in 2005. “The existing evidence for deterrence,” they concluded, “is surprisingly fragile.”
And with the Supreme Court's new moratorium on lethal injections, these studies play a key role in determining the ethical purpose and place that lethal execution has within our legal system.
What role should it play?

Political Stifling, much?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/17/washington/17nsa.html?_r=2&th&emc=th&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

In a case between an Islamic charity which essentially had its basic rights violated by the government's against the National Security Agency's eavesdropping program, critical evidence was removed by the court because of political pressure. This is clear evidence of the government interfering with the legal process, simply because it is the FBI who infringed on these laws.
Problem: where is more media coverage of this violation?

Climate Talks Taking an Urgent Approach

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/03/world/asia/03bali.html?th&emc=th

Apparently with the UN talks on the global climate issue, the debate and discourse has reached a new height. This is great, with all the nations coming together to discuss the newest report from the Global Climate Council, and the recognition of the immediacy of this issue.
My concern is how little this is appearing in the policy formats of the candidates, as well as the general mass media agenda. The public needs to be engaged through the media in order be a part of this discourse, and encourage the candidates to address this in their campaigns.

Bush don't know 'Green'!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/sep/29/usnews.climatechange
- I'm pissed off. -
"George Bush was castigated by European diplomats and found himself isolated yesterday after a special conference on climate change ended without any progress."

So, once again Mr. Bush's banter in front of the leaders of the world show how isolated the US is one this issue. It was clear, says there is no support among the industrialised countries for the proposition that we should proceed on the basis of voluntary commitments. It really is disgusting, the arrogance that we have to separate ourselves to serve our "best interests of economic growth and prosperity".
Furthermore, it's ironic how the governor of California, the 'terminator', is doing more with his state than Bush is doing for the US. He's actually putting caps on pollutants and emissions having just signed a law requiring a 25% cut in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020, with penalties for industries that do not comply. California's three biggest utilities must produce at least 20% of their electricity using renewable sources by 2010.

Axis of Evil losing an Axis?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/04/world/asia/04diplo.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin

So it looks like North Korea is no longer a threat. Now agreed to a plan to have its entire nuclear weapons programmed disabled by the end of the year, Bush calls it a "diplomatic victory for the US", as if the US were the only ones being diplomats (I would say they don't even live up to that standard).

And now we parallel this to Iran, where in the media we basically have war simulator programs about "what we bomb first". Bush gave his typical cowardly answer, stating he would only go into talks with Iran ‘Yeah, just so long as we can achieve something, so long as we are able to get our objective,’. We know what your objective is, Mr. Bush, but you need to make the effort to push it, diplomatically. It seems to me like we're not even really trying.

Religious Minorities in US -- Nobody does it better than the Jews

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/02/us/02hindu.html?_r=2&th&emc=th&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

So it looks like the Hindus and other Indian-Americans are turning to represent themselves in the community by establishing centers and gaining attention from the government. These minorities are highly skilled, well educated people and deserve credible representation. Its good to see that they are turning the Jewish community centers and activist leaders to learn from and partner with because, as we all know, nobody does it better than the jews.

Federal judge rules 2 Patriot Act provisions unconstitutional

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/09/26/patriot.act/index.html

A federal court on Wednesday struck down two provisions of the Patriot Act dealing with searches and intelligence gathering, saying they violate the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures with regard to criminal prosecutions.

"It is critical that we, as a democratic nation, pay close attention to traditional Fourth Amendment principles," wrote Judge Ann Aiken of the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon in her 44-page decision. "The Fourth Amendment has served this nation well for 220 years, through many other perils."

Awesome! Let's just see how long it takes the Justice Department to 'review the court's decision'.
I'm starting a pool... how does 10 months sound?

Taking one step forwards...?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/25/washington/25health.html?th&emc=th

A bill that is set to pass in Congress, but has to get by a threatened veto by President Bush, is an example of how skewed our government's priorities are. The bill would cover four million children, in addition to the 6.6 million already enrolled. The overwhelming majority of those on the rolls are in low-income families.
Yet some how, Bush calls it “an incremental step toward the goal of government-run health care for every American." The reason that somehow seems logical in Bush and other replublican lobbyist's heads is that the bill itself is 'too expensive'. Yet we have the money to invest in our military and not the health of poor children in America? We say we're protecting ourselves by investing in this 'war on terror' (which I am skeptical even to consider a war), and these are the ramifications.

Clinton vs. the Democrats?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/23/us/politics/23dems.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin

As Hilary begins to gain more popularity and strength in the polls, as this article indicates, her rivals begin to focus their attention less on their own image, and instead on derailing that of Hilary's. Even advisers and campaign leaders for the other candidates, such as Edwards and Obama, say that she is beginning to pull away.
Is this campaign for the democratic candidate going to become Hilary vs. the rest? How credible is this article in predicting the next 10 months of the campaign, and will we see it reflected in the news. Keep your eyes open... bullets will fly.

Definition of Democracy

There has been much controversy in Louisiana over the Jena Six and the huge gathering of 10,000 protesters, marched through the small town in defiance of the way these six teens had been treated. Racial issues are said to have been the reason why these six black teens were charged with attempted murder and conspiracy of one white teenager. All types of celebrities and activists have been involved, once again showing that the civil rights movement is still going on.
I would like to draw an interesting parallel to another protest going on halfway across the world, in Myanmar province, in southeast Asia.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/21/world/asia/21myanmar.html?th&emc=th

1,000 monks line the streets in protest of what was a sudden 500% increase by the government in the fuel prices, with no explanation to the public. The Buddhist Clergy, the most organized and powerful organization next to the military, led the protests with monks walking through the largest cities in Myanmar. Some were sprayed with tear gas, but for the most part the government allowed the protests to take place without much interference.

I enjoy the act of protesting, voicing concern for civil rights and liberties, and taking a stand against any injustices. The true heart of democracy is seen in these two separate stories, and there's nothing "Americanized" about it. It is simply a belief, a right, and an act that defines this style of government, and defines this way of life.

Democratic Fundraiser Committed Fraud

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/21/us/politics/21hsu.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin

So in trying to stray a little from the overwhelming bias of my blog, I'll share a few comments about the article stating that Norman Hsu, a major donor to democratic candidates and causes, is under investigation from the FBI. He has been charged with mail fraud, wire fraud and violating the Federal Election Campaign Act. Conviction on all counts could bring 45 years in prison.
This is a serious offense, and clearly this guy is a serious criminal, having been a fugitive avoiding another fraud charge dating back 15 years (he fell violently ill in September and federal agents finally got to him).
Only one candidate has been confirmed, and that's Hilary Clinton, who's campaign staff is cooperating with the FBI in the investigation.
However, it's hard to overlook such corruption, such deception, and injustice in the campaign fundraising today. I'm not surprised to see this in the democratic party, just as I'm sure it occurs in the republican party as well. A little shocking, but I guess this is the way it works here.

Another downer in Iraq

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/13/world/middleeast/13baghdad.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin

So ironically, a contract on oil law in Iraq (essentially going to divide up the oil contracts, one going to Hunt Oil company in Dallas) has fallen apart. I say ironically because oil (a.k.a. 'liberty') was the reason for going into Iraq, in my opinion, and now it should be at least another six to eight months until American TNCs can get a piece of the pie.

The central element of the compromise was agreed to in February after months of difficult negotiations among Iraq’s political groups.

The main parties in those negotiations were Iraqi Kurds, who were eager to sign contracts with international oil companies to develop their northern fields; Arab Shiites, whose population is concentrated around the country’s southern fields; and Arab Sunnis, with fewer oil resources where they predominate.

And now, because of complicated company policies, the proposal has essentially fallen apart.

*snicker*

Congress finally does something right...

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/08/washington/08loan.html?_r=2&th=&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&emc=th&adxnnlx=1189433534-KZY8ZOen/Otc7oiaKR4VGg&oref=slogin

So Congress was finally productive and passed a bill that sharply cuts funding subsidies to lenders and transfers those funds to student grants. Its terrible how students get so far into debt so early in their lives, what they need is more grant money. The final bill, hammered out this week in a House-Senate conference committee, "alters many of the ground rules for financing higher education, offering forgiveness on student loans to graduates who work for 10 years or more in public service professions like teaching, firefighting and the police, and limiting monthly payments on federally backed loans to 15 percent of the borrower’s discretionary income."

Finally, some of the $12 billion that the Republicans took out from federal student aid programs last year is beginning to be put back.
Furthermore, the lower half of the article reveals corruption in the student loan industry, with one expert saying “I don’t know how we can treat banks as credible arbiters of what appropriate subsidies should be.” The violations that are being investigated show the corruption and greed with these lenders, and how so many students have become victims deep in debt.

Gates Plans Speech to Detail The Roots of Security Policy

So Defense Secretary Robert Gates will attempt to "bridge the idealism and realism among Republicans". The pragmatism that has dominated Bush's foreign policy, and changed the way America is viewed by the rest of the world must be changed. This ideal of 'democracy for all' has translated to a sort of arrogance on America's part in attempting to imbue a democratic ideal in a Muslim world.
This just isn't feasible. Gates knows it, hopefully Bush knows it, and the American people know it. Muslim culture, the Islamic faith, and the general ideology doesn't gel with the constitutions that we write 'for them'. Gates will argue that in weighing the "competing impulses in US foreign policy: realism vs. idealism, freedom vs. security, values vs. interests - the country must incorporate both".
Finally, steps taken towards change. Hopefully this controversial speech will translate into action. Probably not, but I'm optimistic.

Mexican President Assails U.S. Measures on Migrants

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/03/world/americas/03mexico.html?_r=2&th&emc=th&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

"The Bush administration has stepped up raids on factories and farms suspected of hiring illegal workers, imposing heavy fines and deporting a record number of illegal immigrants in 2006". Last year, Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents deported 183,431 people after raids nationwide.
Felipe Caldéron's criticism of Bush's treatment of illegal migrants shows an important development in international politics. Even suggesting "that the deportation of undocumented immigrants bordered on a violation of human rights", Caldéron's fierce comments show that some countries aren't afraid to take a stand against the US for their rights of their citizens. Paralleling Hugo Chavez's need for "his own democracy, free of American influence", the Mexican President's national address is one of hope for the developing world. This opens the door for other nations such as Honduras, whose entire economic center is controlled by United Fruit Company, Pepsi, and Coke, can fight for governmental and economic sovereignty.

No Time for Threats

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/30/opinion/30thu2.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin

This article definitely has its opinion, judging from its opening statement. "French President Nicolas Sarkozy made the wrong gesture at the wrong time by brandishing the possible use of force against Iran’s nuclear weapons program". The reason why this gesture is viewed as 'wrong' by the author of the article is because Sarkozy had previously stated "France would not join Washington in military action against Iran", making him sound a bit hypocritical.
What is essentially the purpose of Sarkozy's blunt, direct, and American-supporting statement is that if negotations aren't productive, or if "diplomatic initiative fails", then military force will be necessary to keep stability within the region and prevent the use of Iran's nuclear force.
The irony of it all, though, is this "bullying" of Iran is most likely compromising any chance of a diplomatic initiative or future agreement between Iran and the western allies. Was there, perhaps, and alterior motive behind Sarkozy's sudden 'change of mind'? Will the rest of Europe join Sarkozy and Bush in this "bullying" of Iran? Does Bush truly want a diplomatic initiative in Iran, because it seemed oddly convenient that in a press meeting on August 29th, Bush "suggested the nuclear threat from Iran was a justification for keeping American troops in Iraq."
Perhaps an alterior motive, perhaps not.