(I added a photo of Sen. Yee joining the protest at UCSF. – promoted by Brian Leubitz)
The people who cook lunches, clean classrooms, and provide medical care at the University of California live in poverty. 96% of the people who do these important, necessary jobs are eligible to receive public poverty assistance. Many people working at the UC — one of the world’s most prestigious universities — have to work two or even three jobs just to pay rent and put food on the table for their families.
I just got back from the picket line here at UC Santa Barbara, where I’m a teacher and graduate student. The American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees Local 3299 (AFSCME), which represents the 8,500 people who cook, clean, and work in health clinics across the University, today began a five-day strike after more than a full year of demanding a better contract with fair wages . There are about 100 or so workers and supporters at the main entrance to UCSB right now, demonstrating for a fair contract. Spirits are high, because everyone knows that the University simply cannot work without them — so they’re going to win a fair contract. It’s just a matter of time.
The contract that these folks have had for the last several years is terrible. Currently in Santa Barbara, the median home price is $1,000,000. Average rents for a one bedroom apartment start at about $1,600 (check Craigslist for a taste of that nonsense). Yet, these workers are paid only $10.28 to $11.50 per hour . No wonder so many of them get public assistance simply to afford housing.
The workers aren’t asking for much. Just a raise to $15.00 per hour, and a pay scale that includes a raise every now and then. $15.00 per hour still won’t be nearly enough to afford housing in one of the most expensive housing markets in the world, but it will help some people work fewer hours at their second and third jobs, so that they can spend more time at home, with their children.
The University of California has a massive budget, and they have plenty of money to spread around to pay the salaries of important people like basketball coaches and executive administrators. It’s time for the UC to give the same respect to all of its employees.
Manuel Perez is bringing a socially conservative, economically progressive county back to the Democrats. Imperial County is one of the poorest in California. It’s part of the California 80th Assembly District, which reaches from Palm Springs to Mexico and Arizona. dday gives the best brief of it here. It’s not on the radar of some of the wealthy liberals in the west of the district, which is one of the reasons why we’ve lost this race to Bonnie Garcia over and over. Imperial County has been voting against registration and handing victory to the Republicans, but it’s looking up in 2008. Voters in Riverside and Imperial Counties have a winning progressive this year.
Manuel Perez was raised in both Coachella and Calexico, he does not dismiss the voters in Imperial County.
“Manuel Perez has demonstrated the integrity, honesty and due diligence to bring forth the true representation of Assembly District 80.” — Victor Carillo, Supervisor District #1
“I’m supporting Manuel Perez for State Assembly because he is the most qualified candidate and he is well versed in the Imperial and Coachella Valley. I am confident that Manuel will keep the interests of the Imperial Valley at heart in the California State Assembly.” — Tony Tirado, Imperial County Democratic Central Committee Chair.
His healthcare priorities come from his binational research on the health of women farm workers, and his work with Borrego Community Health Foundation.
The California Medical Association PAC and SEIU healthcare workers and nurses recently endorsed Perez, touting his healthcare advocacy and efforts to provide healthcare for all the residents in the 80th Assembly District.
Manuel Perez also earned the endorsement of the California Nurses Association.
“Manuel Perez is on the front line of the healthcare crisis, making sure kids see pediatricians and seniors receive needed medicine,” said Zenei Cortez, RN President California Nurses Association. “He’ll provide fresh ideas and needed leadership in solving the state’s healthcare challenges.”
His education priorities come from his Schools not Jails experience and his budget battles on behalf of the students of the Coachella Valley Unified School District.
The New River, and its toxic threat to the health of local residents, informs his environmentalism. A grassroots organizer is running for state office, as a citizen, a teacher, a healthcare provider, and advocate for social justice. The only Democrat in the race who speaks Spanish, the only Harvard graduate in the race who also knows poverty firsthand.
Our most critical unions, key legislators, and advocates like Alice Huffman of the NAACP and Dolores Huerta, co-founder of UFW support Manuel Perez, which means he’ll actually get to take that information to the state legislature and get things done. But it’s also going to take grassroots support of the currency persuasion.
This is a call to all those who support the progressive platform that John Edwards pushed throughout the primary season. Even if you currently support another candidate actively, this is a call to you. And even if you are just unable to support anyone but John, this is a call to you. And even if you never actively supported John Edwards but you admired the stands he took on issues, there is something you can do.
Now, I’ve spoken to both Senator Clinton and Senator Obama. They have both pledged to me and more importantly through me to America, that they will make ending poverty central to their campaign for the presidency.
And more importantly, they have pledged to me that as President of the United States they will make ending poverty and economic inequality central to their Presidency. This is the cause of my life and I now have their commitment to engage in this cause.
We need to help John hold them accountable and the way we can do that is use our voice, just as John has shown us, that we can speak out. Whatever issue was important to you, take that issue and contact the other two remaining candidates and demand they not only address it but that they promise to keep their pledge to John.
I’m sure this is something that goes without saying, but be kind and respectful when talking about these issues with the people you call. We are all Democrats (well many of us here) and this is not about the partisan infighting, this is about holding our party and our candidates accountable for what we believe the Democratic Party should stand for.
There will be no talking points and no script, just speak from your heart and let them know that these issues matter to you as a Democrat and as an American and that we demand that our candadites speak to all these issues.
It is a revolutionary world we live in. Governments repress their people; and millions are trapped in poverty while the nation grows rich; and wealth is lavished on armaments.
For the fortunate among us, there is the temptation to follow the easy and familiar paths of personal ambition and financial success so grandly spread before those who enjoy the privilege of education. But that is not the road history has marked for us.
The future does not belong to those who are content with today, apathetic toward common problems and their fellow man alike. Rather it will belong to those who can blend vision, reason and courage in a personal commitment to the ideals and great enterprises of American society.
Robert F. Kennedy went on a poverty tour in 1968, forty years ago this month. “Kennedy’s purpose in touring eastern Kentucky was to examine the outcomes of the first wave of “war on poverty” legislation with the people it most affected.” But what people remembered most about this tour was the fact that Robert spent so much time with individuals talking about their issues and struggles. Robert make this part of his run for President and his reason for running also reminds me of John, “I do not run for the Presidency merely to oppose any man, but to propose new policies. I run because I am convinced that this country is on a perilous course and because I have such strong feelings about what must be done, and I feel that I’m obliged to do all I can.”
Kennedy stood on a ticket of racial and economic justice, non-aggression in foreign policy, decentralization of power and social improvement. A crucial element to his campaign was an engagement with the young, whom he identified as being the future of a reinvigorated American society based on partnership and equality.
Kennedy’s policy objectives did not sit well with the business world, in which he was viewed as something of a fiscal liability, opposed to the tax increases necessary to fund such programs of social improvement. When verbally attacked at a speech he gave during his tour of the universities he was asked, “And who’s going to pay for all this, senator?”, to which Kennedy replied with typical candor, “You are.” It was this intense and frank mode of dialogue with which Kennedy was to continue to engage those whom he viewed as not being traditional allies of Democrat ideals or initiatives.
…
Kennedy made urban poverty a chief concern of his campaign, which in part led to enormous crowds that would attend his events in poor urban areas or rural parts of Appalachia.
A hatip to LaEscapee for the following piece, it draws parallels between John Edwards and Robert F. Kennedy by using their won words. It is also the reason I included John’s speech at the DNC meeting in February ’07.
Suspended not Ended: John Edwards 08
And this is a plea to all those who never supported Edwards, I ask that you too read these or listen to the clip of John’s speech and try to understand why so many of us feel that John’s voice must be kept in the debate even if he is not officially a candidate. This is not a call for votes nor a plea for anyone to change their minds. This is merely another means to inspire you to remember why you call yourself a Demcorat and that we are all in this together, that we all have to speak out for these issues even if we do not agree on how they should be solved.
The following are clips from John Edwards speech during the DNC Winter Meeting and it’s amazing, just amazing. I want you to look at these if you haven’t or even if you have so that you can see how Edwards stayed on message for an entire year and that he spoke to these issues with such passion and clarity.
We have to remember what brought us to Edwards, that he doesn’t just speak about why he needs to be President, but why we need to be the Party that we used to be. We have to push the party to remember its roots and to remember who we stand for, it’s so important and that is why these issues go beyond John Edwards, but througout the heart of this party and the Country. The only thing the last eight years have proven to us is that Republicans could give a rats ass about the everyday American. They are the party of the Corporate hand outs and the endless wars.
Highlights: John Edwards at the DNC Winter Meeting
And, the full text of this speech. Why do I think this is important? Because it was clear from the beginning that Edwards was talking about change for the Democratic Party and for our Country! I also think this speech clearly shows where John was the first candidate of “change”. He used the phrase “transformational change” in February of 2007 and he used the same phrase up to the very end his campaign was active in this race.
Washington, D.C.
February 2, 2007
Thank you.
We’re all here together – but why are we here?
Why are we here?
We are here because somewhere in America an eight-year old girl goes to sleep hungry, a little girl who ought to be drawing pictures and learning multiplication cries herself to sleep, praying that her father, who has been out of work for two years, will get a job again. It doesn’t have to be that way.
We are here because somewhere in America, a hotel housekeeper walks a picket line with her union brothers and sisters fighting for decent health care benefits during the day and works the late-shift at a diner at night so that she and her family can live a decent life and so her boy can go to college and have choices she never had. And somewhere a young man folds a college acceptance letter and puts it in his drawer because even with his part-time job and his mother’s second job, he knows he cannot afford to go. It doesn’t have to be that way.
We are here because somewhere in America a mother wipes her hand on a dishcloth to go answer a knock on her door … and opens it to find an army chaplain and an officer standing there with solemn faces and her boy’s name – her patriotic son who enlisted after September 11 – on their lips. It doesn’t have to be that way.
We are here because somewhere in the world, a 5-year old boy in a refugee camp is bending under the weight of his 2-year old sister. His family massacred, he carries his remaining sister everywhere, and sleeps with his arms wrapped tightly around her, knowing that tomorrow he will have to do the same thing, and again the next day and the day after that because she is all the family he has now. It doesn’t have to be that way.
We are here because somewhere in America a father comes home from the second shift and feels a raging fever on the brow of his sleeping daughter as he kisses her goodnight. And now, bone-weary and worried, he cradles that child in his arms at the emergency room, because there is nowhere else for him to go. It doesn’t have to be that way.
They are why we are here. Because everywhere in America, people are counting on us to stand up for them.
And so I ask you, will you stand up for that tired father forced into emergency rooms to get health care for his little girl?
Will you stand up for the brave young boy in the refugee camp?
Will you stand up for the working men and women in our labor movement who have to fight for decent working conditions and living wages?
Will you stand up for the young man who knows that education is his way out of the cycle of poverty and yet it seems beyond his grasp?
Will you stand up for that hungry eight-year old girl so she doesn’t give up on her life before it’s even begun?
Will you stand up for all the American families whose loved ones are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan?
Will you stand up?
Will you stand up for America?
Because if we don’t stand up, who will?
If we don’t speak out, who will?
Forty years ago, speaking in protest against the war in Vietnam on the eve of its escalation, the Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King said there comes a time when silence is betrayal. Silence is betrayal.
That time has come again. We cannot stand silent.
They have to hear you. Can they hear you?
I believe it is a betrayal not to speak out against the escalation of the war our nation is engaged in today, in Iraq.
It is a betrayal for this President to send more troops into harm’s way when we know it will not succeed in bringing stability to the region.
And it is not right by our silence to enable this President to escalate the war in Iraq. And we must not delude ourselves: our silence enables this President to escalate the war.
It is a betrayal not to stop the President’s plan when we have the responsibility, the power and the actual tools to prevent it.
Being satisfied with non-binding resolutions we know this President will ignore is a betrayal. And shutting down debate in the Senate on this issue is worse than a betrayal. It’s an outright denial of the people’s will.
And one more thing, while I’m at it.
You described yourself as “the decider.” I have news for you. The American people are the real “deciders,” Mr. President. And they are saying, “You have had your chance.”
Americans are speaking out. And our leaders must do no less.
You must stand up now against George Bush’s escalation of the war in Iraq. George Bush is counting on us not to stand up, not to fight against this escalation with everything we have. George Bush is counting on a Democratic Party that will not press for what we know is right.
Silence is betrayal.
Opposing this escalation with all the vigor and tools we have is a test of our political courage. And you’d better believe that George Bush, Dick Cheney and Karl Rove are betting that we don’t have that courage.
They don’t think we have it in us. They’re counting on their opponents to be weak, and political, and careful.
This is not the time for political calculation. This is the time for political courage. Stand up.
Being honest and changing course in Iraq is the first step in restoring America’s ability to provide moral leadership throughout the world. And make no mistake: America must lead. We are the pre-eminent, stabilizing power in the world. If we don’t stand up, who will?
This is the time for political courage – not only when it comes to speaking out against Iraq, but also about the challenges we face here at home.
Because, when it comes to 37 million Americans living in poverty, silence is betrayal.
One in every five children – count them, one in every five American children – live in poverty, here on the richest nation on the planet. It doesn’t have to be that way.
The causes of poverty are complex, entrenched, and powerful. And our will to address them and restore the promises of equality and social justice must be just as strong. Are you strong enough? Will you stand up to end poverty in America? It means addressing education, jobs, health care, housing, predatory lending, and personal responsibility. The fight will be long and it will not be easy. Are you ready? Will you use your voice against poverty, or will you stand silent? Stand up. Stand up to eradicate poverty in America.
When it comes to 47 million Americans without health care, silence is betrayal.
The 47 million are silent victims of a health care system gone wrong, where policies are driven by profits not patient care. We have to stop letting the health insurance companies and the big pharmaceutical concerns decide our nation’s health care policy. We have to give the silent victims, who stand in line at free clinics and use the expired medicines of friends and neighbors, we have to give them the dignity of universal health care.
And while we’re at it, we have to stop using words like “access to health care” when we know with certainty those words mean something less than universal care. Who are you willing to leave behind without the care he needs? Which family? Which child?
We need a truly universal solution, and we need it now.
Will you stand up for universal health insurance in America?
And it’s time we stood up for an energy policy that’s not dictated by the profit margins of Big Oil — and an environmental policy that’s not promoted by or regulated by polluters. Today, not tomorrow, or in the next decade or in the next generation. Today, our planet is at risk, and here, again, silence is betrayal.
So, will you speak out? Will you stand up?
These are the great moral imperatives of our time. And by breaking the silence we are not breaking faith with our flag or our forefathers or our brave young men and women in uniform. We are keeping faith with America.
Because we are better than this. We are better than this.
We should be the bright light, the beacon for all the world.
We are not the country of the Superdome in New Orleans after Katrina;
We are not the country of Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo;
We are not the country of secret surveillance and government behind closed doors.
We are Americans, and we’re better than that.
And we are Democrats, the party of action – not reaction. We are Democrats, the party of principle – not appeasement. The time for half-measures, empty promises, and sweet rhetoric is gone. Now is the time for courage, decisiveness and moral leadership.
It’s time to stand up for the promise of America again — and for the principle that every American matters, no matter where you come from, or what color your skin is, or how much money you have in your pocket.
Let’s stand up for the working people whose labor made this country great. America was built by men and women who worked with their hands. And organized labor has fought for and made better the lives of every working man and woman, by giving them a voice – labor never stands silent where wrongs need to be righted. Will you stand with them? It is time we acknowledged that it is organized labor, which has protected the American worker against mistreatment by corporate America. I am proud to stand beside organized labor? Will you stand with them, too? Will you walk with them and march with them?
We know one thing for sure: it is time to be patriotic about something other than war. It is time to do what you know is right and to speak out against what you know is wrong.
Not tomorrow. Now. Speak out now, take action now.
We don’t have to wait to see if someone keeps the promises of a 2008 campaign. In fact, the transformational change this country needs cannot wait until January 2009.
Tomorrow begins today. And our obligation to act starts right here, right now.
Because somewhere in America, because everywhere in America, people are counting on us to stand by them and to fight alongside them for what we know in our hearts is right.
So let’s stand up together. We have always been the party of promise who stood with the working man and woman, the party of hope who stood with the needy, the party of compassion who stood with the young and the old and the frail. It is who we are.
In times like these, we don’t need to redefine the Democratic Party; we need to reclaim the Democratic Party.
Thank you, God bless you and God bless this great country.
And for those who doubt that John Edwards has given us a call to arms, all you need to do is read from his speech in New Orleans, just one week ago from today and you can see that he was addressing something more than just his Presidnential Campaign, but to the very heart of this party and the fight to reclaim this Country for the right reasons.
I began my presidential campaign here (New Orleans) to remind the country that we, as citizens and as a government, have a moral responsibility to each other, and what we do together matters. We must do better, if we want to live up to the great promise of this country that we all love so much.
…
All of you who have been involved in this campaign and this movement for change and this cause, we need you. It is in our hour of need that your country needs you. Don’t turn away, because we have not just a city of New Orleans to rebuild. We have an American house to rebuild.
This work goes on. It goes on right here in Musicians’ Village. There are homes to build here, and in neighborhoods all along the Gulf. The work goes on for the students in crumbling schools just yearning for a chance to get ahead. It goes on for day care workers, for steel workers risking their lives in cities all across this country. And the work goes on for two hundred thousand men and women who wore the uniform of the United States of America, proud veterans, who go to sleep every night under bridges, or in shelters, or on grates, just as the people we saw on the way here today. Their cause is our cause.
Their struggle is our struggle. Their dreams are our dreams.
Do not turn away from these great struggles before us. Do not give up on the causes that we have fought for. Do not walk away from what’s possible, because it’s time for all of us, all of us together, to make the two Americas one.
Thank you. God bless you, and let’s go to work. Thank you all very much.
So, I ask you, what do you chose to do? I will end with this amazing quote from John that was pointed out to me by NCDemAmy. It’s from Four Trials, which I actually read last year and it’s perfect for the occassion.
I have learned two great lessons–that there will always be heartache and
struggle, and that people of strong will can make a difference. One is a
sad lesson; the other is inspiring. I choose to to be inspired.
I’m asking you, because your candidate is out of the race, are you going to chose to be sad and do nothing, or are you going to chose to be inspired? And for those of you who never supported John, are you going to continue to be angry at those who don’t support your candidate now or are you going to chose to be inspired by their passion and their ideals? Are you going to help your candidate woo them by addressing these very real issues rather than bullying and delcaring that a vote for John is a vote that is lost.
Nothing was lost by supporting John Edwards and so much was gained for this party and can still be gained for all of us who want to keep this message alive and well in 2008 and beyond.
You can be disappointed, but you can’t walk away.
John Edwards – November 2nd, Election Night, Front of Kerry supporters gathered in Boston.
John Edwards was FIRST to take the cue, from billionaire Warren Buffett, about our US Tax Policy which should NO LONGER favor the Rich over the interest of ordinary Working Folks
Nothing better reflects the problems with our tax code than the lower tax rates for capital gains. As Warren Buffett says, there is something wrong when he pays taxes at a lower rate than his secretary.
As president, Edwards will:
– Raise the tax rate on capital gains to 28 percent for the most fortunate taxpayers – taxing the investment income of the wealthiest Americans similarly to the wages of the middle class.
– Repeal the Bush tax cuts for the highest-income households and keep the tax on very large estates (above $4 million for couples).
– Declare war on offshore tax havens by cracking down on tax shelter promoters, cooperating with allies to fight tax havens, and closing the “tax gap” by improving IRS customer service, simplifying tax filing, auditing more large corporations and high-income individuals and requiring more third-party reporting.
– Close unfair loopholes like the tax breaks for hedge funds and private equity fund managers and unlimited executive pensions.
(Welcome back Representative! – promoted by Bob Brigham)
We have a problem with our economy. The raw numbers say the economic pie is growing, but the larger pieces are all going to a small minority of Americans — meaning that for most Americans, wages are barely keeping pace with inflation.
Clearly, it's time to reconnect the economic fortunes of front-line workers to those of their CEO's — who are commonly making making tens of millions of dollars annually — by cutting off tax subsidies for these enormous compensation packages if they are more than 25 times the salary of the lowest paid worker in the company.
When the economy is growing and the only people who are benefiting are the wealthiest among us, we have a problem with our priorities.
When the share of income going to the wealthiest Americans is growing, and the number of people living in poverty is rising as well, we have a problem with our priorities.
When issues like income inequality and poverty are not part of our national political debate, we have a problem with our priorities.
It is time to finally put to rest the ridiculous idea that if we just take care of the wealthy then the rest of the economy will take care of itself. The evidence is overwhelming: it is just not true.
That's why I have introduced new legislation designed to fight income inequality in America starting at the top: by reconnecting the economic fortunes of those in the executive suite with those of their frontline employees.
My bill, the Income Equity Act of 2007, is a simple, common sense piece of legislation that would limit the amount of executive compensation corporations can deduct as a legitimate business expense to 25 times the pay of a company's lowest paid worker.
It's not the government's job to tell corporations what they can pay their executives, but American taxpayers have the right to choose whether or not to subsidize these out of control executive salaries. If a corporation chooses to provide compensation packages that are disconnected from the wages of average workers, then I believe we should have a say over how much of that compensation is tax deductible.
While this particular driver of income inequality can be slowed through specific legislation, it speaks to a larger trend that will require comprehensive changes to fully address. In short, the basic assumptions of the Bush “ownership society” have been shown to be bankrupt: the culture of individualism; the conviction that people who aren't getting ahead “just aren't trying”; the belief that government's only responsibility is to protect business and the wealthy, and the rest will magically take care of itself — these ideas are not just unsustainable, but fundamentally at odds with the sense of collective responsibility that is a core part of who we are as a nation.
On a very basic level, we understand that our fates — rich and poor alike — are ultimately connected. I believe that we should aspire as a nation to be judged not by how well we do by the wealthy, but rather, in the words of gospel, by how we treat “the least of these.”
I hope that this legislation is something that will start a conversation about the best way to address widening inequality here at home, and best wishes to everyone for a wonderful Thanksgiving!
Anti-war movements have their bases set in popular culture. Political leaders will co-opt the popular culture in order to shape their images and to present their messages. Being a pop culture leader in an anti-war movement is not without its peril. Being the target of pop culture is similarly not without its peril.
The purveyors and icons of popular culture have to climb aboard the Peace Train (thank you, Dolly Parton) in order for an anti-war movement to advance. We saw this in large measure during the Vietnam Civil War when artists like Bob Dylan, Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young and others wrote and performed anti-war rhetoric. Norman Whitfield wrote the song “War” and wanted the the Temptations to perform it. However, apparently in response to the conservative following of the Temptations, only Edwin Starr of the Temptations and Whitfield recorded the single so as not to alienate the fan base.
More recently, we have seen the results of The Dixie Chicks’ Natalie Maines making an off-handed remark and Michael Moore’s film-making which were excoriated and blown out of proportion by the Repugnants. More specifically, fans of Maines, Emily Robison, and Martie Maguire were encouraged to destroy the group’s albums and CDs following Maine’s remarks about the embarrassment which is the so-called Pres. Bush. However, The Dixie Chicks kept its stride and bounced back with with an amazing anti-war song, “Not Ready To Make Nice,” one of my favorite songs of all time. The song and album won five Grammy Awards at the 49th Grammy Awards Ceremony. I also personally credit The Dixie Chicks for helping to significantly turn the country away from the dominion of Darkness. Michael Moore has similarly risked his life and standing in the community in order to present Truth to Power with his documentary films including “911.” As with The Dixie Chicks, Moore has suffered at the hands of the Repugnants and their lackeys.
Now, Pink has joined the fray. I love her song and lyrics “Dear Mr. President” that features the Indigo Girls and adore the accompanying video as well. If you have not heard the song, check it out at i-tunes. If you have not seen the video, it is now playing on Time Warner Cable On Demand, at least in the Beaumont/Banning area:
Artist: Pink
Album: “I’m not Dead” (2006)
Dear Mr. President (Feat. Indigo Girls) Lyrics
Dear Mr. President
Come take a walk with me
Let’s pretend we’re just two people and
You’re not better than me
I’d like to ask you some questions if we can speak honestly.
What do you feel when you see all the homeless on the street
Who do you pray for at night before you go to sleep
What do you feel when you look in the mirror
Are you proud?
How do you sleep while the rest of us cry
How do you dream when a mother has no chance to say goodbye
How do you walk with your head held high
Can you even look me in the eye
And tell me why?
Dear Mr. President
Were you a lonely boy
Are you a lonely boy
Are you a lonely boy
How can you say
No child is left behind
We’re not dumb and we’re not blind
They’re all sitting in your cells
While you pay the road to hell.
What kind of father would take his own daughter’s rights away
And what kind of father might hate his own daughter if she were gay
I can only imagine what the first lady has to say
You’ve come a long way from whiskey and cocaine.
How do you sleep while the rest of us cry
How do you dream when a mother has no chance to say goodbye
How do you walk with your head held high
Can you even look me in the eye?
Let me tell you bout hard work
Minimum wage with a baby on the way
Let me tell you bout hard work
Rebuilding your house after the bombs took them away
Let me tell you bout hard work
Building a bed out of a cardboard box
Let me tell you bout hard work
Hard work
Hard work
You don’t know nothing bout hard work
Hard work
Hard work
Oh!
How do you sleep at night
How do you walk with your head held high
Dear Mr. President
You’d never take a walk with me
Would you?
Here is a list of anti-war songs that can be found at onegoodmove.org:
The Price of Oil-Billy Bragg
CodePINK For Peace-Pat Humphries/Sandy Opatow
Bombs Over Baghdad-John Trudell
The Bell-Stephan Smith, Pete Seeger, Mary Harris, Dean Ween
My Hero Mr President-Paula Cole
To Washington-John Mellencamp
Jacobs Ladder-Chumbawamba (not in our name)
Bomb The World-Michael Franti and Spearhead
March of Death-Zack de la Rocha & DJ Shadow
A World Gone Mad…-Beastie Boys
The Final Straw-R.E.M.
We Want Peace-Lenny Kravitz
Life During Wartime-Billie Joe Armstrong (Green Day)
We’re the Enemy-The John Kasper Band
Freestyle Live From No Man’s Land-Saul Williams (not in our name)
Perfectly Comfortable-Alan Fletcher
Bomb The World (Armageddon Version)-Michael Franti and Spearhead
Bush and Saddam-Everton Blender
Self Evident-Ani di Franco
I would appeal to the artistic community to become more visible in the anti-war movement. Songwriters, musicians, actors, screenwriters, producers, filmmakers, arise!
I’m on dozens of Email lists, everybody from the New York Times to Victoria’s Secret (great articles over there) sends me Email and I spend way too much time scanning and deleting most of it daily. I subscribe to Email lists from news organizations, campaign committees, government watchdog groups and all kinds of public service organizations. I also get stuff addressing me as Dear One, with great investment opportunities in Nigeria and missives that promise to make me larger, but I delete them all summarily as I have nothing to invest and…, never mind.
Most of what I receive is of a “progressive” or “liberal” nature but in the interest of knowing what the adversary is up to, I also subscribe to publications from conservative groups, the spectrum runs from the Coulter, Limbaugh breed of invertebrates to the American Enterprise Institute and other large lizards. I”ll tell you, a little of this stuff goes a long way.
I got a real dandy this morning from the Heritage Foundation, you know, the conservative think tank that has worked so tirelessly for the Bush administration, embroiling us in various wars of empire and providing invaluable aid and advice in support of administration efforts to relieve American citizens of such pesky irritants as habeas corpus, civil liberties and due process of law, while conducting additional studies aimed at relieving us of our money.
Heritage has long fought the good fight for corporate rights and limited government. These are the guys who burn the midnight oil to come up with ways to help corporations pocket employee pension funds without exposing themselves to criminal liability while working diligently to ensure that federal regulatory agencies are toothless, and in all ways impotent. The effectiveness of their efforts on behalf of corporate America can be measured in such events as the Crandall Canyon mine collapse.
The organization, which came into existence in 1973 was bankrolled by Joseph Coors, of the Coors Brewing Company and billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife,Paul Weyrich was one of it’s founders, there were no wild eyed leftists in that circle unless they were carrying a rake, polishing the crystal or cleaning the pool.
Heritage is now funded to the tune of 30 to 40 million annually by obscenely wealthy individuals and cash bloated corporations. They also receive large sums from foreign governments and such entities (it has been reported) as the Korean Intelligence agency. In return for their generosity Heritage spends about twenty percent of the take lobbying government on their behalf and publishing studies which tell them things that they want to hear and helping them market bullshit and lies to the rest of us.
In this morning’s Email from Heritage was a featured article written by “Senior Fellow” (please pause to genuflect) Robert Rector (Photo at right) at the National Review Online and titled “Poor Politics” in which he offers the following nuggets of conservative think tank wisdom regarding persons in this country who are classified as poor. From Mr. oops, “Senior Fellow” Rector:
“The following are facts about persons defined as “poor” by the Census Bureau, taken from a variety of government reports:”
“46 percent of all poor households actually own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.”
“Senior Fellow” Rector quoting from a “variety of government reports.”
I don’t know the actual numbers but I’m guessing that most of the 46% quoted own nothing more substantial than a 30 year mortgage which they struggle mightily to pay while staying ahead of such wolves as the costs of daily living and working in America. The idea that forty percent of those below the federal poverty level “own” their homes is nonsense and “Senior Fellow” Rector knows it.
In addition, what happened to the legions of people who live in houses with fewer than 3 bedrooms and the gazillions of apartment dwellers, not to mention the many people who call the porch or patio “home.”
“80 percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, in 1970, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.”
“Senior Fellow” Rector quoting from a “variety of government reports.”
I suppose that “Senior Fellow” Rector would feel more comfortable with the poor if they were sweltering in their “three bedroom houses” and dying quietly and unobtrusively of heat prostration. It must also be noted that those who rent houses or apartments don’t “own” their air conditioners any more than they own their homes. Either way they pay dearly in utility bills and taxes for the meager comfort of not sweating through their shorts.
“Only six percent of poor households are overcrowded; two thirds have more than two rooms per person.”
“Senior Fellow” Rector quoting from a “variety of government reports.”
I currently live in a five room house with my cat, which I suppose places us above “Senior Fellow Rector’s” mandatory squalor requirement average. I will soon be forced to move (due to poverty) from this spacious splendor to share an apartment with my brother and his Grandson. We will then share 5 rooms, I am doing my part to “walk the walk” of the poor by cramming myself into smaller accomodations so that the ruling class may have more room to ride their horsies.
“The typical poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens, and other cities throughout Europe. (These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.)”
“Senior Fellow” Rector quoting from a “variety of government reports.”
It should be noted that America as she was growing in the 19th century and the early part of the 20th, had so many more times the available land area than most European countries that there can be no comparison. Except for those unfortunate millions who were crammed into urban tenements and company “housing” “provided” by railroad, mining, factory or mill owners we have historically been able to spread our elbows regardless of economic status. It does look bad though, I admit it, all those so called poor people with so much wasted space between them. Inefficiency.
“Nearly three quarters of poor households own a car; 31 percent own two or more cars.”
“Senior Fellow” Rector quoting from a “variety of government reports.”
I own a car, It’s 12 years old and I bought it used back when I was not disabled and working six days a week to stay just above the poverty level. I still drive it to my physical therapy appointments at the VA hospital and the grocery store when I can afford to pay the fuel prices that Heritage helped to arrange.
“97 percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions.”
“Senior Fellow” Rector quoting from a “variety of government reports.”
I have two, one is 8 years old and works well, the other was given to me by a friend and sometimes works as well, there is nothing on them but lying news people reading scripts prepared at the Heritage foundation. If that violates my status as “poor” I’ll be happy to turn one over to the “unnecessary entertainment police.”
“78 percent have a VCR or DVD player.”
“Senior Fellow” Rector quoting from a “variety of government reports.”
My wife made me buy a DVD player a couple years before she died. She was an invalid those last several years but found joy and laughter in rented Disney movies. She’s gone now, a year next month. I do feel a bit guilty for the extravagance and promise to atone.
“62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception.”
“Senior Fellow” Rector quoting from a “variety of government reports.”
Got me again, and, I have wireless internet as well. I must have these things, they allow me to stay abreast of those who wage this unrelenting war against the middle and lower economic classes in this and other countries. I also need it to get my Email from the Heritage Foundation and Victoria’s Secret. (good articles over there)
“89 percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and a more than a third have an automatic dishwasher.”
“Senior Fellow” Rector still quoting from a “variety of government reports.”
In all his quoting of vague “government sources,” “Senior Fellow” Rector doesn’t mention wage stagnation, the continually rising cost of living in all areas, outsourcing and offshoring of jobs in all sectors of the economy, community crippling layoffs, pension defaults, natural disasters, catastrophic illnesses, death, war and a host of other legitimate reasons why good, honest, working people have fallen into poverty yet still have that embarrassing dishwasher in their kitchen and still reside in the three bedroom house with a patio that they lived in before their jobs were shipped off to Timbuktu.
There may be a difference between the face of poverty in Dorothea Lange’s hauntingly beautiful “Migrant Mother” from 1940 at the top of this rant and the modern version in this new century but I doubt it, you have to look at the eyes, close up, and personal to see, to know the despair.
I don’t know, Maybe “Senior Fellow” Rector hasn’t heard about those things, yeah that’s probably it.
Anyway, I’m off the hook on the last one, (is he still running on?) my ten year old nuke died and I can’t afford another, that damn poverty thing again, and alas, no dishwasher. I’ve been waiting a long time for a veteran’s disability pension to show up in my mailbox and I’m sure that it will, probably the day after they plant my butt at the VA cemetery. I’ll celebrate, maybe buy a new microwave or a … they still sell “stereos?”
OK, I can't stop thinking about this. All the Orange County Supervisors claim to be good “fiscal conservatives” who are “responsible” in spending our tax dollars. John Moorlach says that current pension benefits for county deputy sheriffs are “irresponsible” and “illegal under state law”. Janet Nguyen tells us that we need a “county services office” in order to better serve taxpayers in Westminster. Now isn't THAT wasteful?
But then, this problem isn't just at the county level. In Sacramento, the Republicans in the State Senate think it's OK to “balance” the budget on the backs of the poor and needy.They decry health care for poor children as “wasteful spending”, and then do whatever they can to preserve tax breaks for the ultrarich and mega corporations that aren't really needed. Is that their priority? Is it really more important that the ultrarich get tax breaks than poor kids getting health care?
Follow me after the flip for more as I wonder what exactly can be considered “wasteful”…
So why is helping those that can't help themselves “wasteful”? And why is helping those who really don't need any more help “prudent”? I don't get it.
I don't get how Republicans always miss the point of government. When we fight back against draconian cuts to services that are needed by the working poor who have difficulty helping themselves, we're chided as “fiscally irresponsible”. When we rail against pension cuts for hardworking public servants, we're called “imprudent”. But when we catch them padding budgets with pork projects and tax breaks for their superrich sugar daddies, they say we're not “economically minded”. And when we catch them spending public funds to help them get reelected, they say that we're on a “political witch hunt”.
So that's it. I've had enough of the Republican wasteful spending. I've had enough of them lecturing us on “fiscal responsibility”, while they treat our tax dollars like their piggy banks to dispose of whenever they want. I've had enough of them coddling their uber-wealthy patrons with pork and tax breaks while our poor neighbors go without health care as they struggle to pay the rent and feed their families. I just hope I'm not the only one outraged by all this Republican waste.
Yesterday, I saw this in The Register. And as soon as I saw this, I was stopped in my tracks.
Roughly 2.5 million low-income adults in California can’t afford to adequately feed their families, resulting in health problems and household stress, according to a UCLA report released this week.
The report measures food insecurity, which can range from reduced quality or variety of diet to skipping meals because of costs. In 2005, 30 percent of low-income adults statewide reported choosing between food and other basic needs, according to data from the California Health Interview Study. Among them, 9 percent experienced a disruption in eating habits or skipped meals. The study did not include the homeless.
In Orange County, the UCLA report says an estimated 190,000 low-income adults struggle to buy food, and about 36,000 people sometimes go hungry. The numbers don’t include children.
Oh my goodness! 2.5 million people in California can’t afford to feed their families? And 190,000 of them are in “wealthy” Orange County? 145,000 of them in San Bernardino County? 740,000 of them in LA County? What’s happening to these people who can’t afford to eat? Why is this happening? And what can we do to solve this problem?
Follow me after the flip for more…
So why exactly is this happening? The UCLA report offers a harrowing answer:
“Food expenditures are the most flexible item in household budgets and are frequently squeezed when income dips or unemployment strikes.”
So these people are having to give up food as they try to scrape up the cash to pay for the mortgage or the rent, as well as the electric bill, and the heating bill, and the water bill, and all those other expenses. They’re having to forgo one of the most basic human needs in order to provide for other basic human needs. Doesn’t this seem disturbing? This shouldn’t be happening. No one should be going hungry. Not in this nation, not in this state, not in any of our communities.
After all, this creates huge societal problems. Hunger does not only cause a growling tummy. So what can happen when people can’t eat? Oh, the children just can’t get educated while the adults don’t get proper health care.
According to the research, children living in households without a sufficient food supply miss more school and experience more emotional problems. Adults are more likely to feel anxious or depressed. Additionally, families are more likely to forgo medical care and filling prescriptions, which affects their overall health.
While it may seem counterintuitive, adults living in households with a shortage of quality food were more likely to be overweight, according to the brief. As a solution, the report recommends helping households receive federally funded help, such as food stamps and child nutrition programs.
We all know the value of education. We know the value of good, preventive health care. We all know the value of good mental and emotional health. This is why we can’t all these poor folks go hungry. Their hunger only contributes to greater problems for them, and for others.
So what can be done about this? What can we do to help these people afford something to eat? Well, maybe can support something like the NOURISH Act. The report suggested that the federal government step up its aid for these poor people who can’t help themselves in providing food for the family table. Well, Rep. Joe Baca (D-San Bernardino) has come up with a solution here.
“We have a moral obligation to feed the hungry. The NOURISH Act includes many provisions to expand assistance to families and improve access for eligible underserved populations. I also propose increasing funding for food banks which provide important help when government programs are not sufficient to meet the rising demands of American families facing hunger.”
We really need to do something about this hidden crisis. The US is supposed to be the richest nation on earth, and California is supposed to be one of the richest states in this nation. And yet, some 2.5 million people struggle to afford feeding their families. This just shouldn’t be happening.
The NOURISH Act sounds like a good start toward solving this problem. Perhaps we should thank Joe Baca for this good legislation. And maybe, we should write our representatives, and urge them to support Baca’s legislation. We just can’t let any more people needlessly go hungry.
I have a conflicted relationship with the LA Times. On the one hand, they still do a stellar job covering international news; I would put the paper’s Iraq reporting up with any other news organization in the world. But on the editorial side, the paper has taken up the neoliberal consensus with a vengeance, and turns a blind eye to vital issues to this community, like inequality and poverty. Nancy Cleeland, an excellent writer, has decided to leave the paper for just this reason:
It’s awkward to criticize an old friend, which I still consider the Times to be, but I think the question of how mainstream journalists deal with the working class is important and deserves debate. There may be no better setting in which to examine the issue: The Los Angeles region is defined by gaping income disparities and an enormous pool of low-wage immigrant workers, many of whom are pulled north by lousy, unstable jobs. It’s also home to one of the most active and creative labor federations in the country. But you wouldn’t know any of that from reading a typical issue of the L.A. Times, in print or online. Increasingly anti-union in its editorial policy, and celebrity — and crime-focused in its news coverage, it ignores the economic discontent that is clearly reflected in ethnic publications such as La Opinion.
Of course, I realize that revenues are plummeting and newsroom staffs are being cut across the country. But even in these tough financial times, it’s possible to shift priorities to make Southern California’s largest newspaper more relevant to the bulk of people who live here. Here’s one idea: Instead of hiring a “celebrity justice reporter,” now being sought for the Times website, why not develop a beat on economic justice? It might interest some of the millions of workers who draw hourly wages and are being squeezed by soaring rents, health care costs and debt loads.
Go read the whole thing, this is an important article. You would think that it would be easier and more cost-effective for the Times to cover what’s happening in its own backyard. Of course, the Times was first part of a corporate-owned media collective, the Tribune Corporation, and now Sam Zell, a multi-millionaire. The top editors and senior staff aren’t affected by the real issues impacting working people, and it shows in where they place their emphasis.
I remembered the workers who killed chickens, made bagged salads, packed frozen seafood, installed closet organizers, picked through recycled garbage, and manufactured foam cups and containers. They were injured from working too fast, fired for speaking up, powerless, invisible. I saw that their impact on all of us who live in the region is huge.
Now, like hundreds of other mid-career journalists who are walking away from media institutions across the country, I’m looking for other ways to tell the stories I care about. At the same time, the world of online news is maturing, looking for depth and context. I think the timing couldn’t be better.
I would suggest that Cleeland would always be welcome on the blogosphere, particularly on this site, where I’m proud to say that issues of class and inequality are often foregrounded.
UPDATE: I would add that proof of the LA Times’ relationship to the poor can be easily gleaned in this BS hit piece on John Edwards by Jonah Goldberg, someone who doesn’t live in California but is hired to write lazy smear jobs based on two-week old stories without merit.
The people who cook lunches, clean classrooms, and provide medical care at the University of California live in poverty. 96% of the people who do these important, necessary jobs are eligible to receive public poverty assistance. Many people working at the UC — one of the world’s most prestigious universities — have to work two or even three jobs just to pay rent and put food on the table for their families.
I got a real dandy this morning from the 
to genuflect) 