The Greater Meaning of Jena

I know it's been a while since I last posted, but I have been busy relocating to Reno to go to college! So, migration complete, it's now back to business for me!

First off, let me get something about the Jena protest today settled: The reason for the protest was relatively minor and--by itself--was not worthy of a movement of such magnitude. That said, allow me to clarify myself before you jump to any judgments.

The events surrounding the arrests of the so-called "Jena 6" were undoubtedly motivated on some level by racism. Whether that racism was explicit or implicit in nature is open to debate. Now, charges have been dropped against the six black students and the white students involved were only given minor punishment (suspension from school) for hanging nooses from a common tree at the high school; this series of events is the casus belli for the massive protest today. Many people--mostly white--make the ignorant assertation that today's protests are about this unfortunate turn of events and are thus "overblown"; they are wrong on both counts.

Today's protest is as much about an isolated event of injustice as the Montgomery Bus Boycott of 1955 was about transportation reform. To equate the spark with the response is folly. A clear example of such a folly on a more massive scale would be somebody making the claim that Archduke Ferdinand's assassination was the principal cause of World War I. His murder was merely the spark that ignited the powderkeg of hostility across Europe. The same principle applies to Jena and the issue of racial injustice in America.

The message of today's protest is, bluntly, this: Blacks, while they have made across the board progress since the Civil Rights Movement, are still getting shafted by the white majority in this country. I could cite numerous statistical indicators on income, life expectancy, the criminal justice system and much, much more, but I feel that the condition of blacks in this country is essentially common knowledge, whether people like to admit it or not.

However, the dilemma of racial injustice today isn't as cut-and-dry as it was in the 1950's and '60s. Under the law, blacks have--in large measure--achieved total equality with whites. Yet, the inequality persists. Why? The answer is difficult to glean accurately, but racism seems to be implicitly built into the very framework of our society. All people are naturally racist to a minor degree; this is widely accepted biologically. Humans tend to congregate with their own kinds as a matter of course. We can see this in gender relations amongst children, especially at younger ages (remember cooties?). As people grow up, though, race becomes the underlying determining factor of social relationships. The reasons for this are many, but are most probably related to cultural and socio-economic differences. White kids at a suburban high school are not likely to empathize with their black inner-city peers.

How do we fix this? No simple solution exists, of course, but forced integration of school districts with some sort of quota system must still be considered a viable and vital option. It might be unpleasant and controversial, but it is truly the only way to mediate the de facto segregation that has persisted since Brown v. Board of Education. Allowing the races to intermingle with each other at school from a young age goes a long, long way in diffusing racial tension and misunderstanding later in life. It's one thing for children to be taught the equality of races without ever meeting many racially diverse kids and quite another for them to actually interact with them as friends and equals. The current Supreme Court has unfortunately removed this option from the table, though, and we will not likely see it reappear for many years, if ever again.

While I don't pretend that this is the only solution to racial injustice, I must emphasize that it is the most obvious and influential that is reasonably available. Teaching tolerance through interaction would, if properly implemented, obviate the majority of our society's implicit racism within a generation, I believe.

__Richard__

The Great Vegas Flag Flap

A local story here in my hometown seems to be gaining steam enough to end up on the national news (at least on Fox), but for all the wrong reasons. From the Las Vegas Review Journal:

Call it a show of patriotic pride. Or call it a crass red-white-and-blue marketing ploy.

Either way, the city of Las Vegas has ordered a Hummer dealership to take down an American flag that flies 100 feet above the business.

Dan Towbin, owner of Towbin Hummer, said he was in disbelief at the City Council's decision this week to require the business to take down the 30-by-60-foot Stars and Stripes that has flown since May 2006 in front of the dealership.

"It's ridiculous in today's day and age to suggest removing an American flag," he said.

Towbin must remove the flag within 60 days, though he said he was contemplating a lawsuit to challenge the council's unanimous action.

When Towbin originally got approval for his flag in May 2006, he agreed to a six-month review, contingent on complaints from neighbors of the dealership on Sahara Avenue near Lindell Road.

At Wednesday's City Council meeting, some residents showed up to complain about the noise from the flapping flag when the wind blows and the aesthetic effect of the looming flag pole.

At the meeting last year, Towbin employee Carl Marcello told the City Council that the dealership planned to build a memorial for military veterans at the base of the flag pole.

On Wednesday, council members and others questioned why Towbin had not built the memorial.

Steve Sanson, president of the locally based Veterans in Politics International, said he didn't believe the flag was about love of country but was instead intended to make the Hummer dealership a landmark.

"What disturbs us is the exploitation of veterans," said Sanson, a Marine in Desert Storm. The flag "is being used for selfish financial gain."

Wayne Earl, 80, who lives near the dealership, said he wasn't bothered by the noise like some of his neighbors but wanted it removed anyway.

"I like to see the flag flown. I don't like to see the flag used as a commercial draw," said the World War II veteran. "It should be flown reverently, not auspiciously."
Towbin insisted the flag is only about his patriotism.

"Whether my heart is in the right place, only I would know that," he said. "How would anyone else know that?"

He pointed to his involvement at Nellis Air Force Base where, he said, he is an honorary commander.

Towbin said the veterans memorial hasn't been built because he was waiting for the City Council's final approval of the flag.

A video of last May's City Council meeting shows Marcello, with Towbin standing next to him, telling the council that he understands they can review and order the flag pole removed after six months. Marcello then said the flag would be dedicated with a plaque and representatives from Nellis Air Force Base to coincide with the city's centennial celebration, which ended later that month.

The six-month review slipped through the cracks at City Hall, and it wasn't until recently that residents approached Councilwoman Lois Tarkanian to ask her about it.

Those for and against the flag's location lobbed accusations of un-Americanism at their opponents on Wednesday.

Towbin read a letter written by Joseph Esposito, president of Liberty Lock & Safe, next to the dealership.

The flag "fills my entire team of 55 employees with pride," Esposito wrote. "Any individual or group that would refer to this symbol of America as a nuisance, eyesore, or noisemaker should be looked at by the Department of Homeland Security to see where their sympathies lie."

Esposito, reached at his store Thursday, said he was "outraged" by the council's
vote.

But Tarkanian, after extolling her love of the flag, told Towbin, "You're not doing this for the right reason."

Last May, Tarkanian had made a motion to allow Towbin to erect a 75-foot flag pole. But Towbin had said he had already bought the 100-foot pole and the flag. Tarkanian's motion failed 6 to 1.

Mayor Oscar Goodman then made the motion to allow Towbin to build the 100-foot-tall flag pole, with a six-month review.

"I would say publicly, whatever this body decides to do, I will live by it," Towbin said.

On Thursday, Goodman said he voted to take down the flag because the veterans memorial was not built.

Goodman said Towbin can reapply for a new flag pole.

The mayor also parried any accusations that the council's decision is unpatriotic by pointing to an ordinance passed under his watch that bans homeowner's associations from prohibiting the flying of American flags.

But Alan Lichtenstein, general council for the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada, said flags can't get any special treatment under the law.

"There can be reasonable time, place and manner restrictions," he said. "But there can't be special rules based on content."

Lichtenstein noted, however, that the city gives variances all the time, often inconsistently.

David Chesnoff, Towbin's attorney, said any potential lawsuit would argue that "the decision was arbitrary and capricious, and also because of the First Amendment
implications, that you can't fly a flag you've been flying for a year."

This isn't the first run-in Towbin has had with the city over flags.

Just before Memorial Day in 2004, Las Vegas code enforcement ordered small flags flying from vehicles at the Prestige Infiniti dealership removed because they were "attention gaining devices."

Towbin said he continued to fly the flags on the cars, and the city backed off after the story got national attention.

After reading this story, I searched through the Blogosphere and found this ridiculous blog about the story. To think that a fellow Nevadan could be so narrow-minded about this issue is embarrassing to me. I cannot stand these radical conservatives who jump on every perceived affront to our flag and start a chorus of "anti-American!"

If one sticks to the letter of the law as written, it becomes clear that the ordered removal of the flag is based simply on logical reasoning, not brooding sympathies with the Al-Qaeda/liberal coalition. The flag is 1,800 square feet and sits on top of a 100 foot tall flagpole, well beyond the city's restrictions for a flagpole. Mayor Goodman's exemption for the pole was generous and required only that Towbin Hummer construct a simple military memorial at its base. The fact that the memorial is not yet built a year later indicates that Mr. Towbin's motives for the construction of the flag lie purely within his wallet.

Use of the flag as a marketing tool is abhorrent and every patriotic American should be demanding its removal, not contemplating a boycott of Las Vegas because of it! At any rate, the type of people around the country who obstinately want this flag to stay up are most definitely not the same type of people who visit this city on a regular basis. So, even if there were a boycott, it would have little to no effect.

Here's a bit of logic for you right-wingers out there: Hummer's gas-guzzling destructiveness to our country's environment is as American as apple pie, so wouldn't putting a flag up at a Hummer dealership cause some kind of a tear in the space-time continuum because of the dangerously high concentration of patriotism? Taking the flag down is not just legal, it's responsible.

I'm counting the time until Bill O'Reilly features this story...

__Richard__

The Lunacy of Mr. Trump

I haven't updated in a while, but I finally found something that has piqued me more than almost anything else can.

The indomitable Donald Trump is a successful real estate mogul and I respect his ability and shrewdness in that field, but in recent years he has been--rather ham-handedly--attempting to co-opt a number of other markets by throwing his name and face all over the place, seemingly at random, to see where it happens to stick.

The first of the numerous markets Trump ventured into was the casino industry. He purchased the Taj Mahal Casino in Atlantic City in 1990, promptly transforming it into the Trump Taj Mahal Casino Resort. The $1 billion dollar price tag of the casino proved to be too much, however, as Trump had to file for business bankruptcy just a year later. While Trump emerged from bankruptcy with a significant fortune, the colossal mismanagement of his casino holdings has continued unabated; his casinos filed for bankruptcy last year. This was only the beginning of Trump's over-extension beyond real estate, though.

In 2004, Trump became the executive producer and star of the NBC reality show The Apprentice. The show achieved sky-high ratings for a couple of seasons as America became fascinated with the various quirks which compose Trump's egocentric personality (not to mention the hair!). But, the show took a massive dive after the novelty of Trump wore off and was not renewed for next season by NBC executives. In true Trump fashion, he claimed that he quit the show voluntarily, saying that NBC did not "fire" him.

During the course of his television stardom, Trump capitalized on his fame to release a series of products branded with his name. The first of these was "Trump Ice", a bottled water which debuted after a feature on his television show. Touted as being from the "best natural springs" on earth, Trump Ice is distributed in all of Trump's hotels and "finer...grocery stores" throughout the country.

In addition to bottled water, Trump has entered the beverage industry with "Trump Superpremium Vodka", a drink which undoubtedly lives up to the standards of any discriminating teetotaler (as Trump is). To be fair, Playboy did give it 3 1/2 out of 4 bunnies, so it apparently it isn't that bad!

Finally, the one that finally pushed me over the edge, "Trump Steaks". When I heard about this product from Conan O'Brien, I fervently hoped that it was some kind of joke. Then, when I heard that it is being sold at Sharper Image, I knew that it couldn't be true and breathed a deep sigh of relief. My confidence was shattered the other day, though, when I walked by my local Sharper Image and saw Trump and his meat in the window display. "No," I thought, "this is too horrifying to be true." Just to make sure that I wasn't being played for a fool, I went online and searched for it. Sure enough, Trump is selling "The World's Greatest Steaks" out of a high-end electronics store. What's the world coming to?

The ice cream industry, too, is being assimilated by Trump as his "Trump Old Fashioned Ice Cream Parlor" has started operations out of Trump Tower (which he asserts to be "one of the most luxurious residential towers in the world"). What follows is a partial list of the rest of Trump's branded products:

The Donald J. Trump Men's Collection
Donald Trump The Fragrance
Trump Magazine
Trump Golf
Trump Bar
Trump Cafe
Trump University
Trump Institute
Trump The Game

I think I might just go to church and pray for our society...

__Richard__

Powered by ScribeFire.

Our Tragic Love of Guns

As we continue to mourn and mourn the dead of Virginia Tech, the same questions repeat themselves over and over in my head: Why must we cling to our guns with such fervor in light of the terror they cause every day? Why do we continue to assert our "2nd Amendment rights" when guns cause such heartache in our country to thousands of families every year? Why can't we just ban these barbaric inventions which were created for the singular purpose of inflicting injury, pain, and death?

Statistics gathered by the UN (more stats) bear out the fact that when a country's citizens have easy access to guns, the murder rate in that country is much higher than when guns are made illegal. Given this fact alone, I can hardly see any purpose for keeping these weapons legal. The argument is often made by pro-gun lobbies like the National Rifle Association that the murder rate in our country is so high because our society is jilted in such a way as to make it more kill-happy. This argument fails under even cursory scrutiny, though. When we compare our country's crime statistics with that of the United Kingdom's (which is perhaps the closest country, culturally, to our own), we see similar per capita statistics in nearly every category of crime, with the notable exception of murder. Our murder rate is nearly four times higher than that of the UK's, a statistic which can be attributed to the fact that our firearm murder rate is more than ten times higher than their's.

We can also observe further evidence that our society's ills are not what causes the murder problem if we study the United Nations Human Development Index, which measures the quality of life in nearly every country on earth. Our quality of life is ranked 8th in the world, yet our murder rate is 24th, which is worse than the murder rate in countries such as Armenia and India, which rank 80th and 126th in the HDI, respectively. To extend the comparison further with the UK, it ranks 18th in the HDI and 46th in murder rate. The discrepancy between our high quality of life and our high murder rate can, therefore, only reasonably be explained by the prevalence of firearms in our country.

As if the moral imperative to ban firearms isn't enough, the rationale against firearm ownership is also supported by the 2nd Amendment. If the phrase "bear arms" is examined in the context of the typical use of it at the time of its writing, we can be sure that the wording of the amendment refers not to individuals having the right to bear arms, but to state militias (better known today collectively as the National Guard) having the right to possess and bear arms. Every use of the phrase "bear arms" in 18th century public discourse is meant in the context of armed forces. To bear arms back in those days meant to form and/or to join a military unit, not to privately own firearms.

With these two overwhelming arguments in favor of gun-control, why do we persist in our beliefs? I surmise that ignorance is the primary culprit. Americans have the opinion that firearms actually reduce violent crime because of their use for self defense. This, as I have demonstrated, is certainly not the case. The fact is that the massacre at Virginia Tech yesterday along with the dozens of other firearm murders that likely happened all over the country that same day would not have occurred if we did not persist in our foolish conviction that guns prevent violence. Until we awaken enough to realize this, the blood will continue to flow through our streets at a sickening, tragic pace that defies all logic and reason.

__Richard__

Powered by ScribeFire.

Our Duty as a Society

The facts of what happened this morning at Blacksburg, in the heart of the quintessentially American Blue Ridge Mountains are awful for their lack of rationality or sense. 32 people were murdered by a gunman in a massacre which ranks as the worst in the history of our country. For what reason they were killed, we know not. All we know is that the killer acted with the chilling, methodical accuracy of a man who has lost all sense of morality or regard for his fellow human beings.

Anger has been directed at members of the police because of their failure to lock down the campus after the first shooting. To be angry at them is fruitless, though. They acted appropriately, given the facts that they knew at the time. They had no way of anticipating the bloodbath that was about to unfold from the evidence at the initial scene. There were really no reasonable measures that could have been taken to prevent this man from killing everybody he did. The anger comes only as a natural response to a traumatic event and the police are the logical targets of this rage, seeing as the gunner committed suicide, an exit typical for this type of killer.

We, especially members of the acidic, eager-to-blame media need to stop looking for scapegoats and need to start focusing on what's really important. That is, we need to give the proper time to remember the young people who died today.

To those among us who do not pray, we need to whole-heartedly support the people who are affected by this and we need to actively work to create a society where hatred, anger, and resentment don't subsist in us as a basic part of our collective being. For those of us that do pray, we need to pray for the families and friends of the victims, that they might find a way to get through their suffering so that they are not haunted by it for the rest of their lives. More importantly, we need to pray for our society. We need to pray earnestly that the Lord may turn our hearts away from the vitriol that consumes us in so many corners of our lives.

If anything positive can come out of this horror, I hope that it is unity as a people. We need to recognize our common, human condition and act with compassion in all events toward all people. If we can just do that, I am confident that nothing like this will ever happen again.

__Richard__

Powered by ScribeFire.

The Massacre

I was planning on writing a post today from the lighter side of my life, but the events of today at Virginia Tech preclude any possibility of that. To ignore the shootings for a funny, ultimately meaningless story would be inexcusable and disrespectful to those who have died in this horrid slaughter.

At approximately 7:15 AM in a building called West Ambler Johnston Hall, the gunman, possibly a student at Virginia Tech, may have had an argument with his girlfriend that escalated to the point of her being shot, along with another person in the dorm room. More shots may have been fired in the dormitory, but the gunman left before law enforcement arrived.

For two hours, nothing occurred. The shooting at the dormitory appeared to be an isolated domestic disturbance to the investigating police. However, at 9:15 the rampage began at Norris Hall, some half-mile away. It was there that the gunman (presumably the same man) chained the front doors of the building and proceeded through at least two classrooms, silently killing and wounding dozens of students and professors before killing himself perhaps an half an hour later. The scope of the tragedy began to become apparent soon thereafter. The death count kept climbing with each news bulletin until it reached its present, unreal number: 33 dead, at least 15 wounded.

__Richard__

Powered by ScribeFire.

Campus Massacre

The story is still developing, but at least 22 people have been killed and 28 injured in a campus shooting this morning at Virginia Tech. The count is likely not complete, but the tally thus far already makes it the deadliest campus shooting in American history. I'll post more when the story settles and develops, but early reports only say that the shooter is dead and is possibly Asian in descent. Stay tuned...

__Richard__

Powered by ScribeFire.

Giuliani the Drag Queen?

If Rudolph Giuliani's multiple divorces and decidedly liberal views on social issues aren't enough to potentially alienate him from many conservative Republican voters, his on-stage carousing in drag just might do the trick! The appearance was at the annual Inner Circle political roast in 1997, and videos of the Rudy Giuliani-Julie Andrews duet are circulating all over the Internet. That roast seemed to spark a personal interest in drag-queenery, as he appeared later that year dressed as a woman (a grandmother-type this time) on an episode of Saturday Night Live, to rave reviews.

The appearances were treated well by New York City voters as they reelected him in a landslide over his Democratic competitor in the 1997 election. But many Republican voters across the country-particularly in the Bible Belt-may not quite get the joke when it comes time to vote in the Republican primaries. Cross dressing is often associated with homosexuality by conservative voters and Giuliani's appearances may make him seem like some kind of gay sympathizer to many of these moral-minded voters. However, with the primaries still nine months away, the impact of a freewheeling, cross dressing Rudy 10 years ago will likely fade from moral panic status to merely a troubling aberration among voters in the Christian right.

__Richard__

More Protests

For the second straight day, Russian riot police violently dispersed a peaceful, anti-government protest, this time in St. Petersburg.

__Richard__

Putin's Crackdown on Democracy

In Russia, as in America, massive demonstrations take place in the streets of the capital to protest various governmental policies. Thousands of people gather in both Red Square and the National Mall to air their grievances to their respective governments through peaceful, democratic assembly. In America, the president merely turns a blind eye to the protests, pretending that they don't happen. In Russia, however, the president sends special police to forcibly disperse protesting crowds and detains thousands of people for expressing their opinions regarding the Kremlin.

Both of our countries have constitutions which guarantee certain freedoms to the people. In our country, the various First Amendment freedoms are frequently exercised and are rarely impinged on. Chapter Two of the Russian Constitution guarantees quite similar rights as our First Amendment. In the event that our First Amendment rights are violated (or are perceived to be violated) the Supreme Court almost always sets the issue right. We have our freedoms and are damned proud to exercise them with an almost reckless fervor. Russia has their Constitutional Court to ensure that their Chapter Two rights aren't violated. In theory, this should be enough. The reality is, unfortunately, that President Putin has undermined the Constitutional Court to such an extent as to render it impotent to carry out its sole function. Here are just a few excerpts from the Russian Constitution followed by examples of blatant violations which have gone unchallenged by the Constitutional Court:

Chapter 2, Article 29.

1. Everyone shall have the freedom of thought and speech.
3. No one may be coerced into expressing one's views and convictions or into renouncing them.
4. Everyone shall have the right to ...disseminate information by any lawful means.
5. The freedom of the mass media shall be guaranteed. Censorship shall be prohibited.

This article has been butchered by Putin's policies. Part 1 has been violated through repeated imprisonments of vocal political enemies for trumped-up or fabricated charges which are pushed through kangaroo courts with no opposition. Part 2 has also been violated through the arrest and imprisonment of those who express their critical views of the government. Part 4 has been violated by government shutdowns of more than 90 NGO's which are deemed harmful to the government's policies. Part 5 has been violated more thoroughly than all of the others in this article through the systematic assumption of state control over almost all of the major televised media outlets in Russia.

Chapter 2, Article 31

Citizens of the Russian Federation shall have the right to gather peacefully, without weapons, and to hold meetings, rallies, demonstrations, marches and pickets.

This provision has been utterly ignored by Putin as can be seen in the police crackdowns on demonstrations, even demonstrations of elderly pensioners.

Chapter 2, Article 32

1. Citizens of the Russian Federation shall have the right to participate in the administration of the affairs of the state both directly and through their representatives.

This provision has also been squashed as President Putin has made illegal the direct election of provincial governors by the general population, a policy which, if applied here, would rob us of the right to elect our own state governors.

The path which Russia is headed down under the lead of President Putin is one of regression toward the authoritarian legacy which should have been forever left behind after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Russia is a democracy in crisis. The very foundation of what it means to be a democratic society is being methodically removed from under the feet of the Russian people. Dissent is steadily growing, though, and I can only hope that Putin and his fascist brethren are soundly defeated in the upcoming presidential election in 2008.


__Richard__

Powered by ScribeFire.