Monday, November 14, 2005

Howard Dean Is No Pacifist


Dean was the loudest, and the only anti-war candidate in 2004. The image has stuck and for good reason. But his stand has also been slightly misunderstood.
  1. We knew all along it was not Saddam but Osama that was behind 9/11. But a majority of Republicans before the Iraq invasion believed otherwise, because they had bought into the W-Cheney propaganda. In a very recent speech W alluded to the "innocent lives lost on 9/11" when he meant to boost support for the Iraq war effort. That is fundamentally misleading. And he apparently has not changed course.
  2. Not long after Baghdad was seized, it became obvious there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq that Saddam was supposed to have had. Looks like Saddam was pulling a W also on his neighbors. As in, don't have it, but talk like you do, they will stay away from you.
  3. W complained on the campaign trail in 2000 about the few cruise missiles that Clinton fired into Iraq after a Saddam plot to assassinate his father while on a visit to Kuwait was found out and foiled. As in, Clinton's response was not enough. Clinton should have done more. The son was angry. Immediately after he got into the White House he made it clear he wanted to do something about Saddam. "He tried to kill my daddy!"
  4. On W's watch both North Korea and Iran have acquired nuclear weapons, or Iran is very close to it. So maybe he is not awfully concerned about the spread of WMDs. And if he is, he does not have the ability, the skill to do the job.
  5. Osama is very much alive and very much active. (3 Bomb Blasts Each: London, Delhi, Jordan)
  6. Colin Powell's presentation at the UN was cooked. Who cooked it?
  7. The intelligence the US Congress looked at was tampered with. Who did the tampering?
  8. Tomland Ridge pulled a security stunt to make sure Kerry did not get a boost after his damn convention in 2004. How irresponsible is that? (Bloomberg: No Mr. Security)
  9. George W and Dick Cheney are both roundabout draft dodgers. You have to look at their brave talk in that light.
  10. The effort in Iraq has cost $200 billion, 2000 American lives, and tens of thousands of Iraqi lives.
  11. Iraq today exports terrorists to the entire region.
War is an option, that is why there is a military. But war always has to be the weapon of the very last resort. The very last resort, the utmost last resort. W's war was waged like a weapon of first resort, it was done in such a hurry. The accusation that there was a deliberate misleading of intelligence is serious.

Not only that, the US went into Iraq without a clear strategy in mind. Some in the W administration talk of perhaps being there for a decade. That sounds like a stay strategy.

Go in in a hurry and stay forever. That is not a smart war strategy.

Troops sent out to war by a country have to be supported. But W is not asking for that. He is asking that his critics be silenced, their patriotism be questioned. Is misleading a country into war patriotic? Is not having a clear exit strategy so as to minimize casualties patriotic? Is the idea of snuffing democratic debate and questioning a legitimate inquiry into the most important act by this president patriotic?

It is important for the country to get to the bottom of this so as to better tackle the challenge that the War On Terror is.

Dean was totally behind the US going into Afghanistan, because that was Osama country, and he was behind 9/11. Iraq became a diversion that let Osama slip into god knows where.

Dean is not saying all wars are wrong, he is saying some wars are necessary. But he is saying a war has to be the weapon of last resort, because through a war you put your troops in harm's way. People are going to die. So you better have a very good reason to get into it in the first place. Once you do send the troops in, support them. And Dean supports the troops in Iraq today. He just does not support W. Big difference. And he is concerned the likes of W and Cheney can be so callous about the countdown to war.

Saddam was a bad guy, but that was not the stated reason for the war.

Democracy is a good thing to spread, but that was not the stated reason for the war.

So what went so wrong? Why was the intelligence presented to the Congress so off the mark? So far there seems not to have been a trace of WMD stuff in Iraq.

More importantly, what is the nature of the War On Terror? Is acting like the Al Qaeda is a standing army the best way to wage this war? Is the Al Qaeda weaker today?

Blacks, Hispanics At The Core Of The Democrat Rainbow Coalition


Blacks vote for Democrats in this country like all of them were their cousins. The Democratic Party does not have a more staunch group of supporters. And hence I imagine a high tech boom in Harlem, among other things.

But Bush managed to dent into the Hispanic vote with his mangled Spanish, and that was not good. A Hispanic co-passenger in a bus in Florida once told me when she was at high school her teacher used Bush' Spanish talk as an example of how n-o-t to speak Spanish. Go figure.

But, seriously. There has to be an all-out effort to court the Hispanic vote.
  1. Apply the spentrum/dialogue concept on gay marriage rather than the litmus test concept. (The Spectrum/Dialogue Concept Is Key To Power)
  2. Articulate progressive family values.
  3. Offer progressive, cuttinge edge immigration policy. There can be no room inside the Democratic Party for any hostility to immigrants. And such hostility among the Republicans has to be exposed and fought.
  4. Bi-lingualism.
  5. Quality public education, universal health insurance for all children on US soil.
  6. Increases in college financial aid.
  7. Mainstream issues of jobs and wages. Create jobs. Increase the minimum wage. Introduce micro credit in the most destitute neighborhoods, and urban renewal programs, and economic empowerment zones.
  8. In a city like New York, non-citizens should be allowed to vote. No taxation without representation.
  9. A major emphasis on US-Mexico relations.
  10. Help with institution buliding in the young democracies in Latin America.
  11. Fight voter intimidation of the ethnic minorities with the passion of a civil rights movement.
  12. Tough on hate crimes. Tough on hate speech.
  13. Howard Dean should take a crash course in Spanish. You don't have to get fluent, but you do have to be able to meet and greet. I will do it with you.
  14. Deaniacs, let it be a fashion statement. Let's all of us learn at least some Spanish.
These are just some of the early stage thoughts. I am sure there are many more. And even these need to be cultivated.

Dick Morris: "The biggest reason for Bush's victory was that he finally cracked the Democratic stranglehold on the Hispanic vote. While Gore won 65 percent of the Latino community, holding Bush to a mere 35 percent, Kerry only carried the Hispanic vote by 55-45, paving the way for the Bush victory. Since Hispanics cast 12 percent of the vote in 2004, their 10-point movement to the GOP gave the president an additional 1.2 percent of the national vote. Take a similar amount away from Kerry, and the Latinos gave Bush a 2.4 percent edge in the general election balloting. Since Bush beat Kerry by only 3.1 percent, how important was the Hispanic vote? Vital and crucial. There are two reasons for Bush’s success among Hispanics. The most important seems to be his emphasis on social values issues, particularly his opposition to gay marriage. ...... Bush worked very hard to win the Hispanic votes. He reversed traditional Republican positions opposing the interests of Latinos. He endorsed bilingual education, reversing decades of Republican agitation for English-only policies. He opposed benefit cuts to documented aliens and rejected out of hand the contention that the children of undocumented workers should be denied public education. He even embraced a version of amnesty that permitted illegal immigrants to gain lawful status and eventual citizenship. Bush may have begun to crack the unholy triple alliance of blacks, Hispanics and single women that anchors the political base of the Democratic Party. These three groups accounted for 54 percent of John Kerry’s vote on Tuesday even though they cast only about one-third of the total vote in the election. Bush still lost blacks by 89-11. He lost single women by 64-36 (while carrying married women by 9 points), but his gains among Hispanics permitted him to win the election anyway."

The Hispanic Vote Elects Bush
PUERTO RICO HERALD: Many Hispanic Voters Skeptical On Bush's Promise
Kerry Has Strong Advantage Among Latino Voters (washingtonpost.com)
Hispanic vote key to Bush win
NPR : Kerry Woos Hispanic Vote; Bush Up Next
VDARE.com: 11/10/04 - Bush Didn't Win 44% of Hispanic Vote - The ...
VDARE.com: 12/09/04 - NRO Rebunks Bush’s Hispanic Share Myth
Richard Nadler on Hispanic Vote & Election 2004 on National Review ...
CNN.com - Kerry, Bush, court Hispanic voters - May 5, 2004
Bush, Kerry try to swing Hispanic vote in their direction - 04/13/04

Sunday, November 13, 2005

2006: When DFA Could Really Grow


Dean has the national name recognition that not even John Edwards has. Dean is no vanilla Democrat, unlike the likes of Kerry and Edwards, neither of which are in any position to lead the charge: Edwards is thoroughly out of power, Kerry is in the Senate. Dean is the only Democrat who could lead the charge for 2006. DNC Chairs are not usually known to lead a congressional effort, but these are challenging times. Budget deficits have gone amok. The War On Terror seems to be going nowhere. (3 Bomb Blasts Each: London, Delhi, Jordan) The Democrats are absolutely, totally out of power. And Dean can do better than Gingrich did for his party precisely because Dean will not be running for House Majority Leader or for Senate Majority Leader. Dean is it, there is no other.

Howard Dean should lead the effort for the Democrats to regain control of both the House and the Senate and a majority of the Governorships. One leader, one 10 point program. It is key that all Democrats running for Congress in 2006 come around to one agreed upon 10 point program. As to what shape and form that will be can be discussed. But once it has been decided upon, that is the party manifesto.

Money, message and organization.

Dean has come up with this wonderful idea, that 2 million Democrats across the country sign up to automatically give $20 a month to the party, kind of like paying one of your smaller utility bills, or something like that. This has to be implemented full force.

The message is the 10 point program.

And Dean can bring something to the fight noone else can. Lord, thy name is DFA. Yes, Democracy For America. DFA needs to approach the 2006 elections like it were the presidential election. 2006 is the real thing, but it is also the dress rehearsal for 2008. With the Supreme Court having gone conservative for a generation, the Democrats need to be taking and keeping the White House and the Congress for a generation. The founding white men called it balance of power.

2006 is a kickass opportunity for the DFA. We really could expand. 2008 is the year when America the republic becomes America the democracy. 2008 will be more like 1776 than any year in between. This is a gigantic opportunity. This is going to be historic. And DFA needs to kick into gear in 2006. The future is now.

Expansion is about applying the one-person-one-vote-one-voice concept. Everything you need at the grassroots to launch and grow your DFA chapter, you already have it. This is to be a bottom up approach.

Use Blogger to the max. Solo blogs, Linkup blogs, group blogs. Expand your personal network as much as possible within the DFA. Get invited to blogs with like minded themes. Definitely have more than one blog, many more. Every level of your organization should have a blog of its own. That is your 24/7 virtual office, kind of. Use audio, and video as well. This is what they call the new media. 2008 is to be the first new media election in history. Prepare.

DFNYC TV, DFNYC Wiki
Blogging Is Scalable Media
The One Voice Concept
Don't Need To Wait Till 2008
One Blog One LinkUp One Atom
More On Organization
An Email From Headquarters
DFA Organization Framework
DFNYC Research And Advocacy Group
The Three Pillars

Not long ago I wrote my first draft of the 10 point program. (Ferrer Gets Aggressive At A Ferrer Fundraiser) I still think it is a decent framework. But it needs a lot of work put into it.
  1. Balance the budget.
  2. Have an exit strategy for Iraq.
  3. Proactively spread democracy to win the War on Terror.
  4. Tax cuts for the middle class.
  5. Raise taxes on the top 1%.
  6. No pension for George W.
  7. Enhance quality of public education.
  8. Health care reform: introduce market forces into the sector so it gets into a position to take a lead on adopting information technology. Universal insurance coverage for all children.
  9. Focus on universal wireless broadband like they built the interstate highways a few decades back.
  10. Campaign finance reform, electoral reform.
Team, let's expand.

# of members: 9706
# of new members today : 29
# of groups: 561

Friday, November 11, 2005

The Spectrum/Dialogue Concept Is Key To Power


Of all the concepts I have been cultivating at this blog, the spectrum/dialogue concept might be the most important. Progressives lose power because we don't handle the business of social change skillfully. Conservatives have it easy: they just fall back into past patterns. We have to constantly be digging new ground.

The litmus test concept does not serve well. Either you are good or bad. Either you are racist or not racist, sexist or not sexist, homophobic or not homophobic. This concept is in vogue. And it ends up hurting us electorally. The concept does not speak to the richness of social change. Social change is not a multiple choice question for most people. Most people feel like wherever they stand on race and gender is where the center of the known universe is, and no further conversation is necessary.

So what is the spectrum/dialogue concept? I have touched upon it, but I have not had a chance to elaborate on it. And I don't think I am quite yet ready to truly elaborate it, but I will try and offer a glimpse.

Let me build the first draft of a spectrum on race.

(10) You are the Buddha of race relations. You have attained enlightenment. You have an intimate knowledge of the entire spectrum. But you are safely ensconced at 10. You have a deep knowledge of cultural diversity, and race relations history. You have seen where it all came from, you know where it is going. You are the ultimate. You literally have zero racism in your heart and mind. You can really see individuals for who they are. You have an in-depth knowledge of the collective identities of individuals from all sorts of backgrounds. You are it. People like you are rare. Maybe you are the only one. Cultural and racial diversity to you is like the physical universe to Einstein. Your heart and mind soars with it.

(9) You are more numerous than the 10s. You are near enlightenment. You have taken care of the heart part. But you still have a lot of work to do at the level of the mind. You do not have an iota of hate or discomfort that can be called racial. But your knowledge has some major gaps. You might never become a 10, but you are never going to stop working towards it either.

(8) You are totally cool with diversity. You are so cool, it is not even an issue. Some of your closest bosom bodies just so happen to be from different backgrounds. You are so politically correct, you don't really work it, it just comes to you. You live in a town or city with a liberal reputation. You just naturally gravitated. Discussions on race relations to you are no different from discussions on social security or medicare. You don't fear the Chinese and the Indians. You have family members who are from other backgrounds, and they get bored when you try to discuss race. They are not white, but they are not into it. They would rather discuss movies and sports, even the news. But there is a lot you don't know. You do speak a second language. But you have not been to every country on the planet, for one. You are a political progressive, way out there, but that does not mean you have a rich knowledge of the backgrounds of all those people you don't dislike or don't hate. Genuine cultural differences in attitudes sometimes catch you off guard, and you get thrown off balance.

(7) Dating people from other backgrounds is no big deal to you. But your closest friends just so happen to be white because well, at college, most people just so happened to be white. It was statistical.

(6) You sing all the right tunes on policy. But you are not sure if America should some day stop being the superpower. At some level you have that discomfort. You feel a little insecure when you look at the economic growth rate numbers for China. But black folks are cool. You like rap.

(5) You vote Democratic, but you are borderline or race. It is not like there are major policy stands you take that make people suspicious. It is in your social choices and attitudes and in your blatant ignorance. You hang out with the 4s and the 6s. You feel like you are truly the center of the universe on race. Those lefty loonies drive you nuts. If they had their way, all the white women would marry all the black men they could find, and there would be no women left. But you are a big fan of FDR, the Kennedys, MLK, the whole stock of them. You say you are liberal on social issues. You are even for affirmative action.

(4) You make it a point to tell people you are not a racist. The generation before you might have been, but times have changed, and you have too. You even have a few black friends. And you tell people that is so. But if there was ever an ideologue against affirmative action, that is you. You are ahead of the curve on that one. You are so anti-racism, that you are anti-affirmative action, you tell people. Physical segregation is over and you are glad it is over, but you practice social segregation, only you don't have the vocabulary for it. You are Republican, but then so is Colin Powell, you tell people.

(3) You think hate crimes are illegal, and hate speech is indecent. And you don't have the time for it anyways. But you have really weird ideas about what people from other backgrounds are like. You think Africans live in the trees, and the Chinese are out to take over the world, that is why there is Walmart. If there is a stereotype out there, you subscribe to it. You don't necessarily avoid people from other backgrounds, but when you do and ask them questions so as to learn more about them, they are really amused every single time. They can't believe the words that come out of your mouth. And you learned about the Eskimos from comic books a long time ago.

(2) You don't commit hate crimes, because you don't like the idea of jail time. But you just can't stand them. What you can not in terms of hate crimes, you compensate for in the form of hate speech. You don't socialize with the "other." You don't like it when anyone you know socializes with the "other." And you make yourself heard.

(1) You commit hate crimes. You think of committing hate crimes. You speak hate words in every other sentence. You blame the "other" for all your private and not so private shortcomings. When you are in the presence of the "other," you might as well be on another planet. And it does not feel exotic to you. You cringe. You dislike. You hate. You give money to hate groups. You attend secret meetings. You maintain hate websites. You are probably a Nazi. You dislike people from other backgrounds so much you also, by extension, dislike women in general. You avoid sunlight. You have few friends, all of whom are also at this end of the spectrum. You fear the white race might go extinct. And if it were not for your various nefarious efforts, it just might. You are on a historic mission. This is a do or die struggle for very survival. You hope future generations will appreciate your efforts even though you don't feel awfully popular among the current breed of folks. You think the federal government is a conspiracy.

What are the lessons to draw? It is not black and white, it is an entire spectrum. A few people might jump from 4 to 7, but most people will only go up one ladder at a time. That really helps manage change. And every 10 years or so, the spectrum will look different. And there is no one diagram for the spectrum. You could write down your version of what you think the spectrum is. Or you could modify my version. It is all open source.

For electoral reasons, you draw it in a way that if you get all the people from 5-10 to vote for you, you win a majority. That is key to near permanent power.

Once you get the basics right, you can then think of ways to accelerate the upward mobility of the population. And there is a lot of room for innovation and creativity there. Like a lot.

What is the dialogue concept? It is not easy to get people to talk about race. Just to get them talking is a challenge. But get to it. That is how you decide where they fall on the spectrum. That is the first part.

The second part is I am proposing dialogue is the best, most productive way to help people move up the ladder. This is not about convincing people, or pushing them. This is about plugging them, this is about helping them help themselves.

Is dialogue the only way? No. Is dialogue the best way? No. Sometimes you just have to draw the boundaries, and uninvite people from your personal space. If you want them out of your face, you want them out of your face.

Dialogue is not recommended in the case of hate crimes. You call the police.

I hope someone draws the first draft of the spectrum on gender. And perhaps a spectrum on internalized racism and sexism.

Thursday, November 10, 2005

3 Bomb Blasts Each: London, Delhi, Jordan

Delhi Bomb Blasts

The Al Qaeda fights a war of asymmetry. And it likes to leave its signature at the crime scene. There is talk the work in London was a few disenchanted homegrown youths, that the work in Delhi was just a few Kashmiri separatists. I for one don't buy into those explanations.

The pattern is too obviuos. Three blasts in close coordination to each other.

And they like the element of surprise. London was unexpected. Delhi was unexpected. Jordan was not exactly considered a target country.

The bad news seems to be the Al Qaeda is very much alive. That is what I read.

Saddam was a jerk and I am glad he is gone. And I am all about spreading democracy. But with $200 billion you could spread democracy into literally every country on the planet, if you do it the progressive way.

But America did not go into Iraq for democracy or for Saddam. America went in to fight the War on Terror. If so, why is the Al Qaeda still so strong?

When bird flu surfaces, you throw smallpox medicine at it, because that is all you have in the stocks. That is what Bush did. He waged his War On Terror like the Al Qaeda were a standing army. Big mistake.

The Al Qaeda is not a standing army. And it prefers to fight the war of fundamental asymmetry.
The number one emphasis should be to infiltrate the Al Qaeda. Human intelligence will do the work. Fancy satellites can not do it. Perhaps throw in a few thousand Arab-looking, Arab-speaking spies amidst their ranks. Penetrate.

Getting Osama is still key. Bush talks like it does not matter if Osama is still at large or not. The point is not only is he still at large, but that guy seems to be able to strike with eery regularity. Bush sounds too eager to congratulate himself on a victory he never achieved.

But all military counter strikes will do no good if there is no fundamental strategy to ensure a total spread of democracy in the Arab world. There is a reason why most of the 9/11 strikers were from the Saudi Arabia. Democracy is so totally absent in that country, all its oil wealth does not seem to be able to channel its people's energies to productive use.

And after the Arab world, China inevitably crops up on the map. There I think the best strategy might be to (1) engage China to the max economically and diplomatically, and (2) try and arrange a soft landing for the Chinese Communist Party such that they remain the largest party within a multi-party framework. But there is no avoiding China. If you bungle, you are looking at the threat of a possible hot war. That is a huge no-no.

America fought World War II against the fascists and the Nazis and democracy got spread in Europe and Japan. America fought the Cold War and democracy got spread in the Russia and that bloc. Now the War on Terror is about spreading democracy in the Arab world.

You can wait until you get hit. Or you can proactively spread democracy, wage a non stop war with communications technology and minimize casualties.

The Al Qaeda is very much at work. That is the bad news. The worse news is Bush and his cronies do not comprehend the virus, and are not even attempting to come up with a new antibiotic. They talk tough but deliver not.

Wednesday, November 09, 2005

38, 20

Bloomberg had a 38 point lead going into the polls but his victory margin is only 20. I had been suspecting something of this sort all along.
  • Bloomberg had only a 14 point lead before he pulled his security stunt. I read that as a 5 point lead.
  • He gave himself a huge security boost. (Bloomberg: No Mr. Security) Ferrer was not able to play that against him.
  • The media felt bought. Bloomberg gave them a ton of ad money. Ferrer called it a "brick wall."
  • There was an overt racial bias against Ferrer from the white boys among the pollsters as well as the media reporters. I saw it in action firsthand at the Bill Clinton event. The bias was to the tune of 38-20. (Bill Clinton Had Icecream For Lunch)
  • Quite a few Bloomberg supporters stayed home.
  • Ferrer should have used the online medium more. He plain refused. (100 Hours Of Video Online Will Elect Ferrer)
  • Ed Koch played villain. He did his very best to neutralize Ferrer's record as Bronx Borough President. It can be argued the $100 million did not come from Ed Koch, it came from Bill Clinton. So Ed Koch gets no credit for the urban renewal in the Bronx. And if it was Koch who did it, all five boroughs should have experienced it, only Bronx did.
  • A lot of Dems lost their passion after the primaries. Many except the national stars who just liked the idea of dropping by the city. It is one sexy city.
  • The blacks were not behind Ferrer. The ethnics can't see eye to eye. It is the socio-psychology of the powerless.
  • Ferrer did great going on the offensive during the first debate. He did the same during the second debate, instead of offering an alternate vision. (First Mayoral Debate)
At the end of the day, Bloomberg won by a landslide. And he deserves to be congratulated. I just felt the need to analyze, crunch a few numbers. (Congratulations Bloomberg, Now Switch Back Parties)

Congratulations Bloomberg, Now Switch Back Parties
Obama Was In Town And I Missed It
Dean And Ferrer At City College
First Mayoral Debate
Mixer For Ferrer
Ferrer Gets Aggressive At A Ferrer Fundraiser
Mixing It For Ferrer
Bill Clinton Had Icecream For Lunch
Bill Clinton Has Left The Building
100 Hours Of Video Online Will Elect Ferrer
Jesse Jackson On Martin Luther King Boulevard
No Taxation Without Representation
Bloomberg
My Photo At ABCNews.com
The Bloomberg Machine
Ferrer Can
Bloomberg: No Mr. Security
Messages To Dean, Ferrer
Soaking In Howard Dean
Lewis Cohen Has Been Behind Ferrer Since Summer 2004
Going On The Offensive For Ferrer
Dean Was In Town Yesterday
Bloomberg Is No Democrat
Fernando Ferrer

Tuesday, November 08, 2005

Congratulations Bloomberg, Now Switch Back Parties


The official results are not out yet, but you had a 38 point lead in the polls going in, so I figure you will win. This is an hour past the polls have closed.

Congratulations.

You were a lifelong Democrat. Then you switched parties in 2001 to avoid the crowded, machine-oriented, cumbersome Democratic primaries to run for mayor of this great city. And you stayed a Republican for 2005. But now all that is behind you. You will not be running for mayor again.

So now it is high time you reclaimed your Democratic roots. Switch back. Make it official. Come out of the closet.

The Republicans just lost New Jersey and Virginia. They will lose the Congress in 2006. Switch now. Or people might think you will go with the party on the upswing. Now is the time. Switch and honor this great progressive city.

DFNYC TV, DFNYC Wiki

I suggested blogging, DFNYC Research and Advocacy group went for a closed wiki. I sugggested video blogging, DFNYC leadership is talking of a DFNYC TV. It will be podcast, and it will also come out like regular TV on public access.

Something is better than nothing. But I am critical of both deviations. And I will explain why.

We are not a think tank. We are a political organization. A closed wiki has the look and feel of a research group working on papers for prestige publications. And most members to date are still trying to figure out how to sign in.

We are not a TV station. We should not be trying to imitate old media. And even with video podcasting, you are raising the barrier to entry. You will only be catering to the crowd with video iPods. Someone spoke the pharase "a more professional presentation" in an apparent reference to my attempt to video blog two events. I disagree. Video blogging is not professional or unprofessional. It is what it is.

We are a political organization. Democracy is our message. Our emphasis should be on making it possible for the average individual to both create and consume media. That is why I emphasize blogging.

Blogging is for the masses. TV stations are for a few. A blog is for everyone, a closed wiki is for the few wiki-literates (I have a recent email inviting me to a wiki training session) among the few who show up for the once a month meeting.

The meeting idea itself is unnatural. What if I am not inspired to think and speak the next ground-breaking idea precisely at that holy hour? Then what? Should the house collapse?

With blogging, the conversation never stops. That is more natural. The conversation never stops, there is no barrier to entry, people can tune in and out as they please, 24/7, and there are no geographical barriers.

Our theme is democracy, remember?

DFNYC TV idea almost sounds like a way to turn Norman Siegel into a David Letterman. Even Dean is scheduled to show up. Both are great guys. But with video blogging, you have literally limitless space for both, and for many more. All DFNYC members should end up on "TV." And with my idea, they do. You don't have to be a Siegel or a Dean to get on TV. In a democracy you don't. And that is where video blogging comes in.

We should encourage as many of our members as possible to blog and then we should let them loose.

I think we should think all DFNYC events are part of a reality show with a national audience, and blog them accordingly. And that is more the truth than an assumption. There does exist an audience. Folks, we need to go national.

If you don't have an email account, get one. If you don't have a Blogger account, get one. And you can also have community blogs, a group all blogging at one address.

Try it. It is addictive. And there are scientific studies that show blogging is good for your brain. Because it works your analysis brain muscles.

DFNYC Research And Advocacy Group

Obama Was In Town And I Missed It


How could I forgive myself?

I opened up the DFNYC mail on time. But the format was unusual. I just skimmed through it a second time a little while ago, and there was Obama with Ferrer. All the work that I have put into the Ferrer campaign would have been worth it just to be able to spend a little time with Obama. I am sure he got mobbed. And I might only have been able to steal a glance. But, uh. I feel so stupid.

This is not fair. Somebody do something about it.

If I had met Obama today, I only needed to meet Hillary and Amitabh Bachchan, and I would have been content.

What just happened? I am dumbfounded.

It is going to be a long time before an opportunity like this one surfaces again.

Ugh!

This is not good. How could I have? This was the one time when I did not skim through all the topics of the newsletter. The DFNYC newsletter, you are not supposed to read everything. The topics are listed at the top. You skim though the topics, and you click on those of interest.

Ugh. This did not just happen.

Opportunity knocked. And I did not listen.

This was the sweetest thing to have come my way through the DFNYC newsletter and I missed it. I can't freaking believe it.

I own the guy's autobiography.

Obama symbolizes hope itself.

Suddenly everything I did today feels like was a total waste of time. Or rather yesterday. This is past midnight.

Looks like both Amitabh Bachchan and Barack Obama are going to be tough nuts to crack.

What do you say during moments like this? Do you call yourself names? I am at a loss of words.

This is not good. Whatever happened to my email reading skills?

(I hear Bono's voice in the background. Usually that is a consolation, but this is not one of those times.)
*(3) Campaign for Freddy with Sen. Barack Obama, this afternoon at 8th Ave & 19th St*

Join U.S. Senator Barack Obama, Democratic Mayoral Candidate Fernando
Ferrer and supporters today in Chelsea

When: Today (Monday, November 7th) 2:15-3:15pm

Where: S.E. corner of 8th Ave. and 19th Street in Manhattan

The group will be walking up 8th Ave to 23rd Street.

Contact: Dorcas Castro (646) 839-4947

Dean-Hillary-Obama Ticket
DFNYC Research And Advocacy Group

French Society: No Easy Solutions


Sick Sarkozy
Riots In France

Opinion: Europe's Lost Future Deutsche Welle, Germany ..... The previous socialist cabinet set up neighborhood police departments focused on dialogue, but was unable to take back lawless enclaves. ........ Current Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy tried the law-and-order approach, but after 11 nights of police crackdown more and more cars are burning in more and more regions of the republic. ........ Sarkozy said these things even though he has realized that "liberty, equality, fraternity" has lost its luster. He's been fighting for affirmative action against the president's resistance. He wants to give Muslim immigrants preferential treatment in the hiring process for the civil service and do away with the principle of equality.

Dialogue alone will not do. A single-minded emphasis on law enforcement alone will not do. A few social and economic programs thrown like bird feed alone will not do.

These young people are destroying the very infrastructure that is their limited ladder to upward mobility. Most of the cars they are burning are cars of their neighbors. Muslim clerics are not in any position to mediate. Muslim groups with reputations of being extremist are actually busy calming things down, with little success. There is no Al Qaeda grand design. This is alienation, disaffection, poverty, racism saying enough is enough.

Citizenship papers alone don't solve problems. Ultimately it is about societal attitudes. The socio-psychological reality itself has to change and become more accepting of people of "other" backgrounds. The social space has to expand or there is implosion.

Ultimately it is an issue of addressing multiculturalism. Institutional racism can feel like a glasshouse of mirrors.

"We are not looking for minorities. We are looking for the best officers."

Does that explain why the French police are not ethnically diverse?

That reflects a society in denial. That is a police department that is ethnocentric in its basic orientation, and that can not continue on.

France as a society has failed these young people. France has to reimagine itself as a society and a country.

Monday, November 07, 2005

Sick Sarkozy


Sarkozy Is Sick, He Needs To Resign, Never Run For President

Riots In France

I wish the riots in France would calm down, but they sure have helped me learn things about the French society I did not know. Peaceful channels for protests and empowerment have to be created. So violence is not the effective option. And obviously the French police are not ethnically diverse.

Europe needed immigrants for cheap labor, said another contributor to the BBC forum, Housam of Swindon, who was offended by French interior minister Nicolas Sarkozy's description of the rioters as "rabble."

This Interior Minister guy Sarkozy who is one of the two people who might become president of France in two short years is a nutcase. If the social alienation of these young Muslims, born and bred in France, was the gasoline, Sarkozy has been the spark to the riots. This is an irresponsible person. He is sick in his mind. He is racist. He is a panderer.

Mr. Ajir, a 29-year-old social worker, lives in La Courneuve, a suburb north of Paris where an 11-year-old boy was killed by a stray bullet earlier this year. During a visit to the projects where the boy was shot, Mr. Sarkozy vowed to clean them with "a Karcher," the brand of a German-made high-powered hose. Some observers say that comment, which got widespread coverage in the French media, planted the seeds of the current violence.

I just did a search on him on Google Images Search, and the guy also looks predictably dumb. He might give Dan Quayle a scare. How did this person end up in the cabinet in the first place? This does not reflect well on the French.

"The indigenous Europeans always want it all: they want the immigrants to do the menial jobs they hate but they are not ready to deal with them on equal grounds as human beings. Indigenous Europeans still live with the colonial mentality of superiority. When the French revolution started against inequality, rioters were also accused of being "scum".

Chirac has talked of restoring law and order, and that is acceptable and desirable language but incomplete, as it does not give a sign that he intends to tackle the riots from many different angles. In a private meeting with the Latvian prime minister Chirac did discuss the alienation theme, but he should be doing it on national television, if only to counter the incendiary, racist remarks by Sarko.

The deaths proved a flashpoint for the frustration and fury of second- and third-generation north and black African immigrants, and spread nationwide, fuelled by the hardline interior minister, Nicolas Sarkozy, calling the rioters "yobs" and "scum".

To the politicians, the political solution should be the weapon of first choice, but so far that has not been the case.


"Put this in your notebook ... ," said a third, rattling off a string of obscenities about France's tough-talking interior minister, Nicolas Sarkozy...... The target of their rage is Sarkozy, who angered many in the suburbs by calling neighborhood toughs "scum." ..... "If they fire Sarkozy, we'll head straight to the police station and pop champagne with them," said Bidou, 22, his baseball cap cocked to the side.