Word on the Street

The source of "rights"

2010-09-18T14:25:00.000-07:00

Are we given rights by God, or by government?

NEITHER ONE.

Our rights and freedoms are protected by the U.S. Constitution; they are not bestowed by the U.S. Constitution. We have them because we were born human, period. Rights pre-exist law, or else law could not be argued to "protect rights" or to "infringe upon rights."

Our rights are not bestowed by any god recognized by any religion, either. The deist who wrote the Declaration of Independence was not referring to any religious authority, Christian or other, when he invoked "Nature and Nature's God." Humans are very fond of invoking the authority of "God" to enforce their personal opinion. The only way that we can all be equal under the law is to have laws based on NO special authority, religious or nonreligious. The only way we can all have equal rights, and equal moral obligations to each other, is to regard those rights and obligations as independent of any special authority or religious belief. And they are.

Morality precedes religion. Toddlers say "No FAIR!" long before they have any concept about gods. Nobody ever said, "That god commands everything I think is wrong and forbids everything I think is right; yeah, I'll follow THAT god!" We have equal moral obligations to each other because we are all human. Very few of us want to be killed, raped, or robbed and we know that to protect ourselves from such violations we have to commit to protecting others equally. We thrive in groups because we can take care of each other, and we know that if we want to be taken care of in times of illness, weakness, disability or old age, we have to take some responsibility for others in or community, too. We want to be free, and most of us recognize that if we want freedom, we have to give others their own freedom.

An ethic, a social norm, of "treat others as you want to be treated," is based on common human reality and not dependent on any special religious authority. It is secular, and a solid foundation for secular government under which all people have equal freedom for our own belief and practice.

Disappointment

2010-06-27T12:26:00.000-07:00

Bad news; a Real Change vendor tells me that Seattle police chased him out of his encampment last night; "They're chasing everybody off of Queen Anne." He was told if he came back he'd be arrested for criminal trespassing. He saw no trespassing signs, thought he was on public land. At least they waited for him to gather his belongings; they didn't confiscate anything.

He also said he'd been stopped by police, asked for ID,"jacked up" on the street, three times in one night.

Is this the effect of the new police chief, or is Mayor McGinn becoming the Mayor McGrinch of our fears, instead of the Mayor McGrin of our hopes?

Example

2009-02-01T14:27:00.000-08:00

I am demonstrating blogging to a workshop student.

Seattle Raging Grannies support Nickelsville

2008-10-17T00:11:00.000-07:00

Eight of the Seattle Raging Grannies (including me) visited Nickelsville today and sang for the Nickelodeons. Some of them sang along with us. I forgot to take my camera! So I can't post a photo of today. In substitute, here's a photo of Seattle Raging Grannies singing at the Nickelsville Die-In, our last community rally before raising Nickelsville.

From the Seattle Raging Grannies:

We support the homeless people of Nickelsville, who are providing shelter and safety for themselves in a hard time.

We admire the courage and compassion of University Christian Church and we thank them for their gift to the community of Seattle, in hosting Nickelsville.

We call on Mayor Nickels to acknowledge the realities of homelessness in Seattle and stop the senseless sweeps of homeless encampments.

The Mayor knows that developers are destroying low-income housing three times faster than it is being created. The Mayor knows that thousands of homeless men, women, and children are left outside after all shelter space in Seattle is full. The Mayor knows that Alan Painter, the head of the Department of Human Services, told the Seattle City Council that all of the shelters are full. The Mayor has no excuse for harassing Nickelsville or its supporters.

The Mayor needs to stop wasting money on harassing homeless encampments, and turn his full energy to real steps to end homelessness. Stop the destruction of low-income housing. Open more emergency shelters. Stop portraying homeless people and advocates as the enemy, and help Seattle come together as a community.

The mission of the Seattle Raging Grannies is to promote global peace, justice, and social and economic equality by raising public awareness through the medium of song and humor. seattleraginggrannies.com

Two of the songs we sang were written/adapted especially for Nickelsville.

THERE IS A RENTAL IN THIS TOWN
(tune: There is a Tavern in the Town)

There is a rental in this town, in this town,
And there my fam'ly settled down, settled do-o-own.
We ate and slept and played there every day,
And paid our rent so we could stay.

Chorus:
Fare thee well for we must leave thee.
Do not let this parting grieve thee.
Our rent jumped sky high believe me,
And so we-e mu-ust part.

Adieu, adieu kind friends, adieu, yes, adieu.
We can no longer be with you, be with you.
We'll hang our clothes on a weeping willow tree,
And sleep in Nickelsville for free.

And:

NICKELSVILLE
(tune: Back of the Bus)

If you miss me at the front of the bus
You can't find me nowhere
Come on up to the driver's seat
I'll be driving up there.
I'll be driving up there, I'll be driving up there;
Come on up to the driver's seat, I'll be driving up there.

If you're looking for shelter
You can't find it nowhere
Come on up to the greenbelt,
Folks are camping up there.
Folks are camping up there, Folks are camping up there;
Come on up to the greenbelt, Folks are camping up there.

If you miss me in the greenbelt
You can't find me nowhere
Come on over to Nickelsville,
Folks are building up there.
Folks are building up there, Folks are building up there;
Come on over to Nickelsville, Folks are building up there.

If you miss me at Nickelsville
You can't find me nowhere
Come on down to the jailhouse,
We'll be bunking down there.
We'll be bunking down there, We'll be bunking down there;
We'll be bunking down there.

If you miss me at the jailhouse
You can't find me nowhere
That's cause we all stood together,
And we're still building up there!
We're still building up there!
We're still building up there!
That's cause we all stood together,
And we're still building up there!

Sing On!

The "litmus test" question

2008-10-15T21:55:00.000-07:00

In both the Presidential debate and the Washington State gubernatorial debate tonight, the candidates were asked about future court appointments.

Whoever is governor 2009-2012 will be appointing a replacement for Judge Gerry Alexander when he retires. The first question of Gregoire and Rossi was: "Who's on your list to replace Gerry Alexander? Will you have a litmus test?"

The Presidential candidates were asked a similar question during their debate: would they consider appointing a Supreme Court judge whom they do not agree with on some issues -- like abortion and same-sex marriage?

I was annoyed by how everybody answered this question. Everybody falls over themselves to affirm, "I would never apply a litmus test, I will appoint the most qualified person."

Of course all appointees should be the most qualified persons available. And one of the qualifications for the position of Supreme Court judge (on state or federal level) is commitment to the constitution.

The following are fundamental principles of the U.S. Constitution:

All rights and powers originate in the people.
Government, at any level, can only exercised the rights and powers explicitly granted by the people.

Ergo, any person who says, "The right of privacy is not established in the constitution" is not qualified to be a judge.

To some extent both liberals and conservatives recognize the existence of a "public sphere" in which our interactions with each other can be legislated and adjudicated, and a "private sphere" in which government should not intrude. We may disagree on where the line is drawn, but for any conservative to deny the existence of a private sphere contradicts everything they say about why government should be limited.

As I see it, a judge who would consider it constitutional for government to regulate sex and reproduction, and who would authorize the state to force a woman to carry a pregnancy to term against her will, is not qualified for the position. That would be an honest answer from Gregoire or Obama -- and Obama, at least, did bury a recognition of that in the midst of "oh no I wouldn't."

And an honest answer from Rossi or McCain would be that they believe that constitutional principles were violated in the Roe vs Wade decision, and therefore any judge who would not overturn Roe vs Wade is not qualified for the position -- and McCain did bury a recognition of that in the midst of "oh no I wouldn't."

I would have been a lot happier if they were direct about it. I would be a whole lot happier if our Washington governor candidates were even close to that direct.

Rossi and Gregoire answer the "litmus test" question

B.C. court rules that homeless people can camp in city parks

2008-10-15T01:18:00.001-07:00

Survival is a human right. The British Columbia Supreme Court ruled Tuesday (October 14) that, with insufficient capacity in Victoria's shelters, a bylaw forbidding homeless people from setting up tents and sleeping in city parks deprives homeless people of life, liberty and security in violation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

read more | digg story

w00t! Good news for Nickelsville!

2008-10-05T18:22:00.000-07:00

I just learned a new word while reading the comments on Tim's blog today.

Tim always blogs much more actively than I do, and he's been posting a LOT on the Nickelsville saga. His most recent post reports some good news I had already heard: the United Indians of All tribes dropped off a letter stating full support of Nickelsville. w00t!

Also w00t! - Human Services manager Alan Painter admitted in an open City Council meeting on Friday that shelters are full. To a direct question on that from a Councilmember, he said yes, they are full, and when they aren't it's only due to special circumstances.

Anitra 'Many Hats' Freeman, WHEEL, and the Women's Funding Alliance

2008-10-03T16:43:00.000-07:00

Today was the King County Combined Federal Campaign 2008 Public Sector Employee Campaign and Recognition Kickoff Event.

Say that six times fast.

Like almost everybody else I know, I am a member of several organizations. One of them is WHEEL (Women's Housing, Equality and Enhancement League). (Aren't you glad you don't have to say that six times fast, you can just say "WHEEL"?) WHEEL is a member of the Women's Funding Alliance, a funding and support federation of 21 agencies serving women and girls in the Puget Sound region. As a small grassroots group of homeless and formerly homeless women organizing our own programs with the assistance of one staff member, what we get through WFA is a major part of our funding. Networking with other federation members is also invaluable; a few years ago, we worked together with the King County Coalition Against Domestic Violence to protect the privacy of women in emergency homeless shelters during government data-gathering.

One of our obligations in return for the funding and support we get from WFA is to participate in events like today; staffing the table in a big, big fair and saying approximately 5,000 times fast, "We are homeless and formerly homeless women organizing our own programs. We are a federation member of the Women's Funding Alliance. For small grassroots groups like ours, the funding and support we get from the Women's Funding Alliance is critical."

Good thing I'm almost over that cold.

The doors opened at 11 AM and I had given out all but one of my WHEEL flyers by 1 PM. I kept one; since WHEEL doesn't have a website right now, here's the contents of the current WHEEL flyer:

WHEEL: Women's Housing, Equality and Enhancement League

Mission:
The Women's Housing, Equality and Enhancement League (WHEEL) is a non-profit and non-hierarchical group of homeless and formerly homeless women working on ending homelessness for women. WHEEL is all about homelessness and action.

WHEEL is the women-only, women-concerned sister organization to SHARE (Seattle Housing and Resource Effort). Both WHEEL and SHARE provide self-managed shelters--including tent cities.

WHEEL works to get women out of the places where they have been hiding, recognize each woman as an individual and involve women in the process of improving programs and creating new programs for their own needs.

WHEEL's goals are to give voice and leadership to homeless women, to organize campaigns around increased services and safety for women, and to develop and support self-managed shelters.

Since 1993, WHEEL has initiated many campaigns that have improved the lives of all women. our efforts have included:

Pushing for longer hours at shelters and drop-in centers
Moving the entrance to DESC from "Crack Alley" to Third Avenue
Holding yearly Homeless Women's Forums, community gatherings, since 1995
Establishing new shelters, day programs, meal projects and housing for women... including the County Winter Women's Shetler, Meal of Fortune, and Dorothy Day House

Current Projects:

Women in Black silent witnessing vigils whenever a homeless person dies outside or by violence in King County. We have stood for 34 people so far in 2008.

Homeless Place of Remembrance, a public place to honor homeless people who have died. We have worked with church and community leaders for the past five years, and are now working with designers toward siting this project in Victor Steinbrueck Park.

Tent City3 is a self-managed camp of 100 homeless women, men and couples which rotates among churches/spaces mostly in Seattle.

Tent City4 is a 100-person self-managed camp in suburban Seattle, mostly on the Eastside.

Shelter for Women: This year there has been a severe lack of shelter for homeless women. our current projecgs and campaigns include: WHEEL's Severe Weather Shelter for Women, open during the worst winter weather, and Organizing for Provision of More Shelter for Women.

The Women's Empowerment Center is a self-managed day organizing, arts and education center for women.

The Dorothy Day Group works for more housing, food, dignity and power among homeless women. we currently have two projects: Sandwichmaking and distributing sandwiches at Westlake Park, and producing and distributing our own newsletter, The Occasional Times.

WHEEL Schedule:

Women's Empowerment Center
Sundays, 8:30 AM--1:30 PM
Hammond House (2nd & Stewart)
Trainings, workshops, educational and fun activities and lunch!

The Occasional Times Newsletter
Mondays 10 AM--Noon
Writing and publication meetings rotate between Angeline's and the WHEEL Office.

Weekly Organizing Meeting
Mondays 2 PM, with refreshments, at the WHEEL office (1902 Second Avenue)
Strategizing meetings for WHEEL--everyone has a voice and a vote

Breakfast and Education Project
Thursdays 8:30 AM--11:30 AM
October--mid-June
Antioch University (6th & Battery)
A collaborative effort of WHEEL, the Sisters Project and Antioch, this program offers breakfast, workshops, and activities.

Women in Black
Wednesdays noon--1 Pm as needed
Municipal Courthouse, 5th & James
We notify people by phone/email when a death has occurred.

Homeless Women's Forum
Community celebration/platform raising held each November.

HOW YOU CAN GET INVOLVED!

Since 1993, WHEEL has been working in partnerhip with other groups and individuals in one of the most unique programs in Seattle, or indeed in the country. All homeless and formerly homeless women are invited to any of our meetings.

Anyone can help in the following ways:

Join us at Women in Black vigils when a homeless person dies outside or by violence. Call (206) 956-0334 to join our notification list.
Does your church have room to host an indoor shelter or tent City? Do you know of other possible hosts? Call (206) 448-7889.
Join our Homeless Place of Remembrance Planning Committee, which meets on the third Wednesday of each month at the Josephinum (1902 2nd Avenue).
Our Women's Empowerment Center needs volunteers to help teach various skills classes, and art supplies for our writing and arts programs.
Contributions for general operating expenses and for special efforts are always welcome. WHEEL is a tax-deductible 502(c)3 program and a federation memebr agency in the Women's Funding Alliance.
Call us to discuss other ways to help!

Mailing Address:
PO Box 2548
Seattle WA 98111-2548

Street Address:
1902 Second Avenue (& Stewart)
2nd Floor, Josephinum

Phone: (206) 956-0334
Fax: (206) 448-2389
Email: wheelorg@yahoo.com

I did all that typing down here at the Real Change offices, where I am a member of the Editorial Committee and also teach writing and computer skills to homeless and low-income adults in a workshop format called StreetWrites. StreetWrites hours start at 5:30 PM, and when I checked in here at 2:30 PM, after the Convention Place gig, I didn't expect I could go home, nap, and get back by StreetWrites time. My Official Sweetie, Dr. Wes, observes (often) that I have no conception of the physics of space and time: I attempt to walk through physical objects if I am thinking about anything at all else, and frequently try to schedule three simultaneous events at once, in separate locations. But occasionally, I do get it right. It's now 4:40 PM. I just have time to put my personal hat on, and eat dinner.

Legal status of Nickelsville: update

2008-10-03T14:47:00.000-07:00

Turns out that UIATF (United Indians of All Tribes Foundation) leases the 20 acres that Daybreak Star is on from the City of Seattle. The federal government deeded land that used to be Fort Lawton to the City of Seattle, on condition that the City lease 20 acres of it to the UIATF.

The City contends that the lease requires the UIATF to abide by city land use codes, and that hosting Nickelsville would be a violation of those codes. The posted 72-hour "Notice to Remove" signs Thursday afternoon. The Northwest Justice Project has filed an injunction on Nickelsville's behalf, and the City has agreed to hold off on sweeping Nickelsville until after the court hearing Monday morning.

I was not at the legal meeting this afternoon, between NJP and Nickelsville, so I don't know what arguments they are actually using. From my own experience (not as a lawyer, but as a party involved in some relevant court cases) these are the arguments I think could be used:

The showdown between UIATF and the City over the People's Lodge established that, as Bernie Whitebear stated at the time, "We have the development and the administrative authority over our property."
The King County Court decision in 2001 that the City of Seattle has been wrong in denying a permit for El Centro de la Raza to host Tent City 3 established that a homeless encampment does not automatically violate land use codes.
A) Churches have the constitutional right to host homeless shelters or encampments on their property, and local governments have only the authority to establish reasonable health and safety standards for those uses. This has been well-established in court.
B) Surely Native Americans have an equal right on their property.

We'll all find out on Monday morning. Stay tuned...

Nickelsville now on tribal land inside Discovery Park

2008-10-02T00:43:00.001-07:00

Nickelsville has moved to tribal land! 75 tents are now up in Discovery Park, beside Daybreak Star Cultural Center on land that belongs to the United Indians of All Tribes.

Nickels was threatening to fine the state $150 a day for violation of land use codes if they allowed us to stay any longer on state land. Now that we are on Indian land, will he threaten the United Indians of All Tribes, or the federal government? Stay tuned...

Personally, I've had a sore throat/chest cold since Saturday, so I haven't camped out in the parking lot yet. I was out at the parking-lot site briefly today, then went back home to bed.

Seattle Raging Grannies had been planning to do a performance down at Nickelsville tonight, and I'd printed up song sheets; then we decided that the Nickelodeons seemed busy, and it might be best to come back after they were settled in the new site. Since I wasn't able to speak more than two sentences without my throat seizing up, I was actually relieved that I didn't have to sing. I gave out the song sheets to Nickelodeons, I'll print up more later.

I got up a couple hours ago; the news started posting to Google about 11. I have a WHEEL meeting at 10 AM; I'll find out more then.

read more | digg story

In hard times, tent cities multiply

2008-09-28T12:53:00.001-07:00

Across the U.S., we are seeing the most visible rise in homeless encampments in a generation. Nearly 61 percent of local and state homeless coalitions say they've experienced a rise in homelessness since the foreclosure crisis began in 2007. Or as our own Tim Harris is quoted, "What's happening in Seattle is what's happening everywhere else - on steroids."

read more | digg story

'Nickelsville' camp continues defiance of city's deadline

2008-09-25T15:43:00.001-07:00

From the news: 'Organizers and residents of the homeless encampment dubbed "Nickelsville" in a jab at Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels are ignoring the city's order to pack up move and have begun constructing a wooden shantytown.' We're standing! Come and join us!

read more | digg story

Aimee Curl gets to say "Nickelsville is Here!"

2008-09-25T14:08:00.001-07:00

Aimee Curl of the Seattle Weekly, who has been covering the planning stages of the Nickelsville homeless encampment, posts video of the setup Monday.

read more | digg story

Homeless people create 'Nickelsville' in Seattle

2008-09-25T13:35:00.001-07:00

The next Nickelsville coverage is in the Seattle Times. With 2600 more homeless people than shelters, Mayor Greg Nickels still tears down homeless encampments. He ordered Nickelodeons to pack up their pink tents and vacate the property; they voted unanimously to stand their ground. "People here, working together, can help each other," a resident said.

read more | digg story

'Nickelsville' homeless camp springs up in South Seattle

2008-09-25T13:30:00.001-07:00

I have, as usual, been too busy to post; I am catching up today before heading back out to Nickelsville. The first media story I found was from Northwest Cable News; it includes video. From the text: "Pink may not be the usual color people associate with homelessness, but the new camp is made up of 155 pink tents. They were erected around 4 a.m. Monday, and the people who hope to make this a long term homeless encampment say they don't care about the color as long as the tents keep them warm and safe."

read more | digg story

I'm off to Nickelsville!

2008-09-22T03:56:00.000-07:00

Nickelsville, the Seattle shantytown for homeless people who have no other shelter, is going up NOW. For more about it, see Nickelsville on the web. I'll check in with updates when I can.

McCain flunks Fact Check again

2008-09-20T15:55:00.001-07:00

McCain continues to distort Obama's tax plans. In one recent ad, he claims that Obama will tax home heating oil. The facts on the ground: Obama proposed a rebate of up to $1,000 per family to help cover increased heating oil costs; costs of the rebate to be funded by a windfall profits tax on oil companies.

The rationalization for the falsehood is, "Raising taxes on oil companies will result in higher costs to the consumer." That prediction is an honest opinion. The statement, "Obama will tax home heating oil" is not a prediction, it is not an opinion, it is a lie.

The prediction isn't a lie, it's just wrong. Like most of the so-called-conservatives, John McCain has never read Adam Smith and has no idea how a free market actually works.

If a business passes the cost of higher taxes on to the consumer, the consumer sees the cost up front. If consumption falls, business lowers the price and when that cuts into profits, business has a motivation for invention, innovation, finding lower-cost ways to deliver its product.

Trying to lower business costs by lowering business taxes is short-circuiting the free market cycle, NOT supporting it. It removes the motivation for innovation in production.

In the real world, when business taxes are lowered they do not pass the savings on to the customer. Why should they? What incentive do they have to do so?

And lowering taxes on business does NOT make the tax burden disappear. It only transfers it. Customers end up paying at the pump and ALSO at the IRS -- and even non-customers end up paying more at the IRS. too.

End of boring wonk session. Now for the rant:

Stop making American taxpayers subsidize Big Oil on the chance it will hold down the cost of your oil and gas. It never does. It only encourages them to gouge more, both up front and behind our backs.

We pay record prices at the pumps and oil companies post record profits. We pay record prices for groceries and agribusinesses post record profits. How many neurons does it take to recognize that you are being HAD?

read more | digg story

Thank you, John McCain

2008-09-20T14:31:00.000-07:00

And thank you, John McCain, for an epidemic of homelessness. Thank you that I get to stand vigil three weeks in a row for homeless people who died without shelter. Heck of a job, Johnny. Bush couldn't have done it without you.

McCain VS Obama, The Issues

2008-09-19T17:12:00.001-07:00

Being the WSJ, I expected this to be slanted toward John McCain. It doesn't work out that way.

McCain's health plan is projected to cost $1.3 trillion in order to cover 5 million more people; that's $260 per person. Obama's is projected to cost $1.6 trillion to cover 34 million more people; that's $47.06 per person. Much more bang for the buck.
"Free trade": McCain is unqualifiedly for it; Obama insists on labor and environmental standards, and using WTO agreements more effectively for American interests.
Taxes: On Obama's plan, low and middle-income taxpayers pay less, upper-income more; $85 billion of tax-cut costs offset by raising capital gains tax and closing corporate loopholes. McCain's tax cuts will cost $500 billion per year, mostly benefit corporations and upper-income, no specifics on how to offset ANY of the cost.
The estate tax already excludes up to $2 million, taxes estates over 2 million at 45%; is scheduled to exclude up to $3.5 mil next year, tax over that by 45%; be suspended in 2010 and return in 2011 excluding only up to $1 million. (So much for "eliminating the estate tax.") Obama proposes keeping the estate tax (no suspension in 2010) excluding up to $3.5 mil and taxing over that at 45% -- the currently scheduled 2009 level made permanent. Not as good for those who inherit in 2010; better for those who inherit in 2011 and after; just the same for those who inherit in 2009.
Both Obama and McCain support education. Obama has a plan; McCain doesn't.

John McCain is all image, no substance.

read more | digg story

Palin's appeal to the base

2008-09-14T14:51:00.000-07:00

This is not the first time I've agreed with Andrew Sullivan, and it probably won't be the last. Sarah Palin's governing style is eerily similar to George W. Bush.

cronyism: not just hiring cronies, hiring unqualified cronies
vindictiveness: punishing anything short of 100% uncritical support
secrecy and lies
piling up debt

And she still has her passionate supporters, even in the small town she left with a big debt.

I think it is because she is divisive; because she rewards cronies (regardless of qualifications) and punishes critics (regardless of accuracy). Whatever Sarah thinks about evolution, she plays to the Old Monkey. By the standards of the Old Monkey, it is right and good to lie to Them, attack Them, and steal Their bananas. It is all for the good of Us & Ours, Home & Hearth, and therefore it is all Good.

To me, McCain/Palin are all talk, no substance; their policies do not help the people supporting them, they actively harm them. Bush has left most of the people voting for him less secure, less prosperous, and more in debt than when he took office; McCain/Palin will continue the downward spiral.

But the Old Monkey follows the tribal chant. "Obama will talk to the Bad Guys! We will bomb the Bad Guys! We're the ones on Your side!" And never mind that "bomb the bad guys" doesn't actually make us any safer; it sounds like strength to the Old Monkey.

We will not win on reason alone. We have to get more people to the polls who vote with humanity, instead of with the Old Monkey.

Offshore Drilling Is Coming to a Vote

2008-09-14T14:13:00.001-07:00

A detail I hadn't read before: the current Congressional moratorium on offshore drilling expires automatically on September 30th. Do opponents of offshore drilling have the votes to renew the moratorium? Or is a compromise of some drilling, with some limits, inevitable?

read more | digg story

Here again!

2008-09-06T01:07:00.000-07:00

So much going on that I think about blogging... the Nickelsville campaign, the WHEEL shelter campaign, the Obama campaign, the garden and the Global Worming campaign, the Raging Grannies... and by the time I get home to the computer I'm too tired to blog. So I'm trying a few things to make it easier. One of them is Disqus, which will make it easier to track the comments I post on other blogs, which are often longer than what I post here! Hopefully, it will also encourage others to comment.

Caucusing for Barack Obama

2008-02-08T23:24:00.000-08:00

The Democratic precinct caucuses here in Washington State begin in a little over twelve hours. If anybody has been reading this blog, you know I will be caucusing for Barack Obama. As a head start:

Why American Veterans Are Voting For Barack Obama
Barack Obama, the grandson of a World War II vet who fought in Patton's army, is passionate and committed to the issues that affect veterans and their families. Obama has pledged a "zero tolerance" policy to end veteran homelessness.
Barack Obama Has Important Legislative Experience
Obama's campaign claims are not just rhetoric. Important legislative successes in both state and Congress demonstrate real ability "to deal with extremely complex issues, to reach across the aisle and to deal with diverse people."
Robert De Niro on Obama's 'Inexperience'
“It's clear Barack Obama does not have the experience to let the special interests run the government. He wasn't experienced enough to authorize the invasion of Iraq. That's the kind of inexperience I can get used to."
Lawrence Lessig: Why I Support Barack Obama
Comparing Obama and Clinton on character, integrity, and what each candidate would do: Barack Obama "represents the very best of who we are, the best of character, of integrity and ideals. And someone who opposed the war from the start."
Obama and Clinton: Not Trivial Differences
Obama's approach to problems reflects a liberal libertarianism not shared by any other leading Democrat, certainly not Hillary Clinton. Clinton wants to help us even against our will (like mandating health insurance); Obama will help us help ourselves.

I went to see Barack Obama speak today. I am not usually excited about going to see candidates in person. What more could I find out listening to someone speak in person than I could by research? I found myself excited about hearing Obama in person. I was ready for some uplift! And indeed, he is an inspiring speaker, charging up a huge crowd even after a two-hour wait.

One of the most telling moments for me was not anything he said. It was the point where he broke his rhetorical drive to reach for a bottle of water. Instead of drinking, he tossed it to somebody in the audience. Then he paused, saying: "Sit down there. Back off, give her room. Let those people through."

A young woman in the crowd immediately in front of the stage had fainted. Obama not only noticed, he took the time to make sure she was alright before returning his attention to his own speech.

All candidates say they are really in it for our sake. Few get a chance to demonstrate that they are paying more attention to the well-being of the people in front of them than they are to their own ego.

Facts and Myths about Tuberculosis and Homeless People

2008-01-27T17:32:00.000-08:00

While I was homeless, in 1995, a homeless group I worked with opened a new shelter with the aid of a neighborhood church. We held several community meetings in the process. One of the objections some neighborhood residents brought up was that "homeless people have TB" -- the Boy Scouts used the same community room that our homeless men and women would sleep in, and the children could catch TB. A district nurse came to a meeting and testified, among other things, that TB is still HIGHER among non-homeless populations than among homeless populations. What makes it a critical issue among the homeless is not the high incidence, but that the circumstances of their lives make the disease a greater threat to them --
as well as more contagious, when thirty of you are sleeping on the floor in one room. But the contagion rate in schools and offices is still higher than among homeless people. You won't catch TB from a rug that a homeless man slept on the night before. In case you were worried.

Shortly after that, I was invited into an online discussion about "homeless people spreading drug-resistant TB." These are notes from that discussion; reposted now because lately, I've been hearing some of the same comments.

A correspondent equated homelessness with "poverty, illness, and insanity." My response:

Poverty, yes -- you can definitely be allowed to be categorical on that. No one with the money to escape it *chooses* to sleep on pavement, or on a mat with two army blankets on the floor of a church basement.

I acknowledge the correlation between poverty and homelessness. I still don't see that it proves anything. Or are we going to bring in Calvinism? To be poor is to be morally inferior, to be homeless is to be poor, therefore to be homeless is to be morally inferior, therefore of course they don't take their meds?

Illness AND insanity, though -- good grief, we not only HAVE to have one of them, we HAVE to have both? We are homeless AND poor AND sick AND insane?

While I was in a homeless shelter, I shared the space with several men and women who were working, full-time -- at blue-collar, minimum-wage jobs, or at seasonal jobs, or they had just gone back to work after illness or injury. It would take them several months, at least, to save up enough to move back into housing -- first and last month's rent, furniture and all the things required for living in a house, from dishes to toilet paper.

None of them were, at the time, physically or mentally ill.

Our shelter was one of the self-managed shelters organized by homeless people themselves. Everyone participated in cleaning and administering the shelter. Therefore the portion of the population we served was more active, motivated and responsible than in, for instance, the city-run emergency shelter. Several of the people in the shelter were, however, in the category of "mentally ill", "disabled by reason of mental illness." I
was one of them. My illness had made it impossible for me to do my former work of computer programming. But I could take my medication. I could take a large portion of responsibility in the shelter, and it increased as I recovered.

As I said in an earlier post, mental illness does not always equal incompetence. "I am in pain, not incompetent."

My correspondent said (as most people believe) that "the homeless are more likely on an individual basis to forget or neglect prescribed medications, especially ones taken after they are pushed back on the streets." My response:

The incidence among the homeful of not finishing medication and not taking it as prescribed is HUGE. It is a continual problem doctors and pharmacists wrestle with. This is with educated, stable, working adults living in their own homes. They either decide that taking one pill a day for twenty days is too slow, they'll take four a day for five days; or
they take the pills for three days and forget for a week; or they take them for ten days and feel better and save the rest for the next time they get sick... have a talk with your doctor the next time you see him, he'll give you lots more variations.

I can find no evidence anywhere that homeless people are any worse about taking medication than people in housing are.

Because any statistic -- or hint of a supposition of a statistic -- can be used to justify blame and horrid measures, it is very important to be responsible about using them, or letting them be used. I reply to any stereotypes about the homeless wherever they show up. Being kind to poor helpless weak-minded sick homeless people or being cruel to stinking useless crazy criminal addict homeless people are both abusive -- abusive to a different extent, in different ways, but the kind pity makes it easier for the cruel oppression. What is really needed is to realize that there are people who have homes, there are people who do not have homes; there is an equally wide spread of intelligence, education, physical fitness and mental health in both categories.

And all those varieties of human should be regarded with as much dignity as you demand for yourself.

End of sermon. Smile, I don't pass a collection plate!

Still another correspondent insisted, "A large percentage of TB inflicted people in the US are homeless, this vector has a hard time taking its meds, as a generalism." My response:

I heard a public health nurse speak about tuberculosis and homeless people: she said that most of the people who have TB are not homeless. This is what I put together from a quick check on the Web:

Eleven Years of Community-Based Directly Observed Therapy for Tuberculosis September 27, 1995. (c) AMA 1996: C. Patrick Chaulk, MD, MPH; Kristina Moore-Rice, RN; Rosetta Rizzo, RN, MHS; Richard E. Chaisson, MD; http://www.ama-assn.org/special/hiv/library/jama95/oc4703.htm

"Conclusions.--In contrast to the national TB upswing during the 1980s,
Baltimore experienced a substantial decline in TB following
implementation of community-based DOT, despite highly prevalent
medicosocial risk factors. Directly observed therapy facilitated high
treatment completion rates and bacteriologic evidence of cure.
Directly observed therapy could help reduce TB incidence in the United
States, particularly in cities with high case rates."
Directly monitoring patients improves their compliance with meds; this was independent of all other socioeconomic factors. Middle-class homeful folk did better on the direct observation treatment program, just as poor immigrants did.: "Factors contributing to increased TB morbidity and drug resistance
include physician mismanagement of cases, patient nonadherence with
therapy, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, and a
substantial decline in funding for public TB control programs."
The rise in homelessness is not cited as a factor.
Department of Health Public Health Fact Sheet * Tuberculosis fact sheet Copyright =A9 1996 Washington State Department of Health http://www.doh.wa.gov/topics/TB.html: "Prolonged exposure is normally necessary for infection to occur."
(Just in case the conversation makes you concerned about catching TB from a homeless person you pass on the street.)
To put some perspective on "people not being compliant with their meds" --: "People with active TB must complete a course of curative therapy. Initial treatment includes at least four anti-TB drugs for a minimum of six months."

A public health nurse told me that treatment can mean up to twelve pills a day. For months. The nurse said that compliancy is NOT a problem restricted to the homeless. "People are not compliant, period. I am not always compliant about my meds."

Things That You Can Do to Stop the Spread of TB

Spread education, yourself. Get public health pamphlets for your church, school, and office; have a speaker come in to your community group, or school, or office, to present the facts on TB, AIDS, and local health issues; provide links from your webpage to accurate health info pages; if you hear someone using inaccurate facts, correct them.
Notice what's going on around you. If someone you know shows signs of a medical problem, get them to see a doctor.
Don't withdraw from friends -- or family, co-workers, church members -- who are ill or in pain. People do, not just from fear of contagion, but from awkwardness and the pain of helplessness. Being emotionally and socially isolated is one of the things that makes people get sicker, or fail to get well.
If you get sick, take your meds as the doctor orders -- but FIRST get the doctor to explain the medication she's prescribing, also read up on it yourself and talk it over with your pharmacist. People who take responsibility for their own health live longer. People who blindly do whatever their doctor tells them to statistically have a shorter life expectancy than people who don't go to doctors at all.
Support spending money for public health. (Take it out of the corporate wealthfare funds.) Tuberculosis was almost wiped out in this country, then we cut back on public health and it resurged, complete with antibiotic-resistant strains -- as if the Unite States was a patient who stopped taking his meds because he started feeling better.
Support local hygiene centers -- places where homeless people and others in need can shower and wash their clothes. And tourists, and tired shoppers, and everyone else stuck downtown without a bathroom.
Campaign to cut out corporate wealthfare entirely and use it to provide adequate housing for all. We should have zero homeless people. (Okay, it doesn't relate directly to TB. I just thought I'd throw it in.)

"Think twice before you speak about the homeless --
the dignity you save may be your own."

Combating Climate Change Denial

2008-01-26T10:05:00.000-08:00

Updated

It may be hard to believe that there are people who can stare straight at where a glacier used to be and swear that Earth's climate is not changing to any degree that will affect humanity. It may be hard to believe that some people who are not oil company executives still refuse to believe that human activities have any effect on the earth's climate. Such arguments do exist, however, and as silly as they sound they cannot be simply ignored.

According to cognitive scientists, a statement that is met with silence is more likely to be believed. Therefore, as frustrating as it is to confront the same falsehoods over and over and over and over... it is necessary. Not to change the minds of the claimants, who are emotionally invested in their position, but for the sake of the innocent bystanders.

Here are some resources for debunking myths and misinformation about climate change:

From the environmental news blog Gristmill, a complete list of the articles in How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic, a series by Coby Beck containing responses to the most common skeptical arguments on global warming.
The better you understand the evidence, the better you can explain it. NewScientist news service has a guide to evaluating the evidence on climate change, and answers to 26 common climate myths.
DeSmogBlog, "Clearing the PR Pollution that Clouds Climate Science," is on ongoing resource.

NEW: RealClimate.org has a Wiki collecting a LOT of information in one place.

I hope that helps you! Human beings are affecting our climate, and being affected by it; these effects will become increasingly serious; and we must take serious actions now or pay serious penalties later. We do not have to wait to act until every last soul on earth is convinced of the necessity. Most people already agree. Our actions will be more effective, however, the more people participate. People with accurate information always solve problems better.

Busting the Climate Change "Myth Busters" : Part II

2008-01-23T02:55:00.000-08:00

“I’ve made up my mind. Don’t confuse me with the facts.” Steven Milloy says that this is the mantra of "global warming fanatics." I say it's the mantra of fanatic global warming deniers. Let's examine Milloy's "Top 10 Climate Myth-Busters for 2007" and see, shall we? I busted Milloy's first five myth-busters back in December; will the next five hold up better?

The multiplication of straw men. Milloy cites the discovery that "brown clouds" (aerosols) in the atmosphere are a warming factor, instead of a cooling factor as previously supposed, to be somehow a reason for dismissing all concern about global warming. He represents climate scientists as having portrayed CO2 as the one culprit in all global warming, and since it isn't, the scientists don't know what they are talking about, at all at all.

#1: No, climate scientists do not claim that CO2 is the one & only man-made influence on global climate change.
#2: Learning you were wrong about something is not evidence that you don't know your science; it is evidence that you are doing real science.

For all those interested in real science:
Milloy claims that global temperatures are not rising as fast as global CO2 levels, therefore the two are not after all connected. From Wikipedia: "None of the effects of forcing are instantaneous. The thermal inertia of the Earth's oceans and slow responses of other indirect effects mean that the Earth's current climate is not in equilibrium with the forcing imposed." source is a pdf.

Milloy cites research published in "April" (it was published in December 2005) indicating that while planting more forest in the tropics could lessen global warming, planting more forest in Northern latitudes could increase it. From here, he jumps to "so maybe Northern forests are causing all the global warming." Read what the research actually says. Oh, and he missed one in 2001.

55 million years ago, warming preceded release of CO2. That's probably what's going on now. This was addressed on RealClimate in 2004: What does the lag of CO2 behind temperature in ice cores tell us about global warming?

In #10, Milloy gives up citing science and just cites the EPA directly. And we all know that George Bush's EPA is completely objective on the science of climate change.

Milloy cannot end the year without crowing that a British judge gave the movie An Inconvenient Truth a "spanking." What the judge really ruled was that An Inconvenient Truth is "broadly accurate" and "substantially founded upon scientific research and fact" and that it can be shown in schools as long as students are informed of nine "errors and omissions" -- none of which invalidate the major premises of the movie. Unhappily for Mr. Milloy et. al. Justice Barton declared that "These propositions, [which the government] submits (and I accept), are supported by a vast quantity of research published in peer-reviewed journals worldwide and by the great majority of the world's climate scientists."

global average temperatures have been rising significantly over the past half century and are likely to continue to rise ("climate change");

climate change is mainly attributable to man-made emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide ("greenhouse gases");

climate change will, if unchecked, have significant adverse effects on the world and its populations; and

there are measures which individuals and governments can take which will help to reduce climate change or mitigate its effects.

Even the Judge's list of nine 'errors' is in dispute. Judge Barton claimed there was no evidence of any Pacific atolls being evacuated. Nobody showed him the newspaper. Judge Barton disputed that "coral reefs were bleaching because of global warming and other factors." The Judge's pointed out: "The actual scientific view, as recorded in the IPCC report, is that, if the temperature were to rise by 1-3 degrees Centigrade, there would be increased coral bleaching and widespread coral mortality, unless corals could adopt or acclimatise, but that separating the impacts of climate change-related stresses from other stresses, such as over-fishing and polluting, is difficult." The bottom line is:

The Judge does not dispute the IPCC report or the general scientific consensus about global warming.
The impacts on the coral cited by the IPCC are man-made.
Global climate changes that have a disastrous effect on human lives and societies are happening.

We need to address questions like "how do we provide clean drinking water after the glaciers melt" and "how do we support communities whose land is washing out from under them." Those problems aren't going to go away no matter how much junk science the Denial Brigade piles up to prove It's Not Really Happening.

Why peace is personal

2008-01-21T21:45:00.000-08:00

Reposted in honor of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., who saw the connection between war and poverty, peace and justice:

"Living is a political act."

I cannot conceive of politics as something divorced from daily life, from "real life." Maybe part of it was how I was raised. Just as it was taken for granted that adults, male and female both, worked to support themselves and their families; that reading books out of personal interest and writing just because you wanted to were common human activities; it was also taken for granted that "government of the people, for the people, and by the people" meant that each of us was obligated to have an informed opinion and do something about it. What happened in the world affected us, and we could have an effect on what happened in the world.

For most of my life, however, that meant voting, occasionally campaigning for a particular issue or candidate, occasionally marching and chanting "Vague Liberal Slogans! Vague Liberal Slogans!"

Becoming homeless, and becoming active in the organized homeless community of Seattle, made me much more active in participatory democracy. I learned that power protects itself by being boring, and that if you avoid all those dreary budget meetings and council hearings and leave them to the people who "have the time for such things," those people are going to have power over decisions that affect your life, and you won't.

I learned that survival is a political act, and that getting bureaucrats to consider survival an important issue is a horrifyingly difficult struggle.

I learned that homelessness kills.

June 28, 2006, our Women in Black group stood vigil for eight homeless people who had died without shelter, in King County. One of them was a newborn baby. Two weeks later, we stood vigil for a disabled homeless veteran who had been set on fire while sleeping in his wheelchair. One week after that, we stood vigil for a homeless woman who was very well-known to many of us, who was stabbed to death.

In the same period of time, several women in our community who had recently gotten housing died of various health issues. Homelessness takes its toll, even after it ends.

As the tragedies piled up, I was not handling them well. I couldn't even write about what I was feeling. It was the vigils and memorial services, sharing grief with others face-to-face and hug-to-hug, that kept me going.

And in the midst of this, I am working with the Committee to End Homelessness, repeatedly faced with the assertion, "It is politically impossible to create more shelter right now. Any money available has to go into long-term solutions, housing. The people outside can move directly into apartments when they are available -- they don't have to go to shelters first."

A man committed suicide last year after years on a housing waiting list -- his apartment came up three days after he died. Tonya Smith, the woman who was stabbed to death, was in recovery, and a treatment bed had opened for her -- people were searching for her for two days before she bled to death on the street. If she had a shelter bed, she could have been found. She would be in treatment right now -- not in her grave.

Since the King County Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness was launched, 1,300 new units of low-income housing have been created here -- and more than twice that many eliminated. That's a net loss. Under the Ten Year Plan, funders at all levels (public and private) are rewarding shelters and programs according to how many and how fast they get people into housing. Sounds good, hey? There is an increase on the street of people who are the most vulnerable, with the most difficulties, who are the hardest to get into housing. People like Douglas Dawson and Tony Smith.

People are dying out there -- while the Committee to End Homelessness trumpets success, and "it is politically impossible to create more shelter now."

And what does this have to do with peace? From the time I became active in this cause, through 2000, we were making a little bit of progress each year. The numbers of homeless people kept rising, but the shelters and services kept increasing too, and there were people getting out of homelessness every day.

From 2001 on, we have been slipping backward. It is a constant struggle just to keep what we have, and even with constant struggle, there is always some erosion each year. The numbers of homeless people keep rising. The numbers of homeless people who die outside without shelter, who die of violence -- including suicide -- keep rising. The economy keeps slipping, and states, counties and city governments are strapped for funds, and survival services to the very poor are the first to go. It's "mere survival." It isn't building anything.

While billions are spent each day on "security" that doesn't keep us safe and war that doesn't keep us safe, the economy is being drained, the poor get poorer, more people need help, and there is less help to be had.

The war in Iraq is killing my friends, right here on the streets of Seattle. Damn right I take it personally.

There have been many more deaths since I first wrote this. Not much else has changed.

Would you buy a used lobbyist from this man?

2008-01-18T22:59:00.000-08:00

Mitt Romney was challenged by a reporter when he claimed that "lobbyists don't run my campaign." Here's the facts on the ground: Romney has accepted the second most money from lobbyists of any Republican presidential candidate; he has received the most endorsements from lobbyists of any Republican presidential candidate; a registered lobbyist is one of his senior advisers. A lot of his "advising" comes from lobbyists.

What happened after the spat (see the video) demonstrated why American journalism has become so abysmal. Glen Johnson, the reporter who called Romney on his b.s., was berated by Romney spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom, who claimed that "arguing" with the person giving a press conference is not "professional"!

It is not surprising that someone wanting to get a message reported his way defines the "profession" of journalism as "repeating whatever you are told." Fehrnstrom works for Romney; it's his job to get Romney's message reported Romney's way. That doesn't even upset me. Freedom of speech means that lying scumbags have the right to lie their scumbags off.

What upsets me is that all too many "journalists" follow the same definition of "objective journalism": "It isn't up to me to think about what's being said, only to parrot it." Journalists aren't supposed to work for the people they report on, they are supposed to work for the people they report TO. Us.

Come to think of it, I will have to qualify that. Some "journalists" work for the people who listen to them by giving them what they want to hear. Most of the people who cheered for Glen Johnson's "watchdog journalism" didn't check out his documentation; they believed what he said because it matches what they believe about Mitt Romney, so it has to be true. The people who agree that Glen Johnson acted unprofessionally won't be checking out his documentation, because what he said doesn't matches what they believe about Mitt Romney, so it can't be true. To those people, Ann Coulter is a journalist. She gives them what they want to hear.

Freedom of speech does not mean you have the right to lie without being challenged. And freedom of information does not mean that you have the right to pick and choose your information based on what you want the truth to be. Whether what we read is unflattering to a person we support or favorable toward someone we oppose, we have a responsibility to try to disprove our initial opinion before we decide its credibility. That is what "being objective" requires.

When you choose to be lied to, you have surrendered freedom. When you subject yourself to the rudeness of being proved wrong, you make yourself free.

Would you buy a used lobbyist from this man?

Environmental Law & Liberty

2008-01-15T02:57:00.000-08:00

Some people consider laws protecting the environment to be an infringement on human liberty.

Can I dump my garbage onto your front lawn just because it's convenient for me? Or does government have a duty to protect your rights, as well as a duty to not interfere with mine?

Why should I have any more right to dump garbage into other people's air?

Responsible and considerate people do not drive across a neighbor's lawn, dump garbage over their fence, steal their cars, or blow car exhaust in their faces. Not everybody is responsible and considerate. We make social agreements on what is acceptable behavior, then we authorize public servants to use force to compel obedience to those agreements from people who do not want to respect them; people who do not want to respect the rights of the rest of us.

If you are against all law, and believe in total anarchy, then objection to environmental protection law is at least consistent. If laws against polluting the air that other people breathe are an infringement on individual rights, then so are laws against theft, rape, and dumping garbage on somebody else's lawn.

Very few human beings want to be robbed, beaten, raped or killed. Some, however, are quite willing to rob, beat, rape, and kill others. None of us objects to police enforcing laws to protect the majority of us from the minority that puts their own gratification above anybody else's rights.

Almost every human belong wants to breathe clean air and drink clean water. Many don't want to give up any of our accustomed pleasures and conveniences in order to avoid dirtying the air and water ourselves. It is just as justifiable to use the force of law to control the behavior of those who place their own gratification above the rights of everyone else to clean air, as it is to use the force of law to control those who place their own gratification above our rights to not have garbage dumped on our lawn.

The people who are most at risk of harm by environmental pollutants – very young, very old, sick, poor, and homeless people -- are those least able to take personal action against polluters. By taking group action, our society both protects the weakest among us and improves the health of all. Even short-sighted polluters.

A picture is worth a thousand rants...

2008-01-09T05:30:00.001-08:00

Anitra does less than 600 words on same-gender marriage :-)

2008-01-07T05:55:00.000-08:00

There are some ethical values that are universal. However, there is also a lot of disagreement about what is right and what is wrong, even among members of the same culture. There are Christians who think that none of us should drink coffee, or drink alcohol -- in any amount -- or dance with a member of the opposite sex, even if we're married to 'em. There are people who think that none of us should eat meat, wear leather, or even own animals as pets.

You have the right to say what you think is right, and argue for it. You do not have the right to do so unchallenged, or without criticism. You must do what you think is right. You do not have the right to impose your standards on others by force of law, arbitrarily.

The only justification for legally limiting the right of all individuals to act as they will is to protect the equal rights of all other individuals. Society has a legitimate interest in forbidding murder, theft, rape, arson, and other offenses against the rights and well-being of others. Society has a legitimate interest in enforcing the positive moral obligations we have to each other as fellow humans: to care for each other in illness and accident; to protect and raise children; to protect public health and prosperity.

If you can demonstrate that same-gender marriage causes a harm to others that they have a right to be defended against, or deprives others of a good they have a right to expect, then you can make a case for legally limiting the right to marriage. If not, you can't. You have a right to be protected from harm. You do not have a right to be protected from being offended.

It is good and proper to want to protect marriage. It does not protect marriage as a whole to limit and restrict it. We should be strengthening marital and family bonds, giving couples and families the support they need to take care of each other, rallying round when we see families in trouble. Forbidding people from entering bonds of caring for each other is the wrong way to go to strengthen society.

Approving a same-gender marriage is not approving the couple's sexual activity. No marital ceremony I know of, civil or religious, refers to how the couple are to have sex. The social approval of marriage is approval of the commitment to take care of each other and of any dependent. The social benefits given to married couples are to support the fulfillment of those obligations. Many heterosexual couples do things in their bedroom that some of their Christian neighbors would disapprove of. Nobody calls for dissolving their marriages because of it. What heterosexual couples do sexually together is none of the community's business, and neither is what homosexual couples do sexually together. What is the community's business is if they are taking care of each other and taking care of their dependents, and fulfilling their responsibilities to the community as a couple.

Methinks my fellow Christians should all stop being so blessed obsessed with sex. It's not healthy, son.

Barack Obama for Me

2008-01-07T00:42:00.000-08:00

I've been torn for several months. Looking at the total positions of the candidates, the top four I was in agreement with, in order of ranking, were:

Kucinich
Gravel
Obama
Edwards

Of them all, Edwards seemed to be the only one directly addressing an issue very critical to me -- the wealth gap and how it shreds society and undercuts democracy; the spread of poverty in America and how many men, women AND children are being left behind and thrown away.

I donated a few bucks to Edwards each month for about a year and kept rooting for him. I think he has helped keep that issue from being ignored, even while so many people want to ignore it.

Even more than Obama's win in Iowa, his victory speech won a lot of us over. As one commentator said, "He didn't speak as a presidential candidate; he spoke as a President." Maybe I don't agree with him about absolutely everything, as I do with Dennis Kucinich. [*] If we're looking for a President who can pull a divided country together again after all the polarizing effects of the last eight years -- including the war and the wealth gap -- I think Obama's our best hope in the bunch.

I guess this is my Dear John letter. I'm going with Obama.

And even though Edwards and Richardson are the next closest to me on the Political Compass, I think Joe Biden would be a better pick as VP. He has at least some foreign policy experience; although "experience" isn't all that Hillary tries to make it out to be. I'll pick someone who has succeeded over someone who has failed; I'll pick someone who has failed and learned from it over someone who has never tried; but I'll pick someone who has never tried over someone who has failed and NOT learned from it.

Take the Electoral Compass Quiz

More on Barack Obama's Political Positions

* I may not agree with Dennis Kucinich about UFOs.

Ron Paul Polarization

2008-01-05T15:11:00.000-08:00

I've seen passionate pro-Ron Paul and passionate anti-Ron Paul stories from liberals, and I've written a few myself.

I have talked with some intelligent, thoughtful Ron Paul supporters who say, "Yes, I disagree with him on abortion, etc; but we need a voice in the arena speaking about reigning in executive power, ending the war, and restoring civil rights." What worries me is the uncritical zealotry of so many of the Ron Paul supporters: "If you are for freedom, you are for Ron Paul; if you are against Ron Paul, you are against freedom!" Polarization kills brain cells. Uncritical support of ANYBODY is always dangerous.

Polarization against -- unconditional enmity -- also kills brain cells. Most of Ron Paul's supporters and most of Ron Paul's critics share common concerns. Instead of attacking Ron Paul, I think we should be presenting alternatives to accomplish the same goals: stop the war, reign in executive power, restore civil liberties.

Personally, I don't think that ANYBODY can "make you free." If individual citizens take more responsibility for our civic life, participate in our local government, get involved in our neighborhoods, we will make ourselves free. A President can only make that easier, or make it harder -- not do it for us. Bush made it harder. I think Ron Paul would make it harder, too -- and anybody else acting on Ron Paul's agenda. Kucinich, Gravel, Obama or Edwards would make it easier.

But NONE of them can do it for us. Yelling for a demagogue who will "make us free" is how countries get dictators.

And dictatorship is only helped by intellectuals who sneer at the "mob" and don't understand the desperation that drives them.

Resolution #25: Write More Humor

2008-01-03T20:53:00.000-08:00

My husband, Wes Browning, is a master at making points lightly. I am not.

After 12 years of hanging out together (ten of those officially) Wes has conditioned me to at least make my points more concisely. I had developed, over the years, the habit of 1) make the point; 2) give an example of how it applies; 3) rephrase it; 4) give another couple of examples of how it applies; 5) rephrase it again; 6) pause for questions. Wes taught me to respect my listeners more; make the point briefly, and only elaborate IF somebody asks questions! (Or responds in a way that indicates she thought I said Wednesday when I actually said peanut butter.) He did this by saying, "Got it, move on," usually after about ten words. :D

I still get a lot more verbose in the written word, when I cannot see a reader's eyes and spot when they've "got it" and it's time to move on.

And I learned all by myself that every single time somebody came back to tell me that I had really, really helped them, I had been feeling "light" at the time; and every time that I was trying very intensely to do something very very IMPORTANT it more often resulted in a noxious mess.

I do write very informally sometimes. I do use humor. Still, when Wes and I introduce ourselves at social occasions, people tend to grip my hand and say in a low and earnest voice, "I am so moved by your writing"; and then he says his name and people tend to get a big daffy grin and hop up and down squealing, "You're Wes Browning! You make me laugh so much!"

It's not that I'm jealous. I like moving people. I want to move people. It's just that I'd like to make them laugh occasionally, too. Not that I'm jealous. They don't have to squeal.

Well, the capper was, Wes read my list of two dozen New Year Resolutions and he complained, "There's not even one funny one!" I can't even think of a funny New Year Resolution! So I thought of making Resolution #25 "Lighten the fuck up." But that sounds way too close to what my sister might say to me right now, or what I might say to my sister right now, anyway, I don't want to go there right now. So I'm making Resolution #25 just, "Write more humor." Not even pointed humor, topical humor, or subversive humor. Something that is funny just to be fun.

I'm even going to add #26: "Do at least one thing each day that is totally, purposelessly, just for fun."

A Hitch in Resolution #14

2008-01-03T20:31:00.000-08:00

New Year Resolution #14 was to call or write to each of my family members at least once a week. I talked to my sister on the 1st, and one of my brothers on both the 1st and 2nd. The phone number that my Dad sent me didn't connect.

Tonight my sister began to rant at me because I expressed doubt that crackers who swamped a friend's chat-room were deliberately imitating her by repeatedly using OMG and WTF. Many times I have just let her rant; tonight I told her "Call me back later," and hung up. She did call me back when she had calmed down -- to tell me that she isn't speaking to me again. And I found out last night that I can't call her cell phone; like Dad's, I can't connect.

Actually, I can still write to both Dad and Sis, postal mail. They are moving around, but Dad told me that letters would be forwarded. Even if the letters never get delivered -- I can still write to them.

2 January 2008: Poetry of the day

2008-01-03T11:50:00.000-08:00

Once again, I kept Resolution #20, "Write at least one poem a day," after going to bed. Last night's effort was more personal than the found poem from Burpee's catalog:

tilth

the world at eight was built on threads of dream
the world of eighteen on wires of anxiety
28, laid on planks of order and responsibility
38, on girders that explored into infinity
48 was built on hard cold dirt

at 58 my world is built on bones of pain
pain undergirds all laughter, love and pleasure
throbs behind all music, song and dance
tinges every taste
it's just there
it's just there
it's always there

and so is laughter
love and pleasure
music, song and dance
chocolate and winter greens
dreams and anxiety
order and responsibility
explorations into infinity
and the hard cold dirt

everything is always happening at the same time

live

1 January 2007: poetry of the day

2008-01-02T15:30:00.000-08:00

I was on my way to bed "last night" (3 AM this morning) when I reminded myself that I had not yet written a poem, as per New Year Resolution #somethingorother [edit: it's #20]. Having approximately three neurons left standing, I wanted to do it as simply as possible, so I decided to make it a "found poem" built from the 2008 Burpee Catalog. I have a new appreciation of how sexy the Burpee catalog is.

Sexy Seeds

HoneyBunch, Fireball,
Tangerine Mama -
velvety chocolate sweetness doesn't fade.
Hot Tomato, Zowie!
Statuesque beauty with a Peppermint Twist.
Burpee is sexy!
Balboa is Blue.
White Wedding at 21.

The Wisdom of Crowds: book review

2008-01-02T15:05:00.000-08:00

How collective decision-making works well; how it goes wrong.

The Wisdom of Crowds
by James Surowiecki
Anchor; Reprint edition (August 16, 2005), $14
ISBN: 0385721706

New Yorker business columnist James Suroweicki demonstrates that large groups of people can be smarter than an elite few, explaining both why democracy works, and also how it goes wrong.

The crowd can be wise: IF it is diverse; if it has a particular kind of decentralization; if its individual members think independently; and if they all have some information.

A group made up of only people who agree with each other (such as all-conservative OR all-liberal groups) make bad decisions. So will a group in which most members defer to the judgment of a few. And even a large and diverse group of independent-minded people are unlikely to make good engineering decisions if none of them know anything about engineering.

The collective judgment of a large and diverse group of voters, however, WHEN all of them have some information (even if each of them thinks all the others are misinformed), AND they are free to disagree and contest with each other, AND their individual opinions can be aggregated in a process that produces a collective judgment -- that judgment will be a good one. Not a perfect one, but good enough to live with, and better than an elite few could have decided for them.

Some of the elements of "why it goes wrong" connect with "how societies fail" in Collapse (by Jared Diamond). When a small group of decision-makers with centralized power are insulated from the effects of their decisions, you have a disaster in the making.

Suroweicki makes the point that the input of each individual's local information and personal self-interest is important, and essential to making democracy work. Each individual voter does not have to be fully informed about all factors affecting everybody; each individual does have to have a way to get our own information into the pot and our personal questions answered.

The book is a good contribution to understanding how Homo Wannabe Sapiens could actually become Homo Sapiens Sapiens, but it is just a starting point. Much more needs to be written on how to create good group decisions, and how to avoid bad ones. Quickly, before a dumb, partisan, groupthink mob runs us all off the edge of a cliff.

Some quotes:

"Gustave Le Bon had things exactly backward. If you put together a big enough and diverse enough group of people and ask them to 'make decisions affecting matters of general interest," that group's decisions will, over time, be 'intellectually [superior] to the isolated individual,' no matter how smart or how well informed he is."

"Diversity and independence are important because the best collective decisions are the product of disagreement and contest, not consensus or compromise... Paradoxically, the best way for a group to be smart is for each person in it to think and act as independently as possible."

Also worth reading: Blink and The Wisdom of Crowds, a dialog between James Surowiecki and Malcolm Gladwell, in Slate magazine.

If you would like to help me buy more books, please rate this article on Gather.

Personal New Year Resolutions

2008-01-01T22:18:00.000-08:00

I didn't even think of New Year Resolutions until a vendor mentioned his to me yesterday. Then I came up with a flood, especially after Wes began writing his.

I listed a lot of my resolutions in my first 2008 post:

Help establish at least one new family shelter in Seattle.
Continue my garden/compost/worm projects. (Wes says it's good to include at least one resolution that you are certain you will keep.)
Keep a more thorough garden journal, and post to my garden blog at least once a week.
Help start at least one new (organic) urban garden in Seattle.
Find a way to continue fresh greens at the Union community meals this winter.
Help homeless shelters, homeless day programs, and other low-income apartment buildings find ways to grow fresh greens.
Add at least one native, heirloom plant to my garden this year, and save the seeds.
Post at least one "environmental justice" entry each week, making the connection between human issues and environmental issues.
Post at least one "public health" entry each week, promoting public health programs and health education.
Keep myself informed about health services available to homeless and low-income people and be alert for people who need that information.
Record the origins of all of my purchases and increase the percentage of those purchases from local sources, and from suppliers who operate fairly and ethically.
Make at least one post a week promoting a company that operates fairly and ethically.
Make at least one post every week that promotes critical thinking and public education.
Talk or write to each family member at least once a week. (Already today I have received calls from my sister and one of my brothers.)
Do more conscious mentoring of new people in the WHEEL, SHARE and Real Change homeless communities.
Stay in closer communication with my friends. Take more time for "hanging out."
Do more writing workshops.
Do more public speaking.

That makes eighteen. :) Now for more personal resolutions:

Continue rebuilding good self-care habits that went out during my depression earlier this year.
- Get more physical exercise.
- Drink more water, less sodapop.
- Eat more vegetables.
- Eat more whole grains, less refined sugar.
- Keep up with my magnesium and other supplements I know help me stay stable and healthy.
Write a poem a day (even if it's lousy).
Submit at least one thing for publication, somewhere, each week.
Publish at least one chapbook of my own.
Put together a (bound) book by the end of the year.
Blog regularly. Rant more.

That makes two dozen even. I think I'll stop there. :D

Happy New Year!

2008-01-01T19:22:00.000-08:00

Just a photoshopped photo found through StumbleUpon, with no attribution. If anyone knows where it comes from, please comment. It looks to me like that kid wants out of there. :D

New Year Resolutions for the Common Good

2008-01-01T16:57:00.000-08:00

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

That is the Preamble to the Constitution of the United States. It recognizes that all of us do have a "general welfare." There are needs and interests that we all share in common, a common good, and it is the legitimate role of government to promote that common good.

This is my list of survival goals that bridge ideological divisions. These seem a good starting point for working together on practical policies that can be agreed on by a broad group. They are also things we can each act on in our own small ways every day. It seemed like a good framework for New Year resolutions.

The health, welfare, and education of children is important to all of us, both emotionally and practically.
- In 2008, I pledge to see at least one new family homeless shelter established in Seattle, Washington.
Clean air, clean water, clean ground, safe and nutritious and sufficient food, are critical to the survival of all of us.
- In 2008, I will continue to garden, compost, and raise worms behind our apartment building.
- In 2008, I will post to my garden blog at least once a week.
- I will also help establish at least one new urban garden (using organic methods) in Seattle.
- In the next three months, I will find a way to continue to provide fresh greens for community meals through the winter.
- I will help homeless shelters, homeless day programs, and other low-income apartment buildings find ways to grow fresh greens.
Life is highly adaptable, but thrives best within certain parameters of climate and resources. Maintaining and even expanding those parameters is therefore important to all of us.
- In 2008, I will use this blog to increase awareness of the connection between human well-being and environmental well-being. I will post at least one "environmental justice" entry each week.
Good public health is essential for the good personal health of all of us. This includes the health of plants and animals.
- In 2008, I will help promote local public health programs. I will post at least on public health entry a week.
- I will keep myself informed about health services available to homeless and low-income people and be alert for people who need that information.
All living things are intricately interdependent in a complex biosphere human science is only beginning to understand. It is critical to our mutual survival to maintain the health of that biosphere, which includes its biodiversity.
- In 2008, I will add at least one native, heirloom plant to my garden, and save the seeds.
Trade, both in the free exchange of goods and services and the free exchange of ideas, has been a foundation of human prosperity and advancement. It is in the interests of all of us to protect an atmosphere for free and fair trade. That requires an atmosphere of equal rights enforced by law; a universal standard of justice. It requires protection and support of the weaker members of society so that all are equal in bargaining power in the marketplace and in the enforcement of contracts. The maintenance of equal trade, equal rights, and equal justice is therefore a common good, a common survival goal.
- In 2008, I will record the origins of all of my purchases and increase the percentage of those purchases from local sources, and from suppliers who operate fairly and ethically.
- I will make one post a week promoting an organization that operates fairly and ethically.
Accurate knowledge is a critical survival resource. Increasing our mutual knowledge, and policing error, is another common good. Public critical inquiry and open debate is the most effective means yet found for that. Increasing the knowledge and the critical and creative thinking skills of another is an increase of our own good. Education is a common good.
- In 2008, I will make at least one post every week that promotes critical thinking and public education.
The most important factor to individual human survival, since we became social animals, is other human beings. The creation and maintenance of social bonds is important to all of us, whether we like thinking of it as something we need, or not. People do need people. We will all be better off by making sure that others have strong social bonds, as well as ourselves.
- In 2008, I will talk or write to each family member at least once a week.
- In 2008, I will do more conscious mentoring of new people in the WHEEL, SHARE and Real Change homeless communities.
- In 2008, I will stay in closer communication with my friends in Raging Grannies and the Fellowship of Reconciliation.
We are each unique, with unique gifts. Other people can see things, think of things, say things, make things that I do not, that I could not. It benefits me to appreciate and encourage the uniqueness of others. The increase of human creativity and individual expression is a common good.
- In 2008, I will do more writing workshops.
An ethical culture, in which all people are treated as we ourselves would like to be treated, is important to all of us. Promoting an ethic of honesty, fairness, kindness, and compassion protects us personally from fraud, exploitation, abuse and neglect. Promoting the human rights of all is the best way to assure our own.
- In 2008, I will do more public speaking on social justice issues.

In blogging terms, that's:

One garden blog entry a week.
One environmental justice blog entry a week.
One public health entry a week.
One entry a week promoting a business that is operating ethically.
One entry a week on critical thinking and countering misinformation.

... which seems doable. So let's see. :D

Happy New Year!

Winding up with a BANG!

2007-12-31T18:54:00.000-08:00

I was feeling pretty good today. Began with helping to put together our homeless community newsletter, The Occasional Times. After this afternoon's WHEEL (homeless women's organizing group) we spent some time talking over the last year. Our organizer, Michele, had to push us to do it because we were all itching to get gone; I ended up grateful I stayed, it was a very rewarding exercise.

Big wins for the year on my personal list:

The publication of our book, Beloved Community: The Sisterhood of Homeless Women in Poetry.
Winning the addition of homeless people as a protected group in Seattle's Malicious Harassment Ordinance (by unanimous vote!).
We saved the Lora Lake Apartments from destruction.

I wound up at Real Change doing some research for WHEEL. Wes was there for the daily Sid-feeding. When Wes announced he was going up to Madison Market, I decided to tag along.

When we got off the bus at 17th & Madison, we jaywalked across the street, slanting downhill toward the market; so I guess you could say we brought it on ourselves. There was a ridge in the asphalt, running lengthwise with the traffic instead of crosswise like a speed-bump. We both tripped over it, almost simultaneously. Wes kept his long legs under him, lurching several steps and flapping "like a clipped-wing chicken trying to fly" as he described himself later. I with my little short legs only managed to avoid falling in the roadway itself. I went face down in the grass at the edge of the sidewalk and lay there while I took stock of how many places I hurt. When I heard Wes's distressed cry of "Oh, shit!" my first thought was, "Did we drop something in the road? Where are my glasses?" His reaction was instead triggered by turning back in relief after he avoided falling down, to find me lying face down and still!

I have only a small bit of bruising on one knee -- which is a miracle, considering how easily I bruise -- but I pulled muscles in my right shoulder badly and it hurt a LOT for the rest of the night. I'm actually writing this on the first, because no way was I using a keyboard last night! It only hurts a little bit now, though. I bought a cold can of rootbeer and kept running it across the sore spots all the way home!

On a bright note, my back feels ever so much better! I thought I had pulled a muscle lifting a worm bin, but maybe it was a slipped disc after all. When I got up from the ground last night, the pain seemed gone! At first I thought it might be just because my shoulder hurt so much worse, but the pain didn't come back as my shoulder pain faded, and my lower back has been more flexible, too.

I don't advise face-first falls as a remedy for lower-back pain, but I will take the serendipitous blessing. :) Sarah N. Dippity rides again!

Happy New Year, everyone!

For Your Gmail Security

2007-12-30T16:37:00.000-08:00

UK-based graphic and logo designer David Airey recently had his domain name stolen through a security hole in Google's free-email service, gmail. The good news is that, with the support of many of the online public and the help of both ICDSoft and GoDaddy, he has it back.

One of the lessons learned during this period is that using a free email service for business purposes is risky. Several comments on Airey's blog contained information that can diminish the risk for all of us (including bloggers).

Any web application can be hijacked by taking its session cookie, not just GMail. The increasing sophistication of technology makes it possible for thieves to snatch this information right out of the air. Always use https when accessing webmail, or any other online account. For GMail, go to (and bookmark) https://mail.google.com/

The Firefox extension CustomizeGoogle keeps all Google domains locked to https (among the many other useful things it does).

You can set up a regular email client, like Thunderbird, Apple Mail, etc, to access GMail via IMAP. This will pretty much make your mail access immune to cross-site scripting attacks.

Write On! And Be Safe!

Climate change deniers never get tired - only their arguments do

2007-12-29T16:28:00.000-08:00

According to cognitive scientists, the first thing our brain naturally does when hearing a new statement is believe it. Only afterwards do the habits of skepticism kick in -- if we have trained them -- and send our neurons scouting for any counter-evidence. "It ain't necessarily so" is a trained response -- not a built-in circuit.

So what do you do if your claim is disproved the first time you make it? Repeat it -- over and over and over, until everybody gets tired of correcting you, and then you win!

I am not tired yet. Steven "The JunkMan" Milloy of the Competitive Enterprise Institute posts a Global Warming Denial's Top Ten List as a year-end wrap-up. Here, once again, is why he is still wrong:

Milloy trumpets a study by climate-change skeptics claiming that Observed temperature changes measured over the last 30 years don’t match well with temperatures predicted by the [IPCC's] mathematical climate models..."

He didn't finish his research. On the same day that Science Daily and Fox News noticed the study, the climate scientists at RealClimate.org posted a refutation of it. For a less technical summary, See #3 of Prof. John Mitchell's Climate Change Myths:
Myth 3 - There is less warming in the upper atmosphere than at the surface which disproves human-induced warming

We expect greater warming in the upper atmosphere than at the surface in the tropics, but the reverse is true at high latitudes. This expectation holds whether the cause of warming is due to greenhouse gases or changes in the Sun’s output. Until recently, measurements of the temperature changes in the tropics in recent decades did not appear to show greater warming aloft than at the surface. It has now been shown that allowing for uncertainties in the observations, the theoretical and modelling results can be reconciled with the observations.

The bottom line is that the range of available information is now consistent with increased warming through the troposphere (the lowest region of the atmosphere).
Turns out, the authors tried the same argument before in 2004 and got trounced. They tried this year with a slightly revised version; they are still wrong.
Milloy says one more time with feeling, "It's all the sun's fault!" This is getting as old as "Evolution is just a theory." One more time, with feeling, "No, it's not!"
It was even warmer 1000 years ago, so we can't be causing the warming now!

This is one more attempt to sell the Medieval Warming Period as a global phenomenon; still shoddy merchandise. The latest "study" is by Craig Loehle, of the National Council for Air and Stream Improvement -- an "environmental resource for the forest products industry" that is largely funded by the forest products industry.

Find out more on the Medieval Warming Period at GristMill, NOAA, and Wikipedia, as well as the RealClimate entry linked above.
We don't have to do anything to correct global warming: the atmosphere self-regulates.

One more example of "personal responsibility" conservatives sloughing off any hint of personal responsibility. James Lovelock, who first proposed the vision of a "self-regulating" system Earth, himself thinks we have overloaded the system.

I think: 1) When you make a mess, do you clean it up yourself or do you wait for the "natural forces of the environment" to decay it? 2) How many people have to lose their livelihoods, lose their homes, sicken, and die while we wait for the climate to "self regulate"? 3) Nature has no reason to favor human interests in her "self-regulation." Natural "self-regulation" could include plague, flood, fire, and other methods more unpleasant to humans than cutting down on driving.
Roll out the Straw Man! A 2005 report on the Atlantic Ocean current raised alarms in some of the media. Milloy uses this as an example of scientists being "alarmist," although scientists themselves were much more cautious about the findings. A better way to prevent future alarmism would have been to improve his readers' understanding of the science, as the scientists at RealClimate did. Further news about the Atlantic Current.

I have gotten a bit tired, after all. I'm going to have to close this blog entry here and continue the list "next year." Do you think that Steven Milloy, who gets paid for this kind of thing, could be induced to do his own research?

More on Steven Milloy.

Ron Paul will not make you free

2007-12-28T19:07:00.000-08:00

I've had a bad cold all week and I don't even really feel like blogging right now, but I am annoyed and fed up, and what's a blog for if you can't rant, eh?

Whatever my criticisms of Ron Paul himself (and I have many), I recognize common interests with most of his supporters. We are angry about the decline of democracy and the engrossment of executive power under all administrations in the last forty years, especially this latest and most blatantly non-democratic administration. We will have an increase of civil liberties in this country, and a return to the balance of powers envisioned by the creators of our Constitution, or we are going to have a new revolution. While there is a division of opinion on what kind of revolution, the feeling of revolution is pretty universal.

Conservatives are feeling trod upon and want to have a revolution that will give them more freedom. Libertarians are feeling trod upon and want to have a revolution that will give them more freedom. Liberals are always certain that everybody is being trod upon and want a perpetual revolution. And everybody is certain that the freedom they want is going to be for everybody else's good -- whether "everybody else" wants it or not!

My head hurts, my nose hurts, my chest hurts, my arthritis hurts, and I'm not feeling tactful tonight. I say a pox on all your houses!

Freedom of thought is meaningless to you if you don't think. Spending one hour researching the argument against one of your own fixed beliefs will do more to advance your freedom of thought that blowing up ten "Ten Commandment" monuments. Freedom of speech is meaningless unless you speak up. When you edit yourself silent you are under a far more efficient tyranny than anyone else can exercise over you. When was the last time you exercised your freedom to associate, face to face and in person? How often do you communicate with your elected officials and governmental bureaucracies? How can anyone give you the "right to petition" if you don't use it?

Cynicism is nothing but laziness and moral cowardice. "All politicians are corrupt" gives all corrupt politicians carte blanche and lets you out of any responsibility for work. What do you think "self-government" meant? You get to cast a vote every now and then and go fishing the rest of the time?

The freedom that most libertarians are hot about is the freedom to enjoy all of the benefits of living in a highly developed country without paying for any of it. By the chance of birth they inherited electricity, indoor plumbing, public hygiene, interstate roads, the internet, and many other blessings they did not earn or create. The very idea that, having benefited from living in a complex society, they have any personal obligation to help maintain it, outrages them!

Honey, if you can be dropped bare naked into the middle of a virgin forest and build a 21st-century civilization from scratch, I will call you a self-made man and agree that you owe no taxes to anyone. In reality as it is, you and I and every soul alive, from those in the most terrible poverty in the middle of the Sudan to Bill Gates the Glorious, receive far more in life than we ever return.

None of us get any benefit whatsoever out of letting anyone else go hungry, homeless, or sick and untreated. All of us become healthier and more prosperous when we increase the health and prosperity of the poorest and weakest among us. A strong country is one with a strong citizenry -- healthy, well-fed, housed, and educated -- and that is a free country.

So get off your free-rider mentality and start increasing the freedom of everyone around you: freedom from want and disease, freedom to study, freedom to raise a family, freedom to travel, freedom to participate in society. That will increase your personal freedom more than the entire World Wide Web's hooting and hollering for Ron Paul.

Tim Ceis's Response to Homeless Deaths: The Smirk

2007-12-24T16:54:00.001-08:00

Seattle Deputy Mayor Tim Ceis's only response to a homeless women who asked him to explain what the City is doing about the rising numbers of homeless people dying on the streets is a smirk.

I like what Tim Harris has to say about this:
"If I hear one more opportunistic bureaucrat say we've decided to 'end homelessness and stop managing it' as an excuse for leaving people out to freeze in the cold and harassing them in the meanwhile, I think I'm going to have to organize a piss-in on someone's front lawn."

Back Door SLAM!

2007-12-23T16:41:00.000-08:00

Allofasudden I don't feel so old ---

Googling Myself

2007-12-22T17:08:00.001-08:00

According to recent news, this is not a rare activity. The latest news&blogs quoting or referring to me (since the roundup I posted on MySpace in July 2006) are:

December of last year (2006), KOMO news reported on one of our Women in Black vigils for homeless people who have died outside or by violence in King County. They included two quotes from me: "There are no throwaway people... everyone deserves to be remembered, honored, to have their life remembered when they die." and "With all of the deaths in the community, if I had to bear this alone, I'd go back into depression and be homeless again." (video included)
Several videos of me by Wes, this year:
- A Video Valentine from Wes (his first experiment in iMovie, be kind).
- Two videos of me at the Union Hotel Valentines Day Dance Party: video one; video two. (None of Wes; no fair!)
- A performance of my poem "Mother Escapes" at a "DESC Talent Show" in February. The sound quality is not good, so I've posted this with the words in the StreetWrites blog.
- The end of May was Memorial Day weekend -- Folklife Festival! I performed with the Seattle Raging Grannies, and Wes got it on video.
- In July, Wes and I went with several other people from Real Change to the 2007 conference of NASNA (North American Street Newspaper Association), held this year in Portland, Oregon. Wes also took the time to blog about it. Video included.

In March, Wes reported on a community meeting about the Homeless Place of Remembrance project, something very dear to my heart. You can believe just about everything he says about it (and about me). Just don't believe him when he says he'll confess to the 20th Century.
In May, "Jewel Two Snaps" quoted from my essay on "Why Write?" and had fun with some of my writing exercises, including the challenge to "simplify!"

Try KISSing these phrases yourself:
- amelioration of affectional starvation
- languor lures linguistic lapses
- transcendental fervor
- cantatas of calumny
- cantabile concatenations of cant
In June, the Seattle P-I quoted me in their report on a Women in Black vigil for Isaac Palmer, a homeless man killed by a brush-clearing tractor.
Back to Wes, who in June (2006) used our adventures with a broken refrigerator and building management to illustrate fractals.
Back to poetry: WHEEL (homeless women's organizing group) has a REAL poetry book out, and Tim Harris reviewed it for Real Change -- starting the blog entry with a vivid description of me editing previous WHEEL chapbooks.
In other good news about homelessness -- on December 10, 2007, Seattle amended the city's malicious harassment ordinance (that defines harm or threat of harm to any person or their property on the basis of their membership in a group as a specific crime as "malicious harassment") to include homeless people as a protected class. The P-I article covering a previous committee hearing on the amendment includes this:
"When you're homeless, especially women, you're afraid all the time. You're afraid when you sleep -- even if you're in a shelter," said Anitra Freeman, who has been homeless. "We have to send a different message to our children, to everyone out there."
And back to poetry (again): My most popular poem, by the number of sites quoting it, seems to be "What is Family?"
- It is posted on the opening page of the Kelley Family Album;
- Somebody who goes by "!O+O!" posted it as part of the theme for Family Day: June 27, 2007;
- The Fowler family used it on their Reunion announcement;
- And "P B & J" posted it, with pictures, in early-morning musings about family and other human connections during the Christmas season. (picture from P B & J)

What Is Family?
Family are the shouts in the dark that keep you awake
trying to be invisible under your blankets.
Family is the warm heart you run to
when everyone else at the rink skates too fast
and you've cut your knees on the ice.
Family are given to you at birth
with your eyes and lips and nose.
They will stick to you wherever you go
and shape how you see
and what you say
and how you are seen
forever.
Family are found new each day
wherever you put your heart last.
Family are the people you share bread with,
and whoever you share the lack of bread with.
Sometimes your family aren't people.
Family is whoever lives under the tent of your soul.
Your family can be as big as you are,
and from birth to death, your real, real family
are the ones who make you grow bigger.

poem by Anitra L. Freeman

As I say at my own website, if I post something on the internet, you may use it freely, as long as you Attribute it to me, Anitra L. Freeman. Don't alter it (change the wording). (You may use small sections out of a whole, as long as the context is clear.) Make nonprofit use of it. If you are going to make money, I want money! If you want to make me extra happy, include a link to my website so that readers can find more: http://anitra.net/writing/

These days, Creative Commons has made such licensing even easier.

This work by Anitra L. Freeman is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.

Eid Al-Adha

2007-12-20T10:50:00.000-08:00

Joyful Eid al-Adha to all Muslim readers.

Two vigils on December 19th

2007-12-17T20:14:00.000-08:00

This coming Wednesday, December 19th, WHEEL and the Church of Mary Magdalene will hold another Women in Black vigil for another homeless person who died outside in King County. The vigil is from Noon to 1 pm, on the steps of the Seattle Justice Center at 5th & James, across from City Hall.

And while the number of homeless people outside without shelter, being attacked outside, and dying outside, rises, Seattle police confiscate and destroy the personal belongings of homeless people camping in the greenbelts -- while leaving garbage out there untouched!

Real Change has been actively campaigning against this harassment, and has organized a rally at City Hall Wednesday night, 5-6 pm, followed by an all-night sleep-out. Seattle Raging Grannies will be opening the rally, and I will be there singing if my throat don't give out before then! (Wes and I are both coming down with a cold.)

Please come join us -- if not to hear me sing, then to support the right of even the poorest people in Seattle to survive!

Senator Sessions Jumps the Shark

2007-12-17T18:49:00.000-08:00

Two of the first news reports I saw today made me very happy: a Federal Judge declared White House visitor logs are public documents (cnn.com) and Sen. Harry Reid Pulled the FISA Telecom Immunity Bill Off the Senate Floor.

Score two for the U.S. Constitution!

Then I read a quote that sent a chill up my spine. During the debate before Reid pulled the bill, Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama said, “The civil libertarians among us would rather defend the constitution than protect our nation’s security.” (emphasis added)

Just in case anyone needs a reminder, U.S. Senators take an oath to support the Constitution! If you vote in Alabama, please remind your Senator of his oath.

The Rise of the Raging Moderates

2007-12-07T16:30:00.000-08:00

Recent conversations I have had with Ron Paul supporters and critics have reminded me all over again why the human species should be reclassified Homo Wannabe-Sapiens.

It isn't that we are all stupid; most people who even know who Ron Paul is are extremely intelligent. That's including both those who consider him the Savior of His Country and those who consider him the latest sign of the Downfall of Civilization.

What makes us Homo Wannabe-Sapiens is how readily we polarize like that. Polarized people can't learn from each other, because they can no longer see any strengths in the other person's argument or any weaknesses in their own. Polarized people don't even seem able to tell the difference between a physical fact and an ideological plank.

This all reminded me of an essay I wrote back in May, when I decided I was a Raging Moderate:

The Rise of the Raging Moderates

The title of one of Jim Hightower's books is There's Nothing in the Middle of the Road but Yellow Lines and Dead Armadillos. The attitude is generally shared even by those on the opposite extreme from Hightower: to be "moderate" means that you don’t believe in, or stand for, anything very strongly.

There is another definition of "moderate." A moderate is interested in solving a problem, not in winning a debate. A moderate places the common good above what is good for any one political party or any other faction. A moderate cares about people and doesn't give much of a fig for ideology. A moderate can see faults in allies and virtues in opponents. Like anyone else, a moderate thinks he's right, or he'd be thinking something else already; but a moderate is willing to find out he's wrong, and change his mind, if the evidence warrants it. A moderate is able to step out of his own viewpoint long enough to listen to and understand a different one. A moderate knows that honest people can honestly disagree, and still have common goals and interests that they can work on together.

A moderate can get angry. A moderate can get tired of being whipsawed between extremists, and say "a pox on ALL your houses!"

The founders of the American system of government spent a lot of time and great intellectual effort on how to forestall any one group, on whatever extreme, from gaining all power and running away with it. They divided and distributed power among different branches and levels of government so that in any conflicts, neither a majority nor a minority could ride roughshod over everyone else; we would all have to negotiate with the people who disagree with us.

And ever since then, extremists have tried to erode that balance of powers and collect all control in the hands of those who see things their way.

Polarization shuts down brain cells. (See Michael Shermer's article in Scientific American: The Political Brain.) The more people you see as your enemies, the more easily manipulated you are by your "friends." Fortunately, both polarized extremes of American politics seem to be losing their credibility. More and more elections depend on the vote of independents who are not arbitrarily aligned left OR Right – who have to be convinced case by case. Less and less independents are stampeded by being told that one party is the one and only force for Good and one party is the one and only force for Evil. An increasing number of voters demand practical results in domestic tranquility, common defense, and general welfare, instead of bigger and louder political slogans.

Books like Jim Hightower's (and, on the other end, Ann Coulter's diatribes about Godless Liberals) are hot sellers these days. On a promising note, so are these:

Culture War? The Myth of a Polarized America presents evidence that the supposed polarized culture is a myth, perpetuated by politicians and the media for their own purposes.

In One Nation, After All : What Americans Really Think About God, Country, Family, Racism, Welfare, Immigration, Homosexuality, Work, The Right, The Left and Each Other, Alan Wolfe analyzes an extensive series of interviews across the county to find that we agree on more than we disagree.

Edward Brooke, the first black U.S. senator since Reconstruction and a Republican elected from the liberal and Democratic state of Massachusetts, has written an autobiography, Bridging the Divide: My Life, covering four decades of American politics.

John Avlon, author of Independent Nation: How Centrism Can Change American Politics, argues that centrism, "the rising political force in modern American life," also offers the best chance for America to prosper.

Barbara Sinclair documents the genesis and consequences of increasing partisan polarization in national policy in Party Wars: Polarization And the Politics of National Policy Making.

Senator John Danforth has directly confronted the combination of religious and poltical polarization with Faith and Politics: How the "Moral Values" Debate Divides America and How to Move Forward Together.

I would like to paraphrase Senator Danforth in a word to the Moderate Majority:

For a long time, the Radical Right & Radical Left have chanted their messages incessantly, while everyone else disdained the tactic of repetition, repetition, repetition. It is time for a clear statement of what we believe, a statement we repeat relentlessly and a statement that expresses the strength of our convictions:
We believe in government of the people, for the people, and by the people, for the common good – not a government of cliques and cronies who sacrifice the welfare of the many to the profit of the few.
We believe that all human beings are fallible, including ourselves; therefore no human being has the right of authority over another's conscience. The power of law should only limit the actions of individuals to the extent necessary to preserve the equal rights of all.
We believe that government by the people must and will embrace conflicting opinions, even on hot-button issues, even of people with whom we vehemently disagree.
Citizens who support the common good over ideological partisanship should express ourselves clearly and forcefully as the alternative to those who favor divisiveness.

Earlier in this article I referred to brain research showing that partisan political responses involve areas of the brain dealing with emotion, not any of those dealing with cognition. Emotion is, of course, part of all of us. Emotion is not grit in the gears of human intelligence, it is an integral part of reasoning. If you had no emotions, you could make no decisions: you would have no preferences, no priorities, and all choices would be equal. A moderate is as emotional, as passionate about values and principles, as any partisan.

According to other brain research, the thinking of teenagers is dominated by the emotional circuits of the brain, and part of the maturation process is the cerebral circuits becoming increasingly active. The emotional circuits are never completely cut out of the thinking process; in what we call more mature thinking, however, the cerebral circuits play the dominant role.

A moderate is as emotional, as passionate about values and principles, as any partisan. A moderate, however, can still think, and listen, even when passionate.

Perhaps it is time for us all to just grow up.

All Together Now: Changing Society to End Homelessness

2007-12-04T16:07:00.000-08:00

May 9, 2007, I gave a keynote speech at the annual conference of the Washington State Coalition for the Homeless. I've broken the text of the speech into several separate posts so that nobody has to read all of the speech. For those who would like to read the whole speech, here's the whole sequence:

Ending Homelessness: for real

2007-12-04T15:58:00.000-08:00

Current community efforts to help homeless people should continue. When we have a flood, we have to get people to high ground, get them fed and keep them warm.

People will always have problems, and people will always have some problems they need the help of other people to solve. There is not one human problem that isn’t easier to solve when you are in safe, clean, secure housing. There is not one human problem that isn’t harder to solve when you’re homeless.

My husband has a doctorate in math, and I checked this with him to make sure I'm right: If you have 100 people and 80 houses, at one person per house you will have 20 homeless people. If you move all 20 of those people into houses, you will displace 20 currently housed people, and still have 20 homeless people. If you improve the health, income, and education level of all the people currently homeless, you will have 20 healthy, wealthy, and well-educated homeless people.

I also checked this math with him: If you start with 20 homeless people, build 20 new houses and tear down 30, you will have 30 homeless people. The only thing Wes found wrong with that is that in real life, we are not losing housing at one-and-a-half times the rate we are creating it, we are losing housing at four times the rate we are creating it.

Building more affordable housing would be a step in the right direction. What we really need to do is rebuild the middle class. And just as labor and unemployed were allies in the campaign to create unemployment insurance, you -- what is left of the middle class and the people who are very poor and who are homeless -- need to be allies in building a society that will not have a big black hole in the middle.

We need to decrease the wealth divide. "Redistribution of wealth" is a dirty term to many people, so stop it: stop redistributing wealth from the majority at the bottom to the minority at the top.

Much of the accumulation of wealth depends on unpaid labor, like that of volunteers and mothers and even homeless people. A living wage is the minimum fair return for labor. A labor force with strong bargaining power was one of the forces that built America's middle class. A strong middle class is the backbone of the country and the mainstay against homelessness.

We need to change the housing market.
- Make it profitable to create affordable housing. Some methods could be: tax incentives, subsidies, federal housing money.
- Make it unprofitable to destroy affordable housing. Some possible methods: tax penalties; a legislative cap on condo conversions.
- Get the federal government back into the creation of housing.
A rising tide really does lift all boats, IF it rises from the bottom up. When everyone has housing, the economy booms. Nobody really benefits from having large numbers of people outside, unsheltered, hungry, and sick. It's an accident that occurs as the result of systems that some people do profit from. Change the system and more people will profit.

Remember the potholes? Studying other cities that don't have potholes, to see what they are doing right? Countries that have a fraction of the homelessness that we do also have universal health care. It's time to bite the bullet and get it here.

Let's change the social attitude. It is NOT virtuous to promote your own gain without regard for any cost to others. We ARE responsible for, and to, each other.

Speaking of responsibility: How can you claim to care about a homeless person's future when you do not take care that he survives tonight? When I am told that "increasing shelter now is politically impossible," I know that all the talk about caring for homeless people is lip service. If you care about somebody, if you value them as a person, you do whatever it takes to keep them alive. That means MORE shelter right now, not less. It means allowing Tent Cities or any other interim survival mechanism until there is enough housing for everyone.

There is no either-or, short-term solutions OR long-term solutions. If we care about each other, we keep each other alive tonight AND we work to make the future better for each other.

If we care about each other, we will continue to increase our efforts to take care of people who are now homeless, get them out of homelessness, and prevent other people from falling into the hole. And, because we care about each other, we will also change our economy, our housing market, our government policies, our health care system, and whatever else it takes, to eliminate the black hole of homelessness forever.

This is part 4 of my speech at the Washington State Coalition for the Homeless Conference, May 2007. The first three parts were:

Reality Check for Committees to End Homelessness

2007-12-04T15:39:00.000-08:00

Here in Seattle, the group in charge of our "Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness" is called the Committee to End Homelessness. Other areas of the U.S. have their own Ten Year Plans and their own Committees. Whatever they are called in other cities, these are equal realities across the country:

There are more people homeless now than when all the "Ten Year Plans" to end homelessness began.
More of the people with the most severe problems are ending up out on the street late at night when all the shelters are full.
More people are dying outside, homeless and without shelter, every year.
Violence against homeless people is increasing.
With all the new low-cost housing created, three times as much is lost to redevelopment and condo conversions. We have a net loss.
The wealth gap is widening, the middle class is vanishing like buffalo, job insecurity has become the new norm.
Health care costs keep rising, along with the numbers of people who can’t afford health insurance.
At a Roots of Poverty conference I attended years ago, incarceration was identified as one of the roots of poverty, and to this day, nothing has changed. The U.S. has the highest number of people incarcerated than any other country in the rest of the world, and it’s giving Communist Red China a run for the money for the world record. We’ve already got their official numbers beat. Let’s see if we can beat their unofficial numbers!
Our social fabric is cut to shreds. Lack, or loss, of a social network is the most basic reason a housed person becomes a “homeless person.” The lack, or loss, of a sense of community, of responsibility to our neighbor whatever her religion, politics, or even personality, is the basic reason the black hole of homelessness exists for her to fall into.
Respect for human dignity is at an all-time low. The homeless person who is at the bottom of the housing market is also at the bottom of the clothing market, and he doesn’t go naked, does he? No. THAT would offend our morality.

Forty years ago, people had problems. We had alcoholics, drug addicts, mental illness, domestic violence, people with physical disabilities and severe illnesses who were not able to work, people getting out of prison, people getting out of the hospital, people getting out of foster care – all of the reasons given for why people are homeless today. We had a fraction of the numbers of homeless people that we have today.

What has happened over the last forty years?

The real income (purchasing power) of 60% of our population has gone down.

The federal government has invested less and less money in housing. Since 1996 they've spent $0.

In private housing development, developers seek the most profit out of every square inch of real estate, resulting in the continual destruction of low-cost housing in order to put up high-cost housing.

The cost of health care has continued to rise, while less and less of the population have any form of health insurance.

The numbers of homeless people have skyrocketed.

The stigma of homelessness was created. Unemployment insurance was won by a campaign of working people and out-of-work, often homeless people, allied. Most housed people at that time had no problem seeing themselves in the shoes of someone who was homeless. Now “homeless” is a separate class, and homeless people are to be treated differently than anyone else is treated.

What happened in the last forty years was, we created homelessness. In order to end it, we have to reverse what we did to create it.

So far, none of the Ten Year Plans are doing that.

This is part 3 of my speech at the Washington State Coalition for the Homeless Conference, May 2007. The whole sequence is:

The Pothole Analogy
A Word to the Housed
Reality Check for Committees to End Homelessness
Ending Homelessness: for real

A Word to the Housed

2007-12-04T15:29:00.000-08:00

We all know homelessness hurts homeless people. Some are beginning to realize that homelessness hurts all of us.

The full reality is, the same system that creates homelessness creates most of your problems, too. You work hard to help people who often yell at you because they can't yell at the people who are really abusing and frustrating them; you accomplish something each day but the scope of the problem keeps getting worse; then you go home and wrestle with the bills and worry over how you are going to pay for your son's dental care or your daughter's education.

We're all in this together. To get out of it, we all have to work together. The noble housed people don't have to rescue the poor homeless people; the oppressed homeless people do not have to force the privileged housed people to rescue them. All us chickens have to work together to rebuild the leaky henhouse. 'Cause guess what? There's nobody here but us chickens.

This is part 2 of my speech at the Washington State Coalition for the Homeless Conference, May 2007. The entire sequence is:

The Pothole Analogy
A Word to the Housed
Reality Check for Committees to End Homelessness
Ending Homelessness: for real

The Pothole Analogy

2007-12-04T15:20:00.000-08:00

Imagine this scenario:

One of your downtown streets has a big pothole in it. It's been growing for years, and other than a lot of new hires in the auto repair industry, nothing much has been done about it. Public pressure is rising. Finally, the city government acts. They do a serious study, and they find that people who have pothole accidents have a lot of problems. Nearsightedness, ADD, alcoholism... and that although the towing and auto repair industries have been booming for years, they haven’t decreased pothole accidents.

With a lot of publicity (and not much money) the city starts a Pothole Accident Prevention Program (PAPP). Towing companies and auto repair companies that wish to do any business with the city are required to refer the drivers in pothole accidents to counseling, so that they will get treatment for their problems and avoid potholes in the future. The most lucrative contracts and tax breaks go to the companies whose customers go the longest without another pothole accident. None of the companies are given any authority to fix the pothole.

The auto industry goes along with the PAPP because it’s politically impossible to get money to fix potholes right now, and at least this way something is being done. And isn’t it good to help people who have problems like nearsightedness, ADD, and alcoholism?

In real life, of course, the city would just fill in the pothole. Right? A city that had a high occurrence of potholes would try to make its streets more pothole-proof – right?

Homelessness is a hole in the street. The people who fall into that hole need help to get out of it. They have problems that need to be addressed. All of that is necessary and worthwhile action. It will not end homelessness, any more than auto repair and driver education will end potholes.

This is part 1 of my speech at the Washington State Coalition for the Homeless Conference, May 2007. The entire sequence is:

The Pothole Analogy
A Word to the Housed
Reality Check for Committees to End Homelessness
Ending Homelessness: for real

The war on science

2007-12-01T16:55:00.000-08:00

Nova had an excellent documentary recently, "Intelligent Design on Trial." You can still view it online.

The push to teach "Intelligent Design" on an equal footing with the theory of evolution is part and parcel of a determined assault on the standards of intellectual inquiry that underpin democracy itself.

The foundation of democracy is liberalism, and the foundation of liberalism is the premise that truth is discovered by free inquiry -- and is always in the process of discovery. Anyone and everyone can make a claim, anyone and everyone can challenge a claim, and all debate is public and based on publicly available evidence.

In the worldview of a certain kind of conservative, there has to be an Authority over everything. When scholars say that truth is not subject to the authority of Scripture, scriptural conservatives think that they are trying to replace that authority with something else. In the worldview of those scholars, however, truth IS the authority, and the only authority.

This is intellectual humility. Enlightenment inquiry acknowledges the limitations of human reason, and therefore requires that all claims be subject to independent test, and always open to question and revision. The more tests a claim stands up to, the more credible it is -- but nothing is absolutely certain, because we aren't absolutely perfect.

To claim that "revealed truth" IS absolutely certain is not "humility" -- it is the ultimate in egotism. The claim that you know God and you know what God said and you understand it beyond question, the refusal to subject your own worldview to any test, are the hallmarks of religious fundamentalism, and they are hallmarks of arrogance. It is no coincidence that the same people who make these claims call democracy "demoncracy" and believe it should be severely restricted. Democracy depends on open dialogue more than it depends on the vote; an open dialogue in which all claims can be tested independently, and there is no special authority over truth.

"Intelligent Design" is not a scientific theory, because it is not testable; it provides no structure on which testable predictions can be made. This is not simply because the proponents of ID do not understand science. It is because they do not want to understand science. The concept of a truth that is independent of authority and always subject to question is inconceivable to them. It frightens them. And until they can confront this fear and accept the reality that the truth IS beyond perfect understanding, they will never understand the scientific debate.

The debate must continue, but it must continue by the rules of scientific reasoning; Enlightenment intellectual ethics. Do not allow those rules to be subverted by "Intelligent Design" proponents trying to run onto the football field with a baseball bat to slam the frizbie into the basket.

Why I won't vote for Ron Paul

2007-11-28T22:35:00.000-08:00

Some of Ron Paul's positions -- like opposition to the war in Iraq, the War on Drugs, and the Patriot Act -- appeal strongly to liberals and conservatives alike, and many internet activists have flocked to him as a candidate that can bring a real revolution to Washington.

But the enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend. For Ron Paul, the ideology of "individual liberty" overrides the liberty of physical individuals, and also overrides physical fact. Sacrificing individuals to ideology and denying concrete fact to maintain an abstract idea have caused great harm in human history, and I won't encourage more of it.

I don't demand that anybody agree with me with 100% ideological purity before I work with them on anything. I'll gladly work with Ron Paul in opposition to the war in Iraq, the War on Drugs, and the Patriot Act, and in any other common cause. But I don't think making a man President who rationalizes imposing his own morality upon others under the ideology of "states rights" to be any improvement over a man who rationalizes imposing his own morality upon others under the ideology of "God's will."

Specific examples:

Ron Paul supports using state force to make a woman bear a pregnancy to term against her will. He (and his followers) rationalize this as "supporting individual liberty" on the grounds that
1. It is state government using force to tell a woman what she can do with her own body, not federal government.
  
  Whether my neighbor, my church, my city, my state, or my federal government imposes on my liberty, it is still an imposition on my liberty.
  
  And Paul's voting record in Congress is inconsistent with this. He introduced federal legislation (the Sanctity of Life Act) to define human life as beginning at conception. He voted in favor of the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act which federally overrides state abortion laws. Ron Paul, an "unshakable foe of abortion" in his own words, is perfectly willing to use federal power when it aligns with what he considers to be right.
2. It is protecting the individual liberty of fetuses. By making abortion legal, argues Paul, "the State simply declares that certain classes of human beings are not persons, and therefore not entitled to the protection of the law. The State protects the 'right' of some people to kill others, just as the courts protected the 'property rights' of slave masters in their slaves."
  
  There is an obvious difference between a slave owner claiming rights over the body of another person, and a woman claiming rights over her own body.
  
  I do consider the lives of fetuses to be important, and I want to protect them. That is a major reason for opposing making abortion illegal. It is simply an ineffective way to preserve fetal lives. To care about actual, physical human beings is to seek practical ways to actually save lives. To make abortion illegal is to sacrifice real people -- both women and children -- to abstract principle. That is a besetting human evil, and my personal pet peeve.
Ron Paul opposes equal rights for non-heterosexuals. Again, his rationale for how this supports individual liberty is contorted, and his actions aren't even consistent with that rationale. .
1. States should be allowed to decide their own laws without interference from the federal government.
  
  Yet Paul says he would have voted in favor of the Defense of Marriage Act, a federal law declaring same-gender messages cannot be recognized as valid by the federal government, and need not be recognized as valid by any state, even if the marriage was licensed by another state. Again, Paul is only opposed to the federal government when it enforces something he does not agree with, like a woman's control over her own body or a person's right to marry regardless of gender. He will readily use federal power to enforce morality that he does agree with.
2. Any state has the right to "pass laws concerning social matters, using its own local standards, without federal interference." Therefore the Supreme Court should not override state anti-sodomy laws or state restrictions on right to marriage.
  
  But the 10th Amendment states that "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." (Emphasis added.) Those who holler about "states rights" always seem to skip that last clause. If a state government claims powers over individuals that exceed the legitimate interests of government, it is the right and proper use of federal power to step in and protect individual right This is in accordance with the Preamble which declares the intentions of the Constitution: "to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity."
3. Defending personal liberty means protecting the right of individuals and groups to discriminate against others.
  
  This is Paul's rationale for opposing the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), and why he thinks the Boy Scouts have the right to not let gay men be scoutmasters or gay boys be scouts.
  
  By these rationales, state governments could pass legislation banning the very existence of the Boy Scouts, and Ron Paul could not object. I would, personally. I think that the rightful role of government is to protect the fullest freedom of any individual that is consistent with the equal rights of others. That means, sometimes, protecting us from other individuals.
4. The military policy of "don't ask, don't tell" should be maintained, because homosexuals should not be treated any differently than heterosexuals.
  
  But homosexuals are not treated the same as heterosexuals under the current policy. Nobody is discharged in the military for openly declaring themselves heterosexual, for showing up at a social function with a partner of the opposite gender, or for being known to have performed sexual acts with a member of the opposite gender.
  
  Ron Paul says "if there is homosexual behavior in the military that is disruptive, it should be dealt with. But if there's heterosexual sexual behavior that is disruptive, it should be dealt with." His support of "don't ask, don't tell" demonstrates that he considers all homosexual behavior to be disruptive. He opposes the use of "the power of the state" to enforce morality that he does not agree with, like the equal rights of both homosexuals and heterosexuals. He supports the use of "the power of the state" to enforce morality that he does agree with, like the unacceptability of homosexuality.

Ron Paul opposes Network Neutrality, claiming that it is "regulating the internet."

Laws against rape and theft are "regulating human activity" also, but I've never heard a libertarian object to them. Prohibiting ISPs from handling internet traffic in a discriminatory manner, like degrading the performance of one website while giving priority to another, is a regulation that protects equal individual rights, like laws against theft and rape do.

He opposes embryonic stem cell research. Supporters claim he only opposes federal funding of such research, consistent with his "smaller government" principles.

But Paul introduced the "Cures Can Be Found Act" of 2005, which would provide tax credits for "qualified" stem cell research, storage and donation, specifically excluding any facilities that use embryonic stem cells. Once more, Ron Paul supports using the federal government to support what he agrees with, he is only against using it to support what he doesn't agree with.

There are more problems with Ron Paul's positions, described in detail at EMPTV. Some of them I have to research further, because Paul may have indeed been misrepresented. For instance: Asked if he supports "bring abstinence education funding onto equal ground with contraceptive-based education," Paul said "yes." Since he doesn't think there should be any federal funding for any education, including contraceptive-based sex education, this "yes" answer may simply mean he does not support funding abstinence-only education either.

There are some criticisms of Ron Paul I consider totally invalid:

That he is a racist, based on quotes from a 1992 newsletter written by someone else.
That he is a white supremacist, neo-nazi, conspiracy nut based on the ravings of some Ron Paul supporters. Oh come on. If the postings of some nuts on Daily Kos does not make Daily Kos a "hate site" then the ravings of some Ron Paul supporters does not make Ron Paul a nut.

There is quite enough in Ron Paul's own words to take honest issue with.

Dennis Kucinich Jumps the Shark

2007-11-28T16:08:00.000-08:00

I agree with Andrew Sullivan (and not for the first time). Dennis Kucinich has jumped the shark.

I do not consider Dennis Kucinich's siting of a UFO to put him in La-La Land, but proposing to take Ron Paul as a running mate does. Close examination of evidence indicates that there are, indisputably, some Unidentified Flying Objects -- flying objects sighted that haven't been identified. Close examination of Ron Paul's statements indicates that he will sacrifice living individuals to the ideology of "individualism" any time they come in conflict.

Dennis, Ron Paul doesn't deserve your support.

And this will "balance the energies"??? Isn't the New Age dead yet?

Dr. Wes, Messiah

2007-11-24T15:21:00.001-08:00

The concept of a "warrior of peace sent from God" is not exclusively Jewish/Christian. The concept was real to Wes at age 7, strongly influenced by Hawaiian traditions. His experiences as the "Fort Devens Messiah" can be followed in reverse chronological order on his blog, Runoff. I've constructed this list for those who want to read it in chronological order.

Very young children can be heroes.

Mujahideen-E Khalq (MEK): The Terrorists that the United States Uses

2007-10-23T22:24:00.001-07:00

Frontline had a great show tonight, background on the conflict with Iran. You can watch the whole show online. The most interesting part to me was this information on a terrorist group that is protected by the U.S. I hope you too find this worth passing on, so that more people know what our government is doing.When Islamic extremists in the Middle East first began using terrorist tactics, the United States did not condemn them. The United States used them. Even today, in the middle of the "War on Terror," the U.S. government will protect any terrorist group that the U.S. finds useful.

read more | digg story

Give 'Em Hell, Catch Hell

2007-10-20T01:33:00.001-07:00

Tim Harris of Real Change caught hell this week for satirizing the upcoming 'Homelessness Awareness' event as "United to Extend Homelessness."

I can't link you to the satirical flyer; it's only "published" as a PDF that can be downloaded from his classroom Wiki (which is currently dormant between class sessions). A sample:

The Unite to Extend Homelessness Community Resource Exchange will provide easy answers to deep-seated problems by producing a spectacle of good will that does little or nothing to solve homelessness, except on a case by case basis. Getting vital services can be challenging and time-consuming — especially when so many are in need and so little is available. This one-day feel good event won’t change that. The Community Resource Exchange is a transparent public relations ploy that began in San Francisco and has now been embraced by the Bush administration and implemented in over 200 cities.

Some of the problems that will not be addressed include the wholesale abandonment of the poor by the health care system; the daunting realities of structural unemployment; how Vietnam-era veterans are treated like shit; and the fact that the legal system in America provides justice only to those who can afford it.

The sponsors of the event could have been listed as United Byway; Committee to Extend Homelessness; Church Rumble of Grumble Seattle; Kingdom County; Paul Allen Town; Belle-Richer-Than-You; Rentounce; Bent. Tim didn't do that; he used the unaltered names and logos of United Way; Committee to End Homelessness; Church Council of Greater Seattle; King County; City of Seattle; City of Bellevue; City of Renton; City of Kent. That drew the ire of Sandy Brown, head of the Church Council of Greater Seattle. He didn't like the Church Council's identity being associated with this sort of thing:

Faith communities have long asked how they can work to end homelessness while avoiding uncomfortable and divisive discussions of poverty and inequality. It All Starts at Home is an interactive symposium that will give faith communities and service organizations the tools they need to continue addressing homelessness in an uncontroversial and depoliticized manner. This symposium will bring together groups from across King County to discuss how the faith community and big philanthropy can provide political cover while the federal government abdicates what little remaining responsibility it has for housing the poor. The seminars will co-opt whatever energy exists to address poverty and inequality by channeling all of our resources into well-intentioned but ultimately inadequate charitable efforts.Each attendee will go home with a resource book that scrupulously avoids the question “why?”

Seminars presented at the symposium will not include: Structural Unemployment in America and Why So Many of the People Filling Our Prisons are Black; Who Benefits When the Feds Abandon Housing for the Poor; How to Develop a Revolutionary Analysis of Deepening Global Poverty (e.g., IMF, World Bank, NAFTA); Creating Your Own Poverty and Inequality Study Group; Moving from Charity to Justice: Pros and Cons; and Understanding How Self-interest Defines the Limits of Our Response.

My personal opinion is that if Sandy Brown doesn't want to look like a collaborator, he should stop acting like one.

Watch "Cheney's Law" Exposed On Frontline Tonight!

2007-10-16T18:08:00.000-07:00

TONIGHT - Tuesday, October 16, 2007 - Frontline reports on Vice President Dick Cheney's three-decade, "secretive, behind-closed-doors campaign to give the president virtually unlimited wartime power." Please: see it, digg it, blog it, buzz it, shout it!

George Bush Knows Exactly When to Say "Democrat Party"

2007-10-16T14:38:00.001-07:00

On the October 15, 2007 "Daily Show" Tony Snow downplayed Bush's reference to the "Democrat Party" as an example of how our dear boy Bush just gets his tongue tangled sometimes. In 2004, Bush got his tongue tangled only in solidly Red states. Everywhere else, Bush always pronounced "Democratic Party" clearly.

The point is not that I find "Democrat Party" to be offensive. The point is that Bush intends it to be offensive, and knows that it fans hostility when he uses it. Tony Snow is just as hypocritical now as when he was being paid for it, and Bush's "uniter not a divider" pretense was never worth more the breath it took to push it.

read more | digg story

Blog Action Day: Lighter Footstep says "Si Se Puede!"

2007-10-15T23:00:00.001-07:00

"Yes we can!" A great quote today from Chris over at Lighter Footstep:

"It's often argued that all the individual action in the world won't offset the environmental damage caused by one dirty coal plant halfway across the globe, and there's truth to that. If there's one thing politicians are good at, though, it's getting in front of a parade. When people act, politicians follow. That's what they call 'leadership.' And we need to let them lead us exactly where we're headed -- toward the agreements we'll need to make sure the process of greening the planet fair for everyone."

Not too long ago, I read another article I agreed with, arguing that all the lists of personal actions "you can do to save the environment" are just deflecting attention from doing the hard stuff: changing the system, challenging the corporate interests that are doing the major damage.

And I agree with that too -- IF all you are doing is changing your personal actions, you are avoiding confrontation with systemic actors. At the same time, if all you are working on is changing the system then you are not only avoiding any personal change, your speeches to other people will sound like empty rants.

It isn't either-or. We need to work on our personal lives AND work on changing the system.

Chris's comments point to where the two intersect. The people making decisions that affect our lives have to maintain their power by constantly convincing us that they have that power, and that we have none. In reality, they only have the power we give them. If there were no consumers, corporations would go bankrupt. If voters could not be bought with campaign dollars, politicians could not be bought with campaign contributions.

Jello Biafra said, "Don't complain about the media; become the media." Don't complain about the economy, become the economy; don't buy what you are told to buy, demand what you want to buy and if corporate business won't sell it to you, trade with your neighbor for it. Don't complain about the government, be the government -- like Americans are supposed to be. Politicians work for you, and if they are doing a bad job, then you are being a bad supervisor.

Don't change your lifestyle thinking that alone will change the world. Change your life because that is the beginning of changing the world.

read more | digg story

Blog Action Day: Building Bridges

2007-10-15T16:36:00.000-07:00

Liberal, neoliberal, conservative, neoconservative, libertarian – as different as our politics may seem, in reality we all hold much the same values. (see The Moral Sense by James Q Wilson)

We prioritize values differently, and it can be frustrating when what you consider critically urgent is at the bottom of everybody else's list (while they "waste" time and money on something at the bottom of your own list). We also have different ideas about how to apply our common values, and it can come as a shock when someone you have long regarded as an ally suddenly opposes your project (like local Seattle environmentalists have split on the transportation proposition on this November's ballot).

It may be hard to remember, in the middle of frustration, that those differences are a good thing. If we had to all work on just one thing, the earth would probably be three miles deep in whales. Everybody loves whales, including me; but I do not love the idea of 6 billion people working 24/7 to save the whales. Somebody's got to take care of the other stuff. Fortunately, we all have different priorities.

It's also good that even when we have the same goals, we have different ideas on how to pursue them. None of us sees everything; viewing any subject from more than one viewpoint yields a fuller picture of a problem and a better approach to it than any one person can come up with alone. If everybody saw things exactly the same way, we’d all run over the same cliff that none of us spotted.

In the end result, it is good that we have individual differences – but only if we are willing to listen to each other, understand each other, work on combining our differences. Polarized debate strangles everybody's neurons. We all stop making progress toward our goals and turn our efforts to building our bunkers.

My personal plea on this October 15th, Blog Action Day, with fifteen thousand bloggers writing about environmental issues and millions of people reading those blogs, is that each of you:

read a blog by somebody you disagree with;
describe for yourself what they are actually saying;
keep redoing #2 until they agree that you understand them;
identify goals and values that you share;
find one thing you can work together on toward a common goal.

Here's what I see as 10 goals we all share in common:

The health, welfare, and education of children is important to all of us, both emotionally and practically.

Clean air, clean water, clean ground, safe and nutritious and sufficient food, are critical to the survival of all of us.

Life is highly adaptable, but thrives best within certain parameters of climate and resources. Maintaining and even expanding those parameters is therefore important to all of us.

Good public health is essential for the good personal health of all of us. This includes the health of plants and animals; most majorly damaging human plagues have originated in our livestock.

All living things are intricately interdependent in a complex biosphere human science is only beginning to understand. It is critical to our mutual survival to maintain the health of that biosphere, which includes its genetic diversity.

Trade, both in the free exchange of goods and services and the free exchange of ideas, has been a foundation of human prosperity and advancement. It is in the interests of all of us to protect an atmosphere for free and fair trade. That requires an atmosphere of equal rights enforced by law; a universal standard of justice. It requires protection and support of the weaker members of society so that all are equal in bargaining power in the marketplace and in the enforcement of contracts. The maintenance of equal trade, equal rights, and equal justice is therefore a common good, a common survival goal.

Accurate knowledge is a critical survival resource. Increasing our mutual knowledge, and policing error, is another common good. Increasing the knowledge and the critical and creative thinking skills of another is an increase of our own good. The passion over "intellectual" debates is understandable as being driven by survival instinct.

The most important factor to individual human survival, since we became social animals, is other human beings. The creation and maintenance of social bonds is important to all of us, whether we like thinking of it as something we need, or not. People do need people. We will all be better off by making sure that others have strong social bonds, as well as ourselves.

We are each unique, with unique gifts. Other people can see things, think of things, say things, make things that I do not, that I could not. It benefits me to appreciate and encourage the uniqueness of others. The increase of human creativity and individual expression is a common good.

An ethical culture, in which all people are treated as we ourselves would like to be treated, is important to all of us. Promoting an ethic of honesty, fairness, kindness, and compassion protects us personally from fraud, exploitation, abuse and neglect.

These are my observations of what people of all political stripes already act like we value, even when we don't do it successfully. These are survival goals that can bridge ideological divisions. They seem a good starting point for working together on practical projects and policies. And each of them are things we can each act on in our own small ways every day.

No Impact Man: taking "Be the change" seriously

2007-10-15T09:51:00.001-07:00

This is a great blog, by a man trying to live green in New York City. I recommend reading the whole story.

A lot of the comments on Digg sneer at the idea, without doing any extensive reading of the reality. One comment pointed out that the average life expectancy at the turn of the century when "life was simpler" was 47.

The life expectancy of a homeless person in the U.S. today is 47. We have a growing number of homeless people, and NOT because there has been any boom in laziness, drug addiction, alcoholism, or insanity. It is because we have a society/economy run on the idea that pursuing your own benefit no matter what the expense to anyone else (or the common environment) is a GOOD thing.

The creation of poverty, homelessness, untreated illness, early death, dirty air and dirty water does not benefit anyone. We can do something about it. Many people each doing a little bit creates greater and more lasting change than a few people doing big bits.

No Impact Man is doing his little bit. Write On!

read more | digg story

You Get What You Pay For: Chevron’s Human Rights Problems Span Three Continents

2007-10-15T08:34:00.001-07:00

I saw Chevron's greenwashing "Human Energy" ad for the first time tonight, and my BS meter began screaming. I knew I'd seen something that ran counter to the ad's claims. It didn't take much searching to find it: last month, a federal judge ruled to force Chevron to stand trial in the U.S. for the massacre of Nigerian villagers.

And there's more:

How did things get to this point? The Free Market Missionaries convinced us -- not all of us, but enough -- that:

The American public bought that, and paid for it, and is paying for it. We created an economic system that rewards unethical behavior and, surprise, we get unethical behavior.

We created it, we can uncreate it. An economy that rewards ethical behavior and penalizes unethical behavior is not a Big Brother (or Big Nanny). Most people don't have to be told what's right and what's wrong -- that's why we have laws to enforce right and wrong on those who do have to be told. We want to live in an ethical society. That is the real American way.

Free Market Missionaries are alive and well even though their abstractions don't translate to reality

Join the resistance

Al Gore Donates Nobel Prize Money to Alliance for Climate Protection

2007-10-12T23:48:00.001-07:00

Al Gore has donated his Nobel Prize money to further the work that got him the Nobel Prize. Upcoming: resource links for debunking "climate change denial."

read more | digg story

Rash of Noose Incidents Reported | World Latest | Guardian Unlimited

2007-10-10T16:04:00.001-07:00

"Nooses were left in a black Coast Guard cadet's bag, at a Long Island police station locker room, on a Maryland college campus, and, just this week, on the office door of a black professor at Columbia University in New York." And it's gotten international notice. Is this the image we want to show the world? What do we do about it?

read more | digg story

All Quiet on the Seattle Abortion Front

2007-10-10T15:34:00.001-07:00

The October 3rd Real Change carried a story on the "40 Days for Life" prayer vigil beginning outside clinics that offer abortions. The national campaign may be hotter in other areas of the county; it seems pretty tame here in Seattle. The only other local news coverage on it is a small blip on the Seattle P-I blog.

I hope that the people not showing up at the daily prayer vigils are out doing something real to save real lives -- like making sure that all women know how to use contraception, have access to contraception, and have access to adequate medical care and all other resources if they do become pregnant.

A moral commitment carries a moral duty to effective action. Standing around looking self-righteous is not effective action.

read more | digg story

Adventures in Bloggery: Learn What's Real

2007-10-10T15:09:00.001-07:00

Dr. Wes Browning, satire columnist for a great metropolitan weekly newspaper (Real Change), congratulates George Bush for exposing the communist plot of children's health insurance. "Whether the communists like it or not, this is a capitalist country. If you aren't part of the profit, you're part of the problem."

read more | digg story

Run Off: Jean Godden Goes to the Environment

2007-10-09T20:40:00.001-07:00

Dr. Wes, satire columnist for a great metropolitan weekly (Real Change), has fun with Seattle Councilperson Jean Godden's campaign literature.

read more | digg story

Night Light: Wiki Thought Control: The CIA, The Pentagon, Homeland Security

2007-10-09T02:18:00.001-07:00

One of the most complete reports on government alterations to Wikipedia. Hot blog, overall.

read more | digg story

Adventures in Bloggery: Muddy Waters

2007-10-09T02:03:00.001-07:00

Dr. Wes Browning writes a weekly satire column for the Seattle street newspaper Real Change. Sept. 26, 2007 starts: "This won't be a fun column. Jesse Macbeth has got my panties in a knot this week."

read more | digg story

Apesma's Lament: The City Spectacular

2007-10-08T22:18:00.001-07:00

"It had actually never occurred to me that the trend toward cities as upscale islands of wealth might be related to globalization, but now that Timothy Gibson points it out, I'm feeling like someone who's been napping for the last decade or so."Tim Harris is the founder/director of Seattle's street-newspaper, Real Change, which has covered issues of homelessness, poverty, gentrification and displacement for just over 13 years. In his personal blog, Apesma's Lament, he gets to expand on those issues, and others, more extensively than in the 400 words we give him each issue in the Director's Corner. He also gets to use stronger language. He makes thinking deeply look like fun.

read more | digg story

Energy Inspirations from Burning Man

2007-10-08T21:34:00.001-07:00

Someday I've got to go to Burning Man. Or I'll lose all my Old Hippie cred. :DFrom the page: "Among the theme camps at the event was a designated Alternative Energy Zone, featuring some 50+ participants who offered a guided tour of their various alternative energy devices, even handing out cookies baked in a solar oven."

read more | digg story

Should Green Blogs Discuss Politics?

2007-10-08T21:20:00.001-07:00

Does the American political system seem unresponsive to the needs of the American people? Maybe because so many American people have the attitude that "politics" is a bad word.From the page: "It seems obvious that politics play a role in society’s response to big environmental issues. America’s response to Global Warming, for example, has been dictated by its political leaders to a great extent. But yet, few blogs that discuss environmental issues discuss politics. Why is that?"

read more | digg story

Bus Chick, Transit Authority

2007-10-08T19:48:00.001-07:00

A bus-rider's blog; carried online by the Seattle P-I, and in print by Seattle's Real Change.

read more | digg story

Blog Action Day. One issue. One day. Thousands of voices.

2007-10-08T12:02:00.001-07:00

Making positive use of the Blogosphere! From the site: "On October 15th, bloggers around the web will unite to put a single important issue on everyone’s mind - the environment. Every blogger will post about the environment in their own way and relating to their own topic. Our aim is to get everyone talking towards a better future."

read more | digg story

YouTube - Columbus Day clip from The Canary Effect

2007-10-08T11:51:00.001-07:00

Some real history for Columbus Day; video excerpt from The Canary Effect.

read more | digg story

Stop War the Geeky Way [ Pic ]

2007-10-06T14:40:00.001-07:00

What you can tell about me from my first Digg blog: I am a peace activist (aka damn lefty liberal), a geek, and I am all for using humor to make a point.

read more | digg story