Tuesday, January 20, 2009

America is still America

Well it has to be said by someone. I know the hate mail will flow.

I understand, and am gleeful, about the history being made as President Obama becomes the first Black man that is President of the United States. It is a moment that I never expected in my lifetime.

That said, I have to wonder and comment on the way the media and many people are treating this as if the world has instantly changed. It is as if suddenly every wrong in America has been wiped away. Or so the media would like many to believe.

I recall a recent television commercial on BET that I caught as I was flipping channels. It had a little girl trying to watch the inauguration, but was far too short to see over the crowd. Then Dr. Martin Luther King comes and lifts up the girl so she can watch the Oath of Office. The commercial ends with the words, The Dream Achieved.

Hogwash. The television commercial is inspirational, but the message is false. President Obama is not the fulfillment of the dreams of Dr. Martin Luther King, and to suggest as such belittles what he strived for. The Civil Rights Movement was not about just gaining political stature, or a title. It was about the understanding of the fundamental rights of equality that Government and society needs to recognize.

Yes, President Obama is one aspect of that realization. But that does not mean America has reached a point of equality. Oscar Grant was murdered after Obama was elected. Millions of African Americans are drop-outs, and single parents. The pay rates of African Americans still lags that of White peers. The stereotypes of African Americans being criminals and/or violent still permeates music, television and movies (when we have the chance to be seen) by and large. Drugs are still allowed to enter Black and poor communities. The dream is not achieved.

President Obama is just one man. He has entered one position, powerful as it is. And it is worthy of acclaim and celebration. But we should not distract ourselves from the reality that exists before, during and after this moment.

Racism and prejudice still exists in America. It is part of the legal system at every level. It still unbalances the opportunities African Americans (and all other 'minorities') experience in this nation.

10% of this nation vocally stated that they would not accept a non-White president. That is huge. Who knows how many were unwilling to make that same statement publicly. Obviously not enough to prevent President Obama's election, but far more than enough to put me at unease.

There is still only 1 African American in the Senate, a mere handful in the House of Representatives. There are few Governors and Mayors that are African American, or just non-White. There are far less than 1% of major CEO's that are 'minorities'. Even in the far-left, politically highly liberal, halls and studios of Hollywood there is barely more than a scattering of non-Whites in front of or behind the cameras.

It took 14 days for the ex-cop who murdered Oscar Grant in cold blood to be arrested. Protestors of the inaction of police in Oakland were arrested the day of protests. National news media coverage of the murder spoke only to the riots and lawsuit the murder provoked. And virtually nothing was said of other acts of police abuse in the nation at the start of the new year.





The dream has not been achieved, yet.

I am exuberant about President Obama's accomplishment. But the world has not changed this second. Racism has not died. Prejudice has not faded away. The ills and wrongs of this nation have not been wiped clean. The slate is still filled.

Rejoice today because it is a day worthy of celebration. But let us not be distracted from the truth that is daily life. President Obama may change many things, but it won't be tomorrow. He has become a symbol, but action still needs to be taken. Millions will remember this day, but it is only one day.

President Obama is not THE answer. He is not THE only change. He is one part of a huge goal that was hoped for by millions of Americans, including Dr. Martin Luther King. But he is not the end of the road nor the ultimate answer to the challenges before us. The dream is still a dream. And we must still strive to make it a reality.

But thankfully we are one step and one day closer to that reality. Let's just not lose focus.

Labels: , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Monday, December 29, 2008

The 2009 resolution I wish would happen

What do you hope for in 2009?

A simple question. Some are making resolutions to lose weight, or quit smoking. Some hope for world peace, a less polluted planet, or just a few less guns on the streets. Some pray for fame, other wish to have their work recognized. And in these troubled times more than a few just want to be able to make ends meet for one more year for their family, friends, and themselves.

All are good things, and I hope each one comes true. But for myself I would like to see honesty.

Right now the nation is preparing to peaceful switch power from President Bush to President-elect Obama. IT will be the first time a Black man has ever held so high an office in this nation. Some fear that, as if the national sport will become basketball or fried chicken will replace hamburgers - and I have heard such drivel. Some believe that this will end all forms of racism left in the nation, as if the declared movies and television shows of 2009 will magically be infused with African Americans, Hispanics, Asians and other cultures at the stroke of midnight.

Neither is going to happen. Both are dreams based in a dishonest expectation of America. And that's why I hope for honesty.

I would love to hear the hypocrits in Hollywood admit that they are one of the last bastions of discrimination. In front of and behind the camera. Because there is no other reason for the abysmal diversity in that industry, even though they love to present stories of diversity and change via their medium.

I would love to hear the extreme left and right tell us that they are promoting some laws and issues just because they want to piss-off the other side. Why else would they not compromise and enact legislation that benefits more people than their bickering and inaction prevents being helped.

I would love to hear racists or whatever race publicly discuss their rationale for their hate. Not with anger or threats but actual debate, so all of us can see the folly in every conclusion. And at least then we all would know what we are actually dealing with.

I would love to have various industries explain why products created today, with superior technology, cannot endure half as long as decades older products made with inferior products still in use.

I would love to hear the radicals that believe in global warming, or global freezing, sit back and admit that there is nothing to prove what they believe, even though it can't hurt us to improve the planet. I would enjoy hearing them state the fact that the Earth changes over time, whether we like it or not, in ways we cannot predict any better than an earthquake and that adapting to the changes is smarter than trying to stop them.

It's all about honesty. Because there is honesty in what I have said, but not what we read and hear everyday. Because some need to be right, even when they are partially wrong. Because some have just a bit more greed than is good for anyone. Because some want power at all costs. And because many people fear any type of change at all.

If 2009 can be a year of honesty, real truth, it will be a year of great changes. Not all of those changes will be pleasant, comfortable, or good for everyone. In fact I would expect everyone to be upset with various aspects of knowing, or acknowledging, the truth. But once that discomfort is over, once the change is past imagine what the world could be like.

Some things will still be unfair, some things will still be harder than they need to be. Some wrongs will go unpunished and everyone won't have everything they want or need. But most things will be better. Closer to equitable. Just that much more balanced. Just that much more improved.

Life is never without struggle. Living is a daily challenge that we all lose at some point. But if we could be just that much more honest, it would be one less thing to have to strive against. One less hurdle to muster strength for. One more thing we all could pat ourselves on the back for having achieved.

Am I asking for too much? Probably is the honest answer. We are all very ingrained with the lifestyles we lead right now. To be honest would be akin to being brutal at this point. There is just too much vested in the continuation of what is happening right now.

So Hollywood will remain biased, politics will continue to be ineffective. Business will take advantage, and the planets resources will dwindle. Things will slowly, at least part of the time, get worse. And we will all get a little deeper into the vortex.

But I can still imagine it different, and as long as some of us can do that we have the potential to change.

Labels: , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Tuesday, June 17, 2008

American oil: 1970 or 2010?

How bad is the energy situation in America? We all are aware of the increases in the price of oil in the past couple of years. In fact there has been a massive amount of attention to every rise and fall of the price per barrel. That attention has of course translated into greater speculation fueling great price fluctuations, happier members of OPEC, richer brokers, and tighter margins for virtually every type of business in America.

But how bad is it? Does this compare to say the 1970’s and that oil disaster? Actually very well. In fact there is virtually no comparison. From 1970 to 1980 the price of oil went up 1566%. Again that was an increase of 15x in 10 years or 1.5x every year for that decade. In the past 10 years oil has increased a mere 300% or 3x counting today’s high.

So what other factors have been involved in the run up between then and now? Considering the fact that oil consumption in America has increased 21% since 1980 alone (I couldn’t find data since 1970). Of course that is 28 years or .75% a year. So that does not explain the price increase, especially when you consider that the price of oil only increased 33% from 1980 to 1990. So there must be another reason.

Perhaps it’s the fact that there is a limited supply of oil in the world. Knowing this, and the fact that the Middle East has no other major exportable good, it makes sense that as demand continues to be steady or increase the price will rise. But that still does not explain the recent dramatic (moreso due to media influence) increase.

Until you look at speculation. In the 1970’s perhaps 15%, maybe 20%, of the nation was involved actively with the stock market. In the 1980’s there was a huge increase in trading of everything, backed up with a healthy helping of movies from Hollywood fueling interest (recall Trading Places, Wall Street, Other People’s Money). As a result the investing populace doubled. Then with the tech bubble we saw the numbers swell to around 60-70%.

As these numbers swelled, more and more people became aware of alternative investment vehicles. Commodity trading along with spot trading became the new penny stocks. With an upfront cap of only 5% of the total investment oil was primed to run as the housing market had its bubble burst. And here we are today.

The only other major factor has been the fact that since the 1970’s neither Republicans or Democrats have done anything about America’s energy needs beyond polispeak. Every administration has talked about alternative energy sources, and funded no research. Each decade has passed without increases in domestic drilling while OPEC made more money. As the years passed the number of oil refineries has dropped to roughly half as many in operation today as in 1970. And speculators made money.

Why is America in an oil shock, and complaining about gasoline prices (which have had a fractional increase in price as compared to oil) – not to mention soon to be reeling from home heating oil prices? Because we have politicians that have been more concerned with fueling special interest groups (eco fanatics and oil companies alike) rather than the average American.

So what is our answer? What are we the people going to do? We can either sit back and accept yet more polispeak about creating advances while ethanol kills the Gulf of Mexico and sits unused in the 5 states that actually have it available to the public or we can get real change. We can either leave domestic oil sources untapped and penalize our economy or use oil and fund research for other sources. We can either do something or suffer the consequences of inaction and polispeak promises.

That is the choice in front of us. Every other option is just a stopgap answer that will placate anyone with a short memory and nothing else. Because the energy situation in America is hardly bad…yet. But soon it will be a real crisis, and one that will give this generation and the next an understanding of the 1970’s that will make them pray for alternative day fuel lines.

Labels: , , , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Friday, February 01, 2008

Can Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger help Obama and endorse McCain?

Recently I was speaking about the endorsement of Senator Barack Obama by Senator Ted Kennedy.



I stated that

“The power of the Kennedy family is without question in American politics. They stretch from New England to California. They include Congressmen, Senators, and the Guvernator. Their supporters range in age from the pre-baby boomers to the first time voters that are a force in this election. The name of the family alone has more political clout than most candidates have had.”


A friend of mine brought up the fact that Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is expected to endorse Senator John McCain. The question to me was how I could justify saying that the Kennedy family endorsement could apply to Senator Obama in California.

It’s a good question. And I love the fact that my friend pays attention to what I’m writing and brings up what they see as conflicts. I do have an answer and it’s the reason I made the statement in the first place.

While it is a fact that the Guvernator is a Republican, his wife Maria Shriver is a Kennedy. I have no doubt, though I have no fact to base it on, that prior and since the endorsement of Senator Obama there has been conversations among all the Kennedy clan. Included to some degree of that would be the Governor. While I would never have expected him to endorse Senator Obama, there are other things that he can do to help him.

Prior to his involvement in politics, the Governor was an actor of some acclaim. During his time in Hollywood he worked with and I imagine became friends with many that are liberal, Libertarian, and Democratic. Considering that much of Hollywood is dominated with vocal non-Republicans, his 20 year career would demand that he at least know those of such a political affiliation. It is those contacts, from his acting days if not his current position, that is the greatest benefit he can provide to Senator Obama. He could introduce him to many people that could provide him with endorsements and money that he might need to ensure a win over Hillary Clinton in California and possibly other states.

Another question is raised by this supposition that I again state is based solely on my own reasoning. That question is - Why would he do this?

Because as a de facto member of the Kennedy’s, and for all the support that was provided to him, he needs to do it. I say the help he received, and again I base this on my supposition. I believe that it was the influence, via subtly introductions and quiet introductions to like minded Republicans, which helped Governor Schwarzenegger to win California. As much stardom as he might have had, the fact is that he had no political experience or exposure. The polispeak of American politics generally prevents unknowns from attaining high political positions, unless they receive significant backing. Few politicians would risk their political capital on an unknown without a strong belief in an individual. That belief, I think, was gained in some cases by the introduction and nudge from the Kennedy family stating in effect ‘I think you should speak with Arnold. He’s got great ideas, in line with your Party.’

Is that what happened? I have no idea in fact, but I believe it did. And on that basis, which seems logical and probable, he owed the family. Providing Senator Obama with the same type of quiet introductions was his quid pro quo. Not illegal, nor damaging to the Republican Party. In fact I’m sure it happens far more often than the polispeak we hear would indicate.

Thus, Governor Schwarzenegger is free to endorse Senator John McCain publicly and still help the Kennedy family who helped him.

That is my reasoning, I think it is sound. Do you agree?

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates
Ask for ad rates