Repeat Performance

Art / Photography / PotD

Repeat Performance

February 15, 2017

We’ve been a bit busy

In fact, we’ve been wholly consumed by New York Fashion Week, and it’s not going to get any better with London, Milan, and Paris still to go. We’ve not had time to edit or curate any photos. So, we thought we’d take a quick look at just a few people who have made repeat appearances in front of our camera. These are some of our most favorite people in the whole world and they’ve let us do some really crazy things with them. Mind you, this isn’t everyone by a long shot. We just wanted to keep the number of photos manageable.

Have fun!

[tg_masonry_gallery gallery_id=”10826″ layout=”contain” columns=”3″]

Current Issues / News & Comment / pop culture

No Love For You

February 13, 2017

Pakistan makes Valentines Day illegal

The Short Version

Pakistan doesn’t like Valentines Day. More specifically, the Islamabad High Court’s order prohibits all Valentine’s Day festivities in government offices and public spaces. Immediately. No cards. No candy. No streamers. Nothing. Conservative Muslim groups are considered to be behind the ban.

A Little More Detail

Pakistan has a very interesting view of Valentines Day. Whereas most Americans think of it as a day to celebrate love and to give sweet gifts of chocolate and nonsense to someone you care about, conservative Muslims in Pakistan see it as an example of Western decadence.

The petition on which the High Court issued its verdict claimed that Valentines Day “promotes immorality, nudity, and indecency under the cover of spreading love.” Kinda makes you wonder what Valentines Day party they were invited to, doesn’t it?

The ban covers any public display and even encouraged national media to not talk about or promote Valentines Day in any form.

Last year, Pakistan’s President Mamnoon Hussain denounced Valentines Day, saying it is a Western tradition and not part of Pakistan’s culture. His words didn’t carry any force, however. It was just sort of a suggestion. Separately, local officials in Kohat, in northwest Pakistan, banned the sale of Valentine cards and goods, and Peshawar local council banned celebrations last year as well.

However, today’s ruling by the High Court affects the entire country. You can’t celebrate Valentine’s Day, which is likely to displease a number of people. The day has become extremely popular especially among Pakistan’s younger and more secular population.

The ban does not necessarily affect card shops and restaurants. However, whether a shop or restaurant is able to get away with any kind of Valentines Day promotion is likely to come at the discretion of law enforcement.

So, if you love someone, don’t plan on spending Valentines Day in Pakistan. Try India. I’m sure they’ll welcome you. [insert evil grin here]

Current Issues / News & Comment

Get Out Now!

February 13, 2017

Dam failure prompts crisis as 150,000 evacuate

The Short Version

California’s Oroville Dam, the highest in the nation, reached its peak yesterday after heavy rains in the area caused water to begin cascading over the top of the 770-foot tall wall. When emergency spillways were opened to relieve the pressure on the dam, a giant sinkhole formed threatening the structure of the entire system. Emergency evacuation orders were issued yesterday afternoon for the nearly 200,000 residents immediately downstream as officials attempt to prevent the damn from breaking.

A Little More Detail

“Get out now!” was the order that came down from Acting Director Department of Water Resources Bill Croyle after engineers warned that the nation’s tallest dam, which creates one of the nation’s largest man-made lakes, could potentially fail at any time without any further warning.

Every nightmare you’ve ever had about being caught in a flood of water stood ready to come true and it caught everyone off guard.

We’ve talked before about how much water Northern California is getting this season. For officials at the Oroville Dam, about 45 minutes North of San Francisco, that difference is very real. Just two years ago, people who had boats on Oroville Lake had to repel down the embankment to get to their vessels. Yesterday, water was slipping across the top of that dam and officials are very frightened that the whole system may fail.

Not that this scenario wasn’t foreseen. Not one, but two emergency spillways were constructed just in case the lake ever became as full as it is now. The emergency spillways would allow for the measured release of water without flooding the cities downstream. Sounds like good, solid planning, right?

It probably was when the whole thing was constructed, but in the nearly 50-year history of the damn, the spillways have never had to actually be used. They’ve just sat there, undergoing routine inspection that, apparently, wasn’t too terribly particular about the decay that was occurring. After all, the spillways have never been needed. It’s never gotten close.

So, when water reached the apex of the damn yesterday and the emergency spillways were opened, a problem developed in the form of a giant sinkhole at the top of the second spillway. Concrete in the first spillway began to fail as well.

This, dear children, is what we adults call an “oh shit” moment.

At first, officials thought they’d be able to use helicopters to drop sandbags and boulders into the sinkhole. However, after looking around for boulders and sandbags and seeing that the choices were less than ideal, that idea was nixed for the time being. The only choice left: get everyone out of the way, just in case.

As one might expect, the folks living downstream were less than happy. This wasn’t supposed to happen. They had been promised that there were safety measures in place to keep it from happening. Now, everything they own is at risk of being swept away should the dam completely fail. People crammed as much as they could inside their vehicles and head toward Chino or someplace else well outside the potential flood zone.

California officials are doing their best to control the situation. Late last night, the water had receded and was no long flowing over the spillway. That will give engineers a chance this morning to take a look at the erosion and develop a plan to repair the damage. However, that does not mean it is safe for residents to return. Water is still pouring through the dam’s gates at the rate of 100,000 cubic feet per second. Do a little math. That’s a LOT of water and the longer it continues the greater the risk of flooding downstream.

Even worse, the continued arrival of more water from upstream sources continues to place an incredible amount of pressure on the dam. While officials insist that the main dam is structurally sound, the spillways obviously are not. Further erosion of the spillways could cause millions of gallons of water to be released without any means of control.

California National Guard has 23,000 soldiers and airmen on call should they be needed and the California Highway Patrol is sending an additional 235 officers to help with the situation.

Here’s hoping that daylight brings sure solutions and that everyone gets back home soon.

Current Issues / Long Read / Personal

Losing Ourselves

February 12, 2017

The more we fight, the more we put at risk

I Am Somebody

I was reminded earlier today of a Calvin and Hobbes comic strip by Bill Watterson. I don’t have permission to share the strip, so I won’t. I can describe it for you, though.

Frame one: Calvin silently stares at a night sky full of stars.
Frame two: “I am significant!” Calvin screams into the night.
Frame three: Calvin returns to the immensity of the night sky
Frame four: “Says the dust speck,” Calvin says as he walks away.

As I consider all that has transpired over the past few weeks, I find myself constantly navigating back and forth between Calvin’s two statements. With every dishonest and deceitful move made by the president and his administration, I ultimately am screaming, “I am significant! Listen to me!” Those may not be the exact words that I use, but the reality is that the motivation behind all our angst and anger comes down to the fact we feel we are being ignored and discarded by the people who are now in power. We march because we fear being thrown away, deported even though we were born here, or made to become refugees as we flee an unrepentant dictator.

Over the past three weeks, we have yelled, we have written, we have shared poignant articles, we have made phone calls, and we quite possibly have threatened to end a political career or two. We have been loud, persistent, resistant, and consistent in fighting the perceived evil at every turn and every tweet. We have called for hearings, called for investigations, and called for impeachment with more furor and frequency than we call for pizza.

And then, we hit the dust speck moment. We find ourselves wondering if anything we’ve said, any action that we’ve taken, ultimately matters. Sure, it matters right now. It matters that women have control over their own bodies. It matters that people fleeing war and famine and poverty are allowed to resettle in a place where they can feel safe. It matters that everyone has a fair and reasonable opportunity to vote. It matters that drinking water be free of contamination. Everything matters in the short term of our lives right at this moment.

But ultimately, when the story of this planet resides in some recorded history of a different place and maybe even different beings, will our actions now matter or are we nothing more than dust specks? Is there a chance that in all of our protests that we could lose more than we gain?

A moment of perspective

I identify as Native American. Neither of my parents would, though. If you ever saw my late father, his native heritage was obvious. When our address was Tahlequah, Oklahoma, the capital of the Western band of the Cherokee, Poppa was frequently asked if he was a tribe member, especially when it came time to elect a new chief. He always said no. In fact, most the time he would tell people he was Black Dutch. Yet, as his eldest sister would remind him, he was very much Choctaw.

Mother, on the other hand, would tell people privately that she was Cherokee, and she was. She was very proud of that. Never mind that her skin was white as any European who ever crossed the Atlantic, Mom made sure you knew she was Cherokee—right up until there was a government form to fill out. Then, she marked that she was white. Every time.

Mom felt she had good reason for not claiming her heritage on government forms. Her mother’s family, the Bucks, had been forcibly relocated from their tribal land in North Georgia. A family child had died along the way and those that survived were ill. The family blamed the tribal rolls. The way my Uncle Windjammer put it, they had been told putting their names on the rolls would keep them safe and they had believed what the tribal elders told them. Then, those same rolls were used to round them all up and drive them all away. The message held in the family was clear: never trust the government and never admit to them that you’re Cherokee.

As I grew older, I found many native peoples who felt the same way. Distrust of the government was high. They did not expect to be treated fairly and they did not expect anyone representing the government to ever keep their word. The name of the president might change, but the lies to native peoples remain the same. Therefore, for many, one was better off publicly denying their cultural heritage and trying to fit in with the white man’s world. Native traditions might be kept at home, but no one was to know.

As a result, that heritage and culture risks being lost completely. I understand much less about our native culture than my mother did. Mother understood less than Grandma did. Hiding from the government has a cost: people lose the knowledge and understanding of who they are; where they fit in the cosmos. We become dust specks.

Losing things

At least once a week, Kat loses her keys here in the house. It happens easily enough. When she comes in from the salon in the evening, she is immediately bombarded by both children and pets anxious for her affection. Anything in her hands, such as her keys, quickly becomes a hindrance. Sometimes she sets them on a shelf by the door. Sometimes she puts them in her purse. Sometimes she sets them on the couch that has a nasty habit of eating such things. Inevitably, as she gets ready to leave the next day, we have to search for the keys. We know damn good and well they didn’t become animated and walk off under their own power. There is limited space wherein they might exist. Yet, for several anxiety-filled minutes, they are invisible.

There is an interesting, poignant, and sometimes humorous article in The New Yorker about losing things. As writer Kathryn Schulz discusses the impact of losing everything from her wallet to her father, she uncovers some important facts about the emotion of loss. After ruminating about the inevitability of losing everything from keys to health to partners to wealth, she finally writes:

There’s precious little solace for this, and zero redress; we will lose everything we love in the end. But why should that matter so much? By definition, we do not live in the end: we live all along the way. The smitten lovers who marvel every day at the miracle of having met each other are right; it is finding that is astonishing. You meet a stranger passing through your town and know within days you will marry her. You lose your job at fifty-five and shock yourself by finding a new calling ten years later. You have a thought and find the words. You face a crisis and find your courage.

We lost the election. We knew losing was possible but we didn’t expect it. We now fear losing much more. We fear losing the right to speak and, just as important, the ability to be heard and to have our voice given some respect. We fear that we might lose the right to decide for ourselves not what is right or wrong but what is best. We fear losing clean air to breathe. We fear becoming cogs in someone else’s machine. We fear a corporate takeover of our very lives.

We fear losing who we are.

I am significant, dammit. I won’t let some orange-tinged narcissistic ball of international embarrassment deny me my personal significance. Yet, as we face this crisis, and there’s no question in my mind that this is a crisis, where do we find our courage? Is courage something we can conjure up from inside us or is it, like Kat’s keys, cloaked in some mysterious veil of invisibility until suddenly, poof, there it is in that same place we’d already looked a dozen times before?

Remedies versus reality

Somewhere back about 30 years or so ago, I had a work acquaintance whose mother had terminal cancer. She was a sweet little old lady, the kind who would bake extra loaves of bread so she would have some to give away or send presents for children she had never met. She was not ready to give up on life just yet. When oncologists in the US said they had nothing left in their arsenal to fight the disease, she latched on to an experimental treatment in Greece that had shown some success. Obviously, her insurance wasn’t going to pay for the treatment. It took every bit of savings she had as well as substantial contributions from her children to pay for the trip and the treatment in advance, but they all assumed that life was worth the sacrifice. Off to Greece she went.

She died her third day in Greece. Ill when she got off the plane, she was never well enough to start the treatment. She passed alone, apart from her family, in a country she knew only from a brief taxi ride.

This is what happens when remedies meet reality. Everything sounds good on paper. The pictures are always pretty in the brochure. Reality comes when one actually tries to embrace the promise of a remedy, though, and reality often isn’t working with the same set of pictures. What one person promises to be the solution to a problem often doesn’t quite pan out when the project moves into execution. Reality delivers to us the unexpected, the unforeseen, and dumps it right smack in the middle of the plans we were sure would work.

Benjamin P. Hardy wrote an article for medium.com about the need to make course adjustments throughout our lives in order to stay on track. He compares our lives to an airplane in flight, constantly making course corrections to avoid problems like running into a volcano and killing everyone on board (which actually happened in 1979). After relating that tragic story, he says something extremely important:

“Small things — if not corrected — become big things, always.”

Hardy then proceeds to offer a very thorough set of remedies through a detailed set of questions. Seriously, this article is long. His remedy involves being organized, planning and investing, tracking metrics, reducing noise, and moving toward goals. There’s nothing actually wrong in anything he says. In fact, the same advice has been around forever and for people of a certain personality type, it probably works.

The problem is reality. No matter how hard I try, and I frequently try, I’m just not organized. My creative mind won’t allow me to be organized. I can get my desk all neatly arranged with a place for everything and everything in its place and 30 minutes later one would swear it had been involved in a train wreck. I try blaming the cats and the kids, but the reality is that my life is just cluttered and messy.

So it is when it comes to resisting this new political reality. I’ve read the guides and looked at the suggestions and it all makes perfect sense. There’s no reason we shouldn’t be able to successfully resist the idiocy that has taken over our government. We can do this. All we have to do is be organized, and plan, and focused, and keep at it.

But the reality is that resistance is exhausting and the folks in the White House know that. Their plan is to make sure everyone who opposes them is so exhausted that we give up. We’re only three weeks into this potentially four-year marathon and already we’re feeling consumed. Who do I need to call today? What’s the current hot issue? Where did I put the Senator’s phone number?

I want to be part of the resistance. I need to be part of the resistance. I cannot let happen here what happened in Germany as Hitler rose to power. The threat is real. Action must be taken.

But then, I wake up in the morning wondering who the hell am I? Is anyone listening? One particular Senator has yet to acknowledge my numerous atttempts at communicating with him. Am I getting through? Is anyone actually listening to the messages being left on his phone?

The reality is that more often I feel like a dust speck. A significant dust speck, perhaps, but still just a speck.

Course correction

Go back to what Mr. Hardy said: “Small things — if not corrected — become big things, always.” This feeling of lostness, of being only a dust speck, is a small thing now. Yet, it has to be corrected. Now. A momentary sense of misdirection or confusion is one thing. If we just blindly keep going, though, if we keep following “the plan” and don’t check ourselves, we risk ending up so impossibly off course that we’ve lost any sense of who we really are. At some point, we will look up and, for better or worse, the resistance will be over. Maybe we win. Maybe we lose. But when we get to that point will we still know who we are or will we have lost our identity to the cause?

One of the biggest challenges anyone faces is changing realities and no one experiences that more harshly than do the dear people who serve in our military. They volunteer, every last one of them, to give their lives in the protection of all we hold dear. They leave. They fight. They experience challenges to their existance on a level that would make most of us soil our clothing. They put everything they have on the line.

Then, they come home and things are different. Suddenly, they no longer need to worry about who or what might be waiting around the next corner trying to kill them. No longer is there a very real chance that the child asking them for candy is a distraction while someone else plants a bomb in their car. Reality has changed and with it comes the need to adapt. Not everyone is successful. Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome (PTSD) is the third most prevalent psychiatric diagnosis among veterans. Some get help and eventually do okay. Some don’t. They lose their identity as an individual and some never get it back. Ever.

To a much lesser extent, we all risk the same thing anytime we commit ourselves to something that is wholly consuming of our time and energy. Fighting the good fight is necessary and admirable, but when it eventually ends, when our service in that war is no longer necessary, do we still know who we are? Can we still function in society without looking at everything as a challenge that must be addressed with protests and marches?

We need to start asking ourselves these questions now, making course corrections while still injoined in the struggle or resistance, or else we risk losing who we really are.

Maintaining identity

When one presents a problem one is supposed to propose a solution, correct? Yet, as we’ve already discussed, remedies too foten run afoul of reality and when my reality is different from your reality I question just how valuable a solution might be on a universal level.

Maintaining one’s identity is rooted in having an initial udnerstanding of who we are and since that is obviously different for every person the so, too, must be the solution. If one does not already have that secure foundation in who they are, then the danger for them is perhaps even more acute. One is never merely a member of a cause, no matter how noble that cause might be. We are significant in our individualities, not just because we belong to a group.

Nonetheless, perhaps a generalized framework of loose-knit suggestions isat least marginally appropriate at this point. Adapt these to your reality as you feel appropriate.

Keep doing what you do. Don’t lose site of what you’ve already established in your life. If you take pictures, keep taking pictures. If you chase kids around all day, keep chasing kids around all day. This is part of your core. Don’t give it up.
Love somebody. I don’t necessarily mean this in the romantic sense, though if you are fortunate enough to have someone with whom you are intimate this is all the more important. The challenge is that being committed to a cause can keep us away from people we care about. Don’t let that happen. Make time.
Make time to play. The weather in the Midwest was beautiful yesterday. Even with a very heavy schedule of fashion shows, I took time between shows to go out in the yard and play with the kids and the dog. Sure, it was just a few minutes here and there, but it was enough to remind me of what really matters.
Try to avoid stress eating. I said try. There are good days and there are bad days and when my AP feed is going nuts or when major fashion shows are stacked one on top of another the stress of just trying to keep up sends me reaching for the chocolate. By the handful. This isn’t healthy. You and I both know it isn’t healthy. If you’re going to stress eat, at least try to make it something that won’t kill you. Avoid Taco Bell®.
Sleep. On a normal day I’m able to get in an afternoon nap before the little ones get home from school. This nap is necessary given the early hour at which my day starts. However, I’ve been missing my nap of late and it is really starting to affect my attitude and my behavior. I’m much more short tempered, less tolerant, and have to work harder to not write something that would get me a visit from the FBI or Secret Service. Yes, there’s a lot to do. Resisting tyranny doesn’t happen with your eyes closed. However, fatigue is the shortest path I know to unreasonable actions and expectations. Sleep, dammit.
Remember, this won’t last forever. Whether our efforts prove successful or not, there is an end to every campaign, every protest, and every cause. Resistance is not long-term. Your life and your individuality are. Don’t let the cause block your vision of who you are.

There is nothing the president and his staff can do that takes away our significance. While we may be dust specks in the overall perspective of the cosmos, we are each important to the here and now of this planet and this life and there is absolutely nothing or no one who can change that.

I had a high school acquaintance try to convince me yesterday that resistance is futile, that the president is the president and that this reality was not going to change. I took his words as a challenge to prove him wrong. Reality is what we make of it and I’m not willing to blindly accept tyranny. I will resist with every fiber of my being if necessary.

But in doing so, I will still be me. I will still take pictures. I will still scream at people running stop signs. I will still enjoy my morning coffee with Kat.

Grab hold of who you are. Don’t let go. Be you.

Current Issues / Music / News & Comment

One More Song

February 10, 2017

Aretha Franklin says she’s retiring after one last album

The Short Version

The Queen of Soul, Aretha Franklin, says she is retiring from performing after one last album. At age 74, such a move is perfectly understandable, especially given her health problems in recent years. So, she’ll make one last album with Stevie Wonder producing and then call it quits. No more. But Clive Davis doesn’t think she really means it.

Some Background Info

If you are one of those dear, innocent three-month-old children who has never heard of Aretha Franklin, it is time you were educated on the matters of soul. Quite simply, there is no one better. Beyoncè and Rhianna and even Lady Gaga would be nothing without the foundation Aretha laid down before those singers were even born. She won 18 Grammy awards back when those actually meant something. She’s sold over 75 million records worldwide. Rolling Stone magazine has named her THE best singer in the world. Period. Aretha was winning lifetime achievement awards back when your parents, or grandparents, were still in high school.

Ms. Franklin has still been going strong. At a Kennedy Center Honors event in 2015, Aretha sat down at a piano and belted out Carole King’s (You make me feel like a ) Natural Woman which was a hit for Franklin all the way back in 1967. Here, take a moment and watch the video:

https://youtu.be/5RIgeu-6Jcs

If I were to try and list just the songs that have been top ten hits for Ms. Franklin, it would extend longer than you likely have time to scroll. There is no one in the music industry today who can even stand in the shadow of Aretha. She’s that important.

So, She’s Going To Retire?

Ms. Frankling told a Detroit NBC news affiliate that she plans to retire this year. She’s already won every award there is to win, including the Presidential Medal of Freedom (2oo5). There really isn’t anything left for her to do except, possibly, put her legacy further out of reach from anyone else. So, being 74, one can see where she might find it preferable to sit back and take it easy for a while.

Oh, but she wants to do one more album. Just one, mind you. One last collection of songs with long-time friend Stevie Wonder at the production controls. The album hasn’t even been named yet and is already the most highly anticipated project of the year. When two legends of R&B come together like this at any time, you know the results are going to be phenomenal. As a finalè goodbye album, just go ahead and hand out the tissues. I don’t care if all she does is sit at the piano and hum, I’m sure it would be the most soul-stirring hum you’ve ever heard.

Of course, if there’s an album, there has to be a tour, right? Franklin told the Detroit station she would do “some select things, many one a month, for six months out of the year.” Still, she asserts, this is her last year in concert. She wants to spend more time with her grandchildren.

I’m not the only one who is skeptical. Clive Davis, whose Arista label produced Aretha from 1980 through 2004, doesn’t think she’ll be able to stay away from the music. Davis told the Associated Press:

“I think that what she might have meant was that she doesn’t plan an extensive tour — still not flying and still traveling by bus, it’s just hard to stay on that bus. Aretha is still magical in person and still has the God-given voice that she has. I don’t believe that she’s retiring. I just believe that she’s cutting back, judiciously.”

Clive’s reasoning makes more sense. Aretha is one of those people who just can’t stop singing. Maybe we won’t see her as often, but I’m almost certain we’ll still see her. Somewhere. On a stage. Making everyone else look like an amateur.

Current Issues / News & Comment

Smaller Is Better

February 10, 2017

Fashion powerhouse LVMH is on the prowl

The Short Version

As the fashion industry spends the next month looking at new styles, some of those people sitting on the front row are more interested in a brand’s bottom line more than what’s coming down the runway. Fashion mega holding group LVMH has changed its strategy from buying large, successful brands to smaller, up-and-coming designers that have yet to make it big. The result is making a lot of designers nervous.

A Little More Detail

Louis Vuitton Moet Hennessy (LVMH) is one of fashion’s largest conglomerates. It owns brands you know such as Marc Jacobs, Christian Dior, Kenzo, Fendi, and Givenchy, among several others. They also own a number of high-end wine and spirit brands and a few other things in the luxury category. They’re big, they’re powerful, and they are extremely well financed. They have plenty of money to throw at most anything they want to purchase.

In the past, the LVMH strategy has been to purchase only known brands, fashion labels that were established, well recognized and profitable. The conglomerate would infuse their purchase with enough capital to fuel extensive growth in an effort to make them super brands. For the most part, that strategy has worked.

However, LVMH CEO Bernard Arnault says that the company is changing its purchase strategy. Instead of going for the big brands, they’re looking for smaller labels that address a niche spot in the market. An example would be their purchase of German baggage label Rimowa late last year. Chance are, unless one travels to Europe frequently, one has never heard of Rimowa. Expect that to soon change. That’s exactly the strategy the group is taking toward fashion as well.

If they’re looking at anyone specific, though, they’re keeping their mouths shut about it and that silence has everyone on edge. There are several smaller brands, from Jason Wu to Adam Semalt, showing in New York this week that could be a good fit for the conglomerate’s new strategy. There are plenty of others in London, Milan, and Paris as well. The question is whether the label’s growth pattern is sufficient to warrant their purchase.

Smaller luxury brands have had it tough given the downturn in luxury sales over the past three years. Smaller labels don’t have as many flagship stores, if any, and are more dependent on department stores to fuel sales. Department stores have been sucking air of late with major chains such as Macy’s having to close hundreds of units. As a result, the attraction of big company money is very attractive to those trying to stay afloat.

Already this year, New York-based designer Bibhu Mohapatra has had to file for bankruptcy protection. Several other small brands could be looking at making similar moves if not closing altogether.

As a result, all eyes are on the front rows looking for any LVMH executive who might be checking out potential purchases. Almost everyone would like to be on LVMH’s list, but they typically make only two or three purchases a year when they’re in a buying mood. Still, several designers have their hopes set high. They’re putting in a little more effort to this week’s presentations, a little more pomp, a little more glamour, hoping to prove they are worthy of a significant investment.

Only time will tell whether the effort will pay off.

Current Issues / Fashion / News & Comment

Defying Authority

February 9, 2017

Retailers don’t care who Ivanka’s daddy is, they’re not carrying her junk.

The Short Version

Retailers including Nordstrom and T.J. Maxx have dumped Ivanka Trump’s fashion line, saying that the products were cheaply made and not selling well. Ivanka’s daddy, who just happens to be president of the United States, tweeted his anger toward Nordstrom yesterday. Not only did the tweets not have the desired effect, it once again draws attention to the ethics issues raised by the president’s business holdings.

A Little Background

Fashion retail is a challenging market, as we’ve discussed several times before. Several once-popular chains have gone completely under. So, it makes sense that a store would stop selling anything that doesn’t sell well. Back in January, department store Nordstrom, as well as T.J. Maxx and Marshall’s, announced that they were dropping the entire Ivanka Trump line because they didn’t sell well last year. Any sane business person would have done the same thing.

Unfortunately, it is an insane businessman we have elected as president.

What The President Said

Yesterday, almost a month after Nordstrom and other retailers dumped his daughter’s label, the president issued this tweet:

My daughter Ivanka has been treated so unfairly by @Nordstrom. She is a great person — always pushing me to do the right thing! Terrible!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 8, 2017

Typically, that would be bad news for Nordstrom. Other times the president has tweeted about a company, their stock took a dive. Not this time.

That’s right, the company’s stock value went UP after the president’s tweet. Could it be that the great orange one holds no sway over fashion? That would certainly seem to be the case.

The Washington Post quotes Indiana University retail merchandising professor Mary Embry on the matter:

“Politics certainly do matter in fashion,” she said, “but the strength of the Nordstrom stock validates the strength of the decision making of that retailer that is based on absolutely knowing its customer.”

Also, she said: “The president is not seen as having any particular expertise on fashion.”

The Fallout

The loss of influence may not be the only consequence of the president’s actions. While the tweet was initially issued from the president’s personal account, it was later re-tweeted from the official @POTUS account. That would appear to be a serious ethics violation, using his position as president to influence a business on his daughter’s behalf. That is a very big no-no in both business and political circles.

Kathleen Clark, a law professor at Washington University in St. Louis, told the Associated Press: “The implicit threat was that he will use whatever authority he has to retaliate against Nordstrom, or anyone who crosses his interest.”

Ethicists all over the country have been weighing in on social media and while some defend the president’s use of his private account to defend his daughter, there is very little question that retweeting the message on the president’s official account is definitely crossing a line.

This adds to a growing list of ethics concern that could eventually end up as part of a Congressional investigation, though the president and Congressional leadership are doing everything they can to prevent that from happening. However, Congress cannot stop the growing number of lawsuits against the president for breaching ethics issues. Already, the president is facing multiple lawsuits over his failure to fully divest his business holdings as other presidents have done. Most damaging may be a lawsuit that claims the president has violated the Emoluments clause of the Constitution. Should the courts ultimately decide against the president, then Congress would be compelled to take action against him.

For all the reasons for opposing the President, ethics is the one over which he has total control. He doesn’t have to tweet at all. He doesn’t have to comment. He chooses what, when, and where he is going to speak. The entire ethics argument could go away overnight were the president to simply keep his hands in his pockets and be more presidential in what he says. Unfortunately, this president seems to be incapable of either of those things.

Over at T.J. Maxx, employees have been instructed to remove all Ivanka Trump merchandise from their shelves and place the branded signs in the trash.

If only it were so easy to remove the president.

Current Issues / Fashion / News & Comment

What is #tiedtogether

February 9, 2017

A new movement is underway in the fashion industry

The Short Version

Digital fashion magazine Business of Fashion (BOF) introduced the #tiedtogether campaign this week, just in time for the ready-to-wear fashion season. Its aim is to provide a focus point for unity and inclusiveness by asking people to wear white bandanas.

A Little More Detail

There’s not a whole lot more to write on the matter. BoF’s own #tiedtogether page is rather brief and void of too many details. The movement is in response to the significant silence on the part of the fashion industry as a whole regarding recent world events, such as the US travel ban and the impact of more nation-centric trade deals. Fashion brands must have a global presence to be successful, but things such as travel limitations and high import fees/tariffs can not only strain the business side of fashion but create animosities between people from different countries.

Few fashion brands have bothered to say much about political situations for fear the backlash might hurt business. While there was some dustup last month regarding which designers might dress the new First Lady of the United States, most companies have chosen to not take a stand. The most notable exception is Levi’s, the denim jean maker, which signed on to an amicus brief for the US 9th Circuit Court of Appeals opposing the travel ban.

BoF’s movement is admirable, to be sure. With the world seeming to fray at the edges, it would seem that we could do with a little more unity and inclusiveness. The question is whether people are actually interested in either. The distance between political ideologies is extreme and in many camps, unity is seen as a compromise that favors the evil of the other side and inclusiveness is pretty much the same as fraternizing with the enemy. The strength of the #Resist movement is an example of the challenges to finding or creating a global sense of unity around most any topic.

Fashion is not immune from politics and the question designers and labels face now is how much of their personal attitudes and feelings to allow into their work. Under previous circumstances, the conventional wisdom has been to keep the two separate. However, there are some notable exceptions to that rule, the most obvious probably being Dame Vivienne Westwood and her strong stand for environmental causes. Much of the rest of fashion, however, prefers to remain quiet.

#tiedtogether did get an important endorsement last night as all the models walking in the Tommy Hilfiger show on Venice Beach were wearing white bandanas imprinted with #tiedtogether on their wrists. Even the designer had one tied to his belt loop as he made the finale walk. If BoF can convince other designers to incorporate the concept into their shows in a similar fashion, the idea might have a chance of catching on, at least as an accessory idea.

Still, we’ve seen this type of movement before. Just because people wear a bandana, or a plastic bracelet with a certain inscription, or a given set of beads, doesn’t mean that they actually subscribe to the philosophy behind the symbol. Wearing every white bandana in the world has little effect if the people wearing them do not genuinely believe in unity and inclusiveness across the deep chasm of political divide. The white bandana risks becoming just another fashion trend with no real substance behind it.

What’s missing in this movement is an example, someone or something that demonstrates what unity and inclusiveness mean in the fashion world. If we’re talking racial inclusiveness, which has been a problem for fashion shows, then seeing more diversity on the runway would be a good start. If we’re talking about gender inclusiveness, then the trend toward mixed men’s and women’s show is a start, but seeing more transgender models on the runway would be a significant step forward. Size diversity has been a significant issue, but only a handful of designers have done anything on that front. There are options and those options have always been there. The industry has been frequently criticized for not embracing those options before now. Are we to expect that a white bandana can be the thing that makes a difference?

BoF is certainly trying hard to get as many designers, editors, models, and bloggers on board as possible. Just getting industry insiders to understand and sign on to the concept is a herculean effort. While we applaud BoF for taking the initiative in starting this campaign, however, we remain skeptical of any real change. We’ve seen other campaigns for inclusivism before and watched as major designers totally ignored them. We will be watching carefully to see if a white bandana can actually make a difference.

Fashion / Fashion Review

Ready For Fashion

February 8, 2017

What we’re expecting from upcoming fashion weeks

The Short Version

Disruption continues this season as some designers abandon New York and challenges to the traditional fashion shows increase. Our fashion week coverage for Pattern magazine begins tonight with the Tommy Hilfiger show on Venice Beach in California. We’re expecting a lot of changes in methodology but don’t know if those changes carry over to the styles themselves.

What’s Going On

New York Fashion Week officially starts tomorrow, Thursday, with Nicholas K at 10:00 AM. So, naturally, the first show we’re covering is tonight on Venice Beach. That makes sense, doesn’t it?

Yeah, I’m having some problem with the logistics myself. Doing NYFW in LA is definitely a continuation of the disruption that started last September. Tommy Hilfiger is taking the lead on Venice Beach, with yet another extravaganza likely to be even larger than the carnival on the boardwalk last season. He’s not the only one who is abandoning NY in search of a younger, possibly more hip audience. Rachel Comey and Rebecca Minkoff are also doing LA. We’re rather used to designers occasionally hopping to Paris or London for a season, but moving to LA is something new. This has a lot of people asking if New York is still the center of American fashion. For now, it is, but be sure that many questions will be asked about what might happen in the future.

There are some serious absences on the schedule this season. DKNY is out. Open Ceremony is out. Rodarte is moving to the couture schedule and no one is quite sure exactly what Tom Ford is doing—some kind of film. Oh, and did I mention the strange mashup between Oscar de la Renta and

Oh, and did I mention the strange mashup between Oscar de la Renta and Monse? This one is going to interesting to watch. Remember, Oscar de la Renta has a new creative team, Fernando Garcia and Laura Kim. Despite Carolina Herrera’s efforts to block Kim from working for the storied house, they are presenting their collection on time. Here’s the catch: Garcia and Lim also have a separate line, Monse, which they started a few years ago. Monse has a similar aesthetic to de la Renta, but doesn’t have the audience or market share. So, the creative team is combining the two shows. Confusing? Almost inevitably.

Then, there’s Raf Simons at Calvin Klein. All I can tell you is that they’ve moved up on the schedule to Friday morning. We’ve been trying to get in touch with their PR team but, as of this writing, haven’t had any luck doing so.

What’s happening in New York is spreading to the other cities: London, Milan, and Paris. There are new creative teams we’ve not seen before in addition to the usual spate of designers hopping houses. In fact, we’re expecting some interesting good-bye parties at Chloé and Givenchy with Claire Waight Keller and Ricardo Tisci both having announced they’re leaving but no word as to where they’re going.

Because there are so many questions and not a lot of answers, we’re changing the way we’re covering the shows. I’ll be doing fewer reviews than previous seasons—no 24-hour writing marathons. We will be trying to go into more detail on the collections we do cover. We’ve been actively trying to make contact with the labels so that we can provide a deeper level of information. We’ll also have more pictures and try to talk more about the clothes and accessories.

So, here we go with another season. As always, our reviews are exclusively on Pattern. We hope you’ll join us.

Current Issues / Long Read / News & Comment

Declaration of Resistance, Annotated

February 7, 2017

Preserving wise words before they magically disappear

A Little Background

I do not know Beau Willimon. I’ve never met the young man and, quite honestly, until last week didn’t know a thing about him. Yet, most of what you will find here, all the good parts, are his words, not mine.

If you know of Mr. Willimon, it is likely in connection with this little show he produced for Netflix called House of Cards. Given all the awards its won and the general acclaim for the series, one might assume that Mr. Willimon understands how Washington politics work.

What you might not know is that Mr. Willimon has hands-on experience in the political world, having worked on campaigns for Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, Hillary Clinton’s 2000 Senate campaign, and was press aide for Howard Dean’s 2004 presidential campaign. He’s done a bunch of other political stuff as well to give him a fairly substantial background in politics. Top that with his House of Cards experience and I think it’s reasonably safe to say his understanding of the political world is a bit more advanced than the average guy sitting at the bar.

So, when he decided last Friday, 3 February, to present the Internet with his Declaration of Resistance via Twitter, it carried a little more weight than the average entertainment industry celeb. However, Willimon is also a playwright and as such there are some subtleties and inferences built into his tweetstorm that may not be immediately obvious. Some of them may not need to be obvious for his meaning to be clear, but our opinion is that assurance is better than adding to the heaping mounds of confusion spread across the Internet. He bases his words largely upon the contents of the Declaration of Independence. Therefore, we’ve decided to annotate his entries both as a means of explaining what might not be immediately evident and confirm what might be inferred.

This also gives us a chance to more reliably preserve and index Willimon’s entries. If there is a downside to posting these things on Twitter, it is that they are quickly pushed down the list and more difficult to find with each passing day. Willimon uses Twitter a fair amount so even one day after they were posted we still had to do a great deal of scrolling to find them. This will, hopefully, provide a more consistent point of reference for more long-term use.

What Beau Said

These are the original tweets since from @BeauWillimon. Our additions are in red italics between tweets. Note: we do not control how Mr. Willimon’s tweets appear on this page.

1. DECLARATION OF RESISTANCE

When in the course of American history it becomes necessary for the people to save our Nation from a Tyrant,

— Beau Willimon (@BeauWillimon) February 3, 2017

If the opening sounds at least slightly familiar, that’s a good thing: it comes close to the opening paragraph of the Declaration of Independence, which I will refer to from here on out as “the Declaration.” He only modifies a portion of the first sentence, but the remainder is implied through the rest of the document. For those who slept through Civics class, please allow me to remind you of that first paragraph.

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

Now, see the connection between what the framers of the Declaration were saying and Mr. Willimon’s words? Consider the phrase “dissolve the political bands” extremely important from here on out.

2. To safeguard equality for all and their inalienable rights of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness from bigotry and corruption,

— Beau Willimon (@BeauWillimon) February 3, 2017

Another Declaration reference. The second paragraph of that document begins:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

The use of the word “men” in this context should be interpreted as representative of all humanity. While women had few legal rights at the time of the Declaration’s writing, the framers were not intentionally leaving them out. Rather, they were attempting to make the statement as inclusive as possible. Willimon nicely modernizes the sentence with the phrase “To safeguard equality for all.”

3. To ensure that our Government continues derive its power from the consent of the governed rather than by autocracy,

— Beau Willimon (@BeauWillimon) February 3, 2017

Breaking things down into smaller chunks, we hit a point of the preamble that some consider inflammatory. Those who would call themselves “patriots” have long used this portion of the Declaration to justify acts of violence against the government and/or its representatives. The Declaration reads:

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed

Arguably, in challenging the authority of the 45th president, Willimon claims that the person residing in the White House does not have sufficient consent of the government. His point is based on the fact that while some 63 million people did vote for the president, over 75 million voted directly against him and over 200 million others are not represented by either vote. Therefore, one might well argue that the president is far from having the consent of the governed and that his election is illegitimate.

4. That whenever any President becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to make such demands upon their Congress:

— Beau Willimon (@BeauWillimon) February 3, 2017

Willimon is being very careful with his words here. Using the phrase, “to make such demands upon their Congress” is a softer action than what is stated in the Declaration. I don’t blame him. To copy the words of the Declaration might be considered by some as an attempt to overthrow the government. Take a look at the original language:

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government

We have to understand the challenges that the founding fathers experienced in living under the auspices of Great Britain, which was in full-tilt empire-building mode at that particular moment. The intent was very clear: do the will of the people or the people will kick you out on your ass and do something different. Never would they have guessed that either the government or the nation would become as large and complicated as it is today. We can’t just march on Washington and institute a new government, no matter how attractive that might sound to some. Appealing to Congress to act on our behalf is a lot safer and doesn’t get one arrested as quickly.

5. Immediate impeachment of the President for crimes committed, or removal from office by way of the 25th Amendment to the Constitution.

— Beau Willimon (@BeauWillimon) February 3, 2017

Impeachment. There’s a word that politicians have been tripping over themselves to avoid. With the president’s administration only two weeks old, there are few members of Congress who have the intestinal fortitude to even think about drafting articles of impeachment at this point. While they might admit that the president is building such a case, few have dared to actually utter the word aloud in public. To engage in impeachment is to bring much of government to a grinding hault while the matter is addressed. This is not a matter to be entered into lightly or without sufficient preparation.

Willimon references the 25th amendment. Let me refresh your memory on that one.

The 25th amendment was ratified in 1967 and clarifies exactly what happens in the event that the president is no longer capable of fulfilling his oath of office. There are four sections to the amendment, the first two not applying to our current situation unless the president should happen to simply fall dead or become a victim of some violent action against his life. Section three has been used any time the president undergoes any type of treatment where he is under anesthesia, temporarily rendering him incapacitated. Section four is the kicker. It reads:

Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice-President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

Let’s be clear that this action would most likely occur only after articles of impeachment against the president had been passed by both bodies of Congress, or should the vice-president be able to convince enough members of the Cabinet to implore Congress with sufficient reasons for removing the president from power. Either path is extremely difficult given the partisan politics currently dominating the legislative bodies. This is a serious course of action with a distinct set of consequences.

6. Donald J. Trump has conducted injuries and usurpations, pursuing the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States.

— Beau Willimon (@BeauWillimon) February 3, 2017

Here is Willimon’s charge against the president: that the has “conducted injuries and usurpations, pursuing the establishment of an absolute Tyranny …” Reference again back to the preamble, pretty much picking up where he left off. The Declaration specifically states:

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Let me emphasize again that the framers were referring to the “abuses and usurpations” of Britain’s King George III. For our use here, Despotism and Tyranny are sufficiently close in meaning as to be interchangeable. In short, Willimon is saying that the current president is no better than mad King George III and should be deposed for exactly the same reasons.

7. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world–

— Beau Willimon (@BeauWillimon) February 3, 2017

This is a direct quote from the preamble. In the Constitution, it is followed by the charges of the colonies made against Britain’s king. This was not so much for the benefit of King George, but a justification for those who might choose with which side the might ally themselves.

In our particular case here, however, very specific charges are necessary not only so that one might recruit allies to the cause, but to justify taking any action in the first place. One does not simply call the president a tyrant without providing evidence of such. So, Willimon proceeds to make his case.

8. He has obstructed the Laws for Naturalization of Immigrants, and illegally banned refugees in need of safe haven.

— Beau Willimon (@BeauWillimon) February 3, 2017

As I am writing this, we are waiting for the 9th circuit court of appeals to make a full decision regarding the president’s ban on immigrants and refugees. The president’s executive order created a ban against people from seven predominantly Muslim countries from entering this US. While verbally asserting that this was not a ban against a specific religious group, it had the effect of such, likely making it a violation of the Constitution’s first amendment prohibiting any action against any religion. One can also reasonably argue that the ban failed to allow for due process. The end result has been chaos.

9. He has continued to violate federal court orders which require the temporary cessation of this ban, thereby violating his executive oath.

— Beau Willimon (@BeauWillimon) February 3, 2017

When a New York judge issued a temporary restraining order against deportations arising from the ordered travel ban, the president refused to acknowledge the action and instructed federal agencies to continue. This can be interpreted as a violation of the presidential oath, but actual charges against the president on this account could easily be challenged by Congress.

10. He has dismissed an Attorney General for fulfilling her oath to defend the Constitution, defying the autonomy of the Dept. of Justice.

— Beau Willimon (@BeauWillimon) February 3, 2017

For the sake of history, and anyone who might not have been paying attention, one should be aware that the president dismissed acting Attorney General Sally Yates for failing to defend the president’s travel ban. By definition, it is the job of the Attorney General and the US Department of Justice to defend the laws and interest of the federal government. However, Ms. Yates voiced concern that the order was possibly not legal and therefore should not be defended.

Willimon’s claim regarding the autonomy of the Department of Justice is shaky, however. The position of Attorney General, specifically, has been highly politicized since John F. Kennedy nominated his brother, Robert, to the post in 1961. There are no laws that specifically require or enforce the autonomy, though it is, in practice, an ethical goal.

11. He has purged the State Dept. of its highest level officials without any regard for a responsible continuity of State Affairs.

— Beau Willimon (@BeauWillimon) February 3, 2017

Here, Willimon is referring to actions taken on 26 January 2017. At first, it appeared as though the senior officials at the State Department had walked out of their own accord. Only later did it become known that they had, in fact, been dismissed by the president. This created a vacuum of knowledge and experience within the federal government regarding international relations. While the move is within the president’s prerogative, it came at a time when the action arguably left all US embassies and overseas personnel without a direct contact or person of authority at the State Department, creating an inherent security issue.

12. He has enlisted amateur ideologues – such as the white supremacist Stephen L. Bannon – to make national security decisions.

— Beau Willimon (@BeauWillimon) February 3, 2017

The reference here is regarding the placement of the president’s chief strategist (and campaign manager) Steve Bannon to the principals committee of the National Security Council. This committee ultimately makes direct recommendations to the president regarding matters of national security. Mr. Bannon’s previous statements present ideologies and philosophies consistent with those of a white supremacist, though Bannon denies the charge.

13. He has vowed to enact policy and legislation which clearly tread on the separation of church and state.

— Beau Willimon (@BeauWillimon) February 3, 2017

At a prayer breakfast on 2 February 2017, the president told a group of religious leaders that he would “get rid of and totally destroy the Johnson Amendment.” The Johnson Amendment was enacted in the 1950s to maintain the wall between church and state by prohibiting religious organizations from participating directly in political activities. The president enjoyed considerable support from Christian extremists during his presidential campaign. This move is seen as a way of undergirding that support. However, repealing the Johnson Amendment would require, at the very least, a two-thirds majority vote of both houses of Congress, something that is not generally considered likely to happen.

14. He has refused to remove or address conflicts of interest regarding both his own business and that of his cabinet and family.

— Beau Willimon (@BeauWillimon) February 3, 2017

Conflicts of interest have been a persistent issue against the president from the day he took office. Already, multiple lawsuits have been filed in federal court seeking to force the president to either divest himself of his business holdings or place them in a genuine blind trust. To date, the president has refused to do either. Instead, he handed off control of his business concerns to his two oldest sons while maintaining full ownership.

The effective law here is what is generally considered the emoluments clause of the Constitution. The clause in Article I, Section 9, of the Constitution says that, “no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or Foreign State.” Given that the president’s considerable business holdings are often utilized by other heads of state, many claim that to retain any interest at all in the properties or holdings would be in violation of the law.

We should note that the current lawsuits represent the first serious challenge to the Emoluments Clause in modern history.

15. He has hastily signed multiple Executive Orders without the advisement of Congress, policy experts, his cabinet or staff.

— Beau Willimon (@BeauWillimon) February 3, 2017

Willimon’s statement here is based primarily on anecdotal evidence. While that evidence appears likely to be valid, it lacks the weight of authority to have any genuine effect beyond the matter of public opinion. The argument speaks more to the character of the president and the possible presence of mental illness, specifically narcissistic personality disorder (DSM-5 301.81 (F60.81)). The presence of such a mental illness could provide justification for the invocation of the 25th amendment.

16. He has signed an Executive Order which knowingly deprives the sick of desperately needed healthcare with no concern for their lives.

— Beau Willimon (@BeauWillimon) February 3, 2017

Repealing the Affordable Care Act was one of the president’s primary campaign promises and one of the first executive orders signed once he was in office. If the repeal were to be immediate, ti would indeed leave many without healthcare. However, any change in the law requires action on the part of Congress where the momentum to make any change has waned under differences of opinion and public backlash. At the time of this writing, there is no way to determine whether the president’s order will have any long-term effect or not.

17. He has signed an Executive Order permitting a pipeline that tramples on Native American Rights and endangers safe water supply.

— Beau Willimon (@BeauWillimon) February 3, 2017

In two separate Executive Orders, the president pushed for reinstatement of the KeystoneXL pipeline and the Dakota Access Pipeline. The Keystone pipeline had been effectively halted by the previous administration while the Dakota Access project had been stalled due to high-profile protests. Both pipelines present significant environmental concerns, endanger nearby water supplies, and usurp the rights of indigenous North American tribes. While the president’s actions on the matter are not technically illegal, one can argue they are in violation of the public trust by putting drinking water at risk.

18. He has illegally threatened to cut off funding to Sanctuary Cities which have determined their values through self-governance.

— Beau Willimon (@BeauWillimon) February 3, 2017

Back in January, the president signed an Executive Order instructing federal agencies to identify funds that might be withheld from sanctuary cities. This presents problems on two fronts. Denying the funds would require an act of Congress and it’s difficult to imagine a member of Congress who would vote against their home state. Such an act would almost certainly come back to haunt them in 2018. Second, the very suggestion of the idea may exceed the limit of the president’s authority. The cities in question are already fighting back. Removing funding from these cities could dramatically hurt a lot of people, but the president seems to not care.

19. He has knowingly, repeatedly and egregiously misled the public, and directed his staff to do the same.

— Beau Willimon (@BeauWillimon) February 3, 2017

You’ve heard the phrase “alternative facts” by now, right? That would be a prime example of what Willimon addresses here. The number of misstatements and outright lies are too numerous to list. One would think that the White House would be embarrassed being caught in so many lies. Instead, they double down and assert their own version of reality. There are a lot of things the White House can get away with, but lying to the American public is not one of them. This issue alone is an impeachable offense.

20. He has strongly advocated for the silencing and suppression of a Free Press.

— Beau Willimon (@BeauWillimon) February 3, 2017

Again, there are multiple examples backing up Beau’s statement. The press is a protected entity under the first amendment. Any attempt to suppress or silence the press would violate the Constitution. The challenge is that the White House is using demeaning and distraction tactics in an attempt to undermine the credibility of the press. The latest salvo came on 5 February as the president claimed that any “negative” polls are a form of “fake news.” Shortly thereafter, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer attacked the satire of an NBC television show. While the tactics skirt the border of legality, any outright attempt to quieten the press would be an impeachable offense.

21. He has repeatedly and consistently shown contempt for people based race, ethnicity, gender, sexual identity and religion.

— Beau Willimon (@BeauWillimon) February 3, 2017

Much of the evidence behind this statement comes from the mountain of information in the president’s path. While he actively denies that he dislikes anyone when he is challenged, his actions and his history both point to an attitude of contempt for anyone not rich and white. This includes comments regarding inappropriate groping of women and demeaning people because of their ethnicity, including a federal judge. While this is not directly an impeachable offense, it does speak to his suitability for the office and could potentially be used in a 25th amendment argument for removal from office.

22. He has shown disdain and disregard for the judiciary, and the fundamental human rights that are the foundation of Justice.

— Beau Willimon (@BeauWillimon) February 3, 2017

Willimon is using nice words again here to convey what is a rather nasty characteristic of the president. Put more accurately, the president seems to have absolutely no concept of the system of checks and balances put in place by the country’s founders. The founders understood all too well the corruptive power of the office of President and put in place multiple safeguards to protect against the totalitarianism of a despot. This is where we get to test those safeguards placed in both the judiciary and legislative branches.

23. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

— Beau Willimon (@BeauWillimon) February 3, 2017

Once again, a direct quote from the Declaration. Of course, in its original context, the “Prince” was King George. The parallels between the behavior of the mad king and the 45th president are striking. Just as there were assertions made regarding the king’s mental state and his suitability for governing, so too have such concerns been raised in regards to the president. Both would seem to suffer from narcicisstic personality disorder, among other things. Of course, proving that assertion without clinical examination is impossible. Yet, given the accusations made above, it doesn’t seem improbable for Congress to demand such an examination.

24. We shall Resist until our Congress uses the mechanisms afforded to by the Constitution to remove this Tyrant from Power.

— Beau Willimon (@BeauWillimon) February 3, 2017

The most important thing Beau says here is the phrase “mechanisms afforded to by the Constitution.” During times like these, there will always be those who find in their cause a reason for violence. We saw those forced in action both at the inauguration day protest and more recently at the protest in Berkley. Chaos and anarchy is their goal. They do not represent thoughtful-minded people but are vigilantes bent on vengeance and a warped sense of justice. Any resistance to this president must first employ every available legal method available to it.

This is the precedent set forth in the Declaration. Look at it. The phrases “We have warned …,” “We have reminded …,” and “We have appealed …,” reference the attempts on the part of the colonists to resolve their grievances in an appropriate and legal manner. King George III and his parliament made the fateful decision to not only ignore the colonists, but to increase the unfair treatment directed toward them. Only when separation was the only choice remaining did the representatives pen the Declaration.

So, too, now it is necessary that we utilize every legal option available to its fullest extent as we resist the illegal dealings of this tyrant in the White House. We must implore Congress to act on our behalf as they have been elected to do and we must show patience in giving them an opportunity to act within the letter of the law. We fail just as surely if we allow ourselves to be taken by our own anarchy as we would if we did nothing.

25. And for the support of this Declaration we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our Honor.

Signed. The Resistance

— Beau Willimon (@BeauWillimon) February 3, 2017

This is an interesting though not inappropriate variation of the final line of the Declaration. The founders included the phrase, “with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence,” and also referred to their “Sacred” Honor. Too many have misinterpreted those inclusions, along with other deific references in the Declaration, as pointing toward a specific religious foundation in our country’s founding.

Those misinterpretations are grossly unfounded. Among the signers of that document were men of many various and contrasting belief systems., most notably Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Franklin, both of whom were deists. None of their belief systems, including those of the four active preachers on the list, would have remotely compared to anything seen in contemporary religion. They would not have held any book or writing as inerrant nor infallible and bristled at the thought of their religious beliefs dictating the functions of government.

The only common belief among them was that some power external to them must be guiding their direction. It was that unnamed power they refer to as divine and sacred.

Given the extremes of religious beliefs and behaviors in contemporary America, it is appropriate that those references be removed so as to not infer an association that does not exist. We are not bound by religious duty or obligation. Ours is a duty to one another as humans. Our morality is based on the greater good of humanity, not the confines and strictures of a specific dogma.We do better because we know better.

Equally important in this statement, and something the founding fathers knew well, is that unity within the cause and the mutual support of those who resist is critical. This president has already proven that he can create chaos and destruction faster than anyone we’ve ever encountered. Dissent and resistance against the broad array of offenses is going to be tiring and will not stop. His intention is to wear us down in hopes we will just give up and let him have his way.

We cannot afford to give up. We cannot afford to give in to weariness. To stop is to yield to tyranny, authoritarianism, and totalitarianism. We cannot let the banner be carried by a few while the rest sit in silence on the sidelines. The resistance must come from every state, from every city, in number incalculable. We must support and encourage each other, helping those most adversely affected by yet another madman attempting to ascent to a throne of his own construction. We must pledge to each other. Together.

Conclusions

I do not know Beau Willimon. I do not know his motivations, his plans, nor his favorite flavor of ice cream. As an artistic person who has achieved some success with his writings, I assume he has an underlying passion that pushes him into action. When he latches on to a concept or an idea, he follows it through with some level of excitement, I would guess. Based on what I’ve seen in his twitter feed the past few days, that seems to be evident. I would also guess that his carefully selected friends consider him a nice guy. Just guessing.

What I do know is that this statement of his is bold. He puts out into the public conversation a well-constructed argument and solid statement of intent. While he leaves the topics of methodology and implementation open for conversation, he has at least provided a framework around which those conversations can occur.

I don’t expect him to stand up and lead this fight. He might, but I don’t think it’s right to obligate him in that way. After all, it wasn’t Thomas Jefferson leading troops across the Potomac in the middle of that cold winter. Some stir the fires, others lead the charge.

Still, Mr. Willimon’s voice alone is not enough. The resistance needs voices in such volume as to create a shout that cannot be ignored. We need those willing and able to march as much as those willing to consistently hold members of Congress accountable for their actions. We need you.

Thank you, Beau Willimon, for igniting this conversation.

Now, let us carry it forward.

Current Issues / News & Comment

Thin Skinned

February 7, 2017

The White House can’t seem to handle criticism

The Short Version

Multiple incidents into this still-young administration demonstrate its inability to accept criticism without lashing back at its source, especially when that source is the news media. Yesterday alone, the president called any negative polls “fake news.” White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer lashed out at NBC’s Saturday Night Live depiction of him. The president also referred to a critical piece in Sunday’s New York Times regarding his personal habits as “total fiction.” Those statements follow a similar pattern the administration has used repeatedly of throwing a hissy fit every time they are criticized.

The Larger Picture

Every president has their critics, especially in the press. One can easily argue that it is the job of the press to keep the president and all other politicians honest by reporting their actions and words to the public. Criticism of president George W. Bush, for example, was unending during his second administration. Every gaffe, every misstatement, was reported and often made into headlines even when there was little supportive content. Even president Barak Obama, who enjoyed a much friendlier press, was swiftly challenged when his policies seemed flawed, especially regarding foreign wars and the ongoing detainment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay.

Each previous administration has had a habit of addressing those criticisms with a carefully crafted statement outlining the reasons for their actions and the steps they would take going forward. Rarely has any exchange between the White House and the press become adversarial outside the Nixon administration. However, the administration of the 45th president has, from its earliest moments, shown itself to be easily offended and more than willing to lash out at the press and anyone else who criticized or challenged the White House.

Right off the bat, the president’s staff, and later the president himself, made false and misleading statements regarding the size of the inauguration crowd. Despite obvious evidence to the contrary, the White House continues even now to defend its position of having the largest inauguration ever. The president was angry that anyone would even question his assertion. The next thing we know, the White House is labeling the press as “the opposition party.”

With each executive order signed, there has been criticism of the president’s action and with each criticism has come a defense that is short on facts and long on insults. Consider the president’s reaction last Friday (3 February) when a Seattle judge halted the travel ban that had been imposed a week earlier. The president immediately took to Twitter, insulting the judge and calling his decision “ridiculous.”

Then, yesterday (6 February), the president made the claim that the media under-reported terrorist attacks around the world. However, when pressed to provide evidence to back up his claim, the White House released a hastily compiled list that not only contained several well-publicized events but several misspellings as well. The president also responded to a Sunday New York Times article that claims he was not fully informed on some decisions by calling the article “a complete fiction.” The president also referred to polls that cast his actions in a negative light as “fake news.” Then, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer lashed out over a Saturday Night Live skit, calling actress Melissa McCarthy’s satirical impression of him “mean.”

Worth pointing out is the fact that such seemingly immature and childish behavior on the part of the president and his staff is characteristic of narcissistic personality disorder. DSM 5 diagnosis 301.81 includes among the symptoms of that disorder, “Resentment of others or a conviction that others are resentful of him or her.” The president’s actions regarding criticism and his relationship with the press are evidence of that symptom, along with others listed. That resentment displays in impetuous acts of defiance such as we’ve repeatedly seen from the president.

The president’s problem has not gone unnoticed. The Associated Press released an article this morning detailing the unusual level of criticism and protest the president has received, and his response to them. CBS news anchor Scott Pelly said the president is “divorced from reality.” CNN’s Jake Tapper, who has been a frequent critic of the president, also pointed out the problems with the president’s response to criticism. Even Britain’s speaker of Parliament lambasted the president yesterday and refused to allow him to address Parliament as other presidents have done.

With this administration still being so very young, one can hope that they will eventually learn the advantages of a more measured and disciplined response. We can hope, even if the current attitude is more like that of a four-year-old child tussling with its sibling.

News & Comment

Remember The Bowling Green Massacre

February 3, 2017

Don’t worry, it didn’t actually happen

The Short Version

White House counselor Kellyanne Conway was defending the president’s travel ban to MSNBC’s Chris Matthews Thursday evening when she referenced the Bowling Green Massacre as having been caused by two Iraqi refugees. The biggest problem with her statement? There never has been a Bowling Green Massacre and the Internet was swift to respond.

Let’s Go To The Video

We wouldn’t want our ridicule to be taken out of context

https://youtu.be/aBC5Qv2HR7E

Run That By Me Again?

Bowling Green Massacre. As in Bowling Green, Kentucky, the sleepy little home of Fruit of the Loom underwear, the National Corvette Museum, and Bowling Green University. The year she cites is 2011. She uses the word “massacre.”

If that’s leaving you scratching your head, it’s because no such thing ever happened. Even the folks in Bowling Green agree, nothing happened there in 2011. Nothing ever happens in Bowling Green. Conway, the mother of “alternative facts,” made the whole thing up.

Completely false.

No one is surprised, though. Apparently, this kind of misinformation is going to be a standard for this administration.

Where She Got Confused

What might have gotten mixed up in Ms. Conway’s addled brain is the fact that, in 2011, two Iraqi citizens who happened to be living in Bowling Green were arrested for attempting to send weapons and money to al-Qaeda for the purpose of killing US soldiers. That is confirmable and was widely reported at the time. The two were eventually sentenced. MohanadShareef Hammadi was sentenced to life in federal prison and Waad Ramadan Alwan was sentenced to 31-40 years.

Ms. Conway’s information is still wrong, though. The Obama administration did not stop or ban Iraqi resettlement. What actually happened, and this is confirmable in multiple federal records from the State Department and other agencies, is that thObama administration imposed more extensive background checks on Iraqi refugees resulting in a slowdown in visa approvals. That was it. No ban.

There was a drop in refugee arrivals from Iraq in 2011. The numbers look like this:

2010: 18,251
2011: 6,339
2012: 16,369

The rate of visa approval in 2011 was dramatically slowed under the new rules, creating a bottleneck of sorts in the system. However, there was NO BAN under the Obama administration during that time.

The Internet Responds

If there’s one thing the Internet is great at doing, it’s catching other people’s mistakes and holding them accountable. Twitter users were quick to step up to the plate and #BowlingGreenMassacre has been trending ever since. Here are some of our favorites:

WARNING ⚠️ Graphic re-enactment of the #BowlingGreenMassacre (with bunnies). pic.twitter.com/wbyvjeaDSW

— Portmanteau Jones (@SadlyCatless) February 3, 2017

On this day we remember the fallen from the #BowlingGreenMassacre. pic.twitter.com/4K7HlGSebu

— Eleven Warriors (@11W) February 3, 2017

More people were killed in the Bowling Green Massacre than are killed by immigrant jihadist terrorists each year. #BowlingGreenMassacre

— Impeach Donald Trump (@Impeach_D_Trump) February 3, 2017

Our thoughts and prayers go out to all those slain in the #BowlingGreenMassacre. Triceratops attacks have no place in civilized society.

— POTUS Fact Dept. (@POTUSFactDept) February 3, 2017

If it were not for Frederick Douglass’s brave contributions, even more lives would have been lost at #bowlinggreen #bowlinggreenmassacre

— Rocco Pendola (@rocco_pendola) February 3, 2017

They coped with the #AlternativeFacts really fast. Donate for the Victims of #BowlingGreenMassacre , now! https://t.co/c3x4xxULH4

— Rasmus Krempel (@rasmus_stuff) February 3, 2017

Live footage of the #BowlingGreenMassacre pic.twitter.com/EziRCNp8m6

— 7012 (@juvelenah) February 3, 2017

Now, with all that nonsense behind us, let’s be clear that such an obvious attempt at gaslighting by a senior White House official is absolutely unforgivable. Ms. Conway didn’t just “misspeak.” The press didn’t “misinterpret her words.” No, she lied. She made up shit that never happened and tried to pass it off as fact.

And while we’re at it, can we call MSNBC’s Chris Matthews on the carpet for letting get away with that ridiculous comment? C’mon, Chris, you knew damn good and well there was no Bowling Green Massacre, yet you just let it blow right past you as you went to the next question. Ya’ need to grow a pair if you’re going to interview anyone from this administration.

And that’s where we end this story. No one should be interviewing Ms. Conway and her “alternative facts” in the first place. She needs to be sidelined by the media and totally ignored. This story stands as a perfect example of why.

We don’t need four years of this nonsense.

pop culture / Social Commentary

James Baldwin

February 2, 2017

Why you need to see “I Am Not Your Negro.”

The short version

Raoul Peck’s stirring documentary about the late James Baldwin, I Am Not Your Negro, opens nationwide in theaters tomorrow. Every person in the United States needs to go see this movie. We need to understand. We need to know. This may very well be the most important film you see all year.

A little background

James Baldwin was a profound and sometimes incendiary writer, poet, and speaker. His words struck a nerve not only within the black community of the 1960s, but among white people who were afraid of the civil rights movement. Baldwin’s words were strong and resonant because they were accurate and true, whether anyone wanted to believe him or not.

Baldwin’s story comes to life in ways never before seen in Raoul Peck’s documentary, I Am Not Your Negro. Peck was given access to the FBI’s extensive file on Baldwin and using that information, along with miles of film footage that hasn’t been seen since the 60s, he brings Baldwin back to life juxtaposed against the Black Lives Matter movement and the groundswell of white nationalism currently taking place across the US.

Here’s the trailer for the movie:

Watch the trailer for James Baldwin’s #IAmNotYourNegro, the film critics are calling “essential viewing for all Americans.” In theaters 2/3. pic.twitter.com/fHETX60JPw

— I Am Not Your Negro (@IAmNotYourNegro) January 5, 2017

In light of the unforgivable gaffes the president made in yesterday’s statement on Black History Month (where he praised the work Frederick Douglass is doing) and his stated intention to declassify white supremacy groups as violent extremists, we need this movie now. I worry that far too many white people are going to dismiss it as “a black thing.” This is not “a black thing.” This is an us thing. You and me. Regardless of our skin color. This is about who we are and who we have always been as a nation.

Because I’m reasonably sure 98% of those reading this have never seen a James Baldwin poem, I’m giving you one now. It’s long. Read the whole thing. Consider what he’s saying. The words may have been written before some of you were born, but they are still just as applicable now as they were 50 years ago.

Staggerlee wonders

I always wonder
what they think the niggers are doing
while they, the pink and alabaster pragmatists,
are containing
Russia
and defining and re-defining and re-aligning
China,
nobly restraining themselves, meanwhile,
from blowing up that earth
which they have already
blasphemed into dung:
the gentle, wide-eyed, cheerful
ladies, and their men,
nostalgic for the noble cause of Vietnam,
nostalgic for noble causes,
aching, nobly, to wade through the blood of savages—
ah—!
Uncas shall never leave the reservation,
except to purchase whisky at the State Liquor Store.
The Panama Canal shall remain forever locked:
there is a way around every treaty.
We will turn the tides of the restless
Caribbean,
the sun will rise, and set
on our hotel balconies as we see fit.
The natives will have nothing to complain about,
indeed, they will begin to be grateful,
will be better off than ever before.
They will learn to defer gratification
and save up for things, like we do.

Oh, yes. They will.
We have only to make an offer
they cannot refuse.

This flag has been planted on the moon:
it will be interesting to see
what steps the moon will take to be revenged
for this quite breathtaking presumption.
This people
masturbate in winding sheets.
They have hacked their children to pieces.
They have never honoured a single treaty
made with anyone, anywhere.
The walls of their cities
are as foul as their children.
No wonder their children come at them with knives.
Mad Charlie man’s son was one of their children,
had got his shit together
by the time he left kindergarten,
and, as for Patty, heiress of all the ages,
she had the greatest vacation
of any heiress, anywhere:

Golly-gee, whillikens, Mom, real guns!
and they come with a real big, black funky stud, too:
oh, Ma! he’s making eyes at me!

Oh, noble Duke Wayne,
be careful in them happy hunting grounds.
They say the only good Indian
is a dead Indian,
by what I say is,
you can’t be too careful, you hear?
Oh, towering Ronnie Reagan,
wise and resigned lover of redwoods,
deeply beloved, winning man-child of the yearning Republic
from diaper to football field to Warner Brothers sound-stages,
be thou our grinning, gently phallic, Big Boy of all the ages!

Salt peanuts, salt peanuts,
for dear hearts and gentle people,
and cheerful, shining, simple Uncle Sam!

Nigger, read this and run!
Now, if you can’t read,
run anyhow!

From Manifest Destiny
(Cortez, and all his men
silent upon a peak in Darien)
to A Decent Interval,
and the chopper rises above Saigon,
abandoning the noble cause
and the people we have made ignoble
and whom we leave there, now, to die,
one moves, With All Deliberate Speed,
to the South China Sea, and beyond,
where millions of new niggers
await glad tidings!

No, said the Great Man’s Lady,
I’m against abortion,
I always feel that’s killing somebody.
Well, what about capital punishment?
I think the death penalty helps.

That’s right.
Up to our ass in niggers
on Death Row.

Oh, Susanna,
don’t you cry for me!

Well, I guess what the niggers
is supposed to be doing
is putting themselves in the path
of that old sweet chariot
and have it swing down and carry us home.

That would help, as they say,
and they got ways
of sort of nudging the chariot.
They still got influence
with Wind and Water,
though they in for some surprises
with Cloud and Fire.

My days are not their days.
My ways are not their ways.
I would not think of them,
one way or the other,
did not they so grotesquely
block the view
between me and my brother.

And, so, I always wonder:
can blindness be desired?
Then, what must the blinded eyes have seen
to wish to see no more!

For, I have seen,
in the eyes regarding me,
or regarding my brother,
have seen, deep in the farthest valley
of the eye, have seen
a flame leap up, then flicker and go out,
have seen a veil come down,
leaving myself, and the other,
alone in that cave
which every soul remembers, and
out of which, desperately afraid,
I turn, turn, stagger, stumble out,
into the healing air,
fall flat on the healing ground,
singing praises, counselling
my heart, my soul, to praise.

What is it that this people
cannot forget?

Surely, they cannot be deluded
as to imagine that their crimes
are original?

There is nothing in the least original
about the fiery tongs to the eyeballs,
the sex torn from the socket,
the infant ripped from the womb,
the brains dashed out against rock,
nothing original about Judas,
or Peter, or you or me: nothing:
we are liars and cowards all,
or nearly all, or nearly all the time:
for we also ride the lightning,
answer the thunder, penetrate whirlwinds,
curl up on the floor of the sun,
and pick our teeth with thunderbolts.

Then, perhaps they imagine
that their crimes are not crimes?

Perhaps.
Perhaps that is why they cannot repent,
why there is no possibility of repentance.
Manifest Destiny is a hymn to madness,
feeding on itself, ending
(when it ends) in madness:
the action is blindness and pain,
pain bringing a torpor so deep
that every act is willed,
is desperately forced,
is willed to be a blow:
the hand becomes a fist,
the prick becomes a club,
the womb a dangerous swamp,
the hope, and fear, of love
is acid in the marrow of the bone.
No, their fire is not quenched,
nor can be: the oil feeding the flames
being the unadmitted terror of the wrath of God.

Yes. But let us put it in another,
less theological way:
though theology has absolutely nothing to do
with what I am trying to say.
But the moment God is mentioned
theology is summoned
to buttress or demolish belief:
an exercise which renders belief irrelevant
and adds to the despair of Fifth Avenue
on any afternoon,
the people moving, homeless, through the city,
praying to find sanctuary before the sky
and the towers come tumbling down,
before the earth opens, as it does in Superman.
They know that no one will appear
to turn back time,
they know it, just as they know
that the earth has opened before
and will open again, just as they know
that their empire is falling, is doomed,
nothing can hold it up, nothing.
We are not talking about belief.

I wonder how they think
the niggers made, make it,
how come the niggers are still here.
But, then, again, I don’t think they dare
to think of that: no:
I’m fairly certain they don’t think of that at all.

Lord,
I with the alabaster lady of the house,
with Beulah.
Beulah about sixty, built in four-square,
biceps like Mohammed Ali,
she at the stove, fixing biscuits,
scrambling eggs and bacon, fixing coffee,
pouring juice, and the lady of the house,
she say, she don’t know how
she’d get along without Beulah
and Beulah just silently grunts,
I reckon you don’t,
and keeps on keeping on
and the lady of the house say
She’s just like one of the family,
and Beulah turns, gives me a look,
sucks her teeth and rolls her eyes
in the direction of the lady’s back, and
keeps on keeping on.

While they are containing
Russia
and entering onto the quicksand of
China
and patronizing
Africa,
and calculating
the Caribbean plunder, and
the South China Sea booty,
the niggers are aware that no one has discussed
anything at all with the niggers.

Well. Niggers don’t own nothing,
got no flag, even our names
are hand-me-downs
and you don’t change that
by calling yourself X:
sometimes that just makes it worse,
like obliterating the path that leads back
to whence you came, and
to where you can begin.
And, anyway, none of this changes the reality,
which is, for example, that I do not want my son
to die in Guantanamo,
or anywhere else, for that matter,
serving the Stars and Stripes.
(I’ve seen some stars.
I got some stripes.)

Neither (incidentally)
has anyone discussed the Bomb with the niggers:
the incoherent feeling is, the less
the nigger knows about the Bomb, the better:
the lady of the house
smiles nervously in your direction
as though she had just been overheard
discussing family, or sexual secrets,
and changes the subject to Education,
or Full Employment, or the Welfare rolls,
the smile saying, Don’t be dismayed.
We know how you feel. You can trust us.

Yeah. I would like to believe you.
But we are not talking about belief.

The sons of greed, the heirs of plunder,
are approaching the end of their journey:
it is amazing that they approach without wonder,
as though they have, themselves, become
that scorched and blasphemed earth,
the stricken buffalo, the slaughtered tribes,
the endless, virgin, bloodsoaked plain,
the famine, the silence, the children’s eyes,
murder masquerading as salvation, seducing
every democratic eye,
the mouths of truth and anguish choked with cotton,
rape delirious with the fragrance of magnolia,
the hacking of the fruit of their loins to pieces,
hey! the tar-baby sons and nephews, the high-yaller
nieces,
and Tom’s black prick hacked off
to rustle in crinoline,
to hang, heaviest of heirlooms,
between the pink and alabaster breasts
of the Great Man’s Lady,
or worked into the sash at the waist
of the high-yaller Creole bitch, or niece,
a chunk of shining brown-black satin,
staring, staring, like the single eye of God:

creation yearns to re-create a time
when we were able to recognize a crime.

Alas,
my stricken kinsmen,
the party is over:
there have never been any white people,
anywhere: the trick was accomplished with mirrors—
look: where is your image now?
where your inheritance,
on what rock stands this pride?

Oh,
I counsel you,
leave History alone.
She is exhausted,
sitting, staring into her dressing-room mirror,
and wondering what rabbit, now,
to pull out of what hat,
and seriously considering retirement,
even though she knows her public
dare not let her go.

She must change.
Yes. History must change.
A slow, syncopated
relentless music begins
suggesting her re-entry,
transformed, virginal as she was,
in the Beginning, untouched,
as the Word was spoken,
before the rape which debased her
to be the whore of multitudes, or,
as one might say, before she became the Star,
whose name, above our title,
carries the Show, making History the patsy,
responsible for every flubbed line,
every missed cue, responsible for the life
and death, of all bright illusions
and dark delusions,
Lord, History is weary
of her unspeakable liaison with Time,
for Time and History
have never seen eye to eye:
Time laughs at History
and time and time and time again
Time traps History in a lie.

But we always, somehow, managed
to roar History back onstage
to take another bow,
to justify, to sanctify
the journey until now.

Time warned us to ask for our money back,
and disagreed with History
as concerns colours white and black.
Not only do we come from further back,
but the light of the Sun
marries all colours as one.

Kinsmen,
I have seen you betray your Saviour
(it is you who call Him Saviour)
so many times, and
I have spoken to Him about you,
behind your back.
Quite a lot has been going on
behind your back, and,
if your phone has not yet been disconnected,
it will soon begin to ring:
informing you, for example, that a whole generation,
in Africa, is about to die,
and a new generation is about to rise,
and will not need your bribes,
or your persuasions, any more:
not your morality. No plundered gold—
Ah! Kinsmen, if I could make you see
the crime is not what you have done to me!
It is you who are blind,
you, bowed down with chains,
you, whose children mock you, and seek another
master,
you, who cannot look man or woman or child in the
eye,
whose sleep is blank with terror,
for whom love died long ago,
somewhere between the airport and the safe-deposit
box,
the buying and selling of rising or falling stocks,
you, who miss Zanzibar and Madagascar and Kilimanjaro
and lions and tigers and elephants and zebras
and flying fish and crocodiles and alligators and
leopards
and crashing waterfalls and endless rivers,
flowers fresher than Eden, silence sweeter than the
grace of God,
passion at every turning, throbbing in the bush,
thicker, oh, than honey in the hive,
dripping
dripping
opening, welcoming, aching from toe to bottom
to spine,
sweet heaven on the line
to last forever, yes,
but, now,
rejoicing ends, man, a price remains to pay,
your innocence costs too much
and we can’t carry you on our books
or our backs, any longer: baby,
find another Eden, another apple tree,
somewhere, if you can,
and find some other natives, somewhere else,
to listen to you bellow
till you come, just like a man,
but we don’t need you,
are sick of being a fantasy to feed you,
and of being the principal accomplice to your
crime:
for, it is your crime, now, the cross to which you
cling,
your Alpha and Omega for everything.

Well (others have told you)
your clown’s grown weary, the puppet master
is bored speechless with this monotonous disaster,
and is long gone, does not belong to you,
any more than my woman, or my child,
ever belonged to you.

During this long travail
our ancestors spoke to us, and we listened,
and we tried to make you hear life in our song
but now it matters not at all to me
whether you know what I am talking about—or not:
I know why we are not blinded
by your brightness, are able to see you,
who cannot see us. I know
why we are still here.

Godspeed.
The niggers are calculating,
from day to day, life everlasting,
and wish you well:
but decline to imitate the Son of the Morning,
and rule in Hell.

by James Baldwin

Current Issues / News & Comment

Inmate Resistance

February 2, 2017

Fear at core of Delaware prison rebellion

The Short Version

Inmates at the James T. Vaughn Correctional Center in Smyrna, Delaware triggered a statewide lockdown after they took four hostages and closed down a cell block in the state’s largest prison. Their reason for doing so? Deteriorating care and fear of changes under the presidential administration. Two hostages have been released as the standoff continues.

Update

6:13 PM EST (AP) State officials used a backhoe to smash through a barricade inmates had constructed from footlockers, ending the 20-hour-plus standoff. A male guard was found dead. A female counselor was released unharmed.

Inmates had used “homemade weapons” to overpower the staff and secure the hostages. The deceased hostage had been shoved into a closet initially and from there radioed other guards to warn them of a booby trap, potentially saving more lives. State officials have not yet revealed when or how the guard died.The other guards taken were severely beaten, but inmates protected the female counselor from harm during the ordeal.

Geoffrey Klopp, union president, blamed severe staff shortages for the guard’s death, saying that the situation would have been preventable had the facility been fully staffed.

Delaware’s Governor, John Carney, repeated his statement that those responsible would be dealt with appropriately.

9:05 AM EST: (AP) Officials announced in a statement Thursday morning that they had secured the building at the James T. Vaughn Correctional Center where the disturbance occurred. The prison is in Smyrna, about 15 miles north of the state capital of Dover. Officials say after authorities breached the building, one Department of Correction worker was found unresponsive and later pronounced dead.

Delaware Gov. John Carney said that the persons responsible will be held accountable and steps will be taken to ensure this doesn’t happen again.

8:54 AM EST: (AP) Delaware prison officials say one hostage is dead and a second is alert and talking after authorities entered a building at the state’s largest prison where inmates had taken staff members hostage.

What We Know So Far

This is still an active situation as of Thursday morning, so be aware that some of this information may change as the day goes on.

The call went out around 10:30 Wednesday morning from cell block C: “Officer in need of assistance.” Officers ran to help. They were immediately taken hostage. The standoff began.

James T. Vaughn Correctional Center in Smyrna, Delaware is that state’s largest prison. Cell block C houses over 100 inmates. According to Dover attorney Stephen Hampton, a civil rights attorney who has represented inmates from the prison, complaints about conditions including medical care and record keeping have increased over the past year. Additionally, pre-trial inmates held at the facility are routinely denied access to the library and other facilities to avoid mingling with regular inmates.

Inmates called The News Journal in Wilmington to explain themselves. Some of their concerns were not surprising: education for inmates, effective rehabilitation, and information regarding how money is allocated to the prison. Then came the surprise. Included in the reasons for their actions was, “[The president]. Everything that he did. All the things that he’s doing now. We know that the institution is going to change for the worse.”

Obviously, that last point makes negotiating a little difficult and may be the primary reason the standoff continued through the night.

Two of the hostages were released. One was taken to a nearby hospital with non-life threatening injuries. 27 inmates who apparently were not normally housed in the cell block and not part of the protest were also released.

Robert Coupe, the secretary of the Delaware Department of Safety and Homeland Security, said they had been in radio contact with the inmates and were continuing to try and peacefully resolve the matter as quickly as possible. He declined to comment on statements made to the newspaper, saying that those points of interest could be addressed once the current situation has ended.

Nationwide, those resisting the 45th president and his administration have taken to various forms of protest. However, the concerns raised by the inmates at the Smyrna prison are the first to be publicly voiced within that community. The president’s rhetoric has been taking a tough stand against crime and criminals, but prisons and their conditions are not topics that have yet been addressed by the administration.

Again, we must emphasize that this situation is still active and likely will change throughout the course of the day. As it does, we will provide updates at the top of the page.

Current Issues / News & Comment

Avoiding Old Age Problems

January 31, 2017

We all want to stay active and alert

The Short Version

As adults grow older, they face the risk of reduced mental acuity and even dementia. However, researched published Monday in the JAMA Neurology journal indicates that simple activities help avoid some of the worst aspects of mental deterioration without the use of expensive gadgets or treatment.

A Little More Detail

While I won’t speak for anyone else, my greatest fear of growing old stems from the possibility of losing my mental awareness to some form of dementia. My grandfather had Alzheimer’s and I remember far too well how devastating that was for everyone. I don’t want to put myself or my family in that situation. I don’t know anyone who wants their final days to be spent in such confusion.

Unfortunately, to date, many of the programs designed to ward off the mental health issues that accompany aging have been on the expensive side, some involving experimental appliances that insurance wouldn’t cover and medicines with some not-so-nice side effects. We haven’t had a lot of choices outside the woo-community’s herbal solutions, which are no solutions at all.

However, a study published Monday n the JAMA Neurology journal gives us some hope. Doing just normal things, the low-level type of activities that many of us are already doing, help to stave off some of the more devastating effects of dementia even past the age of 70, when those problems tend to start presenting themselves more heavily.

What kind of activities are we talking about here? Five areas were specifically studied: computer use; making crafts; playing games including chess or bridge; going to movies or other types of socializing, and reading books. 2,000 adults aged 70 to 93 without any memory problems participated. They were tested for the condition in mental exams at the beginning and every 15 months for about four years.

All of the activities listed worked in providing some level of protection except reading. Why not reading? Apparently, page turning doesn’t provide enough physical activity and promotes isolation. All the other studied areas provided 20-30 percent less likelihood of developing dementia.

What does that mean? Staying active, even if it seems minimal, is better than doing nothing at all. While they weren’t specifically studied, activities such as talking on the phone, going to church, or going shopping would likely have similar protections. The worst thing any of us can do is to stay in and let our brains melt. They need both physical and mental stimulation to survive.

We can’t keep ourselves from growing older, but we can slow down some of the effects.

PotD

Terror in Quebec City

January 30, 2017

Anger at Muslims flows across the border

The Short Version

Two men are in custody after a shooting at a Quebec City mosque that left at least six dead and eight injured. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was quick to denounce the murders and declare them an act of terrorism. The shooting occurred as many in the US were protesting a travel ban on Muslims from seven countries.

A Bit More Detail

Quebec City officials are not releasing a much detail after a shooting at the Quebec Islamic Cultural Centre that left at least six people dead and eight others injured. Approximately 50 worshippers had gathered for evening prayers when the two men began shooting, apparently at random. The dead range in age from 35 to 70.

No motive has been given for the attack as of this morning, but Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau didn’t hesitate to call it an act of terror. Trudeau said in a statement:

“We condemn this terrorist attack on Muslims in a center of worship and refuge. It is heart-wrenching to see such senseless violence. Diversity is our strength, and religious tolerance is a value that we, as Canadians, hold dear.

“Muslim-Canadians are an important part of our national fabric, and these senseless acts have no place in our communities, cities, and country.”

If such violence in Canada comes as a surprise to you, you’re not alone. Canada is generally open and accepting of immigrants and people of any faith. Just earlier this weekend, Trudeau said that Canada would accept those turned away by the US travel ban that caused considerable confusion and outrage over the weekend.

However, the French-speaking province of Quebec tends to be a bit more cantankerous on a number of issues, including immigration. Francois Deschamps, an organizer of a refugee support group in Quebec City, said he was saddened but not surprised by the attack. He says right-wing groups there are well organized, constantly posting leaflets and stickers across the city.

Still, the Associated Press says that Quebec City Mayor Regis Labeaume “appeared visibly shaken.” Labeaume said: “No person should have to pay with their life, for their race, their color, their sexual orientation or their religious beliefs.”

There will be solidarity rallies held across Quebec this evening and increased security at mosques across Canada as well as New York City.

Current Issues / Long Read / Photography

Extreme Vetting

January 28, 2017

What if photographers vetted models like the president proposes vetting immigrants?

Is this really necessary

The United States already has one of the most stringent and difficult vetting processes for people who are wanting to immigrate to our country. In some cases, depending on where one is from, it can take over three years for the vetting process to be completed. When the president signed orders yesterday that completely halts the flow of immigration he also ordered “extreme” vetting for those who still have a chance of getting in.

We disagree with the president and his policies on immigration. We not only find them unnecessary, we find them, in many cases, inhumane and possibly cruel. The new policies turn away refugees desperately in need of an escape from unfathomably cruel and hostile treatment in their own country. While there are millions of refugees worldwide, only a handful ask to come to the US. Even under existing law, a significant number are still turned away.

As Americans, we already have blood on our hands dating back to World War II. We repeatedly turned away and refused requests for asylum from jews who were under persecution from the Nazi regime. We even turned away Anne Frank’s family and well all know how horribly that turned out.

While we understand the need to keep our country safe and protect terrorists from gaining access and doing harm, we are largely certain that goal can be achieved while still addressing the humane need to provide a safe haven for refugees and other immigrants. Already, very few actual terrorists make it through our challenging system. It is far more likely that someone who is already here becomes radicalized after witnessing and/or experiencing the process through which we subject would-be immigrants. The president’s new policies are almost certainly going to result in a significant loss of life as refugees, once again, are turned away. Once again, their blood is on our hands.

So absurd it’s funny

To highlight the absurdity of extreme vetting, we wondered what it might be like if photographers subjected their models to the same level of intense questioning given to would-be immigrants. Certainly, there would be a lot fewer pictures being taken, and quite possibly the problem of people canceling for stupid reasons or just not showing up at all might be eliminated. We gave the matter considerable thought (we even slept on it) and imagine that the initial intake interview might look something like the following conversation. P is the photographer. M is the would-be model. Just for fun, let’s assume the photographer in this scenario is large, bald, sporting an unkempt goatee, and smelling of salami.

The model is ushered into a bare, dimly lit room that contains nothing more than a single gray metal table and two matching chairs. On the side of the table facing the door sits the photographer holding a manilla folder containing the girl’s model application. On one side of the table sits a half-full cup of coffee that has already left a couple of brown rings on the table. On the other side sits an unopened bottle of water.

Glancing up from the folder, the photographer begins:

P: Have a seat, Miss … ?

M: Hornswaggle. Periwinkle Hornswaggle.

P: (Scoffing) That’s quite a mouthful of a name you have there, Miss Hornswaggle. You don’t actually expect to make it as a model with a horrible name like that, do you?

M: Well, I don’t know, I hadn’t given it much tho…

P: You’ll have to change it, but we can talk about that later. You have a lot of other steps to complete before you’ll get to that little detail. A lot of steps. You may not make it. In fact, I have to say, the majority of young women I see in here don’t make it. They give up. They go home. They end up having babies and doing drugs. Are you sure you’re up to being a model?

M: I … I guess so …

P: You GUESS so? You mean you aren’t sure?

M: I mean, yes. Yes, sir. I’m definitely up to being a model. I’ve dreamed of this my entire …

P: Yeah, yeah, I’ve heard that before. Everyone has a dream. Only about one percent of those dreams ever come true, though. This is going to be a very challenging process. I hope you came prepared.

M: Well, I think so. I mean, yes, I’ve brought everything that is required, as well as some additional documentation and letters of reference that I hope will help.

P: That’s good. You’ll need all the positive references you can get. We don’t just let anyone model for us, you know. We can’t run any risks. We only accept those who are really committed to our work and to making our photographs great. The greatest, actually. The best in the whole world. Period.

M: I’m ready to do everything I possibly can. You know, I even …

P: Now, the first matter, Miss Hornswaggle, is are you sure that you are human?

M: Human?

P: Yes, Human. We need to be quite sure that we aren’t allowing any aliens in front of our camera. Bad things happen when aliens get in front of cameras. A light flashes and their little slitted eyes don’t know how to respond and we get pictures that look just absolutely horrid, not to mention the whole tentacle problem.

M: Tentacle problem?

P: Tentacle problem. Aliens have them, you know. Tentacles. Long. Slimy. Reaching for things. Just ruins the equipment. Absolutely ruins it.

M: Well, yes, I’m human.

P: Can you prove that assertion, Miss Hornswaggle?

M: Prove? I’m not sure I understand what you mean. You’re looking at me. Can’t you tell that I’m human?

p: Visual appearance isn’t enough. Those aliens are tricky, you know. Always disguising themselves. I had one a few years ago that disguised herself as a floor lamp. She was bright as hell, too., Very bright. The brightest. Then we took her to the studio and she showed her true form. Scary. Very scary. And sad.

M: What kind of proof would you like?

p: We’ll need to do blood test unless you have a certificate from your doctor confirming that you are human.

M: Uhm, well, I brought my medical records as you requested (she hands him an inch-thick file).

P: (leafing through the papers in the file) Okay, we’ll have to confirm all of these, of course, but they seem to be sufficient for now. Are you hiding anything?

M: Hiding anything?

P: Hiding anything. You know, like drugs, alcohol, weapons, bobby pins, alternate hair colors, wigs, alternate gender replacement pieces, toe rings, anything that might ruin a photograph.

M: How do bobby pins ruin a …

P: That’s not a detail we need to get into, young lady. Now, are you hiding anything or not?

M: No, I’m not hiding anything at all.

P: Are you sure?

M: Yes!

P: (leaning forward) Are you VERY sure? I can have someone do a body cavity search, you know.

M: Yes! I’m positive! I’m not hiding anything!

P: Fine then. If we find out later that you’re lying you’ll be tossed out of here on your butt. Do you understand?

M: (looking frightened) Y-y-y-yes, sir.

P: How many parents do you have?

M: Uhm, two?

P: You seem a little unsure about that.

M: No, I’m certain I only have two, my mom and my dad.

P: And they’re both still living?

M: Yes.

P: How’s their health? How old are they? Neither of them are about to die, are they?

M: (confused) Uh, no, they’re both fine and healthy. I mean, my dad still smokes some when he thinks mom’s not looking, but …

P: So, he has cancer.

M: No! At least, not that anyone knows.

P: He’s keeping his cancer a secret?

M: He doesn’t have cancer!

P: What about contagious disease? Does your dad have any contagious diseases?

M: No, neither of my parents are contagious.

P: Do you live with them?

M: Who? My parents?

P: No, a herd of elephants. Of course, your parents.

M: No, I have an apartment with my boyfriend.

P: Oh, you have an undeclared boyfriend? What manner of worthless bum is he?

M: He’s not undeclared. I put his information on the form they gave me outside. And he’s not a bum. He works construction with his dad.

P: Okay, so you’re mooching off his old man.

M: No! We both work and we pay our own bills. We’re not mooching off anyone.

P: (Scoffs) Right. Does this boyfriend of yours have his own car?

M: Yes, we each have our own car.

P: What piece of junk do you drive?

M: A three-year-old Ford Escort.

P: Three years old, huh? That’s just about the time things start breaking on a car. Do you make enough to cover the repairs?

M: (uncertain) I-I suppose. I keep my oil changed and my tires rotated. You know, all the routine maintenance.

P: Yes, but what happens if you go out and your battery is dead? Would you be stuck?

M: I have jumper cables.

P: Do you know how to use them without blowing something up?

M: Yes.

P: (snorts) Sure. That’d be a first. What about a cell phone. Do you have a cell phone that actually works?

M: Yes (pulls phone from purse). Right here.

P: Is your service all paid up and active?

M: Yes, always.

P: Do you always keep it fully charged?

M: I do my best. I carry a mobile charger with me just in case.

P: You don’t have any annoying ringtones on that thing, do you?

M: I guess that depends on what you mean by annoying. I have some that are music, but …

P: They’ll have to go. I can’t tolerate anything but the normal ringtones. And I’d better not catch you sending text messages, either. I hate those things. They’re nothing but distractions. If you’re going to be a model you’ll have to be totally focused on the photoshoot at all times. No distractions of any kind. How many grandparents did you say you have?

M: You hadn’t asked, but I have three left.

P: (stands up and leans over the table) Don’t you be giving me any sass, young lady! I’ll toss you out of here so fast your hair will braid itself. Do you understand?

M: (backing away) Y-y-yes, sir. I’m sorry. I didn’t mean any disrespect.

P: You need to watch that mouth of yours. (huffs, then sits down and picks up the folder again) Now, how many grandparents do you have living?

M: Three. My grandpa on my mother’s side died before I was born.

P: Are they in good health? None of them are about to die, are they?

M: Well, my one grandma, my mom’s mom, is in a nursing home. She’s 96, so …

P: She could croak at any minute. Got it. What about the other two?

M: Yeah, uhm … (feeling emotional) They live in Florida. We don’t see them often. I guess they’re doing okay.

P: Florida? How lame. That’s just sad. Very sad. I suppose you’ll be going down there when one of them kicks the bucket.

M: (choking back tears) Well, yeah. Wouldn’t you?

P: Of course not! Why would I go to your grandparent’s funeral? I don’t even know them. They probably smell of lotion and ointment, anyway. I can’t stand people who smell of lotion and ointment. By the way, who normally cuts your hair?

M: (caught off guard by the sudden change of topic) Uhm, Allison at Topix Salon. Why does that matter?

P: Are you giving me sass again, young lady?

M: (shuddering) I’m sorry, no. I apologize.

P: What about tattoos? Do you have any tattoos?

M: Just one. I have my brother’s initials on my wrist. He was killed in a car accident last year. (She extends her arm to show him the tattoo)

P: Initials, huh? Are you sure that’s not part of some gang sign or terrorist code?

M: What? No! DNH. Donahue Notwithstanding Hornswaggle.

P: God, your family has stupid names. Okay, I’m ready for you to take your clothes off.

M: Excuse me? I didn’t think that was part of …

P: Look, I’ve got to know exactly what we’re dealing with, here. I don’t know what kind of mess you might be hiding under the clothes. We’ve had people try to sneak all kinds of propaganda into their shots. They think I don’t notice, but there’s nothing that gets past me. Stretch marks, c-section scars, boob jobs, hidden tattoos, nipple piercings—there’s none of it getting past me.

M: I’m not sure I’m comfortable …

P: I really don’t give two shits about whether you’re comfortable. Just strip and let’s get it over with. You don’t have anything I haven’t seen before. Just get to it.

M: I didn’t think you were allowed to …

P: I’m allowed to do whatever the fuck I want, young lady, and if you really want to be a model you’d better take those clothes off right now. I’m not letting you get any further in this interview until I see you naked.

M: (standing up and gathering her things) I’m sorry, that’s just too much. I … I don’t think I want to be a model anymore. (she begins to move toward the door)

P: Hold it right there, you little brat. I didn’t give you permission to leave. You walk out that door and there’s absolutely no chance of you ever being a model. I’ll blackball your ass. Doesn’t matter if you come back ten years from now and talk to a different photographer. They won’t let you through. You leaving now just proves what a horrible person you are. I’ve had my suspicions about you from the moment you walked in here. You don’t have what it takes to be a model! You can’t handle being a model! No other photographer is going to take you, either. I’m the greatest photographer in this town. No one else is as great as I am. I am the greatest and I don’t let just anyone model for me. You leave now and you’re pathetic. Just absolutely pathetic. Sad, even. Very sad.

M: (leaving) Yeah, I think being a fashion editor is easier than this bullshit. (door shuts behind her)

P: (Pulls out phone and starts tweeting) “Just turned away another pathetic wanna-be model. Didn’t have what it takes. Sad. She should have attended my workshop. #ExtremeVetting #MakePhotographyGreatAgain”

Now, if extreme vetting seems stupid in that situation, imagine just how much more ridiculous it would be stretched out over years of investigation. This is not making America great again. This is a disaster.

#Resist

#StayAngry

#WriteYourCongressperson

Current Issues / Long Read / News & Comment / science

Going Rogue

January 28, 2017

Alt, Rogue, and Ungagged Twitter accounts may change more than social media

Side-stepping censorship

[dropcap]Amidst all the tension and worries regarding the actions of the 45th president this week, someone, somewhere, brilliantly side-stepped the new government’s apparent ban on climate science by creating an alternate Twitter account for Badlands National Park and tweeting climate facts. The tweets have since been removed, but the act of defiance struck a nerve and people allegedly, somehow, related to other government agencies started doing the same.[/dropcap]
Here are some samples:

“Censorship is telling a man he can’t have a steak just because a baby can’t chew it”
– Mark Twain#Resist #Science https://t.co/dyiTZAltlN

— NOT ALT WORLD (@NotAltWorld) January 28, 2017

A climate-literate person: understands the essential principles of Earth’s climate system, knows how to assess scientifically credible info

— Alt-Badlands NPS (@AltBadlandsNPS) January 27, 2017

97% of scientists agree climate change is real and that it’s caused by human activity. Denying science is no longer an option. #climatefacts

— AltEPA (@ActualEPAFacts) January 27, 2017

There was a time when US Government meteorologists were not allowed to say the word “tornado”. Thankfully, those days are over. #resist

— Alternative NOAA (@altNOAA) January 27, 2017

“It poses a dangerous question: What, when summer comes, are we going to do when forest fires inevitably happen?” https://t.co/ihwgkwNRpG

— AltUSForestService (@AltForestServ) January 27, 2017

Why science matters: The first images from the new weather satellite were released this week—and they are stunning. https://t.co/zr62UdxqJC pic.twitter.com/2jDzq9dmgK

— Rogue NASA (@RogueNASA) January 27, 2017

As of October 2015, the Earth had warmed by about 1.7 degrees Fahrenheit since 1880 #climatechange #ClimateChangeIsReal

— ALTUSNatParkSer (@ALTUSNatParkSer) January 27, 2017

Questioning what is or isn’t true online? Why not do some independent & scholarly research to find out? We like #ScienceFacts– not #AltFacts

— U.S. EPA – Ungagged (@ungaggedEPA) January 28, 2017

Nearly half of our bird species are severely threatened by #climatechange. https://t.co/O8CiR8eXhs #climatefacts pic.twitter.com/pNP3y5b6Ij

— AltEPA (@ActualEPAFacts) January 27, 2017

There may be more, and if so, please let me know, but these are the ones we’ve located so far. Follow them. All of them. This movement is pretty damn important.

Why the sudden resistance?

The new president doesn’t believe in climate change. Since the fateful day of his inauguration, a number of different memos and email have gone out to the heads of various federal agencies, specifically those who deal in some way with climate change, curtailing their publishing activities. Everyone from the Department of Agriculture to the Department of Health and Human Services was included.

Public furor immediately rose up and social media exploded over the censorship, especially that regarding science. What the new administration has yet to figure out is that they work in a glass bubble. They don’t get to do things in secret and sneak up on us. They don’t like that situation, which is one of the reasons they’ve taken to calling the press the opposition party. However, given that the uproar against those memos and emails was so severe, they backtracked quickly, at least on the public front.

Still, once their intentions were made public, people began to respond. We already knew we would have to fight this administration tooth and nail, every step of the way. The hashtag #Resist was already procured and ready to go; it’s even been hung on a large banner from a tall crane thanks to the folks at Greenpeace. Americans have never been too keen on government censorship and we’re certainly not going to start supporting it now.

No #AlternativeFacts here

As the number of alternative social media accounts continues to grow (we’re following @Alt_FAA, @Alt_DeptofEd, @ALT_USCIS [immigration], and @AltStateDpt), so does the battle against misinformation, or what the administration has referred to as #AlternativeFacts. Other people call them lies, which is more accurate but carries an inflammatory inference that seems to upset those who are part of the current regime. Real facts do exist and in the presence of a concerted effort to mute those facts, someone has to stand up and make sure they are sufficiently unmuzzled, even if doing so draws no small amount of criticism.

There is no question that the new White House wants to control all the information it has so that they are presenting a unified voice. They want to make sure that no matter which agency one contacts, no matter who one talks to on the phone or through email, the information all spews the same lies, recites the same canon, pours the same kool-aid. If they’re going to take over the nation, that has to happen. Official sources of information must all be consistent in the lies they are telling.

What the dear folks inhabiting the White House seem to have forgotten is that the press, and subsequently the free flow of factual information, is protected under the first amendment of the constitution. The administration can only control information up to a point. Our founding fathers were very suspicious of each other and especially of other governments. They had seen what corruption had done across Europe. Hell, they were rebelling against King George III, who is largely considered to have been completely insane (new details about him have just been released, by the way) and was known to have “secret” agents. They wanted to make sure that there was always someone, namely the press, watching every move the government made so that there could be no secret acts of treason undermining the country.

While the White House can try to manipulate the mainstream press and even intersperse false reporters from fake news sites among those sitting in the White House briefing room, it has absolute zero control over what is put on social media. In fact, as we’ve seen to sometimes disgusting proportions, no one really has much control over what is put on social media. For better or worse, it is an absolute bastion of free speech. While the president has used it to circumvent the press, the same tools can also be used to circumvent and repudiate the president and his staff.

We see in all these new rogue accounts exactly what should happen in a free and open society. Where one person tries to hide and quiet information they don’t like, someone else stands up and shouts it. The more the administration tries to put a stranglehold on science and studies that are in opposition to their agenda, the more those involved with those studies are likely to find ways to make sure that information finds its way to the public. We need these new social media accounts to maintain a balance in the flow of information.

There is a dark side

If there is a negative aspect to all these new #Alt accounts, it is the fact that they are, perhaps necessarily, anonymous. We can certainly understand why. While most claim to not be associated with the actual federal agencies, there’s every possibility that those claims are a smoke screen. At the most, we would be surprised if the sources are more than one step removed from someone who is employed by the federal government. Revealing the persons behind these accounts could subject them to danger and possibly even prosecution. The need to be anonymous is real.

However, with anonymity comes certain risks, especially considering the fact that social media is full of security holes. It is difficult to verify an anonymous account without giving away personal information that might be used against the originator of the account. We don’t really know who these people are, what their connection to the various agencies might be, or their ultimate intentions. For the moment, they all look good and are saying things that are verifiable, but what happens if that changes?

Forbes magazine has an article on this same topic that made for some very uncomfortable reading. They bring up things like how easy it might be for someone to attach a virus or piece of malware to an otherwise legitimate PDF document. The social media account links to the document and everyone who opens it is unknowingly infected. One of the fears we’ve seen this week is the possibility that client scientists might be forced to delete large amounts of information. Imagine the security risks if hackers were to get ahold of that information, which is certainly not out of the bounds of possibility, and presented it through an #Alt account. Very little effort would be required to turn those legitimate documents into a stream of digital infection.

The system is far from fool-proof.

Resistance is not futile

Still, these new accounts are present for good reason and are doing a good thing. Our government, every government, needs to be held accountable. Through all his business dealings, our president has never had anyone standing above him telling him “no, you can’t do that.” He is now in a system where checks and balances are written into the constitution. Those checks and balances are required of a democracy and without them, we slip all too easily into fascism or communism.

The threat to our country, our way of life, and even our very existence is real. Climate change is real. Science is real. Diseases that defy immunization are real. We have an urgent need to not only know about the world’s problems but what we can do to mitigate them. We need to understand that our carbon footprint is a very serious matter and that there are simple and practical things we can do to reduce our carbon emissions. We need to know how to eat more safely as some foods to which we’ve grown accustomed may no longer be safely edible. There are mountain ranges full of information we need and if we cannot rely on official government agencies to provide that information then we desperately need sources that fill that gap.

We must, on every level possible, #Resist. We must resist the misinformation and lies. We must resist the attempts at censorship. We must resist the attempts to hide, delete, and obfuscate information. Not only is this our country, this is our planet. We live here. We have an inalienable right to keep it inhabitable and no government has a right to stand in our way, no matter how they think they were elected.

#Resist

#Dissent

#BeActive

Current Issues / Fashion

Wet Seal Dries Up

January 27, 2017

Fashion retail takes another hit

The Short Version

Less than two weeks after American Apparel announced the closing of all its stores, teen-focused retailer Wet Seal announced yesterday that they are closing all 173 stores after failing to find an investor or alternative source of capital to continue funding operations. The closure marks another serious blow to traditional retail fashion as fast-fashion stores such as H&M and Forever21 continue to dominate the sector.

(more…)

Current Issues / News & Comment

The First Spill of 2017

January 27, 2017

charles i. letbetter - first oil spill of 2017

A massive diesel spill in Iowa highlights a problem

The Short Version

An estimated 138,000 gallons of diesel fuel sprung from a pipeline leak in rural Iowa that started Wednesday morning. The leak appears to have been fixed for now and cleanup is underway. While the leak is significant, it was stopped before it had a chance to enter any water source or a nearby wildlife refuge. However, this is not the first leak the managing company has had and highlights a need for greater inspection.

(more…)

Current Issues / News & Comment

Outta Time

January 27, 2017

The Doomsday Clock lost another 30 seconds

The Short Version

Utter and complete destruction is closer than it ever has been before, thanks to continued nuclear proliferation and governments refusal to adequately address global climate change. As a result, the scientists who regulate the Doomsday Clock have moved it to 2.5 minutes until midnight, the closest it has ever been in its 70-year history. Anyone with a lick of common sense should be frightened. Wise people are encouraged to lead humanity away from the brink.

(more…)

Current Issues / News & Comment

Insults Away

January 26, 2017

Insults Are Speech But Not Always Protected

The Short Version

Germany’s long-standing law against insulting leaders of foreign governments is going away after an unsettling row with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. At the same time, American actor Shia LaBeouf was arrested after a verbal altercation in front of an art museum in New York. The contrast between the two incidents demonstrates stark differences in attitudes between the two countries.

Say What?

Germany has long had a law that prohibits people from saying nasty things about foreign heads of state who are in Germany at the time of the insult. The German Criminal Code currently states:

“Whosoever insults a foreign head of state, or, with respect to his position, a member of a foreign government who is in Germany in his official capacity, or a head of a foreign diplomatic mission who is accredited in the Federal territory shall be liable to imprisonment not exceeding three years or a fine, in case of a slanderous insult to imprisonment from three months to five years.”

The law is part of old German code that has its roots in pre-World War II laws and revised to its current version after the war. It was recently brought into play as charges were filed against a German comedian, Jan Boehmermann. Boehmermann’s crime? He read a poem on television that insulted Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. “Insulted” is probably being a little too nice. The poem inferred a connection between the president and child porn and bestiality. I tried finding a reasonable translation and what I found was too disgusting to bother copying. Let’s just say that this poem, any way you look at it, was in very, very bad taste.

Naturally, the Turkish President was butt hurt. He called in the German ambassador. Charges were filed. Both nations got into a real tizzy about the whole thing. That was back in March-April of last year. However, the case was quietly dropped in October due to a lack of evidence. Boehmermann said that the poem was meant to show an example of the type of insult not allowed in Germany and that he never intended to insult the Turkish president directly.

German citizens, however, were deeply upset that charges had ever been filed in the first place, citing free speech. So, Justice Minister Heiko Mass said yesterday that the law is being scrapped, effective the first of next year.

Meanwhile, In The US

Actor Shia LaBeouf was arrested last night on charges of misdemeanor assault after he got in the face of a man reciting Nazi propaganda outside the New York City museum.

In case you’ve not been paying attention, the politically active LaBeouf set up a 24-hour live stream outside the museum on January 20, in conjunction with the inauguration of the 45th president. The stated purpose is for people to come up to the camera and repeat the words, “He will not divide us.”

Naturally, given all the free publicity the campaign has received, a lot of people with different messages have attempted to step in front of the camera and more than once dear Shia has gotten in their face. The Internet rather exploded on Monday with his verbal takedown of a white supremacist. When another such hate-filled speaker showed up in front of the camera yesterday, LaBeouf was again there to shout the person down. Only this time, according to the charges being filed, the actor pulled at the scarf of the man, scratching the man’s face in the process.

Wait, the scarf scratched the man’s face? What was that scarf made of, steel wool? Something doesn’t sound quite right here.

And yes, the Internet has taken note of the fact that a jew was arrested for taking down a Nazi. #FreeShia has been trending on Twitter all night.

The timing of the two incidents is interesting, though. We generally associate Nazis with Germany. Yet, in this case, it would appear that one has greater freedom of speech in Germany than one does in the United States. Something to think about.

Current Issues / News & Comment

A Flawed Democracy

January 26, 2017

The US is no longer a shining example of democracy

The Short Version

Don’t blame the 45th president for this one. A long-term distrust in government, political parties, and elected representatives were among the primary reasons for the United States being demoted to a “flawed democracy” in the latest report from the Economist Intelligence Unit. This change from being a “full democracy” would have happened even without last year’s election. We’ve done this to ourselves.

Wait, Who Are These Guys?

The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) is the research and analysis arm of The Economist Group. Founded in 1946, they provide long-term and far-reaching deep research and analysis used by governments and major corporations with an eye toward recognizing both risks and opportunities to business and economic growth. While their research necessarily involves political matters, their primary perspective is economic and is generally considered non-partisan.

How Are We Defining Democracy?

The EIU defines a “full democracy” as one “underpinned by a political culture conducive to the flourishing of democracy.” That means it has a lot of things that we’ve lost. Things such as respect for political freedoms and civil liberties, a diverse media that functions completely separate from government influence, a government that actually gets things done, an apolitical judiciary whose rulings are enforced, and adequate and effective checks and balances. Stop and think for a minute. We once had all that, but we’ve given it away.

A “flawed democracy,” on the other hand, just sort of go through the motions. They largely have free and fair elections, but may have some flaws here and there. There is a basic nod toward civil rights, but respect for government is low and participation in government is lacking. Again, try to take an objective look at what we’ve become. We fit this definition far too well.

What The Fuck Happened?

Our long-term distrust in government is largely what did us in. Looking at research going all the way back to the 1950s, things such as Vietnam War, the Watergate scandal, the Iraq War, the financial and housing crisis in 2008-2009, and government shutdowns have all contributed to how we feel about our government’s trustworthiness and ability to get things done. Our trust in government, according to data from Pew Research, is at the lowest point it has ever been.

Add to that the most severe income disparity of any developed nation. I mean, we’re not even close no matter how you slice it. Analysis from both Deutsch Bank and Goldman Sachs show just how incredibly wide the gap has become between the very rich and the very poor. As a country, we are failing at taking care of anyone except the super-elite. Frustration with this problem is largely the reason the 45th president was elected, but is unlikely to do anything to solve the base problem.

This results in a populism that is spreading across the globe. This quote from the report provides some important perspective:

“Populist parties and politicians are often not especially coherent and often do not have convincing answers to the problems they purport to address, but they nevertheless pose a challenge to the political mainstream because they are connecting with people who believe the established parties no longer speak for them.”

The EIU finds some encouragement in our low unemployment rate and some increase in basic wages. However, out attitudes toward civil rights and immigration and the president’s propensity to bypass the media continue to work against us.

We Are Not Alone

The United States wasn’t the only country to slip into the “flawed democracy” category. Japan, Italy, France, South Korea, Israel, Estonia, India, and Chile are right in there with us.

Yeah, we’re at the same level of democracy as Estonia. Stop and let that sink in for a minute.

The overall tone of the report is not especially encouraging. Concern is shown over what is seen as an exacerbated distrust in government as populist leaders prove unable to solve any of the problems that swept them into power.

You can download a copy of the full report here.

Current Issues / News & Comment

Mexico Says No

January 26, 2017

Not everyone wants the wall and no one wants to pay for it

Update

4:37 PM EST: Following the president’s remarks at the GOP retreat in Philadelphia, White House spokesman Sean Spicer said that the president would look to impose a 20% tax on all imports from Mexico in order to pay for the wall. Such a tax would require approval from Congress.

There is some consideration, however, as to whether such a tax would be effective in achieving its goal. Mexico’s primary export is manufactured products, which seems like a rather large category. However, a significant portion of those products are pieces used in the assembly of larger products, such as car parts and cell phone pieces. Direct imports to the US would result in higher prices to consumers and, most importantly, American businesses reliant on those parts. The increased cost would result in lower profits, inhibiting growth of American manufacturing.

The second largest export from Mexico is oil and oil products. Any tax here would require a separate act of Congress from the one taxing manufactured products. This would not only result in higher prices at gas pumps, but would significantly impact the profitability of American companies.

Finally, agricultural exports from Mexico are a critical area for US grocers as the demand for fresh fruit and vegetables year-round has become a dominant part of their business. Additional taxes on agricultural imports would significantly raise food prices and make some foods that are grown almost exclusively in Mexico unavailable to large parts of the US market.

There is almost no way to impose a tax on Mexican goods imported into the United States that doesn’t have the US taxpayer ultimately paying for that tax. The fact that the money might pass through the hands of the Mexican government somewhere along the way is irrelevant. We still end up paying for the wall out of our pocket.

12:00 PM EST: Mexico’s president, Enrique Pena Nieto has said he will not attend the working meeting scheduled for Washington next Tuesday. This seems to have come in response to a tweet from the US president that said, “If Mexico is unwilling to pay for the badly needed wall, then it would be better to cancel the upcoming meeting.”

Response across Mexico has been strong. “I think that, in general, diplomacy is not conducted via Twitter,” Finance Secretary Jose Antonio Meade told Radio Formula. Mexico’s best-known opposition politician, leftist Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, tweeted: “in the face of Trump’s latest outburst, don’t go to the meeting, and submit an urgent complaint to the U.N. for human rights violations.”

Both sides say that communication lines between the two countries are still open, but pressure is increasing on president Pena Nieto within Mexico to refuse any talks with the US until the wall is removed from the agenda.

The Short Version

Mexico’s president, Enrique Pena Nieto, said yesterday that Mexico will not pay for any form of a barrier along the US/Mexico border. This comes just hours after the US president signed orders to begin construction planning on the wall. Immigration and refugee activists have long decried the very idea of a wall and funding for the wall still faces strong opposition in the US Congress.

(more…)

Current Issues / News & Comment

Reasons To Protest

January 25, 2017

From pipelines to walls, the reasons to protest keep coming

The Short Version

Yesterday, the 45th president invited those behind the Keystone XL pipeline to resubmit a bid for the controversial construction blocked by the Obama administration. He then signed a directive for the US Army Corp of Engineers to expedite studies related to the Dakota Access Pipeline effectively stopped by protestors last year. Today, he will sign orders paving the way for the construction of a wall between the US and Mexico as well as limiting immigration from seven countries. Everywhere we look, the new administration is providing us ample reason to protest.

Down & Dirty Details

Remember all those protests that took place up in North Dakota last year? Thousands of people took part in a standoff between the Standing Rock Sioux tribe and the government over the Dakota Access Pipeline. While momentum was initially slow to build and media attention often waned, protestors stuck it out until President Obama intervened and instructed the US Army Corp of Engineers to consider alternative routes for the pipeline.

No one was dumb enough to think that the matter was settled, though. A new president had already been elected and had gone on record as favoring more domestic oil and gas drilling in addition to the construction of pipelines from the North. Any victory won back in December was only going to be temporary. Sure enough, the president signed a memo to the Secretary of the Army instructing the Corp of Engineers to:

… review and approve in an expedited manner, to the extent permitted by law and as warranted, and with such conditions as are necessary or appropriate, requests for approvals to construct and operate the DAPL …
… consider … whether to rescind or modify the memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works dated December 4, 2016
consider … prior reviews and determinations, including the Environmental Assessment issued in July of 2016 2 for the DAPL, as satisfying all applicable requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act
review and grant …requests for waivers of notice periods arising from or related to USACE real estate policies and regulations
issue … any approved easements or rights-of-way immediately after notice is provided to the Congress

The full text of the memo can be found here.

Again, no one is surprised; this is exactly what was expected from the new administration. However, the memo is like a wake-up alarm going off for all those who were unsure when their protests might be needed again.

Within the same document-signing session, the president also signed a document inviting the company behind the Keystone XL pipeline to resubmit a proposal. The Keystone XL project had been fully blocked by the Obama administration back in 2014. This move opens the door for the project to be reconsidered. The memo, which is largely full of legal jargon that comes with anything composed in Washington, not only invites TransCanada to resubmit their bid, but authorizes the Secretary of State to approve the bid and the US Army Corp of Engineers to facilitate the construction. The full text of the order can be found here.

Obviously, we’ve not yet seen the orders regarding immigration, but we do know some of the following matters are to be addressed in the signing at the Department of Homeland Security today.

An order to ban the entry of refugees into the United States, except for religious minorities escaping persecution, until more aggressive vetting is in place. This is intentionally directed at the number of Syrian refugees previously approved by the Obama administration.
An order to block visas being issued to anyone from Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen.
An order directing the construction of a border wall with Mexico.

While there is a reasonable chance not all the orders regarding border security and immigration will be ready for signing today, they are almost certainly to be signed at some point this week.

Why Protests Are Necessary

Every last one of these issues establishes an anti-humanitarian foundation for the entire administration. As pipelines have a proven propensity for leaking, they endanger the health and welfare of anyone who lives downstream. Immigration is a necessary humanitarian need for innocent people driven from countries at war as well as those simply looking for a better way of life. The president is so anti-humanitarian that he has even threatened to deny federal funding to the more than 200 Sanctuary Cities scattered across the US. [A current list of the Sanctuary Cities can be found here.]

This is a case of silence yielding consent. When the people of the United States do not speak up on a matter, when we stay in our comfortable chairs and warm houses and do absolutely nothing regarding an issue, Washington then proceeds to do whatever the hell they want. While protests are not always successful, they do at least remind members of Congress that they are answerable to their constituents in the next election. We can replace every last one of them if necessary.

While regular communication with your members of Congress is good, protests emphasize to them just how important an issue is to the American people. Sitting in Washington, D.C. day after day can be numbing. Members of Congress not only lose touch with their direct constiuents, they lose touch with the realities of the nation they represent. They need us to remind them that we’re not only paying attention, but that we actually care about specific issues.

Choose What You Can Do

I know not everyone can do every thing. No one can be at every march. Some of us can’t march at all. The number of issues we care about is larger than we have time to address. A friend posted a link to this article on Medium.com regarding how to #StayOutraged. There is a lot of good advice in that article. It’s going to be a long four years and issue fatigue is going to set in quickly.

Consider what you care about. Find an effective form of protest that works for you. Then, make your opinions known. Loudly. Forcefully.

Let us constantly remind this administration that they do not have a mandate. Despite what the president claims, they lost the popular vote soundly. There is no legitimate evidence of fraud. We need to prove just how strong we are in our opposition to his presidency and, especially, his policies.

Resist.

Dissent.

#StayOutraged

Previous‹ 1 234 5 6 7Next ›Last »

Page 3 of 14

black and white

We’ve been a bit busy

Share this:

Like this:

Pakistan makes Valentines Day illegal

The Short Version

A Little More Detail

Share this:

Like this:

Dam failure prompts crisis as 150,000 evacuate

The Short Version

A Little More Detail

Share this:

Like this:

The more we fight, the more we put at risk

I Am Somebody

A moment of perspective

Losing things

Remedies versus reality

Course correction

Maintaining identity

Share this:

Like this:

Aretha Franklin says she’s retiring after one last album

The Short Version

Some Background Info

So, She’s Going To Retire?

Share this:

Like this:

Fashion powerhouse LVMH is on the prowl

The Short Version

A Little More Detail

Share this:

Like this:

Retailers don’t care who Ivanka’s daddy is, they’re not carrying her junk.

The Short Version

A Little Background

What The President Said

The Fallout

Share this:

Like this:

A new movement is underway in the fashion industry

The Short Version

A Little More Detail

Share this:

Like this:

What we’re expecting from upcoming fashion weeks

The Short Version

What’s Going On

Share this:

Like this:

Preserving wise words before they magically disappear

A Little Background

What Beau Said

Conclusions

Share this:

Like this:

The White House can’t seem to handle criticism

The Short Version

The Larger Picture

Share this:

Like this:

Don’t worry, it didn’t actually happen

The Short Version

Let’s Go To The Video

Run That By Me Again?

Where She Got Confused

The Internet Responds

Share this:

Like this:

Why you need to see “I Am Not Your Negro.”

The short version

A little background

Staggerlee wonders

Share this:

Like this:

Fear at core of Delaware prison rebellion

The Short Version

Update

What We Know So Far