September 2010 Archives
![Tony-Curtis-in-Some-Like--006[1].jpg](http://www.insidesocal.com/friendlyfire/Tony-Curtis-in-Some-Like--006%5B1%5D.jpg)
Tony Curtis with Marilyn Monroe in "Some Like It Hot"
Tony Curtis, one of the last Hollywood legends, died last Wednesday at the age of 85 in Las Vegas. With him goes one of the last greats of the Hollywood era. It was an era of glamour and charm, of coiffed women in ball gowns with their leading men in tuxes. It is an era we will unfortunately never see again because it was before the days when people proudly tout their dysfunctions because they have neither pride nor shame.
Like many of the greats, Tony Curtis, aka Bernie Schwartz, the son of a tailor and Hungarian immigrants, had his demons. His were alcohol and drug addiction, his failed marriages, and his estrangement from his children, but in the end, he fought back and won. You have to envy a man who lived with a no-holds-barred attitude towards life, who lived according to his own precepts and principles and who brought so much joy and laughter to others, especially as "Josephene" in Billy Wilder's classic comedy, "Some Like It Hot" with Marilyn Monroe and Jack Lemmon.
His life was the punctuation mark at the end of a long, jazzy yet melodic sentence, the rose atop some thorns, and the amen at the end of a prayer. And he will be missed.
Watching political debates is one of my many guilty pleasures. They encapsulate much of what I love and hate about politics. They combine the subtle twists of a matador avoiding being impaled on the horns of a charging dilemma, with the frissons associated with bull fighting and all other blood sports. While we usually criticize political news coverage and analysis for being about the "horse race," I think that bull fighting is closer to the truth. The object of any debate is to avoid being impaled while dodging questions and then trying to set up the opponent for the swift kill.
Debates also are like beauty contests with ugly contestants. Instead of judging whom we fantasize about spending the night, we consider with whom we do not want to spend the next 2, 4 or 6 years--who we don't want in our livings rooms on TV. Thus, following a political debate the pundits judge the form and not the substance. How did they look? How comfortable did they seem? Did the stay on message? Did the score points?
As for any substantive issues, well forget about it. As the novelist and satirist Peter DeVries remarked in another context, these debates are "profound only on the surface, deep down," like many of the candidates themselves, "they are shallow."
The only part that is worse than the ducking, dodging and disingenuity of the candidates is the spinning of the partisan pundits. One must wonder if they actually believe any of their own spin? I hope not. I would rather believe them to be professional liars than actual morons. I think.
The media experts have taken most of the real fun and spontaneity out of these events. The candidates have perfected their artful dodges and answer only the questions they want to and ignore the substance of the actual queries. They have been trained to stick to the talking points and just repeat paragraphs from their well-honed and vacuous stump speeches. They have tested and planned how far they can go in responding to an opponent and what kinds of names and imprecations they can cast before transgressing some invisible line that would change the subject from their charges and make them about their judgment.
They walk a blurry line of trying to appear tough, yet sensitive, committed yet open, strong but not mean, knowledgeable but not a know it all. No, it isn't easy. But the challenges have caused them to eliminate anything real, true or important. There are seldom surprises. Jerry will attack Meg for not voting and being an inexperienced and rapacious CEO who is trying to buy the seat. Meg will attack Jerry for being a career politician without any real world experience and a record of abject failure. It is kind of funny since they represent the two most unpopular classes of this political season: Politicians and CEOs.
Their epic fight is shadowed by Carli and Barbara--and again it is a set piece struggle, with predictable charges, between a rapacious CEO who sent jobs overseas, and then bailed with a golden parachutes, versus a career politicians who raised taxes and hates capitalism and America.
So, after this week's round--or corrida--who won? Well, not the public. I guess the winner is observational bias. Whomever you rooted for won, while your opponent looked tired, frantic and lost.
These debates are neither real nor important, but they can be amusing and entertaining as we sit at the edge of our seats and wait for someone to be gored.
©2010 Jonathan Dobrer
www.Dobrer.com
P.T. Barnum would steal this one if he were still around. That's the claim that more blacks than ever now say they back the Tea Party. This bunkum comes courtesy of Pajama TV's tracking poll that purportedly found that more than one out of three African-Americans supports the Tea Party. And even more incredibly back the movement strongly. Even more incredibly still, the poll claims that almost forty percent privately say they like the Tea Party.
The poll can be hacked to pieces from just about any angle. It's too small. There were only 543 "likely voters" who are African-American in the poll. The methodology: What were they asked? How were they asked it? And who asked it? PJTV doesn't say. The bias, PJTV is a hard line right wing echo chamber. The pool of alleged respondents it chose to make the case that there are untold thousands of blacks that reject President Obama's policies and person is deeply suspect coming out the gate.
The poll is, of course, pure balderdash. No reputable political analyst or observer who's even a step removed from comatose would give any credence to it. In the November mid-terms, black voters will back Democrats by the same crushing margin they always have. And despite some private grousing that Obama hasn't said and done enough on black concerns, they will still back his reelection bid by off the chart margins. But that won't stop PJTV and the right wing attack dogs from using this rump poll as proof that there's a hidden army of disgruntled blacks who will bail from Obama the first chance and vote for a Tea Party candidate.
This type of raw, in your face, propaganda can't or shouldn't be cavalierly shrugged off. The Tea Party has been masterful at trotting out a few show piece, handpicked, blacks to rail against big government, taxes, the constitution, and immigrants. The near textbook example of Tea Party race manipulation came a few months back in the immediate aftermath of the NAACP challenge to the Tea Party to purge racists and racism from its ranks. Palin, Glenn Beck, and a bevy of Tea Party luminaries, loudly protested that the party is not racist, and to prove it shoved their same hired gun black faces in front of TV cameras, and microphones to counter the NAACP claim of racism. This charade is not new. In 2000, the nation watched a bevy of black gospel singers, Christian evangelicals, young professionals on the make, and the one or two black GOP elected officials on stage and in front row seats at the GOP national convention in Philadelphia ooze praise of Bush and the GOP. This template has been used repeatedly whenever the issue of GOP racism crops up. And that's often, since the GOP can be depended to oblige on that.
Don't be surprised then to see some black Tea Party hack wave the PJTV poll around on Fox News, some radio gab show, or at a staged rally to prove that legions of blacks are Tea Party converts in waiting. Pt Barnum would love this one.
Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. He hosts a nationally broadcast political affairs radio talk show on Pacifica and KTYM Radio Los Angeles.
Most of us know journalist Daniel Pearl's name because of how he died. He was executed by Al Qaeda in Pakistan while trying to get a story that would have given them a human voice. They chose inhumanity and ended the life of a passionate journalist, a gifted musician and a loving man.
Yes, you know his name because of how he died, but his true legacy is in how he lived. His legacy is thriving, fittingly near where he grew up in the San Fernando Valley, and is taking form at the Daniel Pearl Magnet High School. Here three hundred and fifteen students are learning not simply about journalism; they are learning and doing journalism. They are learning investigative journalism, straight reporting and opinion. They are learning to write, to think and to edit the news. They are learning to create stories for ink and paper, for the Internet and for webcasting. Their skills span journalism from yesterday to today and both point them towards tomorrow. But their curriculum is far wider than simply being a kind of journalistic trade school. They are challenged to be and become leaders and communicators whatever field they may ultimately choose. Ethics and judgment are an important focus of their education.
Not only is there a great spectrum of journalistic learning taking place, there is a much wider vision. This is a comprehensive magnate. They study math, history, English and science. They also play--music and sports. Their teachers are dedicated and seem to thrive in, what is for public education, an amazingly intimate environment.
Along with Daniel's parents, Dr. Judea and Ruth Pearl, I toured their new facility--actually a recycled and refurbished 1940s era military hospital with many courtyards and patios. I was impressed that Principal Janet Kiddoo knew the names of nearly everyone we saw in the halls and in the six classrooms we visited. With only 315 students, and room for 150 more, there is no place either to hide or to get lost. The full staff is there with and for the students. And what students! The spectrum of students is as wide as the subject matter. The classrooms look like America. The students are of all our ethnicities--and when they greeted each other at the start of the semester, they did so in 12 languages.
Their parents and grandparents came from all over the globe, and they come from all across Southern California: From Carson to Eagle Rock, from Down Town to the West Side. Some, it is rumored, come from the San Fernando Valley! Every class we visited reflected our rich diversity. The students in science reflected exactly the same spectrum of ethnicities as the Advanced Placement class.
There are students with physical, social and learning challenges ahead of them--but they have support. There are outstanding students who bring much to share with others. They too will be challenged. In this small school environment there is a visible degree of attention, community and dedication that is literally priceless. One teacher actually turned down a full-time position to be half time in this unique educational environment.
It looks good. It feels good. It sounds good. But does it work? Well, last year, their first graduating class graduated 65 students out of a class of 68. Compare this rate of 95.5% with the 53% rate for the district! Seven of their graduates were accepted at UCLA, with others going to UCSB, Irvine and Santa Cruz--as well as Pepperdine and Syracuse.
The Daniel Pearl High School Magnet is exemplified by last year's valedictorian, Patricia Equiza. Born in the Philippians, raised here in the Valley, she plays sports, loves to compete and writes with wit, clarity and passion. She is so attached to the school that she came in to help conduct our tour just as she is starting her college career at UCLA.
When I say that she is attached to the school, what I mean is not an abstraction. She loves the students with whom she spent three years. She clearly is close to Principal Kiddoo and the teachers--all of whom greeted her by name. She too knew the name of every student--save the new kid who just showed up that day. She knew his name by the time we left.
This school is formed around a vision that exemplifies the values of Daniel Pearl. Ultimately it is about teachers and students creating an environment of learning, respect for learning, respect for the truth, respect for each other and for themselves. Does it work? The smiles on the faces of the Pearls and the enthusiasm in the eyes of the students, brought tears to the eyes of this writer. Does it work? I wish my kids were younger and could attend. I can't wait for my 5 Valley grandchildren to be ready. I'll volunteer in their classes. But why wait? I'll volunteer now.
©2010 Jonathan Dobrer
www.Dobrer.com
Embattled mega church preacher Bishop Eddie Long came as close to confessing his sexual debauchery as any debaucher could come without actually confessing. He cryptically told his singing, shouting, handclapping flock that he wasn't a perfect man, and that he would face some painful situations. This was a good step forward for Long. He didn't do the usual soft shoe, duck and dodge around the issue. Or worse, defiantly claim that he was being persecuted for being a pure and righteous man of God. Or even worse still, break out in a teary eyed plea to family and flock for forgiveness.
These are the stock ploys that a bevy of celeb preachers, politicians and a Pope snatch at when caught with their sexual hypocrisy exposed. Long didn't go there. He simply spun his hypocrisy as that of a man engaged in a thoughtful and reflective soul search. Long now should take one more step in his soul search and apologize for his greatest sin. That's his near decade long, relentless, gay bash. Long didn't just do what many conservative fundamentalist black preachers do and quietly twist scripture and verse to make the case that God condemns gays to eternal hell and damnation. He actively led crusades against gay marriage, and by extension gays, railed against them on his websites, in fiery sermons, loudly backed George W. Bush's federal amendment banning gay marriage, and led a slanderous march to Martin Luther King, Jr.'s gravesite to denounce gay marriage. Each new accusation that Long used his youth training academy as a cover to procure kid sex, may ultimately prove him to be not just a hypocrite, but a full blown sexual predator.
Long then should issue a statement, better still do what he does best, and deliver a sermon on tolerance. That's tolerance toward all those who have a different sexual preference. He should invite the leaders of the nation's top gay rights organizations to take a front row seat at his church and look them square in the eye, as he preaches his sermon on tolerance. He should then make it plain to his mostly black congregation that he does not want them to mindlessly and blindly shout "Jesus Jesus" and "it's time to praise him," and sang hymns such as "white as snow" as they did when he made his kind of sort of admission of guilt from the pulpit. This reinforces the despicable notion that blacks are narrow, bigoted, and brain dead zombies who will give a pass to even the most blatant and outrageous criminal and sexual behavior and exploitation as long as it's done in the name of Jesus and the offender is black.
Afterwards, Long should announce in tandem with gay organization leaders that New Birth Missionary Baptist Church will set up a new academy dedicated to the principle and practice of tolerance. He took a light step in that direction some time back when at the prodding of Soulforce, a gay Christian advocacy group, he played at having a dialogue on his attitudes toward gays. That didn't go very far. This time it should.
Long set the standard of bigotry and bias for a new generation of conservative fundamentalist mega black churchmen on gay rights. An apology and outreach won't undo that. It can though be a step toward his personal repentance. God, I'm sure, would approve.
Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. He hosts a nationally broadcast political affairs radio talk show on Pacifica and KTYM Radio Los Angeles.
Follow Earl Ofari Hutchinson on Twitter: http://twitter.com/earlhutchinson
I'm not so worried about Christine O'Donnell dabbling in witchcraft on a date as a coed in the late 90's. She was young, she was naïve, and maybe the guy didn't have enough money for the average date of a movie and Chinese dinner.
Going on a date on the alter with some blood and chicken feathers and all, which she admitted to on Bill Maher's "Politically Incorrect" in 1999, was enough to nominate the younger O'Donnell for the "Bad Judgment Hall of Fame." It's her penchant for always telling the truth that should earn her a permanent place there.
The Republican nominee for the Delaware Senate made twenty appearances on Bill Maher's show "Politically Incorrect" in the late 90's. On one episode, Maher, who recently made an appearance "Hardball with Chris Matthews," recalled one episode of "Politically Correct" when O'Donnell said that her newfound brand of Christianity compelled her to always tell the truth no matter what. Her version of this is enough to make George Washington roll over in his grave.
According to Maher, Eddy Izzard said, "If Hitler was at the door, and you had Anne Frank hiding in the attic, you wouldn't lie?" "No, G-d would find a way," responded O'Donnell. The hairs on the back of my neck would have stood on end if I was her mother because that's worse than going on a date with a warlock; it's just plain dumb and dangerous.
I'm in favor of telling the truth, too because I have a conscious bigger than the Washington Monument, but there are some cases where a little lie is on order. And the Anne Frank there is one of them. The fact that the Senate hopeful felt otherwise makes me wonder whether some of those chicken feathers from way back when have been coursing through her brain.
Democrats are busy celebrating the divisive potential of the Tea Party. Republicans are whistling past the graveyard hoping that the far right won't present an unelectable slate. The two parties represent the common wisdom, and they are almost certainly wrong.
Both parties do understand that this is an election where the passion is on the negative. The people, from right to left and across the non-ideological middle, are sick of politics and politicians. There is a reason that the fastest growing movements in our country are not unified parties at all. One is the Independent, the "decline to state" people, who are hemorrhaging out of the traditional party system. Then there is the Tea Party that also is not a party but an association of grievances.
Most pundits put the Tea Party on the far right, but this is an incomplete understanding. These are the angry, the alienated who, in the words of the old Groucho song, are singing, "Whatever it is, I'm against it." They are drawing from the center and even from the populist left.
Rachel Maddow, usually an insightful observer, thought it unlikely that Christine O'Donnell would get votes from former Hillary supporters just because she is a woman. This is both naïve and un-historic. As counter-intuitive as it may seem, when Bobby Kennedy was assassinated, a significant number of his supporters went to arch segregationist George Wallace. Some of these former RFK supporters were drawn to Wallace's outsider, anti-establishment populism. This is also true for some Tea Party people.
In this anti-politics election, part of what is drawing Tea Party supporters is an image of authenticity. While I can't judge how authentic the authenticity is, it is attractive. Many folks across the spectrum are sick unto death of the political common wisdom that will say anything and do anything to win. They are scornful of candidates who campaign to the left in the Democratic primaries and to the right in the Republic primaries and then rush to the center once nominated and seem wholly without core principles when elected.
The attraction of the Tea Party, and once upon a time the Greens, and to some extent the Libertarians is that they are not about compromise and common wisdom. Winning is not as high a value as a kind of purity. Once upon a time we valued statements like, "I'd rather be right than be president." That was part of McCain's attraction to some when he said, "I'd rather lose an election than a war." Today there is some considerable nostalgia for a sense of integrity.
The first precept of politics has been for a very long time, "I can't do those good things I want to do if I'm not elected. Therefore I'll start compromising now. I'll sell myself piece by piece to my donors. I'll say what I have to say, but once I'm elected, I'll be good. I promise." We all know that once you have sold out it is hard to get your integrity back--particularly if you are already beholden to your money sources.
Yes, I know that politics is the art of compromise, but left, right and center must understand that this country has never been ideological. We have, however, been tired, cynical and rebellious. Today we should understand the fierce unrest at the core of the public's distrust and antipathy to politics as usual and the politicians who have perfected the common wisdom's path of disingenuousness. If Democrats want to win they need to be about more than winning. Opportunism is not selling well this political season.
©2010 Jonathan Dobrer
www.Dobrer.com
Oh, Christine. That was my first thought when television footage from 1999 of Christine O'Donnell, the Republican Senate candidate in Delaware, aired on "Real Time with Bill Maher." The video showed her explaining she "dabbled in witchcraft." If you haven't already seen it, check it out.
O'Donnell's gaffe reminds me of that girl. The girl in school who would share some unwanted, questionable piece of information in a group conversation, sending everyone into awkward silence until someone finally said, "Oh, Christine."
Rightfully so, O'Donnell's judgment is currently being questioned. People tend to get concerned when someone's past involves a date on a "satanic alter" - Satanic; Root word, Satan; AKA, scary dude.
In the aftermath of what was former vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin, the Tea Party has now delivered O'Donnell. With the party's contributions, she may very well win her seat with a disarming smile.
This video confirms O'Donnell as yet another dull candidate with little hold of her personal (unpaid taxes, home in foreclosure) or political (campaign fund shadiness) finances. I assume reason may be kind of an important characteristic for Senate members.
Oh, Christine. Let's see if you can salvage this one. Let's hope Bill Maher doesn't stick to his promise to continue airing video footage until you accept an invitation to his show.
I looked for coverage of the UCLA game in the three Sunday morning newspapers that I read in ink on paper. I didn't expect to find results and analysis in the New York Times. They, after all, have to be put to bed on East Coast time. I did expect the Los Angeles Times and our own Daily News to be able to stay up till a little after half past ten on a Saturday night. Hey, it's Saturday night! I was disappointed. Our own Daily News at least covered the first half, had pictures and intelligent reporting. The LA Times just kind of admitted that it was too late for them. Yawn.
The issue is not the UCLA game. This incident is only one example of the kind of decisions that are rapidly rendering ink on paper obsolete, not just to a new generation raised on the Net's expectation of instant information, but also deeply alienating to my generation--the last loyal purchasers of dead trees schlepped to driveways. It may be true that ink on paper has no long-term future, but neither does the short-term look good if your loyal customers are underserved and disappointed.
Yes, I know that printing presses have to be shared and that some printing plants have been shuttered. I know there are problems, but you cannot save a product by making it worse. Newspapers cannot compete on speed. Virtually no one who cares about an event--be it sports, entertainment or politics--depends of newspapers for the news. We know how the game turned out, the star's drug test came in and the election results. We grab the paper to understand the context, pick up the nuances and get intelligent and entertaining analyses.
Papers cannot be instant but they have to be timely. Going to bed before 11 on a Saturday evening wastes all the money saved by closing printing plants. What demographic reads the LA Times more than the West Side and the Valley?
The news judgment and economic judgment of our two dailies is utterly unacceptable to the loyal subscribers and self-destructive for the industry and shareholders.
©2010 Jonathan Dobrer
www.Dobrer.com
It's time to rethink Sarah Palin. From the moment that Republican presidential candidate John McCain plopped her on his ticket, the supreme article of political faith from all pundits, much of the press, most Democrats, and the GOP establishment has been that Sarah Palin is a laughingstock, a sideshow diversion, an ignoramus on the issues, a gossip and celebrity starved media creation, and, of course, a closet race tinged crowd baiter. The Palin allure is built squarely on elements of these features. But what's now painfully obvious, is the allure has turned Palin into a political force, threat, and danger.
The millions of Palin loathers gag at the thought of this. But her string of victories by candidates she endorsed in the primaries, and a flip-flop in some polls that now show more people than not say that she should run, and a more than a few say that she should win, have radically changed the game.
The tough to swallow truth is that she has greater national political name recognition than any other Republican and that includes her former ticket head, McCain. She energizes and rallies conservatives, and polls say more Americans self-identify themselves as conservatives than liberals, let alone progressives. Palin's motherly, family-values, fundamentalist pitch fascinates even those who personally detest her message. This includes much of the Palin obsessed media. Her political ineptness, naiveté smacks of a bumbling political innocence that far from being a liability endears her to throngs. This makes her the hot ticket item she is on the media and lecture circuit. It also now has more GOP candidates and some incumbents begging her and her Tea Party pals to troop through their neck of the woods and say a word of praise on their behalf.
GOP regulars and political pundits still shrug her off as a possible GOP presidential candidate in 2012. And she's still a favored running joke of late night comics. But this has endeared her to many as a scorned mother non-politician. That serves to keep her public stock and appeal high. The Christine O'Donnell and Joe Miller GOP senate primary victories in Delaware and Alaska sent her stock through the ceiling.
Palin exploits another feeling that GOP mainstream politicians have been inept, clumsy, or gun shy about exploiting. And that's race and Obama. During the campaign McCain wisely declared that off-limits. But Palin didn't. She quickly trotted out the GOP's old reliable playbook of racially tinged code words, phrases, and digs at Obama, "paling around with terrorists," and "This is not a man who sees America as you see America and as I see America." Far from turning voter's heads in disgust and revulsion at the word play, they got rousing cheers whenever she spewed them out on the campaign stump.
That sent the signal that there were millions of voters who would never accept an Obama presidency, no matter what he said, or did, and no matter how well he said or did it. They just simply could not stomach the idea of a black man in the White House, and they would go to any lengths to get him out of there. But to make the counter assault on Obama work, it would take a media savvy and manipulative, galvanizing figurehead to rev up the crowds, and a vehicle to organize them once they were revved up. Palin and the Tea Party were the manna from above to try and accomplish that. Even while the much of the press and the pundits continued to bash her harder than any GOP candidate since Hoover Herbert during the presidential campaign, the crowds that wildly cheered her didn't slack up one bit. And neither did the endless refrain from the Palin cheerleaders that she was one of us. And since winning elections is still as much about which candidate can win the hearts not the heads of the voters, Palin was clearly the one who could tug at the voter's heart strings.
The final vote result proved it. Despite the colossal baggage McCain and the GOP carried, and colossal advantages Obama and the Democrats had, the majority of white moderate and conservative voters, and a large segment of young whites and independents still voted for McCain. In the nearly two years since Obama's election, Palin has been the GOP stalking horse to stampede the herd of moderates and conservative independents even further away from Obama.
The Palin success in grabbing headlines, firing up anti-Obama mania, and snapping the heads of the GOP establishment to attention hasn't been lost on Palin. She's adroitly moved her game plan to the next level, and has extended the Olive Branch to the GOP mainstream with saccharine public appeals for the party to make peace and target Democrats for the boot in November. Her party unit pitch is aimed at doing one thing, and that's to bring her in from the fringe cold and establish her as a worthy, even credible, presidential candidate in 2012. So far she's done everything else right, and there's no reason to think that she won't make some headway on this either. This horrific possibility is more than enough cause to rethink Palin.
Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. He hosts a nationally broadcast political affairs radio talk show on Pacifica and KTYM Radio Los Angeles.
Follow Earl Ofari Hutchinson on Twitter: http://twitter.com/earlhutchinson
The National Bureau of Economic Research recently released a study, "The Importance of Being an Optimist: Evidence from Labor Markets," proving that optimists, in comparison to pessimists, have a considerably superior job hunt result.
Researchers focused on dispositional optimists - defined as people with a personality trait allowing them to believe, rightly or wrongly, that generally good things happen to them more often than not. According to the study, those with the trait put less effort toward their job search and spend less time searching as positions are offered to them faster than pessimists.
My thoughts? One big eye-roll.
The current unemployment rate in Los Angeles County is over 13 percent. So, I'm to believe that a peppy, cheerful attitude on the part of those fortunate enough to find employment helped them land that job? I think not.
The idea that someone is hardcoded to think, "Hey, everything is going to be eh-OK," doesn't ring true. Optimism comes from someone being aware they have an incredible support system. I'm sure the majority of the MBA students (the study's sample group) who were classified as optimistic, regardless of social or economic status, had a support system that assured their success. A person is prone to optimism during a job search if they know people with contacts in the market, stellar advice and supportive words or can provide financial support in the interim period before landing a position.
When those comforts are extracted, a less resilient individual who finds it hard to cope is discovered. Simply, without support - that fluffy pillow to land on when setbacks occur - a pessimist emerges.
It is mentioned that there are other factors explaining an optimists' job hunt success that are not touched on in the study. Um, understatement?
Quite frankly, these findings are ridiculous. And if I'm considered a pessimist for feeling that way, I don't give a damn.
I don't like the burqa. While some argue that it protects women from harassment, it can be a way of isolating and disempowering them. But there is much I don't like in the religious, tribal, ethnic and national traditions of every society. I'm not crazy about the biblical passage that creates Eve to be under Adam's foot. I object to Paul's exhortation to keep women silent in church. Sati, the Hindu tradition of a widow being thrown on her husband's funeral pyre is, uh, problematic. But of the aforementioned customs and traditions, sati is the only one that to me reaches the level of needing governmental legislation.
The French have passed an act that would ban a face-covering in public. Now they do not name Muslims but ban all such coverings in secular language. Their motives are as transparent as a veil is not. They argue that this is about the dignity of women. While I agree with their perception and intent, this is unworkable and inappropriate.
If the argument were security, then Yes. People have to be willing to be stopped and identified in this age of terror. Religious modesty cannot provide the means of delivering bombs to public places. But dignity legislated by the government? This is truly a slippery slope.
Will they next outlaw Orthodox Jewish women from wearing wigs and keeping their hair (if any) covered in public? Will Jewish Orthodox women be made tear down the mechtizah, the barrier separating men and women during services in the name of equal rights? Will male circumcision be banned as inhumane? Even now, Sweden is working on this--conflating female genital mutilation with male circumcision. They have already banned Kosher slaughter on humane grounds and all kosher meat in Sweden is imported.
The veil is not Quranic. The Quran,the Torah and the Paul's Epistles, demand only modesty. Then a bunch of men get together and define it. Do I like it? No. But is it the government's job to outlaw religious customs? Sometimes the answer is yes, such as female genital mutilation and sati--but veils, wigs, male circumcision and Kosher or Hallal? No.
©2010 Jonathan Dobrer
www.Dobrer.com
Viva la France. Aside from eating French crepes, drinking French wine and engaging in haute couture, they recently began putting a finger on their French Muslim problem. I have nothing against decent, law-abiding Muslims. It's just the rock throwing, bomb-carrying-anti-anything-that-is-not-them element that are the pain, and it is those who watch them in silence that are the other pains.
France, and the many other countries have been having trouble with them, have been treated like lotto winners in a five-star hotel. Yet they have returned the favor either by burning cars or blowing things and people up. Let's face it. It's not the way to ingratiate oneself to the natives.
So being sick of the problem and the smell of burning rubber, the French finally hunkered down and created a law prohibiting women from covering their faces in public. Although no religious group is named, people know who it is aimed towards, and even more so, the unruly masses begged for it.
Granted that only about 2,000 women out of the six million Muslim women residing there wear burqas, it at least makes a statement. At its most elementary level, it's a safety issue because suicide bombers used to hide explosives under them as they strolled the streets and marketplaces during our war in Iraq. And if it happened then, it could happen again. Other than that, the French are using this as a starting point to say that they have had enough of the hooligans that they have welcomed to their country and have fed, clothed and placated as they watched France and the rest of the free world turn into a battle ground. And they are one of the few European countries brave enough to take a stand. But it is going to be a long legal battle and a long, hard road given how their Muslim population has expressed their sentiments in the past. In the end, merci to France and bon chance.
I'd like to weigh in on the parking meter debate especially now that I am a long recovered meter violator. Within my first few weeks of coming out here long before Rodney King's name became a household word and the infamous Northridge Earthquake, I racked up $500.00 in meter fines. Once I parked my compact car in the middle of one of those things. Then I got a ticket by not pulling up enough proving once again that there is no pleasing certain people, especially meter maids. In fact, I've heard that they have to take a special test for anal-retentiveness, overall misery and other misanthropic qualities.
The city should hire someone with my cheerful disposition to do the job. Judging by how people parked their cars, with their tires pointing willy nilly, this way and that towards the curb, I would try and surmise what kind of a day each person was having and leave a note on their car urging them to cheer up, to do better next time or not to be so cheap.
Fie on anyone who says that the parking meter is a great moneymaker. The way money is being spent in this city and state, the average person would think that a funnel with the money from meters and such coming in at the top end leading into certain people's lined pockets was our method of accounting.
Fie on that one as well. The best thing to do is to do away with them whole lot. Ban them all. Have a Farenheit 451 scrap metal meter burning party. Turn the things into scrap metal and use them for plumbing in houses in less affluent neighborhoods. Use the malfunctioning ones with holes in them in the meter maids houses. Send the ones who fulfill their quotas overseas to fight our wars. Give them a constrictive outlet for their frustrations. Only do away with that job and those contraptions.
We should follow Florida's lead, though. They painted their parking meters in cheerful yellow with flowers on them with the words "Help the Homeless" painted on each one. The money isn't going to be given to them directly, but rather will be used for programs to help the ones who want to help themselves.
This just may make the city a kinder, more livable place where we could all just get along.
As a child of the 60s, when I'm outraged by injustice and even mild unfairness, I do not write odes. Ashley is just a better and more balanced person that I. When I get mad, I seek a remedy. Our unfair city is now demanding that even if we have lost money in a parking meter, we have to move and try another one, or get a ticket. This shows us all that our government is not here to serve the public but to service us--and not in a good way. When the city offers something (a parking place), takes our money and then doesn't provide what we paid for and then wants to fine us, this is fraud squared.
The idea that having been defrauded out of a parking space we spent money to rent, the city puts the burden on us to continue searching and continue feeding the beast, is not simply unfair but I promise will get litigated. It is further proof, if proof be necessary, that our city services are not about services but revenue. Our police and parking enforcement personnel are far too busy making money and not protecting the public or ensuring the fair circulation of parking spaces.
As our city's debt gets worse, the city, given this horrible precedent, is apt to stop repairing meters and letting more meters stay in failed mode. After all, people who park at bad meters and are ticketed will be much better revenue sources than those who pay.
Most of the new traffic infractions have fines raised to a degree that many citizens just can't pay. The purpose of traffic and parking fines has shifted from deterrence to revenue production.
Please, Dear Public, do not write odes, write your council member, your state senator and assembly representative. Make noise. Protest. This is, what Rudi Giuliani (not usually one of my heroes lately) called a quality of life crime. Like broken windows and graffiti, it is just one more little thing that alienates us from our government and is toxic to the social contract. It must not be allowed to stand!
©2010 Jonathan Dobrer
www.Dobrer.com
Parking at a failed meter is no longer an option. A few days ago, the Los Angeles Department of Transportation began placing stickers warning drivers that they must pay, in one form or another, to park. The old coin meters are being phased out, meaning there is less than a one percent chance you'll come in contact with a coin and card meter that won't accept payment in at least one form (credit, debit or cash).
The new meters will save the city money, but I can't help but be sad to lose one of the few moments I get to feel as if I'm teaching the city a lesson. If you don't keep the meters working, I park for free.
With that said, it's time for me to say goodbye.
An ode to failed parking meters
You served me and my friends well during our adventures out of the San Fernando Valley.
The many times we leisurely ate at a restaurant in Hollywood one could never tally.
To the many UCLA students who braved the Westwood streets looking for a space,
Their day was made better when like the golden ticket, they found you.
It was fate.
Yes, you may have been vandalized by those who wanted to make luck where it didn't exist.
For upstanding citizens, you made the sun shine brighter on a trip to Santa Monica and more.
A long list.
Most importantly, the coin and card parking meters have nothing on you.
I'll never forget the sweet music the unused coins made in my wallet.
Sadly, future generations will only know of the new.
I spill a strong spirit in your memory.
Hi Ashley. Interesting article. However, I'm going to offer not so much advice as perspective across the generation gap. In the bible Ecclesiastes observes that there is nothing new under the sun. Across the ages each generation has believed it has invented reality. Though I'm not technically a Boomer--I missed the cut-off, January 1945, by 3 months--still, I am a child of the 60s. That's my generation. So I know that we invented drugs, sex and rock and roll. This, of course ignores the obvious sex question of how our parents and grand parents got here. It also ignores ancient art and the depictions of sex acts that we believed we had patented. How embarrassing to see them in Hindu as well as Roman art. As for drugs. Well, the ancients had opium and hashish. The 19th century gave up cocaine and then heroin to cure opium addiction. And everyone had alcohol. Our Native Americans had peyote and their southern neighbors magic mushrooms and coca. Tragically, my generation didn't even invent rock and roll. Arguably that began in the African American community in the 40s.
Logically, there is little reason to be surprised at the Millennial's view that they have invented brand new ways of communicating and seeking advice, support and wisdom through Face Book, Twitter and all the other social networks. The technology may be different, the speed enhanced and the distribution wider, but the form remains the same.
Of course relying on a group for advice has its own perils. The wisdom of the group may be like the accuracy of Wikipedia i.e. Pretty good much of the time but way off sometimes when it really counts. Group sourcing either information or wisdom is predicated on the "law of large numbers," which holds that any individual may be an ill-informed moron, but pile them up in large enough numbers and somehow wisdom will emerge. It is a kind of populism that discounts specialists and experts. And while, yes, experts too can be terribly wrong, my experience with the Internet does not encourage me to give equal weight to individuals or a mass of humanity whom I have not vetted.
Now, the careful reader will have observed that my criticism of group sourcing should also logically apply to democracy itself. And it does.
Isn't democracy also really based on the law of large numbers and the faith that while individual voters might be prejudiced, ill-informed and ignorant that when they come together and become the "People" they magically have some kind of cumulative wisdom? Well, yes. That is the underlying assumption and our communal faith. And quite a few elections seem to refute it.
The assumption of both democracy and group sourcing is a kind of mad alchemy. It holds that if you pile ignorance high enough it transmutes into wisdom. It is like believing that a mountain of manure, if large enough, by shear weight will transmute itself into gold.
The thing is, Ashley, it does sometimes seem to work, but it is not new. For, indeed, there is nothing new under the sun.
©2010 Jonathan Dobrer
www.Dobrer.com
I've been gifted with a tell-me-your-problems face. And, I'm not quite sure if this is a blessing or curse. But, being that I have this quality, I find myself constantly giving advice to friends. Sometimes I fight the urge to answer their request for counsel with, "Remember when you asked me how I was doing five minutes ago and I told you my life was in shambles? Sure you want to take my advice?" This repetitive scenario is the very reason I took such an interest in last week's Wall Street Journal column aptly titled, "Want My Advice? Um, Not Really."
Columnist Jeffrey Zaslow shares that while there has always been a hesitation on the part of youth to take advice from their elders, the "advice gap" has further widened. This, in part, due to generational differences in perspective, work ethic and technology, as expressed in a Pew Research Center poll published last year.
As a Millennial, I believe my generation's choice for guidance comes down to two simple things: 1.) we spend an immeasurable amount of time conversing with friends making it way easier to ask their advice, and 2.) Really, friends have an awesome of way of telling you what you want to hear, not always what you need to hear.
Yes, Millennials may be the first generation to text our parents. However, we still spend more time communicating with our friends than with our elders. A text here and there doesn't compare to the non-stop conveyer belt of communication via text, Facebook, Twitter, Gchat, etc. that keeps Millennials abreast of their peers' actions. In order to get advice, I don't need to explain how I came to need the advice. My friends accumulated that background info as it occurred.
Secondly, when asking a friend for advice, there is a likelihood that they think like you or you can convince them that your first inclination on the issue is correct. Though I cringe to agree, there is some truth to Millenials being the "me" generation. Baby boomer parents nurtured our sense of entitlement, but now that we need to start taking adulthood seriously, they no longer tell us what we want to hear. Our solution? We'll just find another source to soothe our ego.
So, eager to give Millennials advice and more importantly, understand our rationale? All you can do is take comfort in the fact that most likely, our first approach to a problem will be misguided. And when we do finally get it right, it will be because we gave in to that nagging parental voice.
If that isn't enough comfort, be happy that you need not worry about being gifted with the tell-me-your-problems face.
Pastor Terry Jones, who wants to burn Qurans on 9-11, is a very good example of a very bad example. Whether he is just a publicity seeker with ambitions of fame or delusions of power, he is not the poster child for Christian virtue. Those parts of the Gospel that tell Christians that God is Love and ask us all "How we could love God whom we have not seen and not our brothers whom we have seen," well, he must have missed those parts. His stunt of burning Qurans, whether he goes through with it or aborts it, is harmful to us as a nation, to Christians and, of course and intentionally, to Muslims. Stirring this ugly pot will cost human beings their lives. We in the Jewish Community have experienced with being mocked, marginalized, stereotyped and hated.
My purpose however is not to decry his idiocy--there are already plenty of good Christians, Jews and Humanists, across the political spectrum who stand against his hateful act. My purpose and my question is if we can extract anything worthwhile from this sad affair? Are there lessons to be learned and wisdom to be gained? I think so.
The hate and intolerance that proceed from knowing that only you have the truth and all other opinions, beliefs or faiths are intrinsically wrong and morally evil, look the same in every faith and political belief. As the Taliban destroyed the great Buddhist sculptures in Afghanistan because it they were seen as idols and therefore an affront to God, so Pastor Terry would destroy the holy text of Islam because he believes it is evil. Mind you, this has little to do on the surface with 9-11. This is purely a "religious" act that no matter how peaceful a Muslim individual or community might be, they are still, not just different, but actively evil. Why? Because, they don't believe in his version of the bible.
They might feed the hungry, clothe the naked and plead for the widow and orphan, but that's not good enough for Pastor Jones. They might, and in fact do, believe that Jesus was born of a virgin and is the Word, Sign, Messenger and Apostle of God, but these too are useless in his small theology. Their Holy Book is different from the Gospel narrative and therefore is an affront to him--as he speaks, acts and burns for all Christendom.
This is the nature of violent extremists as well as extremists whose words and acts lead to violence. It is the mark of Al Qaeda who would kill all non-believers, including Shiites and Sunni who do not conform to their narrow view. It is the mark Yigal Amir who assassinated Yitzak Rabin of Israel-as well as other Jewish extremists who act without mercy or restraint to impose their own view. Pastor Terry Jones is in bad company, but in a strange way he should feel at home with all who distort and pervert the universal messages of love to be found in the living heart of most religions.
©2010 Jonathan Dobrer
www.Dobrer.com
The Obama Hates America theme is not hyperbole. It has been relentlessly played for all it's worth from the second that then Democratic presidential candidate Obama announced in February 2007 that he would seek the White House. It almost certainly will be played hard again in the days leading up to the ninth anniversary of the 9/11 terror attacks.
Obama's one little step that could feed the wacky line is not telling yet where and how he'll commemorate the day. This in itself supposedly is enough to show that the president disrespects, minimizes, or is cavalier about the hallowed day. It's none of those things. But it's just another in the pile of supposed anti-American sins that Obama is guilty of. The nutty knock of Obama as America hater is driven in part by ignorance, in part by politics, and in bigger part by race. The ignorance behind the attack line is easy to understand, and predictable. His name, the birth certificate flap, his frequent statement's touting religious respect and tolerance for Muslims, and his refusal to flaunt and wave around his very private and personal expression of his Christian faith fuel the stupidity and suspicion about who and what he really is.
The politics behind the attack line is just as comprehensible. The line was set by presidential rival John McCain and run hard with by Sarah Palin VP pick during the campaign. McCain dropped veiled hints that Obama was a far out left liberal who was soft on terrorism, the Iraq war, and the Patriot act enforcement. The implication was that once in the White House he'd give away the company store to America's sworn enemies.
Palin skipped the hints. She practically roared that Obama pals around with terrorists, left dictators, and commies. And that an Obama win would mean a leftwing takeover of the country. McCain's hint was shrugged off, and Palin's hit was outright mocked, ridiculed, and laughed at by much of the media. But millions didn't laugh. They actually believed that Obama fit easily somewhere between Osama and Castro. Polls continued to show that those that said that Obama was an alien and a closet subversive hovered in the low double digit figure. In the past month, the same polls show that the number who say that about him has doubled, and they all aren't' Palin clones and cheerleaders. A lot of Independents and Democrats say the same thing.
Then there's the unstated; and that's race. There's always been a deep feeling among many whites that African-Americans are inherent rebels against America's institutions and values. During the late 1960's that feeling took off. The mass civil rights demonstrations, protests, the black power surge, and the urban uprisings turned the myth of permanent black rebellion into the myth of black radicalism. This is and always has been nonsense. Yet, when facts crash hard against ingrained beliefs, and especially beliefs fueled by racial loathing, it's no contest which will win out.
So it won't make much difference whether Obama picks the World Trade Center site, the Pentagon, Arlington Cemetery, or the moon, to commemorate 9/11. His name, his religious tolerance, his race, and the relentless GOP smear machine have created the perfect storm to tag Obama as the president that hates America. The tweets from Palin, rightwing bloggers, and talk show gabbers snidely implying that Obama's is that are probably already typed out and ready to go on 9/11 and beyond.
Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. He hosts a nationally broadcast political affairs radio talk show on Pacifica and KTYM Radio Los Angeles.
Follow Earl Ofari Hutchinson on Twitter: http://twitter.com/earlhutchinson
This shameless plug is about one of the best auto mechanics around. If Donald Trump held a car mechanic's competition, Sako at Prestige Auto in Encino would either win or place. Take the categories that make him so great:
Honesty. First, he is one heck of an honest mechanic. If a car doesn't need a procedure, he won't try and peddle it to a customer. I once brought him an older Toyota that would shake, rattle and roll when I drove it. He pronounced it DOA, told me that it needed $2,000.00 in repairs and suggested that I just get another car, which meant that he lost out on a sale that time around.
Loyalty: This guy is loyal all the way. When I was going to buy another car, he told me to bring it to him so he could look at it first. When I was thinking about selling my car, he told me to meet this person at his shop rather than selling it at home. When I had a car accident and forgot to get the other driver's insurance information, he asked me why I didn't call him first so he could have told me what to do. Friendship like that is hard to find.
Knowledge: He built his first car when he was a teenager and could probably build one now out of Popsicle sticks and scrap metal. He is that good. I've also sent many people to him, and no one has ever complained.
Plus, the shop is always busy, which is another sign that he and his mechanics know their business and know it well.
Prestige Auto Service
17554 Ventura Blvd.
Encino, CA 91316
(818) 995-4272
While we should pull out of Iraq, that doesn't mean that the United States should develop ostrich diplomacy and stay out of most conflicts while those in other countries suffer. We had a reason for being in Iraq, just as we have a reason for being in Afghanistan, and that reason is the Taliban. We don't want them coming here, though it also seems that most people don't want them anywhere.
We were wrong to go into Iraq but not for the reasons that most people think. Our gravest mistake in going was that our generals and leaders didn't know the enemy's culture and mindset. It's like something my mother used to say, "When you sit down at the table, know who you are sitting down with." We didn't bother to think about who we were sitting down with and it cost us. Seven years later, 5,000 deaths and trillions of dollars later, it cost us.
We shouldn't use our popularity index and fear that we have overstepped our bounds as a reason for avoiding a fight. The idea of the ugly American has been around for decades and isn't going to change whether we were in Iraq of anywhere else. Besides, the reasons behind most anti-American sentiment may not be our foreign policy, but that we are privileged on the whole and one of the richest nations on earth.
However, the next time we go to war, our leaders should also ask themselves whether they'd be willing to send their children or their children's children to die, not some stranger's children but their own. If they would, then this would be the true litmus test of whether we should engage in battle.
With school starting, it's that time of year again. Time for my shameless plugs series. This one is for a housepainter with heart.
Most people have had experiences with the contractor from hell who has a meltdown in the middle of a job and walks off leaving exposed wires and holes in the walls. But Robert of Robert's Quality Painting isn't of that ilk.
Somehow a DSL repairman fixed a neighbor's DSL line but turned off his electricity in his fuse box and leaving this poor man in the dark. It was a matter of locating the fuse box inside the unit and flicking a switch, which was beyond both of us.
Although he was busy helping his girlfriend a few doors down, Robert, owner of Robert's Quality Painting dropped what he was doing to help out. As a contractor he said that he has to know a little of everything. Using my flashlight, we went into the unit, he found the fuse box and flicked the switch and nothing. Knowing that it was a matter of finding the main circuit breaker in the garage and flicking the switch, we went to look for it.
As luck would have it, it was inside a locked room and the one who had the key wasn't home. I began talking about an extension cord, so he went volunteered to loan me one of his. This from someone I had only waved to in passing. I promised to return it, he have me his card and drove off.
Once in his girlfriend's unit, I began to survey his work. The walls looked like something out of a magazine with not an uneven line anywhere.
Finding an honest and caring contractor is like finding a winning lottery ticket. Once you do, you want to be careful and keep it.
He can be reached via his email at rqpn1@yahoo.com
President Obama deserves the cheers of the nation for ending the US combat role in Iraq. The seven year ground war stirred national regional hatred of the US, and reaffirmed the US image as the bully boy of the world. The war was a colossal domestic and international disaster. The mountainous lies and deception used to get and keep the US in Iraq will be a permanent mark of historical disgrace and shame on the legacy of George W. Bush.
Now there's Afghanistan, a war that Obama must tread carefully on to avoid making all the same mistakes that Bush made in Iraq. Obama in the White House pledged that he'd redeploy troops as fast as he could from Iraq to Afghanistan. Though he tossed out the figure of two brigades as the number of troops he planned to send, he hinted this was not fixed, and the number of troops might go much higher. That's still very much a possibility.
Obama has never cited Pentagon pressure as his reason for upping the military ante in Afghanistan. The Pentagon has certainly hammered hard for troop escalation. But the massive troop increase is clearly his call, just as the Iraq war was clearly Bush's call..
Obama, of course, learned from the perils of that call by Bush. He recognized that the Iraq war was an ugly and shameful page in US history. And that millions of Americans were furious and frustrated by it, and that the presidential candidate who would do something to change that would be cheered by Americans. Obama deserves the cheers for that. But Obama's Iraq withdrawal is a great deal.
The only hope for the current peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians is the nearly complete absence of hope. With such low expectations the old clichés are totally missing. "The peace process is inevitable. They are too far along to turn back. Failure is not an option." Failure is a virtual certainty.
Things did not get off to a promising start--and I'm not talking about the slaughter of the four Israelis or the attempted terror attack today. Yes, Netanyahu said the right things. He called Mahmoud Abbas his partner in peace. He called for courage. Educated in the United States and knowing how to play to us, he was pitch perfect in his pitch.
Abbas, on the other hand, was nearly tone deaf. In listening to him in Arabic, I caught the following sentence: "We want a peace that will correct the historical injustice caused by the creation of Israel of 1948, and one that brings security to our people and the Israeli people." Unfortunately, but intentionally, the word that was generously translated as "the creation of Israel," was the single Arabic word, Nakba.
This word is an insult, a pejorative and a virtual call to arms in Arabic. It means the "catastrophe." It is heavy with connotations and meaning. It is a national holiday among Palestinians. Well, holiday is the wrong word; it is a day of mourning. Every Palestinian understands that the "historical injustice" that needs correcting is the creation of Israel, and the only remedy is the destruction of the Jewish state. The word captures a backward looking attitude that cannot be central in this century. Neither the Nakba nor the Shoah belong in a good faith search for peace.
I am surprised that his use of the word did not cause Netanyahu to rise and leave the room. Netanyahu must be serious. But I have to wonder if Abbas is ready to get serious.
©2010 Jonathan Dobrer
www.Dobrer.com
Recent Comments
Jonathan Dobrer on Will Germany Finally Bring Europe to its Knees?: Yes, Carol, it is just like our bankers and their "liar loans," money ...
carolagate on Will Germany Finally Bring Europe to its Knees?: Interesting analysis. But even if the problem is partly Germany's faul ...
carolagate on Catholics, Birth Control & Obama: I heard Mitt Romney signed a bill with the same requirements in Massac ...
Jack on Catholics, Birth Control & Obama: Jon is right-it is a slippery slope with no end in sight. If one trie ...
tommd on Catholics, Birth Control & Obama: i feel like we as a society are going backwards in time. The freedom o ...
tommd on LAUSD Meets Komen, Karzai & Hamas: this is like a written evening news broadcast. wonderfully written as ...
carolagate on They're Just Not That Into You, Mitt: But, Jack, who scares you any less? ...
Jack on LAUSD Meets Komen, Karzai & Hamas: Boy, did you take on an impossible task -- trying to cover all the "im ...
Jack on They're Just Not That Into You, Mitt: Boy did you hit the nail on the head! My first impression of Mitt in ...