Racism In America Over the last year or so, I've listened to a lot of talk about racism and racialism in the United States. In less than one month, a black American will be elected President of the United States. I've been trying to think of a European country that has or ever has had a black President or Prime Minister. Canada? England? Ireland? France? Germany? Any of the Eastern European Countries? I'm drawing a blank, but I know there must be some. Would somebody help me out and name some countries where black people are a minority and the President or Prime Minister is or has been a black man? Maybe we can benefit from their experience as we overcome our racism and racialism and elect our first black President.

Today, the Hive decided to celebrate the patriotism of Bill Ayers and to defend his rehabilitated character against the charge that he is an unrepentant terrorist. The Hive is circulating a petition of support that mentions for Ayers that mentions his "participation in political activity" some 40 years ago. He participated "passionately" in the Civil Rights and anti-war movements of the 1960's, the petition says. In plain English, that means Ayers founded the Weather Underground who blew up things, including a couple of policemen. Ayers says he wishes he could have done more. Ayers was born too soon. Were he a young man today, he could participate in the Civil Rights and anti-war movements by voting for Barack Obama. And no one would get killed.

I know it's too much to hope for, but it's exciting to think that John McCain's "my fellow prisoners" gaffe might be more than a simple slip of the tongue. Maybe, under the pressure of the campaign, McCain has slipped back in time to relive his Vietnam experience. If McCain imagines he is back in Hanoi and we are all in prison with him, this is going to be an incredible month. If we're the prisoners, who are our torturers? Who are the anti-war demonstrators? Who are the liberals, turning our notes over to the Vietnamese? No matter. One thing we shouldn't expect is that John McCain will back off from this fight. He's going to fight tooth and nail whether he thinks he's back in prison or not.

John McCain's plans, whether for "solving" the mortgage crisis or for "reforming" health insurance, are meaningless. Whether McCain proposes to bail out homeowners or banks to solve the mortgage crisis doesn't matter, unless the McCain proposal forces Obama and the Democratic Congress to offer a better plan. And, while it would be smart for him to do it, whether or not he comes around on pre-existing conditions to improve his health insurance plan doesn't matter either. The Democratic Congress will never pass legislation to implement McCain's plans. On the other hand, any proposal Obama, who will have a majority in both houses of Congress, makes has to be taken seriously. And any proposal Pelosi or Reid makes has to be taken seriously as well. In fact, about the only argument McCain can still make on domestic issues is that an inexperienced Democratic President like Obama will just rubber stamp Pelosi's and Reid's agendas.

I am constantly amazed at the wisdom of the Hive. After buzzing around the Outsider food called "The McCain Homeowner Resurgence Plan," the Hive has decided it's not a good idea and it won't work. Why? Because Obama thought of it first.

I just read the details of McCain's plan to refinance mortgages and bring them into line with the current value of homes. I actually like it. The plan goes back to the New Deal. I wish there was some way for liberals to support it, even if McCain grabs the credit. The link feature on blogs seems to be broken, so here's a link to plan. http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/Read.aspx?guid=b9af0d4c-9c0e-4a97-b27f-19df8cfec83d

Overheard around the Hive.

The difference between bombing a black church and what Bill Ayers did is the difference between committing hate crimes and anti-authoritary violence.

The former is a pogrom against the weakest segments of society by the top dogs.  The latter is a political statement and defiance by guerrillas against the all-powerful, abusive State juggernaut.

They are polar opposites in terms of ideological and political spectrum and magnitude.

Think of the "'terror" inflicted by the Fascists against Jews and the "terror" inflicted by the Resistance against the Nazis.  Both resorted to instruments of violence, but their relative positions of power vis a vis their targets makes all the difference between those whose deeds we condemn as nihilistic murder or applaud as heroic antics.

What percentage of the Democratic Party do you think would agree with that statement?

Watching the Democratic Convention, I got the impression we were a nation of workers.  White collar workers.  Blue collar workers.  Professionals.  Journeymen.  Students.  Hard workers in the Great American workplace.  Somewhere.

And, a week later, watching the Republican convention, I got the distinct impression we were a nation of small businessmen and women.  Petite Bourgeoisee, running small businesses all over America.  Places where all those workers go to work every day.

The Corporations?  Nowhere in sight.  They didn't come to the conventions.

Those Corporations better watch out.  

No matter who wins this election, those Corporations are in trouble.

We're going to take their bad loans away from them.  We're going to make them drill for more oil and gas.  We're going to make them issue more health insurance policies and provide more medical care.  We're going to make them build more pipelines, produce more gasoline and compressed natural gas.  And we're even going to make some of their CEOs serve in the cabinet.

And, if those Corporations try to go out of business, we're not going to let them.

That's what they get for not coming to our conventions.  You just listen to the debate tonight.  You'll see.
 

The New York Times has taken a "look" at the Obama and Ayers relationship and concluded that their paths "crossed" a couple of times.

Whether there is anything of concern in the Obama and Ayers relationship or not, the New York Times piece smells like an article that's been trotted out to innoculate Obama from attacks by the McCain campaign.  The Times looked into it and found nothing there.  These guys met a couple of times, but so what?

The Times piece reminds me of the investigative reporting that was done on Obama and Rezko at the beginning of the primaries.  The reporters concluded that Rezko had done Obama a favor by buying the lot next to the Obama home, but they decided they couldn't prove that someone else might not have bought that lot at the same time if Rezko hadn't bought it, and they couldn't prove that Rezko ever got anything in return for the favor.

That's where common sense and a working BS detector come in to pose questions like "who says the payoff needs to be right away?" and "why didn't somebody else buy that lot on the same day Obama bought his house if there were other people willing to?"

The key issue in the Obama and Ayers relationship is the Chicago Annenberg Challenge.  That's the only significant work they did together.
 
Who did Obama and Ayers approve giving money to, and what did the people who got the money do with it?"

When we have the answers to those questions, we'll know if Obama has been completely honest about his relationship with Ayers, and we'll know whether he has been completely honest about his work as a community organizer.

Right now, the picture we have of Obama the community organizer is of a dedicated lawyer, helping people get asbestos out of their apartments.

The fastest way to cut through the BS around Obama's relationship with Ayers is to take a look at whom they gave Annenberg money to.  If the funds were used for purposes as clean as asbestos abatement, the Obama and Ayers relationship is a dead issue.