By CODY LYON

The executive director of a non profit organization that's been campaigning since 2003 to end exclusion of same sex couples from what it says are the 'the rights and responsibilities conveyed by legal marriage' said a Tuesday resolution by the American Bar Association "signals a growing consensus" among the nation's lawyers that "marriage is a fundamental right that belongs to every citizen."

"Freedom to Marry' founder, civil rights attorney Evan Wolfson, said in a statement that the ABA has "strongly declared that there is no good reason to continue excluding same sex couple from marriage."

In its resolution, ABA urges, "state, territorial and tribal governments to eliminate all of their legal barriers to civil marriage between two person of the same sex who are otherwise eligible to marry."

The resolution comes just a week after a federal judge in San Francisco struck down California's Proposition 8 as unconstitutional. The California ruling has opened up a Pandora's box of both supporting and opposing opinions on whether or not same sex marriage is a constitutional right.

For example, Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, who participated at a press conference organized by a few Senate Republicans in Washington Wednesday signaled many in his party are taking the Court ruling by an openly gay judge into the political arena.

Smith said "It simply doesn't get much worse than this: you have a biased judge imposing his personal views contrary to the wishes of the majority of the people of the state."

Of the ABA resolution, Doug Napier, an attorney with the conservative Alliance Defense Fund told 'One News Now' that "once again the American Bar Association is purporting to represent American lawyers, when in fact they only represent about a quarter of American lawyers,"

With its 400,000 members, ABA provides law school accreditation, continuing legal education, information about the law, programs to assist lawyers and judges in their work, and initiatives to improve the legal system for the public.

Founded in 1881, the ABA was founded by one hundred lawyers from 21 states who had gathered in Saratoga Springs, N.Y.

In just under 130 years ago, ABA grew into the nation's largest voluntary professional organization. The resolution on same sex marriage was approved by the 560-member ABA House of-Delegates during its annual meeting held this month in San Francisco.

The resolution's lead sponsor was the New York State Bar Association under auspice of the ABA's Section on Individual Rights and Responsibilities. Created in 1966, soon after a number earth moving court rulings related to the civil rights movement, the ABA 'Section of Individual Rights and Responsibilities' provides leadership within the ABA and the legal profession in protecting and advancing human rights, civil liberties, and social justice

The full resolution approved Tuesday states that "the assertion that separate systems for classes of citizens can satisfy constitutional equality guarantees, as long as identical legal rights are conferred, invokes the long-repudiated reasoning in the court case Plessy v. Ferguson.

In that case, the Court upheld separate railway cars for African-Americans because "when the government... has secured to each of its citizens equal rights before the law, and equal opportunities for improvement and progress, it has accomplished the end for which it was organized. However, as our constitutional tradition and history has made clear, only full marriage equality comports with our constitutional standards that separate is not equal.

With that, ABA says see Brown v. Board of Ed., 347 U.S. 483 (1954).

 

Right leaning Video targets three Senate Votes in Kagan Nomination

(analysis)
by Cody Lyon

Now that Alabama Senate Republican Jeff Sessions has won a weeklong delay on its final vote to confirm Soliciter General Elena Kagan as a supreme court justice, a right leaning. tea party affiliated organization called 'Judicial Action Group' or Jag, also based in Session's home state, is reportedly buying up commercial time for a new video ad aimed at swaying three important senate votes to 'no on Kagan.'

It was just over a year ago in June 2009 that Sessions, the Judiciary Committee's Ranking member vigorously questioned the record of then Supreme court nominee Sonia Sotomayor, focusing attention on Sotomayor's affiliation with the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund. After Sessions raised those concerns, another right leaning organization called "Judicial Watch" released a report on Sotomayor's record it said shows PRLDEF supports a "radical legal agenda. That campaign failed and Sotomayor went on to see confirmation.

The more recent video campaign is more specific and aimed at two Democrats, Senator Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas and Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska, as well as Republican Senator Lindsay Grahm of South Carolina.  Each video has basically the same script, however, each is tailored to either one of the the three Senators, for example, viewers are urged to call and tell Senator Ben Nelosn to vote no on Elena Kagan.

Produced by the "Judical Action Group" , the ads features an urgent toned voice claiming that Kagan, as a professor and Dean at Harvard Law School, 'advocates judicial activism and favors foreign law over our constitution." The ad also says Kagan "welcomed law firms representing terrorists" and "banned our military recruiters" from the school's campus. Kagan also "welcomed law firms representing terrorists' and "took $20 million in Saudi Money to establish a center for Islamic Studies and Sharia Law."  The video, set against still photos of Kagan and hightlighted text of the charges leveled in the video, does no offer any spefic context or sources as to where the charges extend from.

In a July 12 press release, the Birmingham based JAG said it was launching a "Nelson & Kagan" ad campaign by co-hosting a press conference that day in Omaha, NE. The group confirms the effort is meant "to put pressure on Sen. Nelson to vote "No" on Kagan."  JAG said it was co-hosting the July 12 event with Jennifer Hulsey of Tea Party Express, Doug Kagan of Nebraska Taxpayers for Freedom, and Benjamin Smith (former Navy seal) of Move America Forward.  They say similar Pressers and TV ad buys will occur Tues in Little Rock, AR and Thurs in Columbia, SC.

Judicial Action Group is a 501(c)4 non-profit corporation with offices in Washington, D.C. and Birmingham, Alabama. Founded in 2006, the 501(c)4 status (unlike a tax-deductible 501(c)3 status) allows JAG to engage in unlimited lobbying, 'maximizing its influence.' The group is part of a larger coalition of right leaning groups including the web umbrella, Freedom Federation.'  That particular coalition of activists calls itself "a federation of multiracial, multiethnic and multigenerational faith-based and policy organizations and leaders committed to plan, strategize, and mobilize to advance shared core values to preserve freedom and promote justice"  Featured along with Judicial Action Group on the Freedom Federation website, several other widely known Right Wing groups including better known groups like Family Research Council, American Family Association, Eagle Forum and The National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference.

Leading JAG is president Phillip Jauregu,a partner at Birmingham law firm Jauregu & Lindsey who Jauregu's biography says represents various clients ranging from small business, to corporate entities, to individuals, such as former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore. Judge Roy Moore, a hero in right wing circles gained national attention when as Chief Justice, he placed a washing machine sized replica of the biblical ten commandments in the lobby of the Alabama Supreme Court. When challenged and eventually court ordered to remove the replica, hordes of fundamentalist Christian groups from around the nation descended onto the capital Montgomery to pray, protest and hold vigils. 

Moore was eventually ordered out of office and Jauregui led the legal team that eventually lost an appeal that resulted in the removal of then Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore from office, over his refusal to remove the granite replica.

Jauregui's JAG says it believes that the present state of the culture war created the need for a Special Forces unit that single-mindedly devotes itself to one mission: "defeating judicial activism." On its website, JAG says it serves this vital niche.

But, some saw Jauregui client Roy Moore as an activist judge.  In a November 2003 Court of the Judiciary hearing, Alabama's Assistant Attorney General said Moore's defiance, left unchecked, "undercuts the entire workings of the judicial system. He said what message does that send to the public, to other litigants? The message it sends is: If you don't like a court order, you don't have to follow it."

Recently, Moore made a run in the 2010 Republican primary for Governor.  Winning just 19% of state votes, he placed fourth.

The 40 year old Jauregu also served as Assistant Legal Advisor to Alabama Governor Fob James, the Alabama governor who gained attention by opposing the teaching of evolution in the state's public schools.  James' son, Tim James recently also recently made a run for Governor in the same race as Moore. He gained national attention of his own through television ads decryiny multi-linguil drivers license exams.   James, like Moore, lost in the election, placing third in the primary. 

As the Sotomayor nomination came closer to vote, in June 2009, JAG's Jauregu as President of JAG, joined a large group of conservative activists who wrote and signed a letter to Republican Senators urging that they fillibuster then nominee Sotomayer. But, many in that same group of activists had signed a similar letter a few years earlier during the Bush Administration "opposing" the use of filibusters during Supreme Court nominations.

That said, more recently, Jauregu's JAG has made the opposition of Kagan as a supreme court justice a priority.  JAG's website points visitors to research and analysis by Alliance Defense Fund, American United For Life, Family Research Council and the Aiken ScotusBlog.

Perhaps more telling, an article detailing Jauregui and apparently the worry of many Right Leaning groups titled 'Do Ask, Do Tell - Whether Kagan's Public Policies are Improperly Dictated by Her Private Affairs.'

Here, Jauregui worries that "Kagan's decision to bar military recruiters from Harvard was either a horrible legal decision, or a use of her office to impose her personal views on the military."

Then, Jauregui writes "if media reports that Kagan is a lesbian are true, then her decision to bar military recruiters from Harvard has every appearance of growing from her personal preferences and practices.  Obama says that he wants justices who have empathy and know what it is like to be gay.  Well, it is relevant for Americans to know whether such a preoccupation of knowing how it feels to be gay, led Elena Kagan to ignore the law and ban the heterosexual military from Harvard because it conflicted with her own personal feelings and practices."

No word as to whether or not, Jauregui worried that Judge Roy Moore's defiance of the law, when he refused to remove a large replica of the Ten Commandments in the state Supreme Court building might indicate, that the the former chief justice had in fact intended to impose "his" personal views on the state's highest court. 

With all that said, the new Judicial Action Group video aimed at  the three Senators in Arkansas, Nebraska and South Carolina  makes no mention of Kagan's rumored sexuality. 

by Cody Lyon
OPINION

During a conversation with ABC News this past Thursday, Politico.com's Chris Frates told Ron Claiborne that the inability of Congress to pass an extension of unemployment benefits was in part a "battle of approach." 

He's referring to the differing approaches by which Democrats and Republicans would fund a $33 billion dollar extension of the expanded safety net for long term unemployed Americans. Democrats are looking to fund the program with emergency funds that would add to the stimulus while Republicans say part or all of the program must be paid for by taking money from the stimulus program. b Long term unemployed include those people unemployed for six months or longer.   While many on both sides claim to want to extend the program, the reality is, millions of the long term unemployed are getting cut off from an economic life line over the next few weeks, thanks to the inability of a partisan congress to reach a solution.

To some Americans, this latest `real life' impact roadblock, is yet another reason to view the legislative branch as an increasingly pungent cauldron of dysfunction beholden to the next election and not the good of the people the elected officials were called to serve.  

Washington reads like the ugly and mean spirited setting of a novel about corruption. It is a government where hypocrisy laden Republicans are bent on stopping any legislation that's touched by Democrats. Meanwhile, whiny Democrats eager to point the finger at Republicans, have apparently come to relish this role that would be better on the playground. That's where one usually finds the annoying tattle tale child who constantly points out the flaws of the other kids. It seems that the truly sincere defenders of the down trodden are absent. In a nutshell, neither party seems to want to rise above the fray and exhibit the qualities of true leadership on this topic.

By not moving forward with a simple extension of unemployment benefits for millions of unemployed Americans, Republican and Democrat Senators can march up and down main street's across the nation on "Independence Day" and self righteously proclaim they may support an extension, while Republicans claim the 'opposing' party is fiscally irresponsible, or in Democrats case,claim Republicans are increasingly a party that's home to a philosophy based in cold blood.  Meanwhile, among many of the parade viewer's will be friend's and neighbors that are impacted by this latest lack of movement. It is a stalemate that will send them even further into the abyss of what's fast turning into a ruthless recession, an economy that the economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman worries may be the beginnings of the `Third Depression."

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/28/opinion/28krugman.html

Pure and simple, during the economic challenges of the past, unemployment insurance extensions were pretty much routine. The National Employment Law Project reported that since the 1950s Congress has not allowed extended jobless aid to expire when the national unemployment rate is above 7.2 percent. In 1973, extended benefits remained in place until unemployment sank to 5 percent.

On Friday, July 2, the Labor Department released a report saying that there was a June drop in unemployment from 9.5% to 9.7%.  That number sends the statistic to its lowest point since July, one year earlier.

But as a chilling analysis piece by the Wall Street Journal notes, that decline wasn't due to improvement in the labor market. Instead, jobless Americans simply dropped out of the labor force in droves.

Friday's labor report shows that sectors like manufacturing grew payrolls by just 9,000.  That was a much smaller jump than the average of 25,400 jobs over the past five months.

Note, Democrats have resisted calls to take cash from the `stimulus' to fund unemployment checks because they say the stimulus is creating so many jobs.  But, contained in the report, numbers showing that the United States construction industry shed yet another, 22,000 jobs this past June.  The hope was that when the stimulus package first emerged, America might see tangible WPA like investment in its failing infrastructure that would increase construction hiring by the thousands.  There was also hope the investment might produce significant spikes in green technology, innovation and manufacturing, whereby workers might be re-trained for jobs of the future, and more importantly,  we'd be weaned away from our dependence on fossil fuels. Some thought, these hard times presented the country with an opportunity to pause, soul search and plant the necessary seeds that would lead us to a new landscape where evidence of new rapid rail systems, windmill energy and bio technological hubs were soon to be the norm of the future. Perhaps the jobs picture would be even bleaker were it not for this attempt at treading water, but that's another story  

Meanwhile, Republicans have jumped on the rampant fear of a politically motivated austerity band-wagon.  And, as many have pointed out, this latest policy shift by the GOP reeks of corrupt hypocrisy. Remember, it was the Bill Clinton administration that produced a deficit surplus of almost $300 billion according to FactCheck.org.   But, these are some of the same people who endorsed huge tax cuts for wealthy Americans, relaxed rules on Wall Street and wars we never could have never afforded in the first place. Any semblance of surplus all got quickly erased by President George W. Bush. So, some might see this latest Republican roadblock as just a bit disingenuous In fact, when President Barack Obama came to office, just as the economic meltdown was getting into full swing, he inherited a federal deficit of $1.2 trillion the day he was sworn in.

And all this political showmanship has culminated during what's become the worst economic meltdown since the Great Depression.  It is a confusing patchwork of American pain that impacts some areas worse than others.  But, rest assured, this latest move by Congress is wrecking lives and sending thousands if not millions into despair.  How the Senate could simply up and leave the capital for a week long vacation without passing an life line extension to Americans that are facing one of the toughest job markets ever, is outrageous.  If either side had truly believed putting food on the table of the unemployed was a moral issue they would  have seen to it that is passed. Considering there is one job out there for every five Americans looking, if they truly cared,they would have given and taken, it's called a compromise, and the long term unemployed might have joined those parades on main street this July 4, and cheered the Senators as fine examples of a working Democracy surviving during a time of economic crisis.  

Opinion-Cody Lyon

This past Thursday, a number of media outlets were reporting on a Labor Department report that said new weekly claims for unemployment fallen by 3,000 to a seasonally adjusted 456,000. Most of those same stories included details that total unemployment benefit rolls had fallen by 255,000 to 4.5 million.

The unemployment claims drop was called the 'largest decline in almost a year.' In its story, The Associated Press reported speculation that the decline could be because more people are finding work. But then again, it could simply mean that those individuals exhausted their initial state unemployment insurance benefits. The same report said that a Labor Department analyst said state agencies didn't provide any explanation for the drop.

The news helped send the stock market up around 273 points. Reports said traders were encouraged by the 2225,000 drop in total unemployment benefit total claims the week before.

But later that day Barron's Tiernan Ray reported how East Shore Partners exec Joan McCullough had written in a memo to clients that the big drop-off in unemployment roll benefits coincides with the May 22nd cut-off date set by Congress. She noted that's the point when recipients of regular or extended unemployment are no longer eligible to receive emergency unemployment compensation, if there state even offered it.

link to Barrons -http://blogs.barrons.com/stockstowatchtoday/2010/06/10jobless-claims-drop-not-as-nice-as-it-seems-says-east-shore)

Barron's said, McCullough's conclusion is that 46% of the unemployed have just passed the threshold of no return. They've dropped off the edge, rather than simply finding jobs, as it might seem at first.

Add to that, just over a week ago the "The Center for American Progress" lamented the fact "there were 6.7 million long-term unemployed who now account for 46 percent of all unemployed job seekers. The think tank noted that because there are nearly six job seekers for every opening available and little net hiring, the chances of getting one of those (jobs) is indeed slim."

Of course, the hope is that some sort of recovery will chip away at that frustrating statistic and offer some nuggets of hope to jobseekers and for that matter, the overall economy. Americans are rightfully confused about the state of the economy and where its headed as each day seems to bring yet another jumbled and conflicting shard of data. But, one likely and sure fire conclusion is this; thousands of unemployed Americans probably will face many more months of frustration in the job hunt.

Right now, jobseekers-to-jobs ratio, which tells how hard positions are to get, remains around 5.6 to 1.

As things stand now, of the 15 million unemployed, over 7 million have been out of work for more than six months, nearly 5 million for a year and over 1 million for two years.

That leads back to the data from last week, and the way it got reported by a number of news organizations. Reading through the lines, some news stories read like desperate PR blitzes that were seeking to offer a bit of good news in a dismal situation. After all, psychology plays a role in all this.

Still, there were stories like the one from Barron's,that in essence challenged the intial market-moving Thursday stories and the way the data got framed. For instance, McCulough aargued 255,000 unemployed individuals have now dropped out of sight from Continuing Claims. According the article, she said "And the New York Times is touting this as a positive? "

It's worth wondering, where the questions that seek a solid explanation for that huge drop in unemployment benefit rolls? That particular statistic, as evidenced by that day's market shift, is the sort of indicator that has the potential to impact perception and move Wall Street.

But all this news of being stuck in the economic mud poses tougher questions and perhaps too, challenges American society to at least rethink and look more aggressively to what a future economy and workforce can and should be, long term. ,

But, for now, the Senate is debating another emergency unemployment benefits extension, part of H.R. 4213, and once again, there are holdouts in that governing body who say the weekly checks, a lifeline to millions, are to big a cost, in these days of growing national deficit. Others take a condescending view arguing, that the continuous unemployment extensions create America's own real version of the British term, being on the Dole, that they retard job hunt motivation.

But while the deficit looms large and very real on the horizon, it seems almost cruel that the Senate would even flirt with cutting off economic lifelines to so many Americans who, in most cases, arrived at this unfortunate state existence though no fault of their own. Besides that, the benefits are basically a form of stimulus since that money mostly gets pumped back through spending., etc.

And, unless you live in place where the cost of living has plummeted down a cliff, you would be hard pressed to find a laid off American worker satisfied and secure with the amount of money one gets to live on from unemployment insurance. In most cases, the weekly sums are a small portion of what the worker made while employed. For example, in New York State, the highest weekly payment is just over $400. Other states, offer max payments lower than that, a few others, slightly higher. Usually, they provide enough to get by, pay some bills, put food on the table. If it weren't for a current 65% subsidy for COBRA plan payments, which costs roughly the same amount as a month's unemployment benefits, the number of uninsured would have spiked even higher as well. But, that's another sad story.

A study on the effect of recessions on health by Economics Professor Christopher Ruhm, found that because unemployment insurance in the U.S. does not typically replace 50% of the income one received on the job, the unemployed often end up tapping welfare programs such as Food Stamps or accumulating debt.

The sad fact is that the high numbers of long term unemployed continues growing into a scourge in America. It not only decimates consumer power, it tears at less measurable indicators like the psychology of the nation infected by labor insecurity and a large pocket of hopelessness sense born out of the frustration of millions. The hope in all this, is that United States citizens will see immediate relief, but also demand greater investment in the future. There's never been a better moment to call upon the nation's best and brightest innovators, and begin rethinking the ways, places and rules by which we work, produce and buy.
CROSSPOSTED at POLITICAL CORTEX and my own blog, Codylyonblogolater

by Cody Lyon
Opinion
A number of the earlier news stories covering Friday's labor jobs report were reading as if written or encouraged by the positive spin patrol. Most of the stories opened with news that the US had added 431,000 new (nonfarm) jobs this past May. At a number of media outlets, that good news got reinforced with the line, it's the "largest (job creation) gain in the monthly figure in a decade."

But after some apparent head scratching and closer examination, the seemingly good news, got a less happy dose of reality. 411,000 of those 'new jobs' were for Temporary Census Workers. Those jobs will disappear come August.  Most news reports now, are leading with the fact that the jobs market is still very ill.

In truth, as the Labor Department data shows, big as it is, the private sector of the entire United States only added 41,000 new jobs to payrolls this past May. That leaves the unemployment rate essentially unchanged at 9.7%, a slight drop from 9.9% in April.

Around 15 million workers are now unemployed in the United States. That's more than double the 7.7 million at the end of 2007.  And, just to absorb the new workers entering the market, the economy would need to add 100,000 new jobs monthly.


As a Labor Department and National Employment Law Project report highlighted by "TheHill.com's" Vicki Needham noted, the number of long-term unemployed has increased from 1.3 million at the start of the recession and has climbed to 6.8 million, making up 46 percent of all unemployed, up from 15 percent more than 2 years ago.

And, Saturday's "New York Times" reported the number of "discouraged workers," those who have stopped looking for work, because they see no prospect for employment, rose by 291,000 from a year earlier.

With all that, it was hard understand how the President and members of the administration can say the job market in the United States is "getting stronger by the day."

The spin didn't fool the market, as U.S. stocks, already spooked by the debt of Hungary, dove to their lowest closing bell since February.


Perhaps it's even more difficult to understand how so many reporters failed to read beyond the headlines and how a number of respected economists are not fully explaining the argument that the nation is in a period of recovery.  Truth and Leadership are crucial when faced with crisis of any magnitude, and even in a spin filled culture, people can smell smoke and read through mirrors.  Certainly, psychology is important in economic recovery, but, when Americans are seeing Americans all around them struggling, its hard to jump on the positive spin wagon.


But even more hair raising, the fact that so many Americans will lose their only financial lifelines this week as extensions of unemployment insurance benefits expire. The Senate up and went home for Memorial Day before passing any extension of benefits. Some in the Senate are warning of impending federal deficit crisis, which is certainly a legitimate concern, but, in this case of humanitarian aid to fellow Americans, more debt may be necessary. The House passed the new extension a few weeks ago, but, the Senate left the capital for its Memorial Day holiday break before taking up the issue. The Senate is meant to address the topic when it returns, June 7.

The hope is, the numbers will shrink, the lifeline will become less inflated and the nation, will witness a full recovery that everyone can understand and believe in.
LINK TO VICKI NEEDHAM at THEHILL
http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/domestic-taxes/101517-americans-face-eight-month-wait-to-find-a-job

 

Alabama, Tim James, George Wallace and the politics of Exploitation

Cody Lyon

 

 

During a chat on politics while home visiting friends and family in Birmingham Ala., one friend remarked that candidates who speak in 'positives' rarely do well in campaigns for state office in Alabama.  She pointed to the legacy of unfortunate condescension, that use political formulas where candidates steer people's attention from true 'center of life' issues towards hot button social topics. 

 

Of course, this is probably one of the easiest, oldest and cheapest tricks in politics but, fueled on by a media focused on the sensational, it often works, not just in the South, but, across the nation,

 

 And, for some us who grew up or live in Alabama, headlines seem to say this deep-south state has produced more than its fair share of this sort of similar political games.

 

 

Over the past few weeks, Americans have met Alabama Republican gubernatorial candidate Tim James, the 48-year old son of former Governor Fob James who was noted in part for blunt language and loud opposition to the teaching of evolution. 

 

The younger James, a millionaire businessman, has inspired news headlines, sneers from liberals and now a barrage of viral videos based on a real television campaign ad where the candidate for governor tackles Alabama's practice of offering drivers license exams in 12 languages.

 

During the ad, James looks earnestly into the camera and say's "this is Alabama.  We speak English.  If you want to live here, learn it." One would be hard pressed to find evidence that offering drivers license tests to a variety of languages is a 'central to Alabama life issue,' nonetheless, since the ad's debut, James' poll numbers have gone up and local interest in the governor's race has jumped.  These days, he's drawing big crowds as he criss-crosses the state in the 'common sense' express.

 

James' exploitation of anti-immigrant sentiment is one of the latest incidents in an immigrant backlash we're seeing in many states like Arizona.  But, in Alabama, one can't help but draw comparisons to other candidates who, especially during times of economic instability, have exploited the insecurity of voter fear and insecurity.

 

 

As meticulous research in the book 'Alabama, Portrait of a Deep South State,' notes, in the 1960's, when poor whites who'd recently entered the middle class saw their earning power failing to keep pace with inflation, instead of acting rationally and organizing or joining unions, they often acted in non-rational ways, "through scape-goating, fatalism, or blind rage."  To champion the cause, "they chose George C. Wallace."

 

Interestingly, when George Wallace's first ran for Governor in 1958, he ran with the support of the NAACP.  Wallace was defeated by fellow democrat John Patterson who himself, had the support of the Ku Klux Klan.   Afterwards, Wallace, who had been vocal in his opposition to the Klan and apparently seen by blacks as 'fair' before the first governors race, reportedly told an aide, that he'd been "outniggered" in the campaign by Patterson, and that he'd "never be outniggered " again. 

 

Then, in 1962, the historically familiar George Wallace was elected.  He proclaimed against the backdrop of whoops and hollers during his Montgomery inauguration that he stood in defiance of coming change, proclaiming "segregation now, segregation tomorrow and segregation forever." 

Earlier, he'd reportedly told a supporter that people didn't pay attention to his campaign in 1958 when he tried to forward a progressive agenda peppered with talk of all the good he would do like building better roads and schools.  In essence, although social change was inevitable, reactionary politics had become his ticket to the state capital in Montgomery.

 

In truth, Wallace had taken the cheap and easy highway to power, using persuasive political trickery, appealing to base emotions like fear. Although he lived to regret his tactics, begging history to paint him as reasonable, he took the sins of blood stained rhetoric to the grave.

Almost 50 years after the Wallace segregation speech, Alabama has seen remarkable economic and social transformation.  It is a place filled with ethnic diversity, thousands of new jobs, many of them brought by foreign investment.   But, like other states, Alabama has been hit hard by recession, so the appeal of anti-immigrant sounding rhetoric that we've seen in states like Arizona, comes as no surprise.

 

And although Tim James' English only ad is a far cry from the dangerous 1960's rhetoric of George Wallace, James tactic is at the core, cheap and easy politics. 

 

Instead, why doesn't James produce and star in an ad that taunts the insanity of Alabama tax structures?  For example, a 2008 Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy study that says that Alabama's tax system is regressive, relying on income and sales taxes that are skewed against low income people. 

 

Or perhaps, he could get people stirred up over Alabama's consistent ranking as one of the top states for dangerous levels of obesity, smoking, diabetes and poverty.  Another potential point of contention, Alabama's localized school systems are markedly disparate, where in a few wealthy suburbs near cities like Birmingham, children are guaranteed public educational opportunity on a par with the best offered anywhere in the country. Meanwhile, inner city or rural areas, the bigger challenge is to simply see a child graduate from high school.   And, while dramatizing these social ills, mention that the state's biggest city, is home to one of the nation's top ten homicide rates, yes, Birmingham is statistically a much more dangerous than New York City.

 

Those tidbits touch on a few problems facing today's Alabama.  But those problems are also America's problems because we all operate under the same umbrella in this Republic of ours. Yet, with all that going on in this economically uncertain time that's ripe for change, the most enthused political rhetoric spewed onto the nation's airwaves is negative and marked by blame, finger-pointing and once again, scape-goating.  For example, news stories in the mainstream media featuring colorful notes on the tea party movement trump stories on exactly how, why or who led America into the current Great Recession.

 

Meanwhile, there's no doubt that Tim James is charismatic, smart and a good businessman who might make a fine Governor for Alabama.

But, like the originally moderate candidate named George Wallace, who made a campaign decision 50 year ago and won office, the political calculation behind James' English only ad may grab attention now, but ultimately, such diversion mutes hope for healthy open discussion and debate that leads to change for the better of a people.  In the end, these tactics block the path to progress into the future.

 

 

 

From Portfolio.com

The Canadians are coming to the West Side of Manhattan, joining private real estate group Related Companies in one of the most transformative projects in New York City history
\
The West Side Yards partnership is one of several examples of foreign money helping New York City's credit-starved commercial real estate market begin to see some sense of vibrancy, even in the face of an uncertain economic climate.

Full story.....
 http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/daily-brief/2010/05/26/new-york-hudson-yards-project-joins-related-and-oxford#ixzz0p5rVJrsp

From Portfolio.com
Cody Lyon on past New York City clubs, restaurants and organized chaos that made it all work.

Its the story of an earlier time in Manhattan, back when nightclubs were more than $300 bottles of vodka and when restaurants weren't part of chains. Now, those were fun time
Read more: http://www.portfolio.com/views/columns/2010/04/26/cody-lyon-on-past-new-york-city-clubs-and-restaurants#ixzz0nJpzHuQY

by CODY LYON

opinion

News that the Itawamba County Mississippi school board would cancel its upcoming prom rather than allow a gay student, Constance McMillen, to bring her same sex date to the event was a disturbing but necessary reminder of just how hostile much of the nation to the 'full acceptance' of LGBT people, and that includes students.

Perhaps the school system's decision is based in fear rooted in flawed and prejudiced assumptions, that by allowing a teenager to bring her same sex date to such a traditional event as the prom, the powers that be may appear to be condoning gayness to the local masses. More likely,moral concerns extending from literal interpretations of scripture, verses located on the same pages where one finds instructions for the stoning of adulterers and punishments for wearing certain types of textiles. But then again, the Mississippi prom case is more likely just another piece of fallout from a very commonly held membership in a society where there is a quiet tolerance of homophobia which is nothing more than a phobia of homosexuality itself.  

It's easy to draw comparisons to this incident and a 1994 case involving a student in the little east Alabama town of Wedowee. In February of that year, the principal of Randolph County High School called a student body, then around 60% white and 40% black, to an assembly, where he asked the group how many juniors and seniors planned to attend the prom with 'dates' as he put it, "outside their race?"   To his, and perhaps many northern readers who later read details of this tale surprise, several students did in fact raise their hands.  Reportedly, the principal, a white man named Hulond Humphries, promptly cancelled the prom, asking, "how would that look at a prom, a bunch of mixed race couples?" 

Most would probably agree, that no matter how you phrase it, spin it or frame it, at the root of the Wedowee principal's prom decision in 1994, was phobia, a phobia of African American students mixing with whites, and that phobia, still held by many in America, is most likely rooted in racism of one form or another.

But, back to present day Mississippi. There is no denying the bravery of this young student who with help from the ACLU is standing up to authority. It is a shame, that the majority of students who are most likely heterosexual are upset about seeing their big night get spoiled. Like the 1994 Wedowee principal, Itawamba County officials had rather cancel the event, than run the risk of 'appearing unsavory' after all, how would it look if their are lesbians at the prom?   Worth mentioning, for those LGBT leaders in bastions of tolerance, far from places like rural Mississippi, the hope is they will not only take notice of this young girl's brave actions, but, instill the support of all watching this little drama unfold.  Because, in truth, its those drama's that unfold daily in the smaller places of America's heartland, where hearts and minds are changed, ever so slowly, but oh so often, surely.  You see that kind of change in places like Ashburn Georgia, a small town 160 miles south of Atlanta, that held its first integrated black and white together prom in 2007, yes, that' just two years ago.  Guess who voted for the change from 'Jim Crow" appearing segregation to modern day integration, the majority of the student body, all 212 of them.  One hopes too, that despite old thought principals or school boards caught up in society's prejudices, moral conflicts or hang-ups based in misinterpretation or hate, that students like Constance McMillen, will someday have the support of her student body, and that they too, will vote for an integrated prom along the same lines as those kids in Georgia but perhaps, these kids will go a bit further on the tolerance trail, a place where black, white, straight, gay or whatever well behaved junior or senior from that school gains admission to the prom and dances the night away with his or her date, regardless of whether that date is a boy or a girl. 

By CODY LYON

Sen. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (KY-R) told Democrats in the Senate that `every election this fall will be a referendum" on health care reform. McConnell, was rattling his saber after President Obama threw down the gauntlet, where he said congress owes the American people a final vote on healthcare reform. The president gave his blessings to procedural `reconciliation,' a way by which Democrats bypass what has become unanimous Republican opposition to the legislation, in other words, get'er done!

Mind you, the healthcare reform bill is flawed. And, the ways by which the miles high pile of details contained in this bill, the nuts and bolts of "what this legislation" would mean to the American people, have been short in coming to say the least. Republicans and others have seized upon what they portray as frightening hints of socialism, portraying the bill as government interference into the private sector that they falsely proclaim serves us well. But, truth be told, we live in a nation that is home to a healthcare system that does serves some well, while it neglects our less fortunate, the uninsured citizens among us, a number now approaching 50 million with another 15 million considered "under-insured."  Even those who are insured, are unlikely to sing the praises of their insurance companies, especially in these days of skyrocketing premiums and added costs where every nook and cranny within the healthcare system's costs are already interconnected much like a synthetic rubik's cube.

Take note, a February 16 RAND Corporation analysis found that the Senate healthcare reform plan would cause overall health spending to increase by 2 percent because of 'increased utilization among newly insured people.'
For those worried about increased health care costs, RAND says the legislation would help drive down out of pocket insurance premiums. Researchers at RAND estimated that premiums in the employer-sponsored market in 2019 would be 2 percent lower and the premiums paid by individuals buying insurance through exchanges would be 3.7 percent lower than otherwise expected.

Further the analysis found that by 2019, about 28 million people would purchase insurance through the Health Benefit Exchanges mandated by the legislation. The Exchanges would be state-run organizations through which private companies would sell health insurance to individuals. Researchers at RAND estimate that 15 million of those who use the exchanges would qualify for government subsidies to help pay for their insurance.
RAND predicts that among the 25 million Americans who would remain uninsured in 2019, about one-third (9 million) would be eligible for Medicaid but not enroll.

The study finds that health care legislation passed by the Senate would cut the number of uninsured Americans to 25 million by 2019 (a 53 percent decrease) and increase overall national spending on health care by about 2 percent cumulatively between 2013 and 2019.

Perhaps what makes all of this back and forth politicking over healthcare reform even more infuriating, is that Democrats have yet to seize this bull by the horns and broadcast the deeper truths and connect the dots for those Americans who do have insurance already.  Truth's like findings from the privately run Commonwealth Fund who reported in a August 2009 study, that employer sponsored health insurance premiums increased by 119% from 1999 until 2008.  The study projects that premiums will double again without some sort of reform measure.
Fact of the matter, with healthcare reform as it stands,  American families will likely save almost $4,000 by 2020 according to the Commonwealth Fund study. 

As things stand, Democrats have yet to demonstrate that they have gumption and ability to forge legislation through to fruition that will impact the lives of their constituents in a positive way. With the current somewhat flawed, but still `incrementally' positive healthcare reform bill, Democrats have the chance to show they are proactive as leaders and that government can do good things for its people. The President is correct to ask that they draw a line in the sand, and that they pass this bill.

Link to full Story
Cody Lyon
Excerpts from "Real Estate NY" and globeSt.com

Meanwhile, for its part, the Port maintains it's met obligations called for in the 2006 Master Development plan, and "continues to meet them." In August, Port Authority executive director Chris Ward argued that any arbitration decision under the 2006 MDA will not resolve the question of 'when there will be a market for the two private office towers on the site, and how the 'speculative' private office space should be financed.

Almost sadly, the squabble of today seems decades away from the time eight years ago, when at least officially, a consensus emerged, that foresaw the timely rebuilding of the World Trade Center as a message of defiance and triumph that would serve as a symbol of New York City's economic and real estate dominance as well as the major catalyst for revitalizing Lower Manhattan.

Another Excerpt:
Pataki tells Real Estate New York "we had an obligation to keep Lower Manhattan a viable commercial center, in fact, the financial capital of the world." He adds, "that's why, the commitment was made, not to just have the memorial, the transit hub and the upgrading of infrastructure facilities, but, as the insurance documents required, the reconstruction of office space." Full story link

EXCERPT from globeSt.com:

"Part of what the incentives are meant to do is attract the attention of the business community to the opportunities they've been missing out on," Ben Thomases, New York City's first ever food policy coordinator, tells GlobeSt.com. He and representatives from other city agencies spearheading the proposal believe that "landlords, developers and supermarket operators haven't quite put together that the growth of population in these communities, and the lack of high quality supermarkets, is a lucrative opportunity."

In fact, according to research by the Center for an Urban Future's City Limits magazine, 1.67 million New Yorkers have, on average, less than one square foot of grocery store space each. Of those, 74,178 have no grocery store at all. More recently, the Department of City Planning summed that up more grimly, saying that three million New Yorkers are caught in areas with limited access to fresh produce, areas of the nation's largest city it calls "food deserts."

The stats tell a typical tale of urban sociological disparity. According to a 2008 study by the New York City Economic Development Corp. and the Departments of Health and Mental Hygiene and City Planning, a good number of the fresh food denied, live in low to moderate income neighborhoods. That lack of easy access and choice contributes to the fact that some city neighborhoods are home to some of the nation's highest rates of diabetes and obesity and all the ills that come with it.

"We have wealthy neighborhoods in Manhattan where less than 10% of the adults are obese, and low income neighborhoods in the South Bronx, north and central Brooklyn where more than 30% of the adults are obese," says Thomases. "Even if you factor out median income or mean educational attainment in an area, you still find that the presence or absence of a quality grocery store makes a substantial difference in health outcomes in that area."

LINK TO FULL STORY at www.globest.com

Full text at GLOBEST.COM

LINK TO FULL STORY

EXCERPT

A spokesman for Bloomberg tells GlobeSt.com that he wants to help break the current impasse. "He wants to make sure they're talking," says the spokesman. "The mayor is a firm believer that Lower Manhattan is going to come back and we need to invest, and there are billions of dollars being invested now downtown, but, he wants to make sure we continue to see that," says the spokesperson.

Drawing on history, Silver told the Downtown Lower Manhattan Association breakfast that former New York Governor Nelson Rockefeller, along with brother David, and the Downtown Association, led the effort to build the original World Trade Center even though demand for office space in Manhattan was weak.

As Angus K. Gillespie's book titled Twin Towers: Life of New York City's World Trade Center points out, as plans for the site became more clear in the 1960's, private real estate developers and members of the Real Estate Board of New York raised concerns about the 'much subsidized' office space going on an open market that had a glut of vacancies.