Sara Paretsky on Feminism, Social Action and Detective Fiction


Sara Paretsky on her work and her politics.
By Matthew Rothschild

[This interview with mystery writer/social activist Sara Paretsky first ran in the March issue of The Progressive. The Rag Blog.]

I’m not a voracious reader of detective novels, but I wanted to meet Sara Paretsky. She’s the feminist crime novelist, based in Chicago, who is famous for her V. I. Warshawski series.

What impresses me about Paretsky’s work is how engaged she is politically. Bleeding Kansas has a subplot about opposing the Iraq War. Blacklist, which came out in 2003, deals not only with McCarthyism but also with the assault on our civil liberties in Bush’s post-9/11 America. “We were living in paranoid times,” her alter ego writes in Blacklist.

She is even more explicit in her recent memoir, Writing in an Age of Silence. “It is hard not to feel despair,” she declares, adding a little later: “I am tired. V. I. is tired, but we both need to get back on our horses.”

This tall, thin woman in a gray plaid suit with a grayish white scarf to match her hair overflowed with real-life stories she’s yet to put into print. She talked about a driver her publisher had once assigned to her, and what a nice man he was, though his entire family was in the mob. And she regaled me with stories about Bill Clinton, who has taken to sending her lengthy handwritten letters.

The weekend I talked with her, Paretsky received word that Writing in an Age of Silence was a finalist for the National Book Critics Circle Award.

You mention being an organizer in Chicago in 1966 when Martin Luther King Jr. was there. What was that like?

Sara Paretsky: Organizer is kind of a grand term for what I was doing. I answered an ad that the Presbyterian Church of Chicago put up on college campuses. I was at the University of Kansas, and it’s somewhat relevant to my life and work that I’m a Jew. But they weren’t doing a religious litmus test. They wanted energetic, civil-rights-committed college students to come help them run some summer programs.

This was a very progressive group of clergy who foresaw the race riots that were going to take place when Dr. King started helping the local civil rights community push for open housing. They were sort of hoping against hope that we could educate kids in a way that could counter some of the racist messages they were imbibing at home. I don’t know whether we did any good, but it changed my life in every single way.

Q: How?

Paretsky: I had a fantasy as a child that I might be a writer someday. I always thought that meant you went to New York or Paris. But after that intense summer, I never thought that I wanted to live any place but Chicago. It also made me see what the stakes were in the civil rights movement. And it made me see what real hatred was like and the forms that it took. But it also made me understand how powerless ordinary people feel in their lives.

These events are swirling around them. In the white community, people felt like they had no control over their neighborhoods, their destiny. In the black community, centuries of government and economic forces were pushing on them. I went in with a kind of arrogance, maybe, that came from living in a very intellectual family, and I left knowing that there was a lot about the way people lived that I didn’t know about.

Q: How did you contend with that real hatred?

Paretsky: I have one vivid memory of one of the days that the marches were taking place. We were in a Catholic, predominantly Polish and Lithuanian neighborhood. Chicago is a place where people define themselves by their parish and by their ethnicity. When I tell people I was in the St. Justin Martyr parish, if they are native Chicagoans they know exactly where I was and what that was like. The Sunday before this particular march, the archbishop of Chicago, Cardinal Cody, had required all of his pastors to read a letter in support of open housing and economic justice in every parish in the city. And the fury in my community was just staggering.

The young priests in the parish were behind the message. The older priests weren’t necessarily, but they all followed the orders of the cardinal and read the letter. Every Sunday, 2,000 people came to mass at that parish. The following Sunday, the attendance dropped to 200, and never recovered.

The day of the march, we were forbidden to go to the march site. The man I worked for, the Presbyterian minister, knew we would want to be sort of martyrs for the cause and risk arrest. He didn’t want any of that going on. So he made us stay in the neighborhood. While we were walking around, we came to the Catholic church, and we saw that some people had set fire to carpets and banked them around the rectory, which was made out of wood. They knew every fire truck on the South Side was going to be in the park, that the rectory would just burn to the ground. Our one little act was putting out that fire.

Q: Did you get singed?

Paretsky: You know, I don’t remember. It would make a nice story if I said yes. But what I’ve learned is, when your adrenaline is flowing, you can do a lot. I’m not very physical, but once some punks were trying to break into my house and I chased them down.

Q: Sounds like a character in one of your novels. How did you become a crime novelist?

Paretsky: I sometimes think that I was like a sheep stumbling around in the dark. Yet the one common thing that I carried with me everywhere was loving crime fiction. I was in my early twenties when I first started reading American noir fiction, and that was when the women’s movement was starting to crest.

I was reading Raymond Chandler very much with the feminist eye. In six of his seven novels, it’s the woman who presents herself in a sexual way, who is the main bad person. And then you start reading more fiction, whether crime fiction or straight fiction, it’s just bad girls trying to make good boys do bad things, going all the way back to Adam and Eve. The woman that thou gavest me made me do it, Adam says to God.

So I began wanting to create a detective who really turned the tables on that image of women, to know that you could have a sex life and not be a bad person. You could have a sex life and still solve your own problems. It was eight years from when I started having the fantasy that I was going to create such a detective to when I actually sat down and came up with V. I. Warshawski. It was a long, slow journey to come to a writing voice and do that character.

Q: You say in your memoir that it’s hard for you to explore the characters of the wicked very well. Why?

Paretsky: Why is it hard for me to explore the character of people like Dick Cheney? When I see people with that much power, I don’t think of them as having believable foibles that are worth being empathetic with. They are just sitting on my head, making me feel helpless. When I look at Dick Cheney’s picture, I think, there is no soul there. He’s someone who has traded away everything that actually makes us human. So I guess that makes me not write about someone like him very humanly or perhaps very credibly.

Q: You write: “I cannot find words to express the depth of my loss or outrage about what’s happening to this country.” Can you find the words now?

Paretsky: I don’t know if I can find the words for it, but if this country ever recovers, it will not be in my lifetime. If I were elected President, the first thing I would do would be to set up a Department of Restoring the Bill of Rights. I would have 10,000 people working there.

Q: What is your view of Clinton and Obama?

Paretsky: I’m very torn. Barack was my state senator in Illinois, and I was one of his earliest supporters. I’ve always thought very highly of him. Here’s what I admire about Hillary: Every time I am going to walk away from her candidacy, I think, she has absorbed more hate than anyone I can think of over the past twenty years, and she hasn’t cracked under it. That’s a kind of iron fortitude that maybe we need in the President of the United States. People project on to Hillary because she is a woman. They either hate her for everything they hate about women or they long for her to be everything they want in a woman. It’s an impossible burden.

Q: On the other hand, Bleeding Kansas deals with the tragedy of the Iraq War, and Hillary Clinton voted for it. How do you wrestle with that?

Paretsky: Not at all easily. I worry about that. But I also worry about Barack and his “I will go one on one with all of these people.” There’s a certain kind of arrogance to that, either naiveté or arrogance, and both of them make me uncomfortable. I guess I don’t have a candidate who makes my heart go pitter-patter the way I wish it would.

I’m thinking, here’s an African American candidate—yes! And here’s a woman candidate—yes! Why can’t I get behind either one of them? Don’t tell me I have latent sexism or racism that I need to confront. I don’t believe that. I think we are so burned by the current situation that we want somebody that it isn’t possible to have. We want someone who definitely looks like the messiah.

Read all of it Here.

Posted in RagBlog | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Hot Shots and Classic Takes

Willie Nelson and John Belushi. Photo by Stephanie Chernikowski / The Rag Blog

Posted in RagBlog | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

As Long As It Is Legal Tender

Boutique businesses for money laundering
From Joe Bageant’s Blog.

Joe,

I have just read your essay Dead Man Shopping. Your writing simply dazzles. I wish you could enjoy the temperate climes of California. I wonder why certain writers, like Joan Didion and John Steinbeck, ever left this state for New York. To me their talent remained here. The provincial is perhaps the most critical of his own character, like the reformed smoker.

Twenty years ago I lived in Northern California, the Eureka area, which was branded by the twin male occupations of logging and fishing. A third dynamic was taking hold, the male occupation of pot growing. Fishermen may carry guns, loggers probably not, pot growers always.

A friend of mine returned to the area recently and came back with startling reports of a new urbanized, and unprosecuted epidemic of pot growing indoors. She tells me there are billboards advertising hydroponic equipment. Evidently the police don’t care, or they are on the take, (in Southern California they watch your electric and water bills) that much isn’t clear. What is clear about the boutique industry is that it has become the money laundering mechanism, specifically restaurants and microbreweries. Food service is notoriously difficult to audit.

The sheer size of the underground drug economy begs the question. So now when I see these small boutiques with little or no business, I don’t automatically assume its a hobby, it might be a business expense.

Anyway great piece, keep up the good work.

Dave

——

Dave,

We should be so lucky as to have a pot growing industry here in Winchester, Virginia! Especially if its profits could animate our dead downtown area.

Unfortunately, the locals are notoriously uncreative when it comes to main street business (a dog washing shop, a Dollar Store, etc.). But just the same, I am sending your idea to Charlie Weiss, president of the Winchester Chamber of Commerce.

It would be nice to see some dough around here for a change. It can be laundered money or covered with boogers — most of us don’t care, so long as it is legal tender.

Joe Bageant

PS: A city tax break for hydroponic tanks and grow lights would be nice too.

Source

Posted in RagBlog | Tagged , | Leave a comment

His Overwhelming Grace and Exasperated Wrath

God Damn America, Especially Pennsylvania
By Greg Palast

The kids were snoozing so I drove along the back roads skirting the Lackawanna River on a dawn hunt for black coffee and a newspaper.

I think even Norman Rockwell would have found this place too sticky sweet, too postcard: the weathered barns, the fallow fields perfectly snow-frosted; red, white and blue flags already up on the clapboard farmhouses and the white-washed church in the valley already full for Easter prayers.

At a gas station, I scored the paper and coffee, spilled some on the front page – the closest thing I’ve got to a religious ritual – then parked in front of a row of insanely pretty salt-box houses shining like mad teeth on the river bank.

Sheriffs Notice by Greg Palast

One was missing a pick-up in the driveway; its screen door was left half-open, and there was a letter taped to the window. The Sheriff’s Notice of eviction. Another foreclosure.

God damn America.

I know that’s what Obama’s spiritual guide would say.

But why? It seems likes He’s already done a pretty good job of damning these United States.

And He seems to have really taken it out on this corner of Pennsylvania.

The gargantuan Bethlehem steel works have dwindled to a few robot-operated mills controlled from Mumbai, India. The only remainders of nearby Carbondale’s mining industry are in display cases at the ageing Coal Inn. But you could still get out by selling your home to ski tourists from New York – until this year when mortgage markets turned cancerous. That leaves Forest City’s one industry, lumbering – which we can kiss goodbye since a recent ruling by the NAFTA board which allows the import of cheap Canadian wood.

Some local kid has made the paper having been thrown, helmet first, into the volcano called Iraq. The Scranton Times-Tribune, two pages after the photo of a priest blessing a bowl of who knows what, noted that three soldiers killed in yesterday’s bombing are, “pushing the death toll in the five-year conflict to nearly 4,000” – which is true if you don’t count Iraqi dead. But Someone must be counting them. (From way up in heaven, I wonder if we look like a nation of Christians – or an empire of Romans.)

Phil Ochs, before he killed himself, wrote,

“This is a land full of power and glory,
Beauty that words cannot recall.
But her power shall rest on the strength of her freedom.
Her glory shall rest on us all.”

Whatever. It’s a difficult place to be an atheist, in this America, surfeited as it is on every vista with signs of His overwhelming grace and His exasperated wrath. It’s as if the Lord Himself is just as confused and frustrated and disappointed as the rest of us by blessings so abused.

There’s one consolation. He has apparently granted Pennsylvanians the privilege, come April 22, of choosing which Democrat will lose in November.

Which may not mean much to Sandy Ryder on whom the spirit of Easter has landed like a ton of bricks. Sandy, says the flyer tacked up at the Bingham diner, was, “Recently diagnosed with Inflammatory Breast Cancer.” She’s a, “Single mother of two – Tony and Brandon – and Grandmother of one – Jason.”

Benefit for Sandy

And there they were in a photocopied portrait, the earnest elder son and little Jason to her right, the young slacker (Tony? Brandon?) slouched to her left. The town’s hawking a benefit for Sandy, $10 at the door, “including Food and Beverage” and a “Chinese auction.”

(I’ll bet Al Qaeda could pick up some recruits here – if Osama would offer health insurance.)

Whatever. This is, after all, Holy Week, which marks the anniversary of the grounding of the Exxon Valdez, the day the giant oil corporation soaked 1,200 miles of Alaska’s coast with crude sludge. March 24 marks 19 years since the grounding and 19 years since Exxon’s promise to compensate the ruined fishermen. You should watch the 19-year-old video-tape of Exxon’s man in Alaska. I especially like the part where he tells the fishermen, “You have had some good luck – and you don’t realize it.”

I know some of the fishermen on the TV footage, like the Anderson family, Eyak Natives. I can tell you, the Eyak don’t feel so lucky, still waiting for the Supreme Court to act on Exxon’s latest stall on payment. They’ve seen plenty of Sheriff’s Notices these past 19 years.

So Happy Easter.

George Bush tells us he’s, “feeling just fine.” And we should be glad for him, I suppose.

Bush ends his most belligerent speeches by saying, “God bless America.”

So, why hasn’t He?

Maybe you can tell us, Mr. President: Why hasn’t He?

Sunday, March 23, 2008, Forest City, PA

Greg Palast is the author of the NY Times best-selling books Armed Madhouse and Best Democracy Money Can Buy.

Source

Posted in RagBlog | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Stay the Same – Get Left Behind

Blogger Michael Lewis.

“Getting Free”
From Michael Lewis’ Hayduke Blogs.

I’m reading a book, by James Herod, called Getting Free: Creating an Association of Democratic Autonomous Neighborhoods. You can read it, and others online, download a .pdf copy or send the author some money and get a real copy.

Getting Free is an excellent expostulation of the principles of local anarchist organization via neighborhood assemblies and associations of assemblies, as I have explained here and elsewhere and which I proposed in a run for Borough Assembly in Fairbanks, Alaska, and promoted in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Herod has very clearly outlined the principles of such anti-capitalist organization, and steps to get from here to there. I have yet to read the other works on his web site, but they look to offer equal promise. I’m a little bit concerned, as the copyright date on the web site is 2007 and he hasn’t answered my email query. Time will tell.

Be that as it may… I’m a bit older now than when I ran for Borough Assembly and perhaps a bit.. well, older will have to do. I’m not sure if I’m wiser or just more cynical.

I’ve come to the realization, through life experience, gentle prodding by wiser comrades and lucky slaps up side the head, that most people in this world just don’t want to take more control over their own lives. To use a Rule of Thumb devised by my wife Jean and I, about 10% of the people in our world are concerned with the world around them and care to do much of anything about it. The 10% rule seems to apply whether it’s attendance at our Homeowner’s Association, our Live Oak Neighbors gatherings or support for preservation of our local greenbelt.

This is not to say that it cannot be otherwise. There is no “Human Nature” carved in stone, hanging over each and every one of our heads, forcing us to be this way. Individuals in this society are this way because this is how they are taught to be. (Notice how I say “they.” For some reason, Jean and I escaped this conditioning. I suspect there are a few others… 10% I might guess.)

It is a chicken and egg thing, though. Our society is formed by the way we are, which teaches children how to be human beings in our society. It seems like an inescapable spiral.

However, our society didn’t get this way overnight, and it cannot change to another form overnight. It takes time, perseverance, vision and dedication. This is where we come in.

Gandhi said, “Be the change you wish to see in the world.” Ram Dass told us, “Be here now.” Castaneda described the life of the impeccable warrior. It’s all the same thing. We each change the world we live in now, so that our life is moving toward a desired state. We remove ourselves from capitalist employment. We engage in and support neighborhood cooperatives, neighborhood assemblies, democratic decision-making. We withdraw our energy and cooperation from oppressive, capitalist institutions.

We work to build a better world here and now, not at some distant place and time. Our actions do not depend on the actions of others.

We have a finite number of decisions to make in the remainder of our lives. We live to make each decision count.

In times of great change, those who stay the same are left behind.

Source

Posted in RagBlog | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Raging Grannies Mourn the Dead in Iraq

Raging Grannies mourn at midnight in Palo Alto, California, on March 21, 2008. Members of the Raging Grannies Action League were mourning the loss of life and limb in the Iraqi War. Photo by Pam Walton who is producing a documentary on the Grannies. The Rag Blog.

Posted in RagBlog | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Forcing the Candidates to Get Serious About Ending the Wars

Anti-war Campaigners Have To Change Electoral Tactics
By Naomi Klein and Jeremy Scahill

Neither Clinton nor Obama has a real plan to end the occupation of Iraq, but they could be forced to change position

25/03/08 “The Guardian” — — ‘So?” So said Dick Cheney when asked last week about public opinion being overwhelmingly against the war in Iraq. “You can’t be blown off course by polls.” A few days later, his attitude, about the fact that the number of US soldiers killed in Iraq has reached 4,000, displayed similar levels of sympathy. They “voluntarily put on the uniform,” the vice-president told ABC news.

This brick wall of indifference helps explain the paradox in which we in the US anti-war camp find ourselves five years into the occupation of Iraq: anti-war sentiment is as strong as ever, but our movement seems to be dwindling. Sixty-four per cent of Americans tell pollsters they oppose the war, but you’d never know it from the thin turnout at recent rallies and vigils.

When asked why they aren’t expressing their anti-war opinions through the anti-war movement, many say they have simply lost faith in the power of protest. They marched against the war before it began, marched on the first, second and third anniversaries. And yet, five years on, US leaders are still shrugging: “So?”

That’s why it’s time for the anti-war movement to change tactics. We should direct our energy where it can still have an impact: the leading Democratic contenders.

Many argue otherwise. They say that if we want to end the war, we should simply pick a candidate who is not John McCain and help them win: we’ll sort out the details after the Republicans are evicted from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Some of the most prominent anti-war voices – from MoveOn.org to the Nation, the magazine we both write for – have gone down this route, throwing their weight behind the Obama campaign.

This is a serious strategic mistake. It is during a hotly contested campaign that anti-war forces have the power to actually sway US policy. As soon as we pick sides, we relegate ourselves to mere cheerleaders.

And when it comes to Iraq, there is little to cheer. Look past the rhetoric and it becomes clear that neither Barack Obama nor Hillary Clinton has a real plan to end the occupation. They could, however, be forced to change their positions, thanks to the unique dynamics of the prolonged primary battle.

Despite the calls for Clinton to withdraw in the name of “unity”, it is the very fact that Clinton and Obama are still fighting it out, fiercely vying for votes, that presents the anti-war movement with its best pressure point. And our pressure is badly needed.

For the first time in 14 years, weapons manufacturers are donating more to Democrats than to Republicans. The Democrats have received 52% of the defence industry’s political donations in this election cycle – up from a low of 32% in 1996. That money is about shaping foreign policy and, so far, it appears to be well spent.

While Clinton and Obama denounce the war with great passion, they both have detailed plans to continue it. Both say they intend to maintain the massive green zone, including the monstrous US embassy, and to retain US control of Baghdad airport.

They will have a “strike force” to engage in counter-terrorism, as well as trainers for the Iraqi military. Beyond these US forces, the army of green zone diplomats will require heavily armed security details, which are currently provided by Blackwater and other private security companies. At present there are as many private contractors supporting the occupation as there are soldiers, so these plans could mean tens of thousands of US personnel entrenched for the future.

In sharp contrast to this downsized occupation is the unequivocal message coming from hundreds of soldiers who served in Iraq and Afghanistan. Iraq Veterans Against the War which, earlier this month, held the Winter Soldier hearings in Silver Spring, Maryland – modelled on the 1971 Winter Soldier investigation, in which veterans testified about US atrocities in Vietnam – are not supporting any candidate or party. Instead they are calling for immediate, unconditional withdrawal of all US soldiers and contractors. Coming from peace activists, the “out now” position has been dismissed as naive. It is harder to ignore coming from the hundreds who have served – and continue to serve – on the frontlines.

The candidates know that much of the passion fuelling their campaigns flows from the desire among so many rank-and-file Democrats to end this disastrous war. Crucially, the candidates have already shown that they are vulnerable to pressure from the peace camp. When the Nation revealed that neither candidate was supporting legislation that would ban the use of Blackwater and other private security companies in Iraq, Clinton changed course. She became the most important US political leader to endorse the ban – scoring a point on Obama, who opposed the invasion from the start.

This is exactly where we want the candidates: outdoing each other to prove how serious they are about ending the war. That kind of battle has the power to energise voters and break the cynicism that is threatening both campaigns.

Let’s remember, unlike the outgoing Bush administration, these candidates need the support of the two-thirds of Americans who oppose the war in Iraq. If opinion transforms into action, they won’t be able to afford to say, “So?”

Copyright New York Times syndication

Naomi Klein is the author of The Shock Doctrine; Jeremy Scahill is the author of Blackwater: The Rise of the World’s Most Powerful Mercenary Army – Naomiklein.org.

Source

Posted in RagBlog | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

The Devil, You Say…

Posted in RagBlog | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Progressives for Obama

This call has been drafted for immediate circulation, discussion, and action.
by Tom Hayden, Bill Fletcher, Jr., Barbara Ehrenreich, and Danny Glover

All American progressives should unite for Barack Obama. We descend from the proud tradition of independent social movements that have made America a more just and democratic country.

We believe that the movement today supporting Barack Obama continues this great tradition of grass-roots participation drawing millions of people out of apathy and into participation in the decisions that affect all our lives. We believe that Barack Obama’s very biography reflects the positive potential of the globalization process that also contains such grave threats to our democracy when shaped only by the narrow interests of private corporations in an unregulated global marketplace.

We should instead be globalizing the values of equality, a living wage and environmental sustainability in the new world order, not hoping our deepest concerns will be protected by trickle down economics or charitable billionaires. By its very existence, the Obama campaign will stimulate a vision of globalization from below.

As progressives we believe this sudden and unexpected new movement is just what America needs. The future has arrived. The alternative would mean a return to the dismal status quo party politics that have failed so far to deliver peace, health care, full employment and effective answers to crises like global warming.

During past progressive peaks in our political history—the late Thirties, the early Sixties—social movements have provided the relentless pressure and innovative ideas that allowed centrist leaders to embrace visionary solutions. We find ourselves in just such a situation today.

We intend to join and engage with our brothers and sisters in the vast rainbow of social movements to come together in support of Obama’s unprecedented campaign and candidacy. Even though it is candidate-centered, there is no doubt that the campaign is a social movement, one greater than the candidate himself ever imagined.

Progressives can make a difference in close primary races like Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Oregon, Puerto Rico, and in the November general election. We can contribute our dollars. We have the proven online capacity to reach millions of swing voters in the primary and general election. We can and will defend Obama against negative attacks from any quarter.

We will seek Green support against the claim of some that there are no real differences between Obama and McCain. We will criticize any efforts by Democratic super-delegates to suppress the winner of the popular and delegate votes, or to legitimize the flawed elections in Michigan and Florida. We will make our agenda known at the Democratic national convention and fight for a platform emphasizing progressive priorities as the path to victory.

Obama’s March 17 speech on racism was as great a speech as ever given by a presidential candidate, revealing a philosophical depth, personal authenticity, and political intelligence that should convince any but the hardest of ideologues that he carries unmatched leadership potentials for overcoming the divide-and-conquer tactics which have sundered Americans since the first slaves arrived here in chains.

Only words? What words they were.

However, the fact that Barack Obama openly defines himself as a centrist invites the formation of this progressive force within his coalition. Anything less could allow his eventual drift towards the right as the general election approaches. It was the industrial strikes and radical organizers in the 1930s who pushed Roosevelt to support the New Deal.

It was the civil rights and student movements that brought about voting rights legislation under Lyndon Johnson and propelled Eugene McCarthy and Bobby Kennedy’s anti-war campaigns. It was the original Earth Day that led Richard Nixon to sign environmental laws. And it will be the Obama movement that makes it necessary and possible to end the war in Iraq, renew our economy with a populist emphasis, and confront the challenge of global warming.

We should not only keep the pressure on, but we also should connect the issues that Barack Obama has made central to his campaign into an overarching progressive vision.

– The Iraq War must end as rapidly as possible, not in five years. All our troops must be withdrawn. Diplomacy and trade must replace further military occupation or military escalation into Iran and Pakistan. We should not stop urging Barack Obama to avoid leaving American advisers behind in Iraq in a counterinsurgency quagmire like Afghanistan today or Central America in the 1970s and 1980s. Nor should he simply transfer American combat troops from the quagmire in Iraq to the quagmire in Afghanistan.

– Iraq cannot be separated from our economic crisis. Iraq is costing trillions of dollars that should be invested in jobs, universal health care, education, housing and public works here at home. Our own Gulf Coast requires the attention and funds now spent on Gulf oil.

– Iraq cannot be separated from our energy crisis. We are spending an unheard-of $100/barrel for oil. We are officially committed to wars over oil supplies far into the future. We instead need a war against global warming and for energy independence from Middle Eastern police states and multinational corporations.

Progressives should support Obama’s 16-month combat troop withdrawal plan in comparison to Clinton’s open-ended one, and demand that both candidates avoid a slide into four more years of low-visibility counterinsurgency.

Read all of it here.
Progressives for Obama / March 24, 2008 / The Rag Blog

TOM HAYDEN is author of Ending the War in Iraq, a five-time Democratic convention delegate, former state senator, and board member of the Progressive Democrats of America, and was a founder of the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS); BILL FLETCHER, JR., who originated the call for founding “Progressives for Obama,” is the executive editor of Black Commentator, and founder of the Center for Labor Renewal; BARBARA EHRENREICH is the author of Dancing in the Streets[2007] and other popular works and, with Hayden, a member of The Nation’s editorial board; DANNY GLOVER is the respected actor, activist, and chairman of the board of TransAfrica Forum.

Hayden, Fletcher and Ehrenreich are members of the Board of Foundation for a Democratic Society, affiliated with MDS and SDS.
Posted in RagBlog | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Moon over Miami : Spyin’ on My Love and Me…

Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV), aka Spy in the Sky.

He SEES you when you’re sleeping. He KNOWS when you’re awake. He KNOWS if you’ve been bad or good. So be good for goodness sake…

Spy-in-the-sky drone sets sights on Miami
By Tom Brown /Reuters / March 26, 2008

MIAMI – Miami police could soon be the first in the United States to use cutting-edge, spy-in-the-sky technology to beef up their fight against crime.

A small pilotless drone manufactured by Honeywell International, capable of hovering and “staring” using electro-optic or infrared sensors, is expected to make its debut soon in the skies over the Florida Everglades.

If use of the drone wins Federal Aviation Administration approval after tests, the Miami-Dade Police Department will start flying the 14-pound (6.3 kg) drone over urban areas with an eye toward full-fledged employment in crime fighting.

“Our intentions are to use it only in tactical situations as an extra set of eyes,” said police department spokesman Juan Villalba.

“We intend to use this to benefit us in carrying out our mission,” he added, saying the wingless Honeywell aircraft, which fits into a backpack and is capable of vertical takeoff and landing, seems ideally suited for use by SWAT teams in hostage situations or dealing with “barricaded subjects.”

Miami-Dade police are not alone, however.

Taking their lead from the U.S. military, which has used drones in Iraq and Afghanistan for years, law enforcement agencies across the country have voiced a growing interest in using drones for domestic crime-fighting missions.

Known in the aerospace industry as UAVs, for unmanned aerial vehicles, drones have been under development for decades in the United States.

The CIA acknowledges that it developed a dragonfly-sized UAV known as the “Insectohopter” for laser-guided spy operations as long ago as the 1970s.

And other advanced work on robotic flyers has clearly been under way for quite some time.

“The FBI is experimenting with a variety of unmanned aerial vehicles,” said Marcus Thomas, an assistant director of the bureau’s Operational Technology Division.
“At this point they have been used mainly for search and rescue missions,” he added. “It certainly is an up-and-coming technology and the FBI is researching additional uses for UAVs.”

SAFETY, PRIVACY CONCERNS

U.S. Customs and Border Protection has been flying drones over the Arizona desert and southwest border with Mexico since 2006 and will soon deploy one in North Dakota to patrol the Canadian border as well.

This month, Customs and Border Protection spokesman Juan Munoz Torres said the agency would also begin test flights of a modified version of its large Predator B drones, built by General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, over the Gulf of Mexico.

Citing numerous safety concerns, the FAA — the government agency responsible for regulating civil aviation — has been slow in developing procedures for the use of UAVs by police departments.

“You don’t want one of these coming down on grandma’s windshield when she’s on her way to the grocery store,” said Doug Davis, the FAA’s program manager for unmanned aerial systems.

He acknowledged strong interest from law enforcement agencies in getting UAVs up and running, however, and said the smaller aircraft particularly were likely to have a “huge economic impact” over the next 10 years.

Getting clearance for police and other civilian agencies to fly can’t come soon enough for Billy Robinson, chief executive of Cyber Defense Systems Inc, a small start-up company in St. Petersburg, Florida. His company makes an 8-pound (3.6 kg) kite-sized UAV that was flown for a time by police in Palm Bay, Florida, and in other towns, before the FAA stepped in.

“We’ve had interest from dozens of law enforcement agencies,” said Robinson. “They (the FAA) are preventing a bunch of small companies such as ours from becoming profitable,” he said.

Some privacy advocates, however, say rules and ordinances need to be drafted to protect civil liberties during surveillance operations.

“There’s been controversies all around about putting up surveillance cameras in public areas,” said Howard Simon, Florida director of the American Civil Liberties Union.

“Technological developments can be used by law enforcement in a way that enhances public safety,” he said. “But every enhanced technology also contains a threat of further erosion of privacy.”

(Reporting by Tom Brown; Editing by Michael Christie and Eddie Evans)

Source.

From Jim Baldauf / The Rag Blog
Posted in RagBlog | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

"Four Pinocchios" for Hillary

Why Is Hillary Clinton Lying?
By Robert Parry / March 26, 2008

Two weeks ago, I wrote a story that observed a disturbing trend in Hillary Clinton’s campaign – her growing tendency to stretch the truth, twist what her chief rival was saying and then rely on her supporters to go on the offensive against you if you spoke up.

These tendencies were troubling, in part, because they mirrored what had become so common during George W. Bush’s years: to declare that a fantasy is the truth and then to attack the patriotism or sanity of anyone who thinks otherwise. I wrote:

“Throughout history, it’s been common for politicians to shade the truth when caught in a tight spot. But sometimes politicians push the limits, crossing the line into an Orwellian world where up is down, where bullies are victims, where people objecting to the lies are shouted down.”

The article cited a number of examples of Clinton turning reality inside out and repeating false attack lines against Barack Obama, such as claiming that he wanted to “bomb Pakistan” when he really advocated attacking al-Qaeda targets inside Pakistan if the government there refused to act. [See “Clinton’s Up-Is-Down World.”]

A week later, I cited a report in the Boston Globe about Clinton exaggerating her behind-the-scenes support for the State Children’s Health Insurance Program – which was fashioned and passed by a bipartisan congressional effort led by Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Massachusetts, and Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah. I noted that Clinton had transformed her peripheral role into a central theme of her campaign.

“In Clinton’s narrative, she picked herself up from her failed health-care plan, learned some lessons, and then pushed through a slimmed-down measure (S-CHIP) that has produced important results for millions of American families,” my story said. [See “Clinton’s Child-Health Hype.”]

Not surprisingly, these articles questioning Clinton’s truthfulness drew furious reactions from Clinton’s supporters who seem on perpetual alert to any criticism of their candidate, so it can be repudiated as an example of “sexism,” “Hillary bashing” or membership in some “Barack Obama cult.”

The Clinton campaign seems to have concluded that the only way to react to negative comments is by going on the attack. Some Clinton supporters have boasted of this strategy as the only way to beat the Republicans at their own game – even if the broadsides now are aimed at fellow Democrats and journalists who defended the Clintons when they faced unfair accusations in the 1990s.

But those two tendencies – stretching the truth and smacking around anyone who objects – have now led Sen. Clinton into one of the most embarrassing moments of the campaign.

To pump up her mostly ceremonial role as First Lady into experience as a national-security crisis manager, Clinton began embellishing a 1996 trip to war-torn Bosnia that she claimed was too dangerous for her husband, then-President Bill Clinton, to undertake.

When this story became part of Sen. Clinton’s stump speech, one of people on the trip, the comedian Sinbad, disputed her account, claiming that the “scariest” part of the trip was deciding where to eat.

Yet, even with the veracity of her account in question, Clinton stretched the truth even further.

“I remember landing under sniper fire,” Clinton said in a major foreign policy speech at George Washington University on March 17. “There was supposed to be some kind of greeting ceremony at the [Tuzla] airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into vehicles to get to our base.”

In a fact-checking article on March 22, the Washington Post’s Michael Dobbs concluded that “Clinton’s tale of landing at Tuzla airport ‘under sniper fire’ and then running for cover is simply not credible. Photographs and video of the arrival ceremony, combined with contemporaneous news reports, tell a very different story.”

Dobbs awarded Clinton the maximum of “four Pinocchios” for telling a “whopper.”

Yet, instead of immediately retracting the false account and apologizing, the Clinton campaign went after Dobbs and the Post, trying to browbeat them into retreat on the story.

Lissa Muscatine, one of Clinton’s speechwriters in 1996 who was on the trip, accused Dobbs of failing to provide a full picture of what took place. “We were told that a welcoming ceremony on the tarmac might be canceled because of sniper fire in the hills surrounding the air strip,” she said.

Then, Gen. William Nash, who commanded U.S. troops in Bosnia, called in with a complaint that he had been misquoted when he said there was a lack of any “security threat.” He now said there were some “security concerns,” though he admitted he knew of no “sniper threat.”

Dobbs and the Post stood by their fact-checking article and the “four Pinocchios.”

It was only after CBS News ran footage of Clinton walking calmly across the tarmac with daughter Chelsea and chatting with dignitaries and a young child that Clinton began to back down.

Finally, on March 24, first the Clinton campaign and then the candidate retracted the false account, saying she “misspoke” but offering no explanation of why the error had occurred.

One possible reason for this extraordinary gaffe is that the Clinton campaign’s combativeness has veered out of control.

So, when critics questioned how her First Lady experience prepared her for that 3 a.m. “red phone” crisis that she highlighted in a campaign ad, she and the campaign charged ahead. They also may have felt they could get away with a gross exaggeration in part because they had beaten back earlier questions about her honesty.

In many ways, it appears that the Clinton campaign is replicating a typical hardball Republican campaign – or for that matter a Republican administration. Instead of self-restraint and self-criticism, it’s all about going on the attack, never admitting mistakes – and treating critics like enemies.

As the New York Times noted after Clinton’s grudging admission about the bogus sniper story, “the backpedaling was a rare instance of Mrs. Clinton’s acknowledging an error.” [NYT, March 25, 2008]

Who does that sound like?

[Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories in the 1980s for the Associated Press and Newsweek. His latest book, Neck Deep: The Disastrous Presidency of George W. Bush, was written with two of his sons, Sam and Nat, and can be ordered at neckdeepbook.com. His two previous books, Secrecy & Privilege: The Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq and Lost History: Contras, Cocaine, the Press & ‘Project Truth’ are also available there. Or go to Amazon.com.]

Source
From Jim Baldauf / The Rag Blog

Posted in RagBlog | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

EVA BUSH (More Braun Than Brains)

[singing fun for the whole family,
to the tune of “Peggy Sue”]

you used to be Laura
but you married that horror
your crime may be subliminable
but you married a war criminable
(chorus)
oh Eva, oh Eva bush
you know I love that Bush
that pretty Eva Bush

she used to be a teacher
but now we can’t reach her
she banned those peace poets
Eva we didn’t think you’d ho’ it
(chorus)

would a paragon of morals
rest on Iraqi corpses’ laurels
though her outfits are tres slimming
she’s a big ol Stepford lemming
(chorus)

Eva’s known to love books
and highpowered Enron crooks
but I guess she’s not that brainy
cause she loves the wrong Cheney
(chorus)

we knew that George is without sin
and should’ve known that he would win
when Eva came up with the plan
for naked pyramids of man
(chorus)

Eva’s big boy loves his bike
and there’s no pantsuit she won’t like
but they were made for each other
cause she turned out like his mother
(chorus)

Eva loves her cowpoke
and tells a great horse penis joke
though she wears those pantsuits like a burka
she’s a Norman Rockwell berserker
(chorus)

Now Eva loves to wave
and she’d never hurt her slave
but what I’d really like to know is
does Eva keep it shaved
and could it make that man behave?
(chorus)

By Larry Piltz / March 25, 2008
Indian Cove / Austin, Texas / The Rag Blog

Posted in Rag Bloggers | Tagged , | Leave a comment