Category: Domestic Policies

Categories
Domestic Policies News

The Smiths and the Folly of Testing

Whenever I read about the foolishness of using standardized tests to evaluate teachers, I am immediately reminded of my own experiences in school, and how even a competent student like me could have done serious damage to otherwise excellent teachers. I understand the danger of generalizing my experience to the larger issue, but I’m sure that I’m not alone, and I know that many teachers face the same issues I have.

Miss Smith was both my algebra and geometry teacher when I was in high school. She was an imposing women who asked great deal from us, and she didn’t tolerate either fools or students who didn’t want to learn mathematics. She was an excellent teacher in every way. The problem is that I learned very little according to the tests I took in class, and if 50% of her yearly evaluation was based on my, and some of my classmates’, performance on a standardized test, then she would have been in real trouble.

But the problem was not hers. The problem was mine. I studied, but algebra was a foreign language and geometry was an alien language. I did my homework. I went after school for help. I just didn’t, and couldn’t, get it. As the school years progressed, I lost some interest in math, which didn’t help my performance in Miss Smith’s class. So if I had to take a year-end test that would in any way tell the administration how effective a teacher Miss Smith was, my score would have impacted her evaluation. And that would be a terrible injustice to her.

Do I understand algebra and geometry today, three decades later? Yes and no. Algebra comes easier when I need to use variables in my day-to-day existence. Geometry? Not so much. I continue to try and get it, but it’s still an alien language. Miss Smith’s fault? Not on your life.

I also had another Smith in high school, but his name was Mister and he taught Earth Science. If you can believe it, I did worse in that class than I did in either of Miss Smith’s math classes. And again, the problem was me. There was very little that Mr. Smith could do to help me understand and apply facts and analysis about igneous and sedimentary rocks in a way that made sense to me. My test scores were routinely in the 20s and 30s, which mercifully he curved. Was he as effective a teacher as Miss Smith? No. Quite honestly, he wore a scowl daily, was sarcastic, and it was not always clear that he had all of his faculties while he was teaching. But other students did well in his class and he could be a very good teacher.

I had the power, though, to sink him if I had to take a standardized test that evaluated his abilities as a teacher. I didn’t learn much Earth Science and to this day tend to shy away from it, with the exception of plate tectonics, but I don’t really understand that all too well. I just like the rings of fire and how new Hawaiian land gets created.

I did well in English and I loved my Shakespeare class and the teacher (not named Smith), but my full Elizabethan flowering didn’t come until college. Do I give my professor the credit for getting me interested in the Bard? Of course not. It was my high school teacher, but again, if I had to take a standardized test on Hamlet or the Scottish play, I would not have done so well.

So it is with thousands of students in New Jersey and millions across the United States. They are in our classes and we can teach them, but even the good ones will not always learn everything that’s in the curriculum. Or they will do well on certain assignments, but when it comes to synthesis, they either can’t or won’t do it. They are children and they are unpredictable. The tests they’ll take were not meant to evaluate teacher performance.

Further, the standardized tests they’ll take mean very little to them, but they will have enormous consequences to the teachers who administer them. Does that make sense? It does to those people who think they’re reforming education or believe that America’s teachers are failing.

And to them, I can just see Miss Smith’s burning gaze falling upon them as she asks the immortal question I heard many times in her class: “How in the ham sandwich did you get an answer like that?”

For more, go to www.facebook.com/WhereDemocracyLives and on Twitter @rigrundfest

Categories
Domestic Policies women

Violence Against Women’s Act Unawareness At UNC

It seems like the Violence Against Women’s Act was re-signed so very long ago. President Obama signed this important legislation into law on March 7th in which many are hoping will curb attacks against women nationally. We could only hope. But at the University of North Carolina, it appears they are unaware of such legislation being signed, let alone it even being introduced or even discussed in the media, on television or even debated throughout various political battlegrounds both for and against this important and historic law.

Attorney Clay Turner of Chapel Hill North Carolina, sent a letter Monday to The University of North Carolina [UNC] Chancellor Holden Thorp, advising the school of the complaint that his client, Landen Gambill filed with the Office for Civil Rights in the U.S. Department of Education.  Ms. Gambill says the school expelled her for retaliation against her speaking out publicly about the rape and assault on the campus. Attorney Turner wrote to Thorp saying he was “to demand that you immediately end this reckless prosecution. The retaliatory charges against my client are inappropriate, unconstitutional and utterly without merit.”

Landen Gambill

Ms. Gambill has yet to identify the alleged offender but the Chancellor and the Board has stated that she violated the honor code by creating an environment that’s intimidating for him. FOR HIM… The accused!

After a hearings board cleared him of sexual assault, they did find him guilty of a much lesser charge of harassment but no criminal charges were filed.

Mr. Turner lashed out saying, “In speaking out for change at UNC, Ms. Gambill is not ‘harassing’ or ‘intimidating’ her abuser, whom she has never named. “Rather, the university’s decision to press charges against Ms. Gambill has tragically provided her abuser with the opportunity to harass and intimidate her” despite a no-contact order issued against him last May.

This makes the third such complaint against the University in which they are being accused of “under reporting” crimes on the campus. Also, Gambill and five additional women in January filed a Title IX complaint with the office of civil rights, saying UNC-Chapel Hill mishandles sexual abuse cases.

The school has denied any wrongdoing however, and continues to stand by its decision in expelling Ms. Gambill. But this will not go away. It has now gained national attention from Melissa Harris-Perry of MSNBC and others, so the heat on UNC’s Board will get hotter before cooler.

No, this story will not go away but the Chancellor is. Thorp is resigning in June to become the chief academic officer of Washington University in St. Louis.

The school this month hired two new employees to investigate sexual assault allegations and to help victims.

Stay tuned.

Categories
Domestic Policies marriage News Politics Religion

Redefining Equality

The Supreme Court will finally hear arguments in the Marriage Equality cases this week, and it’s about time. If justice delayed is justice denied, than we’ve had denial of justice for a good part of our population for far too long.

The opponents of marriage equality do not want to talk about civil rights. They don’t want to talk about equality. They don’t want to talk about gays sharing in society and being fully accepted in American culture. What they want to talk about is redefining marriage, which they say is what these cases are all about. They also want to point to the Bible for their definition, and cite its prohibitions against any homosexual activity. You’ll excuse me, but I am tired of having to worry about what a book that also mandates stoning, banishment and ritual murder has to say about people who live in a manner that is really not your business. If religious opponents of marriage equality can pick and choose which parts of the Bible they want to apply here, then I will feel free to ignore the Bible altogether as a remnant of tales, stories and oral histories that provide a fascinating narrative, but are not relevant to the modern world.

But in the end, they are simply redefining equality. And that’s wrong.

The main argument against marriage equality is that it would redefine the institution that opponents believe to be the bedrock of any civilization. Once you allow anybody who loves another person to marry them, then you’re opening the door to polygamy, incest and child marriage. Here’s Brian S. Brown, one of the most active opponents of marriage equality:

“When you knock over a core pillar of society like marriage, and then try to redefine biblical views of marriage as bigotry, there will be consequences,” Mr. Brown warned last August in a fund-raising letter. “Will one of the consequences be a serious push to normalize pedophilia?”

Then there’s this audio from the NPR program The Takeaway, where Joseph Backholm, executive director of Family Policy Institute, an anti-marriage equality group, says that not only should gays not be allowed to marry, they shouldn’t be able to adopt and raise children, since that right is traditionally reserved for those who can create children.  I guess childless heterosexual couples need not apply either.

This is what the right wing does best: They scare and twist facts so that there’s no other choice but to oppose the same things they oppose. But Mr. Brown did more than that. He enlisted African-American clergymen and women to oppose marriage equality because, he said, it was less a civil rights issue than one of religious doctrine. Wasn’t this the same argument that segregationists used to fight integration?

 Yes it was.

Denying people rights is the same no matter what their station is. Laws that forbid intermarriage were overturned. Laws that forbid certain sexual practices were overturned. Public places were integrated. The long history of our country generally moves in one direction; towards more freedom and more access for all groups. I can’t imagine the Supreme Court saying that marriage equality is against the Constitution. It’s just a matter of how far they’ll go.

The problem, though, is that even if the Court overturns the Defense of Marriage Act, it doesn’t mean that gay couples will have an unfettered right to marry or enjoy the same rights and privileges as heterosexual couples. Unless the Court mandates marriage equality throughout the nation, states that don’t recognize it can continue to not do so. That will continue to complicate the lives of those couples who are legally married in the eight states that do recognize marriages if they even visit states that do not. That’s not equality. More delays. More denials.

Here is a graphic that explains how the court might rule.

I expect that the Court will open the gates to marriage equality in some way, but won’t make a sweeping judgement that covers the whole country. I also believe that this will be another John Roberts decision and that he will provide the fifth vote in favor. If Anthony Kennedy comes along, then the tally will be 6-3. I just can’t see Scalia, Alito or Thomas signing on to this.

Opponents of marriage equality say that an expansion of marriage rights is not a done deal. I disagree. Many people already have these marriage rights in the states that recognize gay marriage. I cannot imagine that the court would take those rights away. And once they are affirmed, they will become part of the American way of life. Gay couples will be more visible and will ultimately become more accepted. It will take some time and there will be bumps along the way, but it will happen.

Because this is a civil rights issue. Plain and simple.

For more, go to www.facebook.com/WhereDemocracyLives and on Twitter @rigrundfest

Categories
Death Penalty Domestic Policies

The Death Penalty Debate – My Take

Corporal Punishment or ‘The Death Penalty’, has been a topic of national debate for years, especially on a state-by-state basis. Now, after eight years since its last execution, Maryland is planning to become the 18th state to abolish the ultimate punishment. Democratic Governor Martin O’Malley has been pushing for this legislation since his very first year in office. If the Bill passes, convictions will be downgraded to life without the possibility of parole as the most severe sentence statewide.

The House advanced the legislation this week after delegates rejected nearly 20 amendments, mostly from Republicans, aimed at keeping capital punishment for the most heinous crimes.

Death Penalties have been a subject of divisiveness since its inception. Supporters of repeal argue that the death penalty is costly, error-prone, racially biased and a poor deterrent of crime. But supporters of the death penalty say it is a necessary tool to punish lawbreakers who commit the most egregious crimes.

So what about you? How do you weigh in on ending someone’s life? Personally, I’ve teetered from one end of the spectrum to the other. I had been one that didn’t believe in putting someone to death for any reasons but over the years, as more and more senseless murders occur, I’ve leaned more towards Death.

Let’s look at the Mass Murderer or even a Serial Killer as an example. As they are initiating the act of murder, it appears to me to be premeditated, meaning their intentions are to deliberately take someone’s life without hesitation. I’m sorry, but if they are non-remorseful in their actions against an innocent human being, why should we be remorseful in saving there’s? Kind of cold I know, but aren’t they being just as cold, callous and calculated?

We have to look at this decision seriously and very closely. I know there are cases where some convictions are questionable; racially biased, wrongful convictions, etc., but in cases that are absolute, non-questionable convictions where the defendant is beyond the shadow of a doubt guilty, then we should pull the hammer, flip the switch, insert the needle… whatever the method, say goodnight. Some advocates claim this to be a costly solution to evil. Well, how much does it cost to keep them imprisoned for life? I don’t know the answer to that but I’m sure there are some figures out there.

What I do know is everyone has an opinion on this matter. And just think of some of the most heinous murders and murderers of our time and tell me where you side on it:

  • Charles Manson (Leader of Helter Skelter),
  • the Menedez Brothers,
  • David Berkowitz aka ‘Son of Sam’,
  • Ted Bundy
  • and now, a killer on trial for her very life currently, Jody Arias who killed her boyfriend by shooting him, stabbing him 29-times and slit his throat from ear to ear.

I know this debate will rage on, probably forever, but as Maryland attempts to be the 18th state to abolish the death penalty, families of those brutally and senselessly taken are left to wonder if justice is truly being served. Killing the killer will never bring back loved-ones but, sometimes, there is Justice in Satisfaction.

Categories
Domestic Policies Politics teacher evaluation

The Final NJ Teacher Evaluation Rules. Until They Change.

When my colleagues and I met with New Jersey Commissioner of Education Christopher Cerf and his staff in January, he alluded to March 6 as the date when the State Board of Education would be issuing its final rules on teacher evaluation. He reminded us that final rules meant that because of public comments the rules could change, but that we could confidently move ahead with our evaluation system based on what they said. If any were changed significantly, he said, we could also alter ours to adapt to the new rules.

That day is just around the corner. Next week, all interested parties are on notice that they can testify before the State BOE on the new rules, and that this will be the final time that the state board will hear comments. They are then set to consider any last minute changes and adopt the final rules in September. If this seems to be a tight time frame, it is. By design. Unless you’re in one of the Pilot I or Pilot II districts, you basically have this spring to work out any kinks in your evaluation plan, test it, get feedback from the faculty and staff, and get ready to fully implement it beginning in September. Curiouser, the state timeline says that all staff must be trained on their chosen system by August 31. So if there are any changes in September…well, that’s not on the agenda next week. But it would be fun to ask about it, yes?

Remember that the people I met at the DOE are true believers in this new system and to a person said that the old system was “failing our students and communities.” When the Superintendents at our meeting reminded the DOE Assistant Commissioners that their districts had effective evaluation systems in place and that our schools were educating students, the response was that 1. This system is better and 2. You’re lying.

Truly.

One of the assistants, who came from an effective suburban district noted that when he as an assistant principal(!) he came to the conclusion that the manner in which his nationally-noted Middlesex County district evaluated tenured staff members was a “joke” and “didn’t really do a good job at identifying failing teachers.” Thus, the whole state must now adhere to this gentleman’s skewed version of evaluation. It’s that bad.

If you can get down to Trenton on March 6, please do, because we need as many voices as we can to remind the state BOE that those of us who work in classrooms have real concerns about the evaluation system and process. Commissioner Cerf believes that he has the BOE in his pocket. Let’s make sure that our side has its say.

For more, go to www.facebook.com/WhereDemocracyLives and on Twitter @rigrundfest

Categories
Domestic Policies News Politics

The 5:22 to Sequestration Station

You can change here for Dysfunction Junction, or take the local, making all stops to Interminable Terminal. Have your tickets ready. If you can afford them.

This latest skirmish over the economy and the role of government is highlighting more than just the usual differences between the parties. It’s uncovering the stripped-bare disdain the Republicans have for negotiating with the president and their utter lack of gravity when it comes to exchanging ideas. Yes, the left does not want Obama to back down on anything related to Medicare or Social Security or balancing budget cuts with revenue, but when the other party simply refuses to meet you halfway, they cease to be a responsible partner.

Up to now, the GOP criticism of Obama was that he was playing politics with the sequester, didn’t have a specific plan to confront it, and was only looking to blame the Republicans for their obstinacy. And besides which, some said, the cuts will not be as bad as advertised. In fact, they won’t be bad at all.

Well, here comes the reality. Governors of both parties are getting plenty nervous about the effects the cuts will have on their still-fragile budgets. They won’t bring the government to a standstill, nor will they shut down Washington, which I believe to be the secret Republican fantasy, but they will do something worse. They will be a nuisance and a slow trickle of bad news. They will deny people who need certain services what they need. They might result in layoffs at the state and local levels. In short, they will drain away confidence at a time when we need it to increase. But if that’s what the GOP wants, then they’ll get it.

If government by enforced austerity was a theory, then I could see that implementing it could have some positive attributes. But all we need to do is look at Europe to see the real world application of destructive government pullbacks. It ain’t pretty, and it’s getting worse. So why continue to push it? Because the Republican Party is bent not only on destroying itself, but on sticking with ideology at the expense of common sense. I do not question anyone’s patriotism or call them disloyal in the way that Senator Ted Cruz did to Chuck Hagel, but I do wonder what motivates the right to follow policies that will have such a negative effect on the country.

I suppose that President Obama’s, and the Democrats’, worst nightmare would be that the sequester takes effect and the effect is minimal and possibly positive. That would embolden Republicans to continue to push for even more cuts, though not to the military I’m sure, and would discredit and undercut the left’s economic arguments. I’m not gambling on that outcome. The economy needs more money to circulate and get spent, not less. Exactly the opposite will begin happening on Friday.

All aboard.

Register your comments at www.facebook.com/WhereDemocracyLives and on Twitter @rigrundfest

 

Categories
Immigration Immigration Reform Politics

It’s Like Magic! Republicans Are Now For Immigration Reform – Eric Cantor Explains…

Eric Cantor and the leaders in the Republican party are on a massive outreach program, trying to get the votes of people they’ve actively tried to disenfranchised over the last few elections. Besides stealing a speech from President Obama where the President talked about different ways to help the middle class, Cantor went on television today and tried his best to convince Latinos that Republicans are for immigration, despite the fact that they unanimously voted against the last immigration bill called The Dream Act.

Representative Eric Cantor, the No. 2 Republican in the House of Representatives, said Congress could make quick progress on immigration if lawmakers agreed to give citizenship to children – an idea he opposed when it came up for a vote in 2010 as the DREAM Act.

“The best place to begin, I think, is with the children. Let’s go ahead and get that under our belt, put a win on the board,” Cantor said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

Cantor is leading an effort to improve his party’s image as many Republicans worry they will be consigned to irrelevancy in coming years if they do not reach out to the fast-growing Latino electorate, which strongly supports immigration reform.

President Barack Obama has made immigration reform a top priority of his second term in office and a bipartisan group of senators is working to draft legislation that would tackle the issue in a comprehensive manner, rather than the piecemeal approach that Cantor suggested.

Republicans have successfully fooled their base for so long that they now think they can take one position today and change tomorrow. And no one will notice. But I think they’re in for a rude awakening come 2014.

Categories
democrats Immigration Reform immigration reform Politics

Democrats And Republicans, Yes Republicans Agree On Immigration Reform Plan

A bipartisan group of U.S. senators has agreed on an immigration reform plan that would provide a path to citizenship for the 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States but only after borders are better secured.

The plan, unveiled a day before President Barack Obama is to give a policy speech on immigration in Nevada, tackles the most explosive issue – how to deal with the millions of foreigners living in the United States illegally.

Under the group’s proposal, undocumented immigrants would be allowed to register with the government, pay a fine, and then be given probationary legal status allowing them to work.

Ultimately, they would have to “go to the end of the line” and apply for permanent status, according to the document by eight Senators including Republicans Marco Rubio of Florida, John McCain and Jeff Flake of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, and Democrats Charles Schumer of New York, Dick Durbin of Illinois, Michael Bennet of Colorado and Robert Menendez of New Jersey.

The White House praised the group’s efforts but warned that Obama would not be satisfied until there was meaningful reform. The president “will continue to urge Congress to act until that is achieved,” a White House spokesman said.

r/t Reuters

Categories
Domestic Policies Martin Luther King Jr THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT

THE AMERICAN MOVEMENT

1 / 65

I Have a Dream

~Martin Luther King
I am happy to join with you today in what will go down in history as the greatest demonstration for freedom in the history of our nation.
Five score years ago, a great American, in whose symbolic shadow we stand today, signed the Emancipation Proclamation. This momentous decree came as a great beacon light of hope to millions of Negro slaves, who had been seared in the flames of withering injustice. It came as a joyous daybreak to end the long night of their captivity.
But one hundred years later, the Negro still is not free. One hundred years later, the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination. One hundred years later, the Negro lives on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity. One hundred years later, the Negro is still languished in the corners of American society and finds himself an exile in his own land. And so we’ve come here today to dramatize a shameful condition.
In a sense we have come to our nation’s capital to cash a check. When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men, yes, black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note, insofar as her citizens of color are concerned. Instead of honoring this sacred obligation, America has given the Negro people a bad check, a check which has come back marked “insufficient funds.”
But we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt. We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation. And so we have come to cash this check, a check that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and the security of justice.
We have also come to this hallowed spot to remind America of the fierce urgency of Now. This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off or to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism. Now is the time to make real the promises of democracy. Now is the time to rise from the dark and desolate valley of segregation to the sunlit path of racial justice. Now is the time to lift our nation from the quicksands of racial injustice to the solid rock of brotherhood. Now is the time to make justice a reality for all of God’s children.
It would be fatal for the nation to overlook the urgency of the moment. This sweltering summer of the Negro’s legitimate discontent will not pass until there is an invigorating autumn of freedom and equality. Nineteen sixty-three is not an end but a beginning. Those who hope that the Negro needed to blow off steam and will now be content will have a rude awakening if the nation returns to business as usual. There will be neither rest nor tranquility in America until the Negro is granted his citizenship rights. The whirlwinds of revolt will continue to shake the foundations of our nation until the bright day of justice emerges.
But there is something that I must say to my people who stand on the warm threshold which leads into the palace of justice. In the process of gaining our rightful place we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred. We must ever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force.
The marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to a distrust of all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny. And they have come to realize that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom. We cannot walk alone.
And as we walk, we must make the pledge that we shall always march ahead. We cannot turn back. There are those who are asking the devotees of civil rights, “When will you be satisfied?” We can never be satisfied as long as the Negro is the victim of the unspeakable horrors of police brutality. We can never be satisfied as long as our bodies, heavy with the fatigue of travel, cannot gain lodging in the motels of the highways and the hotels of the cities. We cannot be satisfied as long as a Negro in Mississippi cannot vote and a Negro in New York believes he has nothing for which to vote. No, no, we are not satisfied and we will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream.
I am not unmindful that some of you have come here out of great trials and tribulations. Some of you have come fresh from narrow jail cells. Some of you have come from areas where your quest for freedom left you battered by the storms of persecutions and staggered by the winds of police brutality. You have been the veterans of creative suffering. Continue to work with the faith that unearned suffering is redemptive. Go back to Mississippi, go back to Alabama, go back to South Carolina, go back to Georgia, go back to Louisiana, go back to the slums and ghettos of our northern cities, knowing that somehow this situation can and will be changed. Let us not wallow in the valley of despair, I say to you today, my friends. And so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.
I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal.
I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.
I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.
I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I have a dream today!
I have a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of interposition and nullification; one day right down in Alabama little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers. I have a dream today!
I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, and every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight, and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed and all flesh shall see it together.
This is our hope. This is the faith that I will go back to the South with. With this faith we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day. And this will be the day, this will be the day when all of God’s children will be able to sing with new meaning, “My country ’tis of thee, sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing. Land where my fathers died, land of the Pilgrim’s pride, from every mountainside, let freedom ring!” And if America is to be a great nation, this must become true.
And so let freedom ring — from the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire.
Let freedom ring — from the mighty mountains of New York.
Let freedom ring — from the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania.
Let freedom ring — from the snow-capped Rockies of Colorado.
Let freedom ring — from the curvaceous slopes of California.
But not only that.
Let freedom ring — from Stone Mountain of Georgia.
Let freedom ring — from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee.
Let freedom ring — from every hill and molehill of Mississippi, from every mountainside, let freedom ring!
And when this happens, when we allow freedom to ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God’s children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual,
“Free at last, free at last.
Thank God Almighty, we are free at last.”
Categories
Immigration Immigration Reform Politics

After Big Fiscal Cliff Win, Obama’s Next Battle – Immigration Reform

Despite a bruising fiscal cliff battle that managed to set the stage for an even more heated showdown that will likely take place in a matter of months, President Barack Obama is planning to move full steam ahead with the rest of his domestic policy agenda.

An Obama administration official said the president plans to push for immigration reform this January. The official, who spoke about legislative plans only on condition of anonymity, said that coming standoffs over deficit reduction are unlikely to drain momentum from other priorities. The White House plans to push forward quickly, not just on immigration reform but gun control laws as well.

The timeframe is likely to be cheered by Democrats and immigration reform advocates alike, who have privately expressed fears that Obama’s second term will be drowned out in seemingly unending showdowns between parties. The just-completed fiscal cliff deal is giving way to a two-month deadline to resolve delayed sequestration cuts, an expiring continuing resolution to fund the government and a debt ceiling that will soon be hit.

h/t Huffington Post

Categories
Domestic Policies sandy hook shooting violence

The Gun Conversation

Why are we still having this conversation? Why are we still debating whether we should regulate assault and military style (whatever that is) weapons and limit large purchases of ammunition? Why are we still beholden to an organization that believes that the United States Constitution guarantees an unlimited, unfettered, absolute right to a gun, despite a giant clause at the beginning of the Second Amendment that clearly refers to  militias? Do we have absolute free speech rights? Religious rights? Rights to assembly? No. These are all regulated activities. We need to regulate guns.

I’ve read the arguments about how a weapons ban or more regulation would not have stopped this horrific shooting. I’ve listened and watched as talking head after talking head drones on about how politically difficult it is for a Democratic president to pursue controls on weapons because it would be political death.

I’ve had conversations in person and on social media with people for whom their weapon seems to be their most cherished possession.

“If they come for my gun I’ll give them the bullets first!”
“Over my dead body!”
“From my cold dead hands!”
“First it’s my gun, then they’ll come for my house and my family!”
“What we need is for every teacher and principal to be trained in how to use a gun and to be issued one for their classroom.”

Clearly I don’t understand the mania, the attachment, the fear, the anger, and the entitlement that many people have with their guns. I’m not advocating taking anyone’s gun away who can’t prove that they’re responsible enough to carry one. I’m questioning the idea that we don’t have to ask more questions, or do more background checks or limit what kind of gun people can buy and how much ammunition they can get at one time. There are responsible ways to do this. We regulate so many things in our society from marriage to driver’s to pet licenses, from who can be a teacher and a police officer to how fresh the meat and dairy has to be in our food stores.

But guns? Weapons that can destroy lives? Kill children? Apparently not more than the way we regulate them now, despite the fact that the system doesn’t work. When a system doesn’t work and results in people’s deaths, you fix it. That’s what we need now.

Are there ways around these proposals? You bet. And people will find them. But the point is to put them in place and see how they work because what we have now has led to one of the bloodiest, tragic, heartbreaking years this country has seen in quite a while. Gun deaths are preventable. Let’s prevent them.

Register your comments at www.facebook.com/WhereDemocracyLives and on Twitter @rigrundfest

Categories
Domestic Policies

The AIG Bailout Worked – Taxpayers Earned $22.7 Billion in Profit

President Obama did what he felt was right. He authorized the bailout of AIG and received what seemed to be a never ending amount of criticism from Republicans and their news channel, Fox News.

But according to the latest report from the Treasury Department, it appears that the AIG Bailout was the right move, and now the president and the American people are laughing all the way to the bank.

The Treasury Department said on Tuesday that it had sold its remaining stake in the American International Group, earning about $7.6 billion from the sale.

The government sold the 234.2 million shares at $32.50 each, a small discount from the closing price of $33.36 on Monday. The block of shares represented a 15.9 percent stake in the insurer.

With the latest sale, taxpayers have gained about $22.7 billion from a bailout that many predicted would prompt a staggering loss. In an effort to stabilize the global banking system, the government rescued A.I.G. just days after the failure of Lehman Brothers.

The stock sale also means that A.I.G. is a fully private enterprise once more, after the government owned as much as 92 percent of its shares. After the sale, the Treasury Department will hold only warrants to buy about 2.7 million shares of A.I.G. common stock, which will also be sold to generate a profit.

Exit mobile version