Sunday, August 09, 2009

Roundtable

Jim: This is a current events roundtable and we're tossing it together as a scramble as we rush to round out the edition. Participating are The Third Estate Sunday Review's Dona, Ty, Jess, Ava, and me, Jim; Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude; Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man; C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review; Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills); Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix; Mike of Mikey Likes It!; Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz); Ruth of Ruth's Report; Trina of Trina's Kitchen; Wally of The Daily Jot; Marcia of SICKOFITRDLZ; Stan of Oh Boy It Never Ends; Isaiah of The World Today Just Nuts and Ann of Ann's Mega Dub. Ty, why don't you give us an overview of what we've got so far?


Roundtable

Ty: Complete in all ways except typing, we have a commentary on radio by Ava and C.I., we have "Idiot of the Week," we have a lengthy essay on the so-called 'birthers,' we have a piece on Lou Dobbs, a piece on the Green Party and Mike, Elaine, Wally, Kat, Betty, Cedric, Ruth, Stan, Marcia and Rebecca have done "Highlights." That's all we have completed.





Jim: Dona, go over what we'd like to do?





Dona: We want to do a piece on American Dad. We need to do a piece that expands on C.I.'s "Sandra Bullock's Proposal to pass $150 million mark" and focuses on the film Bullock's The Proposal. We need to figure out truest -- if we're going to have any. We also need to figure out if there's time for Ava and C.I. to cover TV this week? Their radio commentary? That came about as a result of Betty's "Sick of KPFA's racism and especially Krish Welch" and Betty asking them to tackle it here as well as five e-mails asking that the issue be tackled. Now, the good news there was that it involves so many topics, that broadcast, that about three features we had planned were suddenly no longer needed because Ava and C.I. are hitting on those topics in their commentary. We don't have our editorial yet and we don't even have a topic at this point -- though everyone would assume it's Iraq.





Jim: Donald e-mailed last week wondering what went into an edition? We need a feature that we can plug a lot of things into so we're doing this roundtable and starting it this way allows Donald's question to be answered.





Marcia: If I can jump in, Friday, I blogged "In California" and, by the way, for a change everyone participating is face to face. We're all at C.I.'s house. So I blogged about Ava and C.I. arriving home, here in California, Friday night, after they, Wally and Kat had missed their booked flight. C.I. stopped to check and make sure we were all fine and then, immediately, Ava and C.I. had to get in front of the TV and begin watching things to figure out what they could review here. They were watching, they were taking notes, they were working the phones. And, as I pointed out then, all of that work, that most of us never witness, might have been for naught because they might show up for the writing edition only to have Jim tell them, "We need you to cover this." Instead.





Jim: Which you're saying happened.





Marcia: No, Betty asked them to cover the radio thing. I'm just pointing out, if we're going to talk about what goes into an edition, there's a lot of work that never gets noted.





Elaine: If I could make a suggestion?





Jim: Sure.





Elaine: A number of us roundtable The Proposal. We break off after whatever question or questions you're wanting everyone to weigh in on and then we go off to another roundtable just on The Proposal. That would include Mike and myself since we made a point to see the movie for the third time last week. It would obviously include Ava and C.I. I believe Betty made a point to see the film for her second time last week in order to discuss it.





Jim: Well, I thought we'd all want to participate, but okay, it probably would save time. Let me throw out a question and everyone can respond quickly and then everyone doing the movie roundtable can leave and we'll stay here and record -- Ty, grab the recorder -- this roundtable. Here's the big question, I'm searching for it, for one, last week, on Iraq what news would you emphasize and why?





Isaiah: I'd go with the news that another Friday saw mass deaths from bombings. I believe the bombing of the mosque just outside of Mosul resulted in 37 or 38 deaths and hundreds injured. This is becoming a pattern and refutes the Happy Talk that violence has gone down.





Jess: We're seated in a circle and we're moving in one. I would go with the continued assaults on Iraqi Christians. Among the deaths reported last week, 2 women, 2 Iraqi Christian women, were killed in their family home. Iraqi Christians continue to be targeted and it is the story that 'independent' media has never been interested in.





Betty: Let me leap over. I want to agree with Jess on that and I want it noted that if it's a mosque bombing, the Amy Goodmans are mentioning it in headlines. If it's a Christian church, they don't care. Now it's happened often enough that it's a pattern of bias and I'd argue that they really need to get over the disdain or hatred of Christianity if they want to pretend they cover the news.





Ava: I would agree with Betty on that. And with Jess, of course. Like many in the Latino community, I'm Catholic and it really does shock me how little play the attacks on Iraq's Christian community -- largely a part of the Catholic Church and that's certainly true in northern Iraq -- receive. But, remember, The Progressive did a 100 year anniversary -- even though it wasn't their 100th anniversary -- and in all the clippings and excerpts from and leading up to WWII, they never included anything on the Jews. You can flip through all those pages on WWII and the ones leading up to it, and you'll never learn one thing about -- or even see a mention of -- the Holocaust. I think there's some huge bias against religion at play.





C.I.: I'm trying to think of one thing. I guess I'd tie it all together, Nouri's attempts to curtail freedoms and to prevent criticism of him. This includes a proposed draft law that no US outlet has reported on -- even though they've all noted Nouri's attempts to censor the internet and books -- that would lead journalists to be legally punished if they reported the truth and it happened to harm or embarrass the government -- meaning Nouri. Let me point out, he has several lawsuits against journalists and news outlets currently. Most Americans have no idea because while you can discover this in the Arab media, in the US they tend to ignore it. Partly out of fear of being kicked out of Iraq. Just yesterday, Charles Levinson (Wall St. Journal) reported on Nouri's latest assault on freedoms, the creation of the State Ministry for National Security which would monitor other political parties and NGOs.





Wally: Every one's covered some really good things but I'd also add that, and C.I. made this point last week, we keep hearing that things are better. But if they're better, where are the human interest stories. If Iraq's dramatically safer, why is it the remaining reporters aren't going out and collecting human interest stories? If violence is raging, then reporters have an excuse to hide out in the Green Zone. But if it's 'safer,' where are the human interest stories that they should be able to report now?





Kat: For me, it's just the never ending lies. I'm so sick of the waves of Operation Happy Talk. I'm so sick of reading how things are better and knowing that if we did around, we'll find out that the reporters fudged reality. For example, NPR was all over a concert in Baghdad and how it was proof that things were better. But, and C.I. found this out with one phone call, that concert took place during the day. They wanted to hold it at night but it wasn't safe enough to do so. So for me, it's the never ending attempts to spin us all.





Marcia: The spin and the silence. I'm appalled by the silence. And I'm appalled by the ignorance. How dare Amy Goodman have Camilo Mejia on for a segment -- a wasted segment at that -- when she doesn't even know he's the chair of Iraq Veterans Against the War? And does not that demonstrate how little work she and her staff do? She's sitting there telling him he's the chair of Veterans for Peace and he has to stop her and tell her, no, he's the chair of IVAW. How does Amy Goodman miss those basic facts?





Stan: Oh. That sets me up for Jeremy Scahill and his ranting last week. If he was so damn determined to attack Christianity, he might have interested a few more people in his story. But I find it interesting that Jeremy goes on WBAI's Law & Disorder and says what the peace movement needs to do is reach out to the African-American community, and then he's filing another story and promoting it with his festering grudge against Christianity. I'm one of the many African-Americans or Blacks making up this roundtable and, someone tell Jeremey Scahill, every one of us is Christian. It's not uncommon in the African-American community. And it's hilarious he wants to preach a reach out one moment and push us away the next.





Ruth: For me, it's the realization that either people are liars or they actually think they're doing work on Iraq. I heard that on Pacifica all last week. People who had nothing to offer on Iraq but were convinced they were doing things -- on air -- to end the Iraq War. They're either liars or their delusional. I'm amazed by how little coverage an ongoing, illegal war gets from the so-called left.





Ann: In one of the snapshots last week, C.I. pointed out that Dahr Jamail hadn't been booked by Amy Goodman to discuss his new book. That is troubling. You'd assume that at least Dahr could still get on Democracy Now! to talk about Iraq. But it goes to how little interest Amy Goodman has in the subject. We're hoping, for anyone wondering, to do a book thing on the book next week. There are three of us who are finishing up the book so we can't do it this weekend.





Cedric: I'm going to go with the assault on Camp Ashraf and how it continues and how human rights activists are calling out the blockade of water, food and medical supplies and that's not an issue to our 'independent' media. I find it outrageous.





Rebecca: I think I'll stick with Cedric's topic. You know, Betty put it great two weeks ago. She said it didn't matter. In "Camp Ashraf," she said it didn't matter to her what the residents believed in, it didn't matter to her who they supported. What mattered to her was that this camp, filled with men, women and children, was under assault. And that's really all anyone has to know. I know Patrick Cockburn and others have made their little 'jokes' about the MEK. What good little tools they are for the US government. But the reality is, no one needs the jokes and an assault is ongoing and our supposed 'defenders for humanity' aren't making a peep. It's amazing. Even more so when you grasp this is a self-described Marxist group. You'd assume 'independent' media could make some time to cover the assault.





Trina: But why, Rebecca? As you point out, MEK is self-described Marxist. And Panhandle Media is filled with Marxists who pose as Democrats and 'independents' so why would they want to speak out for the MEK? It might risk them being dragged out of their political closets. They're cowards and their liars and I find very few people who trust them anymore because their little stunts and lies have gotten old.





Ty: My big shocker for last week was that there was a US service member who died of Iraq wounds in July. And the military covered it up until late Monday to be sure that all the July end-of-the-month reports were written and run not including that death. Six or so days after the guy dies, the military finally announces it. I found that shocking and sad.





Dona: It's as if each year, we're supposed to forget what we learned. The press assumes we do. They think they can repeatedly pull one over on us. I'm just amazed by how many still appear to think they can pimp turned-corner and get away with it.





Jim: Okay, now we're going to split. I assume Rebecca will moderate the other roundtable. We'll also be losing Ava, C.I., Betty, Elaine, Mike and I'm guessing Isaiah and Stan. Anyone else?



Cedric: Actually, Ann and I are going to that roundtable. I've written about Sandra Bullock at my blog from the days before joint-entries and The Proposal is the film, the only film, we've had time for this semester.



Jim: Okay, so as I understand it, we have Ty, Dona, Trina, Ruth, Wally and Marcia. Is that right? Jess is walking off with Ava.



Ty: Yeah, you want to explain why you sound so dejected?



Jim: It's just so rare that we're able to all be together for a roundtable. Okay, what's the biggest story of last week, domestically, that you feel didn't get coverage.



Trina: For me, it comes back to what I was writing about in "Zesty Potatoes in the Kitchen." Three banks were closed last week by federal regulators. Three US banks failed. Bringing the total to 72.



Wally: I had a question about that, sorry. That was 72 for the year, correct?


Trina: Yes. 72 banks have been shut down by federal regulators so far this year. We're in the eighth month so that averages out to nine banks a month.



Jim: That does seem like a large number. But is it? Does anyone know? What's the standard or the baseline?



Ty: First, here's info on the three closed this month:



Community First Bank, Prineville, Oregon, with approximatley $209 million in total assets, was closed. Home Federal Bank, Nampa, ID, has agreed to assume all deposits, excluding certain brokered deposits (approximately $182 million). (PR-141-2009)
Community National Bank of Sarasota County, Venice, Florida, with approximately $97 million in assets, was closed. Stearns Bank, N.A., St. Cloud, MN, has agreed to assume all deposits (approximately $93 million). (
PR-140-2009)
First State Bank, Sarasota, Florida, with approximately $463 million in assets, was closed. Stearns Bank, N.A., St. Cloud, MN, has agreed to assume all deposits, excluding certain brokered deposits (approximately $387 million). (
PR-139-2009)



Dona: We're on the same page, literally. This web page, FDIC. In 2008, 24 banks were closed.



Ty: I'm counting 3 in 2007.



Dona: I'm quoting, "There were no bank failures in 2006."



Ty: And you see the same message on 2005 and four were closed in 2004. 3 in 2003.



Dona: 11 in 2002. 4 in 2001.



Ruth: According to my math, that's 49 banks shut down by the feds in the US from 2001 to 2008 and 72 so far this year. Which means the previous eight years all combined doesn't equal what we've seen this year. That should be very worrisome. I agree with Trina that this is a story that is not getting enough attention.



Jim: Okay. Cash for Clunkers got an additional two billion dollars. Marcia, you covered that some last week so do you want to explain that?



Marcia: Sure but I was barely blogging last week so the basics are that if you have a clunker, you can get a discount of approximately $5,000 towards the purchase of a new car. People are buying domestic and foreign models. Ruth and I were talking about how Senator Barbara Boxer wrongly said people were buying a lot more domestic models. But the money is going to the people -- at least the people who can afford to buy a new car -- and for that reason I am supporting it. Meaning, we've had bank bail outs and what have you, it's about time some bills got tossed at the people.



Jim: And car sales were up for July. That's why the program got more cash.



Marcia: Yes, they were. In fact, it's apparently so successful that NPR was saying early this morning that some dealers are fearful they might run out of cars. Let that be their biggest problem, that they sell out their lot.



Jim: Historical note, 35 years ago today, Richard Nixon resigned the US presidency in disgrace. What, if anything, did we learn?



Wally: I'll certainly go along with Ruth and Trina if they disagree, because they can remember it, but as someone born after Watergate, I really don't think the country learned a thing.



Trina: I wish I could say that I disagree with Wally. But I don't. In part because we saw Bully Boy Bush break one law after another -- including the illegal spying on American citizens -- and we saw no accountability. He was not impeached by the House. He certainly was not tried by the Senate. Like Wally, I don't see what we learned. Maybe people learned how to avoid being impeached? Maybe they learned how to bully and intimidate Congress?



Ruth: Or maybe Congress is just full of too many chickens? Look, Mike Gravel filibustered in the Senate to end the draft. When did you see a senator this decade willing to filibuster for anything? I did not see any. And I think the character of our Congress is much weaker. Even when there was enough support for impeachment, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi refused to put it 'on the table.'



Marcia: And John Conyers. Don't forget him. Pelosi can say it's 'off the table.' But Conyers headed the committee it would have come out of and he refused to buck Nancy even though, if he had, there would have been so much party support that Nancy couldn't have touched him without creating a huge uproar. John Conyers was chicken s**t. And then he lied to us and said Bush could be impeached when he left office. He left office over six months ago, where are those impeachment articles, John Conyers, where?



Ty: There's a -- in our journalism classes, Dona, Jim and I learned about Watergate being seen as an incident that led to distrust in the government. I'd argue that what took place this decade with the refusal to impeach Bush really rooted distrust even deeper. And like Wally, I don't believe we learned a thing from Watergate. As a country, we learned nothing. We've had one impeachment since, Bill Clinton. He was impeached by the House for lying about sex. That tells you what a joke our Congress is.



Jim: Okay, Ava and C.I. have repeatedly addressed how The Progressive did not celebrate 100 years this year. There are e-mail on that. Our e-mail address is thirdestatesundayreview@yahoo.com. Who wants to tackle that?



Dona: I will. In 1909, La Follette's Weekly magazine is started. In their 100th anniversary issue, this appears on page 30, from the December 7, 1929 issue of La Follette's Magazine: "New weekly launched; Company with $25,000 Capital Succeeds La Follette's. The Progressive Publishing company is the name of a new organization which has been incorporated with a capital stock of $25,000 and which will publish a new weekly to be called The Progressive." So The Progressive does not continue La Follette's Weekly. The magazine didn't change names, one ended and another began. The Progressive will hit 100 years in 2029.



Wally: That's really clear and no one should be confused. It's a shame Matthew Rothschild and others had to distort history while claiming to honor it.



Jim: Does anyone have a problem with health care and surrounding issues becomes the editorial because, if so, we can go ahead and wind down the roundtable. I want to thank everyone who stayed and participated it. I think we had some solid information about the banks and a nice discussion on Watergate and on Cash for Clunkers. But a number of the topics I'd selected depended on, for example, Kat or Betty and both are gone. So we're going to go ahead and stop the roundtable here and begin typing. This is a rush transcript.

Dona: I'm jumping in real quick to explain that there were a number of topics. Now one can't be addressed at all because Jess isn't here. It was about the Green Party and, specifically, about a Green who supposedly wanted to have a dialogue but when Jim replied back last week that anything said by either could go up at our website or their website or both, suddenly no dialogue was wanted. In other words, Jim could shut up publicly -- Jim and others, Jim really wasn't leading the charge against the fraud -- by having a private conversation. He wasn't interested no one would be.

Marcia: Without you saying the name, I already know who we're talking about. I think it was chicken s**t of her not to engage in a dialogue that could be made public. Let me guess, she wanted to hide behind Bob Barr for her bad racism call?

Jim: Yeah, you got it. She wanted me to read her bad column by Bob Barr. I don't send her reading materials. If she wants to have a conversation, let's have one. But I'm not going to do it off the books. I'm not going to be engaged in a conversation about topics we've addressed here -- including the one Stan has covered the most followed by Betty and both are in the other roundtable --- in private when the whole point of a dialogue is not, "Oh, I like you, you like me." The whole point is supposedly to increase understanding. So she was a chicken, yes, Marcia. And she seemed to think I'd want to read a Bob Barr column. Why? Am I Republican? No. Am I libertarian? No. Why would I give a damn what Bob Barr has to say? I know Adam Kokesh's opinion of Bob Barr and it's even lower than my own. So why the hell do I need to read a piece by Bob Barr.

Wally: Who is she to give reading lists anyway? She's called Sgt. Crowley, sorry, I don't know his first name, Cedric and I really didn't post on that topic, a racist. When that backfired on her -- and it did on all the ones screaming racism -- she suddenly wanted to say it was the police overstepping their bounds. She failed in her first attempt so she wanted a redo. Not interested, not interested at all.

Ruth: James Crowley is the sergeant's name.

Marcia: Thank you, Ruth. Um. Yeah. Let me make something clear here. For all the White lefties as well as for idiots of my own race. The party line coming down is that it's different for African-Americans. And that we all need to understand that. Well, by the same token, I and others need to understand it's different for Whites. And certainly people should have understood that before they tried to play the race card. If they had, they wouldn't be surprised that they stand so alone. They wanted to play the race card and the bulk of Americans -- including a large number of my race, African-American -- didn't see it as a race issue. I love how sometimes a minority matters to these people and other times it doesn't. In the case of the police, the minority of African-Americans matters. In the case of objections to health care, Nancy Pelosi and others keep insisting that they're not going to let a minority speak for the country. So which is it? Why does the minority opinion matter sometimes and not at other times. And, someone remind these White people, we don't live in "majority rule." There are a number of safeguards that exist for my race and others in the minorty.

Trina: So Jim -- I'm limited in what I can say here. I have relatives serving on the police force in Boston and Cambridge. I have a number of police officers in my family and retired police officers. Maybe making that disclosure means I can cut loose?

Jim: I would say you could, everyone else has been happy to cut loose and few have bothered to disclose anything before doing so.

Trina: Well one of the points Stan and Betty repeatedly emphasized was if Henry Gates was telling the truth about how Sgt Crowley had lied in the report and had victimized him and how there was all this stuff that the American people didn't know about yet, why did he end up having a beer with the guy? If I accused someone of all of that -- and I was telling the truth -- I wouldn't just not want to be around them, I'd be scared to be around them. It makes no sense but it's never made sense, Henry Gates' constantly changing tale.

Ty: Trina, you raised the issue of the working class early on. Did you want to touch on that?

Trina: Police officers are predominately working class in terms of their roots and, in terms of what they make, they remain working class. I was yet again amazed to see the left attack the working class it is as if these 'progressives' can't pass up any chance at scorning the working class. It's ugly and it needs to stop. And I'll further add that Henry Gates supposedly is considering moving not because of threats but because there have been so many complaints that a professor who is described repeatedly as "wealthy" has been provided with public housing. Harvard owns that home, not him. That's how it works in this country, the rich get public housing and the working class is usually one pay check away from being out on the street. As for Kimberly Wilder, she can kiss my ass. That piece of trash owes me an apology because she stereotyped all police officers as racists. Why did the little piece of trash do that? She explained she was mistreated once by a police officer. So she knows, she really, really knows. She knows nothing, she's a stupid ass moron. My opinion, I said it, don't go whining to C.I. I'm a grown woman and I'm responsible for my own remarks.

Wally: I agree with Trina. And I'm so damn sick of every chance the so-called left has, they go against the working class. Now idiots like Kimberly Wilder were telling you that Kentucky or whatever state was racist for supporting Hillary during their primary and not Barack. Even though the Kimmy Wilders had never visited those states. The Kimmy Wilders just knew those states were racists.

Ruth: Well maybe that police officer she had the run in with was from Kentucky? She seems to believe she can take one incident and stereotype. That is the heart of bigotry.

Marcia: Amen. Wally and I went to Kentucky, Wally and I went to state after state campaigning for Hillary and I don't want any Kimmy Wilder telling me about "those people." I was on the ground there. An African-American lesbian. I didn't hide my sexuality and I couldn't hide my race. I experienced no problems, I experienced an outpouring of warmth from Democrats and the reason for that is the Democrats aren't racists. But it was a nice little fairy tale to serve up every time Barack lost to Hillary. You just muttered "Damn racists!" and you didn't have to examine or explore because you had your easy answer.

Jim: To me, and we can wind this down, that's fine. I think this last section has been strong enough to go out and I thank everyone for their participation. But to me, this is the most important issue for the left today. We're not going to get anywhere if our objective is to feel superior to everyone. These non-stop attacks on the working class, this repeated hissing of 'racist' everytime there's a disagreement needs to stop. And all it's doing currently is ensuring that a lot of people are insulted and they're not going to listen to anything from the left as a result.

Ty: Quickly as we close, Betty's kids did the illustration.