ASK Musings

No matter where you go, there you are.

Politics Archive

Tuesday

5

June 2012

0

COMMENTS

Why are we judging people who need help?

Written by , Posted in Politics

There’s a someecard I’ve seen going around with this quote on it:

 

"So you’re on food stamps, but you can afford an iPhone… Seems legit."

 

I’m disappointed that people feel the need to judge poor people who seek out government assistance. Sometimes it is presented as concern, sometimes it is based on innocent ignorance of the facts, and sometimes it seems like it represents a desire to project hate onto people who haven’t been as successful (or lucky) as the hater.

 

While food stamps are just one way the government can provide support to people, I think they’re a pretty good one to discuss, primarily because of the way they’re structured. The SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) provides funds for very specific food items via EBT cards. Fraud is a concern, but .

 

Eligibility

Eligibility is spelled out pretty clearly here: http://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/applicant_recipients/eligibility.htm

 

In case you aren’t in the mood to flip between websites, here’s a breakdown:

·         The monthly take-home (net pay) has to be 100% of the poverty level or lower for the family size. For a family of four, that’s $1,863.

·         If you want to look at it from the gross income perspective, the monthly take-home must be under 130% of the poverty level. For a family of four, that’s an annual salary of 29,064

·         You can have some resources saved up and still be eligible for food stamps. Why? I’m guessing because the government doesn’t want to people out on the street before they ask for help (which is what I think many people who dislike government assistance would prefer, but more on that later).

·         One can only draw SNAP benefits for three months in any 36 month period without working or being enrolled in a training program to get back to work.

 

So, one can have something in savings (but not much), must be taking home income equivalent to about 100% of poverty level, and if unemployed, be able to get back to work or find training within three months. Those requirements seem pretty intense.

 

And with those requirements, what do these high rollers bring home? Well, a family of four can get UP TO $668 / month. That works out to about $5.22 per person per day for all of their food. Breakfast, lunch, dinner, snacks. 

 

The Food Stamp Challenge

Some of you may have heard of the Food Stamp Challenge. The most famous example is Chef Mario Batali’s attempt to use only the equivalent of SNAP for his family of four for a week. He’s a chef, so he’s used to the finer things but he also has the skills to use a variety of ingredients in clever ways, and he has the benefit of time to spend on this project. He should have no problem with this. Wrong. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/15/mario-batali-food-stamp-challenge_n_1517572.html

 

If someone with culinary training and lots of money to take care of the other things in life (like, say, childcare) finds it challenging, that says a few things to me. Namely, that these benefits are not only not extravagant, but they’re probably too low to really meet the need while still allowing the beneficiaries to make healthy decisions.

 

Some people who have been on SNAP resent the Food Stamp Challenge. Chef Batali got to stop after a week. Yes, it was a tough week for him, but he knew that after seven days he could go back to his extravagant life, filled with decadent food. People who are on SNAP out of necessity don’t have that luxury. They have to figure out how to make things work. They don’t get to ‘splurge’ on the berries their kid really wants – have you seen how expensive berries are? They’re like $4/pint, and they go bad so quickly. And if they DO save up their benefits to do something wild, like buy a generic brand cake mix, they get the stink-eye from judgmental people in line behind them.

 

So those receiving SNAP have shown they are making a very small amount of money, they are working (or in training for work), and they have very little by way of savings. I do not see why that should be looked down upon unless we’re less interested in the assistance provided and more interested in judging why someone needs the assistance in the first place.

 

Choosing Judgment

Which brings me back to the card that started this all. When I read that card, I saw a pretty disturbing world view. It’s a world view that suggests that receiving government assistance and having personal possessions (especially those that appear to be expensive) should be mutually exclusive. That people who receive government assistance should be scrutinized and ridiculed. And I see stereotypes that just flat out bum me out.

 

I don’t subscribe to the view that people who are poor are somehow evil, or deserve their lot in life, or have something fundamentally wrong with them. I was lucky to be born to parents who had some money, who supported my education, who saved for me to attend college, and who helped me out before I found work after graduate school. That doesn’t mean I’m somehow more virtuous or more worthy of dignity than someone whose parents didn’t provide them with the same support. And yes, I fully recognize that some people who had zero support and zero help still made awesome lives. That should be applauded and admired, but not used to say "see, I did it, why can’t YOU do it too?"

 

And looking at just the very basics of sentence card that inspired this posting – it makes ZERO sense for someone who has an iPhone, but then loses her job and needs assistance, to get rid of the phone. Even if all that it is good for are pre-paid minutes, selling the phone for $50 means she has $50 to spend on food but no longer has a way to let her parents know she’s alright, or to make calls looking for employment. And if she has a $25/month data plan that is part of her contract, how much sense does it make to break the contract AND lose her ability to look for work?

 

This short-sightedness infuriates me. That attitude is asking the person in need to cut off her nose to spite her face. It seems to be based in resentment. ‘I have an iPhone and I don’t need government assistance. Clearly that person made poor life choices and now I have to pay for it.’ Moreover, it also requires that people who need assistance live lives void of some of the simpler things.  Why should the person on food stamps not be able to buy the cake mix once in awhile? Why do we demand that people who need help be miserable while receiving it?

 

Maybe that person who needs assistance did make poor life choices. And maybe she didn’t. Maybe she had a job and was paying off her student loans when she was laid off. Maybe she’s trying to make the responsible decision to pay for healthcare to stave off going deeper into debt if she gets sick, and needs some help getting food for awhile. Why jump to the conclusion that someone is gaming the system?

 

Fraud

"But what about all the FRAUD?!" Honestly – what about it? Currently SNAP fraud is estimated to be 1% (http://www.fns.usda.gov/cga/PressReleases/2012/0164.htm). In dollar terms, that sounds like it would be a lot. And it is – it is over 718 million dollars in fraud annually. That’s a lot of lost money!

 

It’s also … less than the cost of one day (ONE DAY) of the war in Iraq.

 

One day of the war in Iraq was more costly than a year’s worth of SNAP fraud.

 

I think that says a lot. It suggests that it isn’t really about the money at all. It suggests that some people are more concerned about someone else getting something they ‘don’t deserve’ than they are about why the person needs assistance in the first place. It makes me think that there are a whole lot of people out there who were born on third base and think they hit a triple.

 

Wrap it up, A.

We ALL need help at times. Most people I know received government assistance in the form of a subsidized student loan, because they wanted to improve their lives but didn’t have the money at the time (myself included, for graduate school). I don’t begrudge any of us that – I don’t think "damn, I want those tax dollars back", because that’s help someone needed.

 

We all face circumstances that test us, and sometimes those circumstances are our fault, and sometimes they aren’t. Instead of taking the common path and assuming that those people, with their food stamps (and welfare – oh god, their welfare) are somehow gaming the system, wasting YOUR tax dollar, maybe think instead about how fantastic it is that you don’t need that assistance right now, and how fantastic it is that if you do, even for just a little while, it will be there. It’s a view grounded in reality, and one that seems a lot healthier than carrying around the anger that so often comes out when this topic is discussed.

 

Better Reading

For a better, real-world discussion of the process of getting food stamps, including the fear and judgment, check out this article, and especially the comments. It’s pretty illuminating. http://www.xojane.com/issues/notes-food-stamp-office

Friday

14

October 2011

0

COMMENTS

The 99%

Written by , Posted in Politics

I have been wanting to post something on here for awhile, but I’ve kept putting it off. Should I write about the trials of my latest move? The ineptness of the Sallie Mae system in processing automatic debits? The challenges – and benefits – of living with someone?

All of those topics reek of naval-gazing. And this is a blog, so I suppose that would be okay. But seeing the post today by a friend who I highly respect but find I disagree with on some social issues spurred me to post on this instead: the 99%.

The post in question is the one that’s been making the rounds on Facebook and other media sites: it’s in the same vein as the “I am the 99%”, but it’s clearly a mockery of it. Instead of posting the image, I’d like to address, point by point, the issues raised in the note. I think it’s a great way to frame the discussion, as so many of the attempts at zingers the writer shares actually illuminate the very problems the authors chooses to ignore.

I am a college senior about to graduate completely debt free.
That’s fantastic! I too graduated college completely debt free. I was lucky in that my parents and family members had the foresight to set aside money for my education. If it weren’t for them, I would have had to attend a different college (one that was not as good a fit for me as the one I ultimately attended), or taken out a lot of loans

I pay for all of my living expenses by working 30+ hours a week making barely above minimum wage.
I too worked during college. Seems we have some things in common. Interesting though – that minimum wage you point out you barely exceed with your pay? You realize that’s something put in place to ensure that workers aren’t entirely exploited. Without that minimum wage, the job that helped you make it through school may not have paid enough. You’re certainly lucky that some people who came before you had the foresight to think about some sort of social safety net to help people just trying to get by.

I chose a moderately priced in-state public university.
That’s a great choice. You know that public universities are paid for with public funds, right? A mix of tax dollars and tuition. The tax dollars invested in education used to be seen as an investment in our future – an investment in people like you. Unfortunately, because of our current budget situation, which originated in many ways with the financial industry failures, many in-state universities are seeing serious cuts, and shifting the cost of education further to students. So while you may be attending a ‘moderately priced’ university right now, the economy may mean that the tuition of that university is going to go up. And up. I suppose you could choose to ignore the impact this will have on the people who come after you, since you got your education, but some of us are concerned not just about ourselves, but about the next generation. And the generation after that.
I started saving $ for school at age 17.
That’s awesome. Where did the money come from? Did you have a job? Were you lucky enough that you were able to save the income you earned, as it was not needed by your family because your parents were laid off? If so, congratulations. I hope you recognize this is not everyone’s reality.
I got decent grades in high school & received 2 scholarships which cover 90% of my tuition.
Really? That’s great. I got decent grades too – a 4.0, actually. But the in-state schools in my state (over a decade ago, when the economy was still good) did not offer scholarships to me to cover 90% of my tuition. The National Merit Scholarship I received would have covered about one quarter’s worth of tuition at an in-state school. Again, when tuition was lower than it is now. I hope you realize that your experience, while true for you, is not applicable to everyone in your position, nor even people who were ostensible in a better situation (if we’re counting higher grades as ‘better’).
I currently have a 3.8 GPA.
Sweet! What’s your major? I’m assuming you’ve chosen a reasonable one that couldn’t in any way face job shortages. Like finance, perhaps? I mean, when I was in school, a four-year-degree in finance with a 3.8 GPA would mean nothing but high times ahead! Unless, of course, your chosen industry goes under, and the jobs are not available to you. What will you do then?

I live comfortably in a cheap apartment knowing I can’t have everything I want.  I don’t eat out every day or even once a month.  I have no credit card, new car, iPad, or smart phone — and I’m perfectly OK with that.
Most people know they can’t have everything they want. Do you realize this? I don’t think you do. This entire posting of yours gives me the impression that the information you’ve received in your life suggests that the only reason someone might want for something is because they failed. Do you realize this is not the case? That people can work as hard as – or harder than – you and still not get ahead? That they can cook at home every night, take public transportation and use a phone from the 90s and still not have enough money to get ahead? I hope this isn’t news to you. Oh, and here’s a little tip about life – having a credit card is actually a good thing. It helps you to build credit, which you’ll need at other stages in your life. If you have no loans and no credit card I suggest you look to get one and start building yourself some credit. Otherwise you won’t have a chance to buy a home any time soon …
If I did have debt I would not blame Wall Street or the Government for my own bad decisions.
Why do you associate debt with a bad decision? Some debt can be quite good. Student loans are an example – if one is in a state where tuition has had to increase as a result of the financial crisis, or if one is not eligible for a scholarship that covers housing and books, they may need to take on some debt to get that education. Additionally, the problem is not your “own bad decisions.” The problem is having the right information to make informed decisions. Lawyers and people with degrees in finance should not be the only ones who feel safe getting a home loan, but that sometimes seems the case these days. Philosophically, I wonder: do you think someone is at fault if they make a decision with information they did not know, and realistically probably could not know, was bad? 
I live beneath my means to continue saving for the future.
That works as long as you have no unexpected expenses. What happens when your first job doesn’t offer health care, and you, being responsible, self-insure, but with a plan that has a pretty high deductible. One slip down the stairs could wipe out that savings. What if the job you find requires a long commute, and your used car breaks down? Or when, like me, you end up having to spend nearly $2,000 to address dental problems, even though you’ve been taking care of your teeth and going to the dentist every six months your entire life? Shit happens, and all the planning in the world can’t change that. Living beneath your means to save is obviously a good idea, but the idea that this will somehow make you immune from future trouble is a bit naive.
I expect nothing to be handed to me, and will continue to work my @$$ off for everything I have.
Are you really working your ass off for everything you have? You have a 3.8 – is that in a difficult major? An easy one? Did you choose a field that came naturally? Did you have supportive parents, or teachers, or friends to help you through high school? College? And even if you didn’t, why do you feel so entitled? Why do you think that all you have is solely because you worked hard? Those scholarships you received – you know you got them and someone else – possibly someone who works JUST as hard as you – did not. So that person worked their ass off and didn’t get the handout you got. Why do you feel superior to them? And why do you seem to think that treating people fairly, treating them like human beings who deserve honest information, is equivalent to an underserved handout? Is honesty in business now some sort of privilege reserved only for a few people?
That’s how it’s supposed to work.
Perhaps. But reality should show you that it isn’t always how it works. Just because it seems to have worked for you so far doesn’t mean that it’s going to stay that way.
I am NOT the “99%” and whether or not you are is your decision.
You’re the 1%? Really? Congratulations on the billions of dollars! Oh, you meant that figuratively, right? Well guess what – you may choose to live in ignorance and assume that you have what you have solely because you work hard, and anyone not doing well just made a bad decision, but the rest of us, those who live in reality, we know differently.

And when you can’t find a job, or lose your savings, or find that a decision that seemed good at the time was based on bad information, we will still be here for you. Because the 99%? We care about other people. Perhaps you could look into that – it’s a pretty awesome way to live.

Wednesday

26

January 2011

0

COMMENTS

Critical Thinking, or Why The Interwebs Make Me Want to Yell

Written by , Posted in Politics

I recognize that there are dangers with overcomplicating things – Occam’s razor and all that. Simplicity is seen by many scientists and philosophers as a criterion that strengthens a theory. However, I think that this same simplicity argument can lead to people not taking a critical look at complicated social issues. The recent violence in Tucson has reminded me of this.

What has gotten me thinking about this lately is this comment that has been circulating on Facebook as of late:
“To everyone who is calling for stricter gun laws in light of the tragedy in Tucson, may I offer this little tidbit: If guns kill people, then pencils misspell words, cars drive drunk, and spoons make people fat. Remember: Hold the person accountable for their actions, not the means they chose to utilize!!! Re-post if you agree.”

There is so much wrong about this statement that my mind boggles. First, I believe much of the discussion these days is on the ammunition, not the guns themselves, so this post makes me think the original author may not be fully engaged in the debate. Beyond that, I find it extremely frustrating that so many people seem to be refusing to examine the possibility that certain regulations and laws could be helpful and instead are falling back on simple (and false) analogies. 

Let’s look at the first part of this ‘tidbit’: equating ammunition with pencils, cars and spoons. First, the car argument is actually not a bad analogy – if one can’t be trusted to not drive drunk, then getting rid of the car would be one possible way of addressing the problem of that particular drunk driver. So  yes, actually, I do support not allowing those who are drunk to access their cars. 

I am having trouble addressing the pencil and spoon argument – misspelled words aren’t usually life and death, so that’s a silly analogy. And obesity is such an amazingly complicated situation that I almost see where this metaphor would work – except the thing is, if there were something in spoons causing death akin to huge ammo magazines causing death then perhaps spoons should be examined as part of the solution to health disparities. But somehow I doubt that the person who came up with this pithy analogy would agree.

The second part is equally annoying – this idea that if society chooses to look at ALL the ways that such violence as the Tucson shooting could be prevented in the future, this necessarily means that the person who committed the act is not being held responsible. The two ideas are not mutually exclusive. In fact, focusing ONLY on the person strikes me as a very careless way to handle this type of violence. If we don’t understand what led to the action, how on earth can we expect to prevent it in the future? I’d imagine many people are familiar with the dangers of only treating the symptoms of a disease, rather than the disease itself. I concur – if I have a broken arm, some Advil isn’t going to fix it. However, if I have a broken arm, I’d like surgery to fix it, as well as Advil to help address the pain. Similarly, I’d like to figure out a way to address the issues of those who are prone to violence, as well as keep massive amounts of ammunition out of their hands. It’s a multi-pronged approach that recognizes there is no simple solution. 

Unfortunately, in this case, that requires the same people who refuse to consider the dangers of guns to recognize that there are reasons for violence beyond ‘evil’ or people being ‘bad.’ The world is not often black and white, and this insistence that it is seems to me to be leading people to turn off that part of their brain that involves critical thinking and to grasp at analogies such as the one above.

To be clear: I am not deaf to the idea that perhaps different gun laws are not a good idea. I’m still reading and learning and thinking through how to reconcile them with the constitution. Although, as an aside, I really enjoyed Rachel Maddow’s argument on this front – if the 2nd amendment argument is that we need guns so we can overthrow the government if needed, then we really should start allowing everyone the ability to own the exact same weapons the US military owns. That’s the only way it works. Because right now unless we all have some grenades, and some bombs, we certainly won’t be overthrowing the government. Are you okay with that? I’m not.

I am, however, also not swayed by ill-formed and ultimately inaccurate metaphors. If one is going to speak in the sound bites that Facebook and Twitter require, I think it might make sense to limit that to links to well-informed arguments, or statements that can be backed up by some critical thought and serious discussion. Hiding behind sad attempts to sound pithy only magnifies the ignorance.

Friday

8

October 2010

0

COMMENTS

It’s the healthcare, stupid!

Written by , Posted in Politics

8 October 2010 Last updated at 12:45 ET

US healthcare ‘to blame’ for poor life expectancy rates

Hospital in Chicago US healthcare reform may save lives and money, the study authors wrote

The US healthcare system is to blame for declines in the country’s life expectancy ranking, a study suggests.

The Columbia University report rejects claims that factors such as obesity have shortened life-spans for Americans relative to other wealthy nations.

The study blames reliance on costly and fragmented specialised care, and calls for systemic reform.

Its release comes as President Barack Obama’s healthcare reform remains a key issue in upcoming mid-term elections.

Higher costs

The study notes that in 1950, the US ranked fifth among leading industrialised nations for female life expectancy at birth, but only 46th in 2008.

It finds that US healthcare spending increased at nearly twice the rate of that in other wealthy nations between 1970 and 2002, with the increased spending corresponding with worsening survival rates relative to the other countries studied.

“In most cases, the relative US performance deteriorated from decade to decade,” wrote authors Peter Muennig and Sherry Glied of Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health.

They note the countries to which the US is compared – Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland and the UK – all provide universal healthcare coverage.

Factors such as differing obesity, smoking, road accident and murder rates were taken into account in the study.

‘Meaningful reform’

The US spends far more on healthcare than any other country as a percentage of gross domestic product, the study finds.

“We speculate that the nature of our health care system – specifically, its reliance on unregulated fee-for-service and specialty care – may explain both the increased spending and the relative deterioration in survival that we observed,” the authors wrote.

“If so, meaningful reform may not only save money over the long term, it may also save lives.”

The authors said those aspects of the US health system contributed to unnecessary medical procedures, poor communication between doctors and higher rates of medical errors.

via bbc.co.uk

So, apparently it’s not so much obesity but our crap healthcare system that accounts for the US life expectancy. 

I haven’t had a chance to read the study, so I can’t say whether the reporting on the results is fair. The study is linked above and here.

Friday

1

October 2010

0

COMMENTS

A whole new level of creepy

Written by , Posted in Politics

Have you heard about this? It is making me extremely sad. From what is being reported so far, it appears that freshman Tyler Clementi was recorded remotely by his residence hall roommate, being intimate with another man. It now appears that Mr. Clementi jumped from the GW bridge, killing himself.

There are two aspects to this story that I’m mulling over right now. The first is the ridiculousness of the two alleged defendants. I understand that 18-year-olds may be adults legally but are still figuring some things out. However, while I do not think it is likely that they acted with the idea that Mr. Clementi would end up killing himself, one would have to have never lived in the world – let alone attended high school – to recognize that what they were doing would be highly humiliating and emotionally hurtful. Whether it ended up being made public or just circulated among friends, having photographic evidence of someone doing something they would not normally do in public only serves to embarrass them. Emotional harm can be the only outcome.

The second aspect is whether they would have considered doing this if Mr. Clementi had been intimate with someone of the opposite sex. Was he taped solely because the two people who taped him were thinking it would be funny? Or were they thinking it would be funny because they could humiliate him even more because people are still bigoted towards gay men and lesbians?

Both possibilities are disturbing to me. The fact that young adults still think that humiliating people they do not know or do not like is fun saddens me. Perhaps kids have always been this way, but now the actions can be magnified and sent out across the planet instantly. Once a video is sent to someone, there is no way to get it back. Even if the person who filmed it later realizes that he screwed up, he can’t put the toothpaste back in the tube. It may be unfortunate, but it is the reality, and I think there needs to be more of an effort to explain what that actually means, to try to get these kids (and adults, too, in some cases) to think more long term. I post some silly things on Facebook, but everything is set to private, and nothing I post there would get me in trouble (mostly because I don’t do anything that troublesome). Do young adults not realize that their moments of being obnoxious could have lifelong consequences not just for others, but for them, too?

A sex tape of anyone at any age that was made without his consent is going to be disturbing. I certainly don’t want my intimate moments viewed by anyone else. But if it’s thought worse because it involved two people of the same sex, that’s another example of what is not right in the world. Life can be hard for people who are gay because of people who decide to make life hard for them. Sexual orientation is nothing to be ashamed of or embarrassed about, and the fact that there is a chance that the people who chose to be bigots are what lead this young man to kill himself should be distressing to everyone.

The comments section of Rachel Maddow’s blog is an interesting read.

Thursday

9

September 2010

0

COMMENTS

Koran Burning Cancelled

Written by , Posted in Politics

CNN.com and BBC.com are both reporting that the Florida pastor has called off the Koran burning. Here is the full text of the CNN.com story, from 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/09/09/florida.quran.burning/index.html?hpt=T1&…

 

The Florida pastor who had planned to burn copies of the Quran on Saturday has called it off.

The Rev. Terry Jones of the Gainesville, Florida-based Dove World Outreach Center made the announcement Thursday.

Earlier Thursday, President Obama said Jones’ plan, which had triggered worldwide controversy, would be a “recruitment bonanza for al Qaeda.”

“You could have serious violence in places like Pakistan or Afghanistan” as a result of the proposal by Jones, Obama said on ABC’s “Good Morning America.” “This could increase the recruitment of individuals who’d be willing to blow themselves up in American cities, or European cities.”

Jones had previously said he would proceed with the plan Saturday — the ninth anniversary of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks — despite increased pressure to abandon the proposal and warnings that going ahead could endanger U.S. troops and Americans worldwide.

There were several developments prior to Jones’ cancellation announcement:

— Local governments said they were going to bill Jones for the extra cost of security for Saturday’s event.

— Interpol on Thursday issued a global alert to its 188 member countries, warning of a “strong likelihood” of violent attacks if the Quran burning proceeds.

— An armed Christian organization, which withdrew its support for the Quran-burning event last month, said the administration “needs to stay out of this” and pledged to defend the Dove Center’s right to hold the event, despite its disagreement.

— The FBI warned local law enforcement that the plan, along with other recent controversies involving the American Muslim community, could lead to hate crimes and could encourage extremist rhetoric, although a federal law enforcement official said there was no credible information that attacks were planned.

The FBI visited Jones at the Dove Center on Thursday, according to Jeffrey Westcott, special agent in charge of the Jacksonville, Florida, bureau. The FBI also visited him a few weeks ago, he said, but would not say what was discussed.

Discussions were taking place within the Obama administration about the possibility of intervening, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs told reporters Thursday. Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said the possibility of calling Jones is under consideration, and that Defense Secretary Robert Gates was participating in the discussions.

Earlier this week, the top U.S. military commander in Afghanistan, Gen. David Petraeus, warned that the plan “could cause significant problems” for American troops overseas.

Jones has rejected the pleas, saying his message targets radical Islamists. “The general needs to point his finger to radical Islam and tell them to shut up, tell them to stop, tell them that we will not bow our knees to them,” Jones said on CNN’s “AC360.” “We are burning the book. We are not killing someone. We are not murdering people.”

Meanwhile, Obama told ABC, “As commander in chief of the armed forces of the United States, I just want him to understand that this stunt that he is talking about pulling could greatly endanger our young men and women in uniform who are in Iraq, who are in Afghanistan. We’re already seeing protests against Americans just by the mere threat … this is a destructive act that he’s engaging in.”

The Council on American-Islamic Relations, a Muslim civil liberties and advocacy group, announced an initiative called “Learn, Don’t Burn” on Thursday and will distribute Qurans to replace the burned copies.

Awad said the group is concerned that the plan may lead to hate crimes against Muslims. Cross burnings by the Ku Klux Klan were an indication of hate crimes to follow against African-Americans, he said, and Nazis started with burning books and “ended up burning people.”

CAIR has been working with attorneys, and no basis has been found to stop the burnings under the law, he said, but he added that if the plan is going to incite violence, the government should step in.

“I can assure you that on September 11, you will not see a bonfire of Qurans being burned at the Dove Church,” Imam Mahdi Bray, head of the Muslim-American Society, told reporters.

He said he has just returned from Gainesville, where city officials told him Jones will not receive a burn permit and any sort of incendiary material will violate the city code. A fire truck will be nearby to douse any flames, he said.

Gainesville Mayor Craig Lowe said Jones’ requests for burn permits have been denied, and city officials hope that he will comply. If he breaks the law, action can be taken against Jones, with the response based on whatever the infraction might be, he said. Lowe has declared Saturday “Interfaith Solidarity Day.”

City Communications Manager Bob Woods said the city will tally up costs related to the event and present Jones with the bill.

Alachua County Sheriff’s Office spokesman Art Forgey said “we do plan to compile and send a bill to Mr. Jones.”

“I don’t know that we have the teeth to enforce it, though,” Forgey added. Instead, the bill may just end up being a statement to Jones about how much the event cost local citizens, the spokesman said.

Before Jones announced the cancellation, the Gainesville Students for a Democratic Society said Thursday it would bus in students from as far away as Chicago, Illinois, and would have about 600 on hand Saturday to protest at a nearby park, then march to the church to picket the event.

Meanwhile, two websites associated with Jones and his church were down Thursday.

Rackspace Hosting took down the two sites because the church “violated the hate speech provision of our acceptable use policy,” spokesman Dan Goodgame said.

The company investigated a complaint in the past couple days and made the determination after reviewing both sites, said Goodgame, adding that Rackspace was under no pressure to act.

“This is not a constitutional issue. This is a contract issue,” he said.

Rackspace gave Jones until midnight Wednesday to migrate content and find another host. Goodgame said he did not know how long Rackspace had hosted the websites, but he said it did not handle design or content.

“We have about 100,000 customers,” Goodgame said. “We don’t even know what all the sites are.”

Jones and Dove World had agreed to terms on the Rackspace Cloud service, Goodgame said. The policy dictates the suspension or termination of service for offensive content, including material that is “excessively violent, incites violence, threatens violence or contains harassing content or hate speech.”

“We would have taken the same position if it was hate speech against Christians or other groups,” he added.

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg is one of the few public officials who defended Jones’ right to go ahead with the burning, even as he condemned the idea as “distasteful.”

“The First Amendment protects everybody, and you can’t say that we are going to apply the First Amendment to only those cases where we are in agreement,” Bloomberg said, citing the section of the Constitution that promises freedom of speech.

The U.S. State Department issued a global travel alert because of the potential for anti-American demonstrations if the Quran burning were to have been carried out.

 

Thursday

9

September 2010

2

COMMENTS

Embarassed and disappointed

Written by , Posted in Politics

I am embarrassed. And disappointed. The last year and a half I’ve been watching much of what has been going on in this country from afar. I was mortified by the health care debate, and saddened by the woefully inadequate outcome. Health care is still attached to employment, and for some reason people are content judging those who do not have health care as deficient, as somehow unworthy of the benefit if they do not have a full-time job. I see people who have been fortunate enough to have the opportunity to have a job that provides health care actually believe that they alone deserve those benefits, and those without do not. Not having health care is a punishment for ‘not working hard enough.’ If you have health insurance, you are a good person in a worthy job. If you don’t, it is your fault. You are a bad person and thus not worthy of assistance from others.

I am not willing to accept that compassion for others no longer factors into how we interact with our fellow humans. I do not believe that most rich people got there solely by working hard and pulling themselves up by their bootstraps; they had help, whether they are willing to admit it or not. They had a connection through a parent or friend, or happened to be born into an environment that nurtured their growth. Even those salt of the earth folks who begrudge others access to health care because it is too much government assistance gladly take large farm subsidies, and are happy to have the police show up if they call 911. I do not subscribe to the idea that any one person can succeed all on his or her own, and I also do not believe that some deity rewards some people and punishes others based on some perceived work ethic. Many people work very hard and don’t succeed; others pick a good stock and end up rich. I do not believe life is fair, but I also do not accept the use of that platitude as a way to justify unfair and cruel actions. It may be true that life is not fair, but that does not mean we as a country should be actively engaged in acting in as unfair a way as possible.

The issue of health care hit close to home to me, as previous posts describe, but that is not what motivates me to write today. What spurrs me on is the disgusting Islamiphobia that is bubbling up throughout the country, as evidenced by the opposition to the Islamic Center in Lower Manhattan and the proposed Koran burning on September 11.

I posted Mayor Bloomberg’s response to the debate on the Islamic Center, and it is the most eloquent statement I have heard. In spite of all the severe problems with the US constitution and the inequalities present at the founding of the nation (slavery, lack of vote for women), there were some things the framers got right. They did not found the country on Christian principles, and they chose to specifically allow in the Bill of Rights for both freedom of speech and freedom of and from religion. Those who claim to so love the constitution and the framers seem to be unable to grasp this reality.

Some who have discussed the issue of the Manhattan Islamic Center have said that they think the builder has a right to develop it where it is proposed, but that he probably should not. I disagree. I think he has a right, and I think if that’s the real estate that is available within the group’s budget, then build it there. What is missing in this discussion is the fact, the reality that the people who flew the planes on September 11 2001 were not accurately representing the Muslim faith any more than Scott Roeder was accurately representing the Christian faith when he killed Dr. Tiller. Just because people claim they subscribe to a religion and are acting in support of that claim does not mean they are actually representing that religion.

 

The ‘faith’ of the September 11 terrorists may be what they used as their excuse to murder people, but it is not an accurate representation of the religion. Muslims did not kill nearly 3,000 people that day; assholes with no moral compasses did. That they happened to be Muslim, and believed they were acting in furtherance of their version of that religion does not mean they, the nineteen “men” who destroyed thousands of lives, somehow get the honor of being the poster boys of their religion. That’s not how it works, and it is not what they deserve. 


I am especially disgusted by the Republicans who suddenly care about NYC. I know that September 11 has always been exploited by the GOP, but I find it extraordinary that the same people who spend each day telling me I am not American because I live in a big city on one of the coasts and think gay people should be able to get married suddenly cares about what happens in that city. Either people from New York – including those who support the religious freedoms of all people – are Americans, or they aren’t. If you are not going to take their opinions seriously on other issues, then butt out of this local land use decision. Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich, I’m talking to you. And Newt, as I believe Jon Stewart and others have pointed out better than I can, your statement about Saudi Arabia not allowing churches is beyond ironic. We used to be different from such nations because we allowed religious freedom – ostensibly, at least. Now there isn’t even a pretense; either you’re Christian or you apparently don’t deserve the same rights.

This leads me to the proposed Koran burning on September 11. Book burning is an action taken by people who are afraid that their own belief systems cannot stand up to scrutiny. They hide behind these acts of aggression, Burning books is disgusting and childish. It is the action of those who either know they cannot win an argument on facts, or are too lazy to attempt to do so. I certainly recognize their right to act in whatever manner they choose, but I remain gobsmacked that there are people who would choose to act in this way. As I write this I am trying to find some way to not be filled with such anger towards these people, but I am at a loss.

I am embarrassed. And disappointed.

Friday

11

September 2009

0

COMMENTS

Eight Years

Written by , Posted in Politics

Eight years ago today I was living in Southern California. I was actually awake when the events of the day started, as I had a bit of a commute. I had started a new job on September 10, and was moving into my new apartment (with my roommate) on September 11. I had pretty much all of my non-furniture belongings in my car, and was staying with my roommate’s family that night. After an early shower I went downstairs, where my roommate’s mother was up. She said both of these statements in the same breath:

 

“A plane flew into the World Trade Center in New York. Would you like a freshly baked blueberry muffin?”

 

I asked to turn on the TV, and saw the aftermath of the second plane hitting. I had to be at work by 8 and had a long drive ahead of me, so I jumped in my car. I listened to the radio during the entire drive, and remember a few things very distinctly:

 

Something must have been shown on TV that was very graphic, because Tom Brokaw’s voice got very stern and he said something along the lines of “That is not to happen again.”

 

I had called my mother to tell her but she went back to bed, since initially it seemed like a small plane had hit. Once she and my sister realized what was going on, they called me again and said I should just drive home. I declined.

 

The FAA called the planes in pretty quickly, and I was driving by LAX as plane after plane landed. It was surreal for sure – everyone was driving very slowly, not because of traffic, but because of how eerie it was to see plane after plane after plane swoop in low.

 

I arrived at work for my second day, and actually . . . worked. We didn’t have much of a TV or radio, and the internet was frozen for most of the time, so I got my updates from phone calls with friends. I still feel like I missed out on a lot by not seeing anything after about 6AM pacific time.

 

I moved into my apartment, which was right across the alley from a new coworker, so she and her boyfriend had me over for dinner, which was really nice.

 

That night, I was alone in the place, as my roommate wasn’t moving in quite yet. I remember laying on the deflating air mattress, watching the President talk, and crying. It sucked.

 

At work we did have access to a tiny TV that barely got one channel, and I very vividly remember seeing this:

 

 

A year later, for the first anniversary, I was living in NYC. I had moved to New York for graduate school just two weeks prior and had secured an internship with the Mayor’s Office. I volunteered to work at the Ground Zero memorial. My new roommate and another friend took the subway down there with me at five in the morning, which was quite nice. I was assigned to assist the “special needs family” section, which was where family members of the victims were who needed extra assistance due to being in a wheelchair or for other reasons.

 

After a few hours of that I was asked to help escort families into the pit. Holy crap. I have no training in dealing with emotionally distraught people, and that was very, very difficult. On the one hand I felt completely out of place, as I wasn’t in NYC in 2001, but on the other hand it immediately gave me a connection to the City that will last forever.

 

It was a very windy day, and I recall a bit of fear as we could hear glass shattering at the 130 Liberty street site.

 

I worked from about 5:30 until 2 that day. It was exhausting but worth it to get to help out my new home town.

 

Three years later I took a job working with many people who were involved in the recovery that day and for the years following. It’s pretty remarkable to look at what people are capable of doing to help each other out.

Monday

20

July 2009

0

COMMENTS

Monday

15

June 2009

0

COMMENTS

Newer Entries →
← Older Entries

Subscribe to ASK Musings via email

Enter your email address to subscribe to ASK Musings and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Recent Posts

The Author

Categories

Calendar

April 2025
M T W T F S S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930  

What now?

Books CBR5 CBR6 CBR7 CBR8 CBR9 CBR10 CBR11 CBR12 CBR13 CBR14 CBR15 CBR16 CBR17 Danville England Entertainment Fiction Food Friends Grad School Health Holidays Ireland Life London Memoir Move Movies Music Non-Fiction NYC Philosophy Pics Politics Recreation Religion Running Science Seattle Travel TV Visas Website Work