Now that it's all over but the shoutin'...

...I'm gonna make this short.  Note to the Changeling-n-nem:  If you don't stand for something, you will fall - period! 

There were few surprises for me in these mid-term elections - but there were a couple.  First and foremost, my home state of South Carolina (one of the of the original 13s) - which propped Strom Thurmond up in Congress until he was a-damned-100(!) years old (those last couple years were pretty scary.  Watching him in Congress, I was convinced he'd already passed, but had somehow been dyed and shellacked (Let's be clear here - I mean a type of lacquer that becomes as hard as a shell.) to his seat in his Sunday-go-to-meetin' suit by some upstart mortician.) - "elected the first black Republican to Congress from the Deep South since Reconstruction."

County Councilman Scott - whose district had encompassed the Sea Islands, where the Gullah roots of my family lay; the city of Charleston, where I was born and raised; and North Charleston, where I've also lived on a few separate occasions - defeated the Shellacked One's SON in the June, GOP primary, paving the way for his victory on Tuesday!  As leery as I am of politicians in general, and Black Republicans in particular - I must admit a clearly discernible feeling of schadenfreude in that irony (What?  I keep tellin' ya'll I am human!).

Real Change? Or, more games? 

Though he can legitimately claim more in common with "the party of Lincoln and Frederick Douglass" - instead of just using it as a convenient stage prop and sound-bite, as the Changeling did during his, "I'm gonna run for president speech" on the steps of the Old State Capitol in Illinois - being a Carolina girl myself, I'd definitely choose the latter.
 
I don't know Mr. Scott, but according to three fellow councilmen in this piece that I do know, or know of  (and I am considering the sources) - it seems a toss-up as to what the Palmetto State will get, once Mr. Scott goes to Washington.

The other surprise?  That Sen. Harry Reid managed to hang onto his seat.  I guess I can partially understand the support from the Latino community, given they were literally voting for their lives and freedom from illegal arrests, after Harry played his games (I wonder why Charlie Christ's efforts to get Meek out in FL was a bigger story than what Harry was doing in Nevada?).

I do believe if the Tea Party's, Sharron Angle had been elected - she would have definitely posed a way more "clear and present danger" to their very existence in this country in the short-term, than Ole Harry probably has in his very, long-term.  We shall soon see what his brand of payback looks like.

I said I'd keep it short, and I am.  But as you consider the ramifications of the mid-terms, as well as the upcoming presidential election in two years, I ask you to also consider my sister's words below - for all our sakes:

"You can get with this, or you can get with that" - some choice...

Unlike the little rodents in the video, allegedly offering a better quality product than what's already out on the streets - the little Democrat rodents in DC have just shown that they were merely shining up the same old shit and calling it gold with Reid's Don't Ask Don't Tell/Dream Act amendment.

I'm no fan of McConnell or the Republicans, - but I definitely co-sign this observation:

“They want to use this week for a political exercise. They want to weigh this bill down with controversy in a transparent attempt to show their special interest groups that they haven’t forgotten about them ahead of the election.”

“This is not a serious exercise. It’s a show,” he added. “And it’s because of shows like this that our [Democratic] friends have lost credibility with the public.” (emphasis mine)

No font of credibility his damned self, he does, however, make a couple of salient points to which the Obama faithful might want to pay close attention:

1. You gave your support, your money and your votes on a wing and a damned prayer - to a consummate con man and his handlers who've been lying about what they're going to do for you since day one;
2. In return, they shit in your hand - AND! - expect you to say thank you in November and beyond (and sadly, like many who resigned themselves to a Shrub second-term after he'd gotten the country knee-deep in his "Mission Accomplished" bullshit - you probably will).

When I read this back in May, I was cautiously optimistic - even though there was evidence of some Ickey Shuffling going on:

The push to end the military’s “don’t ask don’t tell” policy that prohibits gays from serving openly in the military cleared two major hurdles Thursday, with the House backing repeal by a 234-194 vote, while the Senate Armed Services Committee voted 16-12 in favor of that body’s version of the change.

Both repeals, offered as amendments to a defense spending bill, would remove the policy only after the Pentagon completes a study due in December on the impact of the change on the military. (emphasis mine

That, "remove the policy only after the Pentagon completes a study due in December" part, seemed to me a set-up, and an awfully precarious row to hoe for actively serving, LGBT service members (do read the study questions!). But, since they'd tacked it onto the defense authorization bill and, since -

The White House and the Pentagon both approved the compromise in the amendments that allows Congress to act while granting the president, the defense secretary and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff the ultimate authority to implement repeal when they are satisfied that the military’s readiness, recruiting, retention and morale would not be adversely impacted by it. (emphasis mine)

- I figured it had at least a snowball's chance. But once I reached this now, pretty-much-accepted-as-real-progress-in-matters-of-equality sentence uttered by Sen. Carl Levin -

"Today’s action by the Senate Armed Services Committee is an important step to end this discriminatory policy.” (emphasis mine)

- cautiously optimistic was immediately replaced with the increasingly nagging suspicion that there were plenty of those "Games Mother Never Taught You" being played by people for whom no "urgency of now" exists. Then came Maj. Margaret Witt, LT. Dan Choi (I really like what I see of this guy!), Lt. Col. Victor Fehrenbach and so many others - bringing with them the memory of my grandmother's tried-and-true caution: "Always follow your first mind." She was right.

In this NPR piece published before the vote, R. Clarke Cooper, executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans beat old Harry to the press-conference punch with this statement:

"The majority leader is setting himself up to simply say 'I tried' when Republicans vote against cloture on the defense bill today"... "If the(defense bill)fails to proceed this week because of cheap political stunts, it is the Senate majority leadership that is should be held accountable, not the unreasonably slighted minority."

Well, we can quibble about "unreasonably slighted minority" but, you gotta admit - this is too funny! I'll bet Harry had that exact speech all ready!

Really now - it's not like he didn't know that Republicans were planning to try and block his afterthought of an amendment!  It's not like - with their Congressional majority and the seat in the Big House on lock - they hadn't had enough time to do their usual backroom, wheelin' and dealin'! What - of any substance - can he possibly say??  Don't bother answering - I think Maxine's got that covered:

And speaking of that now, pretty-much-accepted-as-real-progress-in-matters-of-equality sentence, here it is again - in an emailed petition I got yesterday from Reform Immigration FOR America's, Marissa Graciosa:

"Our country and our children suffer under a broken immigration system.  Pass the defense reauthorization bill and the DREAM Act as a step toward comprehensive immigration reform." (emphasis mine)

No malice or disrespect intended Ms. Graciosa, but please - see numbers 1. and 2. above.

The Changeling's politically expedient, "Suing Arizona" stunt notwithstanding, just ask yourself this question - Why in the world would the people, who definitely did numbers 1. and 2. (not to mention sending 1,200 additional troops to the border to keep people who look like you out), and those who crowed about the passage of SB1070, be invested in the DREAM Act's passage, much less comprehensive immigration reform (aside from more cannon fodder for war, of course)??

Hell, in this piece, just a little over a month ago, Sen. Jon Kyl said:

“As we’ve said many times, until the border is substantially more secure than it is today, there’s not going to be a consensus to move forward on immigration legislation.” (emphasis mine)

I could be wrong, but I just don't see any of 'em giving two shits unless there's something REALLY BIG in it for them. And seeing as the Changeling and his crew have already gotten their really big something from you guys (and us!) via his selection, they've more than shown that there'll be little or no bending over backwards to do what is right for the remainder of this Administration's term (but look out in the run-up to 2012!).

And the Republicans? Given their forever-pandering to the majority "white" voting bloc of "real Americans" in these United States, I doubt there'll ever be any backward-bending over on their part. As a matter of fact, as long as most society-identified "Others," held hostage by the trauma of White Supremacist Capitalist Patriarchy, remain in this weird, Stockholm Syndrome existence, celebrating the crumbs, while resisting true freedom - there's really no need for them to ever do anything.

The solution? Take a hint from my beautiful sister, Lauryn Hill  - and choose not to "get with this, or that":



UPDATE I:  Still scratching my head trying to figure out what's going on, but this is certainly interesting: Pro-Gay Groups Find New Allies in the GOP

UPDATE II:  Margaret Witt, Air Force Major Discharged Under 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Ordered Reinstated

Caption this picture...

No, really!!!

"Bruised but not Broken" - Blagojevich a media joke or Rahm's worst nightmare?

For countless media outlets, Gov. Rod Blagojevich was the joke of the day as he responded to his impeachment by the Illinois House today. Seems no one was really listening to what he actually had to say - too busy laughing and asking, "What is this guy talking about?"

He said a lot. To a few people. And in their continued unbalanced, "Obama love" - the media missed it all. Call me a conspiracy theorist, but here's some of what I heard:

Click :38 - "Let me tell you what I'm not going to do. I'm not going to do what my accusers and political enemies have been doing and that is talk about this case in 30 second soundbites on "Meet the Press" or the TV news." (emphasis his) Direct hit - Sen. Harry Reid.

Click :59 – “And I want to assure everyone who’s here and everyone who’s listening, that I intend to answer every allegation that, uh, comes my way. However, I intend to answer them in the appropriate forum – in a court of law.” (emphasis mine) Direct hit - Obama & Co. on that first part. He let them know that he plans to tell it all (unless of course, in requisite Chicago-style, they do something to get him out of this mess). The second part, direct hit - Illinois House. He told them to kiss his behind. He didn't show up to their kangaroo court because a court of law is the finder of fact - not them.

Click 1:46 – "Now I know there are some powerful forces arrayed against me. It’s kind of lonely right now. But I have on my side the most powerful ally there is. And it’s the truth." (emphasis his) Direct hit - Obama & Co. Just a reminder, if it comes down to it, he's tellin' the whole truth.

Click 1:05 - "From the very moment of my reelection, I've been engaged in a struggle with the House to get things done for the people...The House has stood in the way...In my view, those of us who make the rules ought to be able to uh, follow a simple lesson that I was taught to believe in in Sunday school. It's called the Golden Rule. That you do unto others as "you would have them do unto you." That sounded like a veiled threat to e-e-erbody!

When he entered, I said, "Now why did he bring all these people up there?" He answered, here:

Click 3:09 - 4:43 " So the House's action today and the causes of the impeachment (emphasis his) are because I've done things to fight for families who are all with me here today. Now I'm gonna talk about some of the examples that I'd like you-to share with you and some of the counts that the House is actually choosing to impeach me on. For example, The "I- Save" Prescription Drug program is among the things the House said I should be removed from office for. That was a program we began, I believe it in late 2002, or early 2004. That was a program brought to me by then-Congressman Rahm Emanuel (emphasis his) who suggested that since the big pharmaceutical companies had a tremendous amount of sway with the FDA (emphasis his), that too many senior citizens were being forced to ration their medicine or couldn't afford to buy their medicine...that maybe we should try somethin' different and go to Canada. And Go to the place where ya' make the exact same medicines, for the exact same companies only if you have free and open trade (emphasis his) and go to Canada you can help our senior citizens save up 30-40-50 percent on the cost of their medicines. We did that in Illinois, being the first state in America to defy (emphasis his) the FDA and the big drug companies. And I'm happy to say we were joined by the state of Wisconsin, the state of Kansas and the state of Vermont and a lot of senior citizens in Illinois have had the benefit of being able to afford their medicine at prices they can afford. The house is impeaching me for that. Is that an impeachable offense?"

The 11th Article of Impeachment reads, "The Governor's actions with regard to, and responsibility for, the I-SaveRx Program, as more fully detailed in the Final Report at Section IV-F and in the Committee Record as a whole."

The House Committee on Impeachment's report , upon which the articles were based, is a detailed accounting of the governor's alleged, illegal activities involving the I-SaveRx program (Pgs 39 - 42). And Rahm was right there with him. So why is Blagojevich headed to federal court, while Rahm is headed to the White House "Court" to sit at the Changeling's right hand? Will anybody in the mainstream media ask that question? Particularly since there's this pesky, little thing over at the Illinois state government site.

"Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich and Congressman Rahm Emanuel (D-Chicago) were joined by Wisconsin Governor Jim Doyle for the launch of the new I-SaveRx prescription drug importation program -- the first program in the nation to allow Illinois and Wisconsin residents to purchase lower cost, safe prescription drugs from Europe and Canada."

I don't know if it's an impeachable offense or not but, Direct hit - Obama & Co., Senate Dems, Illinois legislature and especially, Rahm Emmanuel! Blagojevich made sure we knew that he and Rahm had been "talking" way before his "President-elect Advisor" status popped up in Fitzgerald's complaint (not indictment as I'd said previously - shame on me for picking up the media's terminology).

And if the President-select's right-hand man was "talking," with the governor for all that time, I'd venture a guess -he was not alone in doing so (no wonder he's all but blended into the background since the story broke. I guess they figure if he draws no attention to himself, no one will ask the important questions). People, we are fiddling while Rome burns.

(Blagojevich - 5/Democratic leadership - 0)

Illinois Secretary of State says, "Don't Blame Me!"

When I first heard Illinois Secretary of State, Jesse White was refusing to certify credentials for Roland Burris, I said, "Man! Is evererybody in on this charade?"

Turns out I was right - and wrong. According to the podcast here, Senate: Burris Needs Sec. Of State Signature {audio}, Mr. White spoke about how "they" had all agreed not to accept anyone appointed by Blagojevich - including Bobby Rush. But then, it became a problem.

I won't spoil it for you. Follow the link, read the article and do listen to the podcast. Jess White knew he'd been had and he wasn't havin' it! Rich!

(P.S. Undying Obamalove reigns at HuffPo as they've now revised history - yet again, crediting Obama for putting an end to this, rather than the law - which Burris used to back those Senate Dems the hell up!)

Burris will be seated

According to a report at Salon about 20 minutes ago, Roland Burris will be seated. Alex Koppelman writes:

"No more information than that is available so far. First impression, though, is that this news just reinforces the impression that the Democratic leadership handled this really, really badly. If they were going to let him in as of Wednesday, why not seat him Tuesday? Why allow the embarrassing spectacle of Burris walking out in the rain after being turned away? Not a good way to start the new Congress." (emphasis mine)

Yes, the Democratic leadership, and I use that word very loosely, handled this "really, really, really badly" - for all the world to see.

The questions are legitimate. But of course, I cannot speak for them. I do believe however, the very simple answers lay in the questions themselves: "let - allow - embarrassing spectacle." The selection of Barack Obama notwithstanding, America's white supremacist capitalist patriarchy believes it is, and always has been, up to them - and them alone - who does what, when and even how in this country, as evidenced by Sen. Reid's statements in the video at my "The Emperor Strikes Back" post. He reminded us, emphatically and repeatedly, "We are the ones that determine" (Read: "Nobody, not even the law of the land, will tell us what to do." - at least that's how I read it.) He went on to say, "So there's clearly, legal authority for us to do whatever we want to and this goes back for generations." (emphasis mine) And therein lies the problem. The "we," of whom he speaks, has been all-white from the birth of the nation up until Reconstruction when Hiram Rhodes Revels (R-MS) was elected to the senate in 1870 - that's 94 years! Here's an ironic piece (as we kick around "barring" and "citizenship" issues this election) from the United States Senate site, Arts & History section:

February 25, 1870 First African American Senator On February 25, 1870,visitors in the Senate galleries burst into applause as Mississippi senator-elect Hiram Revels of Mississippi entered the chamber to take his oath of office. Those present knew that they were witnessing an event of great historical significance. Revels was about to become the first African American to serve in the Senate. Born 42 years earlier to free black parents in Fayetteville, North Carolina, Revels became an educator and minister of the African Methodist Episcopal Church. During the Civil War, he helped form regiments of African American soldiers and established schools for freed slaves. After the war, Revels moved to Mississippi, where he won election to the state senate. In recognition of his hard work and leadership skills, his legislative colleagues elected him to one of Mississippi's vacant U.S.Senate seats as that state prepared to rejoin the Union.

Revels' credentials arrived in the Senate on February 23, 1870, and were immediately blocked by a few members who had no desire to see a black man serve in Congress. Masking their racist views, they argued that Revels had not been a U.S. citizen for the nine years required of all senators. In their distorted interpretation, black Americans had only become citizens with the passage of the 1866 Civil Rights Act, just four years earlier. Revels' supporters dismissed that statement, pointing out that he had been a voter many years earlier in Ohio and was therefore certainly a citizen.

Massachusetts Senator Charles Sumner brought the debate to an end with a stirring speech. "The time has passed for argument. Nothing more need be said. For a long time it has been clear that colored persons must be senators." Then, by an overwhelming margin, the Senate voted 48 to 8 to seat Revels.

Three weeks later, the Senate galleries again filled to capacity as Hiram Revels rose to make his first formal speech. Seeing himself as a representative of African American interests throughout the nation, he spoke—unsuccessfully as it turned out—against a provision included in legislation readmitting Georgia to the Union. He correctly predicted that the provision would be used to prohibit blacks from holding office in that state.

When Hiram Revels' brief term ended on March 3, 1871, he returned to Mississippi, where he later became president of Alcorn College.

Though Sen. Revels was the first Black to serve, he was not the first to serve a full term. That distinction goes to this equally interesting guy, Sen. Blanche Kelso Bruce, another Republican representing Mississippi from 1875 - 1881. The son of a white Virginia plantation owner and a Black house slave, he was (and will forever be) the only freed slave ever to preside over the U.S. Senate in 1879 (for the day, Dad was a stand-up guy). I live two miles from his residence in DC, declared a National Historic Landmark in 1975 (Hm-m-m wonder who lives there now? Think I'll drive by there tomorrow. I'll post a pic. Also going to find this book about him, "The Senator and the Socialite." Can't critically think and form intelligent opinions without a well-rounded perspective right?)

It would be another 86 years ( somebody check me, I hate Math!) before Blacks would have another successful go at a Senate seat. But in 1966, yet another Republican - this time from the North - Sen. Edward William Brooke, III (R-MA) was elected. In 1993, he was followed by Sen. Carol Mosley Braun (D-IL), the first Black Senator from the Democrats and through some strategic maneuvering, Barack Obama (D-IL) in 2005.

That's it people. Only five Black Senators in the almost 233 years this country has been a country - only five (now I have to go back and and check the stats for my Latino, Asian and Native-American brothers and sisters! - ea, got anything?). Sen. Reid was right. Doing "whatever they want" does go back for generations. But, he is incorrect that there is "legal authority" for them to turn the brother away in the rain.

Today, despite Gov. Blagojevich or because of him, the Senate will have to consider what the law and somebody else wants. Now that's "Change We Can Believe In!" - and it had nothing to do with the President-select who supported the barring in the first place.

(Blagojevich - 4/Democratic leadership - 0)

The Emperor Strikes Back!

Not 43 seconds in, and David Gregory brings up the "defied" word. That just has such a master-subject, elite-commoner, parent-child, unequal connotation to me. This man hasn't even raised his voice, hasn't "performed" like a lot of us say. Gotta keep that Angry Black Man image out there I guess. Now that the white supremacist capitalist patriarchy has their approved-version of a Black man (A "white man" too, as it relates to Blagojevich! Kitty over at Aroo wrote this nail-on-the-head piece about that dynamic), seems there's no intent to suffer any of us fools gladly who don't match those requirements.

~#~

Now Senator Reid, I'm going to be one of the ones to go out on a limb here and suggest there is some very, inherent racial bias, not only in the Burris instance (seeing as you've not offered any reason other than what someone else may have done), but in quite a few things you said. And I assure you, I'm not part of the Blagojevich anything! Just a few examples:

• Click 4:15 - "We are the ones that determine. Democrats and Republicans, determine who's going to sit in the Senate. It's been that way f-f, since before 18(inaudible)." Sounds eerily familiar to "I'm the Decider!" don't you think? And by the way, the "we" looks decidedly different than Burris, or did you miss that?
• Click 6:02 - "We determine who sits in the Senate and the House determines who sits in the House. So there's clearly, legal authority for us to do whatever we want to and this goes back for generations." Exactly the issue, on both counts.
• Click 7:40 - A picture's worth a thousand words, eh??
• Click 9:20 - "I went to the Clark County District Attorney's office to find a nobody, s-s-s-people thought was a nobody to become a federal judge, Johnnie Rawlinson." That'd be the "nobody" on the left of course.

(Judge Johnnie Rawlinson (9th Cir.) (photo left) looks on as Justice Sandra Day O’Connor thanks participants at the Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference last month for the gift of a box of flies. O’Connor is an avid fly fisher. Photo Credit: Ninth Circuit, Office of the Circuit Executive)

And he did that himself ya'll! Please!!!

And Senator Reid? Don't rip your arm out of its socket pattin' yourself on the back there, M-m-mkay?

(Blagojevich - 3/Democratic leadership - 0)