Friday, July 19, 2013

Left Side of the Aisle #117 - Part 1

On the George Zimmerman verdict

I have to talk about the trial of George Zimmerman. Of course I do. You knew I would. But I've been finding this hard to do, to organize what I want to say, because there is so much I want to say and I can't find a cohesive way to go from a to b to c and so on.

So instead of that, I'll start with my bottom-line assessment of the verdict: George Zimmerman got away with murder. Or, if you want to be legally technical, what I say he really got away with was manslaughter: the reckless, unnecessary, unjustifiable killing of a human being.

Unfortunately, it appears that in Florida you can do that. At least, if your victim is black and you can claim you were just so terrified, so threatened, by the overwhelming power of an unarmed black teenager that you had to kill him to save your own life.

That's true even if you are the one following him because you think they're "suspicious" and "on drugs or something." That's true even if you continue to follow him because "these assholes always get away" even after the police dispatcher tells you not to. That's true even if, according to your own statements, when confronted you don't identify yourself, you don't say anything about the Neighborhood Watch, you just demand "What are you doing?" Because if any kind of scuffle ensues, and if at any moment you think you are losing that fight, if you fear harm, you can just pull out your gun and blow him away.

In Florida, that, apparently, is legal, and several legal analysts have said the jury had "no choice" but to acquit given the sick nature of Florida's laws - especially after the judge refused to clarify her muddled explanation of manslaughter. As John Oliver said on the Daily Show, the real outrage here was not that the system was broken but that the system worked - that it intended for George Zimmerman to walk free.

And now, Justice Department officials say that Zimmerman is unlikely to face federal civil rights charges because it would be difficult to prove he acted out of racial bias, which would be necessary to get a conviction.

I don't know to talk about that. I also don't know how to talk about a system that never took the matter seriously until public outcry made them have to do something. Do not forget that initially, police took at face value Zimmerman's claim of self-defense. The cops drug-tested the dead victim but not the live shooter. They did a background check on the dead victim but not on the live shooter. Instead, they let the live shooter walk free without charge, without arrest.

How do you talk about that? How do you talk about a system so ethically corrupt, so astonishingly amoral, so rigged in favor of the killer over the killed?

But as is often true in cases such as this - and there have been so many others, from Oscar Grant in Oakland to Kimani Gray in Brooklyn to Wendell Allen in New Orleans to Terrance Franklin in Minneapolis, and countless others - what is often true is that the details of the particular case are less revealing than the reactions.

There were, for example, numerous attempts to smear Trayvon Martin as "a thug" - in fact one cop called him "a thug who deserved to die" - and a drug dealer with a history of violence, all based pretty much on vapor. There were menacing pictures of him, increasingly menacing pictures, some of them so menacing that they weren't even him. All of it intended to whitewash the crime, intended to make it okay for Trayvon Martin to be dead, intended to make it okay for George Zimmerman to have shot him - because in too many minds it couldn't have been wrong for him to have killed a black kid.

In the wake of the verdict, the right-wingers and other assorted bigots were alight with joy - except that, perversely (well, not actually), they seemed disturbed, even disappointed, that riots had not broken out in minority neighborhoods across the country. That reaction, too, is revealing, more revealing than the actual case.

So right now, I'm not talking about George Zimmerman, in fact at this point I don't even care about George Zimmerman. There are a lot of indications that George Zimmerman is a racist, including a long history of calling police to complain about "suspicious" African-Americans - but even if he's not, it doesn't matter. That broader reaction still matters and it still shows our society and it still shows it in a very unhappy light.

We are a society suffused with racism, infused with racism, infected with racism, a society in which a young black man - and yes, Zimmerman described Martin as black - is "suspicious" simply by virtue of being a young black man. More, not just "young" and not just "man." Black bodies - simply by virtue of being black - are associated with behavior and actions that are deemed threatening, regardless of what they actually do.

Consider the case of 14-year-old Tremaine McMillan, who on May 30 was slammed to the ground and choked by two Miami-Dade Police officers because they claim the teen gave them a “dehumanizing stare” and "clenched his fists," which they say created "an immediate threat" which they had to "neutralize." Two grown men, two armed cops, so threatened by a 14-year-old child giving them a dirty look that they had "no choice" but to slam him down and choke him until he urinated on himself.

Children, men, women, all regarded with suspicion and fear because of their color, their very bodies a mark against them.

You want an example? Last year, John Derbyshire, writing in the National Review, described "the talk" he would have with his children about dealing with black people. Among his bits of advice, beyond saying that the average black person is much less intelligent than the average white person, were these:

- Avoid concentrations of blacks not all known to you personally.
- Stay out of heavily black neighborhoods.
- Do not attend events likely to draw a lot of blacks.
- If you are a public event at which the number of blacks suddenly swells, leave as quickly as possible.
- Do not settle in a district or municipality run by black politicians.
- Do not act the Good Samaritan to blacks in apparent distress.
- If accosted by a strange black in the street, smile and say something polite but keep moving.

To be black is to be suspected, to be dangerous.

That's certainly the attitude in New York City, with its infamous "stop and frisk" policy. Under Mayor Mike "The billionaire" Bloomberg, there have been over 5 million stop-and-frisks, over 86 percent of them on black or Latino individuals. To stop a person lawfully, a cop must have reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, is committing or is about to commit a crime. Despite that, 88 percent of the stops did not result in an arrest or summons, and of course an even smaller proportion ever lead to a conviction. Which means that the cops, who are supposed to be suspecting a crime, were wrong over 90% of the time.

But none of that matters to Bloomberg or Police Commissioner Ray Kelly, who insist that "nobody racially profiles" and in fact, Blooming-idiot said, "I think we disproportionately stop whites too much and minorities too little."

Black and Latino males aged 14 to 24 made up less than 5% of New York's population in 2011, but made up nearly 42% of those stopped and frisked. But nobody racially profiles in New York. Of course.

Which moves me toward another point: Consider the case of Henry Louis Gates. You remember that one. Gates had to force his way into his house. The police got a call. A cop went to investigate. He confronted Gates. At some point Gates produced ID to show that he was in his own home. None of that was in dispute.

What also happened, though, was that there was some kind of argument between the two, as the result of which Gates was arrested on the classic bogus "disturbing the peace" charge, an arrest that happened because, as everyone seems to agree, Gates mouthed off to the cop, who took his cheap revenge.

And again, we have the revealing reaction: In a surprising number of comments on the matter, Gates was criticized as foolish or as blundering or making "a rookie mistake" by arguing with the cop. "Everybody knows you don't do that," we were told, it's "unwise," it "just gets you into trouble." it is "crazy" to defy a cop.

That is, black people are supposed to approach every encounter with police thinking that this person, this cop, is prepared to abuse their authority, to violate the law, to violate their rights, perhaps even to go off the deep end and turn violent - so they must maintain the right "attitude," they must be respectful, passive, obedient, subservient, they are supposed to act like serfs on the feudal estate, shuffling their feet, tugging at their forelocks, casting their eyes downward in the presence of the lord of the manor, even if they themselves are a highly-respected tenured professor in their own home.

Because to do otherwise, to act otherwise, is "crazy." And there are enough dead black people with police bullets in them to justify the claim. Because if you are black, you are a suspect, you are dangerous, you are a threat - and so in every encounter you must be more than innocent, more than harmless, you must instead be less of a person, you must shrink and become smaller, lesser, than you are. And you are simply supposed to accept that, to say that's the way it is, for your own safety - because, in fact, that's the way it is.

You want to know how it is? I'll show you how it is. Look at the graph. I have to explain this to you. Research was done to see if there was a measurable impact in court cases made by stand your ground laws. That's what the graph is about but it shows something else quite clearly. Understand: The standard used was the acquittal rate for self-defense claims in white-on-white violence, that is, cases where a white person was charged with killing another white person. These are in comparison to that.

So what does it say? First, if it's a case of a black person killing a black person, a self-defense claim is about 25% less likely to succeed than in a case of a white killing a white. If it's a black killing a white, a self-defense claim is about 75% less likely to succeed. But if it's a white person accused of killing a black person, a claim of self-defense is nearly two and a-half times more likely to succeed than if the victim was white - and if you invoke stand your ground, you are three and a-half times more likely to get off. Black lives matter less than white lives; black victims matter less than white victims.

As Paul Campos wrote at Salon,
Trayvon Martin was stalked by George Zimmerman because he was black. Trayvon Martin is dead because he was black. George Zimmerman was acquitted of killing Trayvon Martin because the boy Zimmerman killed was black.

If you deny these things, you are either a liar or an idiot, or possibly both.
When are we going to admit to ourselves that racism and bigotry, that rancid, putrid, vomit-inducing ignorance and paranoia is alive and thriving in our society and have been since the beginning? And yes, not only against blacks: Hispanics are just the latest target of our isolationist xenophobia. We can trace that back generation by generation, group by group, target by target. Asians, Poles, Italians, Irish, Jews, Catholics: Any wave of immigrants that was in any way "different" - to be blunt, that wasn't a WASP - any time there was a wave of "different" people, we heard the same things: It's going to destroy the country, undermine it, these foreigners, they're dirty, they're filthy, they're all the rest of this nonsense. We can trace this right back to Native Americans, who weren't even immigrants.

Our record on this is a shameful one. It may not be the worst, it may not even be all that bad compared to some other nations. That doesn't change the fact that it is shameful.

So I don't want to hear a single breath, a single hint, a single whisper, they we are are a "post-racial society." Anyone who says that to you is lying, either to you or to themselves, I don't know which. But the fact is that we are suffused with racism along with sexism and homophobia - we are steeped in our bigotry until it penetrates our souls.

Yes, it's getting better. Yes, it has been worse in the past. Yes, we can see an impact, we can see how bigotry now is usually expressed more with a wink and a nod, with dog whistles, not with overt filth of the old sort.

But if you as an adult sitting there reading this think, if you want to argue to me that racism has nothing to do with why Trayvon Martin is dead and George Zimmerman is still walking around free, then I want nothing to do with you nor should any decent person of decent conscience with two synapses to rub together.

Sources:
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/13/19441838-jury-finds-george-zimmerman-not-guilty?lite
http://daisysdeadair.blogspot.com/2013/07/florida-rules-that-stalking-and-killing.html
http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerman-jury-asks-manslaughter-clarification/story?id=19657201#.UeVwYW1nB6K
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2013/07/qotd-jury-instructions.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/16/john-oliver-reacts-to-zimmerman-verdict_n_3603714.html
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-zimmerman-justice-20130717,0,5160145.story
http://forusa.org/blogs/john-lindsay-poland/impunity-oakland
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/23/kimani-gray-funeral-stop-and-frisk_n_2941145.html
http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2013/03/family_of_wendell_allen_fatall.html
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2013/05/30/news/terrance-franklin-shot-in-back-of-head
http://www.salon.com/2013/07/14/most_disgusting_reactions_to_zimmerman_acquittal/
http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2013/07/trayvons_ghost.php
http://www.care2.com/causes/cops-choke-black-boy-holding-puppy-for-giving-them-dehumanizing-stares.html
http://newsone.com/2514992/tremaine-mcmillan-miami-police-brutality/
http://takimag.com/article/the_talk_nonblack_version_john_derbyshire#axzz1rflvuJxj
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/06/national-review-writer-race_n_1409413.html
http://www.salon.com/2013/03/14/nypd_make_5_millionth_stop_and_frisk_under_bloomberg/
http://gawker.com/bloomberg-on-stop-and-frisk-i-think-we-stop-minoritie-610142398
http://blog.metrotrends.org/2012/03/stand-ground-laws-miscarriages-justice/
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/criminal-justice/is-there-racial-bias-in-stand-your-ground-laws/
http://www.salon.com/2013/07/14/zimmerman_saga_was_all_about_race/?source=newsletter

Left Side of the Aisle #117




Left Side of the Aisle
for the week of July 18-24, 2013

This week:

On the George Zimmerman verdict
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/13/19441838-jury-finds-george-zimmerman-not-guilty?lite
http://daisysdeadair.blogspot.com/2013/07/florida-rules-that-stalking-and-killing.html
http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerman-jury-asks-manslaughter-clarification/story?id=19657201#.UeVwYW1nB6K
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2013/07/qotd-jury-instructions.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/16/john-oliver-reacts-to-zimmerman-verdict_n_3603714.html
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-zimmerman-justice-20130717,0,5160145.story
http://forusa.org/blogs/john-lindsay-poland/impunity-oakland
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/23/kimani-gray-funeral-stop-and-frisk_n_2941145.html
http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2013/03/family_of_wendell_allen_fatall.html
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2013/05/30/news/terrance-franklin-shot-in-back-of-head
http://www.salon.com/2013/07/14/most_disgusting_reactions_to_zimmerman_acquittal/
http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2013/07/trayvons_ghost.php
http://www.care2.com/causes/cops-choke-black-boy-holding-puppy-for-giving-them-dehumanizing-stares.html
http://newsone.com/2514992/tremaine-mcmillan-miami-police-brutality/
http://takimag.com/article/the_talk_nonblack_version_john_derbyshire#axzz1rflvuJxj
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/06/national-review-writer-race_n_1409413.html
http://www.salon.com/2013/03/14/nypd_make_5_millionth_stop_and_frisk_under_bloomberg/
http://gawker.com/bloomberg-on-stop-and-frisk-i-think-we-stop-minoritie-610142398
http://blog.metrotrends.org/2012/03/stand-ground-laws-miscarriages-justice/
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/criminal-justice/is-there-racial-bias-in-stand-your-ground-laws/
http://www.salon.com/2013/07/14/zimmerman_saga_was_all_about_race/
Clown Award: Juror B37
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2013/07/george-zimmerman-juror-says-his-heart-was-in-the-right-place/
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/juror-b37-drops-trayvon-case-book-pitch-article-1.1400096

Outrage of the Week: Faux News spreads racial fears
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/fox-new-black-panthers-were-spark-behind-z
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/07/15/fox-promotes-conspiracy-theory-that-new-black-p/194873
http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/some-odd-reason-fox-goes-silent-abou
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2000/fall/snarling-at-the-white-man

Some news on same-sex marriage
http://www.care2.com/causes/in-indiana-applying-for-a-gay-marriage-license-is-a-felony.html
http://www.nwitimes.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/penalties-await-gay-couples-trying-to-marry-in-indiana/article_3cca22e7-9915-5d26-b0b2-3980aa91afaa.html
http://www.care2.com/causes/pennsylvania-ag-refuses-to-defend-states-gay-marriage-ban.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/07/11/sources-pa-attorney-general-wont-defend-states-gay-marriage-ban/
http://www.aclupa.org/pressroom/aclupaacluandhangleyaronch.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/07/16/britain-same-sex-marriage-legalized/2522911/
http://www.latimes.com/news/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-britain-gay-marriage,0,7549767.story

Update: Moral Monday
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/16/moral-monday-protests_n_3604046.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/12/pat-mccrory-motorcycle-abortion-bill_n_3588466.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/11/north-carolina-motorcycle-abortion_n_3582006.html

Update: Egypt
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/15/egypt-muslim-brotherhood-leaders-arrest_n_3599047.html
http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/16/19500526-egypt-swears-in-new-liberal-cabinet-shutting-out-islamist-parties?lite

Update: Texas passes new abortion restrictions
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/13/texas-senate-abortion-bill_n_3587745.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/12/tampons-confiscated-texas_n_3588177.html

Friday, July 12, 2013

Weekly reminder

As of July 10, at least 6,022 people had been killed by gunfire in the US since Newtown, at least 61 of them in Massachusetts.

Left Side of the Aisle #116 - Part 8

Guns: what you don't see can hurt you

Well, here’s a bit of news to make you feel all warm and fuzzy.  The Illinois legislature has just overriden Gov. Pat Quinn’s conditional veto, thus making the Land of Lincoln the 50th and final state to allow concealed carrying of firearms.

That’s right: Now, everywhere you go in this great nation, from sea to shining sea, the person muttering to themselves as they walk by you on the street, the person getting uncomfortably loud at the next table in the restaurant, the obnoxious fan at the ball game with a few too many beers in them, the driver leaning on their horn, the old guy shouting “hey you kids, get off my lawn,” they, any and everyone of them, could be packing heat.

Doesn’t that make you feel oh so safe?

In fairness to the legislators, they were, you’ll pardon the expression, under the gun: In one of those bizarre “guns are my master, must obey guns” rulings, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals had declared the state’s ban on carrying a concealed weapon to be an unconstitutional infringement on the sacred 2nd Amendment. The court gave the state until July 9 to come up with a new law. Lawmakers feared that failure to act would mean that as of midnight there would have been no gun control of any kind in the state. Whether that was actually true or not - whether, for example, it would have obviated local ordinances - was arguable, but enough members of the state House and Senate were concerned enough to go along.

Rep. Brandon Harris called it “a historic, significant day for law-abiding gun owners” who “finally get to exercise their Second Amendment rights,” because apparently if you can’t carry a concealed weapon, the 2nd Amendment does not exist.

The law does have a list of places off-limits to guns, including schools, libraries, parks, and mass transit buses and trains. But here’s a question: If the guns are concealed, exactly how does anyone propose to enforce this short of, say, searching everyone who wants to get on a bus or go into a library?

Now, of course, one place they can get searched is at an airport. And more and more, people are trying to get on planes carrying loaded guns.

The TSA started keeping records of this in 2011. In 2012, TSA found 1,549 firearms on passengers attempting to go through screening, up 17% from 2011. Eighty-five percent of those guns were loaded. In the first six months of this year, they found 894 guns in carry-on bags, purses, pockets, even in a boot. That is a 30% increase over the same period last year. The TSA set a record in May for the most guns seized in one week: sixty-five in all, 45 of them loaded and 15 of those with bullets in the chamber, ready to be fired. That was 30% more than the previous record of 50 guns, which had been set just two weeks earlier.

The most common excuse? “I forgot it was there.” Either you are so addicted to carrying your gun, carrying it has become so vital to you, that you’re no longer aware of it or you are lying through your damn teeth, attempted to illegally carry a loaded weapon onto a plane.

I don’t find either of those alternatives reassuring.

Sources:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/override-votes-make-illinois-last-state-in-the-nation-to-allow-carrying-of-concealed-weapons/2013/07/09/54a9e766-e8f5-11e2-818e-aa29e855f3ab_story.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/02/more-passengers-guns-airports_n_3536446.html
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/crime/2012/12/gun_death_tally_every_american_gun_death_since_newtown_sandy_hook_shooting.html

Left Side of the Aisle #116 - Part 7

Outrage of the Week: coerced sterilization in California prisons

According to a new report by the Center for Investigative Reporting, between 2006 and 2010, doctors in California prisons illegally sterilized at least 148 female inmates. And there are perhaps 100 more dating back to the late 1990s.

Doctors coerced the women into getting tubal ligations which were conducted without required state approvals and which targeted women that the staff thought were “likely to return to prison in the future.”

Dr. James Heinrich, an OB-GYN who did or oversaw a number of the procedures, naturally denied ever pressuring the women, insisting instead that he was providing an important service, an attitude that can only be described as condescendingly paternalistic and which was echoed by Daun Martin, the top medical manager at California’s Valley State Prison from 2005 to 2008, who creepily characterized the surgeries as an empowerment issue for the women. This despite the fact that she admitted that when she learned that the procedure required approval by the state on a case-by-case basis, she and Heinrich tried to find ways around the regulations, such as labeling a tubal ligation as a “medical emergency.” How that “empowers women” remains a mystery.

We had a name for this kind of brutality in years past: We called it eugenics, where we decided that certain types of people were inferior and should not be allowed to reproduce. At one time, 32 states had compulsory sterilization laws directed at minorities, the poor, the disabled, the mentally ill, and prisoners. It wasn’t until 1979 that California banned the practice.

And if you have any doubt that this is what is going on here, consider the words of Dr. Heinrich, who said any woman who now claims she didn’t want the surgery is lying and is, quoting him, “somebody looking for the state to give them a handout” and who just, quoting again, “wants to stay on the state’s dole somehow.”

Told of the nearly $150,000 the state had paid to local contract doctors for the surgeries, he called it minimal, especially, quoting again, “compared to what you save in welfare as they procreated more.”

So here’s the thing: If you do not find those words to be those of a bigot, if you do not find this whole business a sordid, foul, stinking outrage, you should stop watching this show and spend that time trying to figure out where your moral development went so disastrously wrong.

Sources:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/08/female-inmates-sterilized-california_n_3561564.html
http://jezebel.com/female-prisoners-sterilized-illegally-and-often-throug-699103380
http://cironline.org/reports/female-inmates-sterilized-california-prisons-without-approval-4917
http://www.politicususa.com/2013/07/07/california-prisons-illegally-sterilized-hundreds-female-inmates.html

Left Side of the Aisle #116 - Part 6

Laugh so as not to weep

There is a sort of footnote to this, an example of “I laugh for fear of crying” courtesy of New York Times columnist David Brooks.

In a column last week defending the coup, Brooks declared that “It’s not that Egypt doesn’t have a recipe for a democratic transition. It seems to lack even the basic mental ingredients.”

That’s right, according to David Brooks, Egypt’s difficulties in establishing a real democracy are not due to decades of repressive government, not due to inexperience in self-government, but because the people of Egypt don’t possess the cognitive capacity to handle it.

And it’s not just Egypt, he says; indeed, Islamists in general “lack the mental equipment to govern. ... Incompetence is built into their intellectual DNA.” They are, he said, “incapable of running a modern government.”

As evidence, he cites the cases of Egypt, Turkey, Iran, Gaza, Palestine, and Algeria. Okay, forget Egypt: You can’t cite as evidence the very thing you’re trying to prove, which is that the coup was justified by the failings of the Egyptians. What of the rest?

Well, Turkey and Iran have both shown dramatic economic improvements, including in the lives of the poor, over the past 10 years. You can condemn both the increasing authoritarianism of the government of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and the repression by the mullahs in Iran but you can’t call them incompetent.

In Gaza, Hamas actually has a solid reputation for being very good at delivering social services - again, there is no need to approve of a government to recognize its competency.

Finally, neither Palestine nor Algeria has or ever has had an Islamist government.

As is all too often true, David Brooks has no idea what the heck he is talking about. The man is a complete jackass - and when I think he is a regular columnist for the New York Times, I laugh so I don’t cry.

Sources:
http://www.salon.com/2013/07/05/david_brooks_bigoted_rant/
http://www.fair.org/blog/2013/07/05/david-brooks-mental-equipment/

Left Side of the Aisle #116 - Part 5

Egypt and American mythology

Two things should have become clear from events in Egypt, two treasured notions of American mythology brought into serious question: One, that elections equal freedom and two, that people power equals justice.

After the dictator Hosni Mubarek was brought down by, yes, people power backed up with some military support, Egypt had its first free elections. The outcome was the election of President Mohammed Morsi and domination of the parliament by the Freedom and Justice Party, the political arm of the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood.

A new constitution was then drafted by an assembly chosen by the parliament and thus also dominated by Islamists - who, despite repeated their assurances of respect for religious and political minorities in Egypt, tried to ram through a document that made civil government subservient to Sharia law, that is, to fundamentalist Muslim religious law.

The assembly was controversial enough that the non-Islamists involved eventually just gave up and walked away and courts were considering whether to disband it. But Morsi decreed that they could not as his allies finalized the draft. The final version, with its strong Islamist flavor, passed in a referendum with around 60% of the vote but in an election with a turnout of only around 30%.

So first: Do not forget that Morsi had been democratically elected in Egypt’s first free election, an election that people power ultimately helped bring about. But the overall result was not freedom - not unless you think the word can comfortably be applied to a constitution and a government that was more oriented toward theocracy than democracy.

Dissatisfaction with Morsi’s rule grew until it finally exploded into the streets in an odd coalition of liberals, Christians, Mubarak supporters, Salafists, Al-Azhar scholars, and the military. People power again filled Tahrir Square with tens, hundreds of thousands demanding Morsi go.

And the result? Justice? Not what you would call it. It was a military coup that has arrested hundreds of Morsi supporters as well as shooting down more than 50 of them in one of the worst single incidents of bloodshed in the whole 2-1/2 years of turmoil. (And a coup which, by the way, the US refuses to call a coup because to do so would require cutting off the $1.3 billion in military aid that goes to Egypt each year, and no way does the US government want to do that).

People power is not in charge in Egypt, the military is. And the military has set up its own timetable for drafting yet another constitution and elections for yet another parliament, all within the next 6-1/2 months, the quick pace apparently intended to soothe the ruffled feathers of Western governments.

But there is where it gets extra interesting: Under the timetable issued Monday by interim president Adly Mansour, two appointed panels would be created. One, made up of judges, would come up with amendments. The other, larger body consisting of representatives of society and political movements would debate the amendments and approve them, with a referendum to follow.

Now, aside from the question of who gets to decide what “representatives of society and political movements” get to take part and how much say each of them has, the fact is that the judges who run Egypt's courts made their careers under Hosni Mubarak, and now they are the ones who will come up with the proposed amendments that the other panel will debate.

So do elections equal freedom? Not when they become the classic “tyranny of the majority.” Does people power produce justice? Not when it starts by saying the necessary “no” - and never goes beyond it.

Meanwhile, the Muslim Brotherhood has rejected the whole new deal, calling it an attack on democracy and has called on its supporters to rise in protest. Which they have. As the saying goes, watch this space.

Sources:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/09/egypt-political-roadmap_n_3565902.html?utm_hp_ref=world
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/08/egyptian-army-firing-at-crowd_n_3561467.html?utm_hp_ref=world
http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/08/world/meast/egypt-coup/index.html
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/egypt-transitional-government-pulls-in-mubarak-old-guard-and-salafists-a-910266.html#ref=nl-international

Left Side of the Aisle #116 - Part 4

Clown Award: MA State Police Colonel Timothy Alben

Now for the Clown Award, given for acts of meritorious stupidity.

This week the big red nose goes to State Police Col Timothy Alben, who, because he handled a lot of the press relations, stands in for the entire security complex at this year’s Fourth of July events at the Esplanade.

Forces from the Boston police, the Cambridge police, the Transit Police, the state police, the FBI, and the National Guard were out there by the hundreds, in unprecedented numbers, because they wanted to, in Alben’s words, make people “feel like this is a safe place to come.”

To that end, beyond the swarms of cops and troops, there were what was said to be “an exponentially larger” number of surveillance cameras watching your every move. There was a special number where you could anonymously (supposedly) text tips to the cops about anything or anyone you thought suspicious. There were fewer open entrances to the Esplanade, new security checkpoints on the Esplanade, and tough new bans that prohibited visitors from carrying in backpacks, coolers on wheels, cans, glass containers, premixed beverages, liquids greater than two liters, or any sharp objects. All to make you feel safe.

In fact, people were made to feel so safe that a lot of them decided not to go at all. Turnout was down by an estimated 40% over previous years.

Officials made all sorts of excuses for the low turnout. When a Boston Globe photo of the area in front of the Hatch Shell, taken at about 5:30 p.m., showed what the paper called “an unusual amount of green space,” Steve MacDonald of Boston4 Productions, which produces the event, predicted “a late-arriving crowd” and “a large influx of people” after the sun went down.

Alben blamed the temperature, as did Governor Deval Patrick, who claimed that an aerial view showed the outline of the crowd matched the outline of the shade - which is a pretty bizarre argument since the event takes place at night, when shade would not seem to be an issue.

Obviously realizing the crowd was proving embarrassingly small as the day wore on, officials kept encouraging people to come. It’ll be great, they said, it’ll be wonderful, come one, come all! Never mind the soldiers, the searches, the cameras, the restrictions. Come celebrate America!

Alben actually summed it up rather well, admittedly unintentionally: “We want you all to come and enjoy this celebration which is at the heart of America,” he said.

Unfortunately, to an increasing extent, that is true.

Sources:
http://www.boston.com/metrodesk/2013/07/03/police-announce-huge-presence-more-cameras-for-the/CvgHGRVHMnUJFOBRwn2rrJ/story.html
http://www.boston.com/metrodesk/2013/07/04/fourth-july-revelers-begin-arrive-boston-esplanade/4cDweMptMsgkz6Nf7lBwUL/story.html
http://www.telegram.com/article/20130704/NEWS/130709853/1116
http://www.wcvb.com/news/local/metro/attendance-appears-down-at-boston-july-4-events/-/11971628/20846004/-/745nh2z/-/index.html

Left Side of the Aisle #116 - Part 3

Good news 3: Walmart feels the heat

One final bit of good news-bad news.

Walmart, as I’ve discussed here before, continues to face a mounting labor movement as exploited workers come to feel they have nothing to lose by standing up for themselves.

A union-backed group called OUR Walmart has been conducting a campaign called  Making Change at Walmart to push for improved hours, pay, and benefits for its workers. Many of Walmart's 1.5 million employees earn just above the minimum wage, and rely on food stamps and other government aid to get by.

The corporation is notoriously anti-union, even flying in teams of union-busters to stores at the first hint of union activity. This May, Walmart posted a job listing for a director of Labor Relations, whose job was described as maintaining a “continued union-free workplace.” Those who do try to organize face retaliation: According to OUR Walmart, 11 workers involved in the movement were fired last month alone.

Walmart insists the labor activism is trivial and baseless, that, in the words of corporate flunky Randy Hargrove, "our associates have chosen to remain union-free." But the good news is that it turns out that some of the company’s large investors just aren’t buying it any more.

Two large European pension funds have announced that they would no longer invest in Walmart, charging that the company does not treat its employees in accordance with international standards of freedom of association, and has failed to respond to their concerns.

This comes after five years of efforts to get Walmart to adopt the standards of the International Labour Organization. In a media release Monday, one of the pension funds called Walmart's efforts to block workers from unionizing as "contrary to fundamental principles and rights at work." When a final request for the company to acceptinternational standards was met with a response that it just wasn’t even going to be considered, it was, in the words of an executive of one of the funds, "the final straw that broke the camel's back."

This is not the first such case: Last year, the Netherlands' largest pension fund divested from Walmart for failing to comply with the United Nations' Global Compact, which outlines values related to labor, human rights, corruption, and the environment.

Again, the good news is that this is happening; the bad news is that it’s necessary.

As a footnote to this, even as pressure slowly builds on Walmart from one direction, the corporation is looking to another, apparently reluctantly realizing that it’s image could, well, use some polishing.

Nearly 20 North American retailers - including Walmart - have agreed to a 5-year safety plan for Bangladesh garment factories that would include inspecting every factory within a year. This comes in the wake of the fire in November that killed 112 people in one Bangladesh garment factory and the over 1100 who were crushed in the collapse of another in April.

Unfortunately, this won’t actually do much, as the companies declined to join an agreement worked out in May among mostly European firms that is a)binding and b)includes requirements for independent inspections and for the signatories to stop doing business with any firm that fails to meet the standards, none of which is true of the one just announced. It is, that is, little more than apple-polishing. But still, it does mean that Walmart, which initially denied it had anything to do with or any responsibility for, the dangerous conditions under which the workers of Bangladesh must labor so we can save a couple of bucks on socks, Walmart is feeling the pressure. And that’s a good thing.

Sources:
http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2013/07/03/pension-funds-blacklist-walmart/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/10/bangladesh-factory-safety-plan-walmart_n_3573209.html
http://money.cnn.com/2013/07/10/news/companies/walmart-bangladesh-agreement/index.html
http://money.cnn.com/2013/05/13/news/companies/hm-bangladesh-safety/index.html?iid=EL

Left Side of the Aisle #116 - Part 2

Good news 2: Moral Monday

Here’s another good news-bad news deal; this time the good news comes first.

For the past two months there have been demonstrations every week at the state capitol in Raleigh, North Carolina. The weekly protests are known as “Moral Monday” and they are intended to show opposition to the increasingly-reactionary actions of the state legislature, which seems determined to plunge the state headlong into the 19th century.

The numbers have ranged from dozens to 3,000 and the focus of protests have ranged from legislation that rejected the expansion of Medicaid to the working poor, slashed benefits to the unemployed, and eliminated jobs in public education, as well as addressing not-directly-economic issues like natural gas drilling, school vouchers, and voting rights.

Over 700 people have been arrested in nonviolent civil disobedience over the weeks and there doesn’t seem to be any indication that the protests are going to stop.

One of the biggest turnouts was this week, in the wake of the state Senate’s underhanded passage last week of new restrictions on access to legal abortion. The body had been considering a ban on the “application of foreign law” in family courts, an “anti-Sharia Law” bill that many opponents say is a thinly veiled attempt at stoking anti-Muslim sentiment in the state.

Then at the last minute, with no public notice, no hearings, and no debate, the troglodyte majority added to the bill a series of requirements that abortion clinics conform to the same safety standards as ambulatory surgical centers, a totally medically unnecessary requirement intended to force most clinics to shut down for lack of funds to meet the new demands. It was all done in less than 24 hours, a period even GOPper Gov. Pat McCrory said was unfairly rushed.

Come Monday, 2,000 people jammed the capitol and 64 were arrested for refusing to leave.

The protest may have had some impact: Leaders in the state House say said they are going to consult more with state regulators before deciding whether to vote on the new regulations and state Health and Human Services Secretary Aldona Wos has already said that if safety is the issue, as proponents lyingly claim, state funding for more frequent inspections of abortion clinics would do a better job.

If the bill isn’t passed before the current session ends, which could be as soon as next week, the legislature will have to wait until January to revisit the issue.

State Senator Earline Parmon accurately noted that "It's a small victory," but it’s still a victory.

And the protests, the Moral Mondays, go on. To know that people have not given up, that people are prepared to be on the streets, to put their bodies on the line, that people are prepared to keep the fire lit, that is - to me at least - really good news.

What’s the bad news part? It’s necessary. The protests, the disobedience, the fight - it’s all necessary, now more than ever. And that is depressing.

Footnote: Worth mentioning is the fact that among the people arrested was Rev. Frederick Battle. The last time he was arrested was in 1962 when he took part in the historic Woolworth’s department store sit-in in Greensboro. If you don’t know about that, look it up.

Sources:
http://www.thenation.com/blog/175160/sixty-four-arrested-moral-monday-abortion-access-protest-north-carolina#
http://www.wral.com/-moral-monday-protest-bolstered-by-abortion-restriction-outrage/12638680/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/09/north-carolina-abortion-bill_n_3569509.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/08/moral-monday-rally-nc-abortion-bill-protest-arrests_n_3564506.html
http://swampland.time.com/2013/07/01/moral-mondays-religious-progressives-protest-north-carolina-policies/

Left Side of the Aisle #116 - Part 1

Good news 1: Jeffrey David Olson

A couple of good news-bad news stories to start us off.

Jeffrey David Olson of San Diego was angered by the Bank of America’s immoral, unethical, and illegal treatment of people caught in their web of mortgage and foreclosure intrigue, even more so by the fact that none of this seemed of any concern to federal law enforcement or regulators.

He started a message campaign because "Wall Street banks nearly drove our economy into the ditch" and that “there was basically a criminal racket operating on my block, and I didn't find that acceptable."

So he took to writing statements on the sidewalk in front of three of BoA’s branches in SD. He used children’s sidewalk chalk, the type that washes away in the rain or scuffs off after maybe a couple of days. Between April and August of last year he left 13 such messages, saying thing like "No thanks, big banks" and "Shame on Bank of America."

As a result, after the local security officer for Bank of America prodded the City Attorney's office, Olson was charged with the 13 counts of vandalism, each of which could hypothetically cost him a year in prison and a $1000 fine.

The case got some attention for two reasons beyond the simple absurdity of the charges: One is that the statute requires that something was "maliciously defaced” to qualify as vandalism. Since there was no physical damage and the chalk, again, could easily be removed at minimal cost - or even no cost, if it rained - the only possible application of “malicious” would be to the content of his messages, which would seem to make it an open-and-shut case of free speech.

Which brings up the second reason it got attention: The judge, one Howard Shore, granted a prosecutorial motion to forbid Olson from citing in his defense the phrases "First Amendment," "free speech," "free expression," "public forum," "expressive conduct" or "political speech." The law, he said, “does not mention First Amendment rights," thereby placing a local law about graffiti above the Constitution.

Shore later imposed a gag order on Olson, barring him from talking to the media about his case - remember, this is a misdemeanor case. So according to the city prosecutor, you can potentially face 13 years in prison for expressing your opinion with washable chalk if a giant corporation wants it so and according to “Judge” Shore, you can be banned from complaining that you've been forbidden to argue that being threatened with those 13 years in prison is a violation of your free speech rights.

So what’s the good news?

First, people rallied around him, including writing messages about free speech on the sidewalk around the Hall of Justice, where the trial was held.

Second, last week he was acquitted on all 13 counts, as the jury showed much more sense than the police, the prosecutors, or the judge did. And to make it all the sweeter, San Diego Mayor Bob Filner condemned the City Attorney's Office, calling the whole prosecution a waste of time.

Footnote: After the acquittal, “Judge” Shore condemned the media for sensationalizing the case. Which is not surprising: Vampires do their best work in the dark.

Sources:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/07/01/1220409/-Ding-San-Diego-Chalker-Acquitted-and-Idiot-Prosecutor-Condemned-by-Mayor#20130701205410
http://www.fair.org/blog/2013/06/30/chalk-another-one-up-to-free-speech-hypocrisy/
http://www.sandiegoreader.com/weblogs/news-ticker/2013/jun/25/chalking-the-plank-judge-wont-allow-bank-protester/
http://www.truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/item/18062-san-diego-jury-acquits-on-all-counts-occupy-chalk-protestor-targeted-by-bank-of-america
http://www.10news.com/news/rally-held-to-show-support-for-jeff-olson-man-charged-in-chalk-vandalism-case-06292013
http://www.10news.com/news/verdict-in-san-diego-chalk-vandalism-case-070113

Left Side of the Aisle #116




Left Side of the Aisle
for the week of July 11-17, 2013

This week:

Good news 1: Jeffrey David Olson
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/07/01/1220409/-Ding-San-Diego-Chalker-Acquitted-and-Idiot-Prosecutor-Condemned-by-Mayor#20130701205410
http://www.fair.org/blog/2013/06/30/chalk-another-one-up-to-free-speech-hypocrisy/
http://www.sandiegoreader.com/weblogs/news-ticker/2013/jun/25/chalking-the-plank-judge-wont-allow-bank-protester/
http://www.truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/item/18062-san-diego-jury-acquits-on-all-counts-occupy-chalk-protestor-targeted-by-bank-of-america
http://www.10news.com/news/rally-held-to-show-support-for-jeff-olson-man-charged-in-chalk-vandalism-case-06292013
http://www.10news.com/news/verdict-in-san-diego-chalk-vandalism-case-070113

Good news 2: Moral Monday
http://www.thenation.com/blog/175160/sixty-four-arrested-moral-monday-abortion-access-protest-north-carolina#
http://www.wral.com/-moral-monday-protest-bolstered-by-abortion-restriction-outrage/12638680/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/09/north-carolina-abortion-bill_n_3569509.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/08/moral-monday-rally-nc-abortion-bill-protest-arrests_n_3564506.html
http://swampland.time.com/2013/07/01/moral-mondays-religious-progressives-protest-north-carolina-policies/

Good news 3: Walmart feels the heat
http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2013/07/03/pension-funds-blacklist-walmart/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/10/bangladesh-factory-safety-plan-walmart_n_3573209.html
http://money.cnn.com/2013/07/10/news/companies/walmart-bangladesh-agreement/index.html
http://money.cnn.com/2013/05/13/news/companies/hm-bangladesh-safety/index.html?iid=EL

Clown Award: MA State Police Colonel Timothy Alben
http://www.boston.com/metrodesk/2013/07/03/police-announce-huge-presence-more-cameras-for-the/CvgHGRVHMnUJFOBRwn2rrJ/story.html
http://www.boston.com/metrodesk/2013/07/04/fourth-july-revelers-begin-arrive-boston-esplanade/4cDweMptMsgkz6Nf7lBwUL/story.html
http://www.telegram.com/article/20130704/NEWS/130709853/1116
http://www.wcvb.com/news/local/metro/attendance-appears-down-at-boston-july-4-events/-/11971628/20846004/-/745nh2z/-/index.html

Egypt and American mythology
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/09/egypt-political-roadmap_n_3565902.html?utm_hp_ref=world
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/08/egyptian-army-firing-at-crowd_n_3561467.html?utm_hp_ref=world
http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/08/world/meast/egypt-coup/index.html
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/egypt-transitional-government-pulls-in-mubarak-old-guard-and-salafists-a-910266.html#ref=nl-international

I laugh so as not to weep
http://www.salon.com/2013/07/05/david_brooks_bigoted_rant/
http://www.fair.org/blog/2013/07/05/david-brooks-mental-equipment/

Outrage of the Week: coerced sterilization in CA prisons
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/08/female-inmates-sterilized-california_n_3561564.html
http://jezebel.com/female-prisoners-sterilized-illegally-and-often-throug-699103380
http://cironline.org/reports/female-inmates-sterilized-california-prisons-without-approval-4917
http://www.politicususa.com/2013/07/07/california-prisons-illegally-sterilized-hundreds-female-inmates.html

Guns: what you don't see can hurt you
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/override-votes-make-illinois-last-state-in-the-nation-to-allow-carrying-of-concealed-weapons/2013/07/09/54a9e766-e8f5-11e2-818e-aa29e855f3ab_story.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/02/more-passengers-guns-airports_n_3536446.html

Thursday, July 04, 2013

Weekly reminder

As of July 4, at least 5,715 people had been killed by gunfire in the US since Newtown, at least 61 of them in Massachusetts.

Something to note here, as I will on occasion: The phrase "at least" is important and purposeful, as is the choice of "been killed by" rather than "died as the result of." These are deaths reported in the news media as gathered by Slate and @GunDeaths.

Suicides by gun are rarely reported. The result is that a figure based on CDC estimates, which include suicides, would be 17,086 in the US who have died at the end of a gun since Newtown.

Traditional July 4th post the second

The other thing I like to post every Fourth. It's something I wrote about a trip to a fireworks display on July 4, 1969.
 The 4th of July and Other Downs
The Day dawns again and it's time to love freedom. All the fascists come out to play and long hair and peace are decidedly un-American. Keep muttering things like "My country, right or wrong" and "America, love it or leave it" and you're really in. Middle-class America is out in force to celebrate liberty. Don't look now, but there's a knife in your back. A car goes by covered with flags, streamers, bunting, decals, and assorted other paraphernalia vital to your well-equipped American. Off we go to a fireworks show whose rockets sounded just like mortar fire. (Everything about the Fourth is so appropriate.) A motorcycle cop chomps away on something or other and glares at us with hatred that should have melted his shades as he leans on his bike and tries to figure a way to bust us. Red, white, and blue are the colors of the day, but be careful you don't have more red than blue or you might get lynched in the name of freedom. (You can have as much blue as you want, but the whiter you are, the better off you'll be.) Don't look now, but all the flagpoles look like spears. All in honor of the 36,000 brave boys who've given their lives to bring freedom, truth, beauty, and President Thieu to the South Vietnamese. Three cheers for Richard Nixon and six for J. Edgar Hoover, and better dead than red. The officially sanctioned day of national paranoia has come again, and all is right with the Pentagon.
I've noted with amusement was how the relative meanings of "red" (which at the time, kiddies, meant Communist) and "blue" have shifted over the years.

Traditional July 4th post the first

I have three posts I traditionally put up every July 4th (although I seem to have missed last year for some reason). The first is the text of the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence, which I'm going to skip this year because you can find it at the beginning of the post immediately below this one.

The second is this one, which is the text of a leaflet I wrote for distribution on July 4, 1975. After quoting the second paragraph of the Declaration, the flyer read:
These words should form the backdrop against which the Bicentennial should be seen. Our 200th birthday as a nation should not be a time for celebrating the status quo or for patting ourselves on the back in an orgy of national self-congratulation, but rather a time to reexamine and rediscover the truly revolutionary heritage which America has.

Even more than that, it should be a time to rededicate ourselves to the ideals of the Declaration, to recognize that it is, as the Declaration says, our right and duty to resist dramatically increasing government control of our lives. It is our duty to resist the CIA and FBI when they try to probe every secret of our lives; it is our duty to resist attempts to muzzle, restrict, intimidate, and otherwise restrain both freedom of speech and of the press. It is our duty to resist a militarist US foreign policy that destroys the life and liberty of people in other lands and a militarist US federal budget that proposes to increase spending on weapons by 30% while human needs go unmet. It is our duty to resist government policies that favor big business at the expense of the general public, while inflation and unemployment run rampant. It is our duty to resist a government that seems no longer (if indeed it ever was) interested in and dedicated to securing the "safety and happiness" of the populace.

We do not believe in violence, but we do believe in revolution - nonviolent revolution. And we believe that we are fully within the revolutionary heritage of America when we say we believe it is our duty to demand our rights and our duty to use nonviolence to make any changes necessary to secure those rights, for ourselves and for all others.
In the 38 years since I wrote that, I have been both encouraged and discouraged, hopeful and despairing. It has felt like some version of A Tale of Two Cities: So much has changed and so little has changed, so much has been done and so little has been done. (For one thing, if you're too young to remember it, look up the Church Committee and think about the NSA.)

Sometimes it seems that the only comfort is that the only reason things aren't worse than they are is because of the struggles there have been both during those 38 years and before. So even where we have - as we have more than often enough - fallen short, we can at least say those struggles were not in vain: No genuine effort for justice ever is, no matter the outcome.

And those struggles can be nothing but invigorated when we maintain a day-to-day awareness of, and base the only legitimate patriotism on, our revolutionary heritage.

Footnote 1: The date for the flyer is not a typo; the official Bicentennial Year ran from July 4, 1975 to July 4, 1976.

Footnote 2: UShistory.org has some interesting background on the Declaration of Independence, including earlier drafts. Some of the changes are revealing - such as one long passage denouncing the English slave trade that was deleted.

Left Side of the Aisle #115 - Part 6

Thoughts for the Fourth

This show will be seen in the week including the Fourth of July. I hope you enjoyed your Fourth, I hope you got to see some fireworks or watch a parade or have a barbecue or a picnic or just loll in your yard or chill on your couch with a cool drink. The Fourth is a time for fun and I hope you had your share.

It's also, of course, traditionally a day of patriotism, of celebrating our nation and our heritage. So let me start by reminding you just what it is we are supposed to be celebrating, what heritage we are supposed to be honoring.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

That is the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence, which was adopted on July 4, 1776, which is why July 4 is the holiday.

Which means the Fourth is about celebrating a history of revolution, celebrating the right and duty of people to resist oppression. That history, that principle, should form the basis of our patriotism. So the Fourth is also an appropriate time to talk about patriotism, so that's what I'm going to do. I'll note at the top that a fair amount of what I'm going to say today I said before here, just five weeks ago. I don't care; it bears repeating.

I never used to think of myself as patriotic; I never used to think about it much one way or the other. I actually started thinking about what patriotism is - thinking of principles, beliefs, and so on, thinking of it in that context - during the presidential campaign of 2008. Barack Obama made a speech defending his own patriotism, in the course of which he went out of his way to attack the antiwar activists and the counterculture of the 1960s. Bluntly put, he was defending his patriotism by attacking that of others - including mine.

Sadly, too many people, especially among politicians, follow suit, making patriotism a matter of political or social gain rather than substance, a matter of ostentatious display, of flag pins and the Star Spangled Banner and swirling music and fluttering flags. Next time you see a political debate, amuse yourself by noting how many of the men are dressed in red, white, and blue: red tie, white shirt, blue suit.

I say that patriotism measured in terms of wearing flag pins, of having your hand over your heart during the national anthem, and the like is worthless, dangerous, and shallow. It is a hollow "patriotism," a shell that prefers form to substance and too easily, as we too often have seen over the last years, slides from "patriotism" into jingoism, as even now people who, had they done the equivalent against the British government in 1776, we would be hailing in our school history textbooks as heroes, are instead being labeled as traitors and yes I am thinking of Edward Snowden and Bradley Manning, among others.

Before I go any further, don't anyone bother claiming I said wearing a flag pin or whatever is "hollow." I said no such thing. I said that a patriotism measured in those terms is hollow. And it is.

So here is my understanding of patriotism:

Some years ago I read the comment about patriotism that "it is natural to have an abiding affection for the land of one's birth." I completely agree with that. But going beyond that, I say being a US patriot means being dedicated to the ideals on which the country was supposed to have been founded and which, at its best moments, it strives to uphold in as full a measure as we can manage: Ideals such as "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," as the right to rebellion against oppression, as "promoting the general welfare," as political freedoms, as representative government "of, by, and for the people" - the ideal of, to sum up in a single phrase from the Preamble to the Constitution, an intent to "establish justice," a justice I say must include the economic and the social as well as the political if it is to have real meaning.

Patriotism, that is, lies in the devotion to the ideals, not in any symbolic outward expression of it.

I do not wear a flag pin. I do not put my hand over my heart during the national anthem (which, I'll note in passing, I was taught as a child was something that some folks did but was not required). I do not sing along with the national anthem. In fact - and I know this will provide ammo for some and lead others to say I undermine my argument, but I don't care, it's the truth - I don't even stand up for the national anthem. Because patriotism does not lie in symbols or gestures.

Further, patriotism does not lie in support for or opposition to any particular party or policy except insofar as that support or opposition is an expression of that internal commitment to those ideals.

We are supposed to be a free people. Which means that an opponent of the Iraq war who was angered by the Executive branch's usurpation of power is much more patriotic than a war supporter who kept referring to the president as "the commander-in-chief" as if we were all soldiers expected to obey orders rather than citizens with the obligation held by any free people to "question authority."

We are supposed to be a daring people. We applaud ourselves for how we "dared" to cross the oceans, how we "dared" to cross the plains and prairies, how we "dared" to step out into space. Which means that an opponent of NSA spying is more patriotic, is more in keeping with what we tell ourselves about our heritage, than those who applaud the stripping away of our privacy and our rights as they cower in fear of a dark and vaguely-defined "other."

So I'm not patriotic as the term has unhappily come to be understood by too many: no flag pins, no singing of the national anthem, none of that. But if patriotism can be understood as embracing the ideals of our nation, as striving to hold this country to the highest of those ideals instead of the lowest of its prejudices, if it can be understood as committing to a notion of what the US, of what we as a people, can be and have at times approached being, then I submit that I am as patriotic as they come. And I have neither patience with nor tolerance for those who would make patriotism a matter of gestures and decorations rather than conviction.

Even many professional grouches (like me) are actually unregenerate romantics whose sharp words are honed on the inexplicable, indefensible, yet utterly unshakable conviction that things not only should be but can be better than they are.

Some years ago, I wrote to a friend that "our strongest, surest beliefs are those we don't even know we have until we find them within us." That is, our deepest, most abiding beliefs and commitments are not born consciously of careful philosophical argumentation and reasoned analysis but grow naturally from our root moral and ethical convictions. That argumentation, those analyses, can give form to those convictions, they can provide them with substance and weight and direction, but they do not drive them - rather, they are driven by them.

So despite my tendency to argue my points rationally with facts and figures and references - one of my favorite quotes is "passion and substance are not mutually exclusive" - still it's important for me to drop away on occasion from "here's the data, here's the logic, here's the conclusion" to the fundamental, baseline, radical place where I can say, simply, "I believe."

I believe that life is our highest good and advancing life is our highest ideal. I believe whatever advances life, improves life, is an expression of our humanity, that self-awareness, that capacity for love, that reach for hope that separates us from the other animals of the Earth. I believe that which opposes life, which advances hunger, oppression, and violence, are a rejection of that quality, a rejection of our humanity. I believe that to be human is to reach for life, for our potential. And I believe that is patriotic.

I believe in family, a broad, deep sense of family, of family as based on commitment, not on ceremonies, as based on ties the heart, not on ties of the blood. I believe we must reach beyond the personal to the public; beyond self to others; beyond us and them to we; beyond the individual to the community. And I believe that is patriotic.

I believe we have social obligations, moral commitments to a type of extended family that includes strangers, people who we'll never see, never meet, never have any contact with, but with who we share a mutual obligation, a mutual moral duty, a community extending even to the community of humanity. And I believe that is patriotic.

I believe we must ultimately reject the right of so few to have so much when so many have so little, reject the power of so few to control so much when so many control so little. I believe in the right of every human being to a decent life free of hunger, fear, and oppression and I believe in the duty of every member of society to strive to guarantee that right to all others. I believe that while we should have no desire to place a ceiling over anyone’s aspirations, we should desire to put a floor under everyone’s needs. And I believe that is patriotic.

I believe, ultimately, in justice: not in perfection or idealized utopias, but in human justice, one that rejects ascendancy of bombs over bread, of private greed over public good, of profits over people. A justice that centers on the preciousness of life. A justice that embraces the economic, the social, and the political. And finally, I believe in the indivisibility of that justice: It must be justice for “them” as well as for “us,” for enemy as for friend, or it’s not justice at all but mere favoritism. And I believe that all of that is patriotic.

I may sound like a philosopher, but what I’m interested in is change: not slogans, not philosophies, but getting-the-job-done type change. We have to be factual, practical, in our programs. As the Italian pacifist Danilo Dolci said, “Faith does not move mountains. Work, exacting work, moves mountains.”

But when I say “practical,” I don’t mean it in the sense of the liberals and the so-called progressives, those people who lower their sights, harden their hearts, darken their vision, and then congratulate themselves on their “realism.” You know the saying “I dream dreams of things that never were and ask Why not?” What we have to do is dream dreams of things that never were and ask “How?” How? What are the practical steps we can take right now, today? We have to approach the world with steel in our eyes.

But we can’t let the steel in our eyes cloud the dream. We have to hold to the vision of what we as a people, what we as a nation, can do, what we can be, and not settle, as so many do, for the mere hope that it will get no worse or even less, that it just get worse more slowly. Achieving wide-ranging justice will not be easy, cheap, or convenient - but it is possible and after all is said and done it is simply the right thing to do. And fighting that fight, that fight to “establish justice,” is the very essence of what it means to be patriotic.

I have tried to be a steely-eyed dreamer with varying degrees of success; usually it was a little long on the steel and a little short on the dream, a position that makes unnecessary compromise a little too easy and risk a little too - well, risky.

I've come to a point in my life when I've begun to slow down. I haven't spent as much time on the streets as I did in earlier years - nor as much as I'd like to - and my energy level simply isn't what it was. I find it harder to keep my spirits up and many discouraged days I don't regret that I won't live to experience the world I see coming at such times.

And yet in spite of that, maybe even because of that, recently I have begun to look more the the dream than the steel. So despite it all, despite all logic, despite a mountain of evidence, and without any good reason, I still believe that things must be, can be, better than they are, that it is possible. I just do. And will. I will continue to be a patriot.

Sources:
http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm
http://whoviating.blogspot.com/2008/01/i-believe.html
http://whoviating.blogspot.com/2008/02/and-its-not-even-fourth-of-july.html

Left Side of the Aisle #115 - Part 5

Clown Award: Pennsylvania state Rep. Daryl Metcalfe

Now for our other regular weekly feature, the Clown Award, given as always for acts of meritorious stupidity.

This week, the winner of the big red nose is Pennsylvania state Rep. Daryl Metcalfe.

Last Thursday, state Rep. Brian Sims of Philadelphia, the first openly gay member of the Pennsylvania legislature, attempted to take the floor to talk about the Supreme Court's decision to strike down the Defense of Marriage Act. Instead, several other legislators used a procedural maneuver of objecting to keep him from speaking and then did the same to two others who tried to speak in Sims' support.

Only one of those lawmakers would admit to raising an objection, that being Daryl Metcalfe.

"I did not believe," he said, "that as a member of that body that I should allow someone to make comments such as he was preparing to make that ultimately were just open rebellion against what the word of God has said, what God has said, and just open rebellion against God's law."

In other words, you say just what the Bible says or you don't get to talk.

Metcalfe is from Butler, Pennsylvania, named for Maj. Gen. William Butler, who was killed at the 1791 Battle of the Wabash, also known as St. Clair's defeat, which stands as the worst defeat ever inflicted on the US Army by Native American fighters. All of which seems appropriate since Metcalfe's brain also appears to have died a couple of hundred years ago.

Daryl Metcalfe is a clown.

Footnote: On Thursday, Sims and Rep. Steve McCarter have announced their intention to introduce a measure to allow same-sex marriage in Pennsylvania.

Sources:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/27/brian-sims-doma_n_3513741.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular
http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/component/flexicontent/item/56656-rep-sims-blocked-from-addressing-doma-ruling-in-pa-house?linktype=hp_impact

Left Side of the Aisle #115 - Part 4

Hero Award: Texas state Rep. Wendy Davis

On Tuesday evening, June 25, Wendy Davis, a Texas state senator from Fort Worth, strode onto the floor of the Texas Senate and started talking. And talking. And talking. She talked for more than 11 hours without a break.

Texas GOPpers were trying to use a special session of the legislature to push through legislation that would dramatically limit access to abortion in the state, cutting the number of clinics from 42 to 5 and banning abortions after 20 weeks in direct violation of Roe v. Wade. So Wendy Davis said she was going to filibuster the bill and run out the clock on the legislative session, which ended at midnight on Wednesday morning.

So she got up and she talked. The filibuster rules in Texas are strict. She couldn't be off-topic. And she talked. She couldn't take a bathroom break. And she talked. She couldn't eat or drink. And she talked. She couldn't even lean on anything, not even her own desk. And she talked.

Finally, shortly before the midnight deadline, the GOPpers in the state Senate came up with the three points of order necessary to force her to yield the floor. But supporters used up another hour in their own parliamentary maneuvers, arguing against the GOPpers points of order. Finally, with about 15 minutes to spare, it looked like the reactionaries would get their way.

And that's when it happened: The hundreds of supporters who had gathered in the galleries erupted in shouts and chants of "Shame! Shame!" The were so loud, so insistent, that when Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst shouted into the microphone, trying to call the final votes, nobody seemed to hear him. State police grabbed, shoved, and pulled people out of the galleries.

By the time order was restored and the right-wingers had passed the bill by a vote of 19-10, the official time stamp read 12:03 AM: too late. The bill had been killed by Wendy Davis, some parliamentary work, and what immediately became known as "a people's filibuster."

Sadly, it won't stay dead long: Gov. Rick "Oops" Perry has already said he is going to call another special session to ram through his twisted notion of "protecting life." But at least now the reactionaries know it won't happen without a fight. And as the symbol of that fight, Wendy Davis is a hero.

Sources:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/texas-state-senator-wendy-davis-filibusters-her-way-to-democratic-stardom/2013/06/26/aace267c-de85-11e2-b2d4-ea6d8f477a01_story.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/28/wendy-davis-abortion-filibuster_n_3516524.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/30/wendy-davis-abortion-rights-texas_n_3525474.html?ref=topbar
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/26/rick-perry-special-session_n_3505786.html
http://www.salon.com/2013/06/26/wendy_davis_feminist_super_hero/
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/06/26/5-moments-from-wendy-davis-epic-filibuster.html

Left Side of the Aisle #115 - Part 3

Outrage of the Week: White House ranks BigPharma over world health

Now for one of our regular weekly features, the Outrage of the Week.

The Obama administration has finally decided to take on the pharmaceutical industry.

The generic pharmaceutical industry.

In India.

The White House and members of Congress are pressuring India to change its patent laws for the benefit of US drug companies.

Public health experts say that inexpensive drugs from India are essential to providing life-saving treatments around the world for a number of conditions and diseases. I'll give you three examples:

- About 98 percent of the drugs purchased by the international AIDS relief program begun under George Bush's administration are generics from India. They cost $1 a day, or $365 a year. The non-generic form, produced by Pfizer, costs about $10,000 per person per year, close to 30 times as much.

- Last year, India permitted a generic manufacturer to produce a cheaper version of a cancer drug patented by Bayer. Bayer was charging $5,000 a month for the drug, while only servicing about 2 percent of the population that needed it. The generic version cost $157 a month, so Bayer's version cost 32 times more.

- More recently, Novartis tried to extend its patent in India on a leukemia drug called Gleevec just by making a pill version of the same medication. In January, India's Supreme Court said no, that's not a legitimate innovation. Gleevec costs upwards of $75,000 a year in the US. In India, where the annual per capita income is about $1,400, Novartis was charging about $31,000 a year for the medication. The generic version costs around $2,100, about 1/15 as much.

The bottom line is that low-cost generics from India have dramatically lowered medical costs in developing countries. But by that very same fact they have also cut into the profits of Pfizer and Bayer and Novartis and other US and European drug companies. And we can't have that!

What's more, they have a deep fear that other nations might get ideas, that other nations may follow India's example, something industry supporters actually call "contagion," as if it was a sickness, which I suppose to them, it is.

And given the choice between providing succor for the poor and sick around the world and succor for giant corporations in the industrialized West, there simply is no competition.

So we've had the US Patent and Trademark Office and the Office of the US Trade Representative pressuring the Indian government on its patent standards and Secretary of State John Kerry taking a trip to India where, a department PR flack said, Kerry "discussed a number of economic and trade issues with Indian officials, including ongoing issues in the pharmaceutical sector."

Last week, a bipartisan group of 170 House lawmakers sent a letter to Kerry and Barack Obama grousing about India's patent system, followed by a House hearing on June 27 that spent most of its time soaking up the whining of one Roy Waldron, the Chief Intellectual Property Officer of Pfizer and happily nodding away as he bizarrely claimed that imposing US-style intellectual property policies on India - that is, essentially giving monopoly control of India's medication supply to Euro-American drug companies - would, and yes he said this, help develop a more robust and innovative medical system there. 

All this despite the fact that according to Nirupama Rao, India's ambassador to the United States, more than 85 per cent of all the patents granted in India for pharmaceutical inventions between 2005 and 2011 were owned by foreign companies. But that, apparently, is not enough.

Two weeks ago, I told you how the big pharmaceutical corporations have become notorious for manipulating the patent laws to keep their greedy hands in our pockets. Patents on drugs usually last for 20 years but BigPharma has often succeeded in getting patents renewed by claiming a "new use" for an existing drug (thus extending the monopoly) or in getting a secondary patent for drug based on nothing more than a minor reformulation or a change in delivery, say from an injection to a pill. The practice is known as "evergreening," and is opposed by the World Health Organization precisely because of it's impact on the availability of medicine to the poor of the world.

The blunt fact is, people around the world are dying unnecessarily because of BigPhama's greed, greed embraced, endorsed, and urged by Congress and Obama. And that cannot be anything but a gross moral outrage.

Sources:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/28/obama-generic-drugs_n_3513011.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular
http://in.reuters.com/article/2013/06/25/breakingviews-india-pharma-idINDEE95O05X20130625?type=economicNews
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-06-26/india/40205638_1_nirupama-rao-senate-india-caucus-indian-ambassador
http://whoviating.blogspot.com/2013/06/left-side-of-aisle-113-part-3.html

Left Side of the Aisle #115 - Part 2

Update #2: Salinas v. Texas

Something else I told you about two weeks ago, something that has received scant media attention, was a Supreme Court decision in the case of Salinas v. Texas, in which a man named Genovevo Salinas was convicted of murder based in part on prosecutors arguing that his not answering some police questions before he was arrested indicated he was guilty.

The Supreme Court, in a truly creep-you-out ruling marked by circular logic, said that because Salinas had not yet been arrested, there was no need to read him his Miranda rights and because he did not positively state he was invoking his right to silence, a right of which the Miranda warning was designed to inform him, he had no constitutional protection against his silence being used against him.

In other words, unless you out loud say you are invoking your right to silence, you don't have one. Put another way, you can't be silent if you don't speak - and what you don't say can be used against you.

Well, it turns out that the decision, while largely ignored by the media, it's getting attention - and, happily, criticism - in legal circles.

For one example, Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of First Amendment law at the University of California, Irvine School of Law, said that “Constitutional protections should not be just for those who have legal training and know what they need to say to the police to invoke their rights. Salinas was penalized for exercising his constitutional right to remain silent in the face of police questioning. This should not be tolerated under the Fifth Amendment.”

He's not the only one saying that and hopefully, there will be a lot more of that sort of thing, enough to spread the word so people know about it and enough to deter cops and prosecutors from taking advantage of this new gouged-out hole in your Constitutional rights. In the meantime, if a cop asks you pretty much anything, say "I am invoking my rights under the Fifth Amendment to remain silent" and then shut up.

Sources:
http://www.salon.com/2013/06/30/scotus_no_right_to_remain_silence_unless_you_speak_up_partner/?source=newsletter
http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/chemerinsky_silence_is_not_golden_supreme_court_says/
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/06/salinas_v_texas_right_to_remain_silent_supreme_court_right_to_remain_silent.html
http://www.volokh.com/2013/06/17/do-you-have-a-right-to-remain-silent-thoughts-on-the-sleeper-criminal-procedure-case-of-the-term-salinas-v-texas/

Left Side of the Aisle #115 - Part 1

Update #1: IRS "scandal" evaporates

You heard it here first, folks. Remember the IRS scandal? How the IRS improperly singled out Tea Party groups for extra scrutiny as part of a political vendetta against conservatives? Seven weeks ago I told you that was a phony so-called "scandal." Six weeks ago I told you that for all the fuss and fuming, the only group to lose its tax-exempt status was a liberal group.

Well, the whole business has now evaporated. For one, it turns out that it wasn't only groups with something like “Tea Party” in their name that got targeted for scrutiny. There were a lot of other flags, including words like “Progressive” and “Occupy” and "Israel" and "open source software" and no, that last one is not a joke.

And for another, it emerges that the entire reason the Treasury inspector general to highlight scrutiny of conservative groups, but not liberal groups, is that the creepy-crawly chair of the House Oversight Committee, Darrell Isajerk, told the inspector general “to narrowly focus on Tea Party organizations.”

The whole "scandal" was a fake, a fraud, a set-up, a lie. And I have no compunction about saying I told you so.

Sources:
http://whoviating.blogspot.com/2013/05/left-side-of-aisle-109-part-7.html
http://whoviating.blogspot.com/2013/05/left-side-of-aisle-108-part-6.html
http://www.salon.com/2013/06/24/this_pretty_much_kills_the_irs_scandal/
http://www.salon.com/2013/06/24/irs_chief_tea_party_wasnt_the_only_group_inappropriately_targeted_ap/
http://www.salon.com/2013/06/25/why_is_the_irs_targeting_free_software/?source=newsletter
http://www.salon.com/2013/06/27/issas_irs_scandal_quietly_crumbles/?source=newsletter
http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/domestic-taxes/307813-irs-ig-says-audit-limited-to-tea-party-groups

Left Side of the Aisle #115




Left Side of the Aisle
for the week of July 4 - 10, 2013

This week:
Update #1: IRS "scandal" evaporates
http://whoviating.blogspot.com/2013/05/left-side-of-aisle-109-part-7.html
http://whoviating.blogspot.com/2013/05/left-side-of-aisle-108-part-6.html
http://www.salon.com/2013/06/24/this_pretty_much_kills_the_irs_scandal/
http://www.salon.com/2013/06/24/irs_chief_tea_party_wasnt_the_only_group_inappropriately_targeted_ap/
http://www.salon.com/2013/06/25/why_is_the_irs_targeting_free_software/?source=newsletter
http://www.salon.com/2013/06/27/issas_irs_scandal_quietly_crumbles/?source=newsletter
http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/domestic-taxes/307813-irs-ig-says-audit-limited-to-tea-party-groups

Update #2: Salinas v. Texas
http://www.salon.com/2013/06/30/scotus_no_right_to_remain_silence_unless_you_speak_up_partner/
http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/chemerinsky_silence_is_not_golden_supreme_court_says/
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/06/salinas_v_texas_right_to_remain_silent_supreme_court_right_to_remain_silent.html
http://www.volokh.com/2013/06/17/do-you-have-a-right-to-remain-silent-thoughts-on-the-sleeper-criminal-procedure-case-of-the-term-salinas-v-texas/

Outrage of the Week: White House ranks BigPharma over world health
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/28/obama-generic-drugs_n_3513011.html
http://in.reuters.com/article/2013/06/25/breakingviews-india-pharma-idINDEE95O05X20130625?type=economicNews
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-06-26/india/40205638_1_nirupama-rao-senate-india-caucus-indian-ambassador
http://whoviating.blogspot.com/2013/06/left-side-of-aisle-113-part-3.html

Hero Award: Texas state Rep. Wendy Davis
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/texas-state-senator-wendy-davis-filibusters-her-way-to-democratic-stardom/2013/06/26/aace267c-de85-11e2-b2d4-ea6d8f477a01_story.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/28/wendy-davis-abortion-filibuster_n_3516524.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/30/wendy-davis-abortion-rights-texas_n_3525474.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/26/rick-perry-special-session_n_3505786.html
http://www.salon.com/2013/06/26/wendy_davis_feminist_super_hero/
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/06/26/5-moments-from-wendy-davis-epic-filibuster.html

Clown Award: Pennsylvania state Rep. Daryl Metcalfe
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/27/brian-sims-doma_n_3513741.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular
http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/component/flexicontent/item/56656-rep-sims-blocked-from-addressing-doma-ruling-in-pa-house?linktype=hp_impact

Thoughts for the Fourth
http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm
http://whoviating.blogspot.com/2008/01/i-believe.html
http://whoviating.blogspot.com/2008/02/and-its-not-even-fourth-of-july.html
 
// I Support The Occupy Movement : banner and script by @jeffcouturer / jeffcouturier.com (v1.2) document.write('
I support the OCCUPY movement
');function occupySwap(whichState){if(whichState==1){document.getElementById('occupyimg').src="https://sites.google.com/site/occupybanners/home/isupportoccupy-right-blue.png"}else{document.getElementById('occupyimg').src="https://sites.google.com/site/occupybanners/home/isupportoccupy-right-red.png"}} document.write('');