"Times Gone By!"

It's time to Break It Down!

Happy New Year; Auld Lang Syne, my friends!

Since we are still in the Sweet Spot of the holidays, once again I shall practice minimalism. For your purposes, that means the blog should be available, but not intrusive. To that end, I am taking a page from last week, but going a step further. Instead of a concert, I give you a song…of reflection.

Robert Burns, a Scot, wrote a poem (Auld Lang Syne) in 1788 that has come to symbolize the spirit of mass contemplation that people around the world invoke as the clock strikes midnight, signaling not just the dawn of a new day, but of a new year. Undoubtedly, you have been somewhere, at sometime, when you joined those assembled to sing Auld Lang Syne, which loosely translated means, Times gone by.

Once again, that time is upon us. After thoughtful reflection on my 2010, I have had no choice but to conclude, my travails have been few and small, especially when compared to my blessings, which have been both abundant and vast! All praises to the one true, omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient God; a mighty fortress is He.

No need to thank me for my inherent thoughtfulness. But, by all means, “Drink a cup of kindness,” or eggnog, or Champagne, or “name your favorite adult beverage,” for me. And, if you are a teetotaler, water will do nicely, thank-you! 

As I complete my last post for this year, and, prayerfully and faithfully prepare to embrace 2011, I leave with you this familiar Irish Toast:

May the road rise up to meet you.
May the wind always be at your back.
May the sun shine warm upon your face,
and rains fall soft upon your fields.
And until we meet again,
may God hold you in the palm of His hand.

I invite you to click on the link below, which leads to a Smooth Jazz interpretation of Auld Lang Syne, arranged and performed by Donnie Thomas (and listen to the remainder of this week’s edition of Break It Down:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bffBdmlf0Wo

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com. A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bffBdmlf0Wo

http://tlc.howstuffworks.com/family/question279.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auld_Lang_Syne

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweet_spot

"12 Days Of Christmas: The Concert!"

It's time to Break It Down!

Merry Christmas to you! I know some people are caught up in the whole “We Are The (Secular) World” trip; thus the substitute Holiday for Christmas in their seasonal greetings. Of course those innately curious enough to conduct the requisite etymological research know that the root derivation of holiday is “Holy Day;” but I digress.

By now many of you have already begun your well-planned and richly deserved hiatus from work. You may even have finished your shopping and taken care of all the major errands that accompany preparing for the Big Day. Perhaps all that remains is packing and or traveling; maybe that throw-down cooking marathon that precedes the arrival of the family, friends, and guests whom you will host over the coming week.

As is my custom, I am not going to use this Christmas Post, if you will, to challenge you to sort between the facts, be they esoteric or mundane. No, this is your time to take advantage of the opportunity to hang out with your guests, or to be a guest, and enjoy the hospitality of friends.

In either case, I have, once again, identified and pulled together an assortment of my favorite Christmas Standards. Below, you will find bios for the 14 artists, the 13 youtube videos and interpretations, and the 12 songs listed and included in the e-concert. The information and links below tell the essence of the story; but there are a few points I wish to amplify for your consideration.

The number in parenthesis after each artist’s name is his or her current age, or the age at which the artist died, in the cases of James Brown, Eartha Kitt, John Coltrane, Nat King Cole, and Donny Hathaway. Each artist, song and interpretation is special in its own right.

The legendary Godfather of Soul, as James Brown became known, died on Christmas Day (2006), as did Eartha Kitt (2008), whom shall ever remain, to many of us, the incomparably personified Catwoman. There was both a surreal sadness and a resolute completeness associated with them ending their respective earthly journeys on Christmas Day, two years apart. Both artists were born in South Carolina; Brown in Barnwell, and Kitt, in North. Brown was renowned for his energetic performances, which earned him another of his many titles, “Hardest working man in show business.” His rendition of “Merry Christmas Baby” was a reminder that he had earned his chops the hard way, and that he was much more than flash and dash. Kitt’s “Santa Baby” is on my list, not only because it is a classic; it is, but also because like me, it was born in 1953. I’d like to think we both (the song and I) have held up well.

Donny Hathaway’s “This Christmas” quite simply personifies Christmas for many of us. Hathaway, an initiate of Howard University’s Beta Chapter of Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity, was a brilliant musician, but a troubled man. He endured bouts of depression and suffered from paranoid schizophrenia, which ultimately led him to commit suicide. “This Christmas,” however, lives on, and along with it and many of his other classics, so does his melodious voice.

Chris Brown has had his moments. He is known in most circles as either the Pied Piper to Generation Y (Millennials), or That Guy…you know, the one who beat down Robyn Fenty; Rihanna to you! This post will not attempt to moralize, or capitalize in any other way on the beef between these two. Rather, for the purposes of this commentary, I wanted to touch upon Chris’ cover of Hathaway’s classic tune. I think he did a fine job, and is an example that, many voices to the contrary, Gen X’ers are not only capable, but do in fact, continue to perpetuate the tradition of making great music.

Nat King Cole and Natalie Cole, father and daughter, both stellar musicians, in their own right, also represent two successive generations of the “family business.” Though the elder Cole is probably better known for his interpretation of The Christmas Song,” I intentionally chose his rendition of another standard, “O Holy Night,” to highlight another of his great performances. I included Natalie’s rendering of “The First Noel,” solely because of my partiality to the reverse spelling of “Noel!”

Having eschewed Cole’s version of “The Christmas Song,” I could not omit it altogether. Kem delivers a virtuoso performance of this classic song. He is one of my favorite contemporary artists, singing one of the Christmas songs I enjoy most. Ledisi and Lauryn Hill are two of contemporary R&B’s most accomplished female voices. Their versions of “Give Love On Christmas Day, and “Little Drummer Boy,” respectively, are special treats, and integral components of this e-concert.

John Coltrane and Dianne Reeves add an instrumental (“My Favorite Things”) and vocal (“Christmas Time Is Here”) jazz flavor to the mix. Trane, born in Hamlet, North Carolina, died of liver cancer at age 40; another life cut short, far too young. He and the combo render a cool version of the tune, so much so that it could make it one of “your favorite things.” Ms. Reeves uses her powerful and well-trained instrument to craft a compelling version of “Christmas Time Is Here.”

Christina Aguilera and Brian McKnight unite in a superb collaboration on “Have Yourself A Merry Little Christmas.” They revel in demonstrating multiple octave range and elasticity in framing their unique arrangement of this classic that makes it a song I enjoy listening to again and again. Last, but certainly not least, Will Downing, perhaps my favorite musical artist, delivers a silky smooth rendition of “I’ll Be Home For Christmas.”  What can I say?  Will...is Will!

That’s it; 14 artists, 13 videos (a Baker’s Dozen), and 12 songs. Add it all up and you get “12 Days Of Christmas: The Concert!” Enjoy, and by all means, remember the Reason for the Season! 

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com/. A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

James Brown (73) – Merry Christmas Baby

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xg6FcaYHf4

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Brown

Eartha Kitt (81) – Santa Baby

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfqZmlfQEto&NR=1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eartha_Kitt

Donny Hathaway (33) – This Christmas

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pj1mVUEHeUE

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donny_Hathaway

Chris Brown (21) – This Christmas

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ty2eya8zWyE

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Brown_(American_singer)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rihanna

Nat King Cole (45) – O Holy Night

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4uP32mnAjY

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nat_King_Cole

Natalie Cole (60) – The First Noel

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rf6fTRTQrG4

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natalie_Cole

Kem (41) – The Christmas Song

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jk34lUQoyQ

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kem_(singer)

Ledisi (32) - Give Love On Christmas Day

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehBwM0a9Hf8

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ledisi

Lauryn Hill (35) – Little Drummer Boy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxv88-euQtE

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lauryn_Hill

John Coltrane (40) - My Favorite Things

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0I6xkVRWzCY

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Coltrane

Dianne Reeves (54) – Christmas Time Is Here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hInJstw1cGE&feature=related

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dianne_Reeves

Christina Aguilera (30) & Brian McKnight (41) – Have Yourself A Merry Little Christmas

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftva4G2vmDw

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christina_Aguilera

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_McKnight

Will Downing (47) – I’ll Be Home For Christmas

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhT1_ybF-tI&feature=related

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_Downing

Justice: A Long Time Coming

It's time to Break It Down!

Iowa Republican Congressman Steve King is a staunch opponent of the Claims Settlement Act of 2010. Chances are you have never heard of it. President Obama signed the bill into law a week ago today, just ahead of the onset of the great tax debate of 2010. The Claims Resolution Act of 2010 is a $4.6 billion piece of legislation that includes the $1.15 billion Claims Settlement Act to compensate black farmers fro having been discriminated against by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and the $3.4 billion Cobell Settlement for Native American plaintiffs who claimed that U.S. Department of Interior officials mismanaged royalties from leases of tribal lands used to harvest oil, minerals, and timber. The sum of the Claims Settlement Act is in addition to a $1 billion settlement awarded earlier, making the total amount allocated to offset all claims by black farmers (more than 90,000) $2.15 billion.

Congressman King is joined in his persistent opposition by two other Republican Representatives, Michele Bachmann of Minnesota, and Bob Goodlatte of Virginia. All three House members support a congressional investigation into both settlements. They allege the claims are fraught with fraud and abuse.

Two weeks ago, in an effort to gin up support for his position, Congressman King, appeared on CNN’s John King Show, where he defended:

1. His contention that the bill had been promoted by a very, very urban (then) Senator Barack Obama.

2. His characterization of the settlement as Slavery Reparations

3. His assertion that the claims were riddled by rampant fraud

Where does one begin to deconstruct? There is so much material with which to work. Many people know urban is frequently used as code for pejoratively referring to blacks from the inner city. Mr. King insists that he did not. In fact, he indicated, in response to intense reaction to his comments, he had to go and look it up:

• “We had to go look this up to try to figure out how anybody could hyperventilate over calling the president a very urban, actually a very, very urban president, or a very urban senator at the time. He comes from a very urban area. It is not something that would ever occur to anybody in my background that that would be something that could some kind of racial pejorative. It’s just simply, he comes from the city, that’s urban. You come from the country, you’re rural.”

Fair enough. To make more of that, one would have to debate the Congressman’s intent. I have no doubt a great many people would, and in fact have done so. I don’t think I need to. You have seen both his comments, and his subsequent defense. You may decide that one for yourself.

In his initial speech, on the floor of the House of Representatives, Congressman King argued, forcefully, “We are not gonna pay slavery reparations in the United States Congress. That war’s been fought. That was a century ago. That debt was paid for in blood and it was paid for in the blood of a lot of Yankees, especially.” This type of diversion is frequently referred to as a straw man; fundamentally specious:

• The topic of Slavery Reparations is a familiar and frequently explosive one. As made evident by his line-in-the-sand posture, Representative King views this as a particularly weighty matter. However, the simple truth is, the settlements have nothing whatsoever to do with either reparations, or slaves. These agreements were designed to compensate American citizens, most whom happened to be black, because they were discriminated against while pursuing their livelihood, ostensibly because they were black.

Representative King also described the claims made by African American farmers who were discriminated against by the USDA in the 1980’s and 1990’s as fraudulent. This is yet another assertion that appears inconsistent with record, and that is not supported by investigatory research:

• The USDA has admitted that it denied loans to claimants in a discriminatory fashion, and that this pattern of discrimination was cause of most of the black farmers losing their livelihood.

• Moreover, a federal judge approved the second settlement after an FBI investigation.

• A USDA spokesman, called King’s allegations, “Nothing more than an attempt to derail an effort to provide long-overdue compensation to thousands of farmers who were discriminated against over several decades.”

• Out of 15,000 claims processed under the first settlement; the FBI determined that only 3 were fraudulent.

The current Administration has expressed a commitment to ensure that the new claims process is executed with integrity, and that it provides justice to those who have suffered discrimination. A familiar legal maxim dating all the way back to the 13th Century and the Magna Carta is, “Justice delayed is justice denied.”

Over the nearly 30 years that have passed since the vile acts of discrimination were wrought upon a group of our nation’s farmers, undoubtedly, many of them have died. To those farmers, justice was unquestionably denied. But, to the survivors and heirs who participate in the settlements, I can imagine them harkening back to April 3, 1968, and channeling, not Representative Steve King, or CNN’s John King, or even John, King of England (upon whom the Magna Carta was imposed), but Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., when he said, “Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream.” Indeed, “Justice: A Long Time Coming!”

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com/. A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://obamafoodorama.blogspot.com/2010/12/president-obama-signs-claims-settlement.html

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-signs-bill-settling-black-farmers

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_3Ei1VYWCQ

http://blogs.desmoinesregister.com/dmr/index.php/2010/12/02/iowans-in-war-of-words-over-black-farmers/

http://politifi.com/news/Steve-King-Black-Farmers-Settlement-Is-Slavery-Reparations-VIDEO-1355860.html

http://www.blackamericaweb.com/?q=articles/news/moving_america_news/23865&page=2

http://www.radioiowa.com/2010/12/02/king-rails-against-slavery-reparations/

http://www.blackfarmers.org/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michele_Bachmann

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Goodlatte

http://minnesotaindependent.com/74627/bachmann-king-fight-discrimination-claim-for-black-farmers

http://www.examiner.com/political-buzz-in-national/rep-king-r-ia-accuses-obama-of-supporting-slavery-reparations-video

http://www.blogrunner.com/snapshot/D/0/1/steve_king_black_farmers_settlement_is_slavery_reparations/

http://www.mediaite.com/online/usda-responds-to-andrew-breitbart-and-rep-steve-king-on-black-farmer-settlement/

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/11/steve_king_black_farmers_settlement_is_slavery_rep.php

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2635266/posts

http://www.buzzbox.com/top/default/preview/history-and-geography-lessons-from-steve-king/?clusterId=2575860&id=17024758&topic=settlement%3Asteve-king

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/rep-king-equates-black-farmers-settlement-slavery-reparations/

http://okhenderson.com/2010/12/01/grassley-king-differ-on-pigford/

http://conversations.blackvoices.com/entertainment/99435682aaea4564b24369ed6fc90973/gop-says-obama-adva%20.../712ad1f579b94e29977dc7637872726b?sn=18

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/30/republican-calls-obama-ve_n_789723.html

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/254189/king-disputes-allegations-racism-brian-bolduc

http://www.youaredumb.net/

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=urban

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reparations_for_slavery

The Sell Out Vs. The Sanctimonious

It's time to Break It Down!

This has been a fast-paced week, as far as issues go. The developments of the past 7 days have served to remind me, yet again, why I seldom identify blog topics in advance, and why I almost never write a pre-Blog Night outline. I was reasonably certain I knew, by the middle of last week, what I would write about for today. Then the past 48-hours unfolded, resulting in my totally changing focus.

During the past several days, I have had direct communications with two good friends, one of whom I consider the most dyed-in-the-wool Capitalist, Republican in my immediate friend circle; the other, the most fervent Liberal Democrat I have ever known; also my friend. In communing with them, I had the opportunity to discuss their views on the ideological chasm between Democrats and the GOP-T Party on the so-called Bush Tax Cuts Debate.

Their opinions were about what one would imagine, given their respective political bent and ideological persuasion; almost diametrically opposed. My friend, the self-proclaimed Capitalist (in discussions before the latest BFD), argued passionately for the Bush Tax Cuts, at least in part, on the basis that he believes the federal government is an inefficient monstrosity that cannot help but use the people’s money less prudently than the people would, left to their own devices. He also felt that the Inheritance Tax was simply wrong on its face, and quite frankly, both “un-American and unconstitutional.”

Alternately, my Liberal friend noted (yesterday, after the new BFD) that he is “really disappointed” by the President’s decision to proffer an agreement to extend the Bush Tax Cuts to the wealthy. He added that this proposal would “pass along more debt to future generations, while we watch the country go down the tubes.” Finally, he concluded by reminding me of one of my earlier comments about a previous action taken by President Obama, when I said, “If we continue to make deals like this, we may as well have the Republicans in power.”

While I didn’t make this retort to his last comment, based on the results of the November 2nd Election, we do, for all practical purposes. And, good, bad, or indifferent, I am left to presume, that is the will of the people...or at least it was on November 2nd.

I find it compelling, in a theatrical sort of way, that my friends have so cogently and succinctly stated the key tenets of the two sides. By stating their Guiding Principles, they inadvertently affirmed the notion of the aforementioned great and wide chasm separating the two sides. In a way, it is akin to Kipling’s “The Ballad of East and West,” in which Rudyard proclaims, “Oh East is East, and West is West, and never the twain shall meet.” That dear readers, is the paradigm; the Sphinx-like riddle President Obama is challenged by, and is trying to solve.

Alas, in attempting to leverage a win for the middle class, albeit a short-term boost that will be consumed by additional red ink added to the deficit, the President has elicited a full-throated roar of derision and scorn from the Left, including Democratic members of Congress, and a variety of economists, and media types. In the most contentiously shrill version of these intra-Party friendly fire attacks, President Obama is characterized as having sold out. His critics argue he turned his back on a bedrock campaign pledge by endorsing the extension of the Bush Tax Cuts for the wealthiest 2% of Americans.

While the President has been maligned often for his even-temperedness (not enough fire and/or passion for some people’s tastes), he did seem to take great offense to the allegation that by driving this compromise, he was somehow a sell-out. In fact, he bristled at the notion. In a hastily called news conference to further explain the details of the agreement, and to defend it, President Obama stood his ground and addressed the questionable tactics of the opposition, as well as the stinging criticism of his fellow Party members.

He suggested that Republicans were “worshipping the “holy grail” of Trickle-down economics and using procedural maneuvers to hijack a serious economic policy debate.”

He called out his own Party for suggesting that he had not laid out priorities or made progress on his promises. He likened that aspect of the current conversation to the public option debate, and expressed it thusly:

• "So I pass a signature piece of legislation where we finally get health care for all Americans, something that Democrats have been fighting for, for a hundred years, but because there was a provision in there that they didn't get that would have affected maybe a couple million people, even though we got health insurance for 30 million people, and the potential for lower premiums for 100 million people, that somehow that was a sign of weakness and compromise.
• Now, if that's the standard by which we are measuring success or core principles, then let's face it, we will never get anything done. People will have the satisfaction of having a purist position and no victories for the American people. And we will be able to feel good about ourselves and sanctimonious about how pure our intentions are and how tough we are, and in the meantime the American people are still seeing themselves not able to get health insurance because of a preexisting condition. Or not being able to pay their bills because their unemployment insurance ran out.” 

Shrewd media analysts, itching for an avenue to spike ratings have tried to fuel an increase in the tension between the President and his already disaffected Party cohorts. Several have asked whether it is odd that Mr. Obama seems to aim his chagrin at his fellow Democrats, rather than at Republicans. This gambit is intended to induce a reactionary reply from already angry Democrats that may in turn induce a similar piqued response from the POTUS.


The reality is, of course, President Obama is no more a fan of the Bush Tax Cuts for the wealthy than any other Democrat. He is motivated by the irreducible responsibility that he bears to be the President of all the people, most notably, the 98% who would have seen their taxes increase, had he not acted, as well as a too vivid recollection of the outcome of the November 2nd Election. It was those election results that strengthened the Republicans' hand for the next Congress. Failure to act responsibly and judiciously now would be a prescription for even more severe consequences meted out by the 112th Congress, in which the GOP-T Party will boast a Majority in the House, and increased numbers in the Senate. 
 
Moreover, let it be clear, the President did indict the GOP-T Party, directly, for its intransigence. Finally, it must be noted, this battle did not begin Monday. Had the Democrats shown this apparent newly found zeal to do battle; had they demonstrated this moxie and readiness to unite and challenge the GOP-T Party, earlier, when they actually had the numerical leverage, and time on their side, the President would not find himself in this compromising position now. Of course, gentlemanly, and even-tempered as he is, President Obama, despite all his bluster, has been simply too civil and dignified to remind his esteemed colleagues of that slice of contemporary American History.  

Of course, that’s just my assessment. I look forward to your feedback, and your unique and personal points of view. After all, this may be the just start of a regular dialogue about the pros and cons of “The Sell Out Vs. The Sanctimonious.” It is quite possible that scenarios such as this will play out repeatedly over the next two years. Get ready; all indications are it’s going to be a bumpy ride.

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com. A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703296604576005270162137088.html

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/12/07/tax.deal/index.html?hpt=T2

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2010/12/07/explain.it.to.me.tax.cuts.cnn?hpt=T2

http://celebrifi.com/gossip/Extension-deal-taxes-Dems-patience-4205975.html

http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-cohn/79694/the-tax-deal-hate-the-tax-deal

http://www.idahostatesman.com/2010/12/05/1444486/after-the-tax-fight-parties-move.html

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2010/12/07/obama_and_gop_make_deal_on_taxes/

http://www.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2010/12/obama-addresses-possible-deal-on-bush-tax-cuts/1?imw=Y&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Usatoday-MostViewedArticles+(USATODAY.com%3A+Most+Popular)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/02/AR2010120206050.html

http://www.kentucky.com/2010/12/06/1555453/obama-gop-reach-deal-to-extend.html

http://sentinelsource.com/articles/2010/12/07/news/national/free/id_420845.txt

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/july-dec10/taxcuts_12-07.html

http://online.wsj.com/article/APb16f0a0fb3974d95a4890c331b0cf356.html

American Exceptionalism: Sorry, No Rabbit In This Hat!

It's time to Break It Down!

As the dust settles from the recent 2010 mid term elections, the truly ambitious are gearing up for 2012. While there are rumors and innuendo suggesting President Obama may face a intra-Party challenger, what is known at this time is there will be an all out Festival of Lights among Republicans and the Tea Party to identify the White Knight that will champion the conservative cause in the race for the White House.

Nothing gets such a grand adventure underway like identifying the one undeniably unifying theme that all adherents may cleave to, even while maintaining their individual differences. At the moment, the GOP-T Party’s political Wheel of Fortune seems to be stuck on American Exceptionalism. This quaint, esoteric concept, has been pulled out of moth balls, and is being used as the hand grenade of choice to lob at President Obama.

First of all, the trouble with the term American Exceptionalism is there is no standard, or universally agreed upon definition. Even before President Obama, there were many variants of the expression, and numerous pros and cons held, based upon specific assertions of what it meant. In a most amusing irony, the term itself is thought to have been coined, not by an American, but by Alexis de Tocqueville, a Frenchman.

Tocqueville and Gustave de Beaumont, two French Aristocrats, were commissioned by the French government to study the American prison system in 1831. They spent nine months traveling about the country and taking notes on all aspects of society. Both penned books about the experience; Beaumont wrote a novel about race relations in the United States, and Tocqueville authored an analytical political and social commentary, loosely translated, Democracy in America (De la democratie en Amerique). The latter became widely popular in Europe and the United States. Given the era, not surprisingly, Beaumont’s work is less well known.

So what is American Exceptionalism, and why is President Obama perceived (by his opponents) as its enemy?

One view of the term is:

• American Exceptionalism refers to the opinion that the United States is qualitatively different from other nations. Its exceptionalism stems from its emergence from a revolution, becoming "the first new nation", and developing a unique American ideology, based on liberty, egalitarianism, individualism, populism and laissez-faire". This observation can be traced to Alexis de Tocqueville, the first writer to describe the United States as "exceptional". Although the term does not imply superiority, some writers have used it in that sense. To them, the United States is a "shining city on a hill", and exempt from historical forces that have affected other countries.

For President Obama’s part, he has weighed in on the subject and (part of) his statement is used as kindling for the wildfire that has become the revival of American Exceptionalism. In response to the question of whether, like his predecessors, he believed in American Exceptionalism, Mr. Obama began:

"I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism."

While this egalitarian reply seemed to give credence to his recognition that many abroad hear talk of American exceptionalism as worrisome jingoism, his detractors took that as an indictment that the President of the Country lacked pride in America and “the American Way.”

Of course, such a leap ignores the fact there was more to Mr. Obama’s answer. The President added, in the same response:

“In addition to the world's largest economy and its mightiest military, we have a core set of values that are enshrined in our Constitution, in our body of law, in our democratic practices, in our belief in free speech and equality, that, though imperfect, are exceptional."

He closed by adding:

“I see no contradiction between believing that America has a continued extraordinary role in leading the world towards peace and prosperity and recognizing that leadership is incumbent, depends on, our ability to create partnerships because we can't solve these problems alone."

A number of Republicans presumed to be at least considering a Presidential bid in 2012 have invested personal capital in the new hot stock of political topics. Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, and Mike Pence have each waxed poetic…or rather, political, about the idea. It is early, but if the craze has the staying power to last until the heat of the campaign, American Exceptionalism may replace the GOP’s 2008 toxic “He is not like you. He is not one of us” as the reigning catch phrase to emphasize to specific voters that Mr. Obama is “Other;” not like us.

This observation is not designed to paint Mr. Obama’s challengers, or the voters, as racists. It is intended to underscore and amplify the simple fact that the notion of American Exceptionalism is a straw man; a diversion; meant to steer voters and the debate away from substantive issues and a meaningful exchange of ideas.

The reality is if all the GOP-T Party candidates were gathered in a room, they would be hard pressed to reach consensus among themselves on a working definition of American Exceptionalism. Moreover, the variations among them would likely be greater than with that of the complete statement made by the President. In short, as fodder for Presidential debate, American Exceptionalism is both disingenuous, and vacuous. Certainly, upon deeper reflection, the ruse should be readily apparent…"American Exceptionalism: Sorry, No Rabbit In This Hat!”

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com. A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/28/AR2010112804139.html?wpisrc=nl_pmheadline

http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Alexis_de_Tocqueville

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/11/american-exceptionalism-does-t.html

http://gingrichforpres.blogspot.com/2010/11/lefts-problem-american-exceptionalism.html

http://www.religiondispatches.org/dispatches/sarahposner/3328/gingrich_on_obama%E2%80%99s_%E2%80%9Ckenyan,_anti-colonial_behavior%E2%80%9D_and_%E2%80%9Camerican_exceptionalism%E2%80%9D

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/25/opinion/25Cohen.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hpYHDdQHK8

http://www.periscopepost.com/2010/11/the-myth-and-reality-of-american-exceptionalism/

http://mikepence.house.gov/index.php?Itemid=71&id=4392&option=com_content&task=view

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/opinions/view/opinion/American-Exceptionalism-A-Nicer-Way-to-Say-Obama-Isnt-One-of-Us-5955

http://www.gop12.com/2010/08/president-of-us-or-world-and.html

A Time For Giving Thanks

It's time to Break It Down!

As in the past, since it is Thanksgiving Week, this post will deviate from the standard fare. I know that travel schedules, meal planning, family time, shopping, football, parades, and if there is anytime remaining, relaxation, will dominate the next week. But it is Wednesday, so there shall be a blog! But it is definitely brief. ;-)

Those among us who have ascended to genuine righteousness and perfected humility have, no doubt, elevated giving thanks to an art form, also. The rest of us are left to fully vest our appreciation in the notion, “That’s why we have Thanksgiving!”

Tomorrow is Thanksgiving Day, which kicks of what we refer to commonly as the Holiday Season. Almost instinctively, Thanksgiving and Christmas come to mind. But there is so more than that to the Holiday Season. Over the next 54 days, many of us will enjoy succulent feasting at Thanksgiving, exchange gifts and contribute to those in need during Hanukkah, buy, give, exchange, and/or receive gifts at Christmas, eat, drink, and celebrate the 7 Principles of Kwanzaa, party and toast the dawn of 2011, on New Year’s Day, and honor the life and works of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., on MLK Day. In addition, even in these tough economic times, millions of Americans will pay (literally) homage to our most celebrated of shoppers’ holidays, Black Friday, by rising early, and proceeding to scour the aisles for those perfect gifts…and if not perfect, at least cheap, relatively speaking.

In the past I have recounted my reasons for being thankful. While in many ways this has been a particularly challenging year for me, personally, perhaps the most challenging yet, I find that I have more reasons than ever to sit contemplatively in humble repose, and to affirm boldly, that I know, without caveat, not only the goodness of God, but of his inestimable and inexhaustible beneficence. I thank Him for deliverance, and for imbuing me with the sense and sensibility to discern the distinction between kairos and chronos; Greek concepts for God’s time, and man’s time, respectively.

Eons ago, when I was a college student, I joined a fraternity; the Oldest, Boldest, and Coldest…I digress. The point of this reference is that during what was known as the pledge process, prospective initiates were required to learn a series of poems. There were many, and each one was selected to convey a specific life lesson. Many of them have stayed with me, but none more than Invictus, written by English poet, William Ernest Henley (1849-1903), and never more than this year. The Latin translation for Invictus is undefeated. You may recall it, but just in case, see it below:

Invictus (Latin for Undefeated) By William Ernest Henley

Out of the night that covers me,
Black as the pit from pole to pole,
I thank whatever gods may be
For my unconquerable soul.
In the fell clutch of circumstance
I have not winced nor cried aloud.
Under the bludgeonings of chance
My head is bloody, but unbowed.
Beyond this place of wrath and tears
Looms but the Horror of the shade,
And yet the menace of the years
Finds and shall find me unafraid.
It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll,
I am the master of my fate:
I am the captain of my soul.

So, as you go about your way tomorrow, and all the tomorrows that follow, recognize that Thanksgiving, at its core, is not a day on the calendar. It is a spirit that dwells within us, and that prompts us to thank God (for our being undefeated), and to share His blessings with our fellow men and women. Indeed, everyday is “A Time for Giving Thanks!”

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com/. A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thanksgiving_(United_States)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kairos

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronos

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Ernest_Henley

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invictus

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanukkah

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christmas

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kwanzaa

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Year's_Day

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King,_Jr.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King,_Jr._Day

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Friday_(shopping)

No-Fly Zone: Can You Feel Me?

It's time to Break It Down!

“If you touch my junk, I’m gonna have you arrested!” Those now famous words were uttered by 31 year-old Oceanside, California resident, John Tyner, last Saturday morning at the San Diego Airport. The e-viral phrase is akin to “the shot heard ‘round the world,” or at least around America, in the rapidly escalating protest against TSA’s (Transportation Security Administration) latest efforts to increase the level and effectiveness of airport security.

Tyner, who maintained he was trying to keep it light when he uttered his response to the new-style pat down, taped the audio on his cell phone, and later posted his account of the events on his personal blog. His actions added fuel to an already rapidly growing controversy over the latest TSA rules.

While his initial intent may have been to down play the encounter, it is fair to say, the ensuing results have accorded Mr. Tyner his allotted “15 minutes of fame.” I am not a frequent flyer, so I do not have the best insight into the apparent increasing levels of difficulty confronting persons who fly regularly. With that point stipulated, I admit I find more than a little confounding, the rising decibel level accompanying the TSA rules.

What seems clear at this point is Mr. Tyner is likely to be viewed as the poster child for an emerging movement of guerilla tactics to push back against the most recent rules that the Homeland Security Department’s TSA has instituted, requiring full-body scanning, by machine or pat down. That is unfortunate. I am really focused not so much on Tyner, but upon the larger debate about the wide-spread resistance to the TSA rules.

The new rules have garnered unfavorable reactions from many sources, including some pilots’ groups, individual flyers, bloggers, various interest groups, and critics from other nations. Expressions of resistance were wide-spread before Tyner’s encounter. However, his audio recording made his experience effectively, “on the record.” That dimension creates the prospect of a proverbial game changer.

Commercial flying, as we knew it, forever changed September 11, 2001. That day, which became etched indelibly in the American psyche as simply, 9/11, ushered in a new age of complications for the flying public, and what would previously have been considered time-consuming inconveniences. Shortly after that time, I began flying at least twice a month to locations as near as Washington, DC (I flew into BWI six days after 9/11), and Atlanta, and as far away as Portland and San Diego. It is fair to say the culture of flying changed instantly, or at least as quickly as planes returned to the sky.

Since that day, nine years ago, the rules of engagement for flying have become increasing complex and unintuitive. Critics of the recent changes argue these most recent changes are unnecessary, inefficient, ineffective, and "waaay" too invasive. I know several individuals who read this post fly often. I heartily invite anyone, but especially that group to share your insights and reactions to today’s blog.

One of my favorite commercials from “back in the day,” included the tag-line, “This is not your father’s Oldsmobile.” Of course, given our current economic reality, a fair question would be, “What is an Oldsmobile?” Nevertheless, my point is commercial flying, as noted above, is not what it used to be. Moreover, it likely will never again be as it were, pre-9/11.

So, what about those guerrilla tactics I referenced earlier? Well, a number of individuals and groups are urging persons who will be flying on the day before Thanksgiving to opt-out of being screened by the full-body scanning machines. This year, that day falls on November 24th, and is also known to be the busiest flying day of the year.

The effect of opting-out en masse, as the proponents of the scheme envision, would be to clog up the aviation system for the day, by requiring all passengers to be patted down or strip-searched. By executing this mode of “creative resistance,” the flying public would send a message of protest about the untenable nature of the TSA rules and full-body scanning machines. Or so the proposal’s organizers and proponents argue. I suppose those who just happen to be flying the day before Thanksgiving, and have nothing better to do than spend an extra day in an airport, possibly miss your flight and or connections, and immerse yourself in the undeniable (and unavoidable) ambiance (ifyou would call it that) of the flyers who would rather not be impeded by this incredibly selfish diversion, it’s a great idea.

I have already admitted that I am not a frequent flyer; moreover, I have no plans to fly on November 24th. In that regard, the opt-out day should not impact me. That being said, it is my opinion that using the “reasonable person” test, due to current conditions, full-body scanners are a viable tool for helping to protect the flying public.

In a conversation with a person who flies more frequently than I, was told my view was intolerant, and did not allow space for people who maintained a different opinion. That individual added just because it was reasonable to me didn’t make it reasonable. Point taken; even though as a blog, this post is a “reflection of my opinion,” I labor under the illusion that when I make a reasonable person assessment, I am not the only person included. To that end, I note that in a recent CBS Poll, 81% of respondents indicated full-body scanners should be used, while 15% said no (3% margin of error). A separate poll conducted by TripAdvisor.com found that that 76% of those polled preferred the full-body scanning machine to pat downs.

Not surprisingly, Janet Napolitano, Secretary of Homeland Security, and John Pistole, TSA Administrator, have defended the use of the full-body scanner, and the practice of employing pat downs. These methods of maintaining airport security represent two components of a three-part menu of options provided to flyers. The third option is to choose not to fly. In the grand scheme of things, reasonable people can disagree. After nine years of living in a Post-9/11 world, this is the point at which we have arrived in the debate on maintaining safety for the public flying out of American airports.

Finally, the obvious should not be left unstated.  We live in a politically charged environment.  If and when another terror event is fielded domestically, there will be all manner of second guessing about what authorities did not do, did not do well, and/or did not do properly.  Ms. Napolitano and Mr. Pistone are attempting to exercise leadership, take accountability, and act responsibly, in advance of potential terror-driven behavior, which intelligence agencies suggest is increasingly likely.  It is also both plausible and likely that having devised and executed measures to systematically reduce safety will be characterized as careless and irresponsible in the wake of a disaster.  Of course, it will be too late then. 

Clearly, the debate on this subject is not over; the rules of the friendly skies may change. Secretary Napolitano has indicated that she is open to listening flyers' concerns. For now, however, the options are: entertain the full-body, scan, accept the pat down, or, welcome to the “"No-Fly Zone.” Can you feel me?"

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com. A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/15/AR2010111501824.html

http://community.nytimes.com/comments/fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/15/the-full-body-backlash/?sort=oldest&offset=2&scp=2&sq=airport%20security%20protests&st=cse

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/nov/14/tsa-ejects-oceanside-man-airport-refusing-security/

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-travel-briefcase-20101108,0,6689313.story

http://www.chicagotribune.com/travel/fl-scan-opt-out-protest-20101116,0,5308482.story

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2010/11/16/airport_body_scans_patdowns_draw_fresh_complaints/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYykxMupiT0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8XnZPVcXhM

http://articles.cnn.com/2010-11-12/travel/travel.screening_1_body-scanners-pat-downs-travel-companies?_s=PM:TRAVEL

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2010/11/15/protesting-the-tsas-security-checks/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/15/john-tyner-videos_n_783678.html

http://www.wtsp.com/news/topstories/story.aspx?storyid=156163&catid=250

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/florida/fl-scan-opt-out-protest-20101116,0,3041228.story

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/one_man_airport_body_scan_protest_8sYMhk7jvZIaNsCwOyGAAP

http://www.myfoxny.com/dpps/news/airport-body-scan-protest-becomes-internet-hit-dpgonc-20101115-fc_10625001

http://www.examiner.com/populist-in-national/stop-overreacting-to-tsa-screening-procedures

http://www.redstate.com/laborunionreport/2010/11/14/public-protests-as-tsa-torpedoes-constitution/

http://www.myfoxboston.com/dpp/news/national/one-man-airport-body-scan-protest-becomes-internet-hit-25-ncx-20101115

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_Napolitano

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Homeland_Security

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_Security_Administration

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ac/7190584_national_optout_day_is_a_revolt_against_tsaenhanced_pat_downs_and_naked_body_scans

http://www.optoutday.com/

http://wewontfly.com/opt-out-day/

http://www.smartertravel.com/blogs/today-in-travel/group-plans-national-opt-out-day-to-protest-airport-security.html?id=6240002

http://news.travel.aol.com/2010/11/15/napolitano-defends-body-scanners-and-pat-downs/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_S._Pistole

The Man of Steele vs. The GOP

It's time to Break It Down!

William Learned Marcy, U.S. Senator from New York is credited with having coined the phrase, “To the victor go the spoils.” This concept characterized the political patronage system that was emerging at that time, courtesy of Andrew Jackson, who campaigned against, and defeated then President John Quincy Adams to become the nation’s 7th President.

There has been a great deal of discussion about the “shellacking,” as President Obama called it, administered to the Democrats and the President, and rightfully so. As has been noted far and wide, it was a victory (or depending upon where you stand, a defeat) of historic proportions. But in the spirit of Senator Marcy, I would like to take a moment to see what the victors are up to. That is, aside from dividing all the loot from their monstrous win of course.

After checking the broad strokes of the GOP…which I suppose is about as much as one can be privy to without being an avowed card-carrying member, I gleaned that there is a movement afoot to divest the current RNC Chairman of his position. Perhaps the powers that be concluded, in President Obama’s metaphor about Republicans driving the car in the ditch, Michael Steele was behind the wheel. Hmm, better remedy that lickety-split.

If there is anyone who has, in the last two years, been allocated more blame for the faux pas or less credit for the accomplishments of his Party than President Obama, it is Michael Steele. If you follow these posts, you know I have written extensively about the clear, significant, and numerous achievements of President Obama’s policy and legislative initiatives. At the same time, I have cited a number of instances in which Mr. Steele has run afoul of the GOP “TIP” (Thought & Ideology Police).

However, as I suggested in last week's post, let us step back, reflect and reset. Despite having been under sporadic, and from some sources, constant attack, by his critics, there is no denying Mr. Steele’s vision and leadership has instrumental in catapulting Republicans from a deficit position in House, Senate, and State House (Governorships) seats to numerical advantages in the House (significant) and State Houses (commanding), and a near draw in the Senate. Indeed, the number seats added in the House of Representatives has been deemed historic, and with 35 Governorships, the GOP is in the catbird seat as Congress prepares for legislative redistricting.

The various Snafus, notwithstanding, the issue most frequently cited as Mr. Steele’s crowning egregious shortcoming is his strategic decision to construct a grassroots funding apparatus that targeted virtually all states; much like Howard Dean did for the Democrats in 2008, rather than target traditional "big donors." Although, Mr. Dean’s idea proved to be a master stroke for his Party, he did catch a good deal of flak for it from Party regulars…before success was evident. Oddly, or interestingly, depending upon your perspective, Mr. Steele is catching flak, even after the fact his Party was able to turn out voters in record numbers, all over the country.

I have no axe to grind, and really no desired outcome, as it relates to “The Man of Steele vs. The GOP!” In passing, it is worth noting that, as was the case with Mr. Obama, given what they had to work with; one could argue both have been wildly successful over the past two years. Of course, success, like beauty, often lies in the eyes of the beholder.

The nation considered Election 2010 a plebiscite on President Obama’s leadership. Based upon the results, it is clear the electorate gave him a failing grade at mid term. Laboring, as we are, under the weight of a 9.6% unemployment rate that virtually everyone agrees is really even higher, the President’s F is understandable, even if it is not fair, which is debatable. Alternately, it seems to me, flunking Mr. Steele at this point must be based on somewhat less objective criteria.

Without a doubt, there are different ways to view both of these cases. Eyes of the beholder and all; I am sure those of you who read this will be more than happy to weigh-in and let me know where I dropped the “logic ball.” Be my guest. Meanwhile, I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com/. A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/11/09/steele-lashes-out-at-gop-critics-defends-record/

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/10/us/politics/10repubs.html?src=twrhp

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20101109/pl_yblog_upshot/michael-steele-slams-gop-critics-of-his-rnc-tenure

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101023/ap_on_el_ge/us_republican_chairman

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/09/rncs-steele-takes-victory_n_781199.html

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/republican-party/michael-steele.html

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/127465-steele-touts-rnc-efforts-but-says-wave-was-team-effort

http://thepage.time.com/2010/11/05/steele-vs-the-establishment-2/

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2010/11/08/131169790/rnc-s-michael-steele-takes-victory-lap?ft=1&f=1014&sc=tw

http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheat-sheet/item/republicans-plot-to-ditch-steele/makeover/

Reset: Recognize The People Have Spoken!

It's time to Break It Down!

The results are in; at least the partial results. From California to the Carolinas, and within North Carolina, from Murphy to Manteo, the political landscape reformatted itself as a byproduct of Election 2010.


On January 20, 2008, the Republican Party unofficially became the “Party of No,” with President Obama's Inauguration. Shortly thereafter, the GOP received an ideological boost from the Tea Party Movement. On November 2, 2010, Election Day, the Earth’s axis shifted…Hard Right!

Like most national elections, there will be a few contests in which the outcome will remain unclear, perhaps for days. Still, this much is clear. The U.S. States House of Representatives' Majority Party will change, shifting from Democrat to Republican.

Representative Nancy Pelosi, characterized as the most evil, or at least the most budgetarily insensitive woman in the history of the world, will be stepping down as the Speaker of the House. In all likelihood, she will be replaced by Representative John Boehner, who promises to usher in a new era of fiscal sanity, and social policy restraint, repealing health care reform, and financial reform, while ensuring the wealthiest Americans continue to receive Change…I mean “tax cuts they can believe in.”

Also clear is the fact the U.S. Senate will continue to maintain a Democratic majority for two more years, at least. Representative Pelosi’s evil, or rather, budgetarily insensitive twin, Harry Reid, survived in his bid win re-election to the Senate. There is significant speculation about whether he will retain his position as Senate Majority Leader, however. Working with a smaller majority, and a more conservative Senate, Mr. Reid may not survive a secret ballot vote among his own colleagues. We’ll see.

In North Carolina, the call for change was as irresistible as elsewhere in the nation. Both chambers of the North Carolina Legislature moved into the Red States’ zone. And how odd is that, you may ask? It is the first time since 1898 that Republicans will control the State Senate in The Old North State. That’s one hundred twelve years.

In local elections, the Mecklenburg Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) was not immune, but did prove to be not quite as susceptible to the tsunami of political change. At this hour, it appears Democrats will retain a majority, though by a slimmer margin; in fact, by the slimmest margin possible, 5-4.

So what have we learned from this anti-2008 change in the national, statewide, and local political landscape? As non-committal as it may seem, the answer is, “It’s too early to tell.” Oh one can be certain the spinners are already busy at work telling us what it means. There has been already, a speech by John Boehner to establish his role as House Majority Leader-in-Waiting, a Sarah Palin Tweet, essentially telling President Obama to surrender and relinquish his “transformational” agenda, and the President has scheduled a 1:00 P.M. press conference this afternoon (Wednesday), undoubtedly to reveal his take on where we go from here. Moreover, the Parties will both restructure their leadership, and the GOP and the Tea Party will have to develop a framework for coexisting, while the Democrats will have to now engage the GOP-Tea Party to formulate, vet, and execute a power-sharing model.

Many analysts have concluded the Tea Party movement will arrive on the scene feeling they are there to fight, without compromise, for the issues, that propelled them to prominence, including limited government, lower taxes, repealing health care and financial reform, and ensuring that President Obama is a 1-term President. Some of these same analysts believe relentless adherence to these talking points is a formula for gridlock, and argue mainstream Republicans who have a close affiliation with big business interests will want to be somewhat more flexible, if for no other reason than doing so, might produce more Republican victories, which will put the Party in better stead for the 2012 elections.

Given those parameters, it really is “Too early to tell” what we have learned. There is great deal of intra & inter-Party interplay that must unfold before learning results are evident. So in lieu of having a complete and detailed narrative about the definitive lessons of Election 2010, what appears to be clear, is that after yet another nearly 180 degree pivot, the American system of governance has proved that it is agile, adaptive, and able to absorb abrupt and fundamental change with crises ensuing. At the back end of the most expensive mid term election (nearly $4 billion) in American History, we will observe a contentious, but peaceful transition. We will “Reset: Recognize The People Have Spoken!”

I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com/. A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/11/02/election.main/index.html?hpt=T1

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/11/03/obama.boehner.call/index.html?hpt=Sbin

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/11/03/nevada.senate/index.html?hpt=Sbin

http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/11/02/zelizer.midterms.partisan.gridlock/index.html?hpt=Sbin

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/11/03/1807436/gop-gains-in-both-chambers.html

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/category/the-live-blog/?hpt=Sbin

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/11/01/whats-at-stake-in-the-house-and-senate/

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/11/02/tea.party/index.html

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/11/02/1807161/gop-gives-democrats-a-tough-time.html

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/11/02/1807326/gop-poised-to-regain-control-of.html

Mid-Term Prep

It's time to Break It Down!


By the time I post again, you will have voted…or not. The pundits, the “talking heads,” and even a growing number of men and women on the street have been telling us for weeks, if not months, that there is an enthusiasm gap. That is a fancy way of saying, among the prospective electorate, it is anticipated that many more voters will opt for Republicans than for Democrats next Tuesday. In fact, if all goes as most analysts expect it to, the coalition of the GOP and the Tea Party movement will displace Democrats as the Majority in the U.S. House of Representatives, and threaten to do the same in the U.S. Senate.

One of the many beautifully brilliant aspects of our form of government is, as a felon-free adult, you have a choice, and are free to express it. Typically we think of that choice being shaped by the views, philosophies, ideologies, and voting records of candidates. Those are the main factors that tend to lead us to vote for one person or Party instead of another. However, in this election cycle, those elements, in conjunction with a case of prolonged economic doldrums, made worse by acrimonious, hyper-partisan debate in Washington and across the country, have served to discourage many would-be voters from going to the polls. This seems to ring true, particularly for those Democrats and Independents that supported President Obama and his progressive agenda in 2008.

At the end of the day, this discussion is not intended to tell anyone for whom they should cast their votes. However, I do believe, as a result of all the claims, insults, slurs, and stated aims to make this President fail, many of the facts about what the Obama Administration has accomplished in the last 22 months have been obscured, or quite simply lost in translation. Consequently, I want to spend a few minutes to reframe the discussion in a way that clarifies the record. I hope you will agree that regardless of your position on the issues, one is well served by knowing the facts, even when they do not support or complement the partisan rhetoric that so often carries the day.

Most often, I delve into and pull from a vast array of source material to develop my posts. I am deliberately taking an alternate tack today. I read a piece from Rolling Stone Magazine, at a friend’s urging. It is without question, the most compelling distillation I have seen of the various sides of the Obama accomplishment conundrum. The article discussed eight key areas in which President Obama has distinguished himself in historic and positive dimensions, through his legislative and policy achievements. Regardless of ideological bent, his work in these arenas is significant; made all the more impressive by the withering opposition from an opposition Party committed to defeat his every initiative.

You can read Tim Dickinson’s article in its entirety in the October 28, 2010 Edition of Rolling Stone. Here are the eight areas Mr. Dickinson detailed:

• Averted a Depression

The number that is most frequently used to pair President Obama with the concept of failure is 9.6. The trenchant unemployment rate that gives rise to the argument that Mr. Obama has failed to solve the nation’s most pressing problem.

And while that is a depressing number, consider the cavernous abyss we avoided, due to Mr. Obama’s conviction, commitment, and leadership. Based on analyses by economists from Princeton and Moody’s, more than 16 million jobs would have been lost without the interventions of TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program), the Recovery Act (Stimulus), and the Federal Reserve, twice the damage suffered. Unemployment would have soared to 16.5 percent, and next year, the federal deficit would have more than doubled, to $2.6 trillion. Given what amounts essentially to deflation in prices and wages, the economists concluded, “this dark scenario constitutes a 1930s-like depression.”

The President played a pivotal role in avoiding such a cataclysmic disaster.

1. Re-nominated Ben Bernanke as head of the Federal Reserve

2. Backed the Central Bank’s use of record-low interest rates

3. Demanded transparency from the Fed (Federal Reserve) & Wall Street in administering “stress
    tests” (which restored confidence of panicked investors & allowed “zombie banks” to return to life
    without resorting to nationalization

Due to such deft stewardship, the Treasury now estimates the price tag for the TARP bailout has dropped from $700 billion (the equivalent of the Pentagon’s annual budget) to $29 billion (about one-fourth the spending on veterans). Moreover, Mr. Obama drove the passage of the Recovery Act, which the Princeton-Moody’s study concludes has created 2.7 million jobs.

“The stimulus did what it was supposed to do,” says Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody’s, and a former adviser to John McCain. “It ended the Great Recession and it jumpstarted a recovery.”

Critics labeled the Recovery Act a failure because it did not hold unemployment to below eight percent, as the President’s economic advisers said it would. Alternately liberal economists accused Mr. Obama of failing to fight hard enough for a bigger stimulus that would have saved more jobs. Together, these positions reflect both the refusal to consider how much worse the situation would have been without any stimulus, and the fact that the bill just squeaked through in the form that was passed.

However, the President also won, subsequently, a series of stand-alone measures – including three extensions of unemployment benefits, the Cash for Clunkers program, a second round of aid for states and a package of loans and tax cuts for small businesses – that have infused another $170 billion into the economy. The Recovery Act itself has grown from $787 billion to $814 billion thanks to provisions pegged to metrics like unemployment.

In fact, should President Obama secure passage of two new programs he has proposed — $50 billion in infrastructure spending and $200 billion in tax breaks for investments in new equipment — he will have surpassed the $1 trillion stimulus that many liberal economists believed from the beginning was necessary. "As the need became more obvious to people, we were able to take additional steps to accelerate progress," Obama senior adviser David Axelrod tells Rolling Stone. The president, in effect, has achieved through patience and pragmatism what he was unlikely to have won through open political warfare.

• Sparking Recovery

The day to day assessment and evaluation of the Recovery Act tends to be big-picture and two-dimensional. Has the stimulus put us on the path to recovery – yes or no? The stimulus, however, was far more than microeconomic medicine. Yes, it was designed to deal with the economic catastrophe at hand, but it was also framed to make investments critical to reviving the middle class and improving the nation’s long-term competitiveness.

Quiet as it is kept, the law included the most progressive middle class tax cut ever enacted – delivering benefits to 95% of working families. It invested $94 billion in clean energy and $100 billion in education – unprecedented levels in both areas. In addition, it devoted $128 billion to health care and $70 billion to mending America’s safety net – including direct cash payments to the elderly, the disabled and impoverished parents, as well as billions invested in low-income housing, food stamps, and child care.

"If you passed each of those as separate pieces of legislation," says Norman J. Ornstein, of the American Enterprise Institute, "that in and of itself would make for a very significant record of accomplishment." Seen through this prism, the stimulus alone represents a strikingly progressive presidential legacy — rivaling the biggest reforms of the Clinton presidency. And it passed on Obama's 24th day in office.

• Saving Detroit

The angry left paints President Obama with the brush of a corporate lackey unwilling to take bold action on behalf of average Americans. The fact is, this picture does not resemble the President who made a $60 billion bet on the future of the U.S. auto industry — and hit the jackpot.

Michiganders, auto workers, and their families aside, the prospect of recycling TARP funds to save GM and Chrysler from liquidation was wildly unpopular — a fact that Obama's top political counselors, warning against the intervention, vigorously impressed upon him at the time.

Politically unpalatable as it were, inaction was simply economically intolerable: Had the administration allowed GM and Chrysler to go under, it would have triggered a collapse of parts suppliers and dealerships nationwide, creating such collateral damage that even Ford would likely have gone belly up. The collapse would also have led to the loss of more than 1 million jobs, primarily in the devastated economies of Michigan, Ohio and Indiana, where unemployment is among the highest in the country.

Rather than bailing out the automakers by providing them wads condition-free cash, as the Bush Administration had proposed, President Obama went for broke and used the government’s leverage to set the companies on a more competitive course. Despite cries of "socialism" and "Government Motors," the administration bought a 61 percent stake in GM, ousted its chief executive, forced both bondholders and UAW members to make concessions and steered the company through bankruptcy in record time. Simultaneously, the administration invested $8 billion in Chrysler — a dowry, of sorts, to secure the company's shotgun marriage to Italian automaker Fiat.

It's difficult to overstate how effective and efficient the government's intervention has been. By risking $60 billion, Obama saved a third as many jobs as the entire stimulus package, which cost 13 times more. In fact, the auto industry has not only survived, it has roared back to life. GM is profitable and preparing to go public in an IPO that could allow the government to recoup its investment. Ford is prospering, edging out Japanese rivals for quality. Even Chrysler is expanding its market share. "The bailout of the auto industry protected against absolute devastation in the economies of the Midwest," says Ornstein. "And it is now turning out to be a huge financial boon for taxpayers."

• Reforming Health Care

Obama's crowning legislative achievement is health care reform. And true to Joe Biden's pithy and profane assessment, it's a Big F…..g Deal. "All progressives since Theodore Roosevelt wanted it, all Democrats since Harry Truman fought for it, and only Barack Obama got it," says historian Douglas Brinkley. "This is his huge accomplishment."

Obama's $1 trillion reform is neither simple nor elegant. But over the next decade, it will extend health coverage to 32 million uninsured Americans — the equivalent of New York and Illinois combined — by expanding eligibility for Medicaid and subsidizing insurance for low- and middle-income citizens. By the end of this decade, 95 percent of Americans will have health insurance. The law also:

1. Establishes a new bill of rights for patients

2. Bans denying coverage based on pre-existing conditions, beginning in 2014

3. Precludes annual caps on benefit payouts, beginning in 2014

4. Prevents arbitrary revocation of coverage of those who get sick, beginning September 2010

5. Children with existing illness can no longer be denied insurance

6. Younger Americans can remain on their parent’s insurance until age 26

7. 1 million elderly citizens are receiving checks fro $250 to fill the gap in Medicare’s coverage of
    prescription drugs

8. All of the above is accomplished while extending the solvency of Medicare by twelve years, and cutting
    the deficit by $143 billion over the next decade

Historians rate President Obama highly for finding a way to push through health care reform even after the surprise election of Republican Scott Brown to Ted Kennedy's former Senate seat in Massachusetts. "One of the most extraordinary moments of this presidency was the decision to go for broke on health care after Scott Brown," says Doris Kearns Goodwin. "Instead of deciding to pull back — we'll get half a loaf or whatever — Obama was willing to take a risk at that point. They could have lost that whole thing, and it would have been devastating for his presidency. Somehow, even though we saw the ugly process, it did work in the end."

In gaining passage of the health care bill, the President defeated the anti-government Republicans who sought to destroy him politically and created a program that will benefit Americans for decades to come. It was a costly victory. Many liberals and conservatives attack it from polar ends; conservatives because it costs too much, they say, while the left contends it does not go far enough without a public option, and single-payer apparatus.

The administration remains unapologetic. "We couldn't have gotten there with the public option," says Axelrod. "The choice was between letting the thing fail or taking a huge leap forward for everyone who will benefit from this now and for generations to come. It wasn't a hard choice to make."

• Cutting Corporate Welfare

Although Obamacare, as his critics call it, does not contain a public alternative to for-profit insurance, the President did succeed in dismantling a major corporate gravy train. The health care bill is paid for, in part, by cutting $136 billion paid out under Medicare Advantage — a Bush-era boondoggle under which private insurers were larded with subsidies for the dubious service of inserting themselves as middlemen between patients and government-run Medicare.

Simultaneously, President Obama also used the health care bill to end corporate welfare in an entirely different arena: student lending. For decades, megabanks like Sallie Mae have reaped billions by doing the paperwork on loans to college students — even though Uncle Sam sets the rates and assumes virtually all the risk. The president's Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act, which piggybacked to victory as an add-on to health care, kicked private banks out of the federal lending game. The unalloyed victory over corporate lobbyists will cut lending costs by more than $60 billion over the next decade — $36 billion of which is being reinvested to expand federal grants for low-income and middle-class students. The law also makes unprecedented investments in historically black schools and community colleges, caps student-loan repayment at 10 percent of a borrower's income and pays for a program to forgive the debts of students who make their careers in public service.

"We've stopped this incredibly wasteful practice where there was effectively no benefit for taxpayers, and we were able to recycle that for families and students," says Rep. George Miller, who spearheaded the reform in the House. "We've been fighting for this since the Clinton administration — and Obama had the courage to do it straight up."

• Restoring America’s Reputation

Senator Barack Obama was among the earliest Congressional opponents to the war in Iraq. His clearly articulated opposition was a key factor in propelling him past early favorite, Hillary Clinton, in Democratic primaries. As President, Mr. Obama has stuck to the timetable he laid out, withdrawing nearly 100,000 troops from Iraq — including the last combat brigade, which came home in August. The move meant quietly overruling his top general on the ground, Ray Odierno, who wanted to delay withdrawal.

"Obama gets credit for checking off that box," says Steven Clemons, director of American strategy at the New America Foundation. "Bringing Iraq to a resolution like this is a very big deal." Although 50,000 troops remain — ostensibly in an advisory and training capacity — they too have a date certain for withdrawal: December 31st, 2011.

While Obama has yet to put an end to the fighting in Afghanistan — a war that has now dragged on longer than Vietnam — he has managed to boost America's standing in the rest of the world. Despite the continuing loss of NATO troops, U.S. approval ratings in Western Europe have soared into the 60s and 70s — far higher than during the unilateralism of the Bush era. U.S. approval is up more than 10 points in Poland and Russia, 20 points in China, and 30 points in Indonesia, France and Germany. Overall, global confidence in America's leadership has leaped from 21 percent in 2007 to 64 percent today.

The President himself has shown a deft diplomatic touch: He has thawed icy relations with Russia and negotiated historic cuts in nuclear arms, re-establishing American leadership and credibility on nuclear nonproliferation. He has also convinced Security Council veto-holders Russia and China to back new sanctions to punish Iran's nuclear ambitions — a degree of international cooperation that was unthinkable during the Bush years.

"President Obama has already repaired much of the damage wrought during the eight years of the Bush administration," former secretary of state Madeleine Albright observed in September. "He has restored America's reputation on the world stage."

• Protecting Consumers

President Obama has taken heat from progressive critics — much of it deserved — over the weakest aspects of his effort to reform Wall Street. It remains unclear whether the new law — the most sweeping overhaul of financial regulations since the Great Depression — will do enough to rein in high-risk trading and end the era of Too Big to Fail. But the law does take bold steps to avoid a repeat of the current meltdown. The Federal Reserve and the FDIC now have the power to seize and dismantle firms like AIG and Lehman Brothers and to force the financial industry to pony up the costs of their liquidation. Banks can no longer gamble federally insured deposits on high-risk investments, and they are required to risk a portion of their own assets in the dubious investments they sell — a move designed to prevent firms like Goldman Sachs from profiting off of "shitty deals."

But the most significant facet of the legislation is the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. For the first time, a single regulatory authority will have the power to protect consumers from bad loans and credit deals, the same way the FDA protects patients from dangerous drugs. Armed with an annual budget of $500 million — exempt from congressional cost- cutting — the agency will police everything from payday loans to jumbo mortgages.

For a taste of the kind of regulations the consumer bureau is likely to deliver, look no further than your credit-card bill. Another measure pushed by Obama — the Credit CARD Act — has already forced Visa, MasterCard and American Express to include a box on your statement spelling out how long it will take to pay off your debt making only the minimum payment. It also bans credit-card companies from jacking up your rate without warning, and places stiff restrictions on luring college kids into mountains of debt with easy credit.

The consumer bureau matters not simply to individual borrowers but to the overall stability of the financial system. "Predatory lending played a very big role in the collapse of the financial system," says Joseph Stiglitz, the Nobel Prize-winning economist. The champion and acting head of the bureau, Elizabeth Warren, put it even more bluntly to Rolling Stone earlier this year: "Our financial crisis started one lousy mortgage at a time, one family who got fooled, tricked or cheated at a time," she said. "If nobody can build mortgage-backed securities on trillions of dollars of unpayable instruments, there's a lot less risk in the overall system."

• Launching a Clean Energy Initiative

The President’s failure to curb global warming by passing a comprehensive climate bill stands as his most glaring legislative defeat. But the absence of a cap on carbon pollution has been offset in large part by the enormous strides he has made toward a cleaner, lower-carbon economy. With the Recovery Act, the President effectively launched what greens have long agitated for: an Apollo-like moonshot on clean energy.

Consider that the stimulus targeted $94 billion for clean energy — making unprecedented investments in everything from weatherizing federal buildings to building solar thermal plants in the Mojave. Roughly half of the money involves direct federal spending. But the administration structured the other half — $46 billion — as matching funds and loan guarantees that are realized only when the private sector steps up with capital of its own. According to a report from the President's Council of Economic Advisers, every dollar of federal co-investment is attracting more than $2 in private capital. Add it all up, and the Recovery Act is driving more than $200 billion in public and private investment in clean energy — $20 billion more than the Apollo program would have cost in today's dollars.

"Everybody calls Obama the first black president," says Van Jones, the former green-jobs czar. "But if you were from Mars, and couldn't see race, you'd call him the first green President. That's what distinguishes him on a policy level from every preceding president: this incredible commitment he's made to repowering America in a clean way."

What is the country getting in return? The investment is on track to double the nation's renewable-energy generating capacity by 2012 — bringing enough clean energy online to power New York around the clock. It will also double the nation's manufacturing capacity for wind turbines and solar panels, driving down the cost of clean energy so it can compete with fossil fuels — even if Congress doesn't pass a carbon cap.

The President has also moved aggressively on other fronts to reduce carbon pollution. Cash for Clunkers retired nearly 700,000 gas guzzlers and replaced them with cars that, on average, are 58 percent more fuel-efficient. In the first-ever CO2 restrictions imposed on cars and light trucks, automakers are now required to boost fuel standards high enough to save nearly 2 billion barrels of oil and to reduce carbon emissions by 21 percent over the next two decades. In January, the EPA is expected to do what Congress refuses to: set limits on carbon emissions for large industrial polluters like coal plants and cement factories. And the president has already put America's biggest greenhouse polluter on a carbon diet: By executive order, all federal agencies are now required to reduce their carbon pollution by 28 percent in the next decade. That act alone is enough to scrub 101 million metric tons of carbon from the atmosphere — as much climate-heating pollution as Ireland and Hungary generate combined.

"We have running room to push this forward," says Axelrod. "We can hit the targets we want to hit in terms of reducing emissions, while hopefully spurring a whole lot of economic activity around these new technologies. We're going to keep pushing on that door."

Yes, “Mid-Term Prep” covered a lot of territory, but when the term is four years, you have to expect that. I certainly do not expect every GOP member/Tea Party activist to read this and go out and burn their membership card, or abandon their ultra-conservative views. Rather I would expect those who favor a progressive agenda to reflect on this substantial body of work, and consider the economic and political environment within which it were wrought, and to feel better, if in fact your sense of this Administration's accomplishment were flagging in the first place. Beyond that, I would hope moderates, progressives, and liberals would drop you enthusiasm gap, if you have one, and get to work, recognizing what is at stake.  The fact is, there are those who would like to pretend this President was never elected.  While hisorical records make that next to impossible to achieve, the next aim it seems is to roll back President Obama's accomplishments.

Your vote is a valuable commodity. It is yours with which to do with as you choose. I urge you to use it…early, and to encourage others to do the same.  After all, such a rollback will affect most Americans in more incidiously detrimental ways than it will President Obama's legacy, which is already quite secure.  He is number 44...that is what it is.  I’m done; holla back!

Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com/. A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/220013?RS_show_page=1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troubled_Asset_Relief_Program

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_J._Ornstein

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doris_Kearns_Goodwin