8:33 am November 22, 2012, by Jay
Downtown Atlanta, as seen in a photo taken Wednesday by a daughter returning home for the holidays.
– Jay Bookman
November 24th, 201210:17 pm
Brosephus™ - Alabama State Universty Hornet, and proud about it!!!!!
November 24th, 201210:18 pm
As for Black Masons or White Masons, in the immortal words of Kamchak”
In the immortal words of Brosephus… Educate yourself just a bit more in order to sound like you know what you’re talking about…
I have been a Prince Hall Mason since 1992. If you study the history of Masonry, one has to be officially chartered by a Grand Lodge in order to be considered a valid lodge. Prince Hall Masonry was founded by a charter issued by the Grand Lodge of England, the same Grand Lodge that chartered other lodges here in the US to which people, such as George Washington, were members.
Relationship with predominantly white Freemasonry
This led to a tradition of separate, predominantly African American jurisdictions in North America, which are known collectively as Prince Hall Freemasonry. Widespread racism and segregation in North America made it impossible for African Americans to join many mainstream lodges, and many mainstream Grand Lodges in North America refused to recognize as legitimate the Prince Hall Lodges and Prince Hall Masons in their territory.
For many years both Prince Hall and “mainstream” Grand Lodges have had integrated membership, though in some Southern states this has been policy but not practice. Today, some Prince Hall Grand Lodges are recognized by the Grand Lodge of England (UGLE) as well as the great majority of state Grand Lodges in the US and many international Grand Lodges. The situation is complicated by the level of recognition that is granted, with some lodges giving full “blanket” recognition to all Prince Hall Grand Lodges, while others put on limits with regard to issues such as “intervisitation rights” or treating the Prince Hall Grand Lodges as regular but foreign jurisdictions. While no Grand Lodge of any kind is universally recognized, at present, Prince Hall Masonry is recognized by some UGLE-recognized Grand Lodges and not by others, but appears to be working its way toward further recognition. According to data compiled in 2008, 41 out of the 51 mainstream US Grand Lodges recognize Prince Hall Grand Lodges. The mainstream state Grand Lodges that do not recognize Prince Hall Grand Lodges are located largely in southern states with an estimated 50% of Prince Hall Freemasons: Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, Mississippi, Florida, Louisiana, Arkansas, South Carolina and West Virginia.
November 24th, 201210:27 pm
in the immortal words of a long dead comedian:
“I wouldn’t be a member of any club that would have me”……
November 24th, 201210:29 pm
Sorry, and a happy Thanksgiving to you, Fred !
Guess it’s time for me to call it a night. One thing to consider about all this segregation related stuff is that, we are a product of our past. This country didn’t fully integrate in the 1960’s, and it’s still not 100% integrated today. Most groups are too afraid to give up their self-identity, and that’s one thing that would likely have to happen for us to completely integrate ourselves. Unlike most other countries, we are not made up of one homogenous group. We are far too diverse.
It sounds good on paper and in speeches, but I don’t foresee the US ever having a completely integrated society. As a result, there will be Black and White Greek Letter organizations, HBCUs, and a host of other organizations and groups that cater to specific groups. Instead of focusing on the failed logic that these groups are “racist”, we should applaud ourselves that our free markets work in that groups are formed and thriving that meet the needs of specific people. That’s what the free market is supposed to do.
November 24th, 201210:36 pm
“It sounds good on paper and in speeches, but I don’t foresee the US ever having a completely integrated society”
No, of course not. The best we can ever do is reduce it to the minimum and minimize to near zero it’s effects. It’s based on territorial instincts and that’s an instinct as ancient as they come.
November 24th, 201210:45 pm
Yep, that summed it up much better than I could have done.
November 24th, 201210:49 pm
Thanks Bro. No point in hoping for the impossible. We have to concentrate on the possible first.
Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)
November 25th, 201212:27 am
Did somebody say there’s a rascist on this blog?
November 25th, 20121:35 am
Someone was complaining that black seem to congregate with blacks and whites with whites on a voluntary basis.
And in Georgia no less. Do tell.
Michael Tomasky on How John McCain Humiliated Himself on Susan Rice
November 25th, 20125:55 am
A new report appears to exonerate Susan Rice for public statements following the Benghazi attack. Will John McCain apologize for his reckless crusade against her? Don’t bet on it.
We don’t yet really know as a society what a person has to do to completely and utterly cancel out a record of war heroism, but we may be about to find out. If this CBS News report is even close to accurate, John McCain’s arguments of the last few weeks about Susan Rice are thrashingly demolished. He has, or should have, zero credibility now on this issue. It will be fascinating to see if he emerges from the holiday weekend subtly chastened, attempting to shift gears a bit, or whether he keeps the pedal to the paranoid metal. He’s getting toward the sunset of what was once a reasonably distinguished career, a career (if we count his time in Vietnam) that began in the highest honor and has now descended into the darkest farce.
The CBS report found the following. It was the Office of the Director of National Intelligence that took the words “al Qaeda” and “terrorism” out of Rice’s talking points for those Sept. 16 talk shows. It found also that both the CIA and the FBI approved of these edits, following standard operating procedure. The report states emphatically: “The White House or State Department did not make those changes.” One source told the network’s Margaret Brennan that the controversy over the word choice employed by Rice has come to the intel world as “a bit of a surprise.” Another source said that there were “legitimate intelligence and legal issues to consider, as is almost always the case when explaining classified assessments publicly.”
There’s one bit of irony introduced to the saga by all these details, which is that this report crystallizes the fact that Rice did indeed hide some information from the public on Sept. 16—but it’s the kind of information that has always been concealed from public consumption, for the kinds of national-security-related reasons that the Washington establishment has always agreed upon. Historically, of course, if any person or persons have objected to this kind of filtering, they’ve typically been on the left. Think Daniel Ellsberg first and foremost. The right always defended this practice, on the grounds that making possibly sensitive information public too soon without the proper running of all the intelligence traps could only provide aid and comfort to the commies or the terrorists, as the case may be.
***Don't Mess With Texas***
November 25th, 20126:28 am
November 25th, 20128:13 am
Brosephus – Doggone/GA
Well, so much for ever having a “colorblind” society.
If it sounds just too good to be true, it probably is.
November 25th, 20129:04 am
Indigo – Racial matters have improved a lot since the fifties. That’s about as long as I can remember. There is no legal segregation.
But there are still different cultures between the races.
It’s mitigated somewhat by the intergration that does exist in some public schools and in the workplace. Also the Army and government.
And there is some mixture in housing, proceeding slowly.
Mixed births will continue to spread the genes around so that differences in DBA will be reduced so we will look more alike.
In some areas of the world, DNA has mixed, but the different cultures remain, based on religion and customs.
The DNA among Israel, West Bank and Gaza is probaly about the same. And the DNA of the Sunnis and other forms of Islam are similar. But the differences remain.
Probalby that wil be out future here for a long time.
November 25th, 20129:35 am
When you live in a country where people love to express their individualism, you’re not going to have the atmosphere necessary for complete integration into a “colorblind” society. We are quite territorial people. Our territorialism and tribalistic instincts are what makes America what it is. Most every other country in the world is made up of homogenous ethnic, tribal, or racial groups. We are not. Our country is truly a melting pot of the world’s groups The same barriers and differences that exist in the rest of the world won’t magically disappear simply because of the fact that people reside within our borders.
I think the idea of a “colorblind” society is a great idea. I just don’t think we will see it happen in reality.
November 25th, 20129:36 am
That’s generally true. Still, just go give one example, a local TV station has a football “game of the week”. When the sports guy is shown on the field with the coach, the cheerleaders usually are shown and give a brief show. More and more, these girls are all black or white or almost all one or the other. This, of course, means the student body is almost all black or white.
This after many long years of integration.
“Well, so much for ever having a “colorblind” society.
If it sounds just too good to be true, it probably is.”
No, it’s not too good to be true. It’s possible to have a colorblind SOCIETY. What we will never be able to accomplish is 100% colorblind PEOPLE.
November 25th, 20129:39 am
We ended legal forced segration sixty years ago.
Ending segration (which is a forced division) and choosing intergration (which is a voluntary inclusion) are two different things.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
November 25th, 201210:03 am
This, of course, means the student body is almost all black or white.
My late Da warned against trying to make too much stew from only one oyster, and this is exactly what you’re doing.
November 25th, 201210:06 am
Race is, at best, an artificial construct. Just what is it that makes a “race” to begin with? Oh, we accept the broad anthropological divisions of Caucasoid, Negroid, Mongoloid, and Australoid. We argue incessantly into which of these the latest archaeological specimen of the earliest humanoids fall, each still locked into their own “we were first” mentality of trying to determine themselves somehow “superior” by laying geographic claim to some half simian cache of bones.
Just how artificial it can be even in more recent and recorded history can be seen from such things as Article 14 of the Treaty of Dancing Rabbit Creek when, by the stroke of a pen some 6000 households went from “Indian” to “White.” A little over a century later, several million persons in the United States went from “White” to the newly created “Hispanic” overnight.
It is how we as individuals and specific “communities” relate and interact within these artificially, often enough self, imposed, which is at issue. We, as a society, are still mired in the concept of “color” as the determining factor, a holdover to a great degree from the segregation era with its 19th Century determinations as a legal construct.
As individuals we are moving beyond that. As communities and as a society, we are not.
November 25th, 201210:22 am
Race is scientifically artificial, as there are no scientific guidelines that can tell one race from another. Individual difference within races are greater that the average differences between races.
But somehow, if you were in Sweden, and suddenly were drugged and woke up in Kenya, Viet Nam or Columbia, I think you would notice that the people looked different. Hence, the common sense concept of race.
Somehow, the people in South DeKalb don’t look the same as those in Forsyth County. Can’t put my finger on it, but there seems to be some difference.
November 25th, 201210:25 am
Brosephus, josef, Oscar, Doggone/GA, Kamachek
I hear you. And, yes, you’re all correct.
It’s just that, in studying human history, there seems to be no end to all the misery the “us and them” mentality has caused. Recent troubles in the Mideast are just one of way too many miserable examples.
Will the “us and them” mentality ever be overcome? Or, are we doomed to endless amounts of violence, hatred, mistrust and different ways of living and thinking?
“Race is, at best, an artificial construct”
Of course it is. If we were talking about dogs, instead of people, we would use the term “breed” instead of race…but in the context of both species both words have more or less the same meaning: an artificial separation based on determined specifics.
November 25th, 201210:26 am
When the sports guy is shown on the field with the coach, the cheerleaders usually are shown and give a brief show. More and more, these girls are all black or white or almost all one or the other. This, of course, means the student body is almost all black or white.
You may want to do whatever it takes to avoid watching Tennessee State Univ football then… As a HBCU, their band is the traditional “show band” comprised mostly of Blacks. Their cheerleaders are usually Black, and the crowd at the football games (technically attending the game as most come for the halftime show) are mostly Black. However, TSU is a member of the Ohio Valley Conference, and has a sizeable minority, i.e. White, population because of it’s graduate programs, engineering school, and other opportunities that are provided there.
Just because you see one thing on tv doesn’t always mean that you’ll see the same thing on campus.
November 25th, 201210:27 am
“Will the “us and them” mentality ever be overcome?”
Easy answer: no
As I said last night, it’s based on territoriality and that is an instinct that as existed as long as life has existed. Our job is to minimize it’s effects. But eliminate it? Ain’t gonna happen.
November 25th, 201210:29 am
Just my opinion, but in regards to football on Saturday’s, there is no “us and them” mentality. People are simply choosing to attend the games they want to. College football and “Black College Football” are similar but not one and the same. People attend the Alabama vs Auburn game to watch a good football game. People attend the Southern vs Grambling game to socialize and watch the halftime show. There just happens to be a football game going on all around them.
November 25th, 201210:32 am
Piggybacking on what you just posted. One of the “hot button” topics at the Thanksgiving get together was the Elizabeth Warren fracas and the “look like a” thingie. The great niece in Oklahoma who has begun her Choctaw language and culture classes would “pass” as “high white” in any line-up. The grandbabby the same age, classically “Indian” in appearance, is being raised in an environment where the Indianess is something with which she has had little or no personal contact.
So, which one is a “real” Indian and which one isn’t? The “white” one would be right at home on the rez, the “red” one would be completely alienated. Yet, they are the same family.
So, no, it’s not a construct defined by “color,” just judging from one little laboratory.
November 25th, 201210:34 am
Who knows? Forever is a long time. Our difference arose because we were separated in groups for thousands of years. With more communication, contact, and in termarriage, those differences over time will be reduced and disapear.
Language is the same way. We all were separated and developed different languages. Now, many separate languages are disappearing. Still, there are a lot oc Chinese and Asians who don’t speak English. Racial differenes are similar.
Ending some differences is not going to happen overnight.
November 25th, 201210:37 am
“Ending some differences is not going to happen overnight”
and when they are…others will take their place.
Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...
November 25th, 201210:38 am
Seems to me the incentives against complete elimination of race issues will prevent whatever total race equality (however that is defined) to happen in my lifetime…the incentives of hard core right wingers, we all know who they are, are only equalled by the shakedowns of corporations and other organizations by the likes of Jesse Jackson.
Follow the money and educuation levels and finally the total number of single parent homes…as long as the trends in each follow current outcomes, nothing will change except the cost to all of those less fortunates…of course more whites fall into this category than others..
Seems expanding difference between economic means is a key driver…as opposed the the thought than one race is superior…seems all races of menial financial means are held down..
Just a quick driveby: There is an interesting article here in the AJC today.
Enjoy. oh and get Brocephus prepared for the disappointment, resentment and sadness he’ll be feeling this time next Sunday. He’ll be feeling like the Republicans after the last election as he learns to say “Georgia Bulldawgs, SEC Champions.”
November 25th, 201210:44 am
That “territoriality” concept is certainly a valid one, but its definition can be tricky. That territory can be confined to the home or can encompass massive land expanses. Even at its most limited, the home, it can also be at work, Here is our house there exists a “corner” where the Indian totems, icons, etc. are in evidence and another where the Jewish ones on on display. Even in our “mixed” household, there is a point where we retreat into a tribal thing. For all of our 40 years as a unit, there is that time and place when and where the division is there. I will never completely identify with or even understand some of Unmentionable’s “Indianess” nor he with my “Jewishness.”
November 25th, 201210:49 am
“That “territoriality” concept is certainly a valid one, but its definition can be tricky.”
Certainly. That’s why I say it’s “based” on territoriality…not that it IS territoriality. To an amoeba a “territory” can be just barely beyond the boundaries of it’s shape. To a human it can be, as you say, a massive land expanse.
But xenophobia, which is what we are really talking about, is based on protecting the territory from those who are “outside” the group. In this context, “territory” is not neccessarily based on land. It can be a mindset, a societal habit, a culture. It’s all about protecting those in one group from those in another.
November 25th, 201210:54 am
I agree wholeheartedly on the concept of xenophobia being the most correct term for what we are wont to call “racism.” With that we can move beyond the various artificial determiners and more to confronting and dealing with what is really at work and as you say, “what we are really talking about.”
November 25th, 201210:59 am
“With that we can move beyond the various artificial determiners and more to confronting and dealing with what is really at work and as you say, “what we are really talking about.””
Yep. Because bigotry is pervasive, and we ALL have some form of it. We’ll never get rid of it. But we must, as a society, work to minimize it’s corrosive effects…BECAUSE we’ll never eliminate it from our innermost being.
November 25th, 201211:07 am
Just counting people in the US Census would be a step Forward, with no mention
of race or genealogy.
November 25th, 201211:11 am
“Just counting people in the US Census would be a step Forward, with no mention
of race or genealogy”
It’s a nice dream, but it’s not a good idea. How can you identify the corrosive effects of bigotry if you don’t amass information on it?
November 25th, 201211:12 am
I couldn’t agree more. I have no problem with a “census” (lower case “c”) of such categories. I have a big problem with the “Census” (upper case “C”) doing that.
November 25th, 201211:16 am
Making the government colorblind is the only way to make the people
colorblind since the people are the government.
November 25th, 201211:20 am
“Making the government colorblind is the only way to make the people
colorblind since the people are the government.”
I don’t agree. Yes, the government should be colorblind in it’s policies, but it can’t address the bigotry of it’s population if you make it blind to those bigotries. It isn’t counting the divisions that cause those divisions…it is the existence of those divisions that makes the counting of them neccessary.
You can’t address a problem if you don’t know it exists.
Divide and conquer is an old governing principle and the Census provides
information to accomplish that.
My God is so big, so mighty.......
November 25th, 201211:21 am
Israel and Iran will be fighting within the next 12 months!
November 25th, 201211:23 am
“Divide and conquer is an old governing principle and the Census provides
information to accomplish that”
And it also provides the information to mitigate it.
November 25th, 201211:25 am
Doggone/GA – “and when they are…others will take their place”
I really wish you were wrong on this.
Unfortunately, that is all too true.
In fact, this raises a most uncomfortable idea that few, including me, like to think about.
Are we such a flawed species that our self destruction is just a matter of time?
November 25th, 201211:30 am
“Are we such a flawed species that our self destruction is just a matter of time?”
yes. But that is true of ALL species. Just as the gathering of information bears the seeds of both usefulness and abuse, so do all species carry within them the seeds of both their continuance and their extinction.
We survive because we are supremely adaptable…but we still require a very tiny range of temperature conditions, and oxygen levels. Exceed either of those and we WILL disappear.
November 25th, 201211:31 am
I essentially agree with you both. The data Doggone validly posits as necessary for analyzing the forms of bigotry, are not, in my opinion, the bailiwick of the official Census which was instituted to count heads for congressional representation.
As for Doggone’s point, we would be justly outraged did the Census (upper case) ask for religion of respondent, yet knowing the numbers of certain faiths is elemental in addressing disabilities and or bigotries targeting that group.
November 25th, 201211:33 am
November 25th, 201211:35 am
“the bailiwick of the official Census which was instituted to count heads for congressional representation.”
And I don’t agree. Why spend twice the money to count things that can simply be included in a census that we already HAVE to conduct?
November 25th, 201211:36 am
Contemplating it from the negative, we are indeed a highly flawed species. Yet, the homo sapiens in the blink of the temporal eye have gone from the trees to the stars. Me? In the great scheme of things, I’m the optimist. In the daily outplay of that celestial journey? Not so much.
November 25th, 201211:38 am
Those categories, like, say, religion, should be the bailiwick of the NGOs that have an interest in those data. In a land driven by polls, that would not be too hard to accomplish.
November 25th, 201211:43 am
“Those categories, like, say, religion, should be the bailiwick of the NGOs that have an interest in those data. In a land driven by polls, that would not be too hard to accomplish”
and yet we expect government to fix the issues found. So why not use a mechanism that already exists to identify those issues? There’s not an NGO that exists that has the resources to conduct a nationwide census of such things. Yet the government ALREADY must do that census. It simply makes more sense to just expand it to include questions to identify issues that the government might need to address.
November 25th, 201211:44 am
The government is burdened by the requirement to mitigate the
effects of slavery and provide equal access to the courts to all
citizens. No other bigotry requirements.
November 25th, 201211:47 am
Then, you would agree that religion should be a category on the Census? Sexual preference? Private matters, to be sure, but highly charged in terms of socio-political matters to address the inequalities and bigotries…
The Census you contemplate with questions the are required to be
answered under force of law is becoming Orwellian.
November 25th, 201211:49 am
The Catholics vs the Dawgs or the Tide.
SEC dominates you silly Catholics.
November 25th, 201211:52 am
The Brazilian Census article seemedt to conclude that
racial division are created by the government for its own
November 25th, 201211:54 am
the catholics are burdened by the cross which slows them down..
Brazil is our future with a massive corruption scandal.
November 25th, 201211:55 am
Also, the Catholics are Yankees.
November 25th, 201211:58 am
“Then, you would agree that religion should be a category on the Census? Sexual preference? Private matters, to be sure, but highly charged in terms of socio-political matters to address the inequalities and bigotries…”
I think those things should be on the Census, yes, if and when it begins to appear that bigotry on those issues is pervasive enough to possibly require governmental intervention. You may not be aware that not all questions are on EVERY census. They vary from decade to decade.
November 25th, 201211:59 am
I have always said South America is our future including
Brazil. Had we concentrated there instead of Europe and Asia
we would have had much greater success.
November 25th, 201212:01 pm
“The Census you contemplate with questions the are required to be
answered under force of law is becoming Orwellian”
You think so? Well, yes, it has those seeds. Everything we do has both the seeds of improvement and the seeds of abuse. It’s up to us to minimize the possiblity of abuse, and make the best use of the possibility for improvement.
Yankees are also slow but they play good in cold weather.
November 25th, 201212:03 pm
And not every question is on every census form…there’s the long form and the short form, so, in the long run, not everyone is counted in every category…and as to what categories to include? That’s a political bomb sure to create divisions…right now there’s an “argument” here at home with one of us thinking sexual preference should be included, the other not.
Counting only people minimizes the possibility of abuse.
November 25th, 201212:04 pm
Back in a bit…being paged…
November 25th, 201212:05 pm
Most of Brazil’s last administration are going to prison for corruption.
November 25th, 201212:06 pm
Go Yanks and watch out for those catholics……anyone who survived catholic schools can be a mighty tough opponent!!
November 25th, 201212:07 pm
Sounds like the Nixon administration.
“Counting only people minimizes the possibility of abuse.”
And eliminates the chance the identify pervasive problems.
November 25th, 201212:12 pm
I doubt they will pardon her:
November 25th, 201212:15 pm
The Census has never asked me to identify my pervasive problems
but it has asked me for information it has no need for, to assess the
number of Congressmen required, or to eliminate the residual effects
November 25th, 201212:17 pm
“The Census has never asked me to identify my pervasive problems
but it has asked me for information it has no need for, to assess the
number of Congressmen required, or to eliminate the residual effects
And that second reason is WHY the census can be used, if neccessary, to identify other problems. It’s, basically, more economical to use an existing tool than to develop a new one to do what can already be done easily.
November 25th, 201212:20 pm
probably not now but later.
November 25th, 201212:26 pm
Using the Census to gather information to eliminate the residual
effects of slavery tends to broaden the Census beyond its intent
and can become extremely abusive.
November 25th, 201212:28 pm
Doggone/GA – 11:30 “and we WILL disappear”
Not long ago, I saw a program on TV titled Earth 2100. The idea was to present global warming as a certainty, regardless of who or what was causing it, and to show what might happen by 2100.
Needless to say, it was not pretty. The average global temps increased, ocean levels continued to rise, droughts and floods became more and more commom and famine and starvation increased considerably. Finally, by 2080, populations were moving en masse from one border to another just to find food and water. Naturally, this caused large gun battles and countless deaths. Govts. crumbled and, essentially, it became an every man for himself situation.
Even though this was a worst case scenario, it is not out of the realm of possibility.
All we can do is just take one day at a time and be thankful this awful apocalypse has yet to happen.
November 25th, 201212:31 pm
“Using the Census to gather information to eliminate the residual
effects of slavery tends to broaden the Census beyond its intent
and can become extremely abusive”
And it can be extremely useful.
November 25th, 201212:33 pm
apocalyptic prognostication has endured since man encountered
the first heavy rain….and rainbow.
November 25th, 201212:35 pm
If a Cat 4 or 5 storm hit instead of Cat 1 Sandy, climate change would be addressed immediately.
Big oil has been brainwashing Americans with energy voter propaganda in ads for a decade.
We are not even close to start addressing it until extreme weather makes us address it but it will be too late.
We can’t even cut big oil welfare.
November 25th, 201212:36 pm
“Even though this was a worst case scenario, it is not out of the realm of possibility.”
Of course it’s possible. But “possible” does not mean inevitable.
“All we can do is just take one day at a time and be thankful this awful apocalypse has yet to happen”
Taking it “one day at a time” is part of what got us INTO this situation of having to contemplate the possible outcomes of global climate change. It’s past time we got serious about thinking for the future, and not just for today.
November 25th, 201212:47 pm
Doggone/GA – “it’s past time we got serious about thinking for the future”
And just what do you suggest we do? Vote? That won’t do any good since both parties, for all their talk, essentially look the other way when it comes to serious thinking about the future.
Join an environmental group? Well, they’ve been around for years now and have made little progress. Big Business and Big Politics are very difficult for citizen’s groups to fight.
So, just what do you suggest we do?
November 25th, 201212:51 pm
“So, just what do you suggest we do?”
Stop saying “it’s too expensive” to do things like researching alternate forms of energy. Yes it’s expensive. So is the alternative.
November 25th, 201212:56 pm
Turkeys come in all shades–snipes in black and white.
November 25th, 20121:14 pm
Doggone/GA – 12:51
Perhaps you didn’t fully understand the question.
It is, what can the average ordinary American citizen do to stop increasing global warming?
November 25th, 20121:38 pm
The gop have not got anything right in a decade.
Before we even start listening to the gop ever again, they can start being right and cut big oil, corporate and military welfare before cutting anything else.
That will never happen so the gop are irrelevant.
November 25th, 20121:45 pm
How about electric cars that drive themselves?
How about continue to invest in alternatives knowing some will fail?
How about cutting big oil welfare?
There are many things we can
November 25th, 20121:51 pm
The average American cannot afford an electric car.
The average American doesn’t have money to invest.
The average American has no way of cutting big oil welfare.
November 25th, 20121:56 pm
Yes you can by putting pressure on your failed party instead of marching lock step.
They bow down to one lobbyist named grover so they should be listening to their voters.
Now is the time for you cons to finally do something good for our country and stand up..
The wealthy do not need your help or the gop’s help.
They will be fine without government welfare
Keep Up the Good Fight!
November 25th, 20121:57 pm
what can the average ordinary American citizen do to stop increasing global warming?
Well for Indigo, when the going gets tough, the tough apparently give up. At the immediate individual level, try replacing 5 of your most frequently used old light bulbs with LED lights (or CFC lights), improve home energy efficiency.
On a larger scale, stand up to the stupidity like those who claim “freedom” is lost when standards like light bulbs are improved. Tell the politicians climate change matters and to address it. If more stand up and say the storms, the droughts, the changes must be addressed, it will be. Demand that corporations be responsible and when they aren’t, shop elsewhere.
November 25th, 20122:06 pm
“It is, what can the average ordinary American citizen do to stop increasing global warming?”
There’s no need for me to answer that. There are hundreds of sites that give advice. They’re not hard to find.
November 25th, 20122:08 pm
I requested your email address from Fred, but it seems he forgot. If you want mine, email him and he’ll have it for you.
November 25th, 20122:15 pm
Kam, he didn’t forget. He asked last night if he could share and I did not get the message till this morning. So should be on its way.
November 25th, 20122:29 pm
Speaking of Sandy, climate change, doing something and things like that…
Following Katrina, the press and blogosphere were full of “don’t rebuild, but put them someplace else, dumb-asses.” You don’t see a lot of folks making the same suggestion about NYC and NJ. Instead, you see a lot of “do something NOW” for future protection. It’s where we put our focus and priorities, and who is it bellyaching.
Now that the effects of climate change and failure to take care of a problem before it becomes critical has reached the national hearth, it will be addressed. I fear, though, it will be addressed in a limited, “slap a bandaid on it” fashion instead of a comprehensive plan.
And, maybe it’s just me in Lalaland…but wouldn’t this be a golden opportunity for some good old Rooseveltian state infrastructural socialism to put people back to work?
November 25th, 20122:34 pm
“And, maybe it’s just me in Lalaland…but wouldn’t this be a golden opportunity for some good old Rooseveltian state infrastructural socialism to put people back to work?”
Yep. Now how do we convince the House to go along?
November 25th, 20122:39 pm
“Yep. Now how do we convince the House to go along?”
That’s the $60,000 question.. First, though, is a plan to present. I haven’t seen anything yet remotely resembling on. Once that phase is approached, I’d say the Roosevelt approach might work again. Just make sure that the key reps get the pork for their constituents… it’s expensive, for sure, but it does work when nothing else will…
November 25th, 20122:43 pm
“it’s expensive, for sure, but it does work when nothing else will…”
Any choice is going to be expensive. What I’m thinking is that the idea is good, but the time for it might be passed. A lot depends on the economy. As long as it’s growing, even if slowly, it’s not likely to get much support. If, however, we slide back into a recession and a depression looms, then there might be more support.
November 25th, 20122:46 pm
eat more pizza…
November 25th, 20122:50 pm
I agree with you on that. Which is why, as I said, I’m afraid the most we’re going to get is a slap-dash, band-aid approach which, if you look at it long range, is going to be a lot more expensive and a lot less effective.
As a general rule, I put myself in the anti-big government camp. But this is a big problem, requiring big ideas and big effort. It won’t take place without government input, and, well, it’s big, so it will also take big government.
Like you, I don’t see it coming without another financial crisis…
November 25th, 20122:51 pm
Which kind? Chicago or New York?
An Atlanta blog with a little bit of opinion about a whole lot of things
Jay Bookman RSS feed
Previous entries »
Send a feedback technical issue
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution