Who's Afraid of the Big Bad Wolf?

Mikaela says:
Three letters: F.B.I
and now add two more: me (of them)

Today's NY Times breaks the story on results of a Freedom of Information Act request for copies of files the FBI has collected on civil rights and anti-war organizations.

Large Volume of F.B.I. Files Alarms U.S. Activist Groups
WASHINGTON, July 17 - The Federal Bureau of Investigation has collected at least 3,500 pages of internal documents in the last several years on a handful of civil rights and antiwar protest groups in what the groups charge is an attempt to stifle political opposition to the Bush administration.
...
F.B.I. and Justice Department officials declined to say what was in the A.C.L.U. and Greenpeace files, citing the pending lawsuit. But they stressed that as a matter of both policy and practice, they have not sought to monitor the political activities of any activist groups and that any intelligence-gathering activities related to political protests are intended to prevent disruptive and criminal activity at demonstrations, not to quell free speech. They said there might be an innocuous explanation for the large volume of files on the A.C.L.U. and Greenpeace, like preserving requests from or complaints about the groups in agency files.

But officials at the two groups said they were troubled by the disclosure.

"I'm still somewhat shocked by the size of the file on us," said Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the A.C.L.U. "Why would the F.B.I. collect almost 1,200 pages on a civil rights organization engaged in lawful activity? What justification could there be, other than political surveillance of lawful First Amendment activities?"

Protest groups charge that F.B.I. counterterrorism officials have used their expanded powers since the Sept. 11 attacks to blur the line between legitimate civil disobedience and violent or terrorist activity in what they liken to F.B.I. political surveillance of the 1960's.
...
At Greenpeace, which has protested both the Bush administration's environmental record and its policies in Iraq, John Passacantando, executive director of the group's United States operation, said he too was troubled by what he had learned.

"If the F.B.I. has taken the time to gather 2,400 pages of information on an organization that has a perfect record of peaceful activity for 34 years, it suggests they're just attempting to stifle the voices of their critics," Mr. Passacantando said.

This is why expanded powers under Negroponte for homeland spying is a scary proposition, not to mention the increasing pressure to marry church and state. Can you imagine the FBI going after atheists next? Guess they need to start adding columns onto their national database.

Atheists in this Time of Faith

Mikaela says:
The L.A. Times ran a good article today about how atheists are organizing themselves to counteract the surge of religiosity in Washington. Specifically, the article does a good job of explaining the prejudice that is getting more and more acceptable and pronounced against those who do not conform to the most conventional religous sects. Those of us who are neither atheists nor born-again believers sometimes find it hard to imagine why it matters so much and how it can affect any part of life other than one's personal faith.

This article points out in good detail exactly how it matters. The time is on the horizon when faith may play a role in your ability to get hired, raise children, or live in certain communities -- and it's already affecting who gets elected.

My own experience with religion has been a roller-coaster ride. I was baptized in the Episcopalian church. I remember vividly the sense of reverance I felt in our beautiful downtown Cathedral with its orderly and high-cermony services (although the next-most vivid memory is of the wintergreen Breathsavers Mom used to keep us quiet). When my parents got divorced, they were both too embarrassed to go back. I started going to the Presbyterian church with my more daily faithful friend and her family. This period was filled with songs about Jesus, and I remember singing to God at night and sometimes crying because I loved him so much. I thought he was so beautiful.

As a teen, I was told by a family friend that I did not believe in God because I did not accept an anthropomorphized version of deity. I believed in energy (I still do) that has order in connection. He told me I was an atheist, and to my family's horror, that's what I told the cameraman at Channel 4 when they interviewed me as one of the speakers at my high school graduation. A girl from another school was suing to get the opening prayer taken out of the commencement ceremony. She felt it was oppressive to her and a violation of the separation of church and state. Declaring my atheism to all of Albuquerque didn't even take a second thought. But my family was deeply shocked and disappointed. They still bring it up to shame me.

Today, I've taken to going to the Universal Unitarian church. It's the ultimate liberal's church, valuing multiculturalism, personal faith, reason, pragmatism, and community. I no longer say I'm an atheist, although I still would to help support someone's valid efforts to protect the essential wall between church and state that protects religious freedom. I feel so far from operating in the confines of this debate that it barely registers in my daily life.

But I think we all must continue to be aware of just how much we stand to lose if present trends continue. This is not about who is right and who is damned; this is about freedom from religious persecution and freedom to decide one's own version of faith. We must not shrink from imagining -- and working to resist -- what happens as these freedoms get stripped away.

A Winnings Girl

Maggie says:
Can I just take a moment to celebrate my love for Winnings Coffee?

When it comes to places with great coffee, yummy food, and a side serving of Internet, we coffee-loving wireless addicts have a couple of good choices in town. But sometimes I feel the need to proclaim my allegiance in the always-heated battle of local coffee spots. And because I'm pretty nerdy and not flashy and never in the mood to spend $10 on a sandwich, Flying Star and especially the new Satellite on Central can be just a little... much for me.

So I'm a Winnings girl, through and through. I love the lack of flash, the damn good coffee, the not-trying-too-hard staff, the relaxed atmosphere, the fact that I always see people I like here. Yep, I see people I know at Flying Star all the time, but here I see people I like. Flying Star might be a good option for late-night grub, but I can't ever really just be me there. I always feel like people are looking around wanting to be seen or something. But not here at Winnings. We can do our own thing wearing pajamas if we like, and that's okay. We're safe here, safe to be seen unshowered and wearing dirty clothes and working on our own thing and hugging friends when they walk through the door. It's a little home away from home.

Apparently I'm not the only one: at the table next to me, a little boy and his mom are eating breakfast. He just asked her: "Mom, why is this your favorite place? We come here every time, no where else." And she responded to him, "Well, why would we go anywhere else, honey?" True story.

This all goes back to one of my favorite Ms, who three years ago in a breaking point during a particularly stressful project at school, looked at me and said, "I think we need to go to Winnings." I was brand new in town and had never been here before. That Mikaela is always right, you know. I hate that sometimes. :-)

2% of our country infuriates me

Maggie says:
Just looked at the results of this CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll that shows a majority of Americans think it's a good idea for the next Supreme Court justice to be a woman. (13% said it was "essential" that the next pick be a woman and 65% said it was "a good idea but not essential.") Of course, 13% sounds too low to me, but get this:

2% of respondents - assuming this poll is sound, that pretty much embodies 2% of the country - say it's "a bad idea" for a woman to be picked for the Supreme Court. A bad idea? That 2% makes me sick to my stomach.

In other gender news, check out this Ms. Musings review of "The New Wife," the latest book to make professional women feel guilty for not staying home. Apparently, author Susan Shapiro Barash (who is a gender studies professor!) was recently interviewed on the Today show and when asked what the 21st century wife represented, answered "She's probably the smartest of all because she's willing to scrutinize the recent past and to take the best from each decade."

The Ms. response? "Frankly, I have no idea what we're supposed to take from any decade past the 1950s."

Justice for Ebbers? For the rest of us?

Mikaela says:
Former CEO of WorldCom Bernard Ebbers was just sentenced to 25 years in prison for overseeing the largest corporate accounting fraud in U.S. history.

My very first reaction to this news was happy incredulousness. They really nailed him? No way! Right on. Justice! Corporate accountability... how rare!

Having worked at one of these loosey-goosey telecom companies in Seattle that went through a little bankruptcy (compared to WorldCom's titanic bankruptcy), my perception is that this kind of fraudulent accounting is everywhere. At all levels, from the tiniest of companies to the biggest and all the auditors inbetween. The banks know. The investigators know.

For this man to lose the rest of his life (he's 63 now, and even with good behavior, he's behind bars until he's 85) for doing what everyone winks and nudges about ... I don't know. If it were a different kind of case, we'd be talking about being cautious not to engender martyrs that can mobilize a radical uprising. But corporate guys? Do they care that this guy is taking the rap for what they all do? I doubt it. Think this will ripple through corporate America? Maybe. Maybe they'll be more careful to hide their practices.

But surprise, surprise. It isn't about one guy or one company or one economic sector. It's ... ready for it? ... the system. Ah, the system.

Now what are we going to do about it? Besides sending one arrogant white guy to jail?

Caring about labor

Maggie says:
Still slammed with work today, but during lunch I saw this tidbit that's worth a link.

My hometown best friend and I were discussing Wal-Mart when I was at home several weeks ago, and she brought up the point that in the Southeast, folks tend to be very disconnected from unions given how weak the South's labor history has been. Therefore, talking points about labor don't really come naturally to progressives at home. North Carolina isn't exactly Detroit, after all.

Today, David Sirota (full disclosure: 2/3 of M³ has a major crush on him) writes about this and more in Why You Should Care About the Labor Movement.

Big Business, the Republican Party and the corporate media all want you to believe that America's labor movement is only important to the 13 percent of workers who are actually in unions. It is a ploy to try to make you not care when they bash unions and limit union rights. The problem is, it is a lie - unions matter to everybody, whether you are in a union or not. Here's why.

So Heather, this one's for you. On a sidenote, it just started raining and storming here in ABQ. I love New Mexico moments right before the storm. The air smells incredible right now.

Massacre in Haiti -- by the U.N.?!?!?!?

Maggie says:
Forgive the blogging absence - work calls. But quickly, I heard this on Democracy Now! yesterday and was floored. Their broadcast and interviews with local villagers were absolutely heartbreaking. What in the hell is the U.N. doing killing Haitian civilians? How much does the massacre have to do with the highly politicized nature of the community who was attacked, all of them Aristide supporters? Kind of makes it hard to call for a U.S. pullout of Iraq in favor of U.N. peacekeepers when they're murdering civilians in another country. And how appalling that no one but Democracy Now! is covering this!

Eyewitnesses Describe Massacre by UN Troops in Haitian Slum
In Haiti, UN troops launched a pre-dawn raid on Cite Soleil, one of the most economically-depressed neighborhoods of Port au Prince. Local residents say it might have been the deadliest attack carried out by UN troops since they were stationed in the country last year.

On Saturday hundreds of Haitians gathered for the funeral of Emmanuel "Dread" Wilme -- a popular community leader who lives in Cite Soleil, one of the most economically-depressed neighborhoods of Port au Prince. Wilme was killed last Wednesday when UN troops attacked the neighborhood in a pre-dawn raid.

Although the raid has received little attention, local residents say it might have been the deadliest attack carried out by UN troops since they were stationed in the country last year.

According to residents, the UN troops entered the area at about three in the morning and opened fire. Eyewitnesses reported the UN troops used helicopters, tanks, machine guns and tear gas in the operation. The UN has admitted that its troops killed at least five people. UN military spokesman Colonel Elouafi Boulbars told Agence France Presse, "The bandits tried to fight our men. They suffered serious losses and we found five bodies in what was left of a house." Local residents put the figure at no less than 20. Some estimates are even higher. Witnesses said innocent civilians were among the victims. The United Nations has defended the operation by describing it as a necessary move to wipe out violent gang activity. Both the United Nations and the interim Haitian government have described the slain Dread Wilme as one of the country's top gang leaders. Cite Soleil is comprised largely of supporters of the Lavalas Party and ousted Haitian president Jean Bertrand Aristide who was overthrown in a U.S.-backed coup 18 months ago. To local residents Dread Wilme was a community leader and the attacks were seen as politically motivated.

---

You should really, really, really follow this link to the article and then scroll down to read the transcript of the interviews from this show. You will not believe the details and horror they describe.

Hiding from m-pyre

Want to know where our minds are these days? Wondering where the hard-hitting political analysis has gone? Do you just plain miss the power and passion of M³?

Don't worry: We're still on-line; we're just hiding from m-pyre at the moment. When all seems bleak, write about the small-time stuff!

Get m-pyrical with us; you probably need it. Sometimes we all do.

New Leaked Memo Raises More Questions on US "Planning" in Iraq

Mikaela says:
Given what we now know (thanks to other leaked memos) about the Bush Administration rushing to war in Iraq to oust Saddam with no thought of post-war planning, and given the continuing deaths being reported, today's news about American and British plans for withdrawal meet with some skepticism on my part about the intentions of our fair leaders.

Leaked Memo: US & UK Plan Major Withdrawal From Iraq
A British newspaper has obtained a secret plan written by the British Defense Secretary that appears to outline plans for the allied forces to withdraw the majority of its troops from Iraq by early next year. The memo states, "Emerging US plans assume fourteen out of eighteen provinces could be handed over to Iraqi control by early 2006, allowing a reduction in [Allied troops] from 176,000 down to 66,000." The Washington Post reports the British memo is apparently the first time such a significant reduction has been outlined under a specific timetable. After the memo was leaked, British Defense Secretary John Reid tried to downplay its significance. He said, "No decisions on the future force posture of UK forces have been taken."

While this may sound like good news on the surface for those of us who have been arguing for the withdrawal of troops from BEFORE the war, other news of the day seems to scream for more caution and careful planning and preparation:

Four Dozen Die In Suicide Attacks in Iraq
At least 48 people died on Sunday in a series of suicide attacks. The deadliest incident occurred when a man strapped with explosives blew himself up at a military recruiting center killing 19 and injuring more than 40 people. Earlier today nine Iraqi soldiers were killed in a raid on a checkpoint in central Iraq.

Nine Iraqis Suffocate in Police Custody
The Iraqi government has begun investigating the deaths of nine Iraqi bricklayers who died in police custody. The bricklayers died from suffocation after being detained in a police van for 14 hours.

Ex-PM Allawi: Iraq Is Almost In A "Civil War"
Iraq's former Prime Minister Iyad Allawi is warning that Iraq is on the verge of a civil war. In a recent interview with the Sunday Times of London he said "The problem is that the Americans have no vision and no clear policy on how to go about in Iraq. The policy should be of building national unity in Iraq. Without this we will most certainly slip into a civil war." He went on to say "We are practically in stage one of a civil war as we speak."

So we've bombed their infrastructure, evaporated jobs, killed their work-age men, and incited the radical Islamists to violence. Mission accomplished, and now we're out of there?

Those who argue that U.S. troops should NOT be withdrawn usually point to the need to train Iraqi soldiers to take over the "security" that U.S. troops supposedly provide, all evidence to the contrary. Personally, I think this approach is ludicrous. Why train Iraqis to become like their oppressors that are universally resented?

What I do argue for is having a plan AFTER our troops pull out for how to continue to offer education, infrastructure, and job training once the violence recedes in our absence. Something tells me our planning-deficient government is not burning the midnight oil to figure out how to provide these ongoing responsibilities. Isn't it the least we can do?

I'm not saying we go in there and force it down their throats, but when the Iraqi government has time to get itself on its feet and do some internal assessments, they should come to us with a plan for U.S. involvement -- with strictly defined operating boundaries that protect Iraqi sovereignty but still allow for the U.S. to assist on Iraqi terms in the rebuilding of what it destroyed for no reason other than Bush's personal vendetta against Saddam, who after all was not a nice man, but that's hardly the point. We don't just get to go around removing leaders unilaterally (coalition of the willing my ass), and we CERTAINLY don't get to do it and then pull out with no responsibility for the aftermath.

Let me be clear, I'm talking community building here, not military-building, nation-building, or false-security providing.

Surely America can do better than it's done in the past. Surely we can demand it.

Re-hashing Kelo and eminent domain

For those of you who don't read Duke City Fix (and why don't you, we ask?), M³ has been embroiled in a feisty debate over there about the recent Supreme Court decision regarding eminent domain. Check it out at Eminent Domain: A Counter Post. Enjoy!

Supporting Our Troops

Mikaela says:
This poem by war veteran Simon Ortiz reminds us of the living casualties of our government's wars. We liberals know how to support our troops, to witness and understand the humanness of their pain and madness on return. We will continue to remember them in every vote against war and every vote to support VA services, and we will honor and champion the voices of those brave enough to write about the reality of what they continue to face for the rest of their days.

Cherry Pie

We had barbecue beef on buns,
cole slaw with crushed pineapple,
coffee, and cherry pie.
Here in the VAH, at least,
America feeds well the men
it has driven mad.

“My favorite used to be cherry pie.”

“Lemon is good too.”

“When I was a kid at Indian School,
I worked cleaning yards on weekends.
Walking back to campus at evening,
I’d stop at this café on Fourth
and order banana cream pie.
Two slices of pie, boy, that was good.”

Deanda hasn’t been yelling lately.
They’ve been feeding him more
and better mind silencers lately.

Kelly offers his cole slaw.
Nobody wants it, shake their heads.
He offers his bread, we shake our heads.
“He’s a dedicated nut,” another nut says.

“The only pie I don’t like
is mince meat, too rich.”

“I wish I was rich.”

“I almost married a rich girl once.
She was from Alabama.”

There’s always something that you almost
did that you should have done.

A cherry pie slips to the floor
off a man’s saucer.
He stands there and everything is gone
from his face except sorrow and loss
and it’s hard to lose those.

Tribute to Grantwriters...

Mikaela shares:
This beautiful poem was written by the Acoma poet Simon Ortiz, who should be better known.

Blessings

for Mrs. Aguilar, James, and my son
at a civilrights fundraising function
in 1969

You and your crooked leg, James.
You and your hunger, Mrs. Aguilar.
They are getting bored with your misfortunes.

My son is too young to talk
about what his bones need or how much his
belly might be hurting,
but I am thinking they will be bored
with him too.

“How much gas do you need for a tractor?
For three tractors?” they ask.
“How much would it cost our foundation?”

I wait for them to ask,
“How many dreams have you spent lately?
How many hopes?”

We are not hungry for promises of money
nor for anyone to write us
carefully written proposals.
We are hungry for the good earth,
the deserts and mountains growing corn.
We are hungry for the conviction
that you are our brothers and sisters
who are willing to share our love
and compassionate fingers in your hands.

The grass of this expensive lawn
and the drinks make me feel
a stranger and my acute hunger.
My son smiles while someone says,
“I am not politic; I am talking with you.”

Mrs. Aguilar with your orange dress
and plastic flowers, I am asking blessings
for you with prayers for corn and potatoes,
the growing things for your land,
and my son is hoping with is smile
not to be hungry tomorrow.

James, you 1950’s pachuco,
you are aching in my throat.
You are the many Indians, the anarchist
rising out of the wine slop, angry,
the ones killing false promises,
fighting cops—we are also seeking
blessings for you, for us, for our children
in this war.

Spinning London from Washington

Maggie says:
The news from London today is obviously terrible. But I am alone in feeling like there's no time to mourn the loss of life because within minutes after the tragedy Bush&Co are offering up reasons for absolute outrage? That they're so busy strategizing how to spin the London bombings and take advantage of them through terrorist fears that I become too angry to feel as sad as I should? On the heels of turning 9/11 into one tawdry photo op and macho declaration after another, today we have Bush and the media who love him reminding us that however low Bush's poll numbers are, we're always just one terrorist act away from another Bush love-fest.

Outrageous moment #1: Acting as if the G-8 Summit is a bastion of good-heartedness. We all know that global poverty has been discussed at this summit only because of grassroots global pressure to address it. Pretending otherwise is just plain hypocritical, as is pretending that the Summit is actually going to create positive change. But Bush isn't one to pale at the sign of hypocrisy - he digs right in. Here's his response this morning: "On the one hand, we got people here who are working to alleviate poverty and to help rid the world of the pandemic of AIDS and that are working on ways to have a clean environment. And on the other hand, you've got people killing innocent people. And the contrast couldn't be clearer between the intentions and the hearts of those of us who care deeply about human rights and human liberty, and those who kill, those who've got such evil in their heart that they will take the lives of innocent folks." Sorry, but I'd say you guys are about the only ones convinced that you care deeply about human rights and human liberty. Maybe the rest of the world cares deeply about these things, but leaders at the G-8 Summit most certainly do not. And don't even get me started on what you're "working on," because I take issue with that bunch of lies, too.

Outrageous moment #2: Pretending the Iraq War is about terror and is worth fighting. This from the BBC today (of course it's not the American press), interviewing Condaleeza Rice:

BEALE: Do you think that Britain and America in Iraq are perhaps fighting the wrong war? They went to war to remove physical weapons of mass destruction but partly Saddam Hussein as well, but that hasn’t stopped the terrorist attacks in Western cities like Madrid, in London today. It seems to have fueled those attacks.

RICE: Oh, I don’t think that anything is being fueled here except the fact that the terrorists are finally being confronted. Again, they were — they’ve been doing this now for a couple of decades and for a while the world, going all the way back to Beirut and going back to the attacks on the World Trade Center in 1993 or the attacks on American Embassies in 1998, this has been going on for a while.

Okay, forgive me for saying this for the billionth time, but either the officials in this administration are absolutely brainless or they just assume that we are. Acting as if the many terrorist attacks since 9/11 are not related to our wrongful invasion of Iraq and the "global war on terror" is ridiculous. No matter what, we will never hear this administration admit that this war has caused many more problems than it's solved. I don't know how an attack could be clearer - a sign saying "This is because of Iraq?" And even more troublesome is how many more tragedies will have to happen before Bush&Co stop spinning and start rethinking their approach.

Outrageous moment #3: Mainstream media sucking as usual. It really does only take the mention of terrorism for our mainstream media to begin fawning all over the Homeland Security Director, touting our ridiculous color-coded terror alert system, and making analogies about how strong and justified a leader W is. I am just sick to death of this. We have Katie Couric pestering John McCain with worries about Amtrak security for her weekend getaways (never mind that Republicans have so slashed Amtrak's budget it won't be around much longer anyway). We have blaring headlines screaming "Terror Threat Elevated!" We have the media scaring people into believing that they're next and all they can do is to pray to the Bush administration for protection. In another time and place, we might expect this morning to be the staw on the camel's back, the signal the mainstream media needed to finally stop swallowing everything they're told and to start doing some analytical thinking of their own and affecting real change. But no. In this day and age, they simply revert to what they already know how to do. And for the brainless media, that's hyping up the fear factor and bowing down to a macho man who pretends he has all the answers.

Thanks, Marston

Maggie says:
The Duke City Fix's Marston Moore complimented m-pyre today in his post on "Poli-Blogs."

The M-Pyre team - Majorie, Maggie, and Mikaela – produce intelligent and cogent posts day in and day out. The breadth of their interests and the passion of their commitment keeps the blog reader coming back for more.

Well Marston, we can only return the compliment. Marston has more than proved himself covering local politics for the Fix, and proves to make the upcoming mayoral election a hotbed of gossip and intrigue.

This also illustrates why m-pyrical is a good idea. I mean, we couldn't exactly keep up our Poli-Blog credibility writing about bad first dates and celebrity gossip, could we? Didn't think so.

Thanks, Marston. You're making local politics more interesting by the day.

Hitting m-pyre

I'd just like to call attention to recent m-pyre traffic. This graph represents visits on particular dates from last month and our first few days of July.

What I find really funny is that one of the lowest points on the graph is the day the blog article with that horrible picture came out. It was so bad it actually had a deterrent effect!

That's the power of journalism, people. Fear it, or it will own you. Nya ha ha.

Question for Legal Eagles: Police Surveillance

Mikaela says:
I was driving around yesterday and was suddenly struck -- again -- by the vast number of cameras recording our movements at every intersection.

Does anyone know what permission the FBI has to request the tapes from local police agencies? I'm making the common-sense assumption that the Patriot Act made it legal and easy, if it wasn't previously.

I would love to be wrong. Does anyone know?

Otherwise, I'm thinking, the surveillance society is already here. I guess we can still sneak relatively undetected into the mesa or foothills, but if we stick to the roads, we're visible everywhere. Does anyone else get freaked out by that? I would feel better if there were still some semblance of a legal firewall between local police traffic cameras and the FBI or whatever super-secret national police force we have/will have under our National Security Czar.

Halliburton has a laugh

From the funny folks at Center for American Progress.

Life's many mysteries

Maggie says:
So as I'm passing the time until Demetria begins, I'm contemplating the latest mysteries life has presented me with. Here are three:

• Why on earth would the Albuquerque Journal actually choose to print the all-time worst photo ever taken of Marjorie, Mikaela and I in their newspaper rather than one of the decent ones we were shown? If you missed the article on local blogs, here it is (skip to page 2). It's no accident that I have not linked to the horrendous photo - I'm still trying to laugh it off. Just laughlaughlaugh at how terribleterribleterrible it is.
  
• After a recent M3/Louie viewing of Fast Times at Ridgemont High (really, this movie must be watched once every ten years), I'm wondering if I should be embarrassed that my new favorite character is Mr. Hand. The question: is my new attachment to Mr. Hand rather than the cool, young characters a sign that I'm getting older, getting dorkier, or just developing a strange affection for sarcastic and self-important history teachers?
• How in the world did Altoids create something as magically, wonderfully irresistible as Ginger Altoids? These things are so damn good. I CANNOT stop eating them.
  

Happy Fourth

Maggie says:
Ahhh, the Fourth of July. I used to love this holiday. I remember one year my brother and I made a cake that looked like a flag, which we promptly dropped as we took it out of the oven and had to mold back together with stars and stripes of icing. I remember dying deviled eggs blue and red (which really turn out more like gray and pink, but it's the thought that counts). I remember packing up blankets for a big picnic by the lake near our town where the North Carolina Symphony plays every year before the fireworks. I remember having a great time, coming back covered in mosquito bites but feeling happy and full of celebration.

Our family, although pretty political and well-read and respectful of history, were more of the "summer theme" Fourth of July fans as opposed to the die-hard patriot types. As in, the Fourth represented a family day, a summer celebration, an occasion to eat, a chance to cheer on fireworks, an excuse to get decked out in red and blue. After all, they are great colors. (Hmmm... I'm noticing distinct parallels to Christmas here.)

This makes me think about the Fourth today, in 2005, as I sit here distinctly not wearing red and blue, not making plans to see fireworks, and definitely not dying deviled eggs. This feeling of not really wanting to applaud my country is a sinking one and it makes me feel terrible. If I had kids, would I be dressing them in cute red and blue outfits, packing up a picnic basket and voting on our favorite colors and shapes of fireworks all night? I think not - these days call more for lessons on the importance of dissent. Sigh.

I want to be able to applaud and cheer tonight, to smile at old guys dressed up like Uncle Sam and kids running around with sparklers. But there's too much to be unhappy about. And I can't really cheer for the idea of our country or the founding of ideals when I know how untrue both of those things are, and particularly how subverted they are today. Especially how subverted they are today.

So maybe my problem is that I feel too knowledgable to take part in patriotic festivities tonight. And the other problem is that all of us progressives have been made to feel that if we're not in line with the Bush mantra, we're hurting our country. We hate our country. We're anti-patriots and harmful to America. We couldn't possibly represent our country or hang up a flag. Never mind that we're Americans, too.

I wonder how many other "Summer Theme" families like mine was are simply opting out this year. Maybe their insides just won't allow them to fully enjoy the fireworks because they feel that doing so means they support the very wrong direction in which our country has been taken. But then again, maybe the kids would pitch a fit if their parents proposed skipping fireworks, so there they are on blankets beside the other Fourth families, the ones who believe that Bush is America, that our country is superior to every other one on earth, and that with that superiority comes the right to destroy anyone and anything as we see fit. And as those families cheer wildly for the sheer American-ness of this loud and explosive holiday, the progressive families gulp down their discontent and hope they don't have to sing the anthem with a smile.

To me, today sums up the progressive dilemma. Is it possible anymore to successfully proclaim patriotism without feeling like that means you proclaim Republicanism, too? How can we progressives ever feel good about the flag again, good about red, white, and blue, good about this holiday, without apprehension? And how long will it take before we're welcome into the patriotic fold again - not called out as traitors or evildoers, but as Americans who want to feel good (or at least okay) about their country?

Quizzes for everyone

Maggie says:
In an effort to overcome my work-related writer's block as I try to shut out the happy visions of the family beach vacation I wish I never left, I found these two online quizzes. After taking them, I don't think my writer's block is fixed, but at least I am more self-aware now than before (although still wishing New Mexico had an ocean). Here's to wasting some of your time, too:

Political Compass quiz
This quiz is really interesting. A little long but not as mundane as many others I've seen. Interested in how you rank on the economic and social scale with various world leaders and notorious dictators? Then this is the quiz for you.

My political compass is a -7.00 for Economic Left/Right and a -7.64 for Social Libertarian/Authoritarian. (They show a nifty graph with my dot basically in the far left bottom corner.) My closest world leader appears to be the Dalai Lama. Not bad!

IPIP-NEO Comprehensive Personality Quiz
Feel like really not getting your work or thesis done? Then take this quiz. Pretty exhaustive, a true time-waster!

My results:
- Introvert/Extrovert: The quiz says I'm a 71% Extrovert, which seems pretty high to me given my love for reading, shopping, and hanging out alone. But I'm not one of those "can't talk to people" introverts, so I guess that's why this is so high. Here's the rest: Friendliness 96, Gregariousness 41, Assertiveness 75, Activity Level 63, Excitement-Seeking 22, Cheerfulness 80.
- Agreeableness: Yikes, 97%! Am I really that agreeable? The quiz says I would make a bad scientist or soldier, so maybe it's right on after all. Within Agreeable is Trust 98, Morality 83, Altruism 89, Cooperation 89, Modesty 50, and Sympathy 88.
- Conscientiousness: This one is interesting and all over the place. I scored a 48 on Conscientiousness overall, which they say is average. But the others are kind of funny. Self-Efficacy (confidence in your ability to get things done) is 97, but the rest are very random: Orderliness 16 (okay, it took me almost a week to unpack), Dutifulness 31, Achievement-Striving 81, Self-Discipline 65, Cautiousness 26.
- Neuroticism: This category has the potential to be the most revealing, but apparently I'm a boring un-neurotic person. Overall neuroticism is 12%, "which indicates that you are exceptionally calm, composed, and unflappable." (Again, this sounds like an overstatement.) Breakdown is Anxiety 14, Anger 27, Depression 12, Self-Consciousness 21, Immoderation (concerning urges and indulgences) 52, and Vulnerability 9.
- Openness to Experience: Overall 74%, "enjoying novelty, variety, and change." Imagination 43, Artistic Interests 61, Emotionality 57, Adventurousness 71, Intellect 67 (apparently I am only batting average when it comes to smarts), Liberalism 86.

So there's gotta be someone in need of diversion as much as me. Let's see those results!

CAFTA turncoats

Maggie says:
As you've probably heard, the Central American Free Trade Agreement was passed this week by a 54-45 vote. Wondering which Democrats (and one Independent) voted with the Republicans to screw over family farmers in the US and Central America and squash community autonomy in favor of American corporate control? Here they are, the infamous eleven:

• Bingaman (D-NM)
• Cantwell (D-WA)
• Carper (D-DE)
• Feinstein (D-CA)
• Jeffords (I-VT)
• Lincoln (D-AR)
• Murray (D-WA)
• Nelson (D-FL)
• Nelson (D-NE)
• Pryor (D-AR)
• Wyden (D-OR)

Consider this: while these eleven (including NM's Bingaman) voted for this disastrous bill, twelve Republicans voted against it, meaning this bill could've died on the Senate floor had the Democrats not sold out. These votes are just inexcusable. This is when Democrats should be taking a stand for working-class interests in the face of Republicans' obvious hand-holding with corporate America, not helping Republicans (and their corporate agenda) out.

Next up, CAFTA moves to the House. Let's hope the Democrats there remember how to take a stand for what's right.

Shameless, just shameless

Maggie says:
The reports of Bush's speech last night (no, I didn't watch it because A)I can't watch Bush without wanting to vomit, so tend to choose not to and B)I was out celebrating Marjorie's birthday at Pearl's) are just gross. Gross. The audacity of this administration to continually link 9/11 with Iraq not only dishonors the memory of the 9/11 victims, it dishonors the memory of the men and women killed in Iraq and the men and women still stationed in Iraq fighting a war that is just plain dishonorable.

When Bush tells the country in a televised address, "The war reached our shores on September the 11th, 2001," he is being shameless, and we should be outraged that he thinks we're stupid enough to blindly listen to him. When he says, "Iraq is the latest battlefield in this war," he thinks we actually believe him and that we've forgotten about Afghanistan, a country now destroyed by our thoughtless invasion and prompt exit to another country with oil, leaving them in shambles. When Bush says that despite the deaths of more than 1,700 Americans and 12,000 Iraqis, this war "is worth it," he thinks we'll just accept that he has no plan and is offering no way out. He assumes that we don't care about people dying because like him, we're so far removed from the people who are actually over there that the numbers are too abstract for us to really feel them, to really care.

But he's wrong. I think the poll numbers are showing this, that people have just had it with his lies and presumptions. When Bush asks us to remember "the lessons of September 11," I hope that we all will. Here are what I consider those lessons to be: assume the worst from your president; assume that even in a painful time of unimaginable loss, your president will try and strategically connect that loss with an oil-rich country ripe for American corporate exploitation; assume that your president thinks you are dumb as bricks and will believe anything as long as it's draped in red, white, and blue. Assume the worst from Bush&Co. Assume the worst and hope like hell that people know to expect more, and will fight for it once they realize all they've lost.

Mobilizing in Mountain View

Mikaela says:
A cement-batching company has its hands full trying to locate a new plant across the street from the Community Center in Mountain View. The neighborhood, which has disproportionately beared the fall-out from industries in Bernalillo County for the last 50 years -- largely because they're majority low-income and Hispanic -- has organized quickly, efficiently, and strategically.

Last Thursday night was a public hearing for the company to get an air quality emissions permit (to emit the maximum amount of pollution 24 hours a day, 7 days a week). Residents called 800 households, and approximately 150 people showed up. Universally, they testified against the plant. The testimony ran the gamut from angry to scientific. A woman from the North Valley testified about conditions at the company's other location. Her daughter has had severe asthma problems that only worsened when she started going to school, just downwind of the plant. She testified to the affect on traffic and safety of pedestrians and drivers in the area. An expert on public health testified that the South Valley has the highest rates of hospitalization and death in the County, especially for asthma-related symptoms. Other residents talked about how many children walk and ride bikes to the Community Center, where they play games outside. The traffic and pollution from the plant will pose a significant risk to all of these children.

A lawyer for the company told one resident on his way out the door that he had never seen a community fight like this against what is normally a forgone conclusion.

A neighborhood that is normally not heard spoke loud and clear. They were supported by their NM state senator, U.S. Congresswoman Heather Wilson (believe it or not -- although she just sent a letter read by a lackey that asked the air quality board to give the proper weight to residents' testimony although the company "is a good neighbor" and she's sure that "it would do nothing to hurt its neighbors" which seems to be the conservative party line about corporate pollution -- why would they do it when they know it's bad?), and County Commissioner Teresa Cordova, who, as always, spoke eloquently and passionately to champion the community's efforts to determine its own best future.

The best part, though, was seeing how competently this community battled big money -- with an organized effort that we can only hope will pay off for them in the long run. Although an unfortunate economic metaphor, the payoff in this case will be clean air to breathe and water to drink and the kind of economic development that brings vitality -- in health, in sociability, and in money -- for the community as a whole.

Remember: Cheney's a leader of the free world -- and not-so-free world

Mikaela quotes Democracy Now:
Cheney on Gitmo Detainees: "They've Got Everything They Could Possibly Want"
Vice President Dick Cheney has again defended the treatment of detainees at Guantanamo. He told CNN last night "They're living in the tropics. They're well fed. They've got everything they could possibly want."

[Except maybe, freedom. Access to a lawyer. The right to be treated as human beings without being tortured. The ability to talk to their families. Yep -- just about everything they could want. Except all the important stuff.]

Tick one major win for the coming-soon-to-a-neighborhood-near-you new wave of urban renewal

Mikaela says:
Way to go Supreme Court -- fighting to pave the way for justice for ... the moneyed and empowered.

Cities Given Ok to Seize Homes To Spur Economic Development
The Supreme Court has issued a major ruling on property rights. A split court ruled Thursday that cities may seize and demolish private homes - even in non-blighted areas -- to make way for shopping malls and other private development. Writing for the majority Justice John Paul Stevens wrote "Promoting economic development is a traditional and long accepted function of government." But Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote a scathing dissent saying "Under the banner of economic development, all private property is now vulnerable to being taken and transferred to another private owner. Nothing is to prevent the state from replacing any Motel 6 with a Ritz-Carlton, any home with a shopping mall or any farm with a factory." Joining O'Connor in opposing the ruling were Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. Land use experts are predicting the ruling is likely to encourage more cities to clear land for office complexes or big-box retailers.

Race doesn't exist for Tom Cruise

marjorie says...

Ok, yes, I did watch a rerun of the infamous Tom Cruise appearance on Oprah yesterday. Hopefully most of you stand in grocery store checkout lines enough to know why it’s so infamous. Well, after watching it I have to say that I don’t think he was that off the wall, any more than Oprah herself was, about his new love-affair. In general, the whole audience and Oprah herself were acting hysterical about the guy.

Anyhow, what is most interesting to me is the complete lack of commentary about a short conversation between Tom and Oprah about his mixed race child. It really shows the sensationalism of the press that this doesn’t get mentioned. Here is a transcript that I found on another website of this rather serious moment among the general hilarity:

WINFREY: I meant to ask you this and also Steven Spielberg. You have a biracial son. Steven has biracial children. It never seems to be–you never have mentioned it. You never mention race. You never say anything about it. Yet your son is obviously of a different race. How did you…
CRUISE: We’re–he’s from the human race. He’s from mankind. I don’t see color. I–you know? I don’t…
WINFREY: Was that ever discussed in the family, though? Did you have a conversation? Did you have a conversation with him about it? Nothing–never even discussed in the family?
CRUISE: I mean, it’s–what’s there to talk about? He’s my son.
WINFREY: Yeah.
Mr. CRUISE #1: It’s a point of–I just–listen, that’s how I feel about it.
WINFREY: Really.
Mr. CRUISE #1: It’s something–he’s my son.
WINFREY: Yeah.
CRUISE: And I love him, and I’ve never–I just never thought about color. I’ve never thought about that at all.
WINFREY: Really? Really?
Mr. CRUISE #1: Race–I just have not thought about that at all.
WINFREY: No, well, listen, obviously, I know you haven’t thought about it. It’s not an issue for you because…
CRUISE: But not even for him, and it’s not a point of–I just–I don’t believe in that. We’re all here together. And we’ve got to work it out together, OK?
WINFREY: Together.
CRUISE: And it’s…
WINFREY: You know, it’s so funny.
CRUISE: That’s what brings about understanding.

MARJORIE: OH MY GOD!

Yeah, Tom, it’s not really surprising that you’ve never thought about race, given your subject position. Let’s hope for your son’s sake that it isn’t something he’ll have to deal with…but I wouldn’t lay bets on it given how racist the world is. It would be smart, probably, for you to, you know, be in discussion about it with him since, afterall, you *are* his *father*!

Also, these comments demonstrate pretty clearly why it is that Hollywood continues to be so racist...the guys running the show there just, you know, "never thought about color." This, friends, was structural racism being clearly voiced by a powerful white man.

Rally for the ABQ living wage

Maggie says:
Looks like I'll be bringing back some of North Carolina with me next week. On Tuesday (6/28), former NC Senator and Vice Presidential candidate John Edwards will be leading a rally in support of raising the minimum wage in Albuquerque. It's at 4:15 downtown at the Civic Plaza.

Don't forget to get your petitions signed, too. There's a link on the m-pyre sidebar where you can download one today!

Unrelated PS: How's this for provocative local political writing? I'm intrigued!

Political expression on the beach

Maggie says:

In Duck, NC, planes regularly carry messages across the sky.

This one? Not advertising a new restaurant or shop. Instead: "Build the Mid Currituck Bridge Now!" Planning is truly everywhere. :-)

Political Tide Turning?

Mikaela says:
So I've been buried under 10 teenagers for the last 2 weeks and only able to get snippets of the news. Even so, is it just me, or is there something building?

Excerpts from Democracy Now help build a happy picture for us left-of-liberals:

Rep. Conyers Convenes Hearings on Downing Street Memo
Representative John Conyers says the Downing Street Minutes and other recently released British documents confirm that the Bush administration manipulated intelligence and facts to justify the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Among those testifying in the hearing are former US ambassador to Iraq Joe Wilson and longtime CIA analyst Ray McGovern. Conyers says that every major news network is sending cameras except FOX News. Immediately following the hearing, there will be a mass rally across the street from the White House and Conyers will deliver a petition signed by more than half a million people calling on President Bush to answer questions on the documents.

[It's about time. Thank god for the "cyberlegs" of this story. Something better come of it. It did convince me to finally put the "Why am I not on trial?" bumper sticker of Bush's face on my car. That and: "Need religion? Try Burning Bush." Let's hope I don't go to prison for that one.]

Congress May Intervene on Guantanamo
Amid growing calls for the Guantanamo prison camp to be shut down, the Senate Judiciary Committee recommended yesterday that Congress intervene to resolve the fate of the more than 500 prisoners. In a heated hearing on Wednesday, lawmakers sparred with each other and Justice Department officials who asserted that Washington could hold prisoners for the rest of their lives if it wished. Alabama Republican Senator Jeff Sessions argued that some of the prisoners "need to be executed," while Democrat Patrick Leahy of Vermont called the prison a "international embarrassment."

Patrick Leahy: "Let's get real. These people have been locked up for three years-- no end in sight and no process to lead us out of there. Guantanamo Bay is causing immeasurable damage to our reputation as a defender of Democracy and a beacon of human rights around the world. I'm proud of what our nation has accomplished. I want us to be that beacon of human rights. But we're not being it with Guantanamo."

Durban Defends Guantanamo ‘Nazi’ Comments
Meanwhile, Dick Durbin, the number 2 Democrat in the Senate is under fire for comments he made earlier this week on the Senate floor blasting the conduct of US forces at Guantanamo. Durbin quoted from an FBI agent's report describing prisoners being chained to the floor without food or water in extreme temperatures. He said "If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime — Pol Pot or others — that had no concern for human beings." Republicans have called on Durbin to apologize for the comments but last night Durbin released a statement saying, "This administration should apologize to the American people for abandoning the Geneva Conventions and authorizing torture techniques that put our troops at risk and make Americans less secure."

[A Democrat who doesn't back down? Who actually gets the stakes and stakes his claim? Come on! You have to admit that's news these days!]

Pentagon Docs Show Officials Feared Prison Over Gitmo Tactics
ABC News is reporting that the interrogation techniques used at Guantanamo in 2002 triggered concerns among senior Pentagon officials that they could face criminal prosecution under U.S. anti-torture laws. ABC obtained notes from a series of meetings at the Pentagon in early 2003 showing that Alberto Mora, General Counsel of the Navy, warned his superiors that they might be breaking the law. During a January 2003 meeting involving top Pentagon lawyer William Haynes and other officials, the memo shows that Mora warned that the "use of coercive techniques ... has military, legal, and political implication ... has international implication ... and exposes us to liability and criminal prosecution." Mora's concerns about interrogations at Guantanamo have been known, but not his warning that top officials could go to prison. In another meeting held March 8, 2003, the group of top Pentagon lawyers concluded "we need a presidential letter approving the use of the controversial interrogation to cover those who may be called upon to use them." No such letter was issued.

[Bush stick his neck out for his own beliefs? No way, man. Let those Pentagon officials doing his dirty work fend for themselves.]

House Votes to Block Provisions of USA PATRIOT Act
The House of Representatives voted Wednesday to block the Justice Department and the FBI from using the USA Patriot Act to obtain library records and bookstore sales slips. The vote reversed a narrow loss last year. It still would allow the government to continue to seek out records of Internet use at libraries. Thirty-eight Republicans joined with Democrats in the vote. President Bush has threatened to veto any bill that bars the government from going after library and bookstore records. Many librarians have defied the government by disposing of records quickly in an effort to protect people's privacy.

[I always did love librarians. Add this last big reason to my list! And way to go, House of Representatives. Who would have guessed 6 months ago this could happen? Standing against the President? Hmmm... what could be next?]

Science is in the word -- and the water

Mikaela writes:

Science is beginning to confirm the power of the word. Mystics have known for as long as man has been speaking that words have the power to literally change the air we breathe, the water we drink, the experiences we can have. Now, a scientist in Japan has shown that words – written or spoken – shape water molecules. Words with good connotations create symmetrical patterns in the water molecules. Words like hate spawn asymmetry. This only works with unpolluted water.

I.
What cannot be purified
cannot be transformed

what can be transformed
is pure

thus is born a morality
of molecules

holy water
of a weighted hand

our words
at the center

or maybe the crystalline edge
of the great unknown

where what we can control
and what we cannot fathom

dance together to the beat
of vibrating cosmic strings

Moses parting the water
not with holy staff

but with a plea
a command?

human voice
urging rearrangement

water obeys
responds?

interprets the energy of his voice
into action

miracle
made science

law
suggestion

II.
One Jewish sect asserts the Torah itself is just the name of God. One word that calls forth – embodies – inhabits creation.

Defaming that book
means calling forth darkness

chaos
nothingness

known only to so-called
producers of terror

who now sit praying
in American-run jails

we torture terror
and believe in freedom

we protect our interests
without blaming our banks

we call in darkness
create terror

our words forming asymmetrical structures
in pools of pure blood

what will tranform this evil?
what purification is possible for twisting lies?

most cleanliness
is removal of debris:

first
we jail the jailors

sop up the blood
tend to the wounds

speak kindly to the hurt
free the innocent

burn the prison
and pray

that our words will fall silent
that our prayers for peace will rise

part the waters
connect what has been too-long divided

let fall what may
the heavy fruit of justice

hanging
in the tree of knowledge

we must all bite
and swallow.

In honor of the New Mexico Minutemen

Maggie says:
An excerpt from the commencement speech at Spellman College given by Howard Zinn this year:

--------------------
Recently I saw a photo on the front page of the New York Times which I cannot get out of my mind. It showed ordinary Americans sitting on chairs on the southern border of Arizona, facing Mexico. They were holding guns and they were looking for Mexicans who might be trying to cross the border into the United States. This was horrifying to me -- the realization that, in this twenty-first century of what we call "civilization," we have carved up what we claim is one world into two hundred artificially created entities we call "nations" and are ready to kill anyone who crosses a boundary.

Is not nationalism -- that devotion to a flag, an anthem, a boundary, so fierce it leads to murder -- one of the great evils of our time, along with racism, along with religious hatred? These ways of thinking, cultivated, nurtured, indoctrinated from childhood on, have been useful to those in power, deadly for those out of power.

Here in the United States, we are brought up to believe that our nation is different from others, an exception in the world, uniquely moral; that we expand into other lands in order to bring civilization, liberty, democracy. But if you know some history you know that's not true. If you know some history, you know we massacred Indians on this continent, invaded Mexico, sent armies into Cuba, and the Philippines. We killed huge numbers of people, and we did not bring them democracy or liberty. We did not go into Vietnam to bring democracy; we did not invade Panama to stop the drug trade; we did not invade Afghanistan and Iraq to stop terrorism. Our aims were the aims of all the other empires of world history -- more profit for corporations, more power for politicians.

The poets and artists among us seem to have a clearer understanding of the disease of nationalism. Perhaps the black poets especially are less enthralled with the virtues of American "liberty" and "democracy," their people having enjoyed so little of it. The great African-American poet Langston Hughes addressed his country as follows:

You really haven't been a virgin for so long.
It's ludicrous to keep up the pretext…
You've slept with all the big powers
In military uniforms,
And you've taken the sweet life
Of all the little brown fellows…

Being one of the world's big vampires,
Why don't you come on out and say so
Like Japan, and England, and France,
And all the other nymphomaniacs of power.

'Circus Maximus' in Albuquerque

Maggie says:
In today's Times, John Tierney writes about the "Circus Maximus syndrome," in which "a leader's prime civic responsibility is to build entertainment palaces for the masses." This is an affliction Albuquerque residents should easily recognize - a look downtown is all the proof we need that Mayor Marty is a big time victim of Circus Maximus syndrome.

Tierney: They've endowed downtowns with stadiums, arenas, theaters, concert halls, museums and aquariums. They imagine drawing hordes of out-of-towners to the new convention center, and when the visitors don't materialize, the mayors' solution is to build an even bigger convention center with a subsidized hotel next door. The mayors hire consultants to project grand economic benefits from their projects, but these dreams virtually never come true.

So how does this relate to Albuquerque? Let's see: We have a mayor who is against the Planned Growth Strategy, totally beholden to developers, and all about increasing his voter base with massive sprawl on the Westside. Incidentally, he's also trying to get a new arena built downtown.

Meanwhile, we have pockets of neighborhoods downtown crying out for investment - real planning and development in their interests, not more circus tents. In these neighborhoods you can almost always see one of two extremes: either massive gentrification or major disrepair. Nothing Marty's administration is doing addresses these two problems. We see nothing to protect long-time residents from losing their homes due to price increases and we see nothing to keep other residents from moving to, say, the Westside because they can't get the amenities they expect and deserve as residents of downtown Albuquerque.

What are Marty's answers? In line with Circus Maximus, it's high-dollar development. The new arena. New lofts. A new sports bar. What doesn't investment include? A local grocery store. A local bookstore. Protection against gentrification. Attention - at least recognition - that downtown is more than just a nightspot for college students and young professionals - it's home to about a dozen neighborhoods that have been here for forever. It's home to families, to voters. It's home to me, to Marjorie, and to Mikaela.

I'll let Tierney finish up here. Think of our fair city and who's lining Marty's pockets as you read this:

Those neighborhoods are hurt by grand public buildings that take up valuable real estate and must be paid for with higher taxes, which drive businesses and the middle class to the suburbs. Older cities have made comebacks the past decade by getting back to that core function of protecting people's lives, but most still haven't figured out how to restore their commercial marketplaces.

Instead, their leaders build projects whose economic benefits go to the Circus Maximus industrial complex: real estate developers, construction workers, bond traders, owners of hotels and sports teams. Aside from the thanks of these groups, politicians also get a pleasant distraction from their mundane duties.

It's more fun to pose next to a model of a new stadium than a new water main. Announcing plans for the Olympics gets better coverage than announcing plans for bridge repairs. If you want immediate gratification, there is nothing like a circus, as a moralist named Salvian observed in the fifth century.

By then Rome bore certain resemblances to a lot of American cities. While emperors were investing in monuments, commerce and manufacturing suffered. The population declined along with the port, the roads, the bridges and the water system, but the circuses went on. "The Roman people," Salvian wrote, "are dying and laughing."

Introducing m-pyrical

So who are we, anyway?

That's a burning question lately. And while none of the three of us professes to being mysterious in the least, apparently this whole blogging thing creates an online identity that is not exactly who you are, but not exactly who you're not, either. We're three friends who have lots in common, but we're different in lots of ways too, and those samenesses and differences show up here pretty often.

On m-pyre, we tend to come across as political, serious, sarcastic, engaged, angry, reflective, action-oriented, and hungry for debate. But in our real lives, we're much more than that and not always so... on. In our free time together, we mostly just hang out and talk -- not really about politics as much as you'd expect, but everyday stuff. Girl talk. Book talk. Movie talk. Music talk. Food talk. Dog talk. You get the gist: kind of our "normal people" sides. But it turns out we don't really write about these things on m-pyre that much. Sometimes we do. But mostly we're too busy commenting on and critiquing this sometimes crazy and always interesting world around us to get around to mentioning the great novel we just read.

To the three of us, though, these other things are vital, the stuff of life. Sitting around with friends, reading fiction or poetry, seeing a great movie, listening to an incredible song, enjoying nature: these are areas that make our lives complete... mixed in with some old-fashioned organizing and agitation, of course!

Enter m-pyrical. It's new and kind of the flip side to m-pyre. Think of it as the blog version of Marjorie and Mikaela's front porch, where we sit and talk about fun stuff that has nothing to do with globalization or Bush or Marty.

So continue keeping tabs on what we think at m-pyre (and telling us what you think about what we think at m-pyre), but do check out our more interior selves on m-pyrical as well.

So who are we, you're still asking? We're m-pyre. And all things m-pyrical.

Get m-pyrical: the stuff of m-pyre

Fair wage fight ends bitterly

Maggie says:
Last night's City Council decision was so disappointing and so completely frustrating. Local politics can be so damn... disappointing and frustrating here sometimes.

The best commentary I've seen so far comes from Democracy for New Mexico, who call out Michael Cadigan for the "Darth Vader" that he is. But thank you, DfNM, for ending your piece with a positive look forward: "This was a defeat in name only. The Council's narrow rejection of the Fair Wage was so outrageous that it is sure to ignite the ballot petition campaign that concludes on July 18. The community is energized, and the pale, nervous countenances now belong to the Gang of Five and their corporate sponsors at the Chamber of Commerce."

Before I read that, the only positive thing related to the vote for me was that a favorite friend of m-pyre, the one and only Javier Benavidez (left), had his picture on the Albuquerque Tribune website all day for us to admire. The Trib quoted Javier as saying, "I have a hard time understanding why somebody would disagree with a democratic proposition." Us too, Javi, us too.

Can someone destroy this woman, please?

Maggie says:
I've said it before and I'll continue to say it: nothing irks me (okay, infuriates me) quite like Republican women. Voting against your own interests is mind-blowing to me, but while I see low-income Republicans as votes we should be out there changing, I consider Republican women the epitomy of hypocrisy and frankly would rather just ignore them. Getting that angry just isn't worth it to me; I prefer my mellow sensibility to stay mellow.

But then someone like Kansas State Senator Kay O'Connor comes along, and man if she doesn't make me want to drive to Kansas and strangle her myself. O'Connor just announced she is running for Secretary of State in Kansas, against the wishes of many women in her home state who are still, oh, a little bit pissed that O'Connor proclaimed herself just a few years ago to be a "women's suffrage opponent."

What, you're asking? A woman in public office who came out saying she was against a woman's right to vote? In this century? I couldn't make this up if I tried:

"I think the 19th Amendment, while it's not an evil in and of itself, is a symptom of something I don't approve of. The 19th Amendment is around because men weren't doing their jobs, and I think that's sad. I believe the man should be the head of the family. The woman should be the heart of the family." - O'Connor in 2001

Apparently after O'Connor made these remarks, women in Kansas organized to try and push her from office, but O'Connor held on. Since then she's only referred to the incident as "silliness," adding that "I am who I am. You don't have to agree with everything I say."

This woman is either a complete idiot or completely evil: it's hard to tell which. Either she thinks women shouldn't be allowed to vote but should be allowed to run for office, or she thinks she's exempt from the rest of the "heart of the family" women in her state who don't have enough brains to think politically, or she has absolutely no self-respect at all, or she's extremely, dangerously arrogant, or she's trying to get the misogynist vote among men and fit in as "one of the boys,"or she's just the biggest danger to women when she is also a woman to hit the radar screen since... well, she'd probably be the worst.

Please, please, please to everyone out there in Kansas: find someone to run against this woman, rip her to shreds, and kick her ass at the polls. PLEASE.

Local politics revisited

Maggie says:
Now that we have a real registered Republican running for mayor (instead of the fake one currently holding down the job), I think this obviously changes the local political landscape quite a bit. Luckily for anyone who cares about the quality of life in Albuquerque, I see Marty being left out in the cold, without the support of the Republicans who would've voted for him had Winter not been in the race and losing the run-off to Eric Griego. I hope the Griego campaign can build on the push to get a minimum wage increase on the ballot and focus on rallying the progressive base in Albuquerque and appealing to voters Marty's policies have ignored and/or harmed.

So that said, the race for Griego's city council seat bugs me. I know lots of good folks give Diana Dorn-Jones credit for her community work in South Broadway and excuse her dealings with the Marty administration, but I'd like to see a much more progressive candidate there; in fact, I think we should demand one. This is the district to do that: we're talking downtown, not the Heights. Organizers are busy enough in this town to not always have to worry about how Dorn-Jones will vote and do an eleventh hour push to get her support for every issue. And as someone more in the know than me (and apparently much more in the know than Dorn-Jones apologists) recently said, "Don't kid yourself - Diana Dorn-Jones is in Marty's pocket just as much as Tina Cummings."

So this leaves me to wonder: why couldn't Judy Espinosa have run for Eric's seat instead of running for mayor? She's a great choice for that district: she has the right amount of name recognition to do well in a district, but getting votes citywide will be an uphill battle; she'd be in a winnable race were she running for Eric's seat, unlike the minefield of running for mayor in a crowded field; and most importantly we need her there. So I know this is too little too late (I believe Espinosa is announcing her candidacy for mayor today), but for what it's worth: Judy, why not take a shot at the City Council instead? Help us maintain our progressive city council. We need you!

m-pyre loves Pearl's

Maggie says:
Recently is was noted that some people find the ladies of m-pyre to be "mysterious." And I just discovered that M³ 's favorite watering hole has a website. Enter Pearl's Dive, simply the best bar in Albuquerque if you're anything like the three of us, which means you like to drink, talk, eat good food, and hang out with great friends close to home.

And not to completely spoil our mysterious appeal, but M³ spends a lot of time at Pearl's. Like, ahem, the last two nights in a row. And our favorite waiter is curly-haired Ian, who made up an M³ gang sign for us and puts up with Mikaela's outrageous demands for specific glassware. Marjorie drinks wine, I drink Bass, and Mikaela drinks cider. And we love black bean dip and the portabello quesadillas.

So now that you don't have to sit around wondering about the mysteries of m-pyre, get yourselves over to Pearl's with your free time, local readers. Good drinks, great food, a kick-ass back patio perfect for summer nights, and good conversation await you.

NY Times Headline and Photo -- Front Page

"At Least 33 Killed in Iraq in Day of Blasts and Shootings"

Mikaela says:
As a snapshot of what the best newspaper in the country presents as news, today's NY Times on-line first page is incredibly disturbing.

This just validates the LA Times news story critiquing the lack of images from Iraq. See post from May 26.

KUNM Grumblings

Maggie says:
As an admitted news junkie (and one who's struggling lately without cable news or the internet at home), a fixture of my mornings for ten years now has involved two things: listening to the NPR morning news and reading the newspaper. Since moving to Albuquerque three years ago, both of these have presented problems for me, since getting morning headlines from KUNM is often a dubious prospect and the Journal leaves me... wanting.

But the KUNM thing really bugs me. It's probably a lot harder to change an entire newspaper's philosophical stance and upgrade their writing quality than it is for a public radio station to tweak their programming schedule a little. So in the vein of WBUR and WUNC, great public radio stations that served my last two addresses, I offer the following simple suggestions:

- Respect my need for morning news! This is big, because being disappointed with KUNM in the mornings SUCKS, since I'm usually really wanting to hear headlines and almost always haven't had coffee yet. And sure, the call-in shows that seem to be on every other morning are sometimes interesting (like when callers bitch out Marty or Richardson), but the fact is they are not news, and I need news first thing in the morning!

- If not all news, at least five minutes of headlines. If KUNM insists on keeping programming like the morning call-in shows instead of broadcasting Morning Edition, then why can't they do what other public stations do when programming is coming on: start it five minutes after the hour and fill those first five minutes with NPR feeds of the day's top headlines? It just makes sense. It would appease me a little to at least hear something in the way of news before long-winded discussions like this morning's on youth involvement or the really long-winded broadcasts of speeches from random conferences that really piss me off when I'm hoping to get some news.

- Why not an all-news format? I know a lot of people love KUNM's music programming, and sure, why not keep some of it, but I think of news when I think of public radio, so that's what I expect. WUNC went to an all-news format a couple of years ago and it's been a huge success - there are so many good shows to syndicate (like Fresh Air and The Connection) and doing this would give KUNM time to adjust their programming schedule so that things like the speech broadcasts and the call-in shows could happen in mid-morning, or mid-afternoon, or the evening: just not when all I need are some headlines before my coffee.

- Something positive: Democracy Now! is awesome. The fact that KUNM broadcasts Amy Goodman's brilliance is great. And vital. And just great. So there, I said something positive.

Community Planning

Mikaela ponders:
So the issue is always: how do you know what the community wants?

We're supposed to be helping communities to realize their visions, right? Make the things they want to change or improve or protect better in the ways they identify. That's the idea behind this whole "community planning" endeavor.

In order for us to engage in this process, we ask people to come to community meetings; we do surveys; we spend time in community places; we talk to people -- all in the interest of finding the range of desires and visions and motives of people in the community. At the end of the day, we try to hear the things said the most often, balanced with the things said the most vehemently & the things we may know (whether learned from a community member or from separate investigations) will have huge impacts or implications for a particular place.

And at the end of the day, whether we're optimistic or idealistic or cynical or practical or political, we take a leap of faith that involves several rather large steps 1) that there is something called community -- even if there are competing ideas and interests within it, 2) that we can know what/who it is, and 3) that we can be involved in a helpful way.

Planning theory spends a lot of time finding the indicators for community, because really, how do you know when you know who the community even is, much less what they want? Very quickly and easily, fingers can be pointed at planners because they don't "really know" the community or they don't "really know" what the community wants. And invariably, the person pointing the finger has a different idea of community and community vision.

All of a sudden, we're talking about representation. Who can say they know the community? Let's be frank: there is no perfect planning process out there that ensures community involvement. There is no magic "enough." There is no end. There is no object called community that can be known.

The best we can do is engage community members that want to be engaged or that are willing to be goaded into engaging. And then we have to be careful not to give false hopes of what is really possible while working to expand what's possible.

In the best of worlds, communities would not need planners at all. There would be enough interaction on a daily basis that visions and goals and necessary steps would already be clear, and communities could approach municipal offices and obtain the resources they need to make things happen.

But that's not the way our communities work anymore. I'm hard pressed to come up with a single example. Even the ones that come close -- Sawmill, Pajarito Mesa, etc. -- can come under the same critique that it's only a fraction of the community members working toward a goal. Can they really be said to represent the community -- even when what they want will benefit everyone?

It gets back to the failings of our culture. It literally does not pay to organize your neighborhood. There are few pay-offs. I believe in community more than I believe in most things, and I still don't take an active role in my neighborhood. I say hi to my neighbors, but when it comes time to borrow a saw or a step-ladder, I call a friend. That's modern life in the U.S.

And where does that leave us community planners -- all optimistic and pessimistic and cynical and practical and political and all the rest?

1) We must have more faith in communities than in our own professions. This is not about planning but about place. This means that it must be more important for communities to organize than it is to achieve any one "goal."

2) We must have faith in our professions, because if we really think that nothing can be done or that communities can't fight the market or that it all comes down to politics, then we should be acting on those values that run contrary to those necessary to engage in planning. Scrap the planning job and be a developer or a stock broker or a politician.

3) We must acknowledge and embrace that planning is at its heart radical. All kinds of planning are predicated on interrupting the market -- for whatever aim, even if that aim is to aid the market. The best kind of planning believes in protecting and preserving and enhancing communities -- ensuring that the kinds of things communities want -- and individuals within those communities -- remain viable options. This does not mean preserving culture for the sake of preservation but preserving a way of life because the community values it. Planning helps to add value to those lifestyles in order to balance the value the market places on the alternatives. We validate; we don't prescribe.

If we're good community planners -- working at listening and learning and helping -- maybe the effort is enough. Our approximation of community involvement gives us a place to start and a certain plan of action.

While we engage in this active process, I think it should be more explicit that our aims are nothing short of revolutionary: strong communities, distinctive places, and the potential for each person to choose and pursue an ideal way life.

Books that scare conservatives

Maggie says:
Via Lawyers, Guns and Money, here's the list that Human Events, "The National Conservative Weekly," compiled of the Ten Most Harmful Books of the 19th and 20th Centuries:
1. The Communist Manifesto, Karl Marx
2. Mein Kampf, Adolf Hitler
3. Quotations from Chairman Mao, Mao Zedong
4. The Kinsey Report, Alfred Kinsey
5. Democracy and Education, John Dewey
6. Das Kapital, Karl Marx
7. The Feminine Mystique, Betty Friedan
8. The Course of Positive Philosophy, Auguste Comte
9. Beyond Good and Evil, Friederich Nietzsche
10. General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money, John Maynard Keynes

The commentary at the Human Events link is classic. For The Feminine Mystique, the group dismisses Friedan as a Marxist and says that "Her original vocation, tellingly, was not stay-at-home motherhood but left-wing journalism."

The commentary for General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money is great, too: "The book is a recipe for ever-expanding government. When the business cycle threatens a contraction of industry, and thus of jobs, he argued, the government should run up deficits, borrowing and spending money to spur economic activity. FDR adopted the idea as U.S. policy, and the U.S. government now has a $2.6-trillion annual budget and an $8-trillion dollar debt." Hmmm... sounds to me that according to their own analysis, Human Events should be appalled at the fiscal policies of Bush&Co instead of supporting the war in Iraq and everything that comes out of Bush's mouth. I'd say that's the bigger outrage, not FDR leading the country through an economic crisis.

And for all you fellow book nerds out there, here are the honorable mentions (although without the amusing commentary). This stuff is so interesting:
11. The Population Bomb, Paul Ehrlich
12. What is to be Done, V.I. Lenin
13. Authoritarian Personality, Theodor Adorno
14. On Liberty, John Stuart Mill
15. Beyond Freedom and Dignity, B.F. Skinner
16. Reflections on Violence, Georges Sorel
17. The Promise of American Life, Herbert Croly
18. Origin of the Species, Charles Darwin
19. Madness and Civilization, Michel Foucault
20. Soviet Communism: A New Civilization, Sidney and Beatrice Webb
21. Coming of Age in Samoa, Margaret Mead
22. Unsafe at Any Speed, Ralph Nader
23. Second Sex, Simone de Beauvoir
24. Prison Notebooks, Antonio Gramsci
25. Silent Spring, Rachel Carson
26. Wretched of the Earth, Frantz Fanon
27. Introduction to Psychoanalysis, Sigmund Freud
28. The Greening of America, Charles Reich
29. The Limits to Growth, Club of Rome
30. Descent of Man, Charles Darwin

Historical Footnote

Maggie says:
Now that we know who Deep Throat is, here's another tidbit buried in this Times article about mystery man W. Mark Felt:

Felt "was convicted in 1980 on unrelated charges of authorizing government agents to break into homes secretly, without warrants, in a search for anti-Vietnam War bombing suspects from the radical Weather Underground in 1972 and 1973. Five months later, President Ronald Reagan pardoned him on the grounds that he had 'acted on high principle to bring an end to the terrorism that was threatening our nation.'"

By the way, if anyone out there hasn't seen the documentary The Weather Underground, get yourself to your local video store immediately. It's pretty incredible stuff, very well done.