In the second year of a brutal recession, the ranks of the American poor soared to their highest level in half a century and millions more are barely avoiding falling below the poverty line, the Census Bureau reported Thursday.

About 44 million Americans – one in seven – lived last year in homes in which the income was below the poverty level, which is about $22,000 for a family of four. That is the largest number of people since the census began tracking poverty 51 years ago.

The snapshot captured by the census for 2009, the first year of the Obama presidency, shows an America in the throes of economic upheaval.

My favorite part is this bit of propaganda:

Obama said the numbers could have been much worse were it not for government assistance.

It’s impossible to either prove or refute a statement like that. It’s just as easy to say ‘the numbers could have been much better were it not for government interference.’

However, we do know that just over 50% of the stimulus has been spent and we also know that the money was used to increase government employment by 10% since January of 2008 while private employment dropped by 6%.

Concerned about the young men loitering at the end of their street, Mr. Brown and Ms. Lee-Sebastian, next-door neighbors, decided to take the advice of the police and organize a block club with other residents of the 8100 and 8200 blocks of South Winchester Avenue.

The idea was that through phone trees, monthly meetings and heightened visibility, residents could keep one another abreast of what was happening and send a message to gangs and drug dealers that they were not about to hand over their block.

The violence in Chicago has reached a point where the leaders of the city, those elected to protect the citizens, have outright admitted they have failed at controlling the number of violent crimes. They are thus advising the citizens to take matters into their own hands, so to speak.

This is the perfect opportunity to allow law-abiding citizens to carry concealed weapons. I guarantee you that if the mayor allows members of block clubs to obtain CCW permits and handguns (you have to qualify these things when dealing with Chicago politicians), you’ll see a drastic decline in violent crime in those neighborhoods. All you need to do is post a sign on the corner indicating the presence of armed and organized citizens and the thugs will move on, peacefully.

Like Alderman Lane said: “I just feel that sometimes you have to stand up yourself.”

Seeing one of those T-shirts today reminded me of this document from the Cuba Archive. Some indelible quotes from that document:

A harsh disciplinarian even with his own troops, Ché played a leading or supporting role in the summary execution of at least 21 persons in the Sierra Maestra; at least one shot by his own hand. The victims were usually local peasants accused of collaborating with the Batista army, generally as informants.

[...]

Other subordinates in the tribunals have reported that he would admonish them: ‘Do not delay the proceedings. This is a revolution. Do not use bourgeois legal methods; evidence is secondary. We must proceed to convict.’ They have testified that he would lecture them: ‘There is no need for much inquiry to execute anyone. We only need to know if they should be executed -nothing else.’

[...]

Aside from trampling on the right to life, Ché also advocated and inflicted repression of many more fundamental rights. His uncompromising approach required the subjugation of the Cuban population. Brutalizing and silencing opponents and dissenters were, in his view, key elements for success.

[...]

Those who idolize Ché cannot even claim that he was a visionary of a better world that was constructed by his inspiration. In fact, the debacle he left in his wake lasts to this day and has left Cuba in ruins, its people impoverished. From having the highest socio-economic indicators in Latin America in 1958, Cuba has steadily declined into one of the poorest countries in the world. Today, Cuba‘s GDP per capita is barely ahead of only Haiti in the Americas, and perhaps only because Cuba‘s methodology to calculate GDP ignores standard practice. A typical Ché t-shirt costs more than the entire monthly salary of a Cuban worker, which is an average of roughly US$17.00.

If you want to idolize a revolutionary, you should start here. We all know the fruits of his revolution.

Here’s a better version of the Che’ T-shirt.

hasta la victoria siempre

Updated on 4/12
Updated again on 4/21

Recently, the website WikiLeaks released an annotated, edited video from the gun-camera of an Apache helicopter from 2007. The video shows the helicopter shoot several men, some armed others not, two of which turned out to be Reuters cameramen embedded with the insurgents. Two children were also wounded when the Apache fired on a van that came to extract one of the wounded insurgents. WikiLeaks titled the video “Collateral Murder.” The information below will hopefully help you better understand the video and decide for yourself if the soldiers reacted responsibly.

First, here is a good site that puts the video into context, something you should read before watching the video. Below are key points from that article, which provide missing context and insight into the video:

• “Apache helicopters are usually not called out unless ground troops request them. In this case, ground troops were under fire and requested air support.”
  
• “You hear, numerous times, reports of armed combatants in the area, before this particular video feed can actually see people.”
  
• “This is all happening near friendly soldiers who requested air support because they were fired upon.”
  

Next you should read the post on Dysnomia.us (I can’t get a direct-link to the article, dated 4/6/2010) (direct link updated). This is one of the better opinions I’ve read expressed on this matter and he’s right on target:

Mistakes happen, especially in war. We could probably accept the mistakes if we were fighting for our own survival, or fighting for a cause we believe in strongly enough. But we chose this war, based on lies and the failure of democratic institutions to counter those lies. And these sorts of mistakes are one of the consequences.

A lot of people are arguing what responsibility those soldiers bear today, but not enough are questioning their own.

Lastly, here are my personal points:

• We don’t get to see the raw video first, then the annotated, edited version. Therefore we’re only seeing what WikiLeaks wants us to see, which is how propaganda works.
  
• We have the advantage of hind-sight. We already know there are civilians carrying cameras, not weapons. The soldiers in this video don’t have that information.
  
• As we look at this video we’re in no danger, nor are others we know. We’re not flying a few hundred feet above a combat zone. But the soldiers in this video are and they need to make life or death decisions in the worst of environments to protect their lives and the lives of others.
  
• The soldiers clearly believed they were engaging armed, enemy units and as it turned out, they were to some extent. But calling this edited version “Collateral Murder” influences our opinion of the video before we’ve even viewed it.
  

Here is the link to the video.

[UPDATE] 4/12/10 Colonel W. Patrick Lang, author of the blog Sic Semper Tyrannis posted a redacted report of the 2007 investigation. In that report, a few paragraphs are worth noting — first is paragraphs 8c and d in the conclusion section:

I conclude that the two Reuters affiliates were in the company of the armed insurgents who had been firing on members of Bravo Company, 2-16 Infantry, at the time of the engagement…

I conclude that the presence of the Reuters employees was not known to any of the US Forces operating in the area that morning. The cameramen made no effort to visibly display their status as press or media representatives and their familiar behavior with, and close proximity to, the armed insurgents and their furtive attempts to photograph the Coalition Ground Forces made them appear as hostile combatants to the Apaches that engaged them.

Secondly, paragraph 9, also in the conclusion section:

As to the presence of the children in the black van, it is obvious from the radio transmissions on the gun-camera tapes that the Apache pilots thought the van was to be used as a means of escape for the wounded insurgents. The van arrives as if on cue, and is immediately joined by two military-aged males who appear from the nearby courtyard. The children are never seen, while the driver slides open a door and then retakes his seat while two other males attempt to load the first insurgent into the vehicle. It is unknown what, if any, connection the van had to the insurgent activity.

The shooting of the van appears to be the sticking point. The Washington Post in this article quotes Bibi van Ginkel, an international lawyer and senior fellow at the Clingendael Netherlands Institute of International Relations:

My first guess would be that a war crime was committed. Very simply speaking, if people are helping the wounded, they are non-combatants. If force is used against them, then that is a war crime

The Geneva Convention states in Chapter IV, Article 25:

Members of the armed forces specially trained for employment, should the need arise, as hospital orderlies, nurses or auxiliary stretcher-bearers, in the search for or the collection, transport or treatment of the wounded and sick shall likewise be respected and protected if they are carrying out these duties at the time when they come into contact with the enemy or fall into his hands.

The investigation report does not address the protected status of those trying to help the wounded. I also don’t know what the rules of engagement (ROE) were at the time of the shooting, but it is worth noting that the pilots received explicit authorization from “Bushmaster 7″ to engage the van.

Personally I’m still trying to gather information on this to come to some conclusion but I’m not sure I’ll ever feel that I have the “right” opinion. I don’t know what it’s like to be in combat and have to make these kinds of decisions. I also don’t have much information outside the video to give me what I think is “enough” context or insight into this situation. What I do know is that we (the U.S.) had a choice to get into this war or not get into this war and since we chose the war, we have a greater moral obligation than if we were directly attacked by Iraq. The incident in this video is regrettable, unfortunate, and even devastating in some respects and ultimately it was completely avoidable had the Republic not been asleep at the wheel when the decision to take military action was made.

[UPDATE] 4/21/10 Wired Magazine has interviewed one of the soldiers (Ethan McCord) who responded to the scene. The article is irresponsible in the following ways:

1. There is too much hearsay and conjecture on the part of the McCord. The published interview should not include the part about the hellfire missile attack at the end of the video because McCord clearly states “I wasn’t around that building when it happened.” Everything he says on the topic after that fact is admittedly hearsay.

   In another part of the interview, he’s asked if it was reasonable for the Apache crew to assume the insurgents were part of the group McCord was fighting just a couple blocks away (which is an irrelevant question) and his response was “I doubt that they were a part of that firefight.”, which doesn’t answer the question and regardless, it’s pure conjecture.
   

2. McCord says that what WikiLeaks did by editing the video was not done “in the best manner” but overall he supports what they’re doing. However, what they’re doing is releasing propaganda that could be interpreted as maliciously inaccurate if not outright seditious under U.S. Code, Title 18, Part I, Chapter 115, § 2388.
   
3. McCord thinks the Apache should have fired warning shots at the van. However, the Apache crew didn’t know who or what was in the van. It could have contained another RPG crew. If the ROE states that Iraqis aren’t to remove the wounded from the scene, then the driver of the van violated the ROE, not the Apache crew and the Apache crew was then complying with the ROE by engaging the van.
   

When this ‘most fascinating person’ was asked what her personal paradise is she replied “just clicking through mindless shows” with her dog.

How truly fascinating. Please, tell me more…

I mean, if you think about this year, I had to get these two beautiful girls settled into a new city, into a new home, into a new school. We got a dog. I visited eight countries with my husband. I planted a garden. I’ve started a mentoring program. It has been everything.

How absolutely fascinating. They moved. They got a dog. They planted a garden. Holy riveting stories batman!

At least now she’s proud of her country for the first time in her adult life. Now that her husband, the most recent Nobel Peace Prize winner has set a course to triple the number of troops in Afghanistan, had, by September, exceeded last year’s number of Predator drone strikes, has failed to close Guantanamo in a year, and has failed to produce the transparency he so often promised on the campaign trail. Truly things to be proud of for a most fascinating woman.

[ADDENDUM: Lest we forget, this is the First Couple that gave the Queen of England a very thoughtful iPod and Gordon Brown a boxed set of DVDs.]

Social justice indeed.

The problem is that’s precisely what precipitated the sub-prime mortgage crisis, which precipitated the current recession.

Why are we still forcing lenders to lend money to people who quite simply do not have the means to repay the loan?

But a house bill currently in draft aims to do just that by taxing both the purchase and sale of stocks, options, derivatives and futures at .25%.

I have a better idea; why don’t we end the war (currently costing us $30B per year), shrink government by 25% (starting with the Czars), and lower income and capital gains taxes across the board by 15%. We then take the resultant 10% difference and dedicate it to paying down the deficit.

“How infantile is American society? Last night’s CBS “Business Update” (in the midst of its “60 Minutes” program) featured three items: 1.) The New Moon teen vampire movie led the weekend box-office receipts; 2.) Cadbury shares hit an all-time high; 3.) Michael Jackson’s rhinestone-studded white glove sold at auction for $350,000. Some in-house CBS-News producer is responsible for this fucking nonsense. How does he or she keep her job? Is there no adult supervision at the network?

…

“We are seeing a comprehensive failure of leadership in every sector and every level of American life – in politics, business, banking, education, news media, medicine, and the clergy. All are determined to pretend that we can somehow continue the habits and behaviors of the pre peak oil era. They are all unwilling to face reality, and are all engaged in mutually supporting each other’s dangerous fantasies.

…

“At the moment, going into Thanksgiving 2009, America’s leadership has dedicated itself to the worst action it could take under the circumstances: a campaign to sustain the unsustainable. This is what’s embodied in the foolish term “recovery.” The way we try to explain things to ourselves matters, if we don’t want to be crushed by history. Go back to the top of this blog and look at the things we pay attention to. Aren’t you ashamed?”

Therefore I oppose the notion that my tax dollars can be used for an elective abortion. I don’t mind helping pay for an abortion that is the result of rape, incest, or a pregnancy that threatens the mother’s life but I do not want to facilitate abortion as a form of birth control or a way to maintain someone’s perceived quality of life sans children. If a man and a woman don’t want to have children, it is their responsibility and theirs alone to ensure they don’t get pregnant. It is not the shared responsibility of the community or the nation to bail them out of a situation they had the power and means to avoid. If a couple is in a financial position where child birth would be disastrous to all involved (the parents and the child or children) then it’s the responsibility of the parents to do whatever it takes not to have a child. It isn’t the tax payer’s responsibility to help pay for the consequences of their actions. I understand that no contraception is 100% effective but even that does not make it the tax payer’s responsibility to help pay for someone else’s abortion. The bottom line is that if you are in such dire straights that another mouth to feed would be disastrous, you should either explore abstinence or adoption or take financial responsibility for an abortion, should you chose to have one.

H.R. 3962, the Affordable Health Care for America Act, would overturn existing legislation (the Hyde amendment) that already prevents tax payers’ dollars from funding elective abortions. The Stupak-Pitts amendment ensures that the spirit of the Hyde amendment lives on. Women can still have abortions, they just can’t be funded by tax dollars, which is already the case and has been since 1976.

H.R. 3962 is being used to advance an agenda cloaked in “women’s rights.” It is not a woman’s right to require anyone else to help pay for an elective abortion.

Get Involved

• Tweet your support
  
• Use #HCR to join the conversation on Twitter
  
• Follow me @RickShawMan on Twitter

Contact the Administration and your representatives

Use the USA.gov website to identify and contact your elected officials and let them know where you stand.

But communities like that seem fewer and further between these days. Now it seems like we’re in too much of a hurry with our own lives to slow down and get to know our neighbors. We all-too-often let ourselves get wrapped up in petty squabbles about who doesn’t clean up after their dog or who spends a small mint to buy the latest Wii games for their kids, rather than who needs a hand building a deck for their family or who could use some help cleaning their rain gutters in the fall.

The ramifications of a shrinking community are serious and potentially fatal to a society. The discussion and support networks that constitute the very fabric of a community bolster the individual’s and by extension the communities’ mental well-being. They also reduce poverty and crime. For example, when a community comes together to assist members who have lost jobs in the midst of a national economic crisis, the entire community benefits by preventing poverty from gaining a foot-hold in the community, which also reduces the likelihood of theft, vandalism, and violent crime.

This past week I had the distinct pleasure of witnessing a community coming together in the face of tragedy, to support and reinforce one another simply out of a respect and concern for other members of the community. My niece was hit and killed by a car while she was out roller-blading in the neighborhood with friends. Immediately the community pulled together and provided much-needed support to my sister and our family. Some brought food, paper plates, napkins, etc, while others simply stayed at the house to keep an eye on things during the chaos and to offer a shoulder to cry on for anyone who needed it. Some people donated money to help pay for expenses, while others donated their organizational skills to make sure that people were shuttled around to where they needed to go and that everyone was fed. A local church provided the location for a large community and family gathering and the preacher helped organize a memorial service that included music and a photo slide show projected onto two large screens. Before the service, the extended family sat down to a large buffet dinner donated by parents of children who were in the high-school color guard with my other niece. Flowers were donated by a teacher at the school where my sister works. The entire funeral and memorial service was made possible by family and the community, only 48 hours after the accident.

I’m afraid this is an exception rather than the rule and the loss of the larger sense of community is part and parcel of the moral decline of America. We need to reinvest in the discussion and support networks in our communities if we’re to have any hope in restoring America’s strong moral identity.

Get Involved

• Introduce yourself to your neighbors
  
• Start small by organizing a picnic with a neighbor or two
  
• Support the neighborhood kids and get to know them by buying their girl scout cookies or lemonade from their lemonade stands.
  
• Pay a local kid to mow your lawn rather than paying some large outfit to come in from outside the community
  
• Car pool with neighbors
  
• Offer to run errands for elderly in your neighborhood
  
• Organize community events around light holidays such as halloween
  
• Offer assistance to members of the community who have service members i.e. organize going-away parties before they go to basic training or before they deploy to a base far away from home
  
• Organize or become part of a neighborhood watch program
  

Learn more

• Social Isolation Growing in U.S., Study Says, The Washington Post, 23 June, 2006
  
• Report reveals loss of community spirit The Guardian, 16 August, 2006
  
•